18. Research in Sports Pedagogy
Paper
A Scoping Review of Empirical Studies with Holistic Perspectives on Health and Implications for Teaching Physical Education
Petter Wiklander1, Andreas Fröberg1, Suzanne Lundvall1,2
1Department of Food and Nutrition, and Sport Science, University of Gothenburg, Sweden; 2Department of Sport, Food and Natural Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences
Presenting Author: Wiklander, Petter
Health in physical education (PE) has in recent decades received growing public and political attention. PE is recognized as playing an important role in promoting health and well-being among children and adolescents.
From a biomedical perspective, researchers and stakeholders argue that PE should advocate a public health approach where physical activity (PA) is seen as a central means of avoiding lifestyle-related diseases and maintaining good health (i.e. McKenzie et al., 2016; Sallis et al., 2012). However, other researchers claim that the biomedical perspective reproduces a narrow understanding of health, which ignores how different environmental and social contexts impact people’s health (Harris et al., 2016; Kirk, 2018). When PE teachers uncritically accept and reproduce such approach, it can result in a simplified form of PE that primarily aims to promote PA participation for the improvement of physical health (Kirk, 2018; Maivorsdotter et al., 2010). Critical PE scholars contest the prevalent biomedical perspective on health for its narrow conceptualization of health and its exclusive focus on physical activity and disease prevention. Instead, holistic (critical and/or salutogenic) perspectives that emphasize the complex nature of health are advocated.
Holistic perspectives on health emphasize sociocultural aspects, strengthening factors, and resources that actively promote health in a relation between the individual and their surroundings (Kirk, 2018; Tinning, 2015). An additional line of research highlights aspects of sustainability where environmental, economic, and societal issues become part of holistic perspectives on health (Lundvall and Fröberg, 2022; Olive and Enright, 2021). According to Gray et al. (2015), it is important that stakeholders, teachers, and students regard health as a holistic concept encompassing social, emotional, psychological, and physical domains to deconstruct and challenge the current and prevalent narrow views of health. A salutogenic strengths-based approach can offer PE teachers a broader and more nuanced perspective on health, emphasizing how movement activities can enrich people’s lives (McCuaig and Quennerstedt, 2016; Quennerstedt, 2019). One limiting aspect, however, is that most articles concerning holistic perspectives have been theoretical and merely discussed the different perspectives on teaching health in PE. Little has been done to empirically explore and/or implement holistic perspectives in authentic PE settings (Mong and Standal, 2019). The prevailing narrow conceptualization of health and the dearth of empirical research with holistic perspectives on health highlight the need for more research and a broadening of perspectives. Hence, the overarching purpose of this study is to contribute to knowledge about what characterizes empirical research literature with holistic perspectives on health and discuss implications for teaching PE. Based on the aim, the research question is:
- In what ways do empirical papers with holistic perspectives on health address the teaching of health in elementary, secondary, and upper secondary school PE?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedA scoping review was conducted to map the existing empirical research literature with holistic perspectives on health in PE and to identify and examine key characteristics related to the concept. The methodological framework from Arksey and O’Malley (2005) guided the process of developing, conducting, and reporting this scoping review. This process included: (i) identifying the research question; (ii) searching for relevant studies; (iii) selecting studies; (iv) charting the data; and (v) collating, summarizing; and reporting the results.
Four databases were searched: SportDiscus, ERIC, Web of Science, and Scopus. The searches were limited to title, abstract and keywords, and peer-reviewed literature published in English language academic journals between 2002 and 2021. The following search string was used: “physical education” AND “health” AND “teaching” AND “education.” The selected search string was chosen to source appropriate papers, although we were aware of the risk of ending up with an extensive volume of data. The initial search was conducted in June 2021, and an updated search with the same search string and databases was conducted in January 2022. The 20-year period from 2002 to 2021 was chosen to present a contemporary picture of the field.
When selecting studies, a PCC mnemonic was used to guide the development of inclusion criteria. The papers were required to involve: (i) PE teachers and/or students (population); (ii) teaching holistic perspectives on health (concept); and (iii) general education elementary, secondary, or upper secondary school PE (context). Furthermore, only empirical studies were included. The main reasons for exclusion of papers were: not teaching health in PE (e.g. content related to but not explicitly addressing teaching health); whole-of-school approaches; studies with a biomedical perspective on health; and not empirical studies.
