Stuck in the Sixties

By Dr. Thom McKenzie

Forty-three years ago this week (1966) I received my first degree, a Bachelors of Physical Education. I had mastered a very excellent program, and I had wonderful teachers. They ensured that I was physically fit, physically skilled, current academically on exercise physiology, kinesiology, and other subjects, and that I had practice and feedback on managing and instructing students. I was ready for my first job as a high school teacher and coach, and I did well at it.

My teacher preparation program taught me nothing at all about promoting physical activity or changing human behavior (Skinner was still being entertained by rodents in his laboratory). But that was OK because it was the sixties and sedentary living was not yet a problem. There were no global obesity and diabetes crises and the term diabesity had not yet been coined. I was not at all concerned with getting my students active outside the gym, because they did this automatically. Most walked to school, many did physical labor at home, and the only screen time to worry about was during fly season in the summer.

In my current job as a researcher I spend more time observing what happens in gyms than directing what goes on there. Teachers are still doing pretty much what I did over 40 years ago, although they now face much larger classes and more disruptive students. I find most are pretty well prepared. Unfortunately their preparation has been aimed primarily at facing the challenges that I encountered long ago, not the challenges of today.

In a scientific study using direct observation we found that PE teachers in six states spent only about 20 seconds of each class prompting or encouraging their middle school students to be active outside of class (McKenzie et al., 2006). In addition at AAHPERD this spring, I conducted a very unscientific poll of physical educators and teacher educators. Of the over 40 higher education institutions represented, only two offered current physical education majors courses in behavior analysis/behavior modification and none provided coursework in social marketing.

Even when offered daily, PE provides only a small proportion of the 60 minutes per day recommended by health authorities. According to NASPE Standard 3, a physically educated person “participates regularly in physical activity.” PE teachers cannot help students meet this objective unless they have been prepared to promote physical activity beyond their gym walls. It is time for PETE (Physical Education Teacher Education) programs to become unstuck from the sixties. In the interim, it is up to district staff development programs to help teachers acquire the new skills that are needed to assist students to avoid a lifetime of sedentary living.

References:

McKenzie, T. L. (2007). The preparation of physical educators: A public health perspective. Quest, 59, 346-357.

McKenzie, T. L., Catellier, D. J., Conway, T., Lytle, L. A., Grieser, M., Webber, L. A., Pratt, C. A, & Elder, J. P. (2006). Girls’ activity levels and lesson contexts during middle school PE: TAAG baseline. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 38(7), 1229-1235.

Where does PE fit within our schools? (Part Two)

Can PE contribute optimally to both educational and health goals?  There is a clear illustration that public health’s priorities for PE are not shared in the PE field.  The public health concern is that PE is the only required time for physical activity that affects almost all students on a regular basis. Remember that almost all of the school day is enforced sitting.  It is essential to ensure that opportunity for activity and health promotion is not missed. The Healthy People health promotion objectives for the US adopted a goal that at least 50% of PE class time would be spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA).  Everyone is aware that “PE is more than just physical activity,” but the objective does not require that PE would be reduced to exercise programs where students run all the time.  Active learning, less-active skill drills, game play, and some didactics would seem to fit comfortably in classes that are at least 50% active.  But studies show 50% MVPA requires planning, and often training and an appropriate curriculum.  Major studies funded by NIH, such as SPARK, CATCH, LEAP, and TAAG showed that activity levels can be raised in elementary, middle, and high schools, so the 50% MVPA is realistic and evidence-based. 

The 50% MVPA objective was announced in 1990, repeated in 2000, and is likely to remain in the 2010 editions of Healthy People.  CDC’s Community Guide recommends “enhanced” or highly active PE as an evidence-based intervention to promote physical activity.  The public health community is strong in its support for PE.  However, to my knowledge, no state education department, no PE professional organization, and no school district has adopted the 50% MVPA objective as a requirement or official goal.

This situation demonstrates the need for ongoing dialog between education and health departments at the national, state, and local levels, to work together to achieve multiple aims through excellent PE.  Because improved PE would benefit health, perhaps part of PE’s funding should come from the health sector.  There are several examples of this approach being effective, so it is a model that could be expanded.

