Prof. Dr. Reiner Hildebrandt-Stramann AOR Klaus Wichmann
AR Heike Beckmann
Seminar für Sportwissenschaft
Technische Universität Braunschweig Pockelsstr. 11
38601 Braunschweig
A The staging of physical education lessons in school
– 3 lesson
examples
1 General thoughts
The term staging derives from the register of theatre and means setting the scene in a theatre play. Similar to theatre one can also understand school lessons respectively physical education lessons as the setting of scenes. The form of staging defines the specific options a student has when being confronted with a subject matter. During this process the different subject matters determine themselves. Thus the staging defines how a subject matter is determined. At the same time the staging is also always dependent on how the teacher understands education and instruction and the organisation of learning processes, which determine the perception of the content. Furthermore, the form of staging also always contains an idea of how the students are to be included in the determination of certain subject matters, meaning that it is also always based on a certain picture of a student the educator has in the sense of the idea of man.
Research interest: determination of subject matters as a didactic problem concerning physical activity
As was to be made clear by the constitution of the term “staging“ the research interest focuses on the question how physical education lessons can be successful meaning how a subject is turned into a topic. The question “how” is connected with two further theorems:
1. The theorem of the coherence of implication of didactic decisions
2. The theorem of relation, meaning the relation between a physical activity (the object) and individual demands (abilities, anthropological realities like the motivation of composition, creativity etc.)
The theorem of the coherence of implication says that there is an interrelation between educational goal settings, and the choices of subject as well as method, which determines the process of the determination of subject matters
The same is true concerning the relation between the concept of education, physical activity and teaching as well as the idea of man. The decision for a certain educational objective implies an identical understanding on the other category levels Example:
If we are talking about an education towards independence this educational objective implies a relational or dialogical understanding concerning physical activity and experimentation, which all correspond to a relational idea of man. In actual teaching these understandings imply equivalent pedagogic teaching objectives like e.g. the participation of students in the determination of their lessons, subject matters in form
of open motion topics or motion problems and in terms of methods situations of different experiences respectively a genetically structured mediation function.
The theorem of implication actually contains the second theoretical basic principle: the question concerning the mediation between human being and object. The determination of subject matters is strongly influenced by the way the teacher manages to mediate between child and object. From the point of view of physical education it has to be proved whether the process of the determination of subject matters follows the primacy of the object (sport-oriented, dominated by the teacher and thus instructional), the primacy of the subject (laissez-faire) or the relation between subjective demands and motion-related subjects. Thus it is necessary that school as well as university not only look at the educational and teaching demands but also discuss the subjects of physical education.
Research questions
The above described research interest concerning the point “how to successfully orchestrate physical education lessons” is connected with the following research questions
1. How are physical education lessons staged? (the question concerning the determination of subject matters)
– How do students experience the thematic relation?
– Are the students “in the picture” meaning do they know from the beginning what is happening? (problem, task)
2. Are the students involved in the determination of subject matters Do they grab the sense of teaching (the question concerning the sense of teaching)
– Can the students come up with their own interpretations of the subject? – Are there differences between the interpretations of the teacher and the
students?
– How does the teacher deal with possible different interpretations of his students?
3. What has the subject got to do with the fulfilment of the present of the students, also concerning the world they are living in (question concerning different perspectives)
– Which competences concerning physical activity do the students gain? Which importance does the subject have concerning the future life of the students?
4. Which didactic concept concerning physical activity can be identified on the basis of staging analyses for the respective physical education lessons? 5. What are the consequences for a substantiated education in physical
education didactics in university classes? The Review of teaching as a method of analysis
The method of “review of teaching” has been created by Berg & Ritter (1976) in order to evaluate the quality of instruction in school concerning the relation between institutionalised learning and future life. Dietrich & Landau (1990) have adopted this method for evaluating the staging of physical activities in teaching and training. The questions for the review work develop from the understanding of teaching. The given research project underlies an understanding of teaching which sees teaching in the first place as an event installed for the students. Thus the interest primarily focuses on those processes how the chosen subject is determined for students and teachers. The review work is divided into two steps. First of all a “portrait” (Berg & Ritter 1976) is established, followed by the review. The portrait is the attempt “to describe the
particular lesson as a connection of important events and make them readable didactically.” The description remains on the level of events and notes down all those incidents that appear important to the committed, subjective observer. The form of description is therefore intentionally “subjective” and includes the teacher as well as the students. An intersubjectivity is only achieved when the involved (observer, teacher, student) come to an agreement concerning the presented “portrait”.
On the basis of the portrait the review is established. It exceeds the portrait in such a way as the important incidents of the event are brought onto the level of concept. Such a procedure includes the questions of teaching and physical activity.
