This Report comprises five sections. Section One
provides a context-setting introductory overview of the situation of physical
education in schools, which culminated in the Berlin Physical Education
World Summit in November 1999. Section Two looks at key features of developments
since the 1999 Physical Education World Summit in selected continental
regions and countries, whilst Section Three embraces the issue of Inclusion
and Disability. Section Four focuses on inter-governmental and non-governmental
agencies’ recent initiatives and Section Five contains concluding
comments. Section One: Background Context
A perceived decline in the position and presence
of physical education in school curricula worldwide was apparent in some
countries in the 1970s and 1980s. Subsequent manifestations of a deteriorating
situation were evidenced by a number of conference themes, a range of
journal articles reporting on the perilous position of physical education
in schools, several international and national surveys, on-going analyses
of national and international trends (see Hardman 1993, 1994, 1996, 1998a,
1998b, 1999) and a plethora of international agencies’ and regional
continental organisations’ Position, Policy, Advocacy and Declaration
Statements (refer Hardman and Marshall, 2000, pp.1-2). It is a matter
of historical record that the widespread concerns, particularly in the
1990s, led to the International Council for Sport Science and Physical
Education (ICSSPE) initiated (with International Olympic Committee (IOC)
support), worldwide survey into the state and status of physical education
in schools. One important outcome of this initiative was the World
Summit on Physical Education which was held on 3-5 November 1999
in Berlin, organised by ICSSPE with patronage and support from the IOC,
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)
and the World Health Organisation (WHO). The Berlin ‘Summit’
brought together policy makers, administrators, researchers and physical
education practitioners from around the world to share information on
the situation of, and case for, physical education in schools. The disseminated
findings from the survey reaffirmed the perilous position of physical
education revealed in earlier findings and brought a later UNESCO concessionary
response that the principles of its 1978 International Charter had not
filtered down into practice with physical education and sport not yet
established as a national priority. Physical education was seen to have
been pushed into a defensive position. It was suffering from decreasing
curriculum time allocation, budgetary controls with inadequate financial,
material and personnel resources; it had low subject status and esteem
and was being ever more marginalised and undervalued by authorities. School
physical education appeared to be under threat in all regions of the world.
At best it seemed to occupy a tenuous place in the school curriculum:
in many countries, it was not accepted on par with seemingly superior
academic subjects concerned with developing a child's intellect. The survey
formed the basis for establishing that indeed there was cause for considerable
disquiet about the situation of physical education in schools across the
world, and that, notwithstanding the difficulties and problems of collecting,
interpreting and reporting on data from a broad sample and wide range
of sources, there were common trends and issues, which were a source for
serious concern. The survey pointed to inadequate watching briefs on what
was happening (or not as the case may be) in physical education in many
countries and also highlighted the need for more and better quality baseline
data in each country.
The Physical Education World Summit culminated in
the formulation of Action Agendas and an Appeal to the UNESCO General
Conference and the Ministers with responsibility for Physical Education
and Sport (MINEPS III) meeting in Punta del Este, Uruguay (30 November
- 3 December 1999). The so-called ‘Berlin Agenda’ called for
governmental and ministerial action to implement policies for physical
education as a human right for all children in recognition of its distinctive
role in physical health, overall development and safe, supportive communities.
Furthermore, in making the case for quality physical education, it called
for investment in initial and in-service professional training and development
for well-qualified educators and support for research to improve the effectiveness
and quality of physical education. These were issues, which were repeated
in an Appeal to the General Conference of UNESCO. The General Conference
was urged to commit to developing strategies for effective implementation
of and properly resourced physical education programmes, to mobilise inter-governmental
and non-governmental organisations, public and private sectors to co-operate
in the promotion and development of physical education and was requested
to invite the Director General of UNESCO to submit the World PE Summit’s
Appeal to the MINEPS III meeting in Punta del Este. Subsequently, the
MINEPS III Punta del Este Declaration endorsed the Berlin Agenda for Action
and called upon member states to implement it through incorporation in
school programmes or, as a minimum, meeting with any legal requirements
with respect to physical education programmes in school curricula (refer
Doll-Tepper & Scoretz, 2001). The Ministers reiterated the importance
of physical education as an essential element and an integral part in
the process of continuing education and human and social development,
expressed concern that, in spite of the expansion of elite sport and sport
for all programmes in recent years, opportunities for children to participate
in physical education had been significantly curtailed and noted that
the time required for physical education in schools was not being respected
and was even being substantially reduced in many countries because of
changing priorities. In essence, MINEPS III was acknowledging that member
states were not wholly complying with the 1978 UNESCO Charter.
A year after the publication of the World-wide Survey
Final Report (Hardman & Marshall, 2000), a Council of Europe Committee
for the Development of Sport (CDDS) ‘Working Group of Experts’
on Access of Children to Physical Education and Sport picked
up the baton. The Working Group resolved to examine the situation of school
physical education and sport in the member states of the Council of Europe
with a view to providing informed recommendations for discussion and action
at the Informal Meeting of Ministers responsible for Sport in Warsaw,
Poland 12-13 September 2002. In the event, the ministerial Conclusions
acknowledged a serious decline in the quality and the time allocated for
teaching physical education and sport for children and young people in
schools as well as inadequate opportunities to participate in recreational
sport out of school. Additionally, they indicated a need to study ways
in which the provision of physical education and sport can be improved
in Council of Europe member countries for all children and young people,
including those with disabilities. According to the Deputy Secretary-General
of the Council of Europe, in her Warsaw Informal Ministerial Meeting Opening
Address “the crux of the issue is that there is too much of a gap
between the promise and the reality” (De Boer-Buquicchio, 2002,
p.2).