Exploring educational practices suggests a didactic framework for analysis. A rationale for didactical research is that education involves many different choices in terms of why, what, and how (Quennerstedt and Larsson, 2015). The analytical process was guided by how the selected papers addressed health as purpose (why), content (what), and form (by what/whom in terms of the resources used), and how this was described when embracing holistic perspectives on health. A thematic analysis was conducted for identifying, analyzing, and interpreting patterns, as suggested by Braun and Clarke (2019). Themes were abductively generated regarding the analytical questions.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe findings confirm that empirical papers with holistic perspectives on health, in the research corpus regarding teaching health in PE, are rare (n=12 out of 3263). Two themes were identified through an abductive analysis of the papers: (i) teachers’ philosophies and didactic considerations; and (ii) alternative ways to teach. The review manifests that although PE teachers may hold a narrow understanding of health and lack didactic competence to deliver relevant health-related PE, they are receptive to holistic perspectives and capable of critical reflection, if given the appropriate support and opportunities for professional development. Adopting holistic approaches to health in PE requires perceptive didactic considerations. Promoting students’ consciousness and agency to develop or maintain their physical, mental, social, and emotional health and well-being in and through PE is as much about the form and delivery as the content of teaching, where the educative aspects need to be highlighted. This requires challenging PE teachers’ understandings and beliefs and encouraging them to renegotiate their practice, by enacting critically conscious, inclusive, student-centered teaching approaches, contributing to students’ sustainable well-being. The included articles in our review show traces of elaborated didactic considerations and curricula design, but we recommend further research exploring alternative approaches and deliveries of holistic PE curricula.
Another conclusion is that many of the arguments for holistic perspectives on health in PE align with the rationale for education for sustainable development (UNESCO, 2017), which could also suggest a reorientation for future PE. Lundvall and Fröberg (2022) have recently suggested how health in PE can be reframed when sustainable development issues become part of the holistic perspectives on health.
The questions to ask are: what knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values will the students of today need to thrive and shape their world in an uncertain future, and how can PE contribute to this development?
ReferencesArksey H and O’Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8(1): 19–32.
Braun V and Clarke V (2019) Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 11(4): 589–597.
Gray S, MacIsaac S and Jess M (2015) Teaching ‘health’ in physical education in a ‘healthy’ way. Retos-Nuevas Tendencias En Educacion Fisica Deporte Y Recreacion 28: 165–172.
Harris J, Cale L, Duncombe R, et al. (2016) Young people’s knowledge and understanding of health, fitness and physical activity: Issues, divides and dilemmas. Sport, Education and Society 23(5): 407–420.
Kirk D (2018) Physical education-as-health promotion: Recent developments and future issues. Education and Health 36(3): 70–75.
Lundvall S and Fröberg A (2022) From individual to lifelong environmental processes: Reframing health in physical education with the sustainable development goals. Sport, Education and Society 1–13. Epub ahead-of-print 22 April 2022. DOI: 10.1080/13573322.2022.2062320.
Maivorsdotter N, Burrows L and Quennerstedt M (2010) From teaching young people to be healthy to learning health. Utbildning Och Demokrati 19(2): 97–112.
McCuaig L and Quennerstedt M (2016) Health by stealth – exploring the sociocultural dimensions of salutogenesis for sport, health and physical education research. Sport, Education and Society 23(2): 111–122.
McKenzie T, Sallis J, Rosengard P, et al. (2016) The SPARK programs: A public health model of physical education research and dissemination. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 35(4): 381–389.
Mong HH and Standal ØF (2019) Didactics of health in physical education – a review of literature. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy 24(5): 506–518.
Olive R and Enright E (2021) Sustainability in the Australian health and physical education curriculum: An ecofeminist analysis. Sport, Education and Society 26(4): 389–402.
Quennerstedt M (2019) Healthying physical education-on the possibility of learning health. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 24(1): 1–15.
Quennerstedt M and Larsson H (2015) Learning movement cultures in physical education practice. Sport, Education and Society 20(5): 565–572.
Sallis J, McKenzie T, Beets M, et al. (2012) Physical education’s role in public health: Steps forward and backward over 20 years and HOPE for the future. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 83(2): 125–135.
Tinning R (2015) ‘I don’t read fiction’: Academic discourse and the relationship between health and physical education. Sport, Education and Society 20(6): 710–721.
UNESCO (2017) Education for Sustainable Development Goals: Learning Objectives. Paris: UNESCO.
