Slide 1

+ Examining Pre-Service Teachers Methodologies in Mixed-Ability Elementary Physical Education Yasuda Hiroko- Japan Keiichiro Ijiichi- Japan Seung Yeon Park- Korea Khen Jang- Korea Law Laam- Hong Kong Lauren Fekete- United States

Slide 2

+ ***HOT TOPIC**** Pedagogy in Mixed-Ability P.E. Classes 1. Studies have shown that differences in Fundamental Motor Skills could affect a childs desire to engage in physical activity throughout the lifespan (Goodway & Suminski, 2003; Stodden, et al, 2008) 2. In mixed-ability settings, instructors often focus on students who they deem most talented (Bailey, Tan, & Morley, 2004; Croston, 2013), leaving others behind. 3. Much literature regarding mixed-ability teaching in academic class settings, BUT there is a considerable gap in knowledge regarding the most effective teaching strategies for instructing mixed-ability physical education classes. 4. Teaching strategies that consider mixed-ability classrooms can help encourage all students to succeed in physical education (Evans, 2004; Metzler, 2011). 5. BUT Occupational socialization theory (Lortie, 2002) suggests that pre-service physical education (PE) teachers are inclined to adopt teaching strategies that were used by their mentors

Slide 3

+ WHY DOES THIS MATTER? IF CHILDREN WHO APPEAR LESS- SKILLED ARE NEGLECTED IN P.E. AT AN EARLY AGE THIS COULD DETER THEM FROM LIFELONG PHYSICAL ACTIVITY!

Slide 4

+ Research Questions Q1. What teaching methods are elementary pre- service physical education teachers inclined to use in mixed-ability classes? Do pre-service teachers utilize a range of teaching methods during their practicum or are they limited to one or two? Q2. Why are these teaching methods used or preferred? Q3. Do mentors or experienced teachers methods influence the types of methods used by pre-service teachers in mixed-ability classrooms during their practicum?

Slide 5

+ Methodology 1. Qualitative paradigm We are interested in understanding the thoughts and ideas of our participants (Creswell, 1994) 2. Case study approach Allows for in-depth analysis of the unique experiences and complexity of views of the participants (Cohen et al., 2007, p. 253). 3. Grounded Theory approach The study will be data-driven (INDUCTIVE) and theory will emerge through continuous analysis of the data (Glaser & Strauss, 1987)

Slide 6

+ Methods Participants (criterion-based sampling, Goets & LeCompte, 1984) 15 Pre-service teachers from S university of primary education in Korea 5 experienced teachers from attached elementary school Criteria: 1) Location/ socio-economic basis schools with greater variance in, age, gender, sports experience, home environment, etc 2) Experienced teachers (5 years mentoring or more) Data Collection Semi-structured interviews(Patton, 2002) Experienced and pre-service teachers Field notes with observation in PE class Research journals

Slide 7

+ Data Analysis Inductive Categorical Analysis Grounded Theory- Glaser & Strauss Line by line coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) Constant comparison (Patton, 2002)

Slide 8

+ Trustworthiness Member checking Data triangulation Negative Case Analysis Research logs

Slide 9

+ Ethics 1. Informed Consent From Pre-Service teachers and experienced teachers 2. Parental permission 3. Child Assent 4. Support letter from school 5. Confidentiality Data is kept private 6. Anonymity Pseudonyms 7. Data protection and responsibility Raw data is kept in password protected computer

Slide 10

+ Limitations Lack of generalizability, BUT: Petite generalizations can be made to similar cases (Stake, 2008) Naturalistic generalizations can be made by the reader (Stake, 2008) Hawthorne Effect Observing may alter pre-service teachers behaviour Researcher bias- interpretivist methods emphasize that the researcher plays a crucial role in data interpretation

Slide 11

+ Implications Professional Practice: This can help pre-service teachers to recognize and anticipate effects of occupational socialization on their teaching strategies Catching them early Future research: Experimentally testing how certain types of curriculum models work in mixed-ability P.E. classrooms to engage all students Conduct this study cross-culturally to examine how strategies and factors that influence them change across cultures

Slide 12

+ Identifying Outlets Conferences/ national associations to present findings: 1. AAPHERD- American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance 2.NCSP- National Conference on Sport Pedagogy 3. KAHPERD- Korea Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance JournalJournal of Teaching Physical Education Teaching Elementary Physical Education Korean Association Sport Pedagogy How our research fits We are exploring influences on teaching methodologies in physical education Our results could help elementary P.E. teachers internationally Our results could help inform pedagogical practices in Korean P.E.

Slide 13

+ Acknowledgements We would like to thank Dr. Myrian Nunomura and Dr. Yuhei Inoue for their advice, time, and patience in helping to make this collaboration a success

Slide 14

+

Slide 15

+ References Bailey, R., D. Morley, and H. Dismore (2009). Talent development in physical education: A national survey of policy and practice in England. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy,14, 5972. Bailey, R., J.E.C. Tan, and D. Morley. 2004. Talented pupils in physical education: Secondary school teachers experiences of identifying talent within the Excellence in Cities scheme. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 9, 13348. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in Education (7 th ed.). London: Routledge. Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. (3rd ed) London: Sage Publications Ltd.Creswell, J.W. 1994) Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. Newbury Park, Sage.Croston, A. (2013). Teacher perceptions of talent in PE and sport. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 18,1, 60-74. Evans, J. 2004. Making a difference? Education and ability in physical education. European Physical Education Review 10, 95. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.Goets. C., & LeCompte, M. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. New York: Academic Press. Goodway, J.D., & Suminski, R. (2003). Learner and environmental constraints influenc- ing fundamental motor skill development of at-risk Hispanic preschoolers. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74(Suppl.), A31. Lortie, D. C.(2002). Schoolteacher: a sociological study (2. ed). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Metzler, M.W. (2011). Instructional Models for Physical Education (3 rd ed.). AZ: Holcomb Hathaway Publishers. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Stake, R. E. (2008). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin, & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 119-149). Los Angeles: Sage. Stodden, et al. (2002). A Developmental Perspective on the Role of Motor Skill Competence in Physical Activity: An Emergent Relationship. Quest, 60, 290-306.

Slide 16

+ APPENDIX

Slide 17

+ ALIGNMENT Epistemology Social Constructivism Research Questions 1. What teaching methodologies are elementary pre-service physical education teachers inclined to use in mixed-ability classes? Do they use a rang or are they limited? 2. Why are these teaching methodologies used? 3. Do mentors or experienced teachers methodologies influence the types of methodologies used by pre-service teachers in mixed-ability classrooms during their practicum? Methodology/ Design Qualitative Paradigm Case Study approach Grounded theory approach Interpretivism Data Collection Semi-structured interviews Field Notes Researcher journals Observation Data Analysis Grounded Theory Inductive categorical analysis

Slide 18

+ Timeline