Physical Education Subject Departments as Professional Learning Communities – The interplay between practice and theory

Author(s):

Joao Costa(presenting / submitting)Marcos Onofre Maria Martins

Conference:

ECER 2014

Network:

18. Research in Sports Pedagogy

Format:

Paper

Session Information

18 SES 07, Reaching the Learner through Meaningful Physical Education and Sport

Paper Session

Time:

2014-09-03

17:15-18:45

Room:

B103 Sala de Aulas

Chair:

Mark Griffiths

Contribution

As the latest European policies on Sport and Physical Education (PE) highlight the need for its professionals to have more opportunities to engage in quality professional development programmes (Declaration of Berlin, 2013; European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2013), literature shows the disparity and insufficiency, but also the emerging potential and quality of successful Continuous Professional Development (CPD) initiatives that significantly contribute towards the pedagogical quality of PE teachers, and especially students’ learning (Armour, 2009; Armour & Yelling, 2004; O'Sullivan & Deglau, 2006). This literature also summarizes characteristics that have shown to play a critical role in (un)successful PE-CPD programmes. Concurrently, from an effectiveness standpoint, PE-CPD needs to consider crucial outcomes as positive changes on the professional organisation, the classroom environment and students’ learning (Armour & Yelling; Bechtel & O’Sullivan, 2006). However, and unfortunately, literature also demonstrates the short comes of research in addressing these effectiveness indicators and ultimately in advancing the field in a sustainable fashion.

The emerging picture indicates that the theoretical field needs to come together in engaging on a collective and collaborative reflection on why, what and how to change practice, thus (re)constructing itself upon a process of developmental science (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006). Therefore, we need to identify, describe, and understand field-based “best practices” of groups of teachers that continuously and intrinsically learn together and effectively increase their students’ learning through critical pedagogical and organisational changes. Through such a discovery oriented process, we could build substantive theory, subject to be verified, on how it looks and what it means to be a successful group of PE professionals either outside or inside the school. This argument converges with some authors’ takes regarding practice-based theoretical models that provide study models of collective social learning and organizations (Armour & Yelling, 2004; O'Sullivan, 2007; Tozer & Horsley, 2006), namely Communities of Practice (Wenger, 1998) and Professional Learning Communities (PLC) (Hord, 2008), as promising paths to develop PE-CPD. From a developmental science perspective, this theoretical dynamic between discovery and verification (Bronfenbrenner & Morris), with less known but promising impacts, would surely amplify our understanding not only of PE-CPD programmes but also of its investigation.

Our research (Costa, Onofre, & Martins M., 2011, 2012; Costa, Onofre, Martins M., Marques, & Martins J., 2013), being conducted in the discovery mode, seeks to contribute to the scientific advance of PE-CPD research as it has been using the PLC model to identify, describe and understand the collaborative dynamics of effective PE subject departments (PESD). Hord (2008) underlines the PLC as a specific collaborative work model in the school teaching context that promotes students’ success grounded on teachers’ school-based CPD through five dimensions: shared beliefs, values and vision; shared and supportive leadership; intentional collective learning and its application; shared personal practice; and supportive conditions from a relational and logistic perspective. Tozer and Horsley (2006) comment on the importance of this model for PE teachers, since it emerges as a key-element to change pedagogical practices to promote students’ success, despite contextual differences between schools.

This paper summarizes results and conclusions from our studies to reveal how successful PESDs operate as PLCs, in Portugal. It is our belief and hope that these “best practices” field-cases feed the debate on why, how and what needs to be changed in PE-CPD programmes and research.

Method

This study intends to provide an evolving evidence-based model and launch some theoretical propositions for verification mode science regarding PE-CPD, by combining data and results from the first author’s doctoral investigation. For the underlying research, critical cases (Yin, 2010) were selected to be analysed, after assuring ethical cares of participation. Expert PE teachers indicated a list of high-school’s PESDs as good examples of collaborative work. During the school years of 2010/11 and 2011/12 a total of three PESD were followed. A questionnaire, concerning the department’s professional staff as PLC, was applied to all teachers from the three departments during the first or second terms of the school years during which each department was studied. Qualitative data on the departments’ collaborative work was systematically collected through field-notes over daily collective interactions and classroom environments, one interview with each coordinator, and document analysis. An integrated case study mixed-method approach was adopted. Taking an interpretive perspective, the quantitative data was analysed with resource to SPSS v.20 and the qualitative with MAXqda v.10. Validity was assured through triangulation of methods and sources (Yin).

