No.47 May 2006 |
|||
print view |
Introduction
The Berlin Physical Education World Summit in November
1999 confirmed a decline and/or marginalisation of physical education
in schools in many countries of the world with perceived deficiencies
in curriculum time allocation, subject status, material, human and financial
resources, gender and disability issues and the quality of programme delivery
(Hardman & Marshall, 2000). The Summit’s Agenda for Action
precipitated an array of institutional initiatives to improve access to,
and provision of, quality physical education. The initiatives include:
the International Conference of Ministers and Senior Officials responsible
for Physical Education and Sport (MINEPS) III Punta del Este Declaration
(1999); the Council of Europe’s Recommendations (2003);
the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s
(UNESCO) ‘Round Table’ Communiqué (2003);
the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 58/5 (2003); the
MINEPS IV Athens Declaration (2004); the World Health Organisation’s
(WHO) Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health (2004);
and the UN dedicated 2005 Year of Sport and Physical Education
with its associated outcomes such as The Bangkok Agenda for Actions
on Physical Education and Sport in School (2005) as well as various
governmental (national and regional) and non-governmental (e.g. International
Olympic Committee (IOC), International Council of Sport Science and Physical
Education (ICSSPE), General Association of International Sports Federations
(GAISF), European Non-governmental Sports Organisations (ENGSO) and European
Physical Education Association (EUPEA) inter alia) agencies’
policies and advocacy commitments.
Collectively, the various advocacy statements raise
hopes about a sustained and positive future for physical education. However,
since the Berlin Summit, the developments in school physical education
policies and practices across the world have been diverse: there has been,
as indicated above, a plethora of initiatives, which points to an international
consensus that issues surrounding physical education in schools deserve
serious consideration; and equally there is evidence to generate continuing
disquiet about the situation. There is a gap between “hope and happening”
(Lundgren, 1983). Essentially, the situation now is typified by little
change in some countries and regions and by ‘mixed messages’
in others. The gap between “hope and happening” is occurring
at a time of reported widespread increases in obesity epitomised in the
CBS headline, “Obesity Up, Phys Ed Down” (Turner, 2005), and
sedentary lifestyle-related illnesses and associated rising health care
costs, especially in economically developed countries. Policy and practice
do not always add up, a situation suitably summed up in Maude de Boer-Buqiccio’s
(Council of Europe Deputy Secretary General) comment at the September
2002 Informal Meeting of Ministers with responsibility for Sport
in Warsaw that “… the crux of the issue is that there is too
much of a gap between the promise and the reality”. The advocacy
of positive policy principles witnessed in Resolutions, Declarations,
Communiqués and Strategies need to be juxtaposed with reality
checks!
For the “reality check” overview of the global situation
of physical education in schools, we draw from a preliminary (note:
not final) analysis of an on-going follow-up world-wide survey and relevant
research-related literature. The follow-up survey is being undertaken
on behalf of the North Western Counties Physical Education Association
(a regional association in England) with support from the University
of Worcester, ICSSPE and Council of Europe, and with endorsement from
UNESCO and WHO. The primary aim of this survey is to determine the extent
to which the situation in school physical education/sport has changed
since the Berlin Physical Education Summit of 1999. Specifically, the
survey focuses on the following items.
Section I: national level policy and
practice-related issues in school physical education (legal status, responsible
authority, curriculum time allocation and examination status)
Section II: the physical education
curriculum (aims, themes, content evaluation and monitoring; and gender
and disability equity issues)
Section III: resources (facilities
and equipment and teaching personnel)
Section IV: the physical education
environment (school subject and physical education teacher status; and
pathway links to physical education activity in out-of-school settings)
Section V: issues in provision (concerns
and/or problems related to school physical education)
Section VI: ‘Best Practice’
exemplars in school physical education. As a cautionary note, we reiterate that the present survey is on-going
and that any conclusions drawn from the preliminary analysis of current
data are necessarily tentative. 1. The Situation of Physical Education in Schools
a) General
“Lack of policies for national PE; programme is elaborated but
not totally carried out (and is in) need of some changes, it is not
updated; Directors in PE are not specialists; government contributions
are not enough; lack of infrastructure; lack of materials, resources,
facilities and maintenance: there is not the appropriate environment
for teaching; lack of time for teaching - the time assigned in the curriculum
is too short to reach the objectives;; (there is) a national policy
(but) the government does not take care of it; there are laws but they
are not followed…” (PE Teachers, Venezuela). Within the general education system, a majority of countries (81% primary
schools; 82% secondary schools) have legal requirements for physical
education in schools for at least some part of the compulsory schooling
years (see figures 1a and 1b). Together with countries where there is
no compulsory requirement for physical education but where it is generally
practised, this figure rises to 92% (in the European region, it is all
countries). In 5% of countries (40% in Africa; 17% in the Middle East),
physical education is neither compulsory nor might it be offered for
girls.