The evaluation of the staging considers the following categories:
1. determination of subject matters 2. interpretation 3. competence respectively understanding of physical activity concerning
The review of teaching should be established in such a way that it contains constructive suggestions for didactic progress
Procedure in the Workshop
The idea is to present reviews of several lesson examples. This is to be done in the following order:
1. Basic information
2. Video clips of teaching sequences from the different lesson examples 3. review of the lesson examples including the participants
4. Presentation of the reviews by the course instructors 5. discussion about the reviews
6. consequences for the didactic training of physical education students at the university of Braunschweig
B Three examples
1. How do I start my run most effectively?
Basic conditions:
Grade 7 of a comprehensive school, teaching time: 60 minutes, 18 students participating, 4 students recording the results during group work. At the end of last school year as a preparation for a school sports meeting the class was already introduced to the crouch start respectively the starting out of starting blocks.
Lesson portrait
“How do I start my run most effectively?”
After an open individual warm-up the teacher asks his students to sit in a circle and names the topic of the lesson: “How do I start my run most effectively?” During the conversation he asks his students about which different ways of starting a run they know. The students name the crouch start and with another input from the teacher also the “ordinary” start meaning the standing start. The teacher explains the following task: they are to get together in groups. Each group member is to complete two 20m-sprints once using the crouch start and once using the standing start. Each run is timed by 2 group members. Afterwards the average of the two recorded times is to be taken and noted down. The value of the double time taking and the forming
of the arithmetical mean is discussed and explained during the following conversation.
“Which of the two is more effective respectively faster?”
Before the beginning of the test runs the teacher lets the students make a presumption which starting technique will be more effective. With the exception of 3 students all vote for the crouch start.
Test runs
In the following scene the students work in groups of four. Each group has a starting block for the crouch start. The groups organize the course of the test independently by discussing who will be running first and who will stop the time. There are some differences among the groups concerning the order of crouch start and standing start and the sequence of the two runs for each student: They either execute both runs one after the other or all group members execute the first run and then the second. During this phase there are delays because some of the time-recording students have problems with the handling of the stop watches. While the students are working the teacher takes the role of the observer and only interferes to help the students with the time recording. In one group several students have to redo their two starts because the times were wrongly noted down, so that they cannot be assigned correctly. In this case the teacher finally stops the time together with a student.
“Which starting technique was more effective? What is the tendency in your group?”
In the next scene the teachers gathers his students in a circle again. He asks the students who noted down the times to answer the question of which of the two techniques (standing start or crouch start) has proved to be more effective. They are to refer to the results of their own groups. With the exception of one group the times achieved with the standing start are significantly better.
Trying to find explanations
As a consequence the students are asked to find reasons for this surprising result, which does not correlate with the expectations the students had before the test. The opinions given by the students are summarized by the teacher who points out that the technique has not been mastered yet. He then formulates the next task which again is to be completed in groups. The students receive a worksheet which displays the technique of the crouch start. They are to think about the function of the starting blocks and to experiment with different positions in order to find out an individual crouch start position that works best for every single student.
Tasks for working on the crouch start
The next scene shows how the four groups are working on their tasks. Again the teacher mostly takes the role of the observer. Every now and then he supports individual students in their work or tells groups that have become distracted to focus on their task. The students refer to the work sheet with different frequency. It can be seen that in the beginning some try to imitate the crouch start sequence as illustrated on the work sheet. They, for example, practice the position of the hands on the ground or try to find out where to put the front leg to find the individual most comfortable position for the front leg. It can be noticed that the students have found out a variety of different crouch starts. Some students even trip over.
“What do the professional athletes do differently? What were your difficulties?” “powerful takeoff, crouch as long as possible, don’t trip over.”
In the following scene the teacher discusses the given tasks and wants to know which difficulties have come up when imitating the technique of the crouch start as illustrated on the work sheet and what the function of the starting blocks is. The students report that they found it difficult to crouch forward for a while before they slowly lifted their body. When the teacher asks about the importance of this feature a
student explains that the power that is generated during takeoff can be used for the forward drive while it will be useless if the athlete lifts his body right away. On asking what those runners that have mastered this technique do or are capable of, the students mention a better balance and a higher speed as well as more practice and exercise. Finally the teacher points out the different aspects that have been found out and asks the students to use the last minutes of the lesson to once more practice the crouch start while considering the relevant features.
“What do you need to do?” “Practice”
At the close of the lesson the students formulate their task for the next lesson: practice, practice, practice.”
Review
Determination of Topic
How does the teacher make the topic accessible for the students?
If one wants to run a certain distance as fast as possible or wants to be fastest when competing with others in a race, one has to think about how to already make the start a successful one.
One has to consider the question: “How can I start as effectively as possible?”
Right in the first scene the teacher names the topic of the lesson and asks the students about their ideas concerning a starting technique which is most effective for them. This should give them a first understanding. The following practice and the objective timing of two different starting techniques will give them an even better understanding of the topic. The comparison of the two running times taken for all students leads to a quite unexpected result. As a consequence the topical question turns into a problem for the students which makes it the starting point of their work on the actual topic. The students’ search for the reasons for such a test result leads to the assumption that the performance of the crouch start is not good enough and thus needs to be practiced. This is exactly what is done afterwards. During the experimental phase the students fulfil tasks given on a work sheet which lead to new problems concerning the technique. These are dominant during the final reflective discussion.
