The splintering of school physical education (PE) and teacher education in the field – including both initial teacher education and continuous professional development (CPD) – has led to a fragmented approach in addressing challenges within the field (Tinning, 2015). This siloed and fragmented nature has led scholars to identify a series of “grand challenges” – critical issues evident across international contexts in both PE and teacher education (MacPhail and Lawson, 2021). One such challenge involves articulating clear and consistent aims and outcomes for PE. These are essential for justifying and advocating for PE, determining why, what and how of students learning, and fostering equitable and inclusive learning experiences. Another pressing challenge is the lack of coherence and alignment between school PE and teacher education. For example, a disconnect often exists between the content taught in schools and what is emphasized in teacher education programs (Harris et al., 2021).

Such fragmentation and resulting challenges have hindered progress in the field, prompting calls for a collaborative redesign of school PE and teacher education (Beddoes & Jones, 2022; MacPhail & Lawson, 2021). On a broader scale, MacPhail and Lawson (2021) argue for cross-national collaborations that enable international comparative analyses and the development of innovative approaches and professional learning. This highlights the urgent need for large-scale international, cross-border collaborative research projects to address these challenges (MacPhail & Lawson, 2021).

Moreover, while studies on pedagogies and “signature pedagogies” of teacher education – defined as characteristic forms of teaching that are consistently applied across teacher education contexts (Hordvik & Beni, 2024; Parker et al., 2016; Shulman, 2005) – have provided valuable insights, their limited scope highlights the need for enhanced research designs, robust methodologies, and clear analytical frameworks. Such advancements are essential to scale up research on signature pedagogies in the field of PE. Consequently, there is a pressing need to undertake large-scale, cross-border international projects aimed at understanding the development and implementation of signature pedagogies across PE teacher education contexts.

In response to this need, we present the design and methodology of an international project rooted in cross-border collaboration. This initiative engaged 35 teacher educators, 43 in-service teachers, and, to some extent, pre-service teachers, with the primary aim of promoting sustainable national and international collaboration between school PE and teacher education. This presentation has two specific purposes. First, we outline a design for cross-national collaborative research between school PE and teacher education, emphasizing the development and use of signature pedagogies across educational contexts. Second, we illustrate this methodological approach, detailing the methods used to explore signature pedagogies. This contributes valuable insights to the field regarding cross-national studies on collective action and the exploration of signature pedagogies.

The project is grounded in a relational ontological and epistemological stance, recognizing the interplay of human, material, and cultural elements in co-constructing practices and knowledge (Slife, 2004). The project’s theoretical foundation is rooted in sociocultural learning theories, particularly Lave and Wenger’s (1991) situated learning theory. This framework emphasizes the co-construction of knowledge and the significance of social and cultural contexts in shaping teaching and learning processes and outcomes. Participants engaged in professional learning within the context of “legitimate peripheral participation” in communities of practice (CoPs) (Lave & Wenger, 1991). This involved meaningful, authentic tasks where participants’ contributions were essential to the community’s success (legitimate). The objective was to enable participants to progress toward full participation in the community (peripheral), with knowledge acquired through active interaction (participation).