![]() Figure 1a. PE status in primary schools
![]() Figure 1b. PE status in secondary schools. b) Post 2000 Education Reform Features
“After the educational reform, PE is merged with health education,
which led to the reduction in the teaching time of physical activities.
The time allocated to PE will be affected, since the teaching time of
English has increased, and new subject (e.g. computer and dialects)
were introduced into the curriculum” (PE Teacher, Taiwan).
Over the last decade a number of nations have undertaken educational
reforms. Whilst it is encouraging that physical education has remained
or become compulsory in a large majority of countries, since 2000, it
has lost its compulsory status in 6% of countries. c) Implementation of Physical Education
“It can be considered compulsory in the 1st cycle, but, many
times it is not taught” (PE Teacher, Portugal)
“Our State, Illinois, has a daily PE requirement but many districts
do not enforce this and the state does nothing” (PE Teacher, Illinois,
USA).
Figures 2 and 3 respectively suggest that in around 82% of countries
(in Asia only 33%) the physical education curriculum is implemented
in accordance with regulations, but that in 40% of countries (Middle
East 100%; Central and Latin America 67%; and Africa 66%) physical education
lessons are more likely to be cancelled than other curriculum subjects.
![]() Figure 2. Implementation of PE
![]() Figure 3. Cancellation of PE Lessons d) PE Subject and Teacher Status
“Less value/importance is placed on PE” (Government Official,
Jamaica)
“Low status – priority given to ‘academic subjects’;
the ‘Life Skills’ programme does not allow for active participation
in secondary schools – treated as a non-subject and of non-academic
status” (PE Teacher, South Africa)
“Family not understanding the importance of PE for student; the
school administration not supporting PE lessons/subject); parents don’t
given enough attention to PE lessons; the school board has no interest
in PE lessons because the grade does not count in the final examination
certificate (thus) parents don’t encourage their children to take
part in all PE lessons” (PE Teachers, Kuwait).
There are issues surrounding legal and perceived actual status of physical
education and its teachers in relation to other subjects. Whilst in
82% (only 33% in Africa and Central and Latin America) of countries
its legal position is equal (figure 4a), in 44% of countries its actual
subject status is perceived to be lower (figure 4b); this is particularly
the case in the continental regions of Africa (67%), Central and Latin
America (67%), North America (100%) and Middle East (100%). Moreover,
in 27% of countries (Middle East 100%; North America 67% and Africa
50%), physical education teachers are deemed to have inferior status.
Generally, the perceived lower status is perhaps one reason why physical
education classes are cancelled more often than other subjects (refer
figure 5.).
2. Curriculum Time Allocation for Physical Education
“PE is being squeezed out of the education system by more and
more compulsory academic courses… which hold little benefit compared
to PE” (PE Teacher, Ireland).
Despite national policy concerning required, prescribed, recommended
or aspirational guidelines, local levels of actual control of curriculum
time allocation give rise to variations between schools and, therefore,
difficulties in specifying definitive figures for a country or region.
However, some general tendencies are identifiable. Across primary school
years there is an average 94 minutes (in 2000, 116) with a range of
30 – 180 minutes; in secondary schools, there is an average of
101 minutes (in 2000, 143) with a range of 45 – 250 minutes per
week. There are regional differences in time allocation: Europe 109
minutes for primary schools and 101 minutes for secondary schools; Central
and Latin America (including Caribbean countries) 73 minutes in primary
schools and 87 minutes in secondary schools. During the period 2000-2005,
physical education curriculum time allocation has actually increased
in just over a fifth (24%) of countries, has remained the same in 60%
of countries but has decreased in a quarter (16%) of countries (refer
figure 6). ![]() Figure 6. Physical Education Curriculum Time Allocation Change 2000-2005 The figures represent a worrying trend of decreasing time allocation
from 2000 to 2005, despite international advocacy supported by an overwhelming
medical, scientific, economic, social and cultural case for adequately
timetabled physical education programmes and moves in some countries
to introduce an entitlement of at least 120 minutes per week.
