du.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 41) Show all publications
Backman, E. (2018). Undervisning och bedömning i ämnet friluftsliv i ämnet idrott och hälsa. In: : . Paper presented at Idrott och hälsa. Nationell konferens för lärare i idrott och hälsa arrangerad av Skolporten 9-10 april 2018, Stockholm..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Undervisning och bedömning i ämnet friluftsliv i ämnet idrott och hälsa
2018 (Swedish)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Other academic)
National Category
Didactics
Research subject
Education and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-27506 (URN)
Conference
Idrott och hälsa. Nationell konferens för lärare i idrott och hälsa arrangerad av Skolporten 9-10 april 2018, Stockholm.
Available from: 2018-04-20 Created: 2018-04-20 Last updated: 2018-04-20Bibliographically approved
Backman, E., Nyberg, G. & Larsson, H. (2017). Assessment of movement in Swedish PETE: A matter of learning or just ticking a box?. In: : . Paper presented at AIESEP International Conference, Gosier, Guadeloupe.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Assessment of movement in Swedish PETE: A matter of learning or just ticking a box?
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The general knowledge base of Health and Physical Education Teacher Education (HPETE) is growing stronger. As a part of that knowledge base there is an ongoing discussion of the meaning of HPETE students’ movement capabilities (Brown 2013, Capel et al 2011, Johnson 2013, Siedentop 2009, Tinning 2010). Lee Shulman’s (1987) framework of Content Knowledge (CK) and Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) have been used by scholars to examine how students’ ability to move and their ability to teach are valued in HPETE (Backman & Pearson 2016, Herold & Waring 2016, Ward et al 2015). However, the students’ own voices about these issues have rarely been acknowledged. The aim with this paper is therefore to examine how HPETE students at one university in Sweden experience the assessment of movement knowledge in and about aquatics, dance and ice-skating. Semi-structured interviews with two groups including a total of seven students were performed by the one researcher at three different occasions. The interviewing researcher’s regularly work is not at the same university as the participating students. The interviews focused specifically on the teaching and assessment of aquatics, dance and skating within the first semester of HPETE. The transcription of the six interviews was performed by external assistance and the students were all anonymized in the transcribed material. The following analysis, performed by two researchers stationed at the same university as the participating students, focused on how the transcribed material related to the aim and the concepts of Shulman. Preliminary results show several expressions of that the students in our study were not sure of what kinds or what level of movement knowledge were expected of them as they entered HPETE. Further, several students expressed limited possibilities to develop movement ability merely through HPETE teaching but at the same time, practicing unfamiliar movements outside HPETE teacher-led teaching was rare. Although assessment of movement knowledge were most commonly expressed as a qualitative process, some students mentioned that they occasionally experienced assessment of movement knowledge as “a-tick-in-a-box”. Interestingly, the cognitive aspects of movement knowledge (i.e. describe, observe, analyse, discuss, etc.) were on the one hand expressed as vital, but on the other as less characterized by learning compared to the practice of movement skills. The results will be analysed and discussed in relation to research within the field and in relation to Lee Shulman’s framework of CK and PCK. Although making no claims to generalize the results in this study based on the limited number of participants, they might contribute to the discussion of what forms of knowledge to prioritise in HPETE, and thereby also help develop HPE on a school level.

References

Backman, E. & Pearson, P. 2016. “We should assess the students in more authentic situations”. Swedish PE teacher educators’ views of the meaning of movement skills for future PE teachers. European Physical Education Review. 22(1): 47-64.

Brown, T.D. 2013. “A vision lost? (Re)articulating an Arnoldian conception of education ‘in’ movement in physical education.” Sport, Education and Society 18 (1): 21-37.

Capel, S., Hayes, S., Katene, W. and P. Velija. 2011. “The interaction of factors which influence secondary student physical education teachers’ knowledge and development as teachers.” European Physical Education Review, 17 (2): 183–201.

