Can continuing professional development utilizing a game-centred approach improve the quality of physical education teaching delivered by generalist primary school teachers?
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online May, 2017
Can continuing professional development utilizing a game-centred approach improve the quality of physical education teaching delivered by generalist primary school teachers?
The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a continuing professional development (CPD) intervention in producing changes in physical education (PE) teaching practice and PE teaching quality by generalist primary school teachers when the CPD addressed the use of a game-centred approach. A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in seven primary schools in the Hunter Region, New South Wales, Australia. One year six teacher from each school was randomized into the Professional Learning for Understanding Games Education (PLUNGE) intervention (n = 4 teachers) or the 7-week wait-list control (n = 3) condition. The PLUNGE intervention (weeks 1–5) used an instructional framework to improve teachers’ knowledge, understanding and delivery of a game-centred curriculum, and included an information session and weekly in-class mentoring. The intervention was designed to enhance content and pedagogical knowledge for the provision of pedagogy focused on a broad range of learning outcomes. Teaching quality was assessed at baseline and follow-up (weeks 6 and 7) via observation of two consecutive PE lessons using the Quality Teaching Lesson Observation Scales. Linear mixed models revealed significant group-by-time intervention effects (p < 0.05) for the quality of teaching (effect size: d = 1.7). CPD using an information session and mentoring, and a focus on the development of the quality of teaching using a game-centred pedagogical approach was efficacious in improving the quality of PE teaching among generalist primary school teachers.
AeltermanNVansteenkisteMVan KeerH. (2013) Development and evaluation of a training on need-supportive teaching in physical education: Qualitative and quantitative findings. Teaching and Teacher Education29: 64–75.
2.
AmesC (1992) Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology84: 261–271.
3.
AmosaWLadwigJGGriffithsT. (2007) Equity effects of Quality Teaching: Closing the gap. Australian Association for Research in Education conference.
4.
ArmourKQuennerstedtMChambersF. (2015) What is ‘effective’ CPD for contemporary physical education teachers? A Deweyan framework. Sport, Education and Society: 1–13.
5.
ArmourKYellingM (2007) Effective professional development for physical education teachers: The role of informal, collaborative learning. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education26: 177–200.
6.
AshmanAConwayR (1997) An Introduction to Cognitive Education: Theory and Application. London: Routledge.
7.
AtencioMYiCJClaraTWK. (2014) Using a complex and nonlinear pedagogical approach to design practical primary physical education lessons. European Physical Education Review20: 244–263.
8.
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (2015) The Australian Curriculum: Health and Physical Education, Version 8.1. Sydney.
9.
Australian Primary Principals Association (2014) Submission to Review of the Australian National Curriculum: Executive Summary. Connected Leader.
10.
AveryPG (1999) Authentic assessment and instruction. Social Education63: 368–373.
11.
BeaneJA (1993) A Middle School Curriculum: From Rhetoric to Reality. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
12.
BernsteinB (1990) The structuring of pedagogic discourse: Class, codes and control: Volume IV. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
13.
BernsteinB (1997) Class and pedagogies: Visible and invisible. In: HalseyAHLauderHBrownP. (eds) Education: Culture, Economy and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.59–79.
14.
BiestaG (2010) Five theses on complexity reduction and its politics. In: OsbergDBiestaG (eds) Complexity Theory and the Politics of Education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, pp.5–14.
15.
Board of Studies New South Wales (2007) Personal Development, Health and Physical Education K-6: Syllabus. Sydney, Australia: Board of Studies NSW.
16.
BrophyJ (1998) Motivating Students to Learn. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
17.
BrunerJ (1977) Processes of Education, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
18.
BunkerDThorpeR (1982) A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education18: 5–8.
19.
ChowJDavidsKButtonC. (2007) The role of Nonlinear pedagogy in physical education. Review of Educational Research77: 251–278.
20.
ChowJYAtencioM (2012) Complex and nonlinear pedagogy and the implications for physical education. Sport, Education and Society: 1–21.
21.
CliffordMMKimAMcDonaldBA (1988) Responses to failure as influenced by task attribution, outcome attribution, and failure tolerance. The Journal of Experimental Education57: 19–37.
22.
CohenJ (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
23.
CoulterMWoodsCB (2012) Primary teachers’ experience of a physical education professional development programme. Irish Educational Studies31: 329–343.
24.
CoxMSchofieldGKoltGS (2010) Responsibility for children’s physical activity: Parental, child, and teacher perspectives. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport13: 46–52.
