This article was downloaded by: [The UC Irvine Libraries] On: 30 October 2014, At: 23:17 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/urqe20
Effective Teaching in Physical Education: Slovenian Perspective a
a
ab
Rado Pišot , Matej Plevnik & Vesna Štemberger a
University of Primorska
b
University of Ljubljana Published online: 20 May 2014.
To cite this article: Rado Pišot, Matej Plevnik & Vesna Štemberger (2014) Effective Teaching in Physical Education: Slovenian Perspective, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 85:2, 153-156, DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2014.904715 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2014.904715
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 85, 153–156, 2014 Copyright q SHAPE America ISSN 0270-1367 print/ISSN 2168-3824 online DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2014.904715
Effective Teaching in Physical Education: Slovenian Perspective Rado Pisˇot and Matej Plevnik University of Primorska
Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 23:17 30 October 2014
Vesna Sˇtemberger University of Primorska University of Ljubljana
Regular quality physical education (PE) contributes to the harmonized biopsychosocial development of a young person—to relaxation, neutralization of negative effects of sedentary hours, and other unhealthy habits/behaviors. The evaluation approach to PE effectiveness provides important information to PE teachers and also to students. However, evaluating effectiveness of teaching, especially the effectiveness of teaching PE, is a difficult task, because PE is a constant process of enriching knowledge and developing skills, as well as having a possible impact on students’ health and mental well-being. Many attempts to evaluate PE teachers’ effectiveness exist in Slovenia, but currently, none are being implemented in the national PE curricula. As part of recent discussion on PE teaching effectiveness (McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2013; Rink, 2013; Ward, 2013), we share our views from a Slovenian perspective. Keywords: article review, evaluation, quality, teaching process
We were invited to read the recent articles on teaching effectiveness in physical education (PE) by Rink (2013), McKenzie and Lounsbery (2013), and Ward (2013), respectively, and to share our view from a Slovenian perspective. To provide background for our commentary, we first briefly introduce the Slovenian educational and PE system and then our view on teaching quality. We then share our view on assessing and evaluating effective PE teaching. Finally, we provide a summary of our commentary accordingly. PHYSICAL EDUCATION IN SLOVENIAN COMPULSORY SCHOOL EDUCATION Compulsory or “basic” school education in Slovenia lasts 9 years. It begins when a child reaches the age of 6 and ends Correspondence should be addressed to Rado Pisˇot, Science and Research Centre, Institute for Kinesiology Research, University of Primorska, Garibaldijeva 1, 6000 Koper, Slovenia. E-mail: rado. [email protected]
with the completion of the education program or after 9 years of schooling. The objectives of compulsory education are: to encourage the balanced emotional, spiritual, and social development of children; to develop literacy skills, national identity, and general cultural values based on European traditions; and to prepare children for life in an equal and democratic society. The 9 years of basic education are divided into three 3-year cycles, with the first 6 years as primary or elementary education and the final 3 years as lower secondary education. In the first cycle (Grades 1– 3), elementary school teachers teach all or most of the subjects. In the first grade of the elementary school, half of the lessons are taught with the assistance of a preschool teacher. During the second cycle (Grades 4 –6), subject specialist teachers become more and more involved in the teaching process. In the third cycle (Grades 7 –9), lessons are taught solely by subject specialist teachers. Where deemed necessary, special needs teachers, speech therapists, and also PE teachers may take part in the teaching process.
Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 23:17 30 October 2014
154
R. PISˇOT ET AL.
PE is a compulsory subject in all three cycles of the compulsory school grades as well as in secondary schools, while PE in higher education is not a mandatory subject. Due to developmental characteristics of children, the elementary school-level program is divided into three school periods according to content, organization, and applied methods. In each period, three activities are offered to children: activities that are obligatory for all children, activities offered by the school (children attend these activities on a voluntary basis), and additional activities (children attend these activities on a voluntary basis). About 834 regular class hr and 5 sport days in each school year are spent in PE. The assessment of the degree of learned sport knowledge and monitoring students’ personal sport achievements as well as children’s biological (physical and motor) development are inseparable and indispensable elements of each education program. Planned monitoring and feedback about the collected data on children’s progress, observation, and analysis of the work process enable teachers to appropriately construct teaching plans, adapt the classes to individuals, and advise children on improving their achievements or eliminating deficiencies as well as participating in various extracurricular activities. Each year and in all teaching process stages, a teacher monitors and/or plans children’s physical, motor, and functional development; their level of acquiring knowledge of different types of sport; their personal sport achievements in the class, school, and other competitions; and children’s rate of absence, health problems, and participation in extracurricular sport activities (Kovacˇ et al., 2011).
