| World Summit follow-up | No.37 February 2003 |

Conclusion and summary What did the speakers tell us - Plans and challenges for EUPEA Dr. Chris Laws University College Chichester, U.K. You have listened to 13 speakers during the day and it is virtually impossible to do justice to them and summarise them in a short space of time. The speakers though have given pointers for EUPEA and all of us working in physical education to consider for the future. There are 4 areas to me that seem to have re-occurred during the presentations Definition of Quality Physical Education Delivery of Quality Physical Education Programmes Dissemination of Good Practice Comparative studies of children's experiences of physical education and school sport and the meanings they attach to these experience Defining Quality Physical Education Kevin Gilliver, Paul De Knop and his colleagues all challenged us to define quality and described development both in England and Belgium. Paul De Knop reported that as a result of their survey 'school physical education does not yet reach a satisfying social quality standard'. Similarly Kevin Gilliver told us of new initiatives but these must lead to the raising of standards and quality - the implications are immense and challenging. What is Quality? Should EUPEA continue to lobby for a minimum amount of time for all children in school of physical education? Should EUPEA - although recognising individual differences between countries - define what it is that children should actually do in physical education? Do we need to be far more specific as to what constitutes a balanced physical education programme for all children? Should EUPEA define, far more specifically, issues of equity - if all schools across Europe are to provide quality experiences inclusion policies and strategies for all need to be considered and implemented? Should EUPEA define what it actually means to be physically educated, what are the Knowledge, Skills and Understanding we expect children to acquire as a result of engaging in physical education? Delivery of Quality Programmes Good teachers do make a difference but what are the competencies expected of our teachers of physical education? Should EUPEA define what should count as Subject Knowledge, Pedagogical Knowledge, Contextual Knowledge in the training of teachers? Should EUPEA lobby for the right for in-service for all physical education teachers across Europe? The issue of planned continuing professional development for all teachers is an area for consideration across all European countries as Kristine De Martelaer and her colleagues have told us. Should EUPEA define minimum resources for the delivery of Physical Education programmes? We heard of some exciting developments from Michel Fouquet in France, Helena Kronberg in Sweden and Hugo Van der Poel in The Netherlands, but we do need further work on the best use of resources to support our quality programmes? Dissemination of Good Practice To me this was one of the most exciting areas of the symposium and we heard of some very good examples directly from teachers who are implementing these programmes. Should EUPEA consider ways of disseminating and celebrating the good practice that we know exists in physical education? Pupils' Experiences We need to consider that adopting of a pupil's eye view which can provide us with a useful mirror of the way things eventually manifest themselves and set of criteria against which physical education can be tested. A number of our speakers have implicitly challenged us to understand the outcomes of physical education from a child's point of view. This may well throw up all sorts of challenges, particularly if we discover a mismatch between what we think is happening and what actually happens to children. EUPEA could well lead the way on comparative studies of children's experiences in physical education. There is an interesting quote in Hardman's (2000) work from the Minister of Education for Manitoba in Canada (Janzen 1998). He claimed that despite massive investment in PE… the attitudes of society had not been positively affected by their physical education experience within the school system. (p8) Whatever perspective we take of the state of physical education in Europe, it is clear that an understanding of the frameworks that children use to interpret the subject is crucial to teachers' ability to implement an effective quality programme. Most significant would seem to be the need to provide a curriculum that pupils interpret as relevant to them and their lives, one, which they can carry forward for the rest of their lives. It is clear that there is a role for EUPEA and all our Associations in providing quality experiences for all children - we must take action as a result of this symposium, we do not want to be discussing the same topics in years to come, we must have ways of showing we have moved on. The symposium has provided challenges for us all. Dr. Chris Laws Vice-President EUPEA University College Chichester Head, School of Physical Education College Lane Chichester PO19 6PE Ph: 01243 816330 c.laws@ucc.ac.uk http://www.icsspe.org/portal/texte/area/bulletin/ Conclusion and summary What did the speakers tell us - Plans and challenges for EUPEA Dr. Chris Laws University College Chichester, U.K.