Herold, F. and M. Waring. 2016. “Is practical subject matter knowledge still important? Examining the Siedentopian perspective on the role of content knowledge in physical education teacher education.” Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/17408989.2016.1192592

Johnson, T.G. 2013. “The value of performance in Physical Education teacher education.” Quest 65 (4): 485-497.

Shulman, L.S. 1987. “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform.” Harvard Educational Review 57 (1): 1-21.

Siedentop, D. 2009. “Content Knowledge for Physical Education. In The Routledge Physical Education Reader, edited by R. Bailey and D. Kirk, 243-253. Abingdon: Routledge

Tinning, R. 2010. Pedagogy and human movement: theory, practice, research. Abingdon: Routledge.

Ward, P., Kim, I., Ko, B. and W. Li. 2015. “Effects of Improving Teachers’ Content Knowledge on Teaching and Student Learning in Physical Education.” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 86 (2): 130–139.

Keyword
physical education teacher education, assessment, content knowledge
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Education and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-26776 (URN)
Conference
AIESEP International Conference, Gosier, Guadeloupe
Available from: 2017-12-14 Created: 2017-12-14 Last updated: 2017-12-14Bibliographically approved
Backman, E. (2017). Forskning om friluftsliv i Norge: reproduktion av det nationella eller nyfikenhet på det globala? [Review]. Idrottsforum.org/Nordic sport science forum
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Forskning om friluftsliv i Norge: reproduktion av det nationella eller nyfikenhet på det globala?
2017 (Swedish)In: Idrottsforum.org/Nordic sport science forum, ISSN 1652-7224Article, book review (Other academic) Published
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Malmö: Malmö Högskola, 2017
Keyword
friluftsliv
National Category
Sport and Fitness Sciences
Research subject
Education and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-24564 (URN)
Note

Recension av:

André Horgen et al. (red) Ute! Friluftsliv – pedagogiske, historiske og sosiologiske perspektiver 298 sidor, hft.Bergen: Fagbokforlaget 2016 ISBN 978-82-450-1755-7

Available from: 2017-03-13 Created: 2017-03-13 Last updated: 2017-11-29Bibliographically approved
Backman, E. (2017). Friluftsliv i fjällen: Fjällsäkerhetsrådets läromedel för åk 7-9. Stockholm
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Friluftsliv i fjällen: Fjällsäkerhetsrådets läromedel för åk 7-9
2017 (Swedish)Other (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
Place, publisher, year, pages
Stockholm: , 2017
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Education and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-26782 (URN)
Note

Utbildningsmaterial för skolan som har utvecklats i samarbete med Erik Backman från Högskolan i Dalarna som har lång erfarenhet av läromedelsutveckling inom idrottsämnet

Available from: 2017-12-14 Created: 2017-12-14 Last updated: 2017-12-14Bibliographically approved
Backman, E., Tidén, A., Pihl, L., Svanström, F. & Wiorek, D. (2017). Peer-assessment of technical and tactical skillsin invasion games - possibilities and limitations?. In: : . Paper presented at AIESEP International Conference,Gosier, Guadeloupe..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Peer-assessment of technical and tactical skillsin invasion games - possibilities and limitations?
Show others...
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [sv]

