Background: Many studies have found that Physical Education and Health (PEH) is a popular subject among the majority of pupils. Still, there is an on-going discussion concerning the aim of PEH and what legitimises it as a school subject. It is difficult to identify what knowledge appears as legitimate within PEH, and this creates conflicts within the field. Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to contribute to the on-going debate regarding the knowledge content and the identity problems described in PEH. The conceptual framework used is curriculum theory, inspired by Bernstein's and Lundgren's theoretical work on the social construction of knowledge and the relationship between the production and reproduction of curricular knowledge, further developed by Linde. The specific research questions are the following: (1) What knowledge appears as legitimate in the subject in Sweden on these three levels: In the syllabus, as viewed by teachers, and during the realisation of lessons? (2) What are the similarities and differences between these levels with regard to legitimate subject knowledge? (3) Can we understand the described identity problem in the subject with the help of what knowledge appears legitimate? Research design and data collection: The data used originate from three empirical materials obtained in Sweden from 2003 to 2005: the syllabus valid for compulsory school (i.e. Lpo 94) at the time the interviews and observations took place, material from semi-structured interviews with six PEH teachers who teach year 9 in four different secondary schools, and information from 20 videotaped PEH lessons taught by the interviewed teachers. Findings:The results indicate that one can distinguish two largely dissimilar objects of learning which differ most markedly between the field of formulation and the field of transformation and realisation. The content knowledge of the field of formulation is largely reformulated in the field of transformation, but no major change takes place from the field of transformation to the field of realisation. The 'formulated object of learning' primarily comprises functional physical exercise, conceptual development, and the understanding of health and lifestyles. The 'realised object of learning' consists of formalised sport and physical exercise, with a minor focus on conceptual development. Conclusions: Since two largely different objects of learning emerge in the subject, consensus is low regarding what knowledge is considered legitimate; the knowledge domain on the primary field most likely differs between the two arenas. A main problem for PEH in trying to gain legitimacy is that there are many different actors in the primary field who are related to and have interest in the subject and the # 2014 Association for Physical Education knowledge basis of the subject derives from several different academic disciplines and from non-academic ones.

Since teaching in Swedish preschool was regulated in the Education Act 2010, preschool teachers have appeared to struggle with the concept of “teaching” in their day-to-day practices. This paper is based on a collaborative R&D programme involving preschool teachers and researchers aimed to build knowledge of what can characterize teaching in preschool. The research was carried out in 40–44 preschools/preschool departments in eight municipalities in Sweden between 2018 and 2020. The method was based on a praxiographic approach where preschool teachers tried out different theory-informed teaching arrangements, including didaktik, variation-theory, post-structural gateway and pragmatic perspective. The material for the article consisted of 350 co-plans, 305 co-evaluations and 35 hours of video. Analysis was based on a didaktik premise and can be methodologically described in terms of abductive analysis. Theory-informed teaching arrangements have been tried out and shown to support teachers in conducting teaching in the complex reality that is based on scientific grounds and proven experience. In summary, the analysis is merged in a communicable entity through the concept of “multivocal didaktik modelling.”

The purpose of this study was to examine the values of movement and physical activity (MoPA) using government policy documents (e.g., laws and curricula) on early childhood education and care (ECEC) from Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. This descriptive, comparative study was designed based on curriculum theory and used word count and content analyses to identify similarities and differences in the occurrence of MoPA in the ECEC policies of Nordic countries. Seven terms were identified as MoPA-related in Nordic policy documents. These terms occurred in various content contexts: development, environment, expression, health and well-being, learning and play, albeit sparsely. MoPA was referred to as both a goal in and of itself and as a means of achieving other goals (e.g., learning or development in another area). Formulations specifically dedicated to MoPA as a goal were present in the Danish and Finnish curricula and, to some extent, also in the Norwegian curriculum, while the Icelandic and Swedish curricula mentioned MoPA mostly as a means. Findings indicated that MoPA, which is important for children’s development, health, and well-being, is a low-priority value, to varying degrees, in the ECEC policies enacted by Nordic countries and the guidance provided to educators and stakeholders therein is inexplicit.

Purpose: The purpose of this conceptual article is to explore how Bernstein's concepts can further our understanding of the internal structure of knowledge informing physical education (PE) and the transmission of knowledge from its site of production into the school subject. In the process of constructing a school subject, knowledge is chosen and decontextualised from where it is produced and then recontextualised into the pedagogic context. This process involves a subjective selection of what is valued as important knowledge. That which is stipulated in the curriculum is regarded as legitimate knowledge worth transmitting to the younger generation. This article offers a deepened understanding of the organising principles of knowledge and the transformation of knowledge into the recontextualised field of PE. Background: The subject of PE has been legitimised in various ways over time, yet in many parts of the world PE as a school subject remains under discussion. Competing ideas have appeared over the years about what constitutes PE, and these have been compared and contrasted with each other. Researchers in the field are concerned with a range of different yet related issues regarding the aim of the subject, the relevance of the content knowledge, and the legitimacy of PE as a school subject. Key concepts: Bernstein's concepts of pedagogic device and knowledge structures will be applied as explanatory frameworks. The current PE syllabus and support documents in Sweden serve as examples to illustrate how the use of these two overarching concepts can help deepen the understanding of the internal structure of knowledge informing PE and the transmission of knowledge from its site of production into the school subject. Conclusion: This article demonstrates how applying Bernstein's concepts as an explanatory framework helps identify the characteristics of the knowledge that informs PE and the origin and site of this knowledge. PE appears to be informed by a wide range of different knowledge domains, with each one possessing its own knowledge structure with different characteristics and ways of constructing knowledge. The article suggests that an understanding of the complexity of knowledge informing PE must be taken into consideration in the debate about the subject.

Most children attend preschools in Sweden, and preschool is thus an important arena for children’s development and growth as well as for the development of and through movement. However, little is known about the teaching of movement in Swedish preschools. This article develops knowledge of what can characterize such teaching, particularly regarding goal and motive, content, and teaching actions. The material was generated in 2018–2019 in collaboration with 42 preschool departments in Sweden. The theoretical approach is “didaktik”, and “why”, “what”, and “how” questions are used as analytical tools. A variety of content can be seen, such as fundamental movement skills, different aspects of movement and, in a few teaching arrangements, physical activity. The teaching is often led by the teacher, though the children are sometimes co-leaders. The results also indicate a focus on inherent values but also on investment and added values. The study highlights the importance of preschool teachers’ attention to the prospective object and purpose of teaching movement, but also of teachers’ competence and the need for conscious strategies for teaching movement. Through well-grounded didaktik choices, children can be offered good opportunities to experience and explore movement.