Contents

Publisher's Statement
Foreword
Feature
Current Issues

Archives

Bulletin 65 Pdf

Contacts

| Feature | No.65 October 2013 |

Physical Literacy, ‘Race’ and the Sociological Imagination

Kevin Hylton

Abstract

This paper argues that in relation to physical literacy we must continue to problematise the philosophies that underpin the concept to the point that it is less utopian, idealistic and politically neutral.

For those advocating physical literacy, physical educators are encouraged to consider its ideals as a philosophical underpinning. A realisation of physical literacy is an aspirational outcome of physical education that Whitehead (2012) urges the profession to incorporate in its pedagogies. Whitehead describes six key elements that constitute physical literacy that could all be described as theoretical end states. Physical literacy has a mix of psychological, social, cultural and physical dispositions that Talbot (2012: xvi) states is a challenge for physical educators. This paper draws on principles from critical race studies that begin from the standpoint that society is fundamentally unequally structured that, amongst other things, is the result of past and present racial processes (Hylton, 2009, Hylton, 2012, Hylton and Morpeth, 2012). This pragmatic realist approach to physical literacy forces a recalibration of the philosophical idealism of the end state that is physical literacy with a critical consideration of the physical literacy journey that is on the whole more constrained for black and other minoritised groups. In doing so, the paper draws directly on papers that consider broader concerns in relation to ‘race’ for those working with and developing the concept of physical literacy. These publications incorporate previously published works that focus on the salience of physical literacy in relation to broader considerations of ‘race’ in society (Hylton, 2009, Hylton and Morpeth, 2012), ‘race’, sport and leisure (Hylton, 2005), and sport, social capital and social networks (Hylton, 2008)1.

Whitehead (2013) states that everyone can be physically literate, yet without doubt conceptions of physical literacy are theoretical constructs. These constructs draw from the same idealistic pools that inform policymakers that support the view of the freely available, positive benefits of physical culture that spawned sport for all. As a result physical culture [or sport] have been purported to have properties that enable them to contribute to the smooth running of society as a form of ‘cultural glue’ which helps to hold it together yet their settings as contested arenas are often left undisturbed (Hylton and Totten, 2008). As a result, a reasonable sociological imagination would conclude that certain significant social dynamics that impact our ability to access, take part in and sustain our physical literacy, and in many cases sport per se, are ignored or marginalised. Critical social scientists refuse to accept ideas, concepts, or paradigms that do not systematically centre broader power relations and historical disparities in their exploration of problematics or critiques (Hylton, 2005, Hylton, 2009). The fashion in which physical literacy is theorised and developed in practice seems to take place in conditions that suggest stasis, pluralism and equality.

In the foreword for the systematic review of the literature on BME communities in sport and physical recreation for Sporting Equals and the UK Sports Councils Long et al (2009: 1) state that,

Research suggests that inequality and discrimination persist in the provision of and access to sport and physical recreation opportunities by black and ethnic minority (BME) communities. These communities are poorly represented at decision-making levels and for a number of reasons are excluded or face a range of barriers to sports participation.

I argue elsewhere that I advocate the basic standpoint that we live in an unequal society, where resources and power are unevenly distributed and that part of the job of critical writers is to demystify these social arrangements (Hylton, 2005: 90). Part of this demystification process is to recognise that individual agency, determination or motivation is not enough for individuals from particular background to consistently freely access opportunities for physical literacy in their preferred activities. The notion of being on an individual physical literacy journey cannot be disputed (Whitehead, 2012, Whitehead, 2013) yet the potential for broader structural and institutional constraints affecting such a journey seem frequently marginal in the way physical literacy is articulated.

Each journey is likely to encounter twists, turns and maybe setbacks along the way. Journeys may stall on account of a range of personal circumstances, some, maybe, beyond the individual's control. However with determination and the help of others, individuals' journeys can re-start and indeed flourish (Whitehead, 2013).

Does the notion of ‘physical illiteracy’ really apply to social groups excluded by racialised and even more complex intersecting processes on the journey to physical literacy? Amongst a plethora of authors, Porter (ScottPorterResearch, 2001) reported that it is the fear of racial discrimination – real or perceived – that is the core issue keeping BME groups away from sport and as such conceptions of physical literacy must include as part of its context and critique what people do, when, why, for how long and who with. Otherwise those affected or victimised by racialised processes are likely to remain ‘physically illiterate’ no matter what their standing is in terms of their actual physical abilities. Whitehead (2012: 7) reinforces this point,

While all can be physical literate, it is the case that, if at any stage of life, individuals lack or lose the motivation, confidence and physical competence to value physical activity and take steps to maintain activity, they can no longer be described as being physically literate, in other words they may become physically illiterate.