Section Two: Post-Berlin Developments
Generally, since the Berlin Summit, developments
in school physical education policies and practices across the world have
been diverse. Essentially, because the situation in economically under-developed
and developing regions has changed little in the five years since the
Berlin PE Summit and UNESCO Punta del Este Declaration in 1999, and whereas
there have been significant developments in economically developed countries,
this Section provides a summary overview of the relatively unchanged situation
on the African and Indian Sub-Continent and a more detailed review of
main features of developments in those continental regions and countries,
where developments in school physical education have been more significant.
Developments in economically developed countries are typified in economically
developed countries and regions by ‘mixed messages’; the review
highlights initiatives and trends to illustrate the “mixed messages”
thesis1.
2.1 Africa
Shortage of facilities and adequately trained personnel are widely reported
throughout the continent as are the peripheral value in the curriculum (regarded
as non-educational, non-productive use of time, is treated as recreation/play
time especially in primary schools) and inadequate monitory inspections
in secondary schools (e.g. in Benin, Botswana and Uganda).
Generally, priority is accorded to language and mathematics with even meagre
allocated physical education/sport resources often diverted to other subjects.
In some countries (e.g. Botswana and Malawi)
physical education for girls often suffers from optional status with many
preferring not to take part, a situation, which is exacerbated by dearth
of amenities such as changing rooms. In South Africa, physical
education as a school subject no longer exists though it is a focus (physical
development and movement) of the learning area “Life Orientation”
along with health promotion, social development, personal development and
orientation to the world of work foci in grades R-9 (General Education and
Training Band) (Van Deventer, 2003).
The majority of African countries has either no or
minimal provision for physical education for children with a disability.
Typical is a Benin government official’s comment that his country
does “not have any programme, which deals with the physical education
teaching to the disabilities”. In Botswana a Professor of Physical
Education observes that “cultural beliefs and attitudes do not allow
the handicapped to be exposed to free physical activities and sports,
for fear of their being injured or being ridiculed by their normal peers”
but that “some of the courses offered at the Department of Physical
Education to all grades of programmes include those on adapted Physical
Education including the adapted sports”. 2.2 Asia
In many Indian and Pakistani
schools, lack of qualified teachers and facilities, inadequate inspection,
perception of physical education as a non-educational fun activity and
inferiority to academic subjects, collectively contribute to either minimal
provision or to not even being a feature of the curriculum. Girls are
discouraged from participating in physical education clubs in many rural
areas especially because of what it will do to their bodies (render them
“unfeminine”). In Pakistan, cultural and
religious constraints limit the scope of physical education for girls,
who are not allowed to take part in sports and physical activities except
within the four walls of the schools. In Vietnam, it
is alleged that time allocation does not reach requirements, the physical
education lesson is more likely to be cancelled than other subjects and
teachers’ technique is poor. The Indian sub-continent generally
has minimal provision for disabled students. In India, for example, a
Physical Education Lecturer asserts “there is no special provision
of physical education lesson of the students with disabilities in the
school… The percentage of students with disabilities in the schools
is very negligible”.
Central and Latin America including the Caribbean
In the Bahamas and St. Vincent,
physical education is viewed as play/fun time. It is often used as a class
venue for disruptive or backward students. In Jamaica,
it is regarded as a ‘Cinderella’ subject and/or as a waste
of time.
In the most Latin American countries2,
the most recent legislation has made physical education in elementary
and middle schools (basic education) a compulsory curriculum subject,
though timetable allocation, for which there are no legal prescriptions,
is generally minimal or low. Despite the legislation on requirement, in
most countries (Chile and Colombia are
exceptions) there has been a decrease in the actual number of physical
education classes.
The number of facilities for the general population
participation in physical and sporting activity has generally increased
and outdoor amenities (e.g. beaches) are accessible but community-oriented
physical education programmes have not kept pace with facility provision.
The number of courses leading to qualified teacher
status and masters and doctoral programmes has developed favourably throughout
the continent; in Brazil alone there are 400 Physical
Education College Education Institutions and 12 Physical Education Masters
and Doctors programmes. Concomitantly, the number of publishing companies
and specialist journals in Physical Education has grown steadily, especially
in Brazil, Mexico and Colombia. In Brazil,
the Conselho Federal de Educação Física (CONFEF,
The Federal Physical Education Council) has established a regulatory Register
of Physical Education Professionals (currently about 100,000 physical
educators). CONFEF has also issued a Brazilian Physical Education
Charter, which accords with the Berlin PE Summit Action Agenda principles
for ‘Quality’, as well as a Code of Ethics for registered
professionals. Other countries in the region have started developing processes
similar to the Brazilian example, mainly because there is general consensus
that the regulation has improved the quality and organization of physical
education in the country.
