Conference Agenda

Research and policy statements argue that school Health and Physical Education (HPE) can make a unique contribution to the physical, cognitive, emotional and social development of young people (Opstoel et al., 2020; UNESCO, 2015). It can also provide opportunities for young people to develop the knowledge and skills needed to navigate and respond to the inequities and precarity (Kirk, 2020) that can negatively impact health, and that have been amplified in a COVID-19 era. Despite the aforementioned potential of HPE, it does not always provide equitable opportunities for all students, and often excludes on the basis of gender, sexuality, ethnicity, religion and social class (e.g., Gerdin & Larsson, 2018; Landi, 2019; Mooney & Gerdin, 2019; Walseth, 2015). Due to a range of socio-historical, political and contextual factors, many HPE teachers have not had the opportunity to develop the necessary pedagogical knowledge and skills to teach in inclusive and socially just ways (Gerdin et al., 2018; 2019). Exacerbating this challenge is the limited scholarship focusing on empirically-based, social justice pedagogies in HPE, particularly as informed by teacher and student perspectives.

This proposed symposium will report on the ongoing work of the EDUHEALTH 2.0 project. This project builds on the findings and outcomes of the previous EDUHEALTH project that called on HPE teacher observations and post observation critical incident interviews (Philpot et al, 2020), and identified how broader curricular and school policy interact to facilitate the enactment of social justice pedagogies in HPE. These pedagogies include building goodrelationships, teaching for social cohesion and explicitly teaching about and acting on social inequities (Gerdin et al., 2020). The aim of EDUHEALTH 2.0, which brings together researchers from Sweden, Norway, Spain, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, is to identify, compare, co-design and support the enactment of social justice pedagogies in HPE that promote equitable learning experiences and outcomes. Data will be collected in these countries by; (i) drawing on critical incident technique methodology to observe and identify teaching practices that promote social justice and explore the teachers’ and students’ experiences of these practices; and (ii) doing participatory action-research together with teachers and students in developing social justice pedagogies for HPE practice.

The strength of this research project lies in being able to examine and curate examples of HPE practices across different countries and collectively learn more about social justice pedagogies in practice. Our conception of social justice pedagogies is built on Wright’s (2004) call for teaching practices that assist ‘students to examine and challenge the status quo, the dominant constructions of reality and the power relations that produce inequities, in ways that can lead to advocacy and community action’ (p. 7). That is, social justice pedagogies are about identifying inequalities and empowering individuals and groups to take social action to achieve change (Freire, 1970). Ultimately, the goal of this research project is to inform educational policy, curriculum makers, HPE teacher education and the further development of social justice pedagogies that support HPE teachers in practice.

The session will begin with a brief introduction to the symposium and overview of the project rationale and methodology. This overview will be followed by four separate presentations from four of the participating countries in the EDUHEALTH 2.0 project. Each country will present initial findings from the work has been done to date within their context. At the conclusion of the fourth presentation we will present the future direction and intended goals of the project. Finally, a discussant will reflect on the work presented and the nature of the project before opening the floor to the audience for the final 15 minutes of the symposium.

In Sweden, the school subject Physical Education and Health (PEH) is understood as part of public health policy. Having skills and knowledge related to physical activity and health is described as an asset for both the individual and society (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2011). Despite new curricula in Sweden calling for teachers to address equity (Skolverket [Swedish National Agency for Education], 2011), PEH teachers still have problems catering to the needs of all their pupils (Ekberg, 2016; Larsson et al., 2018) with achievement and higher grades in PEH often being linked to active participation in sport clubs (Svennberg, 2017). Pupils who do not participate in organized sport in their leisure time experience feelings of anxiety and inability (Ekberg, 2016). The PEH teachers themselves tend to focus more on making the pupils interested in and motivated to do (more) physical activity and sport rather than health (Schenker, 2018). Further, higher grades are generally attained by boys with a Swedish background and who have well-educated parents (Svennberg & Högberg, 2018). In this paper we will present some our initial findings from an ongoing critical participatory action-research (CPAR) project at two different upper-secondary schools in Sweden. The schools and teachers involved in the study was selected through purposive sampling (Bryman 2016) located in two different cities in southern Sweden. The participants involve the entire PEH departments at these schools with a total of 14 teachers with the study forming part of their professional development. The first cycle of the CPAR will run from June 2022 – June 2023. Data from the action-research with teachers will be analysed through thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2013) and consistent with principles of teaching for equity and social justice (Freire, 1970). Data will more specifically be analysed through a six-phase thematic analysis approach that will consist of familiarisation with data, initial and advanced coding, identifying and naming themes and reporting findings (Braun & Clarke, 2013). The initial themes will report on the teachers’ perceptions of social justice, the identification of social justice issues in their teaching practice and their efforts to enact social justice pedagogies. The paper concludes with some reflections on the challenges of doing CPAR with PEH teachers and bringing about social change.