students. The PE teacher instructors are from the sport departments in Slovenian colleges/universities. Elementary school teacher education lasts 5 years. The evaluation of the teaching process and the quality of PE teacher education in Slovenia is most frequently evaluated on the following factors (Sˇtemberger, 2004): . . . . . . . . . . . .
lesson planning and realization PE differentiation and individualization learning methods and forms used in PE lessons motivation of students evaluation of PE estimation of knowledge of PE professional development of PE teachers permanent professional education of PE teachers material conditions for PE implementation activities of program sports-related activities students’ sport participation.
A successful system for supporting teachers’ professional development has to be organized within the working environment and while assisted from outside sources. Outside help can facilitate learning about new concepts or new understanding of old ones; sharing of information, materials, experiences, ideas, and advice; supporting networking with teachers from different schools; modeling; and sometimes even supervising (Catelli, Likon, Vonta, & Pisˇot, 2009). OUR VIEW ON EFFECTIVE PE TEACHING
MONITORING AND VERIFICATION ARE THE BASES FOR ASSESSING PE In the first and second grade of elementary school in Slovenia, the students’ knowledge is evaluated descriptively; however, from third grade on, knowledge and progress are evaluated with numeric grades. All subjects are estimated according to the same approach (“National Regulations on Assessment,” 2013). In assessment, teachers evaluate children’s motor knowledge by considering individual changes in physical and motor development. The assessment criteria must be clearly presented to students at the start of the school year. The selected fundamental knowledge is assessed in the first and second education periods, and the application of knowledge in various authentic situations is assessed in the final education period (Kovacˇ et al., 2011). Elementary teachers teach PE in first through third grade, and they may teach it also in fourth grade and fifth grade. PE teachers may start teaching students as early as fourth grade but definitely wholly take over PE of Slovenian students in sixth grade. Elementary teachers are educated in PE, and the required PE teacher education courses include 195 hr of direct contact with
The articles by Rink (2013), McKenzie and Lounsbery (2013), and Ward (2013) describe different approaches to assessing the work of PE teachers and strive to objectively assess the teaching process as well as the teachers’ teaching and students’ learning with the aim to objectively assess the progress of students or the contribution of PE to general educational objectives. The efficiency of teaching in the physical activity field (movement and sport programs), we believe, has a wider aspect than just achieving the knowledge that teachers should acquire. At the same time, measuring teaching methods and teachers’ work efficiency demands clearly predetermined objectives, of which teachers are aware and can implement into their teaching. Only in this way can their work be fairly assessed. Besides school, the family environment and students’ social and peer environment (e.g., students of the same age) also impact the students’ knowledge of PE as well as their motor skills. A question therefore arises as to whether we can truly measure something that does not only depend on a teacher’s work, but also to a great extent (possibly even more importantly) on other factors. This is possible; however, when all other factors that impact a student’s knowledge are considered. The problem arises elsewhere, namely:
Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 23:17 30 October 2014
EFFECTIVE TEACHING: SLOVENIAN PERSPECTIVE
1. The marginalization of the subject is a problem that might be more connected with the quality of PE than we think. First, the subject needs to be established. The key question is how to achieve this. Experience from Slovenia shows that this cannot be achieved by using the same the assessment method for all subjects (all subjects are, regardless of their specifics, assessed by numbers). It is also impossible to achieve this by renaming the subject (in the case of Slovenia, PE as a subject was renamed in the elementary school first to sport education and currently to sport). We believe that the subject can be appropriately valued if it is implemented with the same engagement and professionalism as other subjects. This means that work planning needs to be appropriate (cases show quite the opposite; Sˇtemberger, 2004, 2011). The subject also has to be implemented entirely as it is planned in the syllabus. Equally important is that there is oversight to verify the quality of PE (such as by the school principal). 2. Does subject assessment really increase the quality of the PE process? Research results show that it does not (Catelli et al., 2009). Subject assessment is relevant mostly to preserve an obligatory subject at school. (As an example of abolishing assessment or credit for a subject, at the University of Ljubljana, prior to the Bologna study system, PE was obligatory for all students initially, but after the revision of the program, this subject was no longer assessed/evaluated with credits. Thus, PE became a nonobligatory subject and only a small number of students take this subject.) PE assessment would probably contribute to increasing the quality of work if verifications would actually be made in regards to assessment. 3. Knowledge standards in Slovenia are specifically determined; however, because nobody verifies the achievement of these standards (related to the content under the previous paragraph) it is difficult to speak about the quality of the sport education process.