18. Research in Sports Pedagogy
Paper
Critical Health Literacy in School-based Health Education - the learning potential of Physical Education
Anders L. Hage Haugen, Marc Esser-Nöethlichs, Kirsti Riiser, Hatlevik Ove Edvard
OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway
Presenting Author: Haugen, Anders L. Hage
The school subject Physical education (PE) and its role within the broader public health work have long been a subject of discussion. Academic studies revolving around the health benefits of PE can broadly be categorized as being rooted in either a biomedical or resource-based health perspectives (Mong & Standal, 2019). In short, these perspectives represent different views on the question of ‘what’ health is, and subsequently on ‘why’ health should be part of PE and ‘how’ it should be taught. In the biomedical perspective health is understood as absence of disease and the ‘what’ of PE is often narrowed down to maximizing levels of moderate and vigorous physical activity. The ‘why’ becomes prevention of various non-communicable diseases. The ‘how’ is then dominated by instructional methods of pre-determined content developed by experts (Mong & Standal, 2019). On the other hand, a salutogenetic or resource-based health perspective are proposed to highlight and broaden the educative potential of PE (Quennerstedt, 2008). In this line of research health is understood as a collective and individual resource, and the ’why’ shifts from the preventing of risks to the nurturing assets for health. The ‘how’ is often described in terms of student-active and inquiry-based or critical didactical approaches, and a much broader array of skills, attributes and knowledge can be explored for the ‘what’ of health in PE.
Critical Health Literacy (CHL) is often put forward as a promising conceptual framework for health education (Nash, Patterson, Flittner, Elmer, & Osborne, 2021; Peralta, Rowling, Samdal, Hipkins, & Dudley, 2017). The concept have roots within emancipatory critical pedagogy (Freebody & Luke, 1990; Freire, 1970; Nutbeam, 2000) and consists of three overlapping and interconnected domains, (CHL-A) information appraisal, (CHL-B) understanding social determinants of health and (CHL-C) abilities that enable actions to the benefit of health and well-being in a collective (Chinn, 2011; Haugen, Riiser, Esser-Noethlichs, & Hatlevik, 2022). In this study we focus on the third domain of CHL, which revolves around social actions that adolescents can take to become active agents for health and well-being in a collective. The importance of cognitive and analytical skills for understanding and appraising health-related information is apparent in that most of the research on CHL in school contexts are being conducted within this domain (Haugen, Riiser, et al., 2022; Sykes & Wills, 2019). However, the ability of young people to act to the benefit of one’s own and others health and well-being are inevitably also dependent on social and democratic interaction abilities (Chinn, 2011). PE is an appropriate context for developing social interaction abilities (Ciotto & Gagnon, 2018), and PE contexts are particularly well suited because they qualitatively differ from regular classroom settings by providing a more dynamic and interactive learning environment (McHugh, 1995). Importantly though, learning does not automatically occur as a result of participating in PA or sport within PE, but are dependent contextual and didactical considerations (Bailey et al., 2009).
In Norway PE is a school subject that is graded from 1-6 on equal terms as traditional academic subjects like Science and Language Arts. The grade reflects teachers’ assessment of several competences, attributes and skills described in national standards, including physical, social, and cognitive domains.
The main hypothesis for this study is that achievement in PE (as measured by expected grade) is associated with CHL-C. We also investigate how participation in sport club activities, leisure physical activity (PA) and parents’ education influences the association between PE and CHL-C.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study is part of the Literacies for health and life skills project at Oslo Metropolitan University in Norway (Walseth, 2016). A cross-sectional digital survey was conducted in five partner schools during the autumn of 2021. In total 522 out of 1265 (41 %) pupils consented and responded to a digital survey during school hours. Those that did not bring a written consent or changed their mind about participation were given alternative assignments for the 10-30 minutes duration of the survey.
CHL-C was measured with two scales from the CHLA questionnaire (Haugen, Esser- Nöethlichs, Riiser, & Hatlevik, 2022. Submitted for publication; Haugen, Riiser, et al., 2022). Both scales consist of three indicators measuring perceived abilities to support others (CHL-C1) and perceived abilities to participate in discussions regarding health and well-being (CHL-C2). Performance in PE was measured with one indicator asking pupils which grade (1-6) they expected to achieve in PE this semester.
