Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Educating the Student Body: Taking Physical Activity and Physical Education to School
Approaches to Physical
Education in Schools
221
anced with appropriate attention to skill development and to national
education standards for quality physical education (see Box 5-6). In a
recent literature review, Bassett and colleagues (2013) found that physical
education contributes to children achieving an average of 23 minutes of
vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity daily. However,
the time
spent in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity could be increased
by 6 minutes if the physical education curriculum were to incorporate a
standardized curriculum such as SPARK (discussed in detail below) (Bassett
et al., 2013). Thus, it is possible for physical education to contribute to
youth meeting at least half (30 minutes) of their daily requirement for vig-
orous- or moderate-intensity physical activity.
To help children grow holis-
tically, however, physical education needs to achieve other learning goals
when children are active. To this end, physical education programs must
possess the quality characteristics specified by NASPE (2007b, 2009b,c)
(see Box 5-6). Designing and implementing a physical education program
with these characteristics in mind should ensure that
the time and curricular
materials of the program enable students to achieve the goals of becoming
knowledgeable exercisers and skillful movers who value and adopt a physi-
cally active, healthy lifestyle.
Findings from research on effective physical education support these
characteristics as the benchmarks for quality programs. In an attempt to
understand what effective
physical education looks like, Castelli and Rink
(2003) conducted a mixed-methods comparison of 62 physical education
programs in which a high percentage of students achieved the state physical
education learning standards with programs whose students did not achieve
the standards. Comprehensive data derived from student performance,
teacher surveys, and onsite observations demonstrated
that highly effec-
tive physical education programs were housed in cohesive, long-standing
departments that experienced more facilitators (e.g., positive policy, sup-
portive administration) than inhibitors (e.g., marginalized status as a sub-
ject matter within the school). Further, effective
programs made curricular
changes prior to the enactment of state-level policy, while ineffective pro-
grams waited to make changes until they were told to do so. The teachers in
ineffective programs had misconceptions about student performance and,
in general, lower expectations of student performance and behavior.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: