The purpose of this paper is:
The goal is to provide relevant data, references, and websites from
both developed and developing countries. As an introduction, definitions
are presented as well as explanations of the International Federation
of Adapted Physical Activity (IFAPA) and adapted physical activity as
a profession and service delivery/empowerment system. Definitions
Definitions are socially constructed and thus vary by language, culture,
environment, and time. This paper primarily uses definitions acceptable
to a majority of the Board of Directors of the International Federation
of Adapted Physical Activity (IFAPA), which conducts its business primarily
in English. Inasmuch as the USA is the only country in the world with
a federal law that specifically requires physical education for all
children with disabilities, definitions will sometimes be taken from
this law and its constantly changing interpretations.
The following definitions and explanations are necessary
for understanding other parts of this report. The information under disability
and adapted physical activity particularly need to be exported
throughout the world by organized professional preparation, in-service
education, continuing education, and parent, sibling, and advocate training.
This must be done by time-tested change strategies pertaining to beliefs,
attitudes, intentions, and practices (e.g., Kozub & Lienert, 2003;
Kudlacek, Valkova, Sherrill, Myers & French, 2002; Sherrill, 2004)
and policy changes to foster active living of people with disabilities
(Adomaitiene, 2003; Lyons, Taylor & Langille, 2003).
Young people. This term refers to infants,
toddlers, children, and adolescents from birth through to the age of 21.
This definition conceptually comes from the USA law called the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which provides federal policy
for free, appropriate public school services until individuals with disabilities
reach the age of 22. The term young people might also be defined
as individuals eligible for school-based instruction and socialization.
Federal vs. State. Federal (or national) laws
are those that apply to all states, provinces, or all parts of a country,
representing a top-down approach to change. State and local
(and their many synonyms) are terms describing levels of policy and governance
that are more direct; they are initiated and enforced by ordinary people
living in rural areas, towns, villages, and cities. This approach to change
is called bottom-up.
Relevant data and suggested change strategies are strongly dependent
upon which government bodies and/or private agencies control and fund
the education of young people. In the USA, for example, education is
the responsibility of state and local governments. This surprises professionals
from other countries because IDEA is so widely discussed. Federal law
like IDEA is enacted only when diverse practices among the 50 states
of the USA can be proved by political powers to negatively affect the
health, happiness, and welfare of the nation and/or basic human rights
and thus federal intervention is judged necessary. It must be remembered,
however, when working toward change in the USA, that the tenets of federal
law must be administered through state and local agencies, which are
expected to raise most of the money to initiate change. Throughout the
world, professionals need more training in understanding both law and
funding.
Disability. The definitions of the World
Health Organization (WHO, 2001) are followed to the extent possible by
IFAPA in regard to the terms disability, impairment, and handicap. However,
many countries continue to use old, discriminatory terminology, and change
is a slow process.
Disability, according to Ustun (2003) who explained the new 2001 WHO/ICIDH/ICF
terms and constructs to IFAPA members, may serve as an umbrella term
for health and health-related states that encompass problems (e.g.,
impairments, activity limitations, or participation limitations) that
result from interactions between personal and contextual (environmental)
factors. Or disability may refer specifically to activity limitations,
again attributed to interactions between personal and contextual factors.
Activity limitations, in turn, imply a set of objective, measurable
criteria that are used by designated experts to determine eligibility
of a person for special services, programs, supports, or help for which
funding must be made available. Activity encompasses intellectual, social,
emotional, or physical functions or any combinations, thereof, as may
be observed in specific work, leisure, or daily living tasks. Limitations
come from interactions among impaired body functions and structures,
the nature of activity demands, and societal barriers to participation.
Disability (or its synonym, activity limitations) is no longer determined
by how a person looks and acts. Disability, according to new definitions,
can be determined only by assessment of individual performance and of
context (generally called ecological assessment and supported by scholarly
theory). Assessment must relate directly to criteria that describe safe
and successful performance in each area of educational, vocational,
and health/daily living importance. For example, a person may have a
double-leg amputation, Down syndrome, or total blindness and still not
be legally disabled, according to WHO, if he or she can perform at an
acceptable level in work, leisure, and daily living tasks Concepts of
safe and successful vary by culture and context, and thus understandings
in relation to the new definitions are difficult to teach.
Disability is no longer conceptualised as a global, all-or-none condition.
This means that, ideally, persons can no longer be denied access to
any program or opportunity simply because of the way they look or act.
An underlying assumption of WHO philosophy is that everyone is included
or (must be included) in our world. To be excluded or restricted, and
assigned to specially designed separate services, requires the meeting
of specific eligibility criteria established by experts in each area.
Interpretation of WHO philosophy in North America generally means that
physical education teachers will have students with the full spectrum
of health/activity conditions in their classes. For needy students to
receive special services, programs, or supports, inside or outside the
general classroom, the students must be assessed as failing to meet
specific criteria that establish minimal level of acceptable performance
in each of the tasks considered important within the context of physical
education class instruction and practice. This statement sounds harsh,
for (of course) a teacher generally helps all of her or his students
to the greatest extent possible. However, this explanation is a review
of emerging inclusion/exclusion policies related to general physical
education over the past decade.
In summary, the emerging philosophy is to start with ALL children in
general physical education, conduct assessment, and exclude only those
who cannot meet criteria, even with adapted physical education supports.
Those excluded from general physical education, of course, will be assigned
to one of the many forms of adapted physical education services. In
contrast, the old, traditional policy was to exclude children who looked
or acted disabled and then, after special education (including adapted
physical education) in separate settings, to move the children to integrated
classrooms.
In general, disability is the preferred
term in predominantly English-speaking agencies, international sport organizations,
and other structures that pertain to physical activity for people with
disabilities. For example, the Paralympic movement uses disability
sport and athletes with disabilities (Steadward, Nelson
& Wheeler, 1994); the Deaf movement uses Deaflympics, Deaf sport,
and Deaf athletes (Stewart, 1991); and the Special Olympics movement,
which serves only people with cognitive impairments, uses athletes
with intellectual disabilities (Mactavish & Dowds, 2003). However,
across the world, the new definitions and concepts of disability remain
largely unknown.
Supports or support services refer to supplementary
resources and aids that are provided in a general physical education environment
to enable students with disabilities to be educated with nondisabled classmates
to the maximum extent possible. Considerable research has been conducted
on supports (e.g., Heikinaro-Johansson, Sherrill, French & Huuhka,
1995; Lytle & Collier, 2002; Vogler, Koranda & Romance, 2000).
Supports may be extra helpers present as in dual and team teaching, peer
tutoring, and various forms of consulting by adapted physical activity
specialists. Supports may also be adapted equipment or classroom materials
like station labels in large print or Braille, sport wheelchairs, and
rails on walls to help with balance.
Service Delivery vs. Therapy. Service delivery
refers to the activities of a salaried professional (e.g., teacher, coach,
recreator, fitness counsellor, tutor) who works directly with individuals
with disabilities and who performs one or more of the following job functions:
planning, assessment, paperwork and meetings, teaching, evaluation, consultation,
advocacy. Therapy refers to the activities of a salaried therapist
(occupational, physical, dance, speech, music, art, recreation, activity)
who performs tasks related to rehabilitation and medically prescribed
wellness programs.
International Federation of Adapted Physical Activity (IFAPA)
www.IFAPA.net
IFAPA, an affiliate of the International Council of Sport Science and
Physical Education (ICSSPE), is the only international organization
that specifies physical activity (all forms: educational, recreational,
elite competitive, therapeutic, developmental) for persons with disabilities
as its sole mission and purpose. IFAPA’s vision (2003 board meetings)
is “the worldwide organization that promotes theory and empowers
practice for lifelong physical activity of individuals with disabilities”.
Realizing IFAPA’s vision entails advocacy for social justice as
well as advancing knowledge and understanding of physical activity and
sport by initiating policymaking, coordinating, promoting, and sharing
of research and evidence-based practice worldwide.
IFAPA, founded in 1973, by Clermont Simard, Laval
University, Canada, and colleagues in French-speaking Canada and Belgium,
has held an international symposium every 2 years since its first meeting
in Quebec City in 1977. This, along with committee activity, a website,
newsletter, and an official scholarly journal Adapted Physical Activity
Quarterly, are the major vehicles for conveying new knowledge and
practices to leaders in its six regions, who in turn work with direct
services personnel to promote high quality of life through lifetime habits
of physical activity for persons with disabilities (conceptualised as
activity limitations caused by the interaction of personal and contextual
factors).
IFAPA regions, and their affiliated organizations, are as follows:
Europe: European Association for Research into Adapted Physical Activity (EARAPA), founded in 1987 Asia: Asian Society for Adapted Physical Education and Exercise (ASAPE), founded 1978 North America: North American Federation of Adapted Physical Activity (NAFAPA), founded 1994 South and Central America: Developing Africa: Developing Oceania: Developing The International Symposium for Adapted Physical Activity (ISAPA) rotates
from region to region and has been held in Quebec City, Brussels, New
Orleans, London, Toronto, Brisbane, Berlin, Miami, Yokohama, Oslo/Beitostolen,
Lleida/Barcelona, Vienna, and Seoul. The 2005 ISAPA will be held in
July in Pavia/Verona. These symposia have generated outstanding proceedings
that bring together philosophy, knowledge, and practices from around
the world. These and a growing number of excellent textbooks in several
languages (e.g., Block, 2000; Malkia & Rintala, 2002; Reid, 1990;
Sherrill, 1976; 2004; Steadward, Wheeler & Watkinson, 2003; Winnick,
2000) provide the beginning foundations for adapted physical activity
as a scholarly discipline underpinned by much diverse research (See
list of proceedings under ISAPA in appendices; proceedings also appear
in reference list under names of editors).
The Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly
(APAQ), established in 1984 and adopted by IFAPA as its official scholarly
journal in 1994, is published by Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, which
is internationally known for publications in health, physical education,
recreation, dance, and fitness. See www.humankinetics.com.
The impact factor of APAQ, reported annually by the Journal Citation Reports (JCR), a product of the Institute for Scientific Information (see http://jcr.isihost.com), is a factor often considered in promotion and tenure for professionals who publish their work. The impact factor of APAQ has been high, compared with other scholarly journals in sport science and exercise (Reid & Ulrich, 2001). The APAQ Editorial Board includes representatives from several countries, and APAQ publishes a good sample of the best work emerging throughout the world. Adapted Physical Activity as a Profession
and Service Delivery/Empowerment System
Adapted physical activity is defined as “service delivery, pedagogy, coaching, rehabilitation, therapy, training, or empowerment conducted by qualified professionals to enhance physical activity goal achievement of individuals of all ages with movement limitations and/or societal restrictions (i.e., attitudinal and environmental barriers)” (Sherrill, 2004, p. 4). The definition of adapted physical activity has been frequently updated in accordance with societal changes (Reid, 2003; Sherrill & DePauw, 1997). This definition, for example, aims to support the World Health Organization’s (2001) definition of disability. Other definitions support the triad nature of adapted physical activity as (a) field-based activities of service delivery/empowerment; (b) a profession concerned with advocacy, appropriate professional preparation, and the monitoring of quality of service delivery; and (c) a scholarly discipline or distinct and unique knowledge/research area that generates the knowledge base for adapted physical activity. This topic is presented here because adapted physical activity is believed
to be one of the most viable delivery systems for promoting physical
activity for persons with disabilities and for continuing to develop
a scientific knowledge base to support relevant practices and human
rights. Adapted physical activity has evolved as a multidisciplinary,
interdisciplinary, and cross-disciplinary movement (depending on purpose
and sources) because the goal of physical activity for all children,
especially the underserved and under recognized, is a concern of many
peoples and structures (homes, schools, hospitals, rehabilitation centres,
agencies, governments).
Adapted physical activity, which evolved from Swedish
medical gymnastics, therapeutic exercise, and correctives in the late
1800s, has been known by many names. Brought to the USA primarily by European
physicians, various exercise systems designed to promote health and fitness
were infused into new public school systems and professional preparation
programs in the early 1900s (for primary sources, see Sherrill, 2004).
The philosophy, goals, and content of these exercise systems influenced
and were influenced over the years by many academic specializations and
interests (mainly special education, therapeutic recreation and leisure
education, sports medicine, physical and occupational therapy, disability
studies [a relatively new branch of sociology], and disability sport).
These influences came from many countries as well as from personnel from
the many new facilities built specifically for persons with disabilities
in the 19th century. Among the best descriptions of pedagogy used in state-supported
schools for residents with intellectual and/or sensory disabilities was
that of R. Tait McKenzie (1909) in Exercise in Medicine and Sport.
Adapted Physical Education, A School-Based Term.
The term adapted physical education originated in the USA in
1952, when the American Association for Health, Physical Education, and
Recreation (AAHPER, now the American Alliance of Health, Physical Education,
Recreation and Dance), published a definition and guidelines for adapted
physical education as a recommended school subject for students who could
not safely or successfully participate in vigorous, general physical education
programs. This first definition implied instruction in separate classrooms,
which was consistent with the special education practices of the day.
The underlying assumption was that the population to be served by adapted
physical education was special education students or school-aged individuals
with disabilities (then called handicaps).
Subsequently, in the USA, numerous research studies were presented
to law-making bodies and to professionals indicating that special education
children were not receiving physical education in many schools. As part
of the advocacy movement to make the research data known, members of
the Joseph P. Kennedy family began various initiatives for promoting
interest and commitment (e.g., awareness speeches to conference groups,
1965; establishment of a national unit within AAHPER, 1965; enactment
of laws funding university-based professional preparation in physical
education and recreation for persons with disabilities, 1967 and 1975;
the founding of Special Olympics in 1968). For descriptions of these
initiatives, see Sherrill (1988; 2004), DePauw & Gavron (1995),
and Stein (2004). Through these and other efforts, adapted physical
education experienced a tremendous growth spurt, becoming almost entirely
special education physical education (often called special physical
education) and largely funded by special education rather than physical
education or general education money. In most schools, the nature of
adapted physical education changed and children with activity limitations
in general physical education received little attention.
Other countries were concurrently involved in the 1960s and 1970s in
initiating physical education and recreation experiences for persons
with disabilities, but few records exist and/or are accessible in English.
In the 1960s, Canadian adapted physical activity leaders hosted a first
National Games for Athletes with Disabilities (1968), conducted research,
and began a number of special programs, initially at McGill University,
University of Alberta, and Lakehead University (Wall, 2003). In Europe,
the idea of “Sport for All” was adopted in 1966 by the Council
of Europe, no doubt in support of the several countries like Norway
and Germany, which had innovated “sport for all” programs
in the 1950s and 1960s (De Knop & Oja, 1996). This movement became
international and is still widely popular although participating countries
have their own individual names for “Sport for All” goals
and achievements.
The “Sport for All” movement no doubt
rekindled interest worldwide in physical education for all. Approximately
25 years after AAHPER’s issuing of the 1952 definition, in keeping
with new trends, Sherrill (1976) emphasized that adapted physical education,
as pedagogy, was not limited to separate or special education (segregated)
settings. Adapted physical education could be provided in any setting
to any individual with activity limitations. Sherrill’s (1976) first
definition of adapted physical education was widely accepted.
It was “the science of analysing movement, identifying problems
within the psychomotor domain, and developing instructional strategies
for remediating problems and preserving ego strength” (p. xvii).
Reid (2003) discussed the implications of this definition and reviewed
other definitions posited by Sherrill and colleagues as they sought to
stay abreast of rapid changes in education, service delivery, and human
rights.
Today, the term adapted physical education
is primarily used in the USA, Asia, and by other countries, when referring
specifically to school-based instructional adapted physical education.
From the 1970s onward, however, the broader, umbrella term adapted
physical activity gained popularity internationally as many professionals
sought to emphasize lifespan services, self-actualisation, and empowerment
for persons with disabilities.
Adapted Physical Activity, the Umbrella Contemporary
Term. The founders of the International Federation of Adapted Physical
Activity first used the term adapted physical activity in 1973,
which probably defined the term and related concepts in French (primary
sources not available). In 1983, the first publication bearing the title
adapted physical activity was published by Human Kinetics (Eason, Smith
& Caron, 1983). This was the proceedings of the 3rd ISAPA and the
first of the proceedings to be published and disseminated by a major commercial
company. In 1984, the founders of the Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly
(Geoffrey Broadhead, Claudine Sherrill, and Harriet Lundegren) convinced
Human Kinetics Publishers to name its new multidisciplinary journal Adapted
Physical Activity. The intent of this journal was to attract research
from many disciplines, but especially from adapted physical education
and therapeutic recreation.
The first systematic attempt to define adapted
physical activity in English occurred at the 7th ISAPA, held in Berlin,
in June 1989. The resulting definition was “Adapted physical activity
refers to movement, physical activity, and sports in which special emphasis
is placed on the interests and capabilities of individual with limiting
conditions, such as the disabled, health impaired, or aged” (Doll-Tepper,
Dahms, Doll & von Selzam, 1990, p. v.). This excellent definition,
which refers to the service delivery/empowerment aspect of adapted physical
activity, clearly applied to all age groups, including the very old.
When Sherrill changed the name of her textbook from
adapted physical education to adapted physical activity in 1993
(4th ed.), she summarized international perspectives by stating:
“Clearly, adapted physical activity is the name of the present and the future. It is broad and inclusive and emphasizes the theory and practice of adaptation. [This reference to theory and practice was meant to be interpreted as adapting all kinds of contributing variables (personal, environmental, pedagogical]. It [adapted physical activity] recognizes that adaptations are needed for all persons with psychomotor problems, not just those labelled disabled. Professionals in a number of fields and disciplines can make these adaptations (p. xviii).“ By the 1990s, almost all references in the Western world to adapted
physical activity and adapted physical education emphasized that these
terms referred to special services and supports, not places. In general,
the international service delivery trend was moving toward integration
and inclusion (Block, 2000; Sherrill, 2004; Steadward, Wheeler &
Watkinson, 2003; Van Coppenolle, De Potter, Van Peteghem, Djobova &
Wijns, 2003). However, practices in the field typically lag behind those
described in textbooks, policy statements, and law. Nowhere is this
more true than in services and programs for persons with activity limitations.
Status Quo of Involvement of Young People
With Disabilities In Physical Activity
Reports of the status quo of young people with disabilities in physical activity are sparse. In many parts of the world there are no resources for valid and reliable data collection and this research priority ranks low among other critical needs. Observation reveals that, except for the Australia, USA, and Canada, participation in PE and sports seems to be mostly in special schools and special programs. Young people with some types of disabilities (e.g., intellectual) are more likely to be educated in special schools than others. Leaders, however, in most countries are promoting inclusive philosophies (see text that follows). When the sport is competitive rather than recreational, the training seems to be related mostly to development for or current participation in Special Olympics, Paralympics, and Deaflympics rather than inclusive settings. Number of Persons with Disabilities in the World
Reports vary, and few refer specifically to young people. For instance, Charlton (1998) states, “the oppression of 500 million people with disabilities is rooted in the political-economic and cultural dimensions of everyday life” (p. ix). Charlton (1998, p. 6) states that 80% of all of the people with disabilities live in Third World Countries (he cites the United Nations as providing this information, p. 8). Charlton (p. 8) also cites Rehabilitation International as estimating that, by 2000, there will be 846 million persons with disabilities in the world. This comprises 13% of the world’s population. As noted earlier under the definition of disabilities,
statistics will vary according to the legal definitions of each country.
With regard to the WHO definition, world organizations or individual countries
will have to define activity limitations more specifically for
specific activity areas and different age groups (infants and toddlers,
preschool, school age, working age, retirement age) to determine number
of persons whose function is below average and/or who need special help.
Determination of the number to be classified as disabled and thus eligible
to receive special services that require money over and above traditional
general education funding depends, to a large extent, on economic conditions
in each locale. When the economy is good, more money is generally allocated
to education and to rights and needs of young people with disabilities.
When the economy is bad, the needs of the average citizen are targeted.
Thus, the eligibility criteria for receiving services (and the number
of persons legally identified as disabled) vary with the times as well
as interpretations of laws.
Clearly Third World countries, dominated by hunger and other problems,
and countries with terrorism and war, have larger numbers and percentages
of disabilities, particularly among young people. The countries with
high prevalence of HIV/AIDS also need separate consideration.
Special Olympics International, which maintains excellent records,
indicates that 1.2 million persons worldwide are Special Olympics athletes
(Hunt, 2003). Their goal is to soon provide sport and physical education
to 2 million persons with intellectual disabilities. This goal includes
all age groups.
In the United States, most sources say that 10 to 15% of individuals
in the birth-to-age-22 group have disabilities and could benefit from
special education services, including physical education with and without
adapted physical activity supports. The U.S. Department of Education
documents special education services to only about 2% of this age group.
The actual number served in every society depends on the economy and
politics. Leaders believe that most young people with disabilities are
under identified and underserved.
Europe
At this time, Europe is the only region of the world that has attempted
to assemble data on physical activity involvement (Boursier & Kahrs,
2003; Dinold & Valkova, 2003). As part of the THENAPA project funded
by the European Union, questionnaires were distributed in 23 countries:
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands,
Norway, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, and the
United Kingdom.