3. Physical Education Curriculum Issues
“…Last year many of our gym periods were marred by intense
and destructive competitions” (Primary School PE Teacher, Toronto,
Canada)
A Scottish person’s account of his “… teenage years
dreading games, shivering on rugby fields and subject to all manner
of rebuke for my ineptitude at the game from staff and schoolmates.
In my final week at school I finally confronted my physical education
teacher and challenged him as to why I’d been made to endure this
torture. “Well son”, he replied, “at least you know
now that you can’t play rugby, and that’s what we call an
education” (Anon, cited in Kay, 2005).
A major issue is that of the relevance and quality
of physical education curricula around the globe. In some parts of the
world physical education curricula are undergoing change with signs
that its purpose and function are being redefined to accommodate broader
life-long educational outcomes. Nevertheless, there remains an orientation
towards sports-dominated competitive performance-related activity programmes.
Of some significance is the percentage of time devoted to each activity
area across the world: there is a predisposition to a competitive sport
discourse dominated by games, track and field athletics and gymnastics,
which account for 77% and 79% of physical education curriculum content
in primary and secondary schools respectively (refer figures 7a and
7b). Such sustained orientation raises issues surrounding meaning and
relevance as well as quality of programmes provided and delivered.
![]() Figure 7a. Physical Education Curriculum Content Areas: Primary Schools
(%)
![]() Figure 7b. Physical Education Curriculum Content
Areas: Secondary Schools (%) 4. Resources
a) Facilities and Equipment
“Quality of facilities is below average and quantity of equipment
is limited” (Government Official, Serbia Montenegro)
“Quantity and quality of EQUIPMENT is very poor – pupils
need to bring in some of their own equipment in some sports. Damaged
equipment is used frequently; quality and quantity of facilities is
very poor; and facilities inadequate or poorly maintained” (PE
Teacher, England)
A pervasive feature of concern is related to quality and quantity of
provision of facilities and equipment (refer figures 8a and 8b). This
is particularly the case in economically underdeveloped countries: quality
of facilities is rated as below average/inadequate in all Central and
Latin America countries and in 67% of African countries; and quality
of equipment is deemed to be inadequate in 67% of African countries
and below average in 67% of Central and Latin American countries. In
Europe as a regional example, there is a marked geo-political differentiation
in quality and quantity of facilities and equipment. In the more economically
prosperous northern and western European countries, quality and quantity
of facilities and equipment are regarded as at least adequate and in
some instances excellent; in central and eastern European countries,
there are inadequacies/insufficiencies in both quality and quantity
of facilities and equipment. Hence, there is an east-west European divide
with central and eastern European countries generally far less well
endowed with facilities and equipment. Transcending this divide is the
view in 63% of European countries (100% in the Middle East and 83% in
Africa) that there are problems of low/poor levels of maintenance of
existing physical education sites. Generally, across the national and
regional economic divides, there are many expressions of concern about
facility and equipment provision in economically developed countries,
though admittedly, expectations of levels are higher. Level of provision
can detrimentally affect quality of physical education programmes.
![]() Figure 8. Quality of Facilities
![]() b) PE Teaching Personnel
Quality of provision embraces not only curriculum content but also delivery.
Examples from around the world suggest lack of commitment to teaching
and pedagogical and didactical inadequacies in some countries:
“The majority of teachers who have to present the PE section of
life orientation is not qualified (PE Teacher, South Africa)
“… Very often teachers take children outdoors and leave
them to do their ‘own thing’. Some teachers will take the
children and play a game with some children and leave others unsupervised.
Most sessions are done haphazardly” (St Vincent Government Official).
“We still have coaches/teachers who only worry about summer vacation,
and they roll out the ball for nine months waiting until they can go
golfing again. This is a huge reason PE has such a bad name” (United
States High School PE Teacher).
Both ‘generalist’ and ‘specialist’ qualified
personnel teach physical education in primary schools: generalist teachers
feature in 66% of countries and specialists in 69% of countries; at
secondary school level throughout the region, the large majority (97%)
of physical education practitioners are specialists. In 78% of countries
(only 33% in Central and Latin America), there is a requirement for
in-service training (INSET)/continuing professional development (CPD)
to be undertaken but there are substantial variations in frequency and
time allocated for INSET/CPD. Frequency ranges from choice through nothing
specifically designated, every year, every two years, every three years
to every five years. Duration of INSET/CPD also reveals differences
in practice between countries: those with annual training range from
12 to 50 hours, from 3 to 25 days; biennial and triennial training courses
of 4 weeks; and five years range from 15 days to 3 weeks or 100 hours
over the five year period. In some countries, inadequate promotional
infrastructure and finance can inhibit participation in INSET/CPD; a
Swedish physical educator reports “…Often I have to find
in-service training myself and I have also often to pay for it with
my own money”. A consistent feature of all the surveys on the
issue of further professional development of teachers involved in physical
education teaching is countries across the world indicate a need for
in-service training and there is a recognition in some countries that
in-service and resource materials have been minimal and have been exacerbated
by a marked decline in physical education advisory/supervisory service
numbers. 5. Equity Issues
Many countries have legislation in place but barriers to inclusion remain
for both gender and disability areas.