A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the psychometric properties of the measurement models (the latent variables). Closeness of fit was evaluated with the unbiased Standardized Root Mean Residuals adjusted for average communality (uSRMR/¯R2 ≤ 0.5), along with a criterion of no individual residuals above 0.1 (Shi, Maydeu-Olivares, & DiStefano, 2018; Ximénez, Maydeu-Olivares, Shi, & Revuelta, 2022)
Further analysis was conducted in four steps, with each step introducing a new parameter to the model being estimated. Step one introduces regression paths from PE to CHL-C1 and CHL-C2. In step two we add parents’ education as a predictor of PE and both CHL scales before we repeat the procedure in steps 3-4 with the variable’s participation in sport club activities and leisure physical activity. Global and local model fit will be evaluated for each step of the SEM analysis. We report recommended fit indices such as chi-square test (χ2mvadjusted) of exact fit (p ≥ 0.05), Comparative Fit Index (CFI ≥ 0.95), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA ≤ 0.05) and Standardized Root Mean Residuals (SRMR ≤ 0.05) (Kline, 2016).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsPre-liminary results
Current analysis of the final model yields excellent model fit (χ2mvadjusted = 31.156 (df = 24, p < 0.149), CFI = 0.996, RMSEA = 0.024 [0.000, 0.045], SRMR = 0.036). In the model there was significant and positive effects from PE to both the dependent variables CHL-C1 (βPECHL-C1 = 0.264, p = 0.001) and CHL-C2 (βPECHL-C2 = 0.351, p < 0.000). Neither parents’ education, participation in sport club activities or leisure PA had a significant direct effect on the dependent variables, however they all had a significant and positive effect on PE, in total explaining 30.1 % of the variance in PE. Altogether the direct and indirect effects in the model explains 8.9 % and 13.1% of the variation in CHL-C1 and CHL-C2 respectively. The majority of this is the direct effect from PE, as can be derived by squaring the standardized regression coefficients (R2PECHL-C1 = 0.070, R2PECHL-C2 = 0.123).
Conclusion
This study contributes to the ongoing discussion on the role of health within the school subject of PE, and how PE contributes to health education in the Norwegian secondary school context. We hypothesized that achievement in PE could predict levels CHL-C among pupils in lower secondary schools. The result from our analysis supports this hypothesis as there is a significant association between PE and CHL. This association remains when control variables are added to the model. It is important to note that the cross-sectional design of the study does not allow us to make any conclusions about the causality of the associations. It is possible that higher levels of CHL is rewarded with better grades in PE. However, a reciprocal relationship seems most likely.
ReferencesBailey, R., Armour, K., Kirk, D., Jess, M., Pickup, I., Sandford, R., . . . Sport Pedagogy Special Interest, G. (2009). The educational benefits claimed for physical education and school sport: an academic review. Research Papers in Education, 24(1), 1-27. doi:10.1080/02671520701809817
Chinn, D. (2011). Critical health literacy: A review and critical analysis. Soc Sci Med, 73(1), 60-67. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.04.004
Ciotto, C. M., & Gagnon, A. G. (2018). Promoting Social and Emotional Learning in Physical Education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 89(4), 27-33. doi:10.1080/07303084.2018.1430625
Freebody, P., & Luke, A. (1990). Literacies programs: Debates and demands in cultural context. Prospect: Australian Journal of E.S.L, Vol 5.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). United States of America: The Continuum International Publicing Group Inc.
Haugen, A. L. H., Riiser, K., Esser-Noethlichs, M., & Hatlevik, O. E. (2022).
Developing Indicators to Measure Critical Health Literacy in the Context of Norwegian Lower Secondary Schools. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(5), 3116. Retrieved from https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/5/3116
McHugh, E. (1995). Going ‘Beyond the Physical’: Social Skills and Physical Education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 66(4), 18-21. doi:10.1080/07303084.1995.10608127
Mong, H. H., & Standal, Ø. F. (2019). Didactics of health in physical education - a review of literature. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 24, 506-518. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2019.1631270
Nash, R., Patterson, K., Flittner, A., Elmer, S., & Osborne, R. (2021). School-Based Health Literacy Programs for Children (2-16 Years): An International Review. Journal of School Health, 91(8), 632-649. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.13054
Nutbeam, D. (2000). Health literacy as a public health goal: a challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies into the 21st century. Health Promotion International, 15(3), 259-267. doi:10.1093/heapro/15.3.259
Peralta, L., Rowling, L., Samdal, O., Hipkins, R., & Dudley, D. (2017). Conceptualising a new approach to adolescent health literacy. Health Education Journal, 76(7), 787-801. doi:10.1177/0017896917714812
Quennerstedt, M. (2008). Exploring the relation between physical activity and health—a salutogenic approach to physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 13(3), 267-283. doi:10.1080/13573320802200594
Sykes, S., & Wills, J. (2019). Critical health literacy for the marginalised: Empirical findings. In O. Okan, U. Bauer, D. Levin-Zamir, P. Pinheiro, & K. Sørensen (Eds.), International Handbook of Health literacy - Research, practice and policy across the lifespan (pp. 167-181).