Darling-HammondLMcLaughlinMW (1995) Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan76: 597.
27.
DelpitL (1995) Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: The New Press.
28.
den DuynN (1997) Game Sense - Developing Thinking Players Workbook. Canberra, ACT: Australian Sports Commission.
29.
DysonB (2014) Quality Physical Education: A Commentary on Effective Physical Education Teaching. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport85: 144–152.
30.
EganK (1989) Teaching as Story Telling. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31.
FaircloughSJStrattonG (2006) Effects of a physical education intervention to improve student activity levels. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy11: 29–44.
32.
GaretMSPorterACDesimoneL. (2001) What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal38: 915–945.
33.
GarnerR (1990) When children and adults do not use learning strategies: Toward a theory of settings. Review of Educational Research60: 517.
34.
GibsonJJ (1979) An Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
35.
GoodTLBrophyJE (2003) Looking in Classrooms. Sydney: Pearson Education.
36.
GréhaigneJWallianNGodboutP (2005) Tactical-decision learning model and students’ practices. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy10: 255–269.
37.
GuskeyTR (2002) Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching8: 381–391.
38.
GuskeyTRYoonKS (2009) What works in professional development?The Phi Delta Kappan90: 495–500.
39.
HallalPCAndersenLBBullFC. (2012) Global physical activity levels: Surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. The Lancet380: 247–257.
40.
HardyL (2010) NSW Schools Physical Activity and Nutrition Survey - Executive Summary. Sydney: The University of Sydney.
41.
HarrisJCaleLMussonH (2010) The effects of a professional development programme on primary school teachers’ perceptions of physical education. Professional Development in Education37: 291–305.
42.
HarveySJarrettK (2013) A review of the game-centred approaches to teaching and coaching literature since 2006. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy19: 1–23.
43.
HattieJ (2008) Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.
44.
HobanGF (2002) Teacher Learning for Educational Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
45.
KennedyA (2005) Models of continuing professional development: A framework for analysis. Journal of In-Service Education31: 235–250.
46.
KirkDMacPhailA (2002) Teaching games for understanding and situated learning: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe model. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education21: 177–192.
47.
KlingnerJK (2004) The science of professional development. Journal of Learning Disabilities37: 248–255.
LeeVESmithJCroningerR (1997) How high school organization influences the equitable distribution of learning in mathematics and science. Sociology of Education70: 128–150.
50.
LonsdaleCRosenkranzRRPeraltaLR. (2013) A systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in school physical education lessons. Preventive Medicine56: 152–161.
51.
LubansDRMorganPJCliffDP. (2010) Fundamental movement skills in children and adolescents: Review of associated health benefits. Sports Medicine40: 1019–1035.
52.
MarksHMDoaneKBSecadaWG (1996) Support for student achievement. In: NewmannFM (ed) Authentic Achievement: Restructuring Schools for Intellectual Quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp.209–227.
53.
MarshallHH (1988) In pursuit of learning-oriented classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education4: 85–98.
54.
MarshallHHWeinsteinRS (1984) Classroom factors affecting students’ self-evaluations: An interactional model. Review of Educational Research54: 301–325.
55.
McKenzieTLAlcarazJESallisJF. (1998) Effects of a physical education program on children’s manipulative skills. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education17: 327–341.
56.
McKenzieTLLounsberyMAF (2013) Physical education teacher effectiveness in a public health context. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport84: 419–430.
57.
McKenzieTLSallisJFProchaskaJJ. (2004) Evaluation of a two-year middle-school physical education intervention: M-SPAN. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise36: 1382–1388.
58.
MeeceJ (1991) The classroom context and children’s motivational goals. In: MaehrMPintrichP (eds) Advances in Achievement Motivation Research (vol. 7). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp.261–286.
59.
MemmertDHarveyS (2010) Identification of non-specific tactical tasks in invasion games. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy15: 287–305.
60.
MillerAChristensenEMEatherN. (2016) Can physical education and physical activity outcomes be developed simultaneously using a game-centered approach?European Physical Education Review22: 113–133.
61.
MillerAChristensenEMEatherN. (2015) The PLUNGE randomized controlled trial: Evaluation of a games-based physical activity professional learning program in primary school physical education. Preventive Medicine74: 1–8.
62.
MoherDHopewellSSchulzKF. (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ340: c869.
63.
MorganPBourkeS (2008) Non-specialist teachers’ confidence to teach PE: The nature and influence of personal school experiences in PE. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy13: 1–29.
64.
MorganPHansenV (2007) Recommendations to improve primary school physical education: Classroom teachers’ perspective. Journal of Educational Research101: 99–111.