We believe that to establish and provide quality PE, it is necessary to consider different factors that can impact the final outcome—the knowledge of the student or the student’s competences that will enable them to engage in physical activity (movement or sport programs) and develop a healthy and active lifestyle. Objectives, standards, contents, and assessment must be appropriately prepared (so that a teacher can realize them and students can learn them); however, it is necessary to guarantee ongoing professional training of teachers so that they can learn the latest methods and implement them in practice. It is also necessary to guarantee appropriate supervision in the sense of the school system verifying the realization of the objectives of the syllabus. Greater emphasis must be put on the connection between subjects
155
so that PE is also integrated into other content classes such as natural science, social studies, and health education, for example. PE is very popular among children in Slovenia, and they rank it first in favorite subjects (Jurak, Kovacˇ, & Strel, 2002). However, PE ranks fourth among the students according to its life relevance. If we know how to successfully connect subjects that students consider as relevant for life with PE, we should be able to achieve greater engagement of students in PE. However, the quality of the PE process cannot be achieved only by considering the school factors (teacher work conditions, number of PE hours, syllabus, equipment), but also by considering all factors that may be equally important in establishing quality (family, social, and other environments). The conditions for assessing the success rate of teachers’ work involve clearly defined objectives for teachers to follow in their teaching process. From this aspect, Rink’s article (2013) tries to assess teachers’ success rates according to the set syllabus objectives, so that the relationship, approaches, and methods implemented by the teacher must be considered. The content of McKenzie and Lounsbery’s article (2013) is the most clearly determined content from this aspect. The task of a PE teacher is to guarantee that a student is frequently involved in motor and sport activity and is thus able to achieving public health objectives. Teachers must also offer content that enables that development. Ward (2013) connects in his article the necessity of determining clear results with the policies’ desire to economically assess learning success and results, whereas the author’s proposition for assessment resides mostly in the process-objective relationship while including the environmental paradigm. CONCLUSION An assessment approach for a PE teacher’s work can be done using all of the presented models based on the condition of clearly defined and presented objectives required by the PE process to guide a teacher and their work. These objectives are composed of several subobjectives, like the inclusion of students in movement and presenting a physically active lifestyle as not only beneficial to health but one that can be pleasurable by increasing the quantity of physical activity; students’ desire to be active outside of PE; and the development of motor skills through various contents, among others. Only such clearly defined objectives enable a true assessment of PE. The success of achieving objectives can be evaluated through teachers’ work methods, spatial possibilities, and characteristics of groups, among others. The final assessment in our opinion enables a level-based determination of objectives, from the most general objectives (e.g., physically active lifestyle, positive attitude to physical activity, etc.) to specific objectives (e.g., knowledge about a certain jumping technique). By acknowledging such an approach, clearer
156
R. PISˇOT ET AL.
assessment possibilities are available to determine the success of a teacher as well as PE methods and approaches used to meet the set objective. The final objective of the PE process is not to establish methods or approaches to be used by teachers to meet the objectives, but to assess the students’ knowledge, development, and progress in comparison with clearly determined types of objectives. Teachers’ knowledge, relationships, methods, approaches, manners, forms, and accessories are only some of the tools used to meet objectives. Loosely defined or unclearly set objectives significantly negatively impact the ability to assess PE teachers’ work.
Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 23:17 30 October 2014
WHAT DOES THIS ARTICLE ADD? This article presents the role of PE in the Slovenian compulsory school education system and some approaches that have been used to evaluate the quality of PE in Slovenia and are in some ways different from the approaches presented by Rink (2013), McKenzie and Lounsbery (2013), and Ward (2013). Assessment and assurance of quality of PE is a very broad area and can be defined by a variety of approaches, depending on the context of PE objectives. A very important point for assuring the quality of PE is also to support immediate and wider living, the school environment, and of course, government strategies. This is a view not covered by Rink, McKenzie and Lounsbery, and Ward. Quality of PE can be a research problem for scientists. A holistic approach that includes both a selfevaluation process, internal and external evaluation, and at the same time governmental support for achieving public health and other clearly defined objectives of PE can be an
appropriate evaluation method of PE effectiveness evaluation. REFERENCES Catelli, L. A., Likon, B., Vonta, T., & Pisˇot, R. (2009). Analyzing effective teaching performance. Koper, Slovenia: University Annales Press. Jurak, G., Kovacˇ, M., & Strel, J. (2002). Popularity of physical education among students in comparison to other school subjects. In B. Sˇkof & M. Kovacˇ (Eds.), Developmental directives of physical education. Proceedings of the 15th Professional Conference of Physical Education Teachers (pp. 49– 54). Ljubljana, Slovenia: Professional Association of Physical Education Teachers of Slovenia. Kovacˇ, M., Markun Puhan, N., Loreci, B., Novak, L., Planinsˇec, J., Hrastar, I., . . . Muha, V. (2011). Education plan: Program for elementary school. Physical education. Ljubljana, Slovenia: Ministry for Education and Sport: The National Education Institute of the Republic of Slovenia. McKenzie, T. L., & Lounsbery, M. A. (2013). Physical education teacher effectiveness in a public health context. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 84, 419–430. National regulations on assessment and knowledge evaluation and students promotion in primary school. (2013, June 21). Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, (1988), 6025 (Uradni list RS, n. 52/2013). Retrieved from http://uradni-list.si/1/content?id=113609#!/Pravilniko-preverjanju-in-ocenjevanju-znanja-ter-napredovanju-ucencev-vosnovni-soli Rink, J. E. (2013). Measuring teacher effectiveness in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 84, 407–418. Sˇtemberger, V. (2004). Planning of physical education as an indicator of quality of physical education. Didactica Slovenica, 2, 100–111. Sˇtemberger, V. (2011). Analysis of physical education planning. In V. Manfreda Kolar, B. Sicherl Kafol, & D. Skribe Dimec (Eds.), Special didactics: What we have in common and where are the differences between us (pp. 181– 200). Ljubljana, Slovenia: University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education. Ward, P. (2013). The role of content knowledge in conceptions of teaching effectiveness in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 84, 431 –440.
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/urqe20
Effective Teaching in Physical Education: Slovenian Perspective a
a
ab
Rado Pišot , Matej Plevnik & Vesna Štemberger a
University of Primorska
b
University of Ljubljana Published online: 20 May 2014.