Do the students grab the sense of this teaching strategy?
In the course of the lesson the introductory question is pushed into the background. Because of their experiences the practicing of the “professional technique” stands in the centre of the students’ attention as it has not been well enough performed yet and thus needs to be practiced. The crouch start in itself as technique is not questioned as it is performed by all “real” sprinters and must therefore be the “right” technique.
Interpretations
Which interpretations have been offered by the teacher and how do the students understand the topic?
The introductory question clarifies the interpretation of the teacher. His intention is for his students to recognize the value of a starting technique and find an individual, ideal starting technique for themselves by experimenting and reflecting their doings. The aim of this first lesson of the teaching unit is that the students realize the problems that the crouch start causes in order to use those as a starting point for individual solutions. When applying the genetic approach the result of the two test runs presents the phenomenon which defines the problem. “Why was the crouch
start not effective for you?” “What do the professionals do what you cannot not do (yet)?” The teacher listens to the considerations and ideas of his students and gives them different options to practice the crouch start. As the teacher has already developed a work sheet it is obvious that he had anticipated the results of the test runs as well as the students’ explanatory attempts. At first sight the approach to use assumptions, experiments, experiences and reflective thoughts to introduce the students to the topic seems to be the right one but do they really understand the significance of a certain starting technique for a sprint race? Their interpretations obviously focus on mastering the crouch start technique, as they have no doubt that that is the only possible technique. Despite other personal experiences the students would certainly answer the teacher’s question: “how do I start most effectively?” by saying “with a well performed crouch start.”
What leads to this divergence of interpretations?
The different interpretations can be explained by the course of the lesson but might also have a different reason. It is quite possible that in the first seven years of their school life the students have experienced that school means: skills which have not been mastered need to be practiced. These could be the correct spelling of words, a foreign language but also the execution of certain movements. As a consequence the only sense the students find in this lesson is to practice the crouch start. Although they realize that for most of them the crouch start does not guarantee them a better running time and are even able to give reasons for that fact they cannot draw the conclusion to question the technique as such. This means that the students do not understand the question as an individual but rather a rhetorical one. The teacher does not comment on the results and the students’ statement “practice, practice, practice” gives an outlook on the next lesson on the basis of their understanding respectively their interpretation.
Expectations and reflective thoughts of the reviewer
When observing the lesson superficially one could assume that the teacher tries to teach his students the crouch start. In order to let them gather basic experiences he hands out a worksheet displaying pictures of the different phases of the crouch start. This is done in order to support them when practicing individually and independently. In the following conversation important elements are pointed out, which will then be practiced for only a short time during this lesson and probably more intensively in the following. Although the crouch start has been tried out and practiced during this lesson one will notice that the teacher’s approach differs from a skill-oriented instructional one. As has already been implied above the approach was highly problem-oriented
„Problem-oriented teaching is based on two assumptions: first, the learners must be capable of recognizing problems as such and for themselves and second, they must be capable of developing solutions in a given situation as well as wanting and being able to try them out when they see a chance of success. If teachers want to follow such an approach it is necessary that in a first step they initiate concernment and interest in order to use the curious atmosphere to trigger possible solutions and first attempts of solving the exciting problem.” (Lange&Sinning, 2008, 69). Through the staging of this first lesson it was possible to initiate concernment and arouse interest.
The fact that the two test starts lead to an unexpected result creates a curious atmosphere, in which the students search for explanations. The following work can be considered as a first attempt to find a solution.
The competent observer of the students’ practical attempts recognizes that despite the intensive practice of the crouch start the students will eventually not be faster with
the crouch start than with the standing start. Thus it can be assumed that a further test, e.g. after the next lesson will hardly lead to a different result. On enquiry the teacher exactly points out this fact. It is intended that during the first lesson the students have the opportunity to practice the crouch start meaning to find out for themselves the chances of success concerning their solutions. In the following they can then be confronted with the originally given topic concerning the importance of starting techniques in track and field. Having a broadened perspective the students can be sent on a search for more individual meaning for them more effective forms of starting techniques. At the end of this process some students will use a more or less standardized form of the crouch start, while others will use the standing start or a mixture of both, e.g. practicing the standing start but pushing off from the starting block with one foot.
If the only objective of this teaching unit were to learn the technique of the crouch start the students would miss out on essential experiences. It is quite possible that certain elements of the technique like e.g. the position of the hands or the knee angles of the front and back leg in the “ready-position” might be performed by the students noticeably better with regard to the standardized technique. The actual starting process during which the starting blocks should be used for a rather low push-off forward would hardly be different due to a lack of physical strength.