a) Gender
“Girls not regularly attend the physical education/sport lesson”
(Government Official, Azerbaijan);
“Girls often prefer individual activities, which are occasionally
difficult to provide. Range of girls’ extra-curricular provision
is also often limited because of availability of female staff”
(Physical Education Inspector, Northern Ireland)
“PE is equated with sports; more sport options available for
boys; boys sports still get more time, space, press” (PE Teacher,
Ireland)
“Boys gain more budget than girls for PE lessons, equipment;
our traditional habits prevent (sometime) girls to take part of sport
outside schools” (PE Teacher, Kuwait).
Around 85% of countries indicate equality of opportunity for boys and
girls in physical education programmes but the evidence suggests that
there are barriers to full participation by girls. Such barriers include
cultural traditions, especially religion and, societal attitudes and
restricted range of opportunities. b) Disability
“There is no good infrastructure in the schools; the facilities
are not adapted or adequate; the older PE teachers did not receive any
education on adapted physical education and they do not know how to
deal with disability children” (PE Practitioner, Brazil)
“There are not special sports hall and facilities for students
with disabilities” (Government Official, Azerbaijan)
“Lack of support personnel; need more PE teachers with specialisation
in adapted physical education” (Government Official, Iceland)
“NO (disability equity); teachers are not trained to teach them;
appropriate equipment (is) not available; adequate/suitable playing
areas are not available” (PE Teacher, Jamaica).
In the survey, 80% of countries allege availability of opportunities
for students with disabilities for access to physical education lessons
but as with the gender issue, there are barriers to inclusion and/or
integration. Persistently pervasive barriers to facilitate inclusion
and/or integration in the area of disability include: lack of appropriate
infrastructure, facilities, equipment, as well as qualified or competent
teaching personnel.
The in-service training and professional development of teachers to
assist them with the inclusion of children with disabilities into regular
physical education classes has been addressed by a number of countries
since 1999. The issue of inclusion is an ongoing cross-curriculum challenge
in which physical education can play an important part. Often, physical
education can act as a catalyst for change as the results and benefits
of inclusion are more transparent and immediate. Countries such as Australia,
Canada, England, Finland, Israel and Sweden have in place specific programmes
to support the inclusion of children with disabilities into physical
education. Undoubtedly, these programmes are making progress and are
beginning to cater for a much more diverse group of children than ever
before. 6. Partnership Pathways
With only up to two hours per week time allocation (in many countries
as we have shown, it is frequently less), physical education cannot
itself satisfy physical activity needs of young people or address activity
shortfalls let alone achieve other significant outcomes. Bridges do
need to be built, especially to stimulate young people to participate
in physical activity during their leisure time. Many children are not
made aware of or how to negotiate, the multifarious pathways to out-of-school
and beyond school opportunities. As one French teacher put it, there
is “not enough co-operation between schools and sport organisations”,
an observation underlined by some 56% of countries indicating a lack
of links between school physical education and the community (figure
9).
![]() Figure 9. School Physical
Education - Community Links
7. Regional Roundup
a) Africa
Throughout Africa, diversity and contrasting variations prevail: in
Nigeria, physical education is taught and is examinable at Ordinary
(‘O’) and Advanced (‘A’) levels; in Kenya, it
is taught but is not examinable; in Uganda it is timetabled but not
seriously taught (Toriola, 2005); in South Africa, physical education
as a school subject no longer exists but it is taught indirectly as
a small component of the learning area “Life Orientation”
along with health promotion, personal and social development, and orientation
to the world of work foci in grades R-9 (Van Deventer, 2005); and in
Botswana it is time tabled but inadequately resourced and there are
very few qualified physical education teachers. Shortage of facilities
and adequately trained personnel are widely reported throughout the
continent as are the peripheral value in the curriculum (regarded as
non-educational, non-productive use of time and as recreation/play time
especially in primary schools) and inadequate monitory inspections in
secondary schools (e.g. in Benin, Botswana and Uganda). Generally, priority
is accorded to language and mathematics with even meagre physical education
resources often diverted to other subjects. In some countries (e.g.
