Margaret Whitehead

The Concept of Physical Literacy

The intention of this paper is to open a debate on the concept of Physical Literacy. This is a term that has been used intermittently over the years but has never received serious analysis. The discussion has three parts. The first sets out, briefly, the findings of earlier research (Whitehead, 1987), which created the ground for this paper. The second proposes a context within which the concept of Physical Literacy may be defined and uses this context to discuss possible components of the concept The presentation is set in an existential and phenomenological context and therefore considers the concept of Physical Literacy from a particular philosophical perspective. The final part of the paper lists a series of questions. These challenge proposals that are made in the paper and, at this stage in the debate, need to be subject to critical consideration.The intention of this paper is to open a debate on the concept of Physical Literacy. This is a term that has been used intermittently over the years but has never received serious analysis. The discussion has three parts. The first sets out, briefly, the findings of earlier research (Whitehead, 1987), which created the ground for this paper. The second proposes a context within which the concept of Physical Literacy may be defined and uses this context to discuss possible components of the concept The presentation is set in an existential and phenomenological context and therefore considers the concept of Physical Literacy from a particular philosophical perspective. The final part of the paper lists a series of questions. These challenge proposals that are made in the paper and, at this stage in the debate, need to be subject to critical consideration.

Debates in Physical Education

Introduction Part I The nature of physical education Introduction to Part I 1. What is physical education? Susan Capel and Margaret Whitehead 2. What is the education in physical education? Margaret Whitehead 3. What is Physical Literacy and how does it impact on physical education? Margaret Whitehead Part II Learning in physical education Introduction to Part II 4. What should pupils learn in physical education? Elizabeth Murdoch and Margaret Whitehead 5. Physical education and health? Considerations and issues. Lorraine Cale and Jo Harris 6. What is success in physical education and how can this best be achieved? Val Rimmer Part III Teaching in physical education Introduction to Part III 7. Rethinking teacher knowledge in physical education: What do physical education teachers need to know? Daniel Tindall and Eimear Enright 8. Why do physical education teachers adopt a particular way of teaching? Susan Capel and Richard Blair 9. Are physical education teachers reflective practitioners? Paula Zwozdiak-Myers Part IV The key players in physical education Introduction to Part IV 10. Who is physical education for? Dawn Penney and John Evans 11. Who should teach physical education in curriculum and extra-curricular time? Richard Blair and Susan Capel 12. Public perceptions of physical education? Helen Ives and David Kirk Part V Looking ahead Introduction to Part V 13. Conceptualising teaching as learning...the challenge for teacher education Kathy Armour 14. What is the future for physical education in the 21st Century? David Kirk Conclusion 15. Conclusion Margaret Whitehead and Susan Capel

Laying the foundations for physical literacy in Wales : the contribution of the Foundation Phase to the development of physical literacy

ABSTRACT Background: The Foundation Phase in Wales is a play-based curriculum for pupils aged 3–7 years old. Children learn through more holistic areas of learning in place of traditional subjects. As such, the subject of physical education in its traditional form no longer exists for pupils under the age of 7 in Wales. In light of the role of physical education in developing physical literacy and in particular the importance of this age group for laying the foundations of movement for lifelong engagement in physical activity, the disappearance of physical education from the curriculum could be deemed to be a concern. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the Foundation Phase as a naturalistic intervention and examine its contribution to the development of physical literacy. Participants and setting: Participants included year 1 pupils (N = 49) aged 5 and 6 from two schools in contrasting locations. A smaller group within each class was selected through purposive sampling for the repeated measures assessments (N = 18). Research design and methods: A complementarity mixed-method design combined quantitative and qualitative methods to study the Foundation Phase as a naturalistic intervention. Quantitative data were generated with the Test of Gross Motor Development-2 administered to the sample group of children from both schools as a quasi-repeated measure, the physical competence subscale of the Pictorial Scale of Perceived Competence and Social Acceptance and the Leuven Involvement Scale for Young Children. Qualitative data were generated throughout the study from the analysis of video and field notes through participant observation. Data from the mixed methods were analysed through complementarity to give a rich insight into pupils’ progress and experiences in relation to physical literacy. Results: Overall analysis of the data from TGMD-2 showed significant improvements in the Gross Motor Quotient and Locomotor skills from T1 to T3, but no significant improvement in object control. Data from qualitative methods were analysed to explore processes that may account for these findings. Video and field notes complement the quantitative data highlighting that children were developing their locomotor skills in many aspects of their learning. Observations using the Leuven Involvement Scale indicated that children had high levels of involvement in their learning and apparent in video and field notes was pupils’ motivation for movement. Paired sample t-tests (N = 18) conducted on the Harter and Pike perceived physical competence six-item score subscales (T1 and T3) indicated a significant difference in the mean perceived physical competence scores on the six-item scale between T1and T3. Qualitative data explored pupils’ confidence for movement in many areas of learning. Conclusion: The combination of quantitative and qualitative data indicates that the Foundation Phase is an early childhood curriculum that lays the foundations of physical literacy with the exception of aspects of the physical competence, specifically object control skills. Although these skills only contribute to psychomotor aspects of physical literacy they are strongly associated with later engagement in physical activity. The development of specific physical skills such as object control skills may need more specialist input with early childhood pedagogy teachers trained in motor development to see significant improvements.