Previous studies have found that student teachers value the practicum over other parts of physical education teacher education and that they experience a gap between theory and practice in their education. The purpose of this study was to provide more knowledge about the theory–practice relations in the context of the practicum of physical education teacher education. Data were generated through focus group interviews with physical education teacher education students (n = 37) from three different university colleges in Norway. The analysis and discussion of the data material were framed with the concept of practical synthesis (Grimen, 2008). The findings indicate that students experience theory and practice as fragmented, but that they have a differentiated understanding of what theory is. The analysis also suggests that, for the students, university tutors occupy a rather distant role in the practicum and that it is mostly left to the students to make connections between theory and practice.
Aristotle (1998) The Nicomachean Ethics. London: Penguine.
2.
BallDL (2000) Bridging practices. Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education51, 241–247.
3.
BeltonSWoodsCDunningC (2010) The evaluation of a cooperating physical education teacher programme (COPET). European Physical Education Review16(2): 141–154.
4.
BrantlingerEJimenezRKlingerJ (2005) Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children71: 195–207.
5.
BourdieuP (1990) The Scholastic Point of View. Cultural Anthropology5: 380–391.
6.
ChambersFArmourK (2012) School-university partnerships and physical education teacher education student learning: A fruitful division of labour?European Physical Education Review18(2): 159–181.
7.
DeweyJ (1933) How We Think. New York: Heath and Co.
8.
DowlingF (2006) Physical education teacher educators’ professional identities, continuing professional development and the issues of gender equalities. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy11(3): 247–263.
9.
DunneJ (1993) Back to the Rough Ground. Practical Judgement and the Lure of Technique. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
10.
DunningCMeeganSWoodsC (2011) The impact of the COPET programme on student PE teachers’ teaching practice experiences. European Physical Education Review17: 153–165.
GrimenH (2008) Profesjon og kunnskap [Profession and knowledge]. I: A. Molander og L.I.Terum (red.), Profesjonsstudier [Professional studies], 71–86. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
13.
Hynes-DuselJM (1999) Cooperating teachers’ perceptions about the student teaching experience. Physical Educator56(4): 186–196.
14.
JenkinsJMGarnAJenkinsP (2005) Preservice teacher observation in peer coaching. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education24: 2–23.
15.
KahanDSinclairCSaucierL (2003) Feedback profiles of cooperating teachers supervising the same student teacher, Physical Educator60(4): 180–194.
KvaleSBrinkmanS (2009) Det kvalitative forskningsintervju [The qualitative research interview]. Oslo: Gyldendal akademiske.
18.
KvernbekkT (2012) Argumentation in theory and practice: Gap or equilibrium?Informal Logic32(3): 288–305.
19.
LambPLaneKAldousD (2012) Enhancing the spaces of reflection: A buddy peer-review process within physical education initial teacher education. European Physical Education Review. Epub ahead of print 7 October 2012. DOI: 10.1177/1356336X12457293.
20.
LarssonL (2009) Idrott – och helst lite mer idrott. Idrottsãrarstudenters møte med utbildingen [Sport – and some more sport. PE teachers’ meeting with their education]. (Doctoral dissertation). Stockholm: Stockholm’s University.
21.
MacQueenKMcLellanEKayK (1998) Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis. Cultural Anthropology Methods10(2): 31–36.
22.
MalterudK (2012) Fokusgrupper som forskningsmetode for medisin og helsefag [Focus groups as research method for medicine and health sciences]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
23.
McNeillMCFryJMWrightSC (2012) ‘In the local context’: Singaporean challenges to teaching games on practicum. Sport, Education and Society9(1): 3–32.
Mordal-MoenKGreenK (2012) Neither shaking nor stirring: a case study of reflexivity in Norwegian physical education teacher education. Sport, Education and Society1–20. DOI: 10.1080/13573322.2012.670114.
26.
OvensA (2004) Using peer coaching and action research to structure the practicum: An analysis of student teacher perceptions. Journal of Physical Education New Zealand37: 45–60.
SirnaKTinningRRossiT (2008) The social tasks of learning to become a physical education teacher: Considering the HPE subject department as a community of practice. Sport, Education and Society13(3): 285–300.
29.
SmebyJ-C (2010) Studiekvalitet, praksiskvalitet og yrkesrelevans [Study quality, practicum quality and relevance for work]. In HaugP (ed.) Kvalifisering til læraryrket [Qualification to the teacher profession]. Oslo: Abstrakt forlag, pp.98–117.
30.
SpendloveDHowesAWakeG2010. Partners in pedagogy. European Journal of Teacher Education33: 65–77.
31.
TerumLIHeggenK (2010) Lærarkvalifisering og lærarkompetanse [Teacher qualification and teacher competency]. In HaugP (ed.): Kvalifisering til læraryrket [Qualification to the teacher profession]. Oslo: Abstrakt forlag, pp.75–97.
32.
TjeerdsmaBL (1998) Cooperating teachers perceptions of and experiences in the student teaching practicum. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education17: 214–230.
33.
VelijaPCapelSKateneW (2008) ‘Does knowing stuff like PSHE and citizenship make me a better teacher?': Student teachers in the teacher training figuration. European Physical Education Review4: 389–406.
34.
Utdannings- og forskningsdepartementet (2003a) Rammeplan for Faglærerutdanning i kroppsøving og idrettsfag [National curricula for physical education teacher education]. Oslo: Det kongelige utdannings- og forskningsdepartment.
35.
Utdannings- og forskings departementet (2003b) Rammeplan for Praktisk-pedagogisk utdanning [National curricula for practical-pedagogical education]. Oslo: Det kongelige utdannings- og forskningsdepartment.