On the other hand the problem-oriented approach as seen here allows a
development of other competences. At the end of the teaching unit the students will not only be able to determine their individual and best starting technique, they will also be able to explain why the crouch start probably does not gain them any time advantage (e.g. because their leg muscles are not well enough developed). With regard to a dialogical concept they also learn something about the relationship between the techniques of movements, the intention of movement and one’s personal physical conditions. By the comparison of their intention (starting fast and effectively) and their own experience they will learn to critically think about the given solutions (crouch start) and on top of that estimate them as suitable or not suitable. The divergence of interpretations as described above is created intentionally by the teacher in this first lesson as students will gain knowledge especially through
unsuccessful attempts of finding solutions. Moreover, many of the students will only then develop the willingness to deal with the problem of starting in general and not just with the crouch start.
2. „Protect your wall!“
Tuesday, January 12
th, 11.30 – 13.00, Sporthalle Rebenring
Introduction
The school lesson, which is to be portrayed and reviewed, originated from an inquiry made by a physical education teacher asking about the physical activity and games program of the physical education department of the TU Braunschweig. The teacher is form teacher of a 5th grade of the „Aueschule Wendeburg“. The students of this class have been characterized as difficult in their social interaction. That is why two socially trained teaching aides support the daily school work. The form teacher was looking for a teaching project that would take place outside the school premises and
during which the students would be confronted with a teacher they had not met so far. It was decided that the topic of the project was to be the introduction of a game and that a student teacher from the physical education department of the university would be responsible for the teaching.
Lesson portrait
Warm-up
At the beginning of the lesson the students enter the gym. The class consists of 9 boys and 3 girls. They sit down on benches standing at the long side of the gym. The form teacher and the two teaching aides sit as a group next to their students on a bench. The teacher, who will be in charge of the lesson, welcomes the students and introduces himself. He informs them that as warm-up they will play a game. In order to explain the game he asks the class to form a circle in the centre circle of the gym. The students leave the benches and walk as a group to the centre of the gym where they form a circle. The three girls stand next to each other. The teacher is also a part of the circle. He holds the game equipment – a blue foam ball – in his hands. The teacher explains the warm-up game called “Number passing“. The students are to pass on a ball and later several balls in a given order by throwing and catching. While doing this they are to criss-cross in the playing area and continuously change their positions. The teacher applies a number to each of the students. The boy standing left to him in the circle receives the number 1. The teacher continues until he gets to the boy standing right from him, who receives the number 12.The game starts by handing the ball to the boy who has got the number 1. In the course of the game 2 more balls are introduced into the game. There is little dynamic in the game, which means that the students pass the ball in the given order but hardly change their position on the playing field. The teacher intercepts the game and points out this fact. After that the students change their positions occasionally. The balls are sometimes thrown precisely and caught without problems, at other times they are not caught and fall to the ground. The teacher finishes the game.
Setting the task
The teacher gathers the students in a half circle in front of the blackboard, which is on rolls and can therefore be moved. He gives the name of the following game: “Protect your wall.” The name of the game and some basic rules (“2 teams, the ball is thrown from the centre line, the whole wall is used as goal”) have already been written on a poster, which is stuck to the blackboard.
Game phase 1 and reflection phase 1
A game quickly develops during which mainly the boys throw the ball at the wall of the opposing team. Players who have caught the ball or fended it off quickly run to the centre line and also try to hit the wall. Boys and particularly girls who realize that their throwing force is not powerful enough to cover the distance to the opposing wall hand the ball to stronger throwers. After a game time of about 6 minutes the teacher intercepts the game and once again asks the students to gather in a half circle in front of the blackboard and to describe their impressions of the game. A lively discussion starts concerning the throwing distance. The discussion leads to the suggestion of reducing the throwing distance. On a poster the teacher writes down the problem resulting from the game as well as the suggested solution.
Game phase II and reflection phase II
The rule change everybody agreed on is implemented in the game. All players now throw the ball from a shorter distance at the respective goal area. But this does not
lead to a change in roles. Some boys and girls still hand the ball they have caught to a team mate whose throwing power they consider stronger than their own. The teacher finishes this game phase after five minutes. In the following reflective discussion it becomes clear that the girls and boys consider the solution of reducing the throwing distance as successful. A new problem is pointed out by the students namely that only a few students participate in the throwing. The suggestion of increasing the number of balls to 4 is accepted.
Game phase II1 and reflection phase III
The following game phase is characterized by an intense physical activity. The boys and girls, who get in possession of the ball, quickly run to the throwing line trying to make a hit. In comparison to the game phases before a more equal amount of throws among all team members can be observed. This game phase lasts about five minutes. In the following discussion the students point out explicitly and prominently that they had great fun during the game. The teacher has tried to keep score by noting the hits on the blackboard. He remarks that this was difficult because of the quick succession of the game. The students make clear that the game result is not so important for them. They do not see another problem that might hinder them from enjoying the game. But it is suggested that those students who believe they are strong throwers should throw the ball from the centre line again while the others will continue to throw from a shorter distance.