Inom idrottslärarutbildning har detutbildningsinnehåll som handlar om att utveckla studenters ämneskunskaper iidrott kraftigt reducerats under de senaste decennierna. Inte minst har den delav ämneskunskapen som handlar om studenters förmåga att delta i och undervisaom idrottsliga praktiker drabbats (Kirk 2010). När utrymmet för ett ämnesområdebegränsas aktualiseras frågor om innehåll och bedömning. Alltmedan de flestainom fältet är eniga om betydelsen för studenter att få erfarenheter av rörelseoch idrott under sin utbildning finns olika uppfattningar om huruvida man skabedöma studenters förmåga att praktiskt utöva idrott. Hur man förhåller sigdenna fråga har i hög grad visat sig vara kulturellt betingat (Backman &Pearson submitted, Herold & Waring 2009, Siedentop 2009, Tinning 2010). Isvensk idrottslärarutbildning har just den idrottsliga bedömningens vara ellerinte vara visat på en komplexitet och ambivalens (Backman & Pearson 2016).I en tid av alltmer begränsade resurser har problematiken delvis handlat omhuruvida man ska bedöma (och därigenom värdera) studentens förmåga att delta iidrott som ett mål i sig eller om man ska bedöma studentens förmåga attundervisa i och om idrott (Backman & Larsson 2016, Maivorsdotter et al2014). I de studier som belyst den idrottsliga färdighetens position ochbetydelse inom idrottslärarutbildning har studenters röst varit sparsamtförekommande. I denna studie vill vi därför, genom en implementering av eninternationellt etablerad modell för studentmedbedömning i bollspel (GamesPerformance Assessment Instrument, GPAI) (Oslin et al 1998) i kurser förblivande idrottslärare, ge röst åt studenters syn på studentbedömning avförmågan att spela bollspel. I studien har 140 studenter (N=140) pålärarprogrammet vid

Gymnastik- och idrottshögskolan i Stockholm deltagit. Studien är genomförd inom ramen för en ordinarie bollspelskurs om 3 hp som motsvarar 18 lektionstillfällen med 90 minuters undervisning vid varje tillfälle. Till detta lades två extra lektioner om 90 min för att genomföra studien/datainsamlingen. Studenterna har under och efter kursen bidragit till datainsamlingen i kursen genom ifyllande av etablerade bedömningsformulär där de analyserat varandras spelförmåga. Vidare har studenterna svarat på en utvärdering av hur GPAI implementerats i kursen med hjälp av ett enkätverktyg. Syftet med kursen som studenterna deltagit i är att studenterna ska utveckla sin spelförmåga, leda målspel i skolan samt didaktiska aspekter på målspel i skolan. Studien har omfattat studentmedbedömning i spelen handboll, basket och fotboll som inte enbart ska ses som en utbildning i dessa spel utan som representation för bollspel i allmänhet. Deltagarna i studien representerar alla studenter som hösten 2016 läste den beskrivna kursen. Alla studenter fick information om att deltagandet var frivilligt och att de kunde avbryta när som helst utan att det skulle på verka deras betyg eller vara negativt för dem på något annat sätt. Alla studenter ville vara med i studien. I vår preliminära analys har vi funnit att studenternas observationer av varandra visade på stor variation avseende spelförmåga. I utvärderingen av GPAI-projektet har studenterna uttryckt att de visserligen förstod syftet med GPAI-projektet, och att de förstod hur de skulle bidra till datainsamlingen genom att analysera varandras spelförmåga, men att de var tveksamma till relevansen av GPAI i en bedömningskontext i skolan. Resultaten kommer att analyseras vidare och diskuteras i relation till Shulmans begrepp ämneskunskap (Content Knowledge) och ämnesdidaktisk kunskap (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) samt i relation till teorier om bedömning. I en diskussion där perspektiven ofta begränsas till forskarens och/eller idrottslärarutbildarens kan studenter bidra med viktig kunskap om vad de ser som relevant kunskap för sin kommande yrkesroll.

 

Referenser

 

Backman, E & Pearson, P (submitted) Is movement knowledge common, specialized or pedagogic? Voices of teacher educators on assessment of movement and sport courses in the preparation of Australian HPE teachers. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy

 

Backman, E & Pearson, P (2016) “We should assess the students in more authentic situations”. Swedish PE teacher educators’ views of the meaning of movement skills for future PE teachers. European Physical Education Review. 22(1), 47-64.

 

Backman, E & Larsson, H (2016) What should a Physical Education teacher know? An analysis of learning outcomes for future Physical Education teachers in Sweden. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 21(2), 185-200.