Students with disabilities in these two reports were referred to as
Special Needs Children (SEN). This practice follows the traditional
terminology of Great Britain (Barnes, 1991). The survey focused on involvement
in inclusive PE and sports rather than PE and sport in any setting.
Following are some verbatim statements (occasionally with edits) from
these reports.
p. 51. SEN tend to be included in the school system
but not in PE lessons. The data vary widely. Examples: 30% of SEN in inclusive
(i.e., general or regular) physical education in Austria; 20% in the U.K.
(40% in the inclusive system but only about 6% in PE); nearly all SEN
receive PE in special schools in Norway; 7% in several other countries
[not clear to me whether 7% refers to inclusive PE or any kind of PE,
as in special schools]. Lower number of SEN in PE than in the inclusive
school system.
p. 52 School/educational legislation supporting inclusion has been
introduced in all countries … these laws stress special education,
and PE seems to remain a “blank space” on the map.
SEN have obligatory PE lessons in only 5 countries (Austria, Italy,
Slovakia, Sweden, U.K.), however, they do not participate because they
are excused, with excuses justified on the basis of their exceptional
situation. Physicians (or/and parents, or/and the special education
advisory centre) excuse the majority of them. Excuses are not only a
problem of SEN but of all children.
p. 52 Besides regular PE lessons there is a system of out-of-class
sports -- like swimming courses for beginners, outdoor activities, excursions,
exercises during break, etc….All countries state that they give
SEN a chance to choose and participate, but in reality this very rarely
occurs (15 countries). Illustrative reasons include regular sport not
appropriate for SEN; teachers’ preparation, access, appropriate
time, no interest in SEN.
p. 78 School sport exists in almost all European countries (16), but
in some countries like Spain, Italy, and Lithuania, it is not compulsory.
School sport in the Netherlands is only implemented in the upper half
of the school. Only Greece and Norway don’t have school sport.
The general idea in Norway is that leisure time sport should be taken
care of by the Norwegian Sport Confederation. The sports organizations
of Norway have developed general sport schools where all children can
practice various sport activities.
In four countries, school sport is elitist, the emphasis is on performance
and less attention is paid to recreation and leisure (Czech Republic,
France, Italy, and U.K.).
p. 70 In 8 countries SEN students do not have the possibility to be
integrated into school sport (Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia,
Lithuania, Portugal, Poland, and U.K.).
In 9 countries, some initiatives can be found (Austria, Belgium, Czech
Republic, Finland, Italy, Ireland, and Sweden). Also true in France
and Poland.
SEN students can be integrated into school sport at leisure or recreational
but not at competitive level (Denmark, France, Italy, and U.K.) or may
participate in local inter-school events only (Finland).
p. 108. The participation of disabled persons is not very substantial.
Nevertheless, there are many initiatives showing that the situation
is improving.
p. 109. Many THENAPA representatives analyse that the low number of
disabled persons practicing sport activities might be due to a variety
of reasons, such as numerous barriers (physical, social), lack of information
on sport practices for the disabled, weak cooperation between structures,
a shortage of adapted physical activity (APA) professionals, etc.
The THENAPA key persons’ main comments concern the lack of knowledge
of coaches and partners in the field of adapted physical activity.
United States of America
Today, most sources agree that about 95% of all children with disabilities
(as defined by U.S. law and identified by multidisciplinary, school-based
individualized educational program [IEP] committees) participate in
general (inclusive) physical education classes constituting the mainstream.
Thus, physical education for young people with disabilities depends
largely on the quality of physical education for children without disabilities,
state requirements pertaining to number of minutes per week and class
sizes, and local policies with regard to enforcement, excuses, and substitutions.
Unfortunately, most of the 50 states do not require physical education
for young people without disabilities. This weakens adapted physical
activity services, which should be ongoing in general settings as well
as separate ones.
In reality, most physical educators believe that not enough supports
(especially qualified generalists and specialist-consultants) are available
to make the 95% statistic valid (Block, 1999; Lienert, Sherrill &
Myers, 2001). Although special education needs young people (SEN, using
European abbreviation for consistency) each have a law-based individualized
education program (IEP) committee meeting and a written IEP approximately
every year, the experts comprising the committee seldom give high priority
to physical education needs that might require adapted physical education
extra supports or services.
Understanding the IEP process is challenging. The much-touted law of
1975, that requires physical education (specially designed, if necessary)
for all children with disabilities applies only to those children whom
the multidisciplinary IEP team find to be disabled specifically in physical
education performance. If a child can fit into a general physical education
class and be reasonably successful, he or she (regardless of appearance
or general function) is not considered disabled. Thus, there are children
in wheelchairs, on crutches, blind, or intellectually impaired in the
USA system that are not legally defined as disabled for physical education.
Decision-making of the multidisciplinary IEP team is sometimes political,
taking into consideration school and community resources, and classifying
children in math, reading, and science as disabled but not in physical
education, music, and art. Many physical educators therefore believe
that the law does not work for them in the same ways that it works for
other curricular areas (e.g., Decker & Jansma, 1995). For example,
great emphasis is placed in the USA law on assigning children with disabilities,
after thorough assessment, to a spectrum of least restrictive environment
placement or services ranging from separate classroom through numerous
options that end with general physical education classroom. In physical
education, however, most children are simply left in an inclusive classroom
(where inclusion is typically physical [meaning proximity] but not social).
Recently, increasing emphasis has been placed on making inclusion social
as well as physical. Methods used have included numerous kinds of supports
(people, equipment, environment). Among the most successful of these
is the employment of adapted physical education specialists to serve
as consultants in helping general physical educators build self-confidence,
develop positive attitudes, and improve adaptation skills (Lytle &
Collier, 2002; Lytle & Hutchinson, 2004).
The USA law continues to support least restrictive
environment physical education placements and services for young
persons with severe disabilities who previously received no physical education
services. This is estimated to include about 5% of all young people with
disabilities, and adapted physical education specialists are prepared
specifically to teach them. The law states that physical and occupational
therapy may not substitute for physical education, but this tenet of the
law is often violated when young people are nonverbal, nonambulatory,
and severely limited in almost all of life activities. Nevertheless, these
persons do attend public schools because the concept of inclusion in the
USA (as well as Canada) refers to virtually all young people. No student
is considered too disabled for some kind of physical education.
Canada
The history of young people with disabilities receiving
physical education in Canada is similar to that of young people in the
USA (Reid, 2003; Wall, 2003). Canada does not, however, have a federal
law that specifically mandates physical education for all children with
disabilities and provide federal monies as incentives to follow the law.
Individuals have pioneered in adapted physical education instruction since
the 1960s, but today’s strong impetus for high quality physical
education for young people with disabilities is generally traced to the
Jasper Talks symposium in 1986, which “brought together delegates
from across Canada to acknowledge past achievements, examine the current
situation, and generate strategies for change in adapted physical activity
in Canada” (Wall, 2003, p. 37). According to Reid (2003, p. 141)
“Inclusion was an integral part of the dialogue at the Jasper Talks.
The Active Living Alliance for Canadians with a Disability, created from
the Jasper Talks, sponsored the Moving to Inclusion project [which
began in 1994] to support the inclusion of children in regular physical
education programmes.”
To assure that Moving to Inclusion had
an impact on public school physical education throughout Canada, the government
structure called Health Canada distributed copies of this curriculum to
over 15,000 schools in 1994. Today, over 25,000 have been distributed,
and much personnel preparation has been conducted as continuing education,
in-service education, and preservice education to facilitate optimal use
of this curriculum and to promote the trend of moving from separate to
inclusive physical education instruction (Wall, 2003, p. 41).
Concurrently, after the Jasper Talks, Fitness Canada (another government-supported structure) established a National Advisory Committee on Physical Activity for Canadians with a Disability, which developed a Blueprint for Action (1998), which was distributed to over 1,000 Canadians. See Wall (2003) for more information on this Blueprint or contact the Active Living Alliance for Canadians with a Disability which maintains an especially outstanding website www.ala.ca Fitness Canada included persons with disabilities in its 1983 national
fitness survey as well as other initiatives so that hard data would
be available to promote service and programs. Longmuir and Bar-Or (2000,
p. 51) reanalysed 1983 data of 987 youths with disabilities, ages 6
to 20, and concluded: “ Disability significantly influences habitual
physical activity levels, perceived participation limitations, and perceived
fitness relative to peers….Youths with hearing impairments and
chronic medical conditions are more active than those with physical
disabilities or visual impairments. Participants with cerebral palsy,
muscular dystrophy, and visual impairments are the most limited.”
Asia With major international sport events for people with disabilities scheduled
for Asia during this decade, much positive change is taking place. In
2005, Japan will hold the 8th Special Olympics Winter Games in Nagano.
In 2007, Shanghai will hold the 12th Special Olympics World Summer Games.
In 2008, the Summer Paralympics will be held in Beijing.
Historically, Asia has been active in sports competition. Japan hosted
international games for athletes with physical disabilities in 1951
and established the Sport Association for the Physically Handicapped
in 1961. The 2nd Paralympics (limited to wheelchair athletes with spinal
cord injuries) was held in Tokyo in 1964. Japan had wheelchair basketball
teams at that time. The prestigious FESPIC Games originated in Beppu,
Oita; Hong Kong hosted them in 1982; Bangkok in 1999; and Busan in 2002.
Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Mainland China
Lin (2003) reported a survey concerning adapted physical activities
and sports for people with disabilities in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and
Mainland China. No facts are reported on number and ages of persons
involved. Findings indicated that both Japan and Korea have special
sport facilities for persons with disabilities in hospitals and employ
specialists, primarily called rehabilitation sports instructors, in
Japan and recreation therapists in Korea (pp. 53-54). In 1998, a total
of 102 sports facilities served people with disabilities in Japan. “In
the fields of medical treatment and rehabilitation sports in hospitals,
Japan is the most advanced” (Lin, 2003, p. 54).
People with disabilities in Mainland China, Taiwan, and Korea primarily
use facilities for the general public when doing sports although Korea
does have some special sport facilities for rehabilitation in hospitals.
In Mainland China and Taiwan, the specialists conducting sport in hospitals
are mainly physicians, nurses, occupational therapists, and physiotherapists.
Japan, Korea, Mainland China, and Taiwan all report some adapted physical
education in schools. Special education or physical education teachers
generally teach this. In Korea, in 1997, of the 106 departments of physical
education, 42 offered courses in adapted physical education. Yong-In
University in Korea (led by Prof Kim Ki Hong) established an adapted
physical education department in 1993; this university offers 4-year
bachelor’s degrees specifically in adapted physical education.
Most other universities offer master’s degree adapted physical
education specialization to certified general physical education teachers.