James Sallis

www.drjamessallis.sdsu.edu

Where does PE fit within our schools? (Part One)

Physical education is at the intersection of at least three major academic thoroughfares.  PE has roots in exercise and sports science and represents a primary means of applying the science. PE is itself a pedagogical field and is practiced within educational systems.  The public health field claims PE as a health intervention that is of increasing value due to the childhood obesity epidemic.  Major intersections are often centers of culture and commerce, but the turf surrounding PE is often contested. 

These are my personal observations of how the various fields view PE, though they are necessarily over-generalized.  Over the decades PE programs in universities have split from exercise science departments because they could not reconcile the science and application missions.  This may not be too unfortunate, because neither the scientists nor the PE practitioners tried too hard to bridge the gap between science and practice.  Because all states have some kind of school physical education requirements, education departments in universities and state governments have no choice but to accommodate PE.  However, there is a notable lack of enthusiasm for PE on the part of the education establishment.  The federal Department of Education provides little leadership or support for PE.  Many state education departments refuse to hire a physical education coordinator.  After 100 years in the schools, PE is not considered a core subject and education departments remain unsure what to do with PE.  The percentage of students taking PE has declined in recent years.

In my view, of the three disciplines, public health has the highest level of interest in PE, because it is part of coordinated school health and physical activity has many physical and mental health benefits.  The obesity epidemic has only heightened interest in PE, because obesity is seen as a crisis needing urgent attention.  But public health’s interests in PE are often not reciprocated.  PE professionals seem much more interested in gaining status as a core academic discipline than in ensuring PE is optimized to benefit children’s health.  Is it possible for PE to improve its status within education while improving children’s health?  I will touch on this in my next entry.

James Sallis

www.drjamessallis.sdsu.edu

PE's Unlikely Champion...

Why am I interested in improving physical education?  Two main reasons.  The first is professional.  I am very aware of the need for excellent, daily, active, fun PE and the long way we have to go to get there.  The second is personal, and that’s what I want to write about today. As a kid growing up in the 1950s and 1960s I enjoyed many of my PE experiences, but I also experienced just about every kind of “PE malpractice” you can think of.  I was often picked last for teams, running and pushups were used as punishment, we seemed to play dodge ball mainly to amuse PE teachers’ twisted sense of humor, and I spent countless hours “playing right field” but mainly looking for 4-leaf clovers.  In junior high and high school we played the same team sports each year, but I never really learned how to play them better.  I don’t remember doing any particular skill, exercise, or activity frequently enough to improve.  When we were active I had fun, and it was great being outside to escape classroom boredom, but I didn’t understand the point of it. 

When I understood the important role PE COULD play in getting children active and prepared for a lifetime of activity, I also became motivated to help kids avoid my negative experiences.  I have learned from Thom McKenzie, Paul Rosengard, and other visionaries and dedicated teachers and researchers that PE can be active, educational, and fun. 

When we designed the original SPARK study, our goal was to create and evaluate a program that could be a model of health-related PE used around the country.  Happily, that has come to pass in many ways.  The SPARK story, going from a modest research project to a program improving the lives of more than 1 million children per day, has certainly been my most gratifying professional experience.  I am grateful to the people who have worked at SPARK and the many around the nation who have adopted and implemented the program for all these years.  I am humbled to have played a role in this wonderful program that so many children learn from, benefit from, and enjoy every day.  It has been a long way from my inauspicious start in PE. 

Jim Sallis

www.drjamessallis.sdsu.edu

Scout had a bad day

You might remember our precocious 11 month old (now) female labradoodle Scout from a recent blog entry (“Man’s Best Friend – and Personal Trainer”).  Her beautiful long hair (reminiscent of Farrah Fawcett in the 70’s) was recently shorn (like a sheep on the Australian plain) during her first visit to the groomer.  We dropped our Rastafarian looking “big dog” and 3 hours later, picked up a French poodle looking “skinny chick.” 

We were shocked – (Scout, we hardly knew ye) and from the way Scout acted the rest of the weekend, so was she. 

Personally, as much as I love dogs (and all critters for that matter), I have a problem having a poodle.  I know, I know, it’s not supposed to be about looks and superficiality (“Oh, that’s the cutest dog I’ve ever seen,” I’d hear and smile with a sense of fatherly pride.) but about love, loyalty, and companionship.  So why do I feel I need to adopt a Rottweiller to compensate? 

Scout and I used to be most popular pair on the trail (“What kind of dog is that?  Love her hair!)” at the yogurt store (“Can I pet your dog -- oh her hair is so soft!”) and at dog beach (It that a boy or a girl?  Her coat is so pretty and long I can’t tell.”) Now, we’re ignored like two door to door salesmen with vacuum cleaners in toe. 