Game phase 1V and reflection phase IV
This game phase is also characterized by an intense physical activity. A new tactical element can be observed as once in a while a team gathers all four balls in order to throw them all at the same time. Their intention is to make it harder for the opposing team to fend the balls and thus increase their chances of successful hits. After about five minutes the game is stopped and the final reflective phase begins. One student complains that because of the decision that he as a good thrower has to cover a greater throwing distance than others he feels that he is not treated fairly. The teacher sums up the results of the lesson pointing out that the original game was developed further by making changes to the rules. He adds that the last game phase lead to problems as well and thus the wish to have further changes, which may be discussed in the following lessons.
Wrap up
The lesson is closed with the exercise “silent mail” performed by all members of the class. It focuses on perception and can thus lead to relaxation.
Review
Determination of topic
How do the students understand the topic?
How does the teacher make the topic accessible for the students? How do the students experience the thematic connection?
At the beginning of the lesson the teacher gives the name of the game that the students are to play. “Protect your wall” The name of the game already implies the task the students will have to fulfil. The name of the game is new to the students and therefore creates curiosity and attention. The teacher sets only three simple rules (“2 teams, the ball is thrown from the centre line, the whole wall area constitutes the goal”). At this point the students do not know that these constituting rules will serve as an instrument to modify and develop the game. During the first game phase the
game objective is accepted enthusiastically. All students act according to the game objective. The attacking players try to throw the ball as powerfully and as precisely as possible in order to hit the wall. The defending players place themselves equally along the wall in order to prevent those hits. To increase the success of the attacks the ball is often handed to the best throwers. It can also be observed that the boys have more ball contacts than the girls. But it is also obvious that at this point of the game the boys and girls don’t feel the need to change anything. This situation changes in the following reflection phase, which is lead by the teacher after he has stopped the first game phase. By asking the students to give their impressions on the game he opens the discussion. The high participation in the discussion underlines the students’ interest. With regard to the determination of the topic it is important to notice that one student defines the great distance to the goal area respectively the wall as a problem. He has noticed that there is a discrepancy between the rule to throw the ball from the centre line and the abilities of the students. In order to solve the problem he suggests that the throwing distance is reduced and demonstrates his idea on the playing field afterwards. The problem as well as the suggested solution is accepted by the class. The decision to start the lesson with a game task has provoked problem awareness and problem solution. The students have understood that the rules in this game can be modified and used as an instrument to adapt the game to their own likings.
Interpretation
How do the students understand the intention of this lesson?
How does the teacher try to make his topic accessible to his students? Do the students enjoy this form of teaching?
Does the teacher accept the interpretations?
The teacher has decided to follow the genetic concept which focuses on problem finding and problem solving. By experiencing the game as a phenomenon the students are to find individual or group specific problems, identify these, look for solutions, try out these solutions and finally evaluate them independently. The role of the teacher equals the one of a moderator. He carefully guides the communication among the students, points out important statements, summarizes the problems and helps with the trying out of the possible solutions. The continuous repetition of the ritual concerning consecutive game and reflection phases in the course of the staging helps the students to get a deeper understanding of the interpretation of the topic. The teacher keeps up the lesson structure described above. It can be concluded that there is an agreement between the intentions of the teacher and the students’
perception of the topic.
Expectations and reflective thoughts of the reviewer
What relevance does the topic have for the students concerning the present and the future?
The current pedagogy sees games as an unlimited reservoir of opportunities to assist children in their development of physical, cognitive, emotional and social abilities and skills (Warwitz & Rudolf, 2004). In games children gain experiences concerning movements such as e.g. throwing and catching. They must observe, perceive and react. By doing this they refer to their coordination skills. They experience their bodies and try out different actions and their own capacities. They also reach their limits. Emotions can be enjoyed in victory and have to be mastered in defeat. The handling of different equipment enlarges their experiences concerning materials. Thought processes are initiated through the need to solve problems in different game
situations: e.g. when grasping a game objective, when identifying and keeping rules or when thinking up new game variants. When several partners play together, it is always necessary to find agreements, discuss and decide on rules and keep those. The children develop social competence by developing rule awareness while
interacting with each other.
According to the current sport pedagogic objectives children are in particular to be enabled to play successfully by adapting their rules at any time to the respective individual game conditions (Loibl, 2001). The independent organisation of their play demands from the children to take responsibility for their own actions. The independent and collective decision on rules includes the constitutive rules such as the material, spatial, time and personal conditions of the game as well as the code of conduct which demands that the game members learn to keep the rules they have agreed on. Strategic rules will develop from the experiences during play.