Braun, B., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: Sage. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University Press. Ekberg, J.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 Pedagogy, 21(3), 249–268. Freire, P. (1970). Cultural Action for Freedom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review. Larsson, L., Linnér, S., & Schenker, K. (2018). The doxa of physical education teacher education – set in stone? European Physical Education Review, 24(1), 114–130. Schenker. K. (2018). Health(y) education in health and physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 23(3), 229–243.

In Norway, a new National curriculum for all school subjects was implemented from 2020 (Utdanningsdirektoratet, 2019). According to the overall curriculum aims, HPE shall contribute with insight into cultural diversity, foster respect for others, promote democracy and give equal opportunity for all. Students are expected to a greater extent to explore their own identity and movement capabilities. The curriculum also includes activities from the indigenous Sámi culture in Norway (Utdanningsdirektoratet, 2019). While analysing the former HPE curriculum in Norway, Dowling and Flintoff (2018) pointed to how competence aims that mirrors ‘Nordic movement culture’ with winter-activities and ‘friluftsliv’ can lead to practices that marginalize non-white movement cultures and students from minority backgrounds. A review of ‘friluftsliv’ as part of HPE indicates that this can be a real case in Norway (Abelsen & Leirhaug, 2017). Despite that the new HPE curriculum can be said to invite social justice pedagogies (Gerdin et al., 2022), research indicates challenges with gender and disabilities, as well as it seems to be the sports-active students that get the higher grades and the most of the benefits of HPE (Erdvik et al. 2019; Säfvenbom et al., 2015). This presentation is based on qualitative in-depth interviews with six HPE teachers and seven students from three upper secondary schools. The interviews were conducted as part of preparing a critical participatory action-research (CPAR) within the schools (Kemmis et al., 2014). The schools were selected through purposive sampling (Bryman 2016). The interviews were particularly interested in the local understandings and enactments of social justice pedagogies, as well as possible challenges in the HPE context of teaching for equity and social justice (Freire, 1970). The analysis of both teacher data and student data followed a six-phase reflexive thematic analysis approach inspired by Braun and Clarke (2021). The findings show different understandings and perceptions of social justice, both as a general concept and in concrete examples from their HPE experiences. While teachers say they make effort to create dialog and inclusive practices in their teaching, the students do not experience and understand this the same way. In addition, the initial themes include assessment in HPE as controversial, teacher not listening in ‘the so-called dialog’, and suggest that HPE still struggle with inequities between girls and boys. We conclude by sharing some reflections on how we will use these findings in going forward, doing CPAR with HPE teachers as co-constructers of knowledge.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Sage. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford University Press. Dowling, F. & Flintoff, A. (2018). A whitewashed curriculum? The construction of race in contemporary PE curriculum policy. Sport, Education and Society, 23(1), 1–13, DOI: 10.1080/13573322.2015.1122584 Erdvik, I. B., Haugen, T., Ivarsson, A., & Säfvenbom, R. (2019). Development of basic psychological need satisfaction in physical education: Effects of a two-year PE programme. Journal for Research in Arts and Sports Education, 3(2). Freire, P. (1970). Cultural Action for Freedom. Harvard Educational Review. Gerdin, G., Smith, W., Philpot, R., Schenker, K., Moen, K. M., Linnér, S., Westlie, K. & Larsson, L. (2022). Social Justice Pedagogies in Health and Physical Education. Routledge. Kemmis, S., Mctaggart, R. & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action Research Planner: Doing Critical Participatory Action Research. Springer. Säfvenbom, R., Haugen, T. & Bulie, M. (2015). Attitudes toward and motivation for PE. Who collects the benefits of the subject? Sport, Education and Society 23(3) 629–646. Utdanningsdirektoratet (2019). Curriculum in Physical education (KRO01 05) [Official English translation].

