Contents

Publisher's Statement
Foreword
Feature
Current Issues

Archives

Bulletin 65 Pdf

Contacts

| Feature | No.65 October 2013 |

The History and Development of Physical Literacy

Ms. Margaret Whitehead

Abstract

This article looks at the history of the development of the concept and makes reference both to what are seen as current attitudes to physical activity and also to the philosophy that underpins the concept. Issues concerned with the notions of ‘physical’ and ‘literacy’ are discussed and the piece concludes with an assertion that physical literacy provides a sound footing on which physical activity can be seen as of intrinsic value.

Introduction

Over the past eighty years the notion of physical literacy has been referred to fleetingly by a number of writers in a variety of contexts, not all related to physical activity per se. For example some have been concerned with movement as communication or a form of language. However the concept was never systematically developed. Nor was it perceived as one that could be aligned with the thinking of certain philosophical schools of thought that championed our embodied dimension as of significance in human life.

The development of the concept saw the coming together of a life in the world of physical education and more recent philosophical study.

Physical education and physical activity throughout life

Over the fifty years in which I have been involved in physical education and physical activity I have become increasingly concerned that:

- fewer people are continuing with physical activity after leaving school

- sedentary leisure pursuits are on the rise

- cases of obesity and stress related conditions are increasing

- in many schools and other physical activity settings there was, and is, a subtle move towards high level performance being the principal focus of the subject.

In relation to this last concern, David Kirk (2010) describes the nature of the subject as ‘physical education as sport-techniques’, while Chris Shilling (2008) writes ‘that we are living in an era of performative sport’. There would seem to be a possible link here with the first two concerns mentioned above. It could well be that with high level performance taking centre stage, those unable to match up to this aspiration are being seriously de-motivated and thus all too ready to opt out of active participation when they complete their schooling.

Together these situations present a worrying picture, and regrettably one that seems unlikely to change in the short term. It would seem to be the case that the value of physical activity, beyond the achievement of successful performance at international level, is minimal. Indeed apart from the well rehearsed benefit of exercise to promote physical fitness among the general population, physical activity is viewed as a dispensable recreational pursuit.

This was a disturbing view and one that did not resonate with my own perception of the significance and value of physical activity in human life. This disquiet led me to study certain schools of philosophy, each of which articulated the view that movement and our embodied dimension play a crucial role in life as we know it.

Philosophical studies that played a part in the development of the concept of physical literacy

Three areas of philosophy provide well argued support for human embodiment as an important human potential. These are monism, Existentialism and Phenomenology.

Monism

An early diagnosis in my quest to identify why physical activity and hence physical education has such a low profile was the perception that there was an unquestioned acceptance of dualism. Dualism views the human as comprising two separable parts , the mind and the body, with the mind being far superior to the body and the body being only of importance to keep the mind alive. This view goes back to Plato (1928) but is principally associated with Descartes (1641) who famously said ‘I think, therefore I am.’

In opposition to this view, Monism views a person as essentially an indivisible whole. One of the longstanding issues in philosophy and the sciences is the problem of how the body and the mind can work together. However Strawson (in Gill 2000), who advocates Monism, dismisses this issue in asserting that the person is first and foremost one entity. He argues that there is no problem concerning putting the body and the mind together as they are two elements of an intricately integrated entity. We are comprised of a range of potentials which are interdependent and mutually enriching. This view was supported by Sartre (1957) who wrote that ‘For human reality, to be, is to act’. Similarly Burkitt (1999) writes ‘ prior to the Cartesian ‘I think’ there is an ‘I can’ ’. This view is now held by many philosophers, neuroscientists and cognitive psychologists. Modell (2006) writes that nowadays there are ‘practically no neurobiologists who believe in a Cartesian dualism.

Notwithstanding these views, Descartes’ dualistic assertions have been locked into the thinking of western cultures to such an extent, that habitual language use re-affirms dualism in the way that it refers to the body as a noun. Leder (1990) writes that the stranglehold of dualism has resulted in our being ‘trapped inside a picture – a dualist picture that has limited our self- development and self-relation.’

What is overlooked is the fact that there is more than one way in which our embodiment contributes to our nature as humans. Put simply, there are two very different modes in which our embodiment plays a part in life – the embodiment as an instrument and the embodiment as lived. It is the latter that is overlooked - yet it is this dimension of ourselves which has a highly significant role to play. Habitual language use results in our falling into the dualist trap of only seeing our embodiment as an instrument - forgetting the all pervading role of the embodiment as lived. Our embodiment as lived functions very much on a pre-conceptual level and is thus taken for granted. The exceptional motile intelligence this dimension of ourselves displays is effected without conscious thought and for this reason is overlooked.