65.
MorganPHansenV (2008) Classroom teachers’ perceptions of the impact of barriers to teaching physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport79: 506.
66.
NewmannFM (1991) Classroom thoughtfulness and students’ higher order thinking: Common indicators and diverse social studies courses. Theory and Research in Social Education19: 410–433.
67.
NewmannFM (1992) Student Engagement and Achievement in American Secondary Schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
68.
NewmannFM (1993) Beyond common sense in educational restructuring: The issue of content and linkage. Educational ResearcherMarch: 4-13.
69.
NewmannFMMarksHMGamoranA (1996) Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education104: 280–312.
70.
NichollsJG (1989) The Competitive Ethos and Democratic Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
71.
NolenSBHaladynaTM (1990) Personal and environmental influences on students’ beliefs about effective study strategies. Contemporary Educational Psychology15: 116–130.
72.
NSW Department of Education and Training (2006) Quality Teaching in NSW Public Schools - A Classroom Practice Guide. RYDE NSW: Department of Education and Training, Professional Support and Curriculum Directorate.
73.
PateRRDavisMGRobinsonTN. (2006) Promoting physical activity in children and youth a leadership role for schools: A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Physical Activity Committee) in collaboration with the Councils on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young and Cardiovascular Nursing. Circulation114: 1214–1224.
74.
PetrieK (2010) Creating confident, motivated teachers of physical education in primary schools. European Physical Education Review16: 47–64.
75.
RhodesCBeneickeS (2003) Professional development support for poorly performing teachers: Challenges and opportunities for school managers in addressing teacher learning needs. Journal of In-Service Education29: 123–140.
76.
RinkJE (2013) Measuring teacher effectiveness in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport84: 407–418.
77.
RockoffJE (2004) The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. The American Economic Review94: 247–252.
78.
RoweK (2003) The importance of teacher quality as a key determinant of students’ experiences and outcomes of schooling. ACER Research Conference. Carlton Crest Hotel, Melbourne, 19-21 October.
79.
RyanRMDeciEL (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist55: 68–78.
80.
SallisJFMcKenzieTLAlcarazJE. (1997) The effects of a 2-year physical education program (SPARK) on physical activity and fitness in elementary school students. Sports, Play and Active Recreation for Kids. American Journal of Public Health87: 1328–1334.
81.
SinelnikovOAKimIWardP. (2015) Changing beginning teachers’ content knowledge and its effects on student learning. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy1–16.
82.
SloanS (2010) The continuing development of primary sector physical education: Working together to raise quality of provision. European Physical Education Review16: 267–281.
83.
SmithW (2014) Fundamental movement skills and fundamental games skills are complementary pairs and should be taught in complementary ways at all stages of skill development. Sport, Education and Society21: 1–12.
84.
StolzSPillS (2014) Teaching games and sport for understanding: Exploring and reconsidering its relevance in physical education. European Physical Education Review20: 36–71.
85.
TanCWKChowJYDavidsK (2011) ‘How does TGfU work?’: Examining the relationship between learning design in TGfU and a nonlinear pedagogy. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy17: 331–348.
86.
TimperioASalmonJBallK (2004) Evidence-based strategies to promote physical activity among children, adolescents and young adults: Review and update. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport7: 20–29.
87.
TurnerAMartinekTJ (1992) A comparative analysis of two models for teaching games (Technique Approach and Game-Centered (Tactical Focus) Approach). International Journal of Physical Education29: 15–31.
88.
US Department of Health and Human Services (2012) Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report: Strategies to Increase Physical Activity among Youth. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services.
89.
van BeurdenEBarnettLMZaskA. (2003) Can we skill and activate children through primary school physical education lessons? “Move it groove it”—a collaborative health promotion intervention. Preventive Medicine36: 493–501.
90.
van SluijsEMFMcMinnAMGriffinSJ (2007) Effectiveness of interventions to promote physical activity in children and adolescents: Systematic review of controlled trials. British Medical Journal335: 703.
91.
van SluijsEMFMcMinnAMGriffinSJ (2008) Effectiveness of interventions to promote physical activity in children and adolescents: Systemic review of controlled trials. British Journal of Sports Medicine42: 653–657.
92.
WardP. (2013) The role of content knowledge in conceptions of teaching effectiveness in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport84: 431–440.
93.
WeissC (1995) Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In: ConnellJIKubischACSchorrL. (eds) New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Concepts, Methods and Contexts. New York: Aspen Institute, pp.65–92.