To cite this article: Rado Pišot, Matej Plevnik & Vesna Štemberger (2014) Effective Teaching in Physical Education: Slovenian Perspective, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 85:2, 153-156, DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2014.904715 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2014.904715
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 85, 153–156, 2014 Copyright q SHAPE America ISSN 0270-1367 print/ISSN 2168-3824 online DOI: 10.1080/02701367.2014.904715
Effective Teaching in Physical Education: Slovenian Perspective Rado Pisˇot and Matej Plevnik University of Primorska
Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 23:17 30 October 2014
Vesna Sˇtemberger University of Primorska University of Ljubljana
Regular quality physical education (PE) contributes to the harmonized biopsychosocial development of a young person—to relaxation, neutralization of negative effects of sedentary hours, and other unhealthy habits/behaviors. The evaluation approach to PE effectiveness provides important information to PE teachers and also to students. However, evaluating effectiveness of teaching, especially the effectiveness of teaching PE, is a difficult task, because PE is a constant process of enriching knowledge and developing skills, as well as having a possible impact on students’ health and mental well-being. Many attempts to evaluate PE teachers’ effectiveness exist in Slovenia, but currently, none are being implemented in the national PE curricula. As part of recent discussion on PE teaching effectiveness (McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2013; Rink, 2013; Ward, 2013), we share our views from a Slovenian perspective. Keywords: article review, evaluation, quality, teaching process
We were invited to read the recent articles on teaching effectiveness in physical education (PE) by Rink (2013), McKenzie and Lounsbery (2013), and Ward (2013), respectively, and to share our view from a Slovenian perspective. To provide background for our commentary, we first briefly introduce the Slovenian educational and PE system and then our view on teaching quality. We then share our view on assessing and evaluating effective PE teaching. Finally, we provide a summary of our commentary accordingly. PHYSICAL EDUCATION IN SLOVENIAN COMPULSORY SCHOOL EDUCATION Compulsory or “basic” school education in Slovenia lasts 9 years. It begins when a child reaches the age of 6 and ends Correspondence should be addressed to Rado Pisˇot, Science and Research Centre, Institute for Kinesiology Research, University of Primorska, Garibaldijeva 1, 6000 Koper, Slovenia. E-mail: rado. [email protected]
with the completion of the education program or after 9 years of schooling. The objectives of compulsory education are: to encourage the balanced emotional, spiritual, and social development of children; to develop literacy skills, national identity, and general cultural values based on European traditions; and to prepare children for life in an equal and democratic society. The 9 years of basic education are divided into three 3-year cycles, with the first 6 years as primary or elementary education and the final 3 years as lower secondary education. In the first cycle (Grades 1– 3), elementary school teachers teach all or most of the subjects. In the first grade of the elementary school, half of the lessons are taught with the assistance of a preschool teacher. During the second cycle (Grades 4 –6), subject specialist teachers become more and more involved in the teaching process. In the third cycle (Grades 7 –9), lessons are taught solely by subject specialist teachers. Where deemed necessary, special needs teachers, speech therapists, and also PE teachers may take part in the teaching process.
Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 23:17 30 October 2014
154
R. PISˇOT ET AL.
PE is a compulsory subject in all three cycles of the compulsory school grades as well as in secondary schools, while PE in higher education is not a mandatory subject. Due to developmental characteristics of children, the elementary school-level program is divided into three school periods according to content, organization, and applied methods. In each period, three activities are offered to children: activities that are obligatory for all children, activities offered by the school (children attend these activities on a voluntary basis), and additional activities (children attend these activities on a voluntary basis). About 834 regular class hr and 5 sport days in each school year are spent in PE. The assessment of the degree of learned sport knowledge and monitoring students’ personal sport achievements as well as children’s biological (physical and motor) development are inseparable and indispensable elements of each education program. Planned monitoring and feedback about the collected data on children’s progress, observation, and analysis of the work process enable teachers to appropriately construct teaching plans, adapt the classes to individuals, and advise children on improving their achievements or eliminating deficiencies as well as participating in various extracurricular activities. Each year and in all teaching process stages, a teacher monitors and/or plans children’s physical, motor, and functional development; their level of acquiring knowledge of different types of sport; their personal sport achievements in the class, school, and other competitions; and children’s rate of absence, health problems, and participation in extracurricular sport activities (Kovacˇ et al., 2011).
students. The PE teacher instructors are from the sport departments in Slovenian colleges/universities. Elementary school teacher education lasts 5 years. The evaluation of the teaching process and the quality of PE teacher education in Slovenia is most frequently evaluated on the following factors (Sˇtemberger, 2004): . . . . . . . . . . . .
lesson planning and realization PE differentiation and individualization learning methods and forms used in PE lessons motivation of students evaluation of PE estimation of knowledge of PE professional development of PE teachers permanent professional education of PE teachers material conditions for PE implementation activities of program sports-related activities students’ sport participation.