Two schools of thought which build from a Monist perspective are Existentialism and Phenomenology. Both schools have high regard for our embodiment as lived.

Existentialism.

Briefly Existentialists assert that we create ourselves through our interaction with the world. In other words our uniqueness or essence arises as a result of the experiences we have in interacting with the world. Existence precedes essence. The nature of our being is a result of the accumulated experiences we have in the different environments we inhabit. We are quintessentially beings of the world. As we become familiar with the world about us we also come to realise the wide range of capabilities we have with which we can

interact with the world. Interaction is the key to life, the stimulus to our development. It follows that all those aspects of our human nature that enable us to interact with the world are key capabilities that should be nurtured in the interests of realising a fully human existence. Our embodied capability is one such aspect and should therefore be seen as an important human potential. That is, not as dualists would have it, an inferior aspect of our nature, serving only to house the mind. This is endorsed by Burkitt (1999) who writes – ‘prior to thought and representation, there is a primordial coexistence between the body and its world, which grounds the possibility of developing conscious awareness and knowledge’.

Phenomenology

Phenomenologists build from both Monism and Existentialism and interrogate the nature of perception, which they view as a crucial element of interaction. A significant foundation of their work is that we perceive the world from the backdrop of previous interactions. On account of the fact that each of us brings our personal cluster of previous interactions to a situation, each of us will perceive the situation from a unique and personal point of view. With the inherent involvement of our embodied capability in almost every interaction it follows that our embodied capability will significantly influence our perception. Embodied experience is integral to human existence, we see the world from the perspective of an embodied being. Phenomenologists have interrogated perception with the consistent view, as exemplified by Leder (1990) that ‘Perception is itself a motor activity. Moreover, that which is perceived is always saturated by the implicit presence of motility.’

Thus embodied experience is as important as all other experiences in our understanding of the world – the world of animate and inanimate features. Research now shows that in the early years embodied interaction is the most important medium of interaction and furthermore its value persists throughout life as embodied interaction provides the backdrop to most of our dealings with others and the world.

There is a great deal more to be said about these schools of philosophy (Whitehead 2010) however this brief explanation provides a window into a very different world - a world in which our embodied dimension is a human dimension of incalculable significance, and one that we ignore at our peril.

The way forward

The challenge arising from my philosophical study was to find a way to share this significance with others and to make a case for the recognition of the embodied dimension as an important human capability. A concept was needed that identified the role of our embodied capability in human life as we know it or put in another way to identify the human ability to effect ‘fluent and productive embodied interaction with the world’. The concept would need, firstly, to include reference both to the embodied dimension. Secondly it would need to signal Monist principles and identify the contribution this human capability makes in the majority of our interactions with the surroundings. Physical literacy was the chosen concept, ‘physical’ fulfilling the first requirement and ‘literacy’ fulfilling the second.

Challenges to the concept of Physical Literacy

The concept of physical literacy as identifying a human capability with considerable significance and philosophical support was first presented in 1993. Unsurprisingly there has been, and remains, ongoing debate about the adoption of the concept.

‘Physical’ was seen to be perpetuating the idea of the ‘body’ as an object, and ‘literacy’ was seen as being too closely related to the ability to read and perhaps not a term that it was appropriate to use in relation to our embodied capability.

In defence of ‘physical’

While ‘physical’ does have unfortunate dualist connotations there is no denying that we inhere a physical dimension which is part of our human nature working in orchestrated harmony with all our other capabilities.

‘Movement’ was advocated as an alternative to ’physical’. While it is true that ‘movement’ avoids the dualist connotations of ‘physical’, the term ‘movement’ applies to a myriad of non-human phenomena such as transport and the workings of machines. On this account ‘movement’ has not, generally, been seen as appropriate for use in the field of physical education – although it is been employed on occasion to describe the physical activity undertaken in education in the early years and was, for a few years, used to describe academic departments through giving them the title of ‘Human Movement Studies’. Other alternatives to ‘physical’ are the philosophical terms ‘embodied’ and ‘motile’. Resultant terms would be either ‘embodied literacy’ or ‘motile literacy’. While these might be acceptable terms in the context of philosophy, they were seen as inappropriate for general use, being unfamiliar and somewhat esoteric in nature. So, while accepting that the continued use of the term ‘physical’ has unfortunate associations with dualism, rather than helping to signal the monist view that as humans we are a whole, it was seen to be the most acceptable term to refer to our embodied capability.