 

Herold F and Waring M (2009) Pre-service physical education teachers’ perceptions of subject knowledge: Augmenting learning to teach. European Physical Education Review 15(3): 337–364.

 

Kirk D (2010) Physical Education Futures. Abingdon: Routledge.

 

Oslin, J.L., S.A. Mitchell, & L.L. Griffin. (1998). The Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI): Development and preliminary validation. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 17(2) p. 231–243.

 

Siedentop D (2009) Content Knowledge for Physical Education. In: Bailey R and Kirk D (eds) The Routledge Physical Education Reader. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 243-253.

Tinning R (2010) Pedagogy and human movement: theory,practice, research. Abingdon: Routledge.

Keyword
physical education teacher education, assessment, invasion games
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Education and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-26778 (URN)
Conference
AIESEP International Conference,Gosier, Guadeloupe.
Available from: 2017-12-14 Created: 2017-12-14 Last updated: 2017-12-14Bibliographically approved
Backman, E., Nyberg, G. & Larsson, H. (2017). PETE students’ experiences of assessment of movement: A Shulmanian perspective. In: : . Paper presented at British Educational Research Association Conference, September 2017, Sussex, Brighton, England..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>PETE students’ experiences of assessment of movement: A Shulmanian perspective
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The general knowledge base of Health and Physical Education Teacher Education (HPETE) is growing stronger. As a part of that knowledge base there is an ongoing discussion of the meaning of HPETE students’ movement capabilities. Lee Shulman’s framework of Content Knowledge (CK) and Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) have been used by scholars to examine how students’ ability to move and their ability to teach are valued in HPETE. However, the students’ own voices about these issues have rarely been acknowledged. The aim with this paper is therefore to examine how HPETE students at one university in Sweden experience how movement knowledge in certain movement activities are valued in the assessment. Semi-structured interviews with two groups (3-4 students in each) with a total of seven students was performed at three different occasions focusing specifically on how aquatics, dance and skating was taught and assessed within the first semester of HPETE. Preliminary results of our first analysis of the students’ expressions of their education in aquatics show that the students experience qualitative dimension in the assessment of their performances in aquatics as well as a quantitative measurement. They also expressed a lack of teacher-led occasions for learning in and about aquatics before they assessed. Students were also uncertain of how their own practical performance was acknowledged in the assessment of aquatics in relation to their ability to observe and give feedback on their peers’ performance. The results will be analysed and discussed using Lee Shulman’s framework of CK and PCK. By extension, these results might contribute to the discussion of what forms of knowledge to prioritise in HPETE, and thereby also help develop HPE on a school level.

