Background

Literacy focuses on linguistic and communicative abilities, and disciplinary literacy revolves around the specific literacy in a specific school subject. Disciplinary literacy is about a person’s knowledge and use of many different representational forms to communicate learning, express and challenge ideas (Moje, 2008, pp.97, 99). Different school subjects have different traditions of communications and use of language. The subject-specific literacy must be strengthened in physical education (PE) (Lundin & Schenker, 2022, p.77), a subject that is often organized around the idea of the pupils being active and trying different movement activities (Larsson & Nyberg, 2017). However, there is a resistance among teachers regarding teaching literacy (Moje, 2008, p.98) because they consider it hard to fit into an already full agenda of instruction (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2012, pp.14-15). PE teaching is described as an act of control, where the pupils are expected to follow rules, listen, and do as they are told (Fitzpatrick & Russell, 2015). However, if students get to talk about the meanings of words and use the new words when communicating themselves, they can expand vocabulary and deepen their understanding (Schmidt & Wedin, 2017, pp.3-4). When the involvement of movement is combined with learning language, a bodily experience and a sensation of the language is offered that makes it easier to memorize the knowledge (Chan, 2018). Also, being able to show knowledge in different ways is important (Schmidt & Wedin, 2017, pp.1-2). Through circus, children can challenge themselves based on their ability because circus contains a wide variety of progressions for many movements (Kriellaars et al., 2019). Also, unlike the traditional content of PE, there are an embedded potential in circus arts regarding telling a story and conveying a message.

Aim

The purpose of this workshop is to explore and discuss how to develop and involve the disciplinary literacy in PE and stimulate pupils’ use of verbal language. The focused activities are exploratory circus assignments and the following research questions are addressed:

• How can pupils’ use of verbal language be stimulated in PE?
• What are the participants’ experiences of PE lessons focusing on disciplinary literacy and the involvement of language?
• How can exploratory circus assignments facilitate disciplinary literacy in PE?

The embodiment of words is investigated, where the body functions as a tool to learn, teach, experience, and express yourself. Visual and tactile supports are used. In the workshop, the participants get to see and try out examples of how the use of verbal language can be encouraged and how the disciplinary literacy can be integrated with movement, focusing on exploratory circus assignments.

The theoretical framework

The theoretical concept of Biesta (2014) is used: risk and subjectification. According to Biesta, education always needs to involve a risk – the not knowing of outcome in advance. If there is no risk in education, there is just reproduction and transforming of information from one to another. Also, Biesta means that education is about communication that happens through a two-way dialogical process, between teacher and student. It is about the exchange of meaning. Participants in teaching must be seen as subjects and not objects (Biesta, 2014, p.18). Students are subjects of action and responsibility. Regarding subjectivity and uniqueness, Biesta means that we need each other to be able to articulate that we are different from each other. We are irreplaceable in our responsibility for each other (Biesta, 2014, p.144). During the workshop, the theory will be interwoven in the practical exploratory circus assignments as we try to understand what happens when literacy is focused and how it can steer teaching and learning processes in certain directions. 

Methodology and methods The workshop is based on experiences and results from a study that involved 20 ten-year-old multilingual pupils in Sweden, their PE teacher, and a research teacher. 10 PE lessons were carried out, in which the disciplinary literacy and the use of verbal language was emphasized and intertwined with exploratory circus assignments. The methodology is action research, which has a practice-based approach, and the aim is to investigate and change rather than reproducing (Wood & McAteer, 2017, p.255). It strives to be close to practice (Fulton & Costley, 2019, p.77). Critical reflection regarding the practice is central and involves a problematizing approach that brings questions and searches for alternative perspectives (McAteer, 2014). Action research builds upon four recurring steps in the research process: plan, act, observe, and reflect. This cyclic action research spiral is described and pictured by, for example, Kemmis et al. (2014). Data was collected through field diary, participant observation, video observation, and interviews. In the field diary, the research teacher documented all phases of the study and collected descriptions, interpretations, and reflections (McAteer, 2013). Reflection can be understood as learning from experience, which is a form of learning from practice (Fook, 2019, p.69). Ottesen's (2013, p.112) observation guide was used, with the following points of attention: the participants, the activities, the room, and the relationships. The video recordings helped to capture different aspects, and thanks to repeated viewing, it was possible to get close to different situations and analyze persons’ behavior in context (Öhman & Quennerstedt, 2012). Through interviews a researcher can get to know people’s subjective experiences and attitudes (Peräkylä & Ruusuvuori, 2018, p.669). Semi-structured interviews with the PE teacher and semi-structured group interviews with the children were conducted and audio recorded. The analysis is performed in a cyclical process and started already during the participant observations, interviews, and the reviewing of the video recordings. The data analysis is abductive, which means an oscillating between induction and deduction: moving backwards and forwards between the theory and the data. The analysis is based on the research questions (Öhman & Quennerstedt, 2012) and Biesta’s (2014) concept of risk and subjectification.

