|
QUALITY
PHYSICAL EDUCATION VERSUS MERE PHYSICAL
ACTIVITY 
by Glenna
DeJong, Ph.D., Vice President of
Educational Programs, and Lorin
Sheppard, Ph.D., Director of Curriculum
and Instruction, Michigan Fitness Foundation
Quality physical education programs
do much more than keep kids active.
While physical activity (PA)
is a behavior that is important to a
healthy lifestyle, physical education
(PE) is a curricular area that promotes
development of the knowledge, skills,
fitness levels, and attitudes needed
to lead physically active, and therefore
healthy lives, both now and in the future.
The National Association for Sport and
Physical Education (NASPE) has published
Content Standards for Physical Education
(NASPE, 2004) in which physical activity,
per se, comprises 17% (1 of 6 standards)
of the content deemed important to quality
PE programs. The other five content
standards collectively and importantly
contribute to forming the physically
educated person who is competent and
confident to be physically active outside
of a PE class.
Just as a set of worksheets would not
be considered a quality math curriculum,
a set of activities that gets students
up and moving should not be considered
a quality physical education curriculum.
Having students play games may be enjoyable
for students and easier for teachers
than implementing a true standard-based
curriculum, but this is akin to allowing
students to play Yahtzee, and assuming
that lack of instruction and feedback
by the teacher will nonetheless result
in learning that meets state and national
math standards.
Replacing PE curricula with PA programs
may help students accumulate minutes
of moderate to vigorous physical activity
during the school day; however, PA programs
during school hours have not been shown
to increase students’ willingness
to be active outside of school. In addition,
replacing PE with PA may increase the
disparity between proficient students
and novices by providing proficient
students with additional practice, while
novices struggle to perform skills they
may never have been taught and may not
be able to perform correctly, if at
all. In contrast, a true PE curriculum
provides support for students at all
levels to learn, and gives them the
tools they need in order to participate
competently in a wide variety of activities,
increasing their self-efficacy and enhancing
their motivation to participate in physical
activities on their own. This in turn
increases overall fitness levels and
reduces the risk of diseases related
to sedentary lifestyles.
 The
Physical
Education Curriculum Analysis Tool
(PECAT)†, developed by the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
(2006), outlines the four major components
of a quality physical education program:
policies and environment, curriculum,
instruction, and student assessment.
Of these components, the curriculum
is the cornerstone of an effective program.
It underscores the importance of policies
and environment, provides the content
that is the basis for formal instruction,
and delineates the outcomes on which
students will be assessed.
See the NASPE website (www.aahperd.org/naspe)
for information on their published documents
that further define these areas specific
to physical education:
• Policies and Environment –
Opportunity to Learn Standards
• Curriculum – Moving into
the Future: National Standards for Physical
Education
• Instruction – Appropriate
Practices
• Student Assessment – Assessment
Series
THE EXEMPLARY PHYSICAL EDUCATION
CURRICULUM (EPEC)
 In
response to the need for a quality,
standards-based physical education program,
the Michigan
Fitness Foundation developed the
Exemplary
Physical Education Curriculum. EPEC
is described by CDC as an innovative
physical education curriculum with solid
scientific grounding that equips students
to be active for life (US
DHHS, 2001). Unlike other curricula,
EPEC shifts the emphasis of PE away
from merely keeping children busy, happy,
and good, and instead teaches “toward
specific, highly valued objectives in
a systematic way to create lasting change”
(US DHHS, 2001).
EPEC was developed based on the components
of a quality physical education program
model and the national content standards
for PE. In 2002, the CDC also recognized
EPEC as a successful public-health initiative
with the Award for Excellence in
Prevention Research and Research Translation
in Chronic Disease.
The multiple components and subcomponents
of EPEC interrelate to form a highly
effective educational delivery system
(see Figure 2). The EPEC curriculum
is delineated in a minute matrix (i.e.,
what is taught, where it is taught,
and how long it is taught at each grade
level) and scope and sequence matrices
(i.e., the specific details of what
is taught in each lesson). The Teaching/Learning
Progressions (TLPs) provide detailed
descriptions of each of the developmentally
appropriate, sequential learning steps
of an objective. The assessment rubrics
condense each TLP step into the essential
assessment criteria. These criteria
and cue words/phrases are used in the
instructional segments as the basis
for the explanation and demonstration.
Accompanying posters are constructed
from the assessment rubrics so students
know exactly what is expected of them.
Reinforcing activities add fun ideas
to bolster learning on each TLP.
 Ultimately,
education must be about student gains,
and the implementation of EPEC has yielded
impressive results in students across
a variety of PE outcomes. In a multi-level
study, Kulinna, et al., used a hierarchical
linear modeling technique to find that
EPEC-taught students showed dramatic
gains in health-oriented outcomes, concluding
in support of “the effectiveness
of EPEC in increasing students’
physical fitness, motor skill development
(i.e. overhand throw), and personal/social
behaviors” (Kulinna
et al., 2006).
Other studies and organizations, including
the CDC, have also noted EPEC’s
positive influence on student fitness
(DeJong, 2001;
US DHHS, 2001), and have isolated
EPEC as one of the leading factors.
For example, in comparing EPEC versus
non-EPEC PE programs, “students
taught by [EPEC] had significantly higher
fitness scores” (Kulinna
et al., 2000).
EPEC’s effectiveness was further
demonstrated in a PEP grant study where
a diverse sampling of Detroit schools
monitored fitness and physical activity
levels using pedometers and web-based
software. The results far exceeded projections
with students’ cardiorespiratory
endurance scores increasing by 41% and
their physical activity levels (in and
out of school) increasing by 25% (McCaughtry,
2005).
The goal of EPEC, however, is not simply
to increase physical activity and fitness,
but also to teach. For a PE program
to positively influence students not
only in the present, but also throughout
life, it must equip them with the skills,
knowledge, and attitudes to be physically
active beyond the classroom.
Amidst the mostly minority population
(80%) involved in the Detroit PEP grant
study, students’ knowledge of
fitness and physical activity increased
(Kulinna et al,
2005), and self-efficacy for
a variety of health-oriented outcomes
increased not only among students (Martin
et al, 2005), but also among
teachers (McCaughtry,
2005). Other studies have indicated
that implementation of EPEC has positive
effects beyond increased physical activity
and fitness, suggesting that “EPEC
was more effective than alternate PE
curricula at increasing motor skill
specific self-efficacy, improving motor
skill performance, and increasing self-reported
levels of physical activity” (Russell
et al., 2006).
Summary
Now more than ever, our children and
youth need access to quality physical
education programs. Such programs provide
students with the opportunity to learn
and are based on sound curriculum, instruction,
and assessment. They do much more than
keep kids active by having them skip
and throw; they actually teach students
to skip and throw while being physically
active, thus preparing them for future
activity. EPEC was developed with these
principles in mind. For more information
and to download sample materials, visit
www.EPEC4kids.com.
references
† The PECAT is available for free
online (www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/pecat/)
and is an excellent resource for evaluating
PE curricula for both comprehensiveness
and usability.
|