Keyword
physical education teacher education, assessment, content knowledge
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Education and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-26777 (URN)
Conference
British Educational Research Association Conference, September 2017, Sussex, Brighton, England.
Available from: 2017-12-14 Created: 2017-12-14 Last updated: 2017-12-14Bibliographically approved
Backman, E. (2017). Undervisning och bedömning i friluftsliv. In: : . Paper presented at Idrottslärare 2017. Nationell konferens för lärare i idrott och hälsa anordnad av Kompetensteamet, Stockholm.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Undervisning och bedömning i friluftsliv
2017 (Swedish)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
Keyword
Friluftsliv, idrott och hälsa, skola
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Education and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-26781 (URN)
Conference
Idrottslärare 2017. Nationell konferens för lärare i idrott och hälsa anordnad av Kompetensteamet, Stockholm
Available from: 2017-12-14 Created: 2017-12-14 Last updated: 2017-12-14Bibliographically approved
Backman, E. (2016). Content knowledge or pedagogical pedagogic content knowledge?: Exploring learning outcomes for Australian trainee teachers in physical education. In: : . Paper presented at The European Conference on Educational Research, 23-26 August 2016, Dublin.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Content knowledge or pedagogical pedagogic content knowledge?: Exploring learning outcomes for Australian trainee teachers in physical education
2016 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In the context of physical education teacher education (PETE), content knowledge (CK) and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) are constructions of different forms of teacher knowledge that have been used to address knowledge of a subject and knowledge of teaching a subject to young people (Herold & Waring 2009, Siedentop 2009, Tinning 2010). This paper addresses how these two forms of teacher knowledge are valued through a study of learning outcomes (LOs) in syllabus documents at a sample of PETE universities in New South Wales, Australia. The US educationalist Lee Shulman (1987) originally defined CK as “the accumulation of literature and studies in content areas, and the historical and philosophical scholarship on the nature of knowledge in those fields of study” (p. 8-9). In the PETE context, CK is constructed by various sub-disciplines (Tinning 2010). According to Siedentop (2009), one of the most fundamental as well as the most marginalized of these sub-disciplines, is PE teacher students’ knowledge of movement. In this study, specific interest is devoted to how CK and PCK are expressed in documents regulating sport and movement courses within PETE. Regarding PCK, Shulman (1987) suggests it to be “that special amalgam of content and pedagogy that is uniquely the province of teachers, their own special form of professional understanding” (p. 8. Globally, there seems to be an agreement for the importance of future PE teachers to experience movement and sport practices during their education. However, there also seems to be different ideas about whether CK or PCK should by prioritized in the teaching and assessment of movement and sport practices during PETE (Backman & Pearson 2016, Capel, et al 2011, Herold & Waring 2009, Johnson 2013, Tinning 2010). The study of how LOs are expressed in an educational context can inform us not only of what forms of knowledge are most valued. It might also say something about PE teacher educators’ abilities to formulate his/her expectations of the student’s performance. For this instance, the discussion of learning objectives as formulated in university courses has lately been intensified. In Europe, this discussion has been strongly related to the intentions in the Bologna-declaration (Adam 2008, Brooks et al 2014, Hussey & Smith 2008). Some of the issues raised in the literature have concerned ways of formulating verbs in learning outcomes, student activity built into learning outcomes, and level of difficulty in learning outcomes (Adam 2008, Biggs & Tang 2007). Therefore, the aim of this paper is to analyse LOs formulated in syllabus document for sport courses at a sample of Australian PETE institutions. Further, the aim is to discuss these LOs through a framework regarding teacher knowledge originating from Lee Shulman (1987). Although PETE, like university programs in other subjects, are historical and cultural constructions, research from European countries such as UK, France, Sweden (Backman &Pearson 2016, Capel, et al 2011, Loquet & Ranganathan 2010) display similarities with the Australian PETE context. One characteristic feature of PETE in all these countries is the relative emphasis on constructivist epistemology and critical pedagogy, although this feature appears to be somewhat stronger in Australia compared to Europe and US. In times where the content in PETE is crowded and the time for teaching is short, a study of what forms of PE teacher knowledge are valued in some Australian PETE institutions, a context where the production of PETE research has been significant during the last decades (see e.g. Forrest 2015, Garrett & Wrench 2012, MacDonald et al 2002, Tinning 2010), can therefore serve as a valuable contrast for the discussion of knowledge forms in European PETE contexts.    

Methods/methodology (up to 400 words) 