In research investigation in the physical education
domain, despite growing interest, Latin America lags well behind North
America and Europe. However, physical educators’ commitment to professional
development is evident in Conference etc. attendance figures: the FIEP
Physical Education International Congress in Foz do Iguaçu attracted
some 3,000 teachers from 12 nations, including 9 Latin American countries
in 2004; the FIEP Physical Education South American Annual Congress regularly
has 1,000+ delegates; the Biennial Physical Education Pan-American Congress
had 2,500 participants at its 2003 venue in Mexico; and the CELAFISCS
Sports Science International Symposium, which is about to hold its 30th
event, had more than 2,000 participants in 2003. There is a trend towards
closer relationships between physical education and health; it is a trend
that has emanated from Sports for All programmes, which have raised levels
of awareness. The main referral point here is Agita São Paulo
(Move São Paulo), which has already become Agita América
(Move America), and Agita Mundo” (Move the World). This health-centred
programme prescribes 30 minutes of activity every day. The Argentine
programme Movete is also relevant in health-oriented promotion. Awareness
of the importance of physical education and activity is increasing throughout
Latin America and in some large cities at least, physical activities are
being incorporated into people’s individual cultures: gymnastic
centres, beach and park sports practice, home condominium programmes,
and social clubs’ activities etc. are testimony to the significant
role of physical education in modern life.
2.3 Europe
Europe, with its admixture of economically developed
and developing countries and regions and various and different historical
and socio-cultural settings, is a continental region in which both diversity
and congruence are evident. This sub-section addresses physical education
across Europe by drawing from the Council of Europe CDDS commissioned
survey of school physical education in member states and includes specific
information on developments in the United Kingdom (specifically England
and Scotland). The immediate following summary highlights the main findings
of the CDDS survey (refer Hardman, 2002a & 2002b). 2.3.1 CDDS Survey Findings
1. Legal Status of School Physical Education
2. Physical Education/Sport Implementation and Subject Status
3. Pedagogical Issues: Curriculum Aims, Content, Monitoring and Equity
4. Resources
a) Finance
b) Facilities and Equipment
c) Qualified Teaching Personnel
5. The Physical Education Environment
6. Issues in Provision
Watching briefs on what is happening in physical education in many
European countries are inadequate; there is need for more and better
quality baseline data in each country. There are common trends and issues,
which are a source for some concern:
2.3.2 England
Physical Education remains a compulsory ‘Foundation’
subject within the modified National Curriculum for children aged 5-16.
There is a government aim of entitlement of every child to two hours
of sporting or physical recreation activity per school week by 2004.
This entitlement remains somewhat hypothetical because the reality of
practice is that in many schools, particularly in primary stages (ages
5-11), where literacy and numeracy are prioritised, timetable allocation
for physical education averages nearer 90 minutes and in some schools
can be less than 60 minutes.
Over the last 10 years, a number of strategic policy
documents have been published by government and quasi-governmental agencies,
which variously represent responses to drop-out rates from sport by
teenagers (40% of girls drop out of sport by the age of 18 with girls
as young as 7 being put off the idea of sport for good; 20% of girls
have no regular sport at all during or outside school hours: some girls
cite embarrassment about their bodies, ability or kit to be worn as
reasons for non-participation. Bee, 2003, p.23), fostering of potential
medal-winning athletes, deficiencies in physical education teaching
and qualifications, particularly in primary schools and increasingly
the perceived epidemic of obesity of young children. Two examples of
strategic initiatives are provided here:
(i) The Physical Education, School Sport and
Club Links (PESSCL) scheme is a direct result of the government’s
acknowledgement that physical education and school sport help young
people and reflects its commitment that all school children should have
access to two hours of quality physical education and school sport each
week. Furthermore, the strategy is recognition of the growing evidence
that quality physical education and school sport can play a key role
in improving whole school issues such as pupil attendance, attainment
and behaviour. One of the key aims of the PESSCL strategy is to improve
the quality of teaching, coaching and learning. Thus, £18 million
has been allocated for the new National Physical Education Continuing
Professional Development (CPD) Programme for teachers and others in
England, which will initially run for a three-year period. The National
CPD Programme, which is one of a number of inter-linked initiatives,
will ensure that teachers in every primary, secondary and special school
have the knowledge, resources and confidence to develop quality PE and
school sport in their schools. The National CPD Programme involves teachers
attending a local workshop, completing a self-review, and then selecting
CPD opportunities from a menu of modules. Every maintained school in
England will be able to access these training modules free of charge.
An independent research project will monitor progress and schools are
required to participate in an annual review process. Sharing best practice
is a key element of the programme.
