In this paper, we critically examine the potential of assessment components in physical education teacher education (PETE) to either reinforce or challenge PETE students’ conceptions of what a physical education (PE) teacher needs to know to teach this school subject. To understand the mechanisms that may contribute to the difficulty of challenging these taken-for-granted beliefs (doxa) within PETE, we draw on the theories and concepts of Pierre Bourdieu. Two different kinds of empirical material are analysed: one consists of 62 essays, written by PETE students before starting their degree programme, dealing with their conceptions of PE teachers’ competencies, while the second consists of course booklets and assessment components used within one PETE programme. The study shows that implicit prerequisites and conditions in assessment components are very similar to the conceptions of competencies in PETE students’ statements. The study also shows that taken-for-granted beliefs may be challenged, but at the same time, we argue, the use of socially critical perspectives in PE practice may also (in the name of the doxa) stigmatise those who are not physically active in their leisure time as well as those who do not look fit and sporty, and thus does not challenge the way power and social superiority or inferiority appear in PE.
AnnerstedtCLarssonS (2010) ‘I have my own picture of what the demands are’: Grading in Swedish PEH – problems of validity, comparability and fairness. European Physical Education Review16(2): 97–115.
2.
BackmanELarssonH (2016) What should a physical education teacher know? An analysis of learning outcomes for future physical education teachers in Sweden. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy21(2): 185–200.
3.
BackmanEPearsonP (2016) ‘We should assess the students in more authentic situations’: Swedish PE teacher educators’ views of the meaning of movement skills for future PE teachers. European Physical Education Review22(1): 47–64.
4.
BoudD (1990) Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education15(1): 101–111.
5.
BoudD (2007) Reframing assessment as if learning were important. In: BoudDFalchikovN (eds) Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education: Learning for the Longer Term. London: Routledge, pp.14–25.
6.
BourdieuP (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
BourdieuP (1990) The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
8.
BourdieuP (2005) The Social Structures of the Economy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
9.
BourdieuPPasseronJ-C (1990) Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: SAGE Publications.
10.
BrownD (2005) An economy of gendered practices? Learning to teach physical education from the perspective of Pierre Bourdieu’s embodied sociology. Sport, Education and Society10(1): 3–23.
11.
BrownDEvansJ (2004) Reproducing gender? Intergenerational links and the male PE teacher as a cultural conduit in teaching physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education23(1): 48–70.
12.
CamachoAFernández-BalboaJ-M (2006) Ethics, politics and bio-pedagogy in physical education teacher education: Easing the tension between the self and the group. Sport, Education and Society11(1): 1–20.
13.
CapelSHayesSKateneW (2011) The interaction of factors which influence secondary student physical education teachers’ knowledge and development as teachers. European Physical Education Review17(2): 183–201.
14.
Commission on Social Determinants of Health (2008) Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Final Report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization.
15.
DowlingF (2006) Physical education teacher educators’ professional identities, continuing professional development and the issue of gender equality. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy11(3): 247–263.
16.
DowlingF (2011) ‘Are PE teacher identities fit for postmodern schools or are they clinging to Modernist notions of professionalism?’ A case study of Norwegian PE teacher students’ emerging professional identities. Sport, Education and Society16(2): 201–222.
17.
DowlingFKårhusS (2011) An analysis of the ideological work of the discourse of ‘fair play’ and moral education in perpetuating inequitable gender practices in PETE. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy16(2): 197–211.
18.
EkbergJ-E (2016) What knowledge appears as valid in the subject of Physical Education and Health? A study of the subject on three levels in year 9 in Sweden. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy21(3): 249–268.
19.
EvansJDaviesBPenneyD (1996) Teachers, teaching and the social construction of gender relations. Sport, Education and Society1(2): 165–183.
20.
FagrellBLarssonHRedeliusK (2012) The game within the game: Girls’ underperforming position in Physical Education. Gender and Education24(1): 101–118.
21.
GarrettRWrenchA (2011) Negotiating a critical agenda in middle years physical education. ARE Journal38(3): 239–255.
22.
GibbsG (2006) How assessment frames student learning. In: CleggBBryanC (eds) Innovative Assessment in Higher Education. London: Routledge, pp.23–36.
23.
HayPPenneyD (2013) Assessment in Physical education. A Sociocultural Perspective. New York: Routledge.
24.
HayesSCapelSKateneW. (2008) An examination of knowledge prioritization in secondary physical education teacher education courses. Teaching and Teacher Education24(2): 330–342.
25.
HeroldFWaringM (2010) Pre-service physical education teachers’ perceptions of subject knowledge: Augmenting learning to teach. European Physical Education Review15(3): 337–336.
26.
HermerénG (2011) Good Research Practice. Stockholm: The Swedish Research Council.
27.
HunterL (2004) Bourdieu and the social space of the PE class: Reproduction of doxa through practice. Sport, Education and Society9(2): 175–192.
28.
JohnsonTG (2013) The value of performance in physical education teacher education. Quest65(4): 485–497.
29.
KirkDMacDonaldDO’SullivanM (eds) (2006) The Handbook of Physical Education. London: SAGE Publications.
