The second data set was collected at the conclusion of the curriculum studies topic foregrounding the construction of sport curriculum within physical education and pedagogy for sport teaching. The topic had introduced the theory and pragmatic elements of a sport literacy framework for sport teaching within physical education. 43 PETE-PS teachers completed the second survey. Demographic data relevant to this sample is presented in Table 6.
Table 6.
Demographic Data: Post Instruction Survey ofPETE-PS Teachers.
Gender Male Female
23 20
Age 20-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 >40
39 3 1 - -
Data Analysis
A word frequency analysis was initially conducted to establish preliminary coding (Table 7). These codes were used to analyse the qualitative data so that themes could begin to be generated. Once themes were established a cross- question analysis was performed to further drill down the themes and to identify points of differentiation in the responses.
127 Table 7.
Word frequency coding of post topic survey data
Nine themes were generated from the PETE-PS teacher‘s reflections of their experiences learning to play, learning to plan and enact sport teaching through a sports literacy framework. The themes were:
1. Teacher use of questioning as a pedagogical instrument and planning feature is a positive strategy for sport teaching within physical education; 2. A tactical emphasis delivered through guided inquiry has not previously
been part of their sport teaching apprenticeship of observation;
3. Inexperience in a sport, or lack of exposure (both theoretical and applied), to a tactical emphasis across a range of sports is a constraint upon the planning and enactment of a sport literacy approach;
4. Designing sport curriculum with a tactical emphasis is challenging; 5. A sport literacy approach is more inclusive and engaging of less able or
athletic students, but there are concerns about less time being spent on movement skill development through drills;
6. A sport literacy approach provides an expanded sport knowledge base from which to design and enact sport curriculum within physical education.
128
7. Designing sport curriculum with a tactical emphasis requires a different ‗mind set‘ of the physical education teacher;
8. A sport literacy approach places more emphasis on student engagement through empowerment and inclusion; and
9. It is difficult to shift PETE-PS teachers‘ mental construct of skill teaching from textbook techniques/sport specific movement skills to a ‗game sense‘ understanding of skill.
The themes are summarised in more detail in Appendix 8. The results indicated, however, that the foregrounding of student knowledge formation through the teacher use of questioning as a pedagogical instrument and planning feature was seen to be a positive strategy for sport teaching within physical education. It was viewed as assisting students and teachers make more sense of sport performance by encouraging breadth and depth of thinking in order to promote knowledge
formation. A tactical emphasis delivered through guided inquiry had, in the main, not previously been part of the PETE-PS teachers sport teaching apprenticeship of observation. The data indicated that sport literacy was not a feature of the PETE-PS teacher‘s biography of engagement in physical education. The majority of
respondents (70%) had not observed or experienced features of SE and TGfU in physical education. Using the tactical features of sport to focus lesson planning and delivery was regarded as a departure from the normative practice of physical
education.
Inexperience in a sport, or lack of exposure (both theoretical and applied) to a tactical emphasis across a range of sports emerged as constraints upon the planning and enactment of a sport literacy approach. Designing sport curriculum with a
129
more thinking, as an initial tactical analysis of a sport may be required in order that the teacher fully understands the sport before they can plan their teaching.
Designing sport curriculum with a tactical emphasis was also challenging as it required a different ‗mind set‘ of the physical education teacher as the teachers role shifts to become more of a facilitator of learning. A constraint on the planning and enactment of sport literacy was the perception that the potential existed for less time to be devoted to movement skill development through drills if a sport literacy focus was adopted.
Questions in this survey also investigated the PETE-PS teacher‘s experiences learning to play volleyball, learning to plan and enact sport curriculum through a sport literacy framing. The data suggested that as learners, the PETE-PS teachers believed that the approach improved their sport knowledge and game understanding. While the less experienced players signalled a belief that their sport specific motor skills improved the majority were either unsure (30.2%) or disagreed with the
proposition (30.3%) that there was an improvement in their sport specific movement skill. The PETE-PS teachers disagreeing with the proposition had volleyball playing experience either through school (For example: Volleyball as a Year 12 Physical Education topic) or club affiliation.
There was an optimistic and positive response for the potential of sport literacy within physical education. The model was viewed as enhancing their ability to plan quality sport teaching within physical education (90.7%). It was evaluated as being consistent with the intentions of the Middle and Secondary Years Outcomes of the curriculum framework (SACSA) as it was seen to be a framework for sport
teaching that assisted their capacity to plan (86%), teach (93%) and assess (90.7%) sport units of work that address student achievement of the curriculum (SACSA)
130
outcomes. The specific task of analysing a sport for its tactical complexity was considered as having improved their personal sport literacy (81.4%).