(ii) The Learning through PE and Sport
strategy launched jointly by the Department for Education and Skills
and the Department of Culture, Media and Sport with a three year projected
investment cost of £458 million. The overall objective is to enhance
take up of sporting opportunities by 5-16 year olds. Targets set include:
2.3.3 Scotland
At present, in Scotland, for the 5-14 age group
(from primary schools to secondary S2), physical education is included
in the Expressive Arts (art, drama, music and physical education)
that should make up 15% of the curriculum, but exactly how this is organised
is left up to head-teachers with the consequence that the quality of
PE in primary schools can vary drastically from school to school: “if
the school panto is the priority in a crowded curriculum then PE or
something else has to suffer” (Crichton, 2004). For children in
S3 and S4, 80 hours out of 1200 hours in school have to be spent on
physical education. There are no prescribed guidelines for S5 and S6
pupils, which “means that something like 40% of girls in this
age group do no physical exercise at all” (Crichton, 2004). Littlefield
et al (2003) indicate that physical education is an elective subject
within the National framework (though schools are not required to offer
it) and that numbers of pupils exercising their choice for physical
education is increasing. Those not electing for physical education take
a core programme. In their recent investigative study, they report “positive
features” mixed with “serious concerns”: popularity
amongst pupils of Standard and Higher grade physical education demonstrates
that certification flourishing and allocation of time for Standard grade
has increased in a majority of schools contrast with a reduction in
time for core physical education in the first two years of secondary
school and declining access to facilities and extra-curricula provision
(Littlefield et al, 2003).
The perceived obesity epidemic (estimated to cost
the Scottish National Health Service £700 million annually) amongst
young children is concentrating the minds of the Scottish Executive
as it is in many governments in economically developed countries. In
Scotland, more than 20% of three-and-a half-year-olds are overweight
with a further 8.8% considered obese and around 5% registered as severely
obese; 20% of 12 year-olds are clinically obese with a further third
diagnosed as overweight (Qureshi & Barnes, 2004). A Scottish Executive
established Physical Activity Task Force has recommended a
target of two hours of quality physical education per week for all school
children by 2007 to assist in offsetting decline in health-related fitness
and activity levels. The quality issue is specifically directed at changing
the negative image of physical education by moving the emphasis of activity
away from competition towards widening participation opportunities.
This widening participation theme, along with a the imposition of a
two-hour minimum requirement for physical education from nursery school
to the end of secondary school to promote active life-styles and increase
exercise, are key features in a Report by another Scottish Executive
appointed group, the Physical Education Review Group. Important
as these recommendations are, there has been an immediate reaction based
on realities: an already stretched school curriculum (to expand physical
activity necessitates the disappearance of something else from the curriculum);
and a requirement of additional resources (facilities, equipment and
appropriately trained and qualified personnel – already, even
before the Education Minister pronounces on the Review Committee’s
Report, there is growing concern that Scotland’s school sector
will be unable to deliver because of a lack of human resources) for
schools, although two local government authorities (Scottish Borders
and Clackmannanshire with 10 specialist posts) have jumped the gun and
advertised new posts for specialist physical education teachers in primary
schools (Barnes, 2004).
2.4 North America
In Canada, despite support from
medical practitioners, physical educators continue to experience problems
in convincing provincial Ministries of Education that physical education
has an important role both in the education system generally and in
health promotion in particular. Timetable allocations have remained
relatively stable since the Physical Education World Summit but budget
allocations have been reduced and many schools have sought to raise
monies from other sources in order to sustain physical education programmes.
The main trend in Canadian physical education, as evidenced in new curricula,
is promotion of active lifestyle, which includes use of external resources
for which there are costs’ implications. There have been widespread
cuts in numbers of provincial and school district consultants and/or
curriculum co-ordinators. In provinces such as British Columbia, where
‘generalist’ teachers teach most elementary school physical
education classes with little or no training in physical education,
the shortfall in advisory consultants and curriculum co-ordinators has
impacted negatively. This is especially the case where new curricula
have been developed and which need the assistance of relevant professionals
to implement them. Thus, these innovative curricula are left to gather
dust on shelves (Turkington, 2002, pp.42-43).
In the United States, the “effect
of the Berlin PE Summit has had no impact in the United States, where
9/11 and the terrorism threat together with the war in Iraq have significantly
impacted on the economy and diverted funds into the military”
(Feingold3, 2004). At the same time, there
is an educational environment that stresses accountability and standardized
testing primarily focused on the so- called "academic subjects".
The result is that school administrators look to cut back on special
subjects, such as health, physical education, art and music. There are
almost daily reports about the obesity epidemic and health costs, yet
the general public does not relate much of this to the need to increase
physical education (Feingold, 2004).
An initial post-Berlin Summit initiative was the
US Congress Bill on 15 December 2000, which included a US$5million appropriation
for the Physical Education for Progress (PEP) Act for 2001.
Grants are to help initiate, expand and improve physical education programs
for K-12 students. Funds can be used to purchase equipment, develop
curriculum, hire and/or train physical education staff, and support
other initiatives designed to enable students to participate in physical
education activities. Subsequent clarification on grant aid revealed
that PEP grants were intended for so-called Title 1 schools (i.e. academic
deficient schools) only. Nevertheless, this enactment was a positive
step in securing funds for physical education resources in deprived
school settings. However, a year on from the PEP Act, another legislative
initiative has worked counter to the interests of school physical education.
President Bush’s January 2002 No Child Left Behind Elementary
and Secondary Education (NCLB) Act, intended to stimulate educational
reform and promote academic achievement and accountability in curricula
that are identified as ‘core’ subject areas, neglected in
omitting some subjects such as physical education and health to address
the debilitating condition of the nation’s youth and did not acknowledge
the link between health, physical activity and academic performance.