The traditional concept which considers the instruction, exercising and mastering of techniques in teaching sequences as a precondition for successful play is inadequate to realize the set objectives. On the one hand this concept leads to the fact that children only imitate rules and movements presented by the teacher and on the other hand does not enlighten the relation between rules and game for the learners. Thus a creative and responsible participation of children in their own learning and training process is not possible. This is also true for methodical concepts in which the order of the consecutive games is also determined by the teacher. (Bietz, 1998; Loibl, 2001) But the aim to develop game competence, which also includes social and cognitive processes and in which rules are understood as changeable and “tactics and techniques as means to solve a game task in the context of the game objective” (Loibl, 2001, 19) demands a genetic (teaching) concept. According to Wagenschein (1991) the genetic concept is characterized through three principles.
– The learners work on a problem and develop solutions independently (genetic) – The teacher supports and guides the learners’ process of problem solving by
asking questions that serve as impulse. (socratic)
– The learning process develops by working on particular examples through which the learners can gain basic knowledge (exemplary)
It should be obvious that the description and review of the staging of the lesson is based on a didactic concept which focuses on the motor-sportive potential as well as on the educational potential of games and play.
Literatur:
Bietz, J. (1998). Sportspielvermittlung – Konzepte, Probleme, Perspektiven. sportunterricht, 47 (7), 267-274. Loibl, J. (2001). Basketball – genetisches Lehren und Lernen. Schorndorf: Hofmann.
Wagenschein, M. (1991). Verstehen lernen. Weinheim, Basel.
Warwitz, S. & Rudolf, A. (2004). Vom Sinn des Spielens. Reflexionen und Spielideen. Hohengehren: Schneider Verlag.
3. Together we are strong – social learning and teaching in primary
physical education
Basic conditions
The observed group is a fourth grade with 19 students, 15 boys and 4 girls. This will be the introductory lesson to a teaching sequence entitled “social learning in primary physical education.” This topic has been chosen because of major social conflicts among the class as it contains different ethnic groups (Turkish, Russian, Polish, and Romanian). Only four of the students are Germans.
Portrait of the lesson covering the topic “Together we are strong.”
The rope on the floor?
After welcoming the class the teacher asks the students to sit down on a bench. Without further comment the teacher asks a girl to play tug of war with her. In order to do so she has put a 20m-long rope on the gym floor. She also decides where the two have to grab the rope and defines the marks on the floor which will decide on the winner respectively the loser.
Showdown
The girl uses all her strength to pull the rope. But she understands very quickly that she doesn’t stand a chance against her teacher. After a very short time the unequal competition is decided in favour of the teacher. At once the students complain that the competition was unfair as it was clear right from the beginning that the teacher is stronger and the girl was thus bound to lose. Another argument given by the students is that the girl’s obvious physical inferiority took all the excitement out of the competition. At this point the teacher interrupts and asks what could be done to make the tug of war more interesting. The students’ answer is clear. The girl needs support. The girl chooses a boy to support her. The second attempt begins. This time the teacher doesn’t stand a chance. What is there to be done now? The teacher chooses a student to support her. As a consequence the balance of power is again in favour of the “teacher team”. Again the opposing team chooses a student. This procedure continues until all students are members of one of the two teams. On one side there are 9 students on the other side there are 10 students and the teacher. Both teams appear equally strong. The competition has turned into a true tug of war, in which everybody pulls ambitiously on the rope.
Together we are strong – the topic
The competition is followed by a discussion about the question what is important in a tug of war. The students at once mention aspects like “team work” and “strength”. The answer to the teacher’s question “when are you strong?” is promptly given: when we all pull together”. Thus they have named the topic of the lesson. This is written on a poster, hung up on the wall and thus visualized for all the students.
Together we are strong – the bridge between tug of war and building pyramids
By defining the topic together with the class the teacher has laid a foundation for the tasks to come. The objective is to build human pyramids. Thus the students are to transfer the topic “together we are strong” to the task of building pyramids.
After the teacher has given detailed instructions concerning the right body posture and set rules for ascent and descent the students start experimenting. The teacher has handed out work sheets showing illustrations with pyramids of only two or three people. This means the students can only build pyramids with two or three people. The students are to form 5 groups.
This first experimental phase is characterized by high intensity. The students perform a variety of pyramids with two or three people. But they violate the rules. That’s why
the teacher invites all her students to a second discussion round. She once again explains and points out the most important body postures and the safety rules for ascent and descent. After that she asks the students to form three groups and start working on the building of pyramids with five people. Again she has prepared work sheets with the appropriate illustrations. And again the students practice and experiment with great enthusiasm and intensity.
At the end of the lesson the students gather in a circle. Each group is to perform their pyramid. Each performance is appreciated by applause from the observing class mates.
The fundamental question: “What was essential to perform these acrobatic elements successfully?”
After the performances the teacher starts a discussion on the objectives of the lesson. The question, what is essential to perform these acrobatic elements successfully is posed intentionally. It is the fundamental question regarding the development of common interests. The students have no problem answering the question as they recognize the relation between the task and their doings. “Team work, support, following the rules, defining positions, which are to be taken during the construction of the pyramids”. (students’ comments). This final discussion ties in the result of the first discussion. The teacher connects beginning and end of the lesson and thus closes the didactic circle which was the basis of her teaching.