In defence of ‘literacy’

Alternatives to ‘literacy’ suggested were ‘competence’, ‘ability’ and ‘skill’. However ‘physical competence’, ‘physical ability’ and ‘physical skill’ would seem to leave the concept very much tied to pure physicality and to perpetuate dualistic attitudes. While physical competence forms a key element of physical literacy, the terms identified above would seem to focus on the embodiment as a machine or an instrument and do not address important role of the embodiment as lived. Nor do these terms signal the interactive significance of the embodiment as highlighted by Existentialists or endorse the monist foundation of the concept.

The notion of literacy as characterising a form of interplay with our surroundings or productive relationship with the world is supported by UNESCO. The definition of literacy given by UNESCO refers to literacy in its traditional use as a stand-alone concept being the:-

"ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate and compute, using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society”.

UNESCO Education Sector Position Paper: 13. 2004.

Notwithstanding the fact that this definition is directed to the written word, the reference to literacy as facilitating full participation in the community and wider society undoubtedly infers the development of a productive relationship between individuals and their environment. In UNESCO’s terms this relationship is made possible through the ability to read and write. However I would argue that, in line with existentialist thinking, there are multiple ways in which we can develop this productive relationship. This would seem to be endorsed in that a good many subject areas have now adopted the suffix ‘literacy’ to describe the value, goals and intentions with respect to their work. The following can be found on the world-wide web:- Music literacy, Computer literacy, Digital Literacy, Nutrition literacy, Political literacy, Media Literacy, Maths Literacy, Science Literacy, Geographic Literacy, Arts Literacy, Health Literacy, and, of course, Physical Literacy

Clearly there has been a major shift in the understanding of the term ‘literacy’ – now being subject to much wider use. In this context it could be asked ‘What are the common threads of understanding among all those who are now adopting ‘literacy’ as an element of their lexicon?’ I would propose that all would want to include attributes such as appreciation, recognition, knowledge, understanding, assimilation, accommodation and the initiation of an appropriate action, relevant to their specific context. In combination these attributes would seem to point to the ability to respond appropriately and engage productively within a particular field.

I suggest that the phrase ‘fluent and productive interaction’ with the world, sums up the root characteristics of ‘literacy’ in any field/area. Effective interaction with the world is, in the view of Existentialists, the key to a fulfilled life. This interaction is available in any medium through which we interact with the world, hence the acceptability of the current multiple uses.

In this context I feel it is not inappropriate to use the language and substance of the UNESCO definition and to describe physical literacy as identifying a human capability that affords us

‘the ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, respond effectively and communicate, using the embodied human dimension, within a wide range of situations and contexts. Physical Literacy involves a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society’.

At this stage it needs to be stressed that the adoption of the notion of ‘literacy’ in the field of physical activity is not designed to give academic respectability or credibility to this human capability, but rather to highlight its educational validity as part of a liberal education that recognises all our human capabilities and potentials as of equal importance and value.

Conclusion

In summary, I argue that the notion of ‘literacy’ in conjunction with the notion of ‘physical’ is both apposite and revealing. Physical literacy is in tune with certain schools of philosophy and has resonances with life as we know it

Physical literacy:-

- signals the significance of the embodied dimension in interaction with the world, and in so doing acknowledges the role of this dimension in perception

- implicates the embodied dimension in doing, interpreting, responding and understanding, thus underwriting Monist views

- implicates the embodiment as lived and thus broadens the role of the embodied dimension being purely a machine or instrument

- has non-exclusive connotations, indicating all can achieve this capability in line with their unique endowment

The concept of physical literacy underwrites the key role that the embodied dimension plays in life as we know it. In the context of our nature as beings-in-the –world physical literacy affords us an essential avenue of interaction without which we could not realise out potential as humans. Physical Literacy supports the view that we should celebrate our embodied capability, a capability that needs no justification beyond its unique and indispensible contribution to human life.

.

References

1. Burkitt, I. (1999) Bodies of Thought. Embodiment, Identity and Modernity. Sage London

2. Descartes, R. (1641) The Philosophical Works of Descartes. Cambridge: CUP

3. Gill, J.H. (2000) The Tacit Mode. State University of New York

4. Kirk, D. (2010) Physical Education Futures. London : Routledge

5. Leder, D. (1990) The Absent Body. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press

6. Modell, A. (2006) Imagination and the Meaningful Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

   Plato (1928) The Philosophy of Plato. Edited by Irwin Edman. New York: Modern Library.

   Sartre, J-P. (1957) Being and Nothingness translated by Hazel Barnes. London: Methuen

8. Shilling, C. (2008) Changing Bodies . London: Sage

   Whitehead, M.E. (2010) (ed) Physical Literacy: Throughout the lifecourse. London: Routledge

Contact

Margaret Whitehead

4 Veranzerou Str. 10677
Athens
Greece
E-mail:Margaret Whitehead whitehead67@aol.com

http://www.icsspe.org/