When considering the overarching educational policy landscape in Scottish physical education, the two main documents that influence teaching and learning are the Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) (Scottish Government, 2009) and Benchmark physical education (BPE) document (Education Scotland, 2017). Despite claim of a central focus of health and wellbeing (HWB) within physical education curriculum documents, many schools do not have this focus on HWB and HWB often gets marginalised in practical settings (Thorburn et al., 2009; Thorburn et al., 2011). Thorburn and colleagues (2009) point out, for example, that there is a recognized problem with the policy-driven process because of this notable difference in government documents and the actual practices happening in schools. Furthermore, teachers are required to read, interpret and enact curriculum policies across a wide variety of teaching contexts (Penney, 2006). Given this, teachers have been conceptualised as policy actors (Alfrey et al., 2017) who go through a process of making sense of policy documents. Through this process, teachers may have different interpretations of the CfE and BPE document. Therefore, it is important to explore how teachers shape their classrooms based on curriculum policy documents. As some scholars have noted, in the classroom, teachers' beliefs may not align with those with the official curriculum (Hay & Macdonald, 2010), and their actions may not be as "progressive" as they are in the documents (Evans & Penney, 2008, p.32). Therefore, this research aims to gain insight into how physical education teachers and teacher educators in Scotland engage with, the curriculum policy, and physical education benchmarks.

Research Questions:

 1.How do PE teachers and teachers educators understand with Curriculum for Excellence and the Benchmarks for Physical Education?

2.What challenges do PE teachers and teacher educators face in using the Benchmarks?

Critical Theory as a lens in this research

Critical theory, as an approach is based on the assumption that knowledge is a social construct (Bain, 1989). This lens is particularly relevant in the field of physical education, which is a discipline that is shaped by social and cultural constructs (Kirk, 2010).  In this study, critical theory is used as a lens to examine physical education teachers' interpretations and understanding of curriculum policies in the Scottish context, specifically the curriculum for excellence.  

Kirk (2006) points out the fundamental features of critical pedagogy in physical education, which is primarily concerned with education for social transformation. He emphasizes critical pedagogy as cantered on achieving social change through education, revealing the complexity of society and resisting indoctrination as well as the imposition of simplistic and “quick-fix solutions” (p. 257). Therefore, this study attempts to explore issues of current curriculum policy, as well as teachers' positions, perspectives, through critical theory. Teachers, as intellectuals, work groups, and actors of curriculum, I support Kirk (1986) advocates that teachers are potential agents of social reproduction or emancipatory change.

Critical theory provides a useful framework for examining physical education teachers' and teacher educators engagement with curriculum policy in the Scottish context. By analysing the underlying power dynamics and social constructs that influence teachers' and teachers educators understandings and values, physical education teachers' perspectives on curriculum for excellence and benchmarking policies are uncovered. The lens of critical theory allows for an in-depth and wide-ranging analysis of the issues and factors affecting physical education in Scotland. This research has the potential to contribute to the development of transformative curriculum policy and practice.

This research takes a qualitative approaches to address research questions. Currently, this research project is in the data collection process---through individual interviews with physical education teachers and teacher educators Individual interviews The research question aims to explore how physical education teachers and teacher educators understand with CfE and BPE policies and what challenges face in using physical education benchmarks. In this phase, 10 participants took part in individual interviews to discuss their understandings and perspectives of the CfE and BPE document. Individual interviews could be an effective approach to understanding the participants’ perspectives, experiences and real thoughts (Cohen et al., 2018; Maxwell, 2012). By engaging in one-on-one conversations, researchers can obtain in-depth insights and capture the nuances of each participant's understanding and experiences related to the CfE and BPE document.The individual interviews will be semi-structured, as it provides a middle ground between the unstructured and highly structured, allowing participants some freedom to describe their concerns while allowing researchers to ask crucial research questions (Liamputtong, 2019). The semi-structured nature of the interviews fosters an open dialogue where participants can freely describe their thoughts and experiences, facilitating a deeper exploration of their perspectives. Therefore, the individual interviews serve as a valuable means to uncover the participants' perspectives, experiences, and thoughts, contributing to a richer understanding of how physical education teachers and teacher educators navigate the CfE and BPE policies and address the challenges they encounter in utilizing physical education benchmarks.

The expected findings of the research project exploring how physical education teachers and teacher educators understand and face challenges with the Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) and Benchmarks for Physical Education (BPE) policies may vary depending on the specific context and participants involved. However, here are some potential findings that could emerge from the individual interviews: The research may reveal that physical education teachers and teacher educators have diverse interpretations of the CfE and BPE policies. Some teachers may struggle to understand the value and relevance of these curriculum policies. The individual interviews may reveal areas where physical education teachers and teacher educators require further professional development or support to effectively implement the CfE and BPE policies. This could include additional training on interpreting benchmarks, instructional strategies and assessment methods. The findings could highlight the challenges faced by educators when using physical education benchmarks. These challenges may include limited resources, time constraints, conflicting priorities, and difficulties in assessing and measuring student progress according to the benchmarks. The expected results of this study include a better understanding of physical education teachers' perspectives on the Curriculum for Excellence and Benchmark policies. Through the lens of Critical Theory, this study aims to provide a deep and broad analysis of the factors that influence physical education in Scotland. By engaging in reciprocal conversations between a physical education teacher and a researcher, this study has the potential to uncover the complexities and nuances of teachers' and teacher educators' positions and perspectives. By amplifying teachers' and teacher educators' voices, this study will provide policy makers with recommendations for future improvements to the CfE and BPE documents.

Alfrey, L., O'Connor, J., & Jeanes, R. (2017). Teachers as policy actors: Co-creating and enacting critical inquiry in secondary health and physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 22(2), 107-120. Education Scotland. (2017). Benchmarks Physical Education. March 2017. https://education.gov.scot/improvement/Documents/HWBPhysicalEducationBenchmarksPDF.pd Evans, J., & Penney, D. (2008). Levels on the playing field: The social construction of physical ‘ability’ in the physical education curriculum. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 13(1), 31-47. Hay, P. J., & Macdonald, D. (2010). Evidence for the social construction of ability in physical education. Sport, education and society, 15(1), 1-18. Kirk, D. (2012). Defining physical education: The social construction of a school subject in Postwar Britain. Routledge. Paraskeva, J. (2021). ‘The Nature of Conflict’ In Paraskeva (Ed.) Conflicts in curriculum theory: Challenging hegemonic epistemologies / [internet resource] (Second ed., Education, politics, and public life), pp. 1-15. Penney, D. (2006). Curriculum construction and change. In D. Kirk, D. Macdonald, & M. O'Sullivan Handbook of physical education (pp. 565-579). SAGE Publications Ltd, https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848608009.n31 Schwandt, T. A. (2007). Dictionary of Qualitative Inquiry. In The SAGE Dictionary of Qualitative Inquiry (3rd ed.) Scottish Government. (2009). Curriculum for excellence: Building the curriculum 4: Skills for learning, skills for life and skills for work. https://www.education.gov.scot/Documents/btc4.pdf Thorburn, M., Jess, M., & Atencio, M. (2009). Connecting policy aspirations with principled progress? An analysis of current physical education challenges in Scotland. Irish Educational Studies, 28(2), 209-223. Thorburn, M., Carse, N., Jess, M., & Atencio, M. (2011). Translating change into improved practice: Analysis of teachers' attempts to generate a new emerging pedagogy in Scotland. European Physical Education Review, 17(3), 313-324.