I know, I know, it’s only hair and it will grow back -- eventually.  Scout is still the same sweet dog I know and love.  I’ll get over it and try and dig deeper; even move below the shallow surface and my 8^th grade mentality (Wendy’s descriptor for my current attitude). 

But for now, if you happen to see Scout and I out for our run, you can call us,

The Hairless Pairless in San Diego.

-Paul Rosengard

Is it time to Tampa with your curriculum?

I’m just back from 6 rigorous days at the AAHPERD Convention in Tampa. Rigorous, not because I was physically active! Rigorous because I made 5 presentations and participated in 2 additional national meetings that contributed an additional 9 hours of sedentary living to my week. I was again reminded that if we don’t plan for physical activity it will not happen—even if the weather is superb and the beach is next door.

I was also reminded that lots of physical educators are unaware of how many others are attempting to get moving. For example, in October the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the first ever National Guidelines for physical activity.  These guidelines describe the types and amounts of physical activity that offer substantial health benefits to Americans. These follow the Surgeon Generals Report on Physical Activity by 12 years (in 1996), and are a BIG deal!

The 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans can be found at http://www.health.gov/PAGuidelines/

Briefly for children and adolescents, the guidelines call for 60 minutes or more of physical activity (PA) daily. Most of this should be of moderate- or vigorous-intensity, and include vigorous intensity at least 3 days a week. Additionally the activity should include muscle-strengthening PA at least 3 days a week and bone-strengthening PA at least 3 days a week.

These guidelines were derived for a thorough review of the evidence related to physical activity and health. This evidence is summarized (if 683 pages can be considered a summary) in a document titled Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report 2008. It is also available free from Health and Human Services 

http://www.health.gov/PAGuidelines/committeereport.aspx

Based on these new Guidelines, a National Plan for Physical Activity is being developed. This national plan will not only involve Education, but 7 other Sectors:

•         Public Health

•         Transportation/Urban Design/Community Planning

•         Mass Media

•         Healthcare

•         Business/Industry

•         Parks/Recreation/Fitness/Sports

•         Not for Profit Organizations

Wouldn’t it be nice if all these sectors came together to help promote physical activity?  Actually they are! Each sector is producing a “White Paper” which will be presented at a national meeting in DC in early July [http://www.physicalactivityplan.org/conference2009.htm].

Daryl Siedentop, former dean and professor emeritus at The Ohio State University, will produce the white paper for the education sector. It will have 10 important recommendations regarding how schools can be helpful in promoting physical activity. Stay tuned to see if your school program is aligned with these recommendations. If not, perhaps you will need to “Tampa” with it.

Thrive,

Thom 

Got PE?

Like milk, isn’t physical education (PE) “essential” for kids?  Doesn’t it contribute to their growth and development?  So why are so many deprived of it? 

Myth vs. reality:

“Time in PE is time away from academic pursuits – and that’s what the kids are tested in.”

The latter is true – too bad because PE should be a part of standardized testing – but the former is false.  No study has ever shown that more time in PE has a negative impact on academic achievement.  The good news?  Students don’t have to sacrifice their health for the core subjects – they can have their math and move it too.  Need proof?  Go to http://www.sparkpe.org/results.jsp 

“We don’t have enough money to afford daily, quality, PE – or the credentialed teachers we need to instruct it.”

Budgets are tighter than ever.  However, it’s not a money issue – never has been.  There is money to spend – not much, not enough, but there IS money.  Budgets are always a pie to be consumed and the issue is how do you slice it?  How large a piece does PE receive -- deserve?  I believe its section should be the equivalent of the other core subjects and not a penny less – and that includes equality for class size too.  Class size for PE should be linked to class size averages for other subjects.

“Parents care about grade point averages and want their students in class and learning.”

A national survey of parents and teachers concluded that over 75% opposed eliminating PE due to budget constraints or to meet increased academic standards (Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 2003).   

There are more myths and contradictory realities.  The issue is clear and the time is now.  When PE programs and teachers are placed on the budgetary chopping block – speak up.  Ask if they plan to stop serving milk in the cafeteria too.  Got PE?

We’d like to hear YOUR opinions on this subject.  Wipe that milk mustache off your face and speak up!  (smiling)

-Paul Rosengard