Just as in other aspects of education we must ask questions about why individuals may lack motivation, confidence and perspective to value physical activities and their environs. Similarly, questions should be asked about why there is an imbalance in the literacy, motivations and exclusion of social groups in their take up and practice of certain physical pursuits. All physical pursuits are not the same qualitatively, socially, culturally or even economically. Any consideration of physical literacy as an organising principal for educationalists must be underpinned by broader notions of social dynamics and how they impact individual and group behaviours. Lin (2001) contends that we should consider how different social groups have different access to social capital, often related to privileges of structural positions or social networks (Hylton, 2008). The consequence of the marginalisation of racialised relations in theorising social capital is that historical power relations and inequalities are marginalised or ignored thus leaving some analyses narrow, colour-blind and pluralistic in nature. In his analysis of social capital, Field (2003) agrees that networks can promote inequality due to their restrictive access to the means of accruing social capital through association. Sport networks have been seen to operate with a noticeable inability to include others from an ethnically diverse background, thus reinforcing the marginalisation and power differentials people face in other social arenas. Some connections are clearly more useful than others in terms of their ability to build bridges and open up opportunities. This has become particularly emphasised by the literature on racial exclusions, racism and sport (Hylton, 2009, Long et al., 2009, Hylton, 2010). History has shown that ignoring racialised processes and formations in sport and wider society neither renders them benign nor harmless and even the creation, (re)creation and contestation of public spaces in terms of how our spatial practices structure how we experience sport/physical activity (passively and actively) is poorly understood and should therefore be problematised (Hylton and Morpeth, 2012).

Vickerman and DePauw (2012) argue that those involved in developing physical literacy throughout the lifecourse must respond to diversity in a proactive way that some in the public sector have been slow in adapting to. In a case study of BEMSport (Hylton, 2008), a black sports pressure group, I argued that BEMSport occupied a space in regional sport networks that was paradoxical; BEMSport’s existence contested the discourse of equality within the public sector, which presents public sector sport as equitable in terms of the development and implementation of sports policy/practice. BEMSport’s existence contests the discourse of equality within the public sector, which presents local government sport as equitable in terms of the development and implementation of sports policy/practice. BEMSport’s presence highlighted the historical developments that led them to challenge the cumulative negative outcomes of public sector activity. BEMSport’s story is a counter-story, a competing discourse, an alternative paradigm that situates the black experience of sport in a process that constrains as it liberates, empowers as it disempowers, includes as it excludes; all of these processes impacting upon the environment in which physical literacy is experienced and developed. Harrison et al. (2004) are clear that ‘race’ and diversity are neglected in physical education and sport and they query its lack of significance in this academic arena. Though sport and leisure theorists have been more proactive in recent times they have also been criticised for such tardiness (Hylton, 2005, Hylton, 2009).

In relation to physical literacy I argue that we must continue to problematise the philosophies that underpin it to the point that it is less utopian, idealistic and politically neutral. It must move beyond relying on the politics of the reader to write ‘race’ and its related intersecting factors in so that its inherent philosophies incorporate the social world and couch its conception with a less theoretical and more pragmatic realist backdrop.

1 It is recommended that these papers are consulted for a more in-depth analysis of these themes.

References

1. Field, J., 2003. Social Capital London: Routledge.

2. Harrison, L., Azzarito, L. & Burden, J., 2004. Perceptions of Athletic superiority: A view from the other side. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 7, 159-166.

3. Hylton, K., 2005. Race, Sport and Leisure: Lessons from Critical Race Theory. Leisure Studies, 24, 81-98.

4. Hylton, K., 2008. Race Equality and Sport Networks: Social Capital Links. In M.N.A.R. Hoye. (ed.) Sport and Social Capital. London: Butterworth-Heineman.

5. Hylton, K., 2009. 'Race' and Sport: Critical Race Theory London: Routledge.

6. Hylton, K., 2012. ‘Race’, Sport, and Legacy. Runnymede Trust Bulletin. London: Runnymede Trust.

7. Hylton, K. & Morpeth, N.D., 2012. London 2012: ‘Race’ Matters, and the East End. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 4, 1-18.

8. Hylton, K. & Totten, M., 2008. Community Sports Development. In K. Hylton & P. Bramham (eds.) Sports Development. Policy, Process and Practice. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 77-117.

9. Lin, N., 2001. Social Capital: A theory of social structure and action New York: CUP.

10. Long, J., Hylton, K., Spracklen, K. & Ratna, A., 2009. A Systematic Review of of the Literature on Black and Minority Ethnic Communities in sport and physical recreation. Birmingham: S.E.A.T.S. Councils.

11. Scottporterresearch, 2001. Sport and Ethnic Minority Communities: Aiming at Social Inclusion. Edinburgh.

12. Talbot, M., 2012. Foreword. In M. Whitehead (ed.) Physical Literacy Throughout the Lifecourse. London: Routledge.

13. Vickerman, P. & Depauw, K., 2012. Physical Literacy and Issues of Diversity. In M. Whitehead (ed.) Physical Literacy: Throughout the Lifecourse. London: Routledge.

14. Whitehead, M. (ed.) (2012) Physical Literacy Throughout the Lifecourse, London: Routledge.

15. Whitehead, M., 2013. The Definition of Physical Literacy [online]. http://www.physical-literacy.org.uk/definitions.php [Accessed Access Date 2013].

Contact

Kevin Hylton
Leeds Metropolitan University
United Kingdom
Email:K.Hylton@Leedsmet.ac.uk

http://www.icsspe.org/