A Collaborative Approach for Quality Physical Education in Early Childhood using a Personalised System of Instruction

There is an international imperative to improve and transform the state of Physical Education in schools.

The underlying challenge we address through this project is that classroom primary teachers are enable, due to inadequate training, delivery time, or systemic marginalisation, to teach quality Physical Education (PE) (Edwards et al., 2019; Jones & Green, 2017; Morgan & Bourke, 2008; Morgan & Hansen, 2008; McMaster, 2019; Pill, 2015; Richards et al., 2018).

The principals of the five schools who have expressed an interest in participating in our project, have indicated a need for our evidence-based student-centred pedagogical intervention. Our approach addresses a criticism of PE that because of its arguably misleading title “… it has long since lost its scientific basis. It implies that one type of education is exclusively concerned with the ‘mind’ and another exclusively with the ‘body’” (Elias, 2009, p. 188).

By using a Personalised System of Instruction (PSI) (Metzler, 2017) to addresses the broad scope of the Australian Curriculum for Health and Physical Education (AC: HPE) (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], 2016) learning intentions for Physical Education, beyond only the physical domain, we acknowledge that education “… prepares children for adult life by developing the full potential of their personality, talents and mental and physical abilities” (ACT Government Education, 2021b).

Further justification for our project, is that research by the Chief Investigator has identified a lack of quality Physical Education teaching in ACT schools, specifically limited use of contemporary pedagogy, authentic assessment approaches and limited connections to curriculum (Williams & Pill, 2018; Williams, Pill & Hewitt, 2020). There is a need for ACT teachers to use research informed approaches such as the PSI (Metzler, 2017) which we plan to use in our project. Further, as the PSI (Metzler, 2017) is used internationally and is taught at University of Canberra (UC) to our pre-service HPE teachers by some of our team, there is increased opportunity to support the dissemination of outcomes from our research.A mixed methods approach will be used, with specific research activities tailored for the student and teacher participants.

A mixed methods approach will be used, with specific research activities tailored for the student and teacher participants.

Qualitative methods

Self-study: involves as a highly reflexive form of inquiry to involve our classroom teacher participants as co-investigators who will engage and collaborate in the reproduction of PE-STEM knowledge. Self-study is defined as “the interplay of practice and scholarship in pedagogical contexts” (Ovens & Fletcher, 2014, p. 1), and is informed by other research disciplines including reflective practice, action research, autoethnography and practitioner research. The following characterise self-study: It is self-initiated, improvement oriented, interactive, and uses qualitative methods (LaBoskey, 2004).

Appreciative Inquiry: in constructing the semi-structured interview process, capable of generating unique insights while also assisting participants to identify achievements, strengths, and directions for further effort (Fiorentino, 2012).

Quantitative methods

Generalised linear mixed model approach to assess the statistical significance of Year 1 students personalised learning through their PSI progress charts, where fixed effects will be determined.

The research aims to address the following questions:

1. How can completing context-specific Year 1 and 2 focused Physical Education professional learning facilitate engaging, meaningful, and innovative practice?
2. What was the impact of our early childhood personalised learning project on teaching Physical Education in the study schools?
3. To what extent has teaching the Health Benefits of Physical Activity Focus enabled the Australian Curriculum: Health and Physical Education Key Idea of Educative Purpose?
4. Can a graduate teacher assume the role of a Health and Physical Education educator for ACT primary school teachers?
5. What was the Year 1 and 2 student experience of our personalised learning approach, and is there a preference for certain instruction and task presentations?
6. To what extent if any did the use of Year 5 and 6 proctors add educative value to the project?
7. What are the parent and carer perceptions of our early childhood personalised learning project, and what impact if any was there on their child's relationship with Physical Education?
8. How did our personalised learning approach influence learning, capacity and confidence building amongst our UC Pre-service Teacher Scholarship winners?
9. What unintended consequences, if any, resulted from implementing our early childhood personalised learning Physical Education project?
10. How feasible is the continuation of the project as a system level intervention?

Fiorentino, L. H. (2012). Positive perspectives on the profession: Reframing through appreciative inquiry. Quest, 64(4), 209-228.

LaBoskey, V. (2004). The methodology of self-study and its theoretical underpinnings. In J. McMaster, N. (2019). Teaching Health and physical education: In early childhood and primary years. Oxford University Press.

Ovens, A. & Fletcher, T. (2014). Introduction. In A. Ovens & T. Fletcher (Eds.), Self-study in physical education teacher education: Exploring the interplay of practice and scholarship (pp. 3–14). Springer.