Thus, the Act has created unintended negative consequences (diminishing
time and resources) and has contributed to increased marginalisation
of physical education in many states (Keyes, 2004). Following the Act,
the President of the Education Association in Alaska pointed out that
teachers need to be “highly qualified”, except for PE and
computer science teachers (Orr, 2002) and in doing so rendered inferior
status to both physical educators and the subject. As if the fall-out
from the No Child Left Behind enactment was not enough to impact negatively
on physical education, in the same newspaper article in which Health
and Human Services Secretary, Tommy Thompson, announced that "We
are eating just too darn much and we're going to do something about
it" (voluntarily, of course), the Bush administration announced
that funding for the VERB campaign, a CDC project to promote physical
activity among 9-13 year olds, will be cut from US$36 million to US$5
million dollars (Herzog, 2004).
United States’ teachers report inadequacies
in facilities (mainly dilapidation and use for other purposes), reductions
in timetable allocation and waivers allowing exemption from physical
education classes, large class sizes and budget deficits. Illustrations
of these problems are abundant. The following selected exemplars suffice
to illustrate the problems.
(i) Facilities
(ii) Time Allocation Reductions and Waivers
In some states mandated time is not being met (e.g. Illinois, Maryland,
New Jersey, Washington and Wisconsin). Even districts that “meet
state requirements are slashing time and equipment for gym class”
(Kippers, 2004).
iii) Large Class Sizes
In many states, large class sizes are the norm for physical education
classes. Californian elementary school teachers for example regularly
have 40-70 children on average in a class. Large class sizes can and
do affect quality of delivery of physical education.
(iv) Budget Deficits
Section Three: Inclusion and Disability Issues4
The Berlin Physical Education World Summit Action
Plans embraced the issues of inclusion for all children.
Naturally, this included children with disabilities. In terms of these
actions as they relate to children with disabilities in physical education,
there appears to be varying amounts success on how they have been implemented
world wide.
The in-service training and professional development
of teachers to assist them with the inclusion of children with disabilities
into regular physical education classes has been addressed by a number
of countries since 1999. The issue of inclusion is an ongoing cross-curriculum
challenge of which physical education can play an important part. Often,
physical education can act as a catalyst for change as the results and
benefits of inclusion are more transparent and immediate. Countries
such as England, Sweden, Canada, Australia, Finland and Israel have
in place specific programmes to support the inclusion of children with
disabilities into physical education. Undoubtedly, these programmes
are making progress and are beginning to cater for a much more diverse
group of children than ever before. Several notable characteristics
and commonalities have emerged from these programmes that continue to
challenge inclusion generally. These are:
There is a need for more quality research into
the many aspects of inclusion of children with disabilities in physical
education. Without research to inform programme development, the movement
toward inclusion will continue to be slow.
The Berlin Agenda clearly placed a heavy
emphasis on quality physical education for all and on the rights of
all children to physical education. Legal mandates in many countries
have attempted to enforce inclusion. But Agenda’s and mandates
cannot guarantee inclusion alone. World wide, there appears to be a
lack of recognition, mostly from Education itself, of the important
role that children with disabilities play in our playgrounds.
Section Four: Recent Inter- and Non-governmental Organisations’
Initiatives
The Berlin World Summit on Physical Education
was instrumental in placing physical education on the world political
agenda. The MINEPS III Declaration of Punta del Este (1999) was an encouraging
initial development, but restructuring within UNESCO has hitherto hindered
implementation. The restructuring potentially reduces visibility accorded
to physical education and sport. Under such circumstances, it is difficult
to see how UNESCO can fulfil its role as focal point of the United Nations
for matters related to physical education and sport. Nonetheless, at
the UNESCO ‘Round Table Meeting’ of Ministers and Senior
Officials of PE and Sport in Paris in January 2003, along with proposals
related to protection of young athletes and anti-doping, the Communiqué
adopted by representatives from 103 countries noted that in many countries
physical education was being increasingly marginalised within education
systems even though it is instrumentally important for health, physical
development, social cohesion and inter-cultural dialogue, and this at
a time when sport has become a significant economic activity with prominent
global visibility. To reverse the marginalisation trend, the ‘Round
Table’ participants committed themselves to working for implementation
of MINEPS III policy principles and the full recognition of the place
and inclusivity (i.e. non-discriminatory) of physical education and
sport both within and outside education systems. The fact that this
commitment to implement policy principles was more than three years
on from the MINEPS III Punta del Este Declaration is perhaps a stark
reminder of the limitations of UNESCO’s spheres of influence.
The commitment is to be pursued through actions to bring about curriculum,
sports facilities and equipment, status of physical education and initial
and in-service teacher training improvements together with synergetic
co-operation of partners, specifically the family, schools, sporting
associations and clubs, communities, local and other relevant authorities,
public and private sectors. The participants requested the UNESCO Director-General
to draw the United Nations’ Secretary-General’s attention
to the importance of physical education and sport and to the desirability
of debating this topic in the General Assembly. Furthermore, they sought
to have the Communiqué presented to the Fourth International
Conference of Ministers and Senior Officials Responsible for Physical
Education and Sport (MINEPS IV) in Athens in August 2004 (http//www.UNESCO.org,
2003). UNESCO General Conference (October, 2003) proclaimed 2005 as
the International Year for Physical Education and Sport. A ‘Task-Force’
has been created, which has effectively side-tracked UNESCO as the focal
point for matters linked to PE and Sport in the UN system, which means
that physical education is being "diluted" and has to stand
along health, development, UNICEF-type work, refugee camp-work, etc.