Ewha Woman’s University in Seoul (Prof Yang Ja Hong) was perhaps
the pioneer university in Korea to provide strong adapted physical activity
training at several levels (Yabe & Hong, 1994). In 2000, Taiwan
(the National Taiwan Normal University, Prof Man-hway Lin) initiated
a master’s degree in adapted physical activity and other universities
are following suit.
Taiwan
Taiwan is the only Asian country for which details about SEN are easily
accessible in English (Lin, 1999). This is because these facts are routinely
presented at ISAPAs and reported in ISAPA proceedings. In 1992, “a
total of 75, 562 disabled children were enrolled in some form of school,
accounting for 2.12% of the total number of students” (Lin, 1999,
pp. 18-19). “Compared to the 6.6% receiving special education
services in the USA and 11% in Japan, the prevalence rate in Taiwan
seems to be relatively low. However, according to researchers in Taiwan
the actual ratio [I think she means percentage] may be approximately
7.7%.” Most of the SEN in Taiwan have mental retardation, but
law identifies five categories of disability.
Among 1232 schools in Taiwan, 801 have special education classes but
only 5.9% have adapted physical education classes (Lin, 1999, p. 19).
Lin summarizes, “about 55.1% of all disabled students are participating
in sports class like other students, and 29.3% have their sports lectures
in groups of students who have the same handicap. Only 15.5% are not
participating in these classes” (p. 19). Lin’s report made
no mention of children with severe disabilities who might be unable
to attend special education classes.
Since 1992, the Taiwan Dept of Education has supported extensive in-service
and continuing professional preparation in adapted physical education
conducted by international experts, usually during summers. Hundreds
of teachers have benefited from this initiative. Taiwan has also granted
scholarships to a few carefully selected physical education teachers
to study adapted physical activity in other countries.
Hong Kong
In Hong Kong “the dominant cultural ideology is that children
with disabilities should live at home with their families attend schools
specially designed for their particular disabilities” (Sit, Lindner
& Sherrill, 2002, p. 454). As perceived by the parents (95% of whom
are ethnic Chinese), “participation in physical activity means
a waste of time and hinders academic achievement,” the strong
emphasis within traditional Chinese culture. These family values affect
all physical education, not just that for children with SEN. Some SEN
children in Hong Kong live in residential schools (about 78% with visual
impairments, 61% with maladjustment; 21% with physical disability; 10%
with hearing impairments). According to Sit et al. (2002), no children
with mild mental retardation live in residential schools.
Although related literature of Sit et al. indicated that SEN in Hong
Kong were mostly sedentary, Sit et al. reported that most of her participants
(who represented 10 special schools) participated in at least one sport
during their free time (83%); in at least 2 sports (66%); in at least
3 sports (46%); and in more than 3 sports (33%). Location of participation
varied significantly by disability; SEN with mental disability and visual
impairment mostly used public playgrounds and parks rather than schools,
private clubs, or organized lessons. School facilities were the second
most popular location of sport.
Indonesia
Indonesia is illustrative of the many countries that are initiating
adapted physical activity organizations to promote better quality of
life through physical activity. The Indonesian Society for Adapted Physical
Education (ISAPA) was founded in August 2002 (ISAPA, 2003) and reported
on its activities at the 14th International Symposium for Adapted Physical
Activity (also called ISAPA) in Korea in 2003. Their constitution and
by-laws are exemplary. The following facts come from that report.
The distribution of SEN tends to be concentrated in special schools
in a few provinces (Jakarta, West Java, Central Java, East Java, and
South Sulawesi). Some SEN are scattered throughout the other 25 provinces
of Indonesia. No mention of SEN in general education was made. SEN receiving
special education instruction are mostly hearing impaired (45%), visually
impaired (30%), and mild intellectual impairment (13%). No description
of physical education (or adapted physical education) instruction is
given, and the report’s text implies that SEN receive little attention
from the physical education profession.
However, the needs and change strategies are understood by leaders
(members of ISAPA), who have begun conducting adapted physical activity
workshops for teachers. Individuals attending these mostly have no previous
training in any kind of physical education.
Oceania (Australia, New Zealand, Pacific Islands)
Australia is best known internationally for the outstanding, long-duration
work of the Australian Sports Commission (ASC), which is known for assisting
“anyone and everyone involved or interested in the inclusion of
people with disabilities in sport and physical activity.”(ASC
materials, 2001). Since the early 1990s, ASC’s Disability Education
Program has published and widely disseminated the Willing and Able series
of physical education and sport personnel preparation books, brochures,
disks, and other materials. No other country (or entity) has surpassed
or equalled the quality or quantity of Australia’s personnel preparation
materials and strategies in physical activity for persons with disabilities.
Although the Australian Sports Commission funds
its leaders to participate in the International Federation of Adapted
Physical Activity, its policy seems to be refusal to use the term adapted
physical activity, because Australian decision-makers apparently
believe that this term still connotes separate physical education for
people with disability. The philosophy of Australia in regard to physical
activity for persons with disabilities is 100% inclusive, and its implementation
of this policy appears exemplary.
A problem occurs internationally, however, in that Australian leaders
repeatedly call for a paradigm change away from the terminology and
practice of adapted physical activity, which has gradually (with much
work) been accepted and implemented in most other countries of the world.
Illustrative of the difference in thinking, Australian leader and IFAPA
vice president Peter Downs (2003, p. 20) stated: “If APA is about
adaptation then it can be described as an exclusionary phenomenon. It
is to do with the concept of exclusion of people with disabilities in
sports and physical activity.” These words are hard to understand
in that nearly all philosophical statements about adaptation and adapted
physical education in other countries promote inclusion and focus on
adaptation as services and supports in all settings. In fact, a current
international trend is the preparation of adapted physical activity
specialists to help local school districts and general PE personnel
in general classrooms with inclusion.
The philosophical split between Australia and other countries appears
to be mostly at the terminology and basic assumptions levels and does
not seem to affect cooperation and collaboration. Most adapted physical
activity specialists in the world would love to have in their own countries
the administrative supports of government and governing sport and education
bodies that Australia models.
Summarizing this issue, Australia requires that all personnel be taught
to how to keep children included in all mainstream activities. Official
revision of interpretations of the USA law now emphasize that all SEN
must remain in general physical education (and thus general educators
must know how to teach them) unless a particular child, on rare occasion,
can be documented as unable to benefit, even with supports, from general
education instruction. Enforcement of law is difficult, however. In
most countries of the world, law or policy specifies that all children
shall be included to the maximum extent possible. Insofar as I know,
the USA is the only country that specifically specifies physical education
for young people with disabilities in federal law and mandates, by implication,
that physical education pedagogy should precede the name as other school
subjects.
Australian researchers (generally university personnel) show evidence
of the same pedagogical dilemmas as other countries in their studies
of inclusive physical education classrooms (Temple & Walkley, 1999).
Research from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology University,
Bundoora, in the state of Victoria, for example, reports that students
with mild intellectual disabilities spend significantly less time engaged
in inclusive physical education class activities (and presumably learning)
than nondisabled classmates. This problem of course needs resolved.
Temple and Walkley (pp. 71-72) conclude:
‘There is obvious cause for concern when students with minimal
intellectual
disabilities are spending on average only 15% of their lesson successfully engaged with the curriculum. In some settings in this project, 15 % would equate to less than 5 min/week. The low MA and associated high levels of MI behaviour indicates a need for curricular and instructional adaptation. Modification to lesson content needs to be planned and tailored for student success.’ The Australian Sport Commission is funding a personnel preparation
project, called Pacific Sports Ability (PSA), to facilitate involvement
of people in New Guinea in inclusive physical activity (a.jobling@mailbox.uq.edu.au).
Several workshops will be presented in New Guinea, which will generate
leaders for a network of Inclusive Activities Coordinators, one for
each of PNG’s provinces, who will act as liaisons for future development.
After its pilot testing in New Guinea, the template will be rolled out
across 16 other Pacific nations (teena.jackson@ausport.gov.au)
Africa
Only a few Africans attend ISAPA symposia, and little is known about
adapted physical activity and sport on this continent except through
occasional published reports of leaders who work in Africa for short
periods (De Potter, 1994), oral sharing of other visitors (e.g., Nina
Kahrs of Norway, who helps with a Norwegian project in Africa), and
occasional articles and correspondence from Africans (e.g., Kolo, 1995).
At least one African is studying adapted physical activity in the USA
(Agueda Gomes at Texas Woman’s University) and plans to return
to her country (Angola) and facilitate the development of adapted physical
activity. Surely, others are following this pattern.
In 2003, the Georgia State University in Athens, in collaboration with
the International Paralympic Committee and the African Sport Federation
of Disabled (ASCOD), provided a 2-week academy for representatives of
15 African countries. This academy was the second phase of a 4-year
collaborative project for the development of sports programs for youth
with disabilities in Africa and the Middle East and is designed to promote
peace and friendship through an educational initiative that identifies
and trains emerging leaders from these regions. Training in Phase 1
of this project was primarily conducted by Egyptian sport organizations.
ICHPER. SD Journal (the official magazine
of the International Council for Health, Physical Education, Recreation,
Sport, and Dance) featured several articles on HIV/AIDS in African countries
in its Fall, 2003, issue. “HIV infection disproportionately affects
Africans in the sub-Saharan region. Although only 10% of the world population
lives in Africa, it is estimated that 70% of all HIV infected people live
on this continent.” (p. 25)
Central and South America
Little is known about adapted physical education and sport in the Spanish
and Portuguese speaking countries, except that Brazil supports IFAPA
activities, conducts numerous types of adapted physical education personnel
preparation, and maintains an excellent website, SOBAMA. Puerto Rico
and Costa Rica both employ adapted physical activity specialists prepared
in the USA in their universities and schools. Presumably many other
countries do this also, but no information has been assembled.
Benefits, Values, and Trends Relating to
Young People with Disabilities
The benefits and values of physical activity involvement for young people
with and without disabilities are the same, except that the needs are
greater among persons with activity limitations. Several sources present
outstanding reviews of the diverse benefits and values of physical activity
for all young people (e.g., De Knop & Oja, 1996), while others describe
benefits and values only for people with disabilities (e.g., Wheeler
et al., 1999).
Several articles review or present research on the values of a particular
activity for young people with disabilities (e.g., Castenada & Sherrill,
1999 on challenger baseball; DePauw, 1986 on horseback riding).
The most controversial trend is probably integration
or inclusion of young persons in school and community physical activity
(Block, 2000; Reid, 2003; Van Coppenolle et al., 2003). The controversy
is not so much about what is right or wrong, but rather how to achieve
total inclusion for all children, and whether this goal is realistic.
Until about 2000, the term integration rather than inclusion
was used in European physical education. First, the terms were used interchangeably
or combined (e.g., integration/inclusion). Later, inclusion was “understood
as a process, brought about by daily life integration, education, and
physical education (PE) lessons” (Dinold & Valkova, 2003, p.