LarssonL (2009) Idrott – och helst lite mer idrott. Idrottslärarstudenters möte med utbildningen. [Sport – and preferably a little more sport. P. E. students’ encounter with the education.]PhD Thesis, Stockholm University, Sweden.
32.
LingardB (2010) Policy borrowing, policy learning: Testing times in Australian schooling. Critical Studies in Education51(2): 129–147.
33.
Lorente-CatalánEKirkD (2016) Student teachers’ understanding and application of assessment for learning during a physical education teacher education course. European Physical Education Review22(1): 65–81.
34.
MaivorsdotterNLundvallSQuennerstedtM (2014) Being a competent athlete or a competent teacher? Aesthetic experiences in physical education teacher education. European Physical Education Review20(3): 407–423.
35.
Mordal-MoenM (2011) ‘Shaking or stirring’? A case-study of physical education teacher education in Norway. PhD Thesis, Norges idrettshøgskole, Norway.
36.
Mordal-MoenKGreenK (2014a) Physical education teacher education in Norway: A case-study of student-teachers’ perceptions. Sport, Education & Society19(6): 806–823.
37.
Mordal-MoenKGreenK (2014b) Neither shaking nor stirring: A case study of reflexivity in Norwegian physical education teacher education. Sport, Education and Society19(4): 415–434.
38.
Muros RuizBFernández-BalboaJ-M (2005) Physical education teacher educators’ personal perspectives regarding their practice of critical pedagogy. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education24(3): 243–264.
39.
NASPE (2008a) 2008 National Initial Physical Education Teacher Education Standards. USA: National Association for Sport and Physical Education.
40.
NASPE (2008b) Advanced National PE Teacher Training Standards. USA: National Association for Sport and Physical Education.
41.
PattonM Q (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Method. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
42.
RedeliusKFagrellBLarssonH (2009) Symbolic capital in physical education and health: to be, to do or to know? That is the gendered question. Sport, Education and Society14(2): 245–260.
43.
RossiTSirnaKTinningR (2008) Becoming a health and physical education (HPE) teacher: Student teacher ‘Performances’ in the physical education subject department office. Teacher and Teaching Education24(4): 1029–1040.
44.
RustC (2000) Do initial training courses have an impact on university teaching? The evidence of two evaluative studies of one course. Innovations in Education and Training International37(3): 254–262.
45.
SäfvenbomRHaugenTBulieM (2015) Attitudes toward and motivation for PE. Who collects the benefits of the subject. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy20(6): 629–646
46.
SchenkerK (2011) På spaning efter idrottsdidaktik. [In search of Sport Didactics.]PhD Thesis, Malmö University, Sweden.
47.
SchenkerK (2016) Health(y) education in health and physical education. Sport, Education and Society. Epub ahead of print 18 April 2016. DOI: 10.1080/13573322.2016.1174845.
48.
SFS (2010) Act of Education 2010:541. Stockholm: The Swedish Government.
49.
Sicilia-CamachoAFernández-BalboaJ M (2009) Reflecting on the moral bases of critical pedagogy in PETE: Toward a Foucaultian perspective on ethics and the care of the self. Sport, Education and Society14(4): 443–463.
50.
SloanS (2007) An investigation into the perceived level of personal subject knowledge and competence of a group of pre-service physical education teachers towards the teaching of secondary school gymnastics. European Physical Education Review13(1): 57–80.
51.
SOU (1999) Att lära och leda. En lärarutbildning för samverkan och utveckling 1999:63. [To Teach and Lead. A Teacher Education for Cooperation and Development]. Stockholm: The Swedish Government.
52.
SOU (2008) En hållbar lärarutbildning 2008:109. [Sustainable Teacher Education]. The Swedish Government.
StandalØFMordal-MoenKMoeVF (2014) Theory and practice in the context of practicum: The perspectives of Norwegian physical education student teachers. European Physical Education Review20(2): 165–178.
55.
SvennbergLMeckbachJRedeliusK (2014) Exploring PE teachers’ ‘gut feelings’: An attempt to verbalise and discuss teachers’ internalised grading criteria. European Physical Education Review20(2): 199–214.
56.
The Standing Committee on Education and Research (2003) Rammeplan for Faglærerutdanning i kroppsøving og idrettsfag [Curriculum for the Physical Education Teacher Education]. Oslo: The Norwegian Government.
TinningR (2006) Theoretical orientations in physical teacher education. In: KirkDMacDonaldMO’SullivanM (eds) The Handbook of Physical Education. London: SAGE Publications, pp.369–385.
59.
TinningR (2012) A socially critical HPE (aka physical education) and the challenge for teacher education. In: DownBSmythJ (eds) Critical Voices in Teacher Education: Teaching for Social Justice in Conservative Times. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, pp.223–238.
60.
VelijaPCapelSKateneW (2008) ‘Does knowing stuff like PSHE and citizenship make me a better teacher?’ Student teachers in the teacher training figuration. European Physical Education Review20(2): 165–178.
61.
WagerEKleinertS (2011) Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22–24, 2010. In: MayerTSteneckN (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Singapore: Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, pp.309–316.