A successful system for supporting teachers’ professional development has to be organized within the working environment and while assisted from outside sources. Outside help can facilitate learning about new concepts or new understanding of old ones; sharing of information, materials, experiences, ideas, and advice; supporting networking with teachers from different schools; modeling; and sometimes even supervising (Catelli, Likon, Vonta, & Pisˇot, 2009). OUR VIEW ON EFFECTIVE PE TEACHING
MONITORING AND VERIFICATION ARE THE BASES FOR ASSESSING PE In the first and second grade of elementary school in Slovenia, the students’ knowledge is evaluated descriptively; however, from third grade on, knowledge and progress are evaluated with numeric grades. All subjects are estimated according to the same approach (“National Regulations on Assessment,” 2013). In assessment, teachers evaluate children’s motor knowledge by considering individual changes in physical and motor development. The assessment criteria must be clearly presented to students at the start of the school year. The selected fundamental knowledge is assessed in the first and second education periods, and the application of knowledge in various authentic situations is assessed in the final education period (Kovacˇ et al., 2011). Elementary teachers teach PE in first through third grade, and they may teach it also in fourth grade and fifth grade. PE teachers may start teaching students as early as fourth grade but definitely wholly take over PE of Slovenian students in sixth grade. Elementary teachers are educated in PE, and the required PE teacher education courses include 195 hr of direct contact with
The articles by Rink (2013), McKenzie and Lounsbery (2013), and Ward (2013) describe different approaches to assessing the work of PE teachers and strive to objectively assess the teaching process as well as the teachers’ teaching and students’ learning with the aim to objectively assess the progress of students or the contribution of PE to general educational objectives. The efficiency of teaching in the physical activity field (movement and sport programs), we believe, has a wider aspect than just achieving the knowledge that teachers should acquire. At the same time, measuring teaching methods and teachers’ work efficiency demands clearly predetermined objectives, of which teachers are aware and can implement into their teaching. Only in this way can their work be fairly assessed. Besides school, the family environment and students’ social and peer environment (e.g., students of the same age) also impact the students’ knowledge of PE as well as their motor skills. A question therefore arises as to whether we can truly measure something that does not only depend on a teacher’s work, but also to a great extent (possibly even more importantly) on other factors. This is possible; however, when all other factors that impact a student’s knowledge are considered. The problem arises elsewhere, namely:
Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 23:17 30 October 2014
EFFECTIVE TEACHING: SLOVENIAN PERSPECTIVE
1. The marginalization of the subject is a problem that might be more connected with the quality of PE than we think. First, the subject needs to be established. The key question is how to achieve this. Experience from Slovenia shows that this cannot be achieved by using the same the assessment method for all subjects (all subjects are, regardless of their specifics, assessed by numbers). It is also impossible to achieve this by renaming the subject (in the case of Slovenia, PE as a subject was renamed in the elementary school first to sport education and currently to sport). We believe that the subject can be appropriately valued if it is implemented with the same engagement and professionalism as other subjects. This means that work planning needs to be appropriate (cases show quite the opposite; Sˇtemberger, 2004, 2011). The subject also has to be implemented entirely as it is planned in the syllabus. Equally important is that there is oversight to verify the quality of PE (such as by the school principal). 2. Does subject assessment really increase the quality of the PE process? Research results show that it does not (Catelli et al., 2009). Subject assessment is relevant mostly to preserve an obligatory subject at school. (As an example of abolishing assessment or credit for a subject, at the University of Ljubljana, prior to the Bologna study system, PE was obligatory for all students initially, but after the revision of the program, this subject was no longer assessed/evaluated with credits. Thus, PE became a nonobligatory subject and only a small number of students take this subject.) PE assessment would probably contribute to increasing the quality of work if verifications would actually be made in regards to assessment. 3. Knowledge standards in Slovenia are specifically determined; however, because nobody verifies the achievement of these standards (related to the content under the previous paragraph) it is difficult to speak about the quality of the sport education process.