Malawi) physical education for girls often suffers from optional status
with many preferring not to take part. This situation is exacerbated
by a dearth of amenities such as changing rooms.
b) Asia
In many Indian and Pakistani
schools, lack of qualified teachers and facilities, inadequate
inspection, perception of physical education as a non-educational, fun
activity and inferiority to academic subjects, collectively contribute
to either minimal provision or absence from the curriculum. Girls are
discouraged from participating in physical education clubs in many rural
areas especially because of what it will allegedly do to their bodies
(render them “unfeminine”). In Pakistan, cultural and religious
constraints also limit the scope of physical education for girls, who
are not allowed to take part in sports and physical activities except
within the four walls of the schools. Elsewhere in the sub-continental
region, it is alleged that time allocation does not reach requirements,
the physical education lesson is more likely to be cancelled than other
subjects and teachers’ technique is poor. Generally there is minimal
provision for disabled students.
c) Europe
Europe, with its admixture of economically developed and developing
countries and regions and various and different historical and socio-cultural
settings, is a continental region typified by ‘mixed messages’.
Reports reveal improving situations in some countries and discussions
on increasing physical education curriculum time allocation in, for
example, Croatia and Denmark. These developments are in contrast with
the possibility of intentions to introduce higher quality and more time
for physical education under proposed curriculum reform being compromised
in Ireland because of insufficient space in the timetable for increased
time allocation, since the government introduced two new subjects in
an already tight programme.
d) North America
At the present time in the United States, there
is an educational environment that stresses accountability and achievement
in core, so-called, ‘academic subjects’. President Bush’s
No Child Left Behind Elementary and Secondary Education (NCLB) Act
(2002), neglected, by omitting some subjects such as physical education
and health, to address the debilitating condition of the nation’s
youth and did not acknowledge any link between health, physical activity
and academic performance. The Act has created unintended negative consequences
by contributing to increased marginalisation of physical education in
many states (Keyes, 2004) with mandated time not being met (e.g. Illinois,
Maryland, New Jersey, Washington and Wisconsin) and waiver programmes
allowing exemption from mandates. “Less than two-thirds of high
school students attend physical education classes. Nearly a third of
all high schools exempt youngsters from taking gym if they are cheerleaders,
members of the marching band, choir, or an athletic team” (Wickham,
2001).
e) Oceania
Despite the recent re-introduction of daily physical education in Australian
states’ schools, physical education has a poor branding image
in the country, which starkly contrasts with the successful branding
of sport. There is far greater recognition of the contribution of sport
throughout the community from the prime minister down. In facing the
problem of inactivity among children, the Australian Government turned
to the sporting community and not to the physical education profession.
The concern is that unless the physical education profession can find
a more relevant and strident voice, the delivery of activity in schools
will grow without it and it will be condemned to persistent marginalisation
in a world of change and opportunity (Saunders, 2004). In New Zealand,
the concern is more on deficiencies in quality of teaching and learning
than on image and curriculum time allocation is usually met (Hollard,
2005). Elsewhere in the region, Pacific islands countries variously
adhere to the ‘mixed messages’ theme from no physical education
programme in Nauru and no primary school physical education in American
Samoa, through limited growth of physical education and school sport
in Guam and growing stature of physical education in the Cook Islands
to an integral curriculum role for physical education in Kiribati to
weekly physical education and sport in Tuvalu (Skinner, 2005).
f) South America
In several Latin American countries, recent legislation
has made physical education in elementary and middle schools a compulsory
subject, but timetable allocation, for which there are no legal prescriptions,
is generally low. Despite the legislation requirement, in most countries
(Chile and Colombia are exceptions) there has been a decrease in the
actual number of physical education classes. Several countries in the
region have started to develop regulatory Register of Physical Education
Professionals (originally established by the Brazilian Federal
Physical Education Council), mainly because there is general consensus
that regulation will assist in improving the quality and organization
of physical education. There is a trend towards closer relationships
between physical education and health; it is a trend that has emanated
from Sports for All programmes, particularly the Brazilian Agita
São Paulo (Move São Paulo), which has raised levels
of consciousness (Tubino, 2004).
7. Conclusions
Arguably, the surveys’ data provide a distorted picture of physical
education in schools. However, what the survey and literature review
data do reveal are congruent features in several areas of school physical
education policy and undoubtedly in some specific areas of practice.