One of the follow-up issues of the Ministers Round-Table that UNESCO
has to deal with is the development of an International Anti-Doping
Convention, to supplement the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA)
work, into which a deal of effort is being made and at the expense of
addressing physical education-related concerns. Of course, doping issues
are much more ‘glamorous’ than school physical education.
The most powerful advocate for physical education in the United Nations’
system is now the World Health Organisation (WHO), especially with its
adoption of a Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health.
The UNESCO Communiqué echoes some
of the set of Conclusions agreed by the European Ministers at their
Informal Meeting in Warsaw in September 2002, mentioned in Section One
in this Report. However, the Conclusions (Hardman, 2002a &
2002b) essentially embracing issues of quality5 and
delivery (curriculum content, facilities and equipment, teacher training),
inclusion, more active lifestyles and an associated variety of pan-European
programmes, implementation of a range of measures grouped around perceived
spheres of influence (home and family, school, local and wider community
collaborative provision and flexible programmes), development of relevant
and appropriate national policies, intergovernmental co-operation, sharing
information, research findings and national experiences in promotion
of physical activity, were more detailed and prescriptive. It remains
to be seen what impact, if any, the ministerial deliberations may have.
It is encouraging to see physical education and sport in schools on
the Council of Europe political agenda but the status of Conclusions
is far removed from any form of mandatory requirement of member states.
As well as inter-governmental initiatives since
the Berlin Physical Education Summit, a number of European non-governmental
organisations have begun to address issues and concerns surrounding
physical education in schools. Two examples will suffice as illustrations.
In October 2002, the European Non-Governmental Sports Organisation (ENGSO)
held a two-day forum in Malta, in which access to physical education
in schools and the role of non-governmental organisations in contributing
to a sustainable future for school physical education were main themes
discussed. ENGSO pledged its support for school physical education through
appropriate partnership advocacy initiatives and demonstrated interest
in the EUPEA’s recently published Code of Ethics and
Good Practice Guide for Physical Education to inform its own
planned code of ethics and practice for personnel involved in sport.
A landmark for EUPEA itself, founded in 1991 to “promote more
and better physical education all over Europe”, was its 1st Symposium,
9th November 2002 in Brussels, Belgium on the topical theme of Quality
Physical Education. Nearly 200 delegates from 35 countries attended
the Symposium from which a number of perceived challenges emerged. These
challenges embrace minimal time requirements, balanced programmes, inclusion
strategies and policies, teacher education and competencies, in-service
training and planned continuing professional development, ways and means
of disseminating good practice and understanding frameworks used by
young people to interpret physical education in contexts of national
and cultural diversity across Europe. In summarising the deliberations
of the Symposium, EUPEA Vice-President Chris Laws (2002) concluded that
in striving for a relevant physical education curriculum there is a
role for all European Physical Education Associations to act to provide
“quality experiences for all children”. Clearly there is
concurrence here with the UNESCO Communiqué and the
Council of Europe’s ministerial Conclusions. Section Five: Concluding Comments
Without doubt, there are examples of positively
implemented programmes and good practices in physical education and
in physical education teacher education in most, if not all, countries
across the world. Furthermore, there is an array of individual and institutional
endeavours to optimise the quality of physical education delivery and
so enhance the experiences of children in schools. Equally, there is
evidence to generate considerable continuing disquiet about the situation.
It is clear that in too many schools in too many countries there is
a record of failure in physical education. Children are being denied
the opportunities that will transform their lives. Such denial of opportunities
is inconsistent with the policy principles of the Council of Europe
and UNESCO Charters and does bring into question the effectiveness of
these Charters as appropriate standard-setting instruments; perhaps
the justification lies in fundamental purposes of the Charters ostensibly
to reduce inequalities between countries and ensure minimum standards
of provision.
Thus, the messages are mixed and continue to be
so as testified by reports in the Minutes of the EUPEA Forum meeting
in Brussels, 8 November 2002. Physical education representatives pointed
to an improving national situation in the Czech Republic, Poland and
Slovenia and discussions on increasing physical education curriculum
time allocation in Croatia and Denmark. At the same time, it was indicated
that in France it is difficult to maintain school sport every Wednesday
and that there is a problem with physical education evaluation in the
final year of secondary schools: “teachers find it difficult to
do” BVLO, 2002); and in Ireland that intentions to introduce higher
quality and more time for physical education under proposed curriculum
reform may be compromised because “there is not a lot of room
for increased time allocation, since the government introduced two new
subjects in an already tight programme” (BVLO, 2002).
There is a sense of déjà vu
about the ‘mixed messages’ situation. The 1997 EUPEA Survey
(Loopstra & Van der Gugten) revealed a similarly confused scenario.