49). These experts emphasized that inclusion should not be the aim, “but
a means to socialisation and independent living, characterized by a range
of variants, from the most restrictive to the least restrictive environment”
(p. 49).
The trend of integration/inclusion is discussed further under initiatives.
Determinants and Constraints to Participation
in Various Cultures/Environments
Politics and economy are the most powerful determinants and constraints.
Politics here refers specifically to the priorities and subsequent funding
that international bodies and government leaders (national, state, provincial,
local) give to meeting the rights and needs of people with disabilities.
Constraints
Constraints Specific to Areas Dominated by Poverty
and/or War
It is unlikely that physical activity can be the main priority in areas
where young people are homeless and hungry. However, when health policies
are formulated that emphasize proper food and nutrition as human rights
and vehicles to health, physical activity and its many benefits should
be specified also. Whenever international bodies convene to discuss
health, experts in adapted physical activity should be included among
the delegates as well as experts with disabilities. These experts should
be representative of the new 2001 WHO/ICIDH/ICF bio psychosocial model,
rather than limited to the older medical or social models.
When low morale and depression is an issue, research shows that exercise,
sport, and dance can be used to improve mental health. Improvements
can come through either direct participation or through participation
as spectators, hosts, and helpers. Sports engaged in by persons from
more than one country and properly planned and conducted, promote understanding
and friendships that contribute to Peace.
IFAPA wishes to express its strong support of the United Nations General
Assembly, 58th Session, Plenary meetings, 2nd meeting, which passed
a resolution that included the promotion of peace as one outcome of
physical activity. We look forward to “2005 as the International
Year of Sport and Physical Education, as a means to promote education,
health, development, and peace.” We hope that governments will
involve the adapted physical activity and disability sports movements
as they “organize events to underline their commitment”
and that they will include athletes with disabilities among the sports
personalities whom they look to for assistance.
Constraints Specific to Females with Disabilities
and Activity Involvement
A large body of literature documents the prejudice,
stigmatisation, and oppression of women in relation to sport involvement
at local, national, and international levels (Doll-Tepper, Scoretz &
Tiemann, 1995; Krotoski, Nosek & Turk, 1996; National Women’s
Studies Association Journal, 2002). Many countries still do not enter
women into the Paralympics, and always the number participating is disproportionate
to the female populations. Even the 2003 Special Olympics World Summer
Games in Ireland was unable to meet the goal of equalizing participation
by gender. Although 7,000 athletes with intellectual disabilities participated,
representing 150 countries, only 37% of the total were females (Smallwood,
2003).
Women with disabilities describe themselves as triply disabled (i.e.,
negatively affected by activity limitation, poverty and gender) in most
walks of life. Women with disabilities appear to be more limited than
men by society in regard to obtaining employment and hence tend to have
less money and lower quality of life. Less money influences the amount
of money that can be spent on exercise and sport, which in turn may
translate to lower fitness and impaired mental health. In many cultures,
prejudice against females with disabilities is experienced at very young
ages when little girls are not introduced to sports and/or may be taught
that they will not be fit for marriage and childbearing.
Constraints of Prejudice, Stigmatisation, and
Oppression
The long history of prejudice, stigmatisation, and
oppression experienced by people with disabilities in all walks of life
still exists (e.g., Charlton, 1998; National Women’s Studies
Association Journal, Special Issue, 2002; Sociology of Sport Journal,
Special Issue, 2001). Therefore, attitude toward general disability and
toward specific disabilities of young people is an important variable
recognized by many physical activity researchers. (Kozab & Lienert,
2003; Kudlacek et al., 2004: Theodorakis, Bagiatis & Goudas, 1995).
Attempts to change attitude are typically described as top down (as in
the enactment of laws and the production of national blueprints) and as
bottom up (as in integration and inclusion experiments based on contact
and other specific theories and tested by research). Much research is
now available on measuring attitude toward disability and on change strategies.
Kozab and Lienert (2003) provide an excellent review of this research.
Both top-down and bottom-up approaches require money over and above what
school systems are typically allocated. Laws, for instance, lack effectiveness
if no money is authorized for implementation and enforcement. The extra
money, in most cases, needs to be directed toward family and teacher cooperation,
collaboration, and education. Families and teachers should be integrated
in attitude awareness and change workshops, projects, and the like because
one group, without the other, cannot do much to change quality of life
for young people.
For concrete data about attitudes, the Special Olympics
magazine Spirit presents findings from a survey of over 7,500
people from 10 countries (Brazil, China, Egypt, Germany, Ireland and Northern
Ireland, Japan, Nigeria, Russia, and the USA). Responses from the different
countries ranged from 5% to 93% on such beliefs as the ability of persons
with intellectual disabilities to sustain friendships, wash and dress,
tell time, understand news event, and handle emergencies (Norins, Siperstein,
Evangelista & Corbin, 2003, p. 17). In regard to beliefs about which
type of school children with disabilities should attend, samples from
all countries answered “special schools” most often.
Constraints of Not Realizing Trends in Attitude
Research
The trend is toward use of models that encompass beliefs, attitudes,
intentions, and actions with the goal of learning what kind of change
strategies work best for specific samples toward specific target individuals,
groups, and populations in specific contexts. Attitude research, correctly
planned and conducted, is extremely difficult and should be preceded
by much practice with pilot studies. Entire books on attitude research
methodology, as well as entire courses on attitude measurement and change,
should comprise experience base before an attitude project is begun.
Attitude research is often criticized because too much of it is of poor
quality.
Survey studies of attitudes of physical education personnel and the
development of measurement instruments are giving way to experimental
studies based on specific theories (e.g., contact, reasoned action,
planned behaviour) which can be incorporated into evaluation models
used to assess the effectiveness of pedagogy and curricula. Conferences,
symposia, and projects of all kinds (including research) should emphasize
collaboration between school and university personnel. Numerous sources
cite the importance of cooperation and collaboration, but these practices
are seen far too seldom.
Many research findings on attitudes specifically
related to physical activity for young people with disabilities are available,
especially in the specialized journal Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly.
Research findings are presented also in electronic formats by such vehicles
as the EARAPA’s (European regional IFAPA) onsite journal and the
National Center on Physical Activity and Disability (NCPAD), a federally
funded USA project located in Chicago, Illinois (www.ncpad.org
and ncpad@uic.edu)
Constraints of Translation of Research into
Action Pedagogy and of Dissemination
The body of knowledge that could underlie attitudinal change and other
adapted physical activity strategies is developing faster than practitioners
can be taught to use new principles and techniques. International bodies
might commission panels of scholarly experts to translate research knowledge
into practice and panels of excellent practitioners to field test the
products of the research-oriented scholars. Requisite to the success
of this project would be careful selection of panel members.
In general, practitioners throughout the world do not know best practices
in regard to adaptations and supports for safe, successful physical
activity. This is because they have had no specialized training in adapted
physical activity or the training has been outdated or is of poor quality
because of the lack of knowledge of the staff conducting the training.
Constraints of Not Recognizing and Teaching
Specific APA and Disability Sport Knowledge Base
Lack of training may also be caused by prejudice, discrimination, or
ignorance with respect to awareness that a body of knowledge called
adapted physical activity does exist with principles, theories, and
practices to guide application of adaptation and supports in many services,
environments, and contexts. Over 20 textbooks in adapted physical education/adapted
physical activity, published and sold by commercial companies, existed
by the early 1990s (DePauw & Sherrill, 1994). Several of these textbooks
were subsequently translated into other languages, particularly in Asian
countries. Translations have often incorporated many cultural adaptations
and replaced photos to show children of the country for which the book
is prepared. Because of cultural differences, it is doubtful that one
or two textbooks could ever universally serve all countries.
Although originally textbooks came from USA sources, the European Master’s
Program published its own textbook in English (Van Coppenolle) because
the official language of the European Master’s program was English.
This textbook included chapters by several adapted physical activity
experts representing different countries, thereby emphasizing the spirit
of cooperation among the many countries which participate in the European
Master’s program (Van Coppenolle & De Potter, 2001; Van Coppenolle,
Vanlandewijck & Van de Vliet, 2001).
More recently, countries around the world have been publishing adapted
physical education/adapted physical activity textbooks written by their
own leaders in their own language. Illustrative of these are outstanding
adapted physical activity books written primarily for use by Canadians
(Steadward, Wheeler & Watkinson, 2003) and Finnish people (Malkia
& Rintala, 2002).
Specialized knowledge underlying adapted physical activity practice
is also available in the proceedings of ISAPAs (e.g., Doll-Tepper et
al., 1990; Dinold et al., 2003; Yabe et al., 1994) and in specialized
books in specialized areas of adapted physical activity and/or persons
with activity limitations (e.g., Cermak & Larkin, 2002; Reid, 1990).
Yet, a constraint exists because many people throughout the world still
do not know this body of knowledge exists or they diminish the stature
of the body of knowledge, insisting that you teach persons with activity
limitations in the same way that you teach others.
See reference lists in recent adapted physical activity textbooks for
more information on the many sources that contribute to the knowledge
base (e.g., Sherrill, 2004; Steadward et al., 2003). Determinants
Determinants: Good Professional Preparation
Enhances Participation of Young People
For young people with activity limitations to participate, there must
be programs that welcome them and offer challenging recreational and
competitive sport experiences. These programs should be diverse (some
separate, some inclusive) so that individuals have choices of what best
may meet their needs. For example, the extensive network of wheelchair
basketball throughout the world is separate, but no competitor would
trade his or her competitive experiences for an adapted game of stand-up
ball in an inclusive setting. Paralympics, Special Olympics, and Deaflympics
mostly feature separate programs. In contrast, school-based instructional,
recreational, and competitive programs (especially in the Western world
and Australia) seem to emphasize inclusive programs.
Regardless of whether services and programs are separate or inclusive,
the quality depends on the commitment, enthusiasm, knowledge, and skill
of the human resources. Thus, we return to personnel preparation and
the descriptions of some practices that have worked.
Determinants: Federal Law
United States – Federal Legislation Funding
University Specializations, 1967.
Originally, adapted physical education preparation began at the master
and doctorate levels, largely influenced by the faculty members who
received federal grants to fund part or all of the development and administration
of specialization areas. In the mid-1960s, qualified physical education
university faculty, representing several universities, were selected
(not sure by whom) to attend a workshop on how to write grants and mentored
through the grant submission process. Subsequently, in 1969, ten universities
began doctoral specializations in physical education for the disabled
funded by Public Law 90-170. The major purpose of doctoral programs
was to prepare teachers to be employed by universities to teach undergraduate
and graduate courses in what later was called special physical education
or adapted physical education. Supporting this purpose was knowledge
that a law would soon be passed that would require physical education
instruction for children with disabilities and the assumption that universities
must assure that public school teachers would be ready. Master’s
programs began the same way, except that their purpose was to prepare
future teachers to work directly with SEN children.