There are many examples of good practice in many schools in many countries
across the world but equally there are continuing causes for serious
concern. The ‘mixed messages’ embrace positive initiatives
to assist in contributing to increasing levels of physical activity
engagement amongst young people and in combating obesity and sedentary
lifestyles’ diseases. Examples of these initiatives include:
The “reality check” reveals several areas of continuing
concern. These areas embrace: physical education not being delivered
or delivered without quality, insufficient time allocation, lack of
competent qualified and/or inadequately trained teachers, inadequate
provision of facilities and equipment and teaching materials, large
class sizes and funding cuts and, in some countries, inadequate provision
or awareness of pathway links to wider community programmes and facilities
outside of schools. Whilst improvements in inclusion can be identified
since the Berlin Physical Education Summit, barriers to equal provision
and access for all still remain.
Countries, via the relevant agency authorities, should identify existing
areas of inadequacies and should strive to develop a ‘Basic Needs
Model’ in which physical education activity has an essential presence
and is integrated with educational policies supported by governmental
and non-governmental agencies working co-operatively in partnership(s).
Satisfaction of these basic needs requires high quality physical education
programmes, provision of equipment and basic facilities, safe environments
and appropriately qualified/experienced personnel, who have the necessary
relevant knowledge, skills and general and specific competences according
to the level and stage of involvement together with opportunities for
enrichment through continuing professional development.
It is imperative that monitoring of developments in physical education
across the world be maintained. The Council of Europe, UNESCO and the
WHO have called for monitoring systems to be put into place to regularly
review the situation of physical education in each country. Indeed,
the Council of Europe referred to the introduction of provision for
a pan-European survey on physical education policies and practices every
five years as a priority! (Bureau of the Committee for the Development
of Sport, 2002). “Promises” need to be converted into “reality”
if threats are to be surmounted and a safe future for physical education
in schools is to be secured. Otherwise, with the Council of Europe Deputy
Secretary General’s intimation of a gap between “promise”
and “reality”, there is a real danger that the well intentioned
initiatives will remain more “promise” than “reality”
in too many countries across the world and compliance with Council of
Europe and UNESCO Charters will continue to remain compromised (Hardman,
2005). References Anon, (2004) Dundee Courier, December; cited in
Kay, W., (2005), Physical Education – Quality: A quality
experience for all pupils. Paper presented at the National Summit
on Physical Education, CCPR, London. Monday 24 January.
Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers, (2003).
Recommendation Rec(2003)6 of the Committee of Ministers to member
states on improving physical education and sport for children and
young people in all European countries. Strasbourg, Council of
Europe, 30 April.
De Boer-Buqicchio, M., (2002). Opening Address.
16th Informal Meeting of the European Ministers responsible
for Sport. Warsaw, 12 September.
Hardman, K. (2005). Global Vision of the
Situations, Trends and Issues of Sport and Physical Education in Schools.
Paper presented at the International Conference on Sport and Physical
Education. Bangkok, Thailand, 30 October-2 November.
Hardman, K. and Marshall, J.J. (2000). World-wide
survey of the state and status of school physical education, Final
Report. Manchester, University of Manchester.
Hollard, B. (2005). Personal Communication.
17 November.
Keyes, P. (2004). Physical Education and
Health Education Professionals from across the Country meet to address
‘No Child Left Behind’. NASPE. 21 February.
Lundgren, U., (1983). Curriculum theory,
between hope and happening: Text and Context. Geelong, Deakin
University.
Saunders, J., (2004). Personal Communication.
21 October.
Skinner, J., (2005). Regional Discussions
and Issues of Sport and Physical Education in Oceania Schools.
Paper presented at the International Conference on Sport and Physical
Education. Bangkok, Thailand, 30 October-2 November.
Toriola, A., (2005). Synopsis on Africa. Personal
Communication. 21 November.
Tubino, M., (2004). Personal Communication.
18 December.
Turner, D., (2005). CBS. The early show.
January 27.
Van Deventer K., (2005). Personal Communication.
14 February.
Wickham, D. (2001). Let’s Reopen the
School Gym Door. Bring Back P.E. http://www.cwu.edu/~jefferis/jeff_justipe.html
05/02).
World Health Organization, (2004). Global
Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health. Geneva, WHO.
17 April.
Contact:
Dr. Ken Hardman International Society for Comparative Physical Education and Sport (ISCPES) Oxford Road Manchester M139PL United Kingdom ken.hardman@tiscali.co.uk ![]() http://www.icsspe.org/portal/index.php?w=1&z=5 |