We believe that to establish and provide quality PE, it is necessary to consider different factors that can impact the final outcome—the knowledge of the student or the student’s competences that will enable them to engage in physical activity (movement or sport programs) and develop a healthy and active lifestyle. Objectives, standards, contents, and assessment must be appropriately prepared (so that a teacher can realize them and students can learn them); however, it is necessary to guarantee ongoing professional training of teachers so that they can learn the latest methods and implement them in practice. It is also necessary to guarantee appropriate supervision in the sense of the school system verifying the realization of the objectives of the syllabus. Greater emphasis must be put on the connection between subjects
155
so that PE is also integrated into other content classes such as natural science, social studies, and health education, for example. PE is very popular among children in Slovenia, and they rank it first in favorite subjects (Jurak, Kovacˇ, & Strel, 2002). However, PE ranks fourth among the students according to its life relevance. If we know how to successfully connect subjects that students consider as relevant for life with PE, we should be able to achieve greater engagement of students in PE. However, the quality of the PE process cannot be achieved only by considering the school factors (teacher work conditions, number of PE hours, syllabus, equipment), but also by considering all factors that may be equally important in establishing quality (family, social, and other environments). The conditions for assessing the success rate of teachers’ work involve clearly defined objectives for teachers to follow in their teaching process. From this aspect, Rink’s article (2013) tries to assess teachers’ success rates according to the set syllabus objectives, so that the relationship, approaches, and methods implemented by the teacher must be considered. The content of McKenzie and Lounsbery’s article (2013) is the most clearly determined content from this aspect. The task of a PE teacher is to guarantee that a student is frequently involved in motor and sport activity and is thus able to achieving public health objectives. Teachers must also offer content that enables that development. Ward (2013) connects in his article the necessity of determining clear results with the policies’ desire to economically assess learning success and results, whereas the author’s proposition for assessment resides mostly in the process-objective relationship while including the environmental paradigm. CONCLUSION An assessment approach for a PE teacher’s work can be done using all of the presented models based on the condition of clearly defined and presented objectives required by the PE process to guide a teacher and their work. These objectives are composed of several subobjectives, like the inclusion of students in movement and presenting a physically active lifestyle as not only beneficial to health but one that can be pleasurable by increasing the quantity of physical activity; students’ desire to be active outside of PE; and the development of motor skills through various contents, among others. Only such clearly defined objectives enable a true assessment of PE. The success of achieving objectives can be evaluated through teachers’ work methods, spatial possibilities, and characteristics of groups, among others. The final assessment in our opinion enables a level-based determination of objectives, from the most general objectives (e.g., physically active lifestyle, positive attitude to physical activity, etc.) to specific objectives (e.g., knowledge about a certain jumping technique). By acknowledging such an approach, clearer
156
R. PISˇOT ET AL.
assessment possibilities are available to determine the success of a teacher as well as PE methods and approaches used to meet the set objective. The final objective of the PE process is not to establish methods or approaches to be used by teachers to meet the objectives, but to assess the students’ knowledge, development, and progress in comparison with clearly determined types of objectives. Teachers’ knowledge, relationships, methods, approaches, manners, forms, and accessories are only some of the tools used to meet objectives. Loosely defined or unclearly set objectives significantly negatively impact the ability to assess PE teachers’ work.
Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 23:17 30 October 2014
WHAT DOES THIS ARTICLE ADD? This article presents the role of PE in the Slovenian compulsory school education system and some approaches that have been used to evaluate the quality of PE in Slovenia and are in some ways different from the approaches presented by Rink (2013), McKenzie and Lounsbery (2013), and Ward (2013). Assessment and assurance of quality of PE is a very broad area and can be defined by a variety of approaches, depending on the context of PE objectives. A very important point for assuring the quality of PE is also to support immediate and wider living, the school environment, and of course, government strategies. This is a view not covered by Rink, McKenzie and Lounsbery, and Ward. Quality of PE can be a research problem for scientists. A holistic approach that includes both a selfevaluation process, internal and external evaluation, and at the same time governmental support for achieving public health and other clearly defined objectives of PE can be an
appropriate evaluation method of PE effectiveness evaluation. REFERENCES Catelli, L. A., Likon, B., Vonta, T., & Pisˇot, R. (2009). Analyzing effective teaching performance. Koper, Slovenia: University Annales Press. Jurak, G., Kovacˇ, M., & Strel, J. (2002). Popularity of physical education among students in comparison to other school subjects. In B. Sˇkof & M. Kovacˇ (Eds.), Developmental directives of physical education. Proceedings of the 15th Professional Conference of Physical Education Teachers (pp. 49– 54). Ljubljana, Slovenia: Professional Association of Physical Education Teachers of Slovenia. Kovacˇ, M., Markun Puhan, N., Loreci, B