All universities could compete for federal grants (and in many states,
for state grants), but economic constraints severely limited the number
of universities that could be funded. Over time, almost all universities
have employed or retrained faculty to teach adapted physical education
courses, with practica, to future teachers. Most universities require
such courses. However, only a few universities have found the resources
(grants and otherwise) to maintain specialization master and doctoral
degrees (e.g., Ohio State University, Texas Woman’s University,
Oregon State University, Indiana University).
Determinants: Advocacy Strategies
Illustrative Advocacy Organizations
National Consortium for Physical Education and Recreation for Individuals
with Disabilities (NCPERID) – founded 1973 to monitor and guide
funding agencies.
Federal funding of universities in the adapted physical education area
probably would not have endured over the years if a forward-looking
group of physical educators and recreators (mostly grant directors)
had not founded the NCPERID (current name) to advocate for high quality
professional preparation and for funding that would continue to support
personnel preparation needs (Johnson, 1986). During the first few years,
NCPERID obtained funding to conduct national and regional workshops
in adapted physical education and therapeutic recreation (with AAHPERD
and sometimes Special Olympics money). Representative members continue
to work very closely with legislators and their aids in assuring that
the words physical education were not omitted from each revision and
amendment to the laws. In 1992, NCPERID (concerned about quality control
of persons being employed to teach public school adapted physical education)
obtained a federal grant to develop personnel preparation standards,
a voluntary national examination, and a voluntary national certification
process that would grant the CAPES initials to be written after the
name of persons who met national standards (i.e., passed the national
examination) just as nurses write RN and physicians write MD.
NCPERID (1995) standards, published in a 216-page book, now guide several
administrations of the examination each year and a growing number of
certified adapted physical educators. Fifteen areas of standards would
be developed, with some standards specified for general physical education
teachers and some for adapted physical education specialists. These
areas were human development, motor behaviour, exercise science, measurement
and evaluation, history and philosophy, unique attributes of learners,
curriculum and development, assessment, instructional design and planning,
teaching, consultation and staff development, student and program evaluation,
continuing education, ethics, communication. Each area includes information
about needs of students with and without disabilities. The emphasis
is on individual differences. It is hoped that the revision, which is
underway, will adhere to WHO definitions and emphasize both personal
and contextual factors.
The reason for the NCPERID-based general certification program was
that few of the 50 state departments of education, over the years, agreed
to regulate quality of teaching in the field by issuing separate teacher
certificates in adapted physical education. Instead, many state departments
and/or individual employers at local levels insisted that future adapted
physical education teachers complete many credits in special education.
Whereas university physical education departments mostly controlled
adapted physical education personnel preparation, special education
personnel mostly controlled adapted physical education employment, practices,
and evaluation. When school districts could not find enough physical
educators with adapted PE preparation, they often employed occupational
and physical therapists to provide physical education to children with
disabilities despite the fact that this practice was in violation of
the law. Another quality control issue was that some school districts
employed aides (paraprofessionals) with minimal preparation and thus
low salaries, to teach young people with disabilities in inclusive settings,
but this teaching was often inferior and separate from that of the class.
Despite many problems, adapted physical education has emerged in the
USA as a strong profession with many leaders determined to meet the
needs of young persons with disabilities through services in both inclusive
and separate settings (Kelly & Gansneder, 1988; Sherrill, 2004;
Sherrill & DePauw, 1997). As societal needs have changed, adapted
physical education roles have expanded to now include consultants employed
by school districts to work directly with general physical educators
and sports personnel. Consultants mostly provide continuing education
to general physical educators and aides, but also team and dual teach
(Lytle & Collier, 2002; Lytle & Hutchinson, 2004). Consultants
also work with parents and provide family education with regard to leisure
time use and the importance of physical activity.
Determinants: Cross cultural Cooperation and
Collaboration
The European Model of Professional Preparation – the European
Master Degree in Adapted Physical Activity (EMDAPA)
In 1991, Herman Von Coppenolle, then President of the European Association
for Research into Adapted Physical Activity (EARAPA), began to implement
funding from the European Union to plan and conduct a cooperative master’s
program in which students and professors from many countries could participate
(Van Coppenolle, Vanlandewijck & Van de Vliet, 1993). By 1991, 30
universities were participating. Students began with 4 months at the
Leuven University, Belgium, which was headquarters for the project.
During the 4 months of orientation, students attended classes conducted
by 24 professors from participating universities and 14 professors from
Leuven University. The official language for the program was English.
After 4 months of this general instruction, students selected a professor
with whom he or she wished to work further with emphasis on practica,
research, and the completion of a thesis. By 2001, 200 students from
Europe and the whole world had completed this outstanding program. The
program, as it existed in 1991, is described by Van Coppenolle et al.
(2003).
In 2004, EMDAPA’s funding had increased so it could assertively
recruit and fund master’s level students from all over the world.
THENAPA – The European Network in Adapted Physical Activity (A
Model for Cooperative Survey Research and the Facilitation of Inclusive
Physical Activity)
THENAPA, a project funded by the European Union from 1999 through 2004,
was awarded to Van Coppenolle of Belgium but implemented by professionals
representing over 10 countries (Adomaitiene, 2003; Boursier & Kahrs,
2003; Dinold & Valkova, 2003; Van Coppenolle & De Potter, 2003).
This project might serve as a model for other countries to follow, particularly
if WHO or WHO contacts could make funding possible.
First of all, a proposal was written after 1995, the date that the
White Paper on European Social Policy “issues were transcribed
into working objectives... The programme asserted the need for an active
society for all, including people with disabilities. There was a series
of initiatives, in particular aiming at taking the necessary steps to
adopt the principles stated in the UN Standard Rules (1993) for creating
equal opportunities for people with disabilities and to support introduction
of a non-discrimination clause in the EU Treaty” (Adomaitiene,
2003, p.21). The UN document that guided the EU supported participation
in all areas of social life, including integrated education, recreation,
and sport. This opened the way for funding, specifically in physical
activity for people with disability.
When funding was received, the following countries participated: Austria,
Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany,
Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Tasks
completed included a survey of the status quo concerning integration/inclusion
of young people with disabilities in physical education and sport in
these countries (reviewed earlier in this report); numerous forums for
physical activity personnel to discuss personnel preparation, identify
problems, and propose solutions; and the development and dissemination
of ADAPT-CD-ROM, a multimedia tool for planning and implementing a curriculum
and service provision in adapted physical activity. Out of these activities
came a proposed revision of adapted physical education personnel preparation
that many European countries are now addressing.
The THENAPA final report emphasizes that more specific legislation
is needed by the European Commission to support physical education and
sport for people with disabilities. THENAPA conceptualises itself as
an advocacy body with the obligation to now “ask the European
Commission to demand from the Governments of Member States to create
and approve legislation on the national level regarding the equal rights
and opportunities of disabled in the areas of physical education, disability
sport, and leisure activities of recreation of disabled” (Adomaitiene,
2003, p. 33).
It is clear that the UN and WHO need to support the initiative of individual
countries that enact specific legislation that mentions physical education
and recreation for people with disability as an essential right, opportunity,
and vehicle for health and quality living. One way that the UN and the
WHO can do this is by modelling and always specifically mentioning “with
disabilities” in their official documents.
DEUAPA Model for Undergraduate University Students.
Moving Toward a Common Curriculum for European Students With Different Languages.
Diplome Europeene Universitaire en Activite Adaptee/European University
Diploma for Adapted Physical Activity (DEUAPA), funded through the European
Union, began in 1997/98 to meet the needs of upper level students enrolled
in undergraduate (postsecondary school) sport science and physical education
preparation. DEUAPA was created for future teachers who wish to prepare
specifically for APA positions with direct teaching responsibilities
with young people with disabilities. According to Bianco (2003), DEUAPA’s
intensive program “is about fundamental teaching of APA, and is
held by specialists in different deficits. It will run for 5 weeks for
a total of 175 hours (p. 212). In addition to these 5 weeks of instruction
in French (with slides in English), students complete a hosted period
of 3 months in an European country (and university) that offers a topic
of their choice (e.g., intellectual disabilities, cardiac diseases,
school integration). During this time students collect data for a thesis
after which they return to a home university to write the thesis and
pass examinations.
These three examples of collaborative/cooperative personnel preparation
are only a few of the positive determinants that support adapted physical
activity service delivery and empowerment. The program in each example
might be improved by recruiting faculty and students with disabilities.
Other determinants relate to all of the variables associated with eliminating
prejudice, discrimination, and oppression. Each time an architectural
barrier to a play space or sport facility is eliminated, this becomes
a determinant. Each time neighbours agree to “be exercise and
sport partners” with persons who ordinarily do not have such supports,
this is a determinant.
Selected Initiatives
Individually conceptualised and conducted published surveys in several
countries have generated hard data that respondents believe the greatest
need is personnel preparation (e.g., Dinold & Valkova, 2003; Lin,
2003). To meet this and other needs and to execute initiatives, funding
is needed.
Initiatives are described throughout this report so only a few needs
and trends are included in this section.
Funding
A high priority initiative might be an international commission to identify
concrete sources where money is available and to train carefully selected
leaders and potential leaders on the many ways to obtain such money
(e.g., grant identification and writing, infusion into business and
industry and into places and times where subtle and direct decisions
about money are made, specific communication strategies with different
kinds of people responsible for different sources of money).
Continuing Education for Families and Employed
Personnel
Personnel preparation should include all kinds of continuing education
for parents and for employed personnel in general education and mainstream
community settings who, increasingly, are expected to deliver high quality
services and to facilitate empowerment of people with disabilities of
all ages. There is a trend toward recognising that families gain much
information as they raise their own children with disabilities and should
be used as resources to school and community agencies and programmes.
The USA law requires that parents be involved in planning the individualized
education programs (IEPs) of their children and IEPs cannot be implemented
without the signatures of parents. Thus, parents need continuing education
of the same kind as many teachers.
Education for Persons Entering Adapted Physical
Activity Professions
Minimum standards and competencies to be met for persons planning on
entering adapted physical activity service delivery/empowerment professions
should be addressed in international conferences. As time goes on, accreditation
of university and agency programs may be necessary. Scholarships and
grants to train persons who agree to work in “needy” countries
must also be addressed because obviously the regions which need adapted
physical services, most seldom have the resources to do so.
Resources
International help is needed in identifying and maximising resources.