.
Review
My personal idea of social learning
The unit topic of which this lesson that is to be reviewed is entitled: “social learning and teaching in primary physical education” What does social learning mean for us? When children interact together during physical education lessons they start a physical relationship, which means they are related bodily. In this context FUNKE-WIENEKE (1997) talks about a “social physicalness” (34). Consequently social learning means the “cultivation of the social body”. What is meant is that students are “to realize physical relationships which are more or less demanding, thematically manifold, but are not in the first place to interact verbally but through their actions” (1997,35). Understanding each other through action is always connected to the body. Thus the sociality, meaning everything that connects people fundamentally, is placed into the medium of physicalness. The explicit creation of a sphere of community as an inter-physicalness is what is predominant when children interact together physically. “Social learning as cultivation of the social body” thus means that children need to learn to discuss their actions in which they create physical relationships and also gain respectively deepen their competences of social interaction. The differentiation between understanding and communication as was described above is explained by FUNKE-WIENEKE (1997, S. 34-35) from a phenomenological perspective. “In general it is demanded that social learning in physical education means that the participants learn to find an understanding among each other and that that is determined as social. They are…to refer sympathetically and emphatically to the inwardness of the others.” But from the phenomenological point of view the factual dialogue is the actual starting point for the analysis of social relationships. Consequently the problems of empathy and presentation are pushed aside. The primary question is not: how can I understand the others but which is the task that all of us will have to fulfil right now in our world? At first there is the common practice followed by the discovery that we have also connected in our doing. “First and foremost the understanding occurs not only as an action but also as a thematic
intention. (…) Instead of talking about understanding we talk about communication, a term which expresses the working character of this process well. (COENEN 1979b, 248; quoted after FUNKE-WIENEKE 1997, 34-35). This position must not be understood as a plea for a speechless and thus senseless teaching. What is intended is to find a connection between primary understanding in interaction and verbal forms of understanding and to put these to good use for the social teaching in physical education.
The following teaching example has therefore been chosen to evaluate which thematic physical relations the students realize and if or how they communicate in their interaction.
Staging relationship patterns in a tug of war. Or: how does topic become accessible for the students?
After welcoming the students the teacher asks the students to sit themselves on a bench along the gym wall. The students follow this demand without complaining. On the contrary: they follow her with great interest as they
1. have seen the rope that is lying on the floor
2. believe that the demand to sit themselves on a bench instead of moving around is different to other lesson beginnings.
Through this behaviour and the following staging of the tug of war the teacher creates curiosity and excitement. What will happen with the rope? The question is answered by the explanation that the teacher will start a tug of war against a female student. But just as quickly as this question is answered another one comes up: when is a tug of war really interesting? The tug of war between teacher and student is certainly not interesting as it becomes clear that the balance of power is in favour of the teacher. What is to be done to make the tug of war interesting? This question is also quickly answered by successively increasing the number of students: tug of war is interesting if the balance of power is more or less equally distributed on both sides. If one or more students drop out at the same time and on both sides a tug of war becomes obsolete. This fact is recognized by the students as in the following discussion the students answer the teacher’s question: when are you strong”? with “if all pull together”. The students gain this insight through the physical relationships which this form of physical contest with the rope demands and the students also accept. They engage in the socially formed physical dialogue with the matter. On the one hand the tug of war is characterized by forms of cooperation among the teams and on the other hand by rivalry between the two teams. The cooperation is mainly based on a form of physical understanding. Everybody needs to use their physical power simultaneously to win against the opponent. Only together we are strong! The fascination of the tug of war lies exactly in this physical relationship aspect.
The teacher stages the beginning of the lesson according to the phenomenological view explained above. Fundamental is a dialogue with the matter, which is object-related as well as physically based. Only on the basis of their doings do the students discover that they have also moved closer socially and that they have built up a form of social physicalness on both sides of the rope: together we are strong.
Which interpretations have been offered by the teacher and how do the students understand the topic?
The competition-oriented introduction of the topic might lead to the fact that the students will follow up on the rivalry perspective. This angle is stopped skilfully by the teacher as she visualizes the topic on a poster during the discussion and on top of that starts the second stage of the lesson with a task, which hardly allows the rivalry
perspective and at the same time incorporates the topic of the building of physical relationships: the construction of human pyramids. I will only look at the aspect of social physicalness. It is really interesting to see how enthusiastic the students work on the task. They check the “stability of the foundation” (= students that constitute the lowest position) through tactile hand and foot contacts, when ascending and descending they spot, push and hold each other. Again and again they communicate via movements and body contact. The working character of this form of staging of “construction and physical activity” (cf. Beckmann, Hildebrandt-Stramann, Wichmann 2005) becomes obvious.