At all levels of education, the concept of social justice and what it is that teachers can do in the name of teaching for, and about social justice is both ubiquitous and simultaneously poorly understood. If social justice is an aspiration of education (Freire, 1970), the understandings of what it is take on importance as it will inevitably inform the pedagogical work of teachers. This presentation draws on data from an ongoing international collaborative study that explores teaching for social justice in the subject of Health and Physical Education (HPE). In this presentation, we report on New Zealand Health and Physical Education teachers’ perceptions of social justice and social justice pedagogies Participants were 20 secondary school HPE teachers from New Zealand, a country where social justice is an espoused orientation of national health and Physical Education curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007). Participants were selected through purposive sampling (Denzin & Lincoln, 20012), with a requirement to be fully registered secondary school HPE teachers with at least three years teaching experience, who were interested in sharing their perspectives on social justice. Data were collected though individual semi structured online interviews and transcribed for analysis. Data were analysed through a six-phase thematic analysis approach (Braun & Clarke, 2017). Although the participants teachers were not able to articulate a clear understanding of social justice, they provide insights into how issues of inclusion and equity can/are addressed in everyday HPE practice. In this presentation we report three themes. The first theme, ‘Social justice – good question,’ highlights that social justice is not a concept that is commonly used in HPE departments. The HPE teachers suggest that social justice is important but the meaning of the concept is unclear. The second theme ‘ Equity and Inclusion’ highlights the most common understanding of social justice. The final theme, ‘Acting on difference’ conveys how teachers endeavour to teach for equity and inclusion in their classrooms. We discuss these findings through Nancy Fraser’s (2014) theories of justice. The discussion highlights how the pedagogies of HPE teachers can contribution to recognition, redistribution and representation.

Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y. S (2012). Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Boston: Sage. Clarke, V. & Braun, V. (2017) Thematic analysis, The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12:3, 297-298, DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613 Fraser, N. (2014). Justice interruptus: Critical reflections on the" postsocialist" condition. Routledge. Freire, P. (1970). Cultural Action for Freedom. Harvard Educational Review. Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.

Situated within the ‘big tent’ of critical scholarship (Lather, 1998), the pursuit of social justice agenda’s in education broadly, and HPE specifically, have been relatively modest in practice, despite an extensive (and growing) body of work advocating these laudable aims (Hickey et al., 2019). Substantial scholarship has identified the role of initial teacher education (ITE) in ‘subverting the conditions and practices that serve to privilege, albeit unwittingly, individuals who project particular behaviours and dispositions over those that do not’ (Hickey & Mooney, 2019, p. 148). In short, it appears that despite the introduction of a national curriculum underpinned by social justice and emancipatory aims in HPE a decade ago (Macdonald, 2013) and a policy imperative instantiated through national teacher standards to practise in socially inclusive ways, examples of ways in which various practices in HPE contribute and reproduce injustices for many young people continue to be reported. Understanding the conditions that support dispositional interrogations that manifest in pedagogical practices becomes key to achieving changes to teacher’s practices (Hickey et al., 2019). While it seems blatantly obvious that ITE has a role to play in achieving this, the manifestation of broader political discourses and agendas at both the federal level, with the capability levers and responsibility of funding Higher Education and ITE providers, and at the local state level with the responsibility for funding schools and the teacher workforce, constrains what can be achieved across various levels of the Australian education system. Fernandez-Balboa (2017) argues that key here is a redirect from the social to the personal – to understand more about what enables or constrains the conditions of pedagogical practice, we need contemporary insights into the personal drivers (biographical, social and political) of certain practices. Against a backdrop of global and local political crises, financial and economic collapse, pandemics, climate change and social conflict, relatively little is known about the ways in which teacher’s personal politics shape constructions of social justice and their pedagogical practices. This paper reports preliminary findings from a pilot questionnaire with approximately 50 pre-service and graduate Australian HPE teachers located in the state of Victoria to examine the ways in conceptions of social justice are shaped through broader political dispositions. Findings are analysed through descriptive statistics and qualitative responses thematically analysed (Braun & Clarke, 2006) to identify the ways in which personal politics become implicated in conceptions of social justice and practices of social justice pedagogies

Braun. V., & Clarke, V. (2006). ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101 Fernandez-Balboa, J. (2017). ‘Imploding the boundaries of transformative/critical pedagogy and research in physical education and sport pedagogy: looking inward for (self) consciousness/knowledge and transformation’. Sport, Education and Society, 22(4), 426-441. Hickey, C., Mooney, A. & Alfrey, L (2019). ‘Locating Criticality in Policy: The ongoing struggle for a social justice agenda in school physical education’, Movimento, v. 25, e25063, p 1-11. Hickey, C., & Mooney, A (2019). ‘Critical scholarship in Physical Education Teacher Education: A journey, not a destination!’ in R. Pringle, H. Larsson & G. Gerdin, Critical research in sport, health and physical education: How to make a difference, Routledge., pp. 147-159. Lather, P. (1998). ‘Critical pedagogy and its complicities: A praxis of stuck places’. Educational Theory, 48(4), 487-497. Macdonald, D. (2013). ‘The new Australian Health and Physical Education Curriculum: a case of/for gradualism in curriculum reform’, Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education, 4(2), 95-108.