Government-funded and private-funded organizations
(as well as non-profit organizations) must also increasingly sponsor diverse
forms of parent, family, and professional advocacy and training. Some
countries support professional organisations as vehicles for certification,
endorsement, and other recognitions of quality abilities and practices
(e.g., the Australian Sport Commission’s initiatives in certifying
various levels of coaching athletes with disabilities and the National
Consortium for Physical Education and Recreation for Individuals with
Disabilities’ (NCPERID’s) national voluntary certification
examinations in the USA). Special Olympics International (www.specialolympics.org)
is an example of a privately funded organisation that organises numerous
initiatives (see Spirit, Fall 2003, or any issue). Other disability sport
organisations also fund initiatives, but do not follow through with sufficient
information dissemination to be well known.
An excellent source to learn about disability sport
initiatives is The Paralympian: Newsletter of the International Paralympic
Committee (www.paralympic.org
or info@paralympic.org.
Key Proposals for Increasing Participation and Facilitating
Change
The history and outcomes of several key proposals of the past were described
in the section on Status Quo. It is recommended that these key proposals,
described because they have been largely successful, been exported,
with cultural adaptation and financial help, to countries identified
as most needing help in the area of physical activity for young people
with disabilities. Identification of countries needing the most help
(or perhaps perceived as best able to benefit from help) seems to be
the task of an international body like WHO or an international organisation
funded and monitored by WHO.
Relating to physical education, these include enactment of law, adoption
of human rights policy, personnel preparation, widespread dissemination
of inclusion curricula, establishment of government agencies to guide
innovation and make funding choices, creation of professional advocacy
organisations to monitor funding agencies, etc. Proposals must state
specifically physical education for young people with activity limitations
(or disabilities) rather than the generic and idealistic term, physical
education for all. There must be no misunderstanding concerning what
is meant when proposals are developed. Physical education must be defined,
as must physical activity. Young people with activity limitations (or
disabilities) must be defined. It must be made absolutely clear that
all young people with activity limitations are to benefit from a law,
policy, or curriculum ….not just those with mild or moderate difficulties.
Penalties for not complying with law and policy or effectively using
curricula should be written with procedures for enforcement. Praise
and recognition mechanisms should also be in place.
Human Resources, Including Involvement of Adult
Athletes with Disabilities
Most IFAPA regions have experienced success (although sometimes small
and slow) in whatever proposals their countries have developed and are
implementing. In most locations, the greatest need is a larger number
of committed human beings with high levels of personal motivation, energy,
and resources (monetary and otherwise). Many adapted physical activity
professionals have long used personal money to develop programmes, conduct
instruction, sponsor or support young promising professionals, participate
in conferences, and conduct research. Probably no other group of professionals
demonstrate the degree of commitment that adapted physical activity
people do, but inevitably burnout is high and few leaders can continue
at the necessary pace without realising huge family and other sacrifices.
Recruitment and training must therefore be a major focus of new key
proposals. Promising young leaders must be identified in as many countries
as possible and mentored carefully by existing leaders, including those
who are retired or retiring soon from salaried jobs. Systematic evaluation
models (tested, when possible, by research) need to be developed for
assessing leadership development, and new leaders should be provided
with many sources of encouragement and recognition. Whenever international
conferences and symposia are conducted, established leaders should be
required to bring along and involve promising leaders to assure a strong
future for work that needs to be done.
Among the new leaders should be adults with all kinds of disabilities
who have completed university degrees comparable to those of other leaders.
Comparable does not mean the same; degree and certification requirements
may have to be adapted and special supports provided. Paralympic athletes
(especially those who are retired) are one excellent source of promising
professional leaders (Wheeler, Malone, VanVlack, Nelson & Steadward,
1996; Wheeler, Steadward, Legg, Hutzler, Campbell & Johnson, 1999).
Wheeler and colleagues provide outstanding research (some international)
on elite disability sport participants with suggestions on helping retired
athletes to assume the highest possible productivity in training and
leading others.
Conferences, Workshops etc.
Conferences on physical activity for people with disability, in the
future, should have people with disabilities as speakers and discussion
leaders as well as audience members. Architectural, attitudinal, and
aspirational barriers should be addressed as conferences are planned
and conducted. A concerted effort should be made to have at least a
10-50% sample of people with disabilities involved, depending on age
groups targeted. It should be remembered that well over 50% of the population
over 70 have disabilities. United Nations and World Health Organization
committees and meetings should adopt guidelines that assure these practices
so that predominantly able-bodied persons no longer control decision-making.
Models
Young people with disabilities should have many opportunities to view
female and male models of all ages with disabilities similar to their
own (e.g., Driscoll, 2000; Hankins, 2003). It is especially important
that they see persons of all ages and disabilities engaging in regular
daily physical activity and that they see accessible, inviting facilities
for physical activity in their own neighbourhoods and/or have free or
inexpensive transportation to physical activity sites. See magazine
called Sports ‘N Spokes that households and community centres
should have. This should be done through the renovation of neighbourhood
and community structures, careful control of new facilities, and by
as much media as possible. In particular, outdoor areas should be safe,
accessible, with clean air, and ample protection from the sun and rain.
In war-torn and disease-infected countries, international money may
be directed toward construction of model physical activity areas, for,
without models, how can people dream and plan? In areas where migrating
or immigrating people (or war prisons) are forced to congregate, there
should be planned recreational physical activity and space allocated
to physical activity, as a life necessity, not merely a pleasure.
With the steadily increasing lifespan making an impact on society,
young people need to see society helping old people to live high quality
lives. People over 70 (especially the frail elderly) should be targeted
for adapted physical activity as much as younger people and especially
need well prepared professionals to conduct free, appropriate activities
in private homes, community centres, and assisted living facilities.
As people live longer (increasingly into the 100s), satisfying, fun,
healthy physical activity must be provided to assure quality of life.
References
The writer apologizes that accent marks and other symbols are missing
from personal names.
Adomaitiene, R. (2003). European Union policy with respect to the non-discrimination
and social integration of people with a disability through physical
activity. In Van Coppenole, De Potter, Van Peteghem, Djobova, &
Wijns (Eds.). Inclusion and integration through adapted physical activity
(pp. 17-36). Leuven, Belgium: Thematic Network Educational and Social
Integration of Persons with a Disability through Adapted Physical Activity
(THENAPA).
Australian Sports Commission (ASC, 1900s onward).
Willing and Able series. Also Give It a Go (2001) and other personnel
preparation materials. Belconnen ACT: Australian Sports Commission. pubs@ausport.gov.au
Barnes, C. (1991). Disabled people in Britain and discrimination: A
case for anti-discrimination legislation. London: Hurst and Co.
Bianco, A. (2003.). DEUAPA –European University diploma in adapted
physical activity –“ERASMUS CDI” in M. Dinold, G.Gerber,
& T. Reinert (Eds.). 13th ISAPA Proceedings, 2001, Vienna, Austria
(pp. 210-213). Vienna, Austria: Austrian Federation of Adapted Physical
Activity.
Block, M.E, (2000). A teacher’s guide to including students with
disabilities in general physical education (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Brookes.
First ed., 1994.
Block, M.E. (1999). Did we jump on the wrong bandwagon? Problems with
inclusion in physical education. Palaestra, 15 (3), 30-36, 55.
Castenada, L., & Sherrill, C. (1999). Family participation in challenger baseball: Critical theory perspectives. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 16, 372-388.
Cermak, S.A. & Larkin, D. (Eds.). (2002). Developmental coordination
disorder. Albany, NY: Delmar.
Charlton, J.I. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression
and empowerment. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Decker, J. & Jansma, P. (1995). Physical education least restrictive
environment continua used in the United States: Report based on federal
grant findings, 1990, primary investigator, P. Jansma. Adapted Physical
Activity Quarterly, 12, 124-138.
Chow, B.C. & Sit, C. (Eds.) (2003). Proceedings: Seventh International
Symposium of Asian Society for Adapted Physical Education and Exercise,
Hong Kong, August 7-9, 2002.
De Knop, P. & Oja, P. (1996). Sport for all. (pp. 15-43). Current
issues of sport science (pp. 15-43). In ICSSPE Sport Science Studies,
8.
DePauw, K.P. (1986). Horseback riding for individuals with disabilities:
Programs, philosophy, and research. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly,
3, 217-226.
DePauw, K.P. & Sherrill, C. (1994). Adapted physical activity:
Present and future. Physical Education Review, 17, 6-13.
DePauw, K.P. & Gavron, S. (1995). Disability and sport. Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics.
DePauw, K.P. & Doll-Tepper, G. (2000). Toward progressive inclusion
and acceptance: Myth or reality? The inclusion debate and bandwagon
discourse. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 17, 135-143.
De Potter, J.C. (1994). Adapted physical activity in African countries.
Physical Education Review, 17, 68-74.
DePotter, J.C., Van Coppenolle, H., Van Peteghem, A., Djobova, S. &
Wijns (Eds.). (2003). Vocational training in adapted physical activity.
Leuven, Belgium: THENAPA.
Dinold, M. & Valkova, H. (2003). Inclusion in physical education
in school. In Van Coppenolle et al. (Eds). Inclusion and integration
through adapted physical activity (pp. 47-74.). Leuven, Belgium: THENAPA
Dinold, M., Gerber, G. & Reinelt, T. (2003). Towards a society
for all --through adapted physical activity. 13th ISAPA, July 3-5, 2001,
Vienna, Austria. Vienna: Austrian Federation of Adapted Physical Activity.
Doll-Tepper, G., Dahms, C., Doll, B. & von Selzam, H. (Eds.). (1990).
Adapted physical activity: An interdisciplinary approach. Proceedings
of the 7th ISAPA, Berlin, June 1989.
Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Doll-Tepper, G., Scoretz, D. & Tiemann, H. (1995). Women in disability
sport: Current cross-cultural perspectives and future directions. In
H. Van Coppenolle, Y, Vanlandewijck, P. Van de Vliet & J. Simons
(Eds.). Second European Conference on Adapted Physical Activity and
Sports: Health, Well-Being and Employment (pp. 237-240). Leuven, Belgium:
Acco.
Doll-Tepper, G. (2003). Adapted physical activity –Developments
and challenges from an international perspective. In M. Dinold, G. Gerber,
& T. Reinelt (Eds.). 13th ISAPA Proceedings, Vienna, Austria, 2001.
(pp. 29-36). Vienna, Austria: Australian Federation of Adapted Physical
Activity.
Driscoll, J. (2000). Determined to win. New York: Barnes and Noble.
Eason, R.T., Smith, T. L. & Caron, F. (Eds.). (1983). Adapted physical
activity: From theory to application: Proceedings, Third International
Symposium on Adapted Physical Activity (ISAPA), November 1981, New Orleans,
LA, USA. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Hankins, G.W. (2003). Rolling on: The story of the amazing Gary McPherson.
Edmonton, Canada: University of Alberta Press.