By the end of 2014, there were 24 universities across Australia offering PETE, eight in New South Wales (NSW). These eight universities in NSW makes the total sample (N=8) in the study reported in this paper. To the collection of the empirical material in form of written documents, five PETE-universities (n=5) of the total sample have contributed. Each university was asked to contribute with two unit outlines for courses in sport and movement for PETE students. A unit outline is a written document intended to give the student more specific information compared to what a curriculum document for a course will provide (e.g. regarding examination, schedule, expectations, etc). Further, a unit is generally only a part of a whole course. The collected unit outlines contained a the total number of 73 LOs. The sample of unit outlines can be described as a strategic and purposeful sample (Patton, 2002). The empirical collection from the participating universities was carried out during November and December 2014. After information about the study through e-mail and phone, a total number of 10 unit outlines were sent to the author by e-mail. In the analysis Alvesson and Sköldberg (1994) description of analytical induction or abduction has served as an inspiration. This means trying to let, on one hand, the empirical material inform the choice of theoretical perspective while on the other hand, acknowledging that some specific theoretical perspectives, in this case Shulman’s (1987) forms of teacher knowledge, have been viewed as more relevant than others before conducting the study. The primary analysis has been divided into two steps. In the first step, when reading through the collected and transcribed material questions such as: ‘What movement and sport practices do students meet during PETE in NSW?’ and ‘How are movement and sport practices expressed through the LOs in the unit outlines?’ has been asked. Asking these questions to the material has involved a process of clustering described by Patton (2002) as convergence which has been followed up by a process of divergence, that is, an exclusion of formulations and quotes that do not fit into the identified pattern. In the second stage of the analysis, the choice of Shulman’s (1987) concepts for forms of teacher knowledge was confirmed and strengthened as we discovered that the different views of assessment of movement and sport practices were clearly related to our chosen definitions of CK and PCK.

Expected outcomes/results (up to 300 words) 

The preliminary analysis of the LOs shows that the knowledge in sport and movement courses at the investigated PETE institutions is sometimes formulated as CK and sometimes as PCK (Shulman 1987). Within these two main categories there were also sub-categories related to abilities expressed through different verbs. With regards to PCK one such main sub-category addressed the students’ ability to “plan, arrange, carry out and assess different forms of teaching situations”. Further, another ability expressed within the PCK category was the ability to “observe, analyse and critically reflect over educational practices”. These two PCK sub-categories clearly reflect research emphasizing critical pedagogy in Australian PETE (Garrett & Wrench 2012, MacDonald et al 2002, Tinning 2010). Further, two other forms of sub-categories, expressed both as CK and as PCK, was firstly, the ability to “perform movements” and secondly, the ability to “demonstrate an understanding” of different forms of movement and sport practices. Findings will be discussed in relation to research criticizing the decrease of sport performances in PETE (Herold & Waring 2009, Siedentop 2009) as well as work emphasizing the importance to teach and assess movement practices to PETE students in contextualized situations (Backman & Pearson 2016). The concept of “understanding” was found to be very commonly used in LOs both when expressed as CK and as PCK. Generally, students were encouraged to “demonstrate an understanding” of different forms of knowledge. In literature of how to formulate knowledge in higher education, the concept of understanding has been discussed, sometimes criticized as lacking precision (Adam 2008, Biggs & Tang 2007), sometimes claimed to be under-contextualised (Hussey & Smith 2008). Part of the discussion will focus on various meanings of understanding in sport courses at some Australian PETE-institutions and how these meanings can differ depending on whether CK or PCK is addressed.

Intent of publication:  

References (400 words)

Adam, S. (2008). Learning Outcomes Current Developments in Europe: Update on the Issues and Applications of Learning Outcomes Associated with the Bologna Process. Retrieved 12 May 2015, from http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/BolognaSeminars/documents/Edinburgh/Edinburgh_Feb08_Adams.pdf

Alvesson, M. & Sköldberg, K. (1994). Tolkning och Reflektion. Vetenskapsfilosofi och Kvalitativ Metod. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Backman, E. & Pearson, P. (2016) ‘We should assess the students in more authentic situations’: Swedish PE teacher educators’ views of the meaning of movement skills for future PE teachers. European Physical Education Review, 22, 47–64.

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Third edition. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Brooks, S., Dobbins, K., Scott, J. J., Rawlinson, M., & Norman, R. I. (2014). Learning about Learning Outcomes: The Student Perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 19, 721-733.

Capel, S., Hayes, S., Katene, W. and Velija, P. (2011). The interaction of factors which influence secondary student physical education teachers’ knowledge and development as teachers. European Physical Education Review, 17, 183–201.

