Affective goals for physical education have historically been an identified goal for physical education programs, and such goals continue to be integral parts of what physical education teachers say they want to do. Affective value orientations to curriculum have also been identified as strong aspects of the values and belief systems of practicing physical educators (Ennis, Ross, & Chen, 1992) as well as the values and belief systems of preservice teachers (Solmon &Ashy, 1995). The national standards for physical education (National Association for Sport and Physical Education [NASPE], 1995) identify seven standards that students should achieve as a result of a comprehensive physical education program. According to these standards, a physically educated person
The purpose of this study was to directly compare teacher and student expectations for task difficulty and performance, perceptions of actual task difficulty, perceptions of student performance and effort, and perceptions of teacher feedback. Stimulated recall interviews following a 14-lesson volleyball unit were conducted with 8 sixth-grade students and their physical education teacher. The results revealed little congruency between student and teacher perspectives of task difficulty or perceptions of student performance and effort. The students and the teacher agreed the most on expected performance level and the least on perceptions of effort. Such differences in perspectives may be partially explained by the sources of information used by the teacher and students to form their expectations and perceptions. There was somewhat higher agreement between the teacher and students on the purpose of and affective reactions to skill-related feedback.
This study examined cooperating teacher (CT) experiences in and perceptions of the student teaching practicum, and the impact of the practicum on their beliefs about teaching in physical education and on their perceptions of the practicum. Constructivism, particularly social constructivism, provided the theoretical framework. The participants were 7 elementary physical education teachers serving as CTs. The primary data sources were standardized, open-ended interviews with the CTs and journals kept by the CTs throughout the practicum. The results showed that these CTs saw the practicum as a positive experience that caused them to increase reflection on and revitalize their teaching. Few changes were noted from pre- to postpracticum in the CTs’ beliefs about teaching physical education or their perceptions of the practicum. CTs with positive practicum perspectives have in common certain contextual factors and social interactions that differ from CTs with negative perspectives; these are discussed.
This paper describes a development, research, and improvement (DRI) framework for conducting comprehensive program assessment in physical education teacher education (PETE) programs. The DRI model has three main stages: development, research, and decision-making for improvement. Each stage is comprised of a series of questions that allow a PETE faculty to proceed through program assessment to arrive at a “custom made” plan. The framework functions mainly on the collection of valid and reliable data gathered by using existing systematic observation instruments, qualitative techniques, and psychometric instruments from the current sport pedagogy literature. The resulting data are then used to monitor students’ acquisition of the program’s intended pedagogical skills, content knowledge, performance knowledge, beliefs-attitudes, and professional dispositions. Having become a “learning organization,” the PETE faculty is then able to make more systematic decisions about improving selected program components.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.