Heikinaro-Johansson, P., Sherrill, C., French, R. & Huuhka (1995).
Adapted physical education consultant model to facilitate integration.
Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 12, 12-33.
Heller, T., Hsieh, K. & Rimmer, J.H. (2004). Attitudinal and psychological
outcomes of a fitness and health education program on adults with Down
syndrome. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 109, 175-185.
Hunt, C.P. (2003). 1.2 million and counting: Special Olympics athlete
participation summary. Spirit: The Magazine of Special Olympics, 9 (4),
22-23.
See www.specialolympics.org Hutzler, Y., Flies, O., Chacham, A. & Van den Auweele, Y. (2002).
Perspectives of children with physical disabilities on inclusion and
empowerment: Supporting and limiting factors. Adapted Physical Activity
Quarterly, 19, 300-317.
Johnson, L.E. (1986). The need for a national consortium. Adapted Physical
Activity Quarterly, 3, 144-146.
Kelly, L.E. & Gansneder, B. (1988). Preparation and job demographics
of adapted physical educators in the United States. Adapted Physical
Activity Quarterly, 15, 141-154.
Kiphard, E. (1983). Adapted physical education in Germany. In R. T.
Eason, T. L. Smith, & F. Caron (Eds.). Adapted physical activity:
Third ISAPA Proceedings (pp. 25-32). Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics.
Kolo, I.A. (1995). Fostering integration in community-based rehabilitation
programmes by adapting indigenous African games for disabled persons.
In I. Morisbak & P. E. Jorgensen (Eds.) Adapted physical activity:
Proceedings, third ISAPA (pp. 80-88). Omslag, Norway: BB Grafisk.
Kozub, F.M. & Lienert, C. (2003). Attitudes toward children teaching
children with disabilities: Review of literature and research paradigm.
Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 20, 323-346.
Kudlacek, M., Valkova, H., Sherrill, C., Myers, B. & French, R.
(2002). An inclusion instrument based on planned behavior theory for
prospective physical educators. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly,
19, 280-299.
Krotoski, D.M., Nosek, M.A. & Turk, M.A (Eds.). (1996). Women with
physical disabilities: Achieving and maintaining health and well-being.
Baltimore: Brookes.
Leavitt, R.L. (Ed.). (1999). Cross-cultural rehabilitation: An international
perspective. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.
Morisbak, I. & Jorgensen, P.E. (Eds.). .Quality of life through
adapted physical activity, a lifespan concept: 10th ISAPA, May 22-26,
1995, Oslo & Beitostolen, Norway. Omslag, Norway: BB Grafisk.
Lin, M-H. (1999). Issues of developing sport activities for disabled
people in Taiwan. In H. Nakata (Ed.). Adapted physical activity: Self-actualization
through physical activity (pp. 17-24). Fujisawa, Japan: Shonan Shuppansha
Co.
Lin, M-H (2003). The qualification and training system for adapted
physical activities in North East Asia. In B.C. Chow & C. H. P.
Sit (Eds.). Proceedings, 7th symposium of ASAPE, Hong Kong, August,
2002 (pp. 50-59).
Longmuir, P.E. & Bar-Or, O. (2000).Factors influencing the physical
activity levels of youths with physical and sensory disabilities. Adapted
Physical Activity Quarterly, 17, 40-53.
Lytle, R.K. & Collier, D. (2002). The consultation process: Adapted
physical education specialists’ perceptions. Adapted Physical
Activity Quarterly, 19, 261-279.
Lytle, R.K. & Hutchinson, G.E. (2004). Adapted physical educators:
The multiple roles of consultants. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly,
21, 34-49.
Lyons, R.F., Taylor, B. & Langille, L.L. (2003). Policy strategies
to foster active living. In R. D. Steadward, G. D. Wheeler, & E.
J. Watkinson (Eds.).Adapted physical activity. Edmonton, Canada: The
University of Alberta Press.
Malkia, E. & Rintala, P. (2002). Uusi Erityisliikunta: Liikunnan
sovellukset erityisryhmille. Helsinki: Liikuntatieteellisen Seuran julkaisu
nro.
Mactavish, J.B. & Dowds, M.J. (2003). Physical activity and sport
for individuals with intellectual disability. In R. D. Steadward, G.
D. Wheeler, & E. J. Watkinson (Eds.). Adapted physical activity
(pp. 559-587). Edmonton, Canada: The University of Alberta Press.
McKenzie, R.T. (1909). Exercise in education and medicine. Philadelphia:
Saunders.
Nakata, H. (Ed.) (1999). Adapted physical activity: Self-actualization
through physical activity. Proceedings of the 5th International Congress
of the Asian Society for Adapted Physical Education and Exercise (ASAPE).
Fujisawa, Japan: Shonan Shuppansha Co.
National Consortium for Physical Education and Recreation for Individuals
with Disabilities (NCPERID). Kelly, L.E. (Ed.). (1995). Adapted physical
education national standards. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
National Women’s Studies Association Journal (2002). Special
Issue, Feminist disability studies, 14 (3), 1-230.
Norins, J., Siperstein, G.N., Evangelista, D. & Corbin, S.B. (2003).
Roadblocks on the way to inclusion. Spirit, 9, (4), 16-17.
Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement. London: Macmillan.
Reid, G. (Ed.). (1990). Problems in movement control. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Reid, G. (2003). Defining adapted physical activity. In R.D. Steadward,
G.D. Wheeler & E.J. Watkinson (Eds.). Adapted physical activity
(pp. 11-26). Edmonton, Canada: The University of Alberta Press.
Reid, G. & Ulrich, D.A. (2001). The impact factor and APAQ. Adapted
Physical Activity Quarterly, 18, 119-126.
Sit, C.H.P., Lindner, K.J. & Sherrill, C. (2002). Sport participation
of Hong Kong children with disabilities in special schools. Adapted
Physical Activity Quarterly, 19, 453-434.
Sherrill, C. (1976). Adapted physical education and recreation: A multidisciplinary
approach. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown.
Sherrill, C. (Ed.).(1988). Leadership training in adapted physical
education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Sherrill, C. (1993). Adapted physical activity, recreation, and sport:
Crossdisciplinary and lifespan (4th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown.
Sherrill, C. (2004). Adapted physical activity, recreation, and sport:
Crossdisciplinary and lifespan (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.
Sherrill, C. & DePauw, K.P. (1977). Adapted physical activity and
education. In J. D. Massengale & R. A. Swanson (Eds.). The history
of exercise and sport science. (pp. 39-108). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Smallwood, K. (2003). Sport: The universal language. Spirit, 9 (4),
6-11.
Sociology of Sport Journal (2001). Special Issue, The sociology of
ability and disability in physical activity, 18, 1-135.
Steadward, R.D., Nelson, E. & Wheeler, G.D. (Eds). (1994). Vista
‘93 --The outlook: Proceedings, May 14-20, 1993. Edmonton, Canada:
Rick Hansen Centre.
Steadward, R.D., Wheeler, G.D. & Watkinson, E.J. (Eds). (2003).
Adapted physical activity. Edmonton, Canada: The University of Alberta
Press.
Stein, J.U. (2004). Adapted physical activity: The golden years. Palaestra,
20, 26-29, 56.
Stewart, D.A. (1991). Deaf sport: The impact of sport within the Deaf
community. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Temple, V.A. & Walkley, J.W. (1999). Academic learning time --
Physical eduation (ALT-PE) of students with mild intellectual disabilities
in regular Victorian schools. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 16,
64-74.
Theodorakis, Y., Bagiatis, K. & Goudas, M. (1995). Attitudes toward
teaching individuals with disabilities: Application of planned behavior
theory. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 12, 151-160.
Ustun, B.T. (2003). WHO’s international classification of functioning,
disability and health (ICF). In M. Dinold, G. Gerber, & T, Reinelt
(Eds). 13th ISAPA Proceedings, July 3-7, 2001. (pp. 71-77). Vienna:
Austrian Federation of Adapted Physical Activity.
Valkova, H. (2003). History and development [of EARAPA and THENAPA].
In H. Van Coppenolle et al. (Eds). Inclusion and integration through
adapted physical activity (pp. 9-15). Leuven, Belgium: THENAPA.
Van Coppenolle, H. & De Potter, J.C. (2003). Dissemination of the
results of the European Thematic Network APA in the Domains of intergration
and training of professionals. In M. Dinold, G. Gerber & T. Reinelt
(Eds.). 13th ISAPA Proceedings, Vienna, Austria, 2001 (pp. 207-209).
Vienna, Austria: Austrian Federation of Adapted Physical Activity.
Van Coppenolle, H., Vanlandewijck, Y. & Van de Vliet, P. (2003).
The renewed program of the European master in adapted physical activity.
In M. Dinold, G. Gerber & T. Reinelt (Eds.). 13th ISAPA Proceedings,
Vienna, Austria, 2001 (pp. 205-206). Vienna, Austria: Austrian Federation
of Adapted Physical Activity.
Van Coppenolle, H., De Potter, J.C., Van Peteghem, A., Djobova, S.
& Wijns (Eds). (2003). Inclusion and integration through adapted
physical activity. Leuven, Belgium: Thematic Network Educational and
Social Integration of Persons with a Disability through Adapted Physical
Activity (THENAPA).
Vogler, E.W., Koranda, P. & Romance, T. (2000). Including a child
with severe cerebral palsy in physical education: A case study. Adapted
Physical Activity Quarterly, 17, 161-175.
Wall, A.E. (Ed.). (2003). The history of adapted physical activity
in Canada. In R.D. Steadward, G.D. Wheeler & E.J. Watkinson (Eds).
Adapted physical activity (pp. 28-43). Edmonton, Canada: The University
of Alberta Press.
Wheeler, G.D., Malone, L.A., Van Vlack, S., Nelson, E.R. & Steadward,
R.D. (1996). Retirement from disability sport: A pilot study. Adapted
Physical Activity Quarterly, 13, 382-399.
Wheeler, G.D., Steadward, R.D., Legg, D., Hutzler, Y., Campbell, E.
& Johnson, A. (1999). Personal investment in disability sport careers:
An international study. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 16, 219-237.
Winnick, J. (Ed.). Adapted physical education and sport (3rd ed.).Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics.
World Health Organization (2001). International classification of functioning,
disability, and health (ICF). Geneva: Switzerland: Author.
Yabe, K. & Hong, Y.J. (1994). Adapted physical education, health,
and fitness in Asian countries. Physical Education Review, 17, 58-67.
Yabe, K., Kusano, K. & Nakata, H. (Eds.). (1994). Proceedings:
9th ISAPA, Yokohama, Japan, August 4-7, Adapted physical activity: Health and fitness. Tokyo: Springer-Verlag. ![]() http://www.icsspe.org/portal/bulletin-january2005.htm |