Forrest, G. (2015). Systematic assessment of game-centred approach practices – the game-centred approach Assessment Scaffold. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 20, 144-158.

Garrett, R. & Wrench, A. (2012). ‘Society has taught us to judge’: cultures of the body in teacher education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40, 111–126.

Herold, F. & Waring, M. (2009). Pre-service physical education teachers’ perceptions of subject knowledge: Augmenting learning to teach. European Physical Education Review, 15, 337–364.

Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2008). Learning Outcomes: A Conceptual Analysis. Teaching in Higher Education, 13 (1), 107-115.

Johnson, T.G. (2013). The value of performance in Physical Education teacher education. Quest, 65, 485-497.

Loquet, M. & Ranganathan, M. (2010). Content knowledge in teaching, an investigation into an adequate ‘milieu’ for teaching dance: The case of Indian dance in France. European Physical Education Review, 16, 65–79.

MacDonald, D., Hunter, L., Carlson, T. & Penney, D. (2002). Teacher Knowledge and the Disjunction between School Curricula and Teacher Education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 30, 259-275.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. London: Sage Publications.

Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-21.

Siedentop, D. (2009). Content Knowledge for Physical Education. In R. Bailey & D. Kirk (Eds.), The Routledge Physical Education Reader (pp. 243-253). Abingdon: Routledge

Keyword
Australia, learning outcomes, Fenstermacher, Shulman, content knowledge
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Education and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-22919 (URN)
Conference
The European Conference on Educational Research, 23-26 August 2016, Dublin
Available from: 2016-08-25 Created: 2016-08-25 Last updated: 2017-03-03Bibliographically approved
Backman, E. (2016). Friluftsorganisationernas roll och villkor. In: Ulf Silvander (Ed.), Friluftslivet och politiken: Svenskt Friluftslivs friluftspolitiska program 2016 (pp. 78-87). Bromma: Svenskt Friluftsliv
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Friluftsorganisationernas roll och villkor
2016 (Swedish)In: Friluftslivet och politiken: Svenskt Friluftslivs friluftspolitiska program 2016 / [ed] Ulf Silvander, Bromma: Svenskt Friluftsliv , 2016, p. 78-87Chapter in book (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bromma: Svenskt Friluftsliv, 2016
National Category
Health Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-22896 (URN)
Available from: 2016-08-23 Created: 2016-08-23 Last updated: 2016-08-23
Mikaels, J., Backman, E. & Lundvall, S. (2016). In and out of place: exploring the discursive effects of teachers' talk about outdoor education in secondary schools in New Zealand. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 16(2), 91-104
Open this publication in new window or tab >>In and out of place: exploring the discursive effects of teachers' talk about outdoor education in secondary schools in New Zealand
2016 (English)In: Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, ISSN 1472-9679, E-ISSN 1754-0402, Vol. 16, no 2, p. 91-104Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The purpose of this article is to explore and problematise teachers’ talk about outdoor education in New Zealand. The focus is on what can be said, how it is said and the discursive effects of such ways of speaking. The inquiry draws on Foucauldian theoretical insights to analyse interview transcripts derived from semi-structured interviews with eight outdoor education teachers who work at secondary schools in New Zealand. Findings suggest that different discourses co-exist and are intertwined in the participants’ talk. Associated with a dominating discourse of adventure are subdiscourses of risk and safety, pursuit-based activities, skill and assessment. Connected to a discourse of learning are subdiscourses of environment, sustainability and social critique. Resistance towards a dominating discourse of adventure with pursuit-based activities can be traced in a discourse of learning in the form of a more place responsive pedagogy.

Keyword
Discourse, adventure, learning, place, curriculum
National Category
Health Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:du-22899 (URN)10.1080/14729679.2015.1086660 (DOI)000380145700001 ()
Available from: 2015-09-24 Created: 2016-08-23 Last updated: 2017-12-14Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-4660-717X

Search in DiVA

Show all publications