While the teacher introduces the interpretation of a “safe” pyramid building by giving detailed explanations on safety rules, which is absolutely necessary, the students interpret even further. For them it is important “to be in balance together.” This becomes clear when observing the mutual tuning of the individual movement of the whole, which sometimes appears very emotional, as well as the guaranteeing of the collective balance. Both actions demand non-verbal and verbal communication. The movements of the partners happen complementary; they complement one another and in all groups end up as complete creations, in this case human pyramids consisting of several students. When looking from the phenomenological view again the final presentation is only the outside picture of a physical relationship, in which the individual physicalness is given up for a social physicalness, which encloses all participants.
Expectations and reflective thoughts of the reviewer
There are certainly different review aspects to be considered from the didactic point of view. So far I have only been interested in the staging of the social topic from a motional and physical perspective. Before coming to an end I am going to discuss a second perspective of the staging, which is closely connected with the question of how the topic is made accessible for the students. What I mean is the didactic perspective. The lesson is definitely teacher-centred. She stages the beginning of the lesson as well as the following phases. Nevertheless, the beginning of the lesson is problem-oriented in the sense of genetic learning:
1. The rope and the form of staging (one student after another) create curiosity, surprise and motivation in the students. Right from the beginning they are caught up in the situation.
2. The topic is successively developed and transferred onto a different topic (pyramid building) in the second and third phase. At this point the students need to show their abilities to transfer knowledge, which they do as they manage to find individual solutions to the problem. This culminates in the question: “what do we need to do together in order to actually construct the product ‘pyramid’”
3. The pyramid building in itself becomes the learning process: At first the students imitate the pyramids displayed on the illustrations. They seem to enjoy this and on top of that they gain security. In the following they start developing and building their own ideas of pyramids. This is where the lesson actually gets its true workshop character. The students must start physical relationships, which are thematically challenging, and need to interact. These physical relationships must be the basis for the following lessons. But there is also another connection. The competent observer notices that only very few students have the necessary body tension, no matter which position they take. Thus it will be necessary to fulfil exercises that help to build up tension and the closely connected ability of self-perception.
C Discussion of the reviews
All three examples have the same problem-oriented approach when dealing with topics of physical activity. At the beginning of each lesson the teacher unfolds the particular problem, which the students are to be confronted with. It is either the solving of a problem concerning a game (“Protect your wall”), a technique (“Start effectively”) a social conflict (“Together we are strong”). In doing so the teacher gains three results:
1. He creates curiosity respectively excitement in the students.
2. The problem the students have to deal with is clearly identified. This is a precondition so that the students can work on it independently and individually.
3. As a consequence the responsibility for the success of the learning process is to a great extent put into the hands of the students. The teacher takes the role of an advisor and moderator.
It becomes clear what it means to learn from problems. It is not important to follow figural form instructions or given game patterns. The kinetic questions that stand behind those form instructions and game patterns are predominant for those learning processes. This is also true for the social topic, which only becomes one, as the kinetic questions that stand behind the pyramid building need to be solved through interaction. In order to initiate those seeking and discovering learning processes the teacher has to consider during the planning stage which the decisive learning moments of the respective topic are and how they can be perceived by every single student. (experimenting with different game variations respectively different starting positions and evaluating these empirically; transferring the social learning motif to the pyramid building) Depending on the respective problem the teacher needs to provide a selection of tasks, equipment and material constellations.
All three examples show the same effort of an “educating teaching“, which constitutes itself in the implied relationship between an agreement of education, physical activity and teaching. The objective to enable students to deal individually and independently with problems concerning physical activity is closely connected with the objective of an education towards self-education. One objective embodies the other. In order to fulfil this objective the teachers in all three lesson examples create an educating atmosphere which allows the students from the very beginning to create their learning process individually. Of course, there are moments when the teacher gives the direction but only to enable the students to get back on their own track. The students gain knowledge when they deal with the problems and tasks through physical activity and physicalness. The relational understanding of physical activity becomes clear: Physical activity serves as a medium of dialogue between me and my social and material surroundings. Through this physical dialogue the different meanings which the playing in teams has, which are inherent in the topic “starting effectively” and which might develop in pyramid building, are recognized.
1. Playing in teams: everybody wants to participate - Can everybody play? (physical activity as medium to create team games)
2. Starting effectively: which starting position works best for me in order to gain maximum speed as quickly as possible? (speed maximizing)
3. Together we are strong: what needs to be done to build a pyramid that is really safe? (importance of balance).
The concept of education as self-education and the dialogical understanding of physical activity are the preconditions for a critical-emancipatory teaching concept. The didactic discussion understands this concept as one that is open for individual
experiences made by the learners. This form of learning is characterized by learning through experiences whose fundamental feature is the dialogical interplay between doing and experiencing, of feeling and achieving as Dewey describes it. “Learning through experience means to connect forward and backward what we do to the objects and what we suffer through them” (Dewey 1993, S. 358). Experience as learning in an educating sense only takes place through this connection of backward and forward: the acting becomes important and one learns to understand oneself and the material and social world one is confronted with.