In identifying the grand challenges facing PE, MacPhail and Lawson (2021) call for the bold redesign of school PE and teacher education through strategic innovation within a collective action project. While collective action initiatives may vary in terms of size, scope and purpose, it is imperative that they begin with a timely agenda around a common purpose and include people, organizations and cross-sector partnerships (Lawson et al., 2021). The methodology of this project revolves around a collective action, designed using signature pedagogies for professional learning (Beni & Hordvik, 2024). This approach integrates practitioner inquiry (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009) with CoPs (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015). Specifically, three collective initiatives were developed. Collective action one: Exploring signature pedagogies in an international collaboration between school PE and teacher education Participants: 43 in-service teachers, 35 teacher educators, and 17 pre-service teachers (PSTs) from seven project countries. Activities: Teachers engaged in both online and in-person activities, including five transnational physical meetings in partner countries and regular online discussions. Activities centered on sharing insights, discussing signature pedagogies, and participating in workshops (practical, theoretical, and hybrid). Data Collection: Data included the collection of artifacts, audio recordings of meetings, non-participant observations of workshops, and focus group interviews.' Collective action two: Exploring signature pedagogies across international PE initial teacher education programs Participants: 14 teacher educators and their local critical friends, and the PSTs they taught. Activities: Two teacher educators from each of the seven partner nations explored one or more signature pedagogies within their practice in at least one module/course. They also participated in small, online, international CoPs, collaborating regularly with teacher educators from the other partner countries. Data Collection: Teacher educator reflective diaries, non-participant observations of their practices, focus group interviews with PSTs, and audio recordings of the international CoP meetings. Collective action three: Exploring signature pedagogies across international continuous professional development for in-service teachers Participants: 14 teacher educators, 43 in-service teachers and the students they taught. Activities: Six local CoPs were established, each comprising 4-6 in-service teachers and teacher educators in each participating country. These CoPs were tasked to: (i) Developing innovative PE content for in-service teachers to implement in their teaching. (ii) Exploring how in-service teachers adopted and applied signature pedagogies in their teaching practices. Data Collection: Audio recordings of workshops and online meetings, non-participant observations, reflective diaries, artifacts such as lesson plans and vision documents, and focus groups with students.

In this presentation, rather than presenting the results of the project’s processes and outcomes, we focus on illustrating the functioning of the collective actions, their connections to the individuals involved, and how the data generated can inform our claims about signature pedagogies. To enhance audience understanding and ensure coherence, we spotlight one project member—a teacher educator from Sweden. We detail his involvement in the collective action and explain how insights about his use and development of signature pedagogies were generated through multiple methods. The results are presented through two main illustrations. First, we demonstrate the functioning and interplay of collective actions one, two, and three, showing how the Swedish teacher educator’s individual exploration of signature pedagogies influenced and was influenced by discussions in the small CoP (i.e., action two). These discussions, in turn, shaped the content and sparked further reflections and debates within the large CoP (i.e., action one). Second, we illustrate how various data collection methods can be integrated to provide diverse key insights into the use of signature pedagogies. This methodological illustration shows how different approaches offer unique perspectives into the structures and application of signature pedagogies in initial teacher education. In conclusion, we advocate for a robust design and methodology to conduct large-scale, cross-border international collective action projects involving teacher educators, in-service teachers, and PSTs from diverse PE teacher education contexts. Specifically, we outline such a project and illustrate our research design with empirical examples. These examples demonstrate how the various types of data generated over time can deepen our understanding of signature pedagogies in teacher education. By emphasizing the importance of robust methodologies, clear analytical frameworks, and structured procedures, we suggest these elements are critical for scaling up studies and facilitating the development and application of signature pedagogies within the field.

Beddoes Z and Jones E (2022) Enhancing collective action in physical education teacher education: A three-pathways approach Quest, 74(3): 251-265. Cochran-Smith M and Lytle SL (2009) Teacher research as stance. In: Somekh B and Noffke SE (eds) The Sage Handbook of Educational Action Research. London, UK: Sage, 39-49. Hordvik M and Beni S (2024). Signature pedagogies of teacher education in physical education: a scoping review. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 1-17. Lave J and Wenger E (eds) (1991) Situated learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation in Communities of Practice. Cambridge University Press. MacPhail A and Lawson HA (eds) (2021) School Physical Education and Teacher Education. London: Routledge. Shulman LS (2005) Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus 134(3): 52-59. Tinning R (2015) Commentary on research into learning in physical education: Towards a mature field of knowledge. Sport, Education and Society 20(5): 676–690. Wenger-Trayner E and Wenger-Trayner B (2015) Introduction to communities of practice: A brief overview of the concept and its uses. Accessed June 2024 https://www.wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/