On the one hand, the survey indicated that in some countries within
the region, especially in central and Eastern Europe, there were some
encouraging developments in curriculum time allocation. On the other
hand, however, the subject appeared to be under greater threat than
it had been at the beginning of the decade: only Austria, France and
Switzerland were providing two hours per week for physical education
at primary and secondary levels (ages 6-18) and only 9 out of 25 countries
surveyed were offering two hours per week for the 6-12 years age group;
a majority of countries had inadequate training in physical education
for primary school teachers, undervaluing the contribution of the primary
school phase curriculum as well as insufficient curriculum time, especially
for primary age groups and the 17-18 years age group; and there was
insufficient monitoring of the quality of physical education programmes.
The evidence presented in this Report indicates
that many national governments have committed themselves through legislation
to making provision for physical education but they have been either
slow or reticent in translating this into action i.e. actual implementation
and assurance of quality of delivery at the national level. Deficiencies
continue to be apparent in curriculum time allocation, subject status,
financial, material and human resources (particularly in primary school
teacher preparation for physical education teaching), the quality and
relevance of the physical education curriculum and its delivery and
gender and disability issues. Of particular concern are the considerable
inadequacies in facility and equipment supply, frequently associated
with under-funding, especially in economically underdeveloped and developing
countries and regions. A matter of some additional concern in some countries
(for example within the central and Eastern European region) is the
issue of low remuneration of physical education/sport teachers. More
generally, there is disquiet over the falling fitness standards of young
people and high youth dropout rates from physical/sporting activity
engagement, which are occurring concomitantly with the perceived decline
in the position of physical education in schools and its questionable
quality. It seems that the disquiet is exacerbated by insufficient and/or
inadequate school-community co-ordination and problems of communication
in some countries (see Hardman, 2002).
The Berlin Physical Education Summit Agenda
for Action for Government Ministers, the Punta del Este Declaration,
the Council of Europe’s Warsaw Meeting Conclusions and UNESCO’s
‘Round Table’ Communiqué together with various
WHO, IOC and some national governments’ initiatives, amongst others,
demonstrate that there is now an international consensus that issues
surrounding physical education in schools deserve serious consideration
in order to solve existing and future problems. It is imperative that
monitoring of developments in physical education across the world is
maintained. Both the Council of Europe’s ministerial Conclusions
and the UNESCO ‘Round Table’ Communiqué called for
monitoring systems to be put into place to regularly review the situation
of physical education in each country. Indeed, the Council of Europe
referred to the introduction of provision for a pan-European survey
on physical education policies and practices every five years as a priority.
(Bureau of the Committee for the Development of Sport, 2002a; 2002b).
Policy, as well as idealistic and sometimes politically inspired rhetoric
can, and do, mask the truth. In spite of official documentation on principles,
policies and aims, actual implementation into practice exposes the realities
of situations. “Promises” need to be converted into “reality”
if threats are to be surmounted and a safe future for physical education
in schools is to be secured. Otherwise with the Council of Europe Deputy
Secretary General’s intimation of a gap between “promise”
and “reality”, there is a real danger that the Informal
Ministers’ meeting’s agreed Conclusions will remain
just that – more “promise” than “reality”
in too many countries across the world and compliance with Council of
Europe and UNESCO Charters will continue to remain compromised.
Notes
1. Sources for information reported in Section Two
include physical educators in schools and higher education, advisory
supervisors and government officials. In the interests of confidentiality,
individual names and designated positions of such individuals have been
withheld unless information provided has been publicly or widely disseminated.
2. The information on developments in Latin America has been provided by Prof. Dr. Manoel Tubino, President of the Fédération Internationale Education Physique (FIEP). 3. Prof. Dr. Ronald Feingold is President of the Association International des Ecoles Supérieures d’Education Physique (AIESEP). 4. The information in Section 4 was provided by Peter Downs, Australian Sports Commission and IFAPA representative. 5. The final (revised) Conclusions refer to “quality” with an undefined time allocation. This replaced the initial draft, which specified a long-term aim of “a minimum of 180 minutes per week of structured lesson time” (Bureau of the Committee for the Development of Sport, 2002a); the consensus amongst ministerial representatives was that 180 minutes was unrealistic and for at least one country’s representative was unacceptable. References
Barnes, E., (2004) Compulsory PE for 3-year-olds
to beat obesity. Scotland on Sunday. 30 May.
Bee P., (2003). In the press and in the parks
women are being let down. The Guardian. Sport. Monday October
27. p.23.
Bureau of the Committee for the Development of
Sport, (2002a). Draft conclusions on improving physical education
and sport for children and young people in all European countries.
MSL-IM16 (2002) 5 Rev.3. 16th Informal Meeting of European Sports
Ministers, Warsaw, Poland, 12-13 September. Strasbourg, Council of
Europe.
Bureau of the Committee for the Development of
Sport, (2002b). Draft conclusions on improving physical education
and sport for children and young people in all European countries.
Revised by the Drafting Group. MSL-IM16 (2002) 5 Rev.4. 16th
Informal Meeting of European Sports Ministers, Warsaw, Poland, 12-13
September. Strasbourg, Council of Europe.
BVLO, (2002). Minutes of 13th EUPEA Forum
Meeting. Brussels, 8 November.
