Charlotte Beaudoin

Implementing a Physical Education Curriculum: Two Teachers’ Experiences

In this article, we present a case study of two teachers’ experiences implementing a junior- high school physical education curriculum. Using interviews, observations, and document analysis, we organized our data around Brunelle et al.’s (1988) conceptual framework. Our results noted several constraining factors to implementation: lack of time to achieve outcomes, inadequate equipment, large classes, heavy teaching loads, lack of professional development, and lack of consultant support. To facilitate implementation, teachers used school “exploratories” and community facilities, worked with parents, and established user fees. Data indicate that, despite teachers’ best efforts, students did not meet all curriculum objectives. Keywords: physical education curriculum, curriculum implementation, Nova Scotia curriculum implementation, case study Cet article traite d’une etude de cas portant sur l’experience de deux enseignants dans l’implantation d’un programme d’education physique dans une ecole secondaire de premier cycle. Les donnees ont ete organisees selon Brunelle et al. (1988) en utilisant des entrevues, des observations et en faisant une analyse documentaire. Les resultats demontrent plusieurs facteurs limitatifs a l’implantation : manque de temps pour atteindre les resultats, equipement inadequat, nombre eleve d’etudiants dans les classes, charges d’enseignement trop lourdes, manque de formation continue et manque de service de soutien. Pour faciliter l’implantation, les enseignants utilisent les « school exploratories » et l’equipement communautaire, travaillent avec les parents et imposent des frais d’utilisation. Les resultats indiquent que, malgre les meilleurs efforts des enseignants, les etudiants n’atteignent pas tous les objectifs du programme. Mots-cles : programme d’education physique, implantation du programme, etude de cas de l’implantation d’un programme en Nouvelle-Ecosse

Coaches’ Adoption and Implementation of Sport Canada’s Long-Term Athlete Development Model:

This work explores the adoption and implementation of Sport Canada’s long-term athlete development (LTAD) model by coaches and tries to understand the barriers to and enablers of these processes. LTAD adoption was studied in 14 coaches (5 female, 9 male) in seven sports while implementation was assessed among 10 different coaches (2 female, 8 male) from nine sports. Semistructured interviews ascertained coaches’ perceptions of and experiences with the LTAD model in their coaching practice. Coaches adhered to the global vision and general principles of LTAD. However, several barriers to LTAD adoption and implementation were identified. A mismatch between the model’s long-term and the short-term visions of results in sport was perceived as deterrent to LTAD adoption and implementation. Coaches involved in early development sports mentioned a lack of compatibility of LTAD with the demands of their sport. Coaches also perceived complexity in LTAD athlete’s developmental stage determination and the identification of “windows of opportunity” or critical periods. These barriers should be addressed to complete diffusion of LTAD among Canadian coaches.