Expected Outcomes

Each department collectively assessed its dynamic as a PLC, revealing different collaborative profiles, but mainly common patterns regarding their successes and challenges where time is crucial. Shared beliefs, values and vision, a highly appreciated dimension, flows from a collective discussion on the PE syllabus methodological guidelines, and converges on an operational idea of subject area and students’ success, where learning results inform, and derive from, the collaborative analysis and decision-making processes. Shared and supportive leadership, another greatly appreciated dimension, underlines the coordinators as central strategists for the collective decision-making, the departments’ dynamics, and the PE role and status within their schools. Intentional collective learning and its application is highly consistent and rests on discussion practices with diverse natures of formality/informality or plenary/small-group, arising from classroom pedagogical practices and standardized processes of collecting evidence on students’ learning. Shared personal practice consistently emerged as a critical collaborative challenge, yet still being valued and engaged by joint-teaching and feedback on classroom practices and students’ success mainly: through the coordinators, through highly reputed and respected peers as informal leaders, and from standardized processes of collecting and discussing evidence on students’ learning. The social relations were more prevalent as supportive conditions considering that a “hard-core” of peers (those informal leaders) consistently emerged as simultaneously promoting and inhibiting further initiatives from more recent colleagues. Material, spatial and time resources were addressed mainly as a process of acquiring the logistic supportive conditions that sustain the collaborative work and students’ learning. Altogether, these results provide the basis for an open model of how PE teachers work as a PLC within their departments, with measures/characteristics of authentic professional and pedagogical success, providing information and some propositions for PE-CPD programmes and research.

References

Armour, K. (2009). AIESEP position statement on PE-CPD. Retrieved from http://www.aiesep.ulg.ac.be/pages/future_event.php Armour, K., & Yelling, M. (2004). Continuing professional development for experienced physical education teachers: Towards effective provision. Sport, Education and Society, 9(1), 95-114. Bechtel, P., & O'Sullivan, M. (2006). Chapter 2: Effective professional development - What we now know. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 25(4), 363-378. Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In W. Damon & R. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol.1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 793-828). New York: John Wiley. Costa, J., Onofre, M., & Martins, M. (2011). Thinking and practice of teachers from PE departments with different dynamics: The importance and implementation of the students’ social agenda. In: MacPhail, A., O'Sullivan, M. & Tannehill, D. (eds.) AIESEP 2011 International Conference. University of Limerick, Ireland. 23. Costa, J., Onofre, M., & Martins, M. (2012). Classroom ecology supported by the Physical Education subject department’s collective work. Paper presented at ECER 2012. Universidad de Cádiz, Spain. Costa, J., Onofre, M., Martins, M., Marques, A., & Martins, J. (2013). A relação do trabalho coletivo do grupo de educação física com a gestão da ecologia da aula. Boletim SPEF, 37, 61-80. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2013. Physical Education and Sport at School in Europe. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. DOI:10.2797/49648 Hord, S. (2008). Evolution of the professional learning community. Journal of Staff Development, 29(3), 10-13. O'Sullivan, M. (2007). Creating and sustaining communities of practice among physical education professionals. Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 40(1), 10-13. O'Sullivan, M., & Deglau, D. (2006). Chapter 7: Principles of professional development. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 25(4), 441-449. Tozer, S., & Horsley, H. (2006). Chapter 8: Professional development of teachers in physical education - Where are we now? Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 25(4), 450-457. UNESCO. (2013). Declaration of Berlin - MINEPS V. Berlin: Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002211/221114e.pdf Wenger, E. (1998, February/26/2000). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system Retrieved November, 2010, from http://www.co-i-l.com/coil/knowledge-garden/cop/lss.shtml Yin, R. (2010). Estudo de caso - Planejamento e métodos (A. Thorell, Trans. 4ª ed.). Porto Alegre: Bookman.

Author Information

Joao Costa (presenting / submitting)

Faculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon

Education, Social Sciences and Humanities

Rio de Mouro

Marcos Onofre

Faculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon, Portugal

Maria Martins