Secondary Online
Physical Education: Walking a Tightrope
by Craig
Buschner, California State University, Chico
 Nine
years ago while serving on the Board of Directors of NASPE,
a high-school teacher asked me for "our position" on secondary
online physical education (OLPE). This Southwest teacher was
concerned about his school district's hasty adoption of online
learning. He wanted to know more about online learning but
felt conflicted. As an award recipient for his effective teaching
and service on behalf of the school, department, and state
association he said, "I feel like I'm walking a tightrope."
At the time, NASPE had no official position. We realized one
was needed! This was a tipping point. The wonders of the digital
age and online learning were intersecting with school physical
education. More than a few physical education programs and
teachers were being asked to transition from traditional,
face-to-face teaching, to online instruction.
Subsequently, NASPE published a position paper entitled Initial
Guidelines for Online Physical Education (2007).
The skinny was that "no published evidence of OLPE learning
existed, that OLPE should meet national standards for learning,
that a hybrid model was a reasonable instructional alternative
until research was available, and that OLPE was an exciting
and attractive - yet untested - alternative to delivering
quality PE." Later, NASPE published the paper Appropriate
Use of Instructional Technology in PE (2009). Reasonably,
NASPE advocated technology as "a tool for learning if used
appropriately for instructional effectiveness…that it could
supplement, but not substitute, for effective instruction."
As long as school physical education survives or thrives
(see Mike Metzler's recent pelinks4u essay for thoughts on
this), physical educators will always be concerned about what
to teach and how to teach. Recently, the Shape of the Nation
Report (SON, 2012) reported that 30 states now grant credit
for online physical education, however, only 17 states require
certified PE teachers. It made me wonder who teaches these
courses in the other 13 states? Some futurists predict that
by 2020 half of all secondary education courses will be delivered
online. If true, before long many school physical educators
will be challenged to walk this instructional tightrope.
Since that time, I've met both digital utopians and digital
critics when confronting this controversial topic. It seems
most have an opinion about OLPE's worth; however, I find that
many teachers are lacking substantive information about this
"still new to us" technology. A director of physical education
in a large Milwaukee high school told me that his staff was
unhappy with an administration that forced his teachers to
develop and implement OLPE. He said, "We will get it done
because we have no options other than to resign." In contrast
of course, some PE teachers are embracing and enthusiastic
about the challenge.
It's important to realize that PE teachers and schools have
choices when considering face-to-face, hybrid (blended), and
virtual instruction. You may be surprised to learn that in
2010 the Florida Virtual School (FLVS) estimated that over
30,000 students completed OLPE courses. Without success, I
've tried to obtain student learning and attitudinal data
from this system. I would like to know what is working and
not working for teachers and students in Florida. I wonder
what was taught and learned? And I'm curious about the backgrounds
of the teachers who designed and implemented these curricula.
A handful of articles and a few empirical studies have only
begun to scratch the surface regarding secondary OLPE. I believe
that the paucity of evidence and best practices leaves teachers
and the profession with unproven balance and strength to successfully
complete this high wire act. We still don't know enough, and
as usual, we have more questions than answers. Moreover, we
lack a close examination of OLPE's consequences for schools,
teachers, and students.
Not surprisingly, technology often goes unchecked and is
considered worthy simply because it exists. This has to do
with our culture's love affair with all kinds of technology.
My approach has been to express a critical viewpoint until
reliable and accurate information are available. I even find
online learning data for other school subjects to be minimal
or missing. There is lots of experimentation in online environments
(which is good), but little to verify student learning. My
critical view often disappoints those who jumped quickly on
the OLPE bandwagon. But it's vital that each discipline decides
upon the type and substance of online learning that is appropriate
for American secondary students. The following incomplete
lists may stimulate your thinking and understanding of the
thorny issues surrounding OLPE:
Arguments For OLPE:
- It fits the technological learning style and interests
of digital natives.
- It offers student choice when
learning in physical education and it’s convenient
for students, parents, and school leaders.
- It may reach the needs of diverse
learners.
Arguments Against OLPE:
- Children and youth need to move more and sit less. Studies
show that U.S. youth average 7+ hours a day of screen time
to include multi-tasking. Might this subject be well served
with measured technological intervention and less screen
time?
- OLPE alters the “socialization
process” that’s often a strength in well-taught
face-to-face classes.
- OLPE may devalue the professional
expertise of certified teachers.
Several Weighty Questions:
- What messages or worldview do we send students, parents,
administrators and the public by advocating and delivering
virtual physical education?
- What is the hidden curriculum
when planning and delivering OLPE?
Books Worth Reading: (Note: These do not
directly address school physical education)
My study of this topic tells me that OLPE is not a black
and white issue. It is loaded with political, economic, ethical,
moral, social, and pedagogical challenges. It seems to me
that most professionals haven't dug deep enough into the implications
and that our acrobatic skills will be tested in the coming
years. Physical educators need to study, think, converse,
ask questions, and take a pledge that student learning must
always be the primary reason for the design and implementation
of any new physical education curriculum.
Walking the online tightrope is not about a quick jaunt to
one side. It will require a suspension of judgment, accurate
information, courage, and practice (which will inevitably
include trial and error). In short, we need to determine the
meaning and significance of online learning for "our subject
matter." Finally, leaders of AAHPERD /SHAPE America need to
revisit and revise the 2007 OLPE guidelines. The profession
would benefit from a carefully designed research agenda with
financial support to study the phenomena. Let's insure that
PE teachers are prepared to navigate this precarious walk!
Please share your OLPE thoughts and experiences with me at:
cbuschner@csuchico.edu.
Biography: Craig Buschner is a Professor
in the Department of Kinesiology at California State University,
Chico. He received his B.S. from the Virginia Commonwealth
University, MA from Western Illinois University, & Ed.D.
from Oklahoma State University. He was an elementary physical
education teacher in Illinois and subsequently trained physical
education teachers at the University of Southern Mississippi
during the 1980’s. His professional service includes
presentations at state, district, national and international
conferences and the publication of numerous articles and book
chapters. He was the President of the National Association
for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) in 2007-2008.
(back
to pelinks4u homepage) |