The tentative results from the study show that there are many opportunities and different ways of involving the disciplinary literacy in PE teaching. However, because of habits and expectations of how the PE subject is often organized, challenges occurred. Time turned out to be both a prerequisite and an obstacle when working with disciplinary literacy and emphasizing the use of verbal language in PE. Emphasizing disciplinary literacy and the use of verbal communication in PE lessons, carried many potential opportunities. However, the invitation of pupils to speak raised awareness regarding what they said and how it could be interpreted. Also, the results show that there are challenges to reach all pupils – but these barriers can be bridged.

Biesta, G. (2014). The beautiful risk of education. Paradigm Publishers. Chan, M. J. (2018). Embodied Pronunciation Learning: Research and Practice. CATESOL Journal, 30, 47-68. Fitzpatrick, K., & Russell, D. (2015). On being critical in health and physical education. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 20(2), 159-173. Fook, J. (2019). Reflective models and frameworks in practice. In Costley, C. & Fulton, J (Eds.), Methodologies for practice research: approaches for professional doctorates. London: SAGE Publications Ltd:57-76. Fulton, J. & Costley, C. (2019). Ethics. In Costley, Carol & Fulton, John (Eds.), Methodologies for practice research: approaches for professional doctorates. London: SAGE Publications Ltd: 77-91. Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action research planner : doing critical participatory action research. Springer Singapore. Kriellaars, D. J., Cairney, J., Bortoleto, M. A. C., Kiez, T. K. M., Dudley, D., & Aubertin, P. (2019). The Impact of Circus Arts Instruction in Physical Education on the Physical Literacy of Children in Grades 4 and 5. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 38, 162-170. Larsson, H., & Nyberg, G. (2017). ‘It doesn't matter how they move really, as long as they move.’ Physical education teachers on developing their students’ movement capabilities. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 22(2), 137-149. Lundin, K., & Schenker, K. (2022). Subject-specific literacy in Physical Education and Health - the case of Sweden. Curriculum Studies in Health and Physical Education, 13(1), 62-82. McAteer, M. (2013). Action research in education. SAGE. Moje, E. B. (2008). Foregrounding the Disciplines in Secondary Literacy Teaching and Learning: A Call for Change. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(2), 96-107. Ottesen, L. S. (2013). Observationsstudier i idrætsfeltet. In L. F. Thing & L. S. Ottesen (Eds.), Metoder i idrætsforskning (pp. 106-122). Munksgaard. Peräkylä, A. & Ruusuvuori, J. (2018). Analysing talk and texts. In Denzin, Norman K. & Loncoln, Yvonna S. (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Fifth edition. Los Angeles: SAGE: 669-691. Schmidt, C., & Wedin, Å. (2017). Språkutvecklande undervisning. 1, 1-9. Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What Is Disciplinary Literacy and Why Does It Matter? Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7-18. Wood, L., & McAteer, M. (2017). Levelling the Playing Fields in PAR: The Intricacies of Power, Privilege, and Participation in a University–Community–School Partnership. Adult Education Quarterly, 67, 251-265. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713617706541 Öhman, M., & Quennerstedt, M. (2012). Observational studies. In K. M. Armour & D. MacDonald (Eds.), Research methods in physical education and youth sport. Routledge.