Walseth, K. (2016). Literacies for Health and Life Skills. Faculty of international studies and teacher education. Oslo Metropolitan University. Retrieved from https://uni.oslomet.no/hls/
18. Research in Sports Pedagogy
Paper
Students’ Perceptions of the Learning and Assessment of Subject-Specific and Generic Knowledge in Physical Education and Health
Nina Westrin Modell, Göran Gerdin, Katarina Schenker
Linnaeus University, Sweden, Sweden
Presenting Author: Westrin Modell, Nina
There is an ongoing discussion about what constitutes knowledge in the school subject of physical education and health (PEH). Previous research from both the teachers' and the students' perspective indicate that the object of knowledge remains somewhat unclear and that there is a lack of learning taking place in PEH (see e.g. (Modell & Gerdin, 2021; 2022). In Sweden, research and government reports (see e.g., Larsson 2016; Swedish Schools Inspectorate 2018; have over the years emphasized the importance of discussing the objects of knowledge in PEH. Despite this, both teachers and students find it difficult to express themselves about knowledge, learning and learning processes in the subject (Redelius & Hay 2012; Wiker 2017). When it comes to assessment and grading, character-building elements tend to be important (Quennerstedt 2006), while it is unclear which objects of knowledge are central (Larsson & Karlefors, 2015). Recent studies of Swedish PEH practice (Modell & Gerdin, 2021; 2022), for instance, demonstrated how both teaching and assessment/grading practices in PEH are shaped more by the norms and values of competitive and club sports rather than the PEH curriculum. The results also demonstrate that there is an ongoing prioritisation of practical over theoretical knowledge in PEH practice, involving an emphasis on doing and being active without any clear learning objectives.
The role and purpose of schooling emphasizes both general education and subject-specific knowledge. School curriculum documents can be interpreted as saying that knowledge of important societal values is something that schools must convey, but at the same time such knowledge should not be graded (Wibowo, Krieger, Gaum & Dyson 2022). Wibowo et al. (2022) point out that in order to promote a more general and holistic education in PEH, both subject-specific knowledge and generic knowledge such as social, emotional and values knowledge are needed. In this study, it is investigated whether theories of general education knowledge that puts emphasis on social, emotional and values learning can be useful for investigating learning in PEH. The intention is to investigate the possibility of understanding objects of knowledge in PEH by drawing on Michael Uljens non-affirmative theory where an education with both subject-specific and generic knowledge is seen as important (Uljen's 2021). As pointed out by Sjöström and Tyson (2022, p. 52), "It's about connecting a focus on subject learning with clear value-based perspectives such as education and democratic upbringing".
The overall aim of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of knowledge in PEH from an educational perspective by examining upper-secondary school (age 16-19) students' perceptions of learning and assessment in PEH. The study is guided by the following research questions: (i) What do students perceive that they learn in PEH?; and (ii) What knowledge do students perceive to be assessed in PEH?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo understand how students perceive learning and what constitutes important knowledge in PEH, a qualitative approach was used (Alvesson & Sköldberg 2018). Through a convenience sample (Bryman, 2016), contact was made with a teacher of PEH at a secondary school located in a medium-sized city in southern Sweden. After a pilot study was conducted in 2021 the main data collection took place during 2022 including two different PEH classes with data being collected through observations and interviews during one school semester (20 weeks).
The observations were of a non-participatory nature (Bryman, 2016) and focus was on what knowledge the students had the opportunity to learn. During the lessons, the researcher also had informal conversations with the students where sometimes the researcher approached select students to talk to them and at other times the students came up to the researcher spontaneously. After each lesson, the observations were documented in the form of field notes and the students' statements about learning and assessments/grades were written down. In addition, separate interviews were conducted with the students by drawing on semi-structured interview guide that was designed to explore their perceptions of learning and assessment of subject-specific and generic knowledge. These interviews were recorded using audio and then transcribed verbatim.
Based on the observational data and the interview transcriptions, categories were created informed by questions that deal with learning and assessment in PEH. In particular, the focus of the analysis was on both generic knowledge and subject-specific knowledge (Uljens, 2021; Uljens & Nordin, 2022)). The analysis was guided by Kvale and Brinkman´s (2018) assertion that with the help of theoretical interpretation of interviews, the interpretation can be deepened and other dimensions can be discovered. The main categories that were constructed based on the data were; (1) “projects and in-between-lessons”, (2) “generic knowledge” and (3) “subject knowledge and assessment of knowledge”.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe results show that the students account for how they have some larger projects in PEH like strength projects, health projects, orienteering, apparatus gymnastics and dance. Between these projects, they have lessons that the students refer to as "in-between-lessons". The results further show that the students consider that they learn certain generic knowledge as well as subject-specific knowledge in PEH. The subject-specific knowledge that the students learn in this study is both reproductive and productive in nature. For example, they learn rules and techniques in formalized ball games, but they also have the opportunity to change the focus of the subject-specific learning based on their own needs, which is, for instance, expressed in their health project. When it comes to the learning of generic knowledge, it happens more continuously and implicit. However, the students point out that the grades are based on subject-specific knowledge and not on generic knowledge. Despite this, the students believe that it is important to learn generic knowledges associated with social, emotional and values knowledge and that PEH gives them great opportunities for this type of learning to take place. Based on the findings of this study, there is potential for more education-oriented learning to occur in PEH that can open up for more meaningful learning, creativity and ethical-critical action (Sjöström & Tyson 2022; Uljens & Nordin 2022).
ReferencesAlvesson, M & Sköldberg K. (2018). Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research. 3rd edition. Los Angeles: Sage.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.
Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2018). Doing interviews (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Larsson H (2016) Idrott och Hälsa – Igår, Idag, Imorgon [‘Physical Education and Health – Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow’]. Stockholm: Liber.
Larsson, H., & Karlefors, I. (2015). Physical education cultures in Sweden: fitness, sports, dancing … learning?, Sport, Education and Society, 20(5), 573-587.
Modell, N., & Gerdin, G. (2022). ‘But in PEH it still feels extra unfair’: students’ experiences of equitable assessment and grading practices in physical education and health (PEH), Sport, Education and Society, 27(9), 1047-1060.
Modell, N., & Gerdin, G. (2022). ‘Why don’t you really learn anything in PEH?’ – Students’ experiences of valid knowledge and the basis for assessment in physical education and health (PEH). European Physical Education Review, 28(3), 797-815.
Quennerstedt M (2006) Att lära sig hälsa [‘To learn about health’]. Doctoral Thesis. Örebro universitet, Örebro.
Redelius, K. & Hay, P. (2012). Student view on criterion-referenced assessment and grading in Swedish physical education. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 17(2), 211-225.
Sjöström, J. & Tyson, R. (2022). Didaktik för lärande och bildning. . Liber: Stockholm
Swedish Schools Inspectorate (2018) Kvalitetsgranskning av ämnet idrott och hälsa i årskurs 7–9 [‘Quality Assessment of the School Subject Physical Education and Health, Grade 7-9’]. Stockholm: The Swedish Schools Inspectorate.
Uljens; M. (2021). Pedagogiskt ledarskap av pedagogisk verksamhet. I Uljens, M. & Smeds-Nylund, A-S. (red.). Pedagogiskt ledarskap och skolutveckling (s. 37-99). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Uljens, M. & Nordin, A. (2022). Icke-affirmativ didaktik för skolan. I Nordin, A. & Uljens, M (red.). Didaktikens språk – om skolundervisningens mål, innehåll och form (s 37- 58). Malmö: Gleerups.
Wibowo, J., Krieger, C., Gaum, C., & Dyson, B. (2022). Bildung: A German student-centered approach to health and physical education. European Physical Education Review, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X221133060
Wiker M (2017). “Det är live liksom” Elevers perspektiv på villkor och utmaningar i Idrott och Hälsa [‘It’s Like Live: Students Perspectives on Conditions and Challenges in Physical Education and Health’]. Doctoral thesis. Karlstad: Karlstad University.
|