Crichton, T., (2004). Whatever happened to school
sports? Sunday Herald. 4 April.
Crooks, L., (2002). PE Digest. Saturday 9 November. De Boer-Buqicchio, M. (2002). Opening Address.
16th Informal Meeting of the European Ministers responsible for Sport.
Warsaw, 12 September.
Doll-Tepper, G., and Scoretz, D. (2001). Proceedings,
“World Summit on Physical Education”. Schorndorf,
Verlag Karl Hofmann.
Downs, P. (2004). Personal Communication.
12 March.
Editorial, (2003). Teaching Cuts in Physical
Education are NOT Inevitable! PE News, 5 (5) May
15).
Evers T. cited in Sweeney, N. (2004). As obesity
grows, schools cut education. Activity levels of students drops
from years ago. www.jasonline.com/news/gen/apr04/224866.asp)
24 April.
Feingold, R. (2004). Personal Communication.
25 January.
Hardman, K. (1993) ‘Physical education
within the school curriculum’, in J. Mester (ed.), 'Sport Sciences
in Europe 1993' - Current and Future Perspectives, Aachen,
Meyer and Meyer Verlag. pp.544-560.
Hardman, K. (1994). Physical education in schools.
In F.I. Bell and G.H. Van Glyn (Eds), “Access to Active
Living”. Proceedings of the 10th Commonwealth & International
Scientific Congress, Victoria, Canada, University of Victoria. pp.71-76.
Hardman, K. (1996). The fall and rise of
physical education in international context. Symposium Paper,
Pre-Olympic and International Scientific Congress, Dallas, Texas,
9-14 July.
Hardman, K. (1998a). School physical education:
current plight and future directions in international context.
Paper presented at the 11th Commonwealth and International Scientific
Congress, Kuala Lumpur, 3-8 September.
Hardman, K. (1998b). Threats to physical
education! Threats to sport for all. Paper presented at the I.O.C.
VII World Congress “Sport for All”, Barcelona, Spain,
19-22 November 1998.
Hardman, K. (1999). The World Summit on Physical
Education: Challenges for the next Millennium. Pre-All African
Games Congress, Johannesburg, South Africa, 6-9 September.
Hardman, K. (2002a). Council of Europe Committee
for the Development of Sport (CDDS), European Physical Education/Sport
Survey. Report on Summary of Findings. MSL-IM 16 (2002) 10. Council
of Europe, Strasbourg.
Hardman, K. (2002b). Council of Europe Committee
for the Development of Sport (CDDS), Report on School Physical Education
in Europe. MSL-IM 16 (2002) 9. Strasbourg, Council of Europe.
Hardman, K. & Marshall, J.J. (2000a).
World-wide survey of the state and status of school physical education,
Final Report. Manchester, University of Manchester.
Hatten, T. (2001). Rock Valley College, Rockford,
Illinois. PE-Talk Digest. 26 February.
Herzog, J. (2004). Concerns. PE Digest,
Thursday, 11 March.
http//www.UNESCO.org.
(2003).
Intermediate School Teacher (2001). Short Class Periods. PE Digest. 16 August. Keyes, P. (2004). Physical Education and Health Education Professionals
from across the Country meet to address ‘No Child Left Behind’.
NASPE. 21 February.
Kippers, B. cited in Sweeney, N. (2004). As
obesity grows, schools cut education. Activity levels of students
drop from years ago. www.jasonline.com/news/gen/apr04/224866.asp).
24 April.
Laws, C. (2002). Report on 1st EUPEA Symposium,
Brussels, 9th November 2002. Personal Communication.
Littlefield, R., Green, B., Forsyth, S. &
Sharp, B. (2003). Physical Education in Scottish Schools - A National
Case Study. European Journal of Physical Education, 8 (2).
pp.211-227.
Loopstra, O. & Van der Gugten, T. (1997).
Physical Education from a European Point of View. EU-1478.
Needham, N. (2002). Huge Class Sizes in Music
and PE. PE Digest. Sunday 24 March.
Orr, D. (2002). ESEA. PE Digest, Friday
15 November
Qureshi, Y. & Barnes, E., (2004). Fat
Chance. Scotland on Sunday. 30 May.
Smith, C. (2001). House of Commons Oral Answer
to Questions from Angela Smith, MP for Basildon. 30/4.
Stretch, V. (2002). Standards. PE Digest.
Tuesday 19 November.
Tubino, M. (2004). Personal Communication.
18 December.
Turkington, H.D. (2002). Physical Education in
Canada. FIEP Bulletin, 71 (2). pp.42-46.
Van Deventer, K. (2003). Personal Communication.
14 May.
Valentini, A. (2001). Large class sizes???, Andover,
CT. PE-Talk Digest. 25 March.
Vickroy, P. (2001). Gilroy, California. PE-Talk
Digest. 4 May.
Wanner, S. (2000). San Diego Unified School District.
PE-Talk Digest. 26 September.
Wickham, D. (2001). Let’s Reopen the
School Gym Door. Bring Back P.E. http://www.cwu.edu/~jefferis/jeff_justipe.html
05/02).
![]() http://www.icsspe.org/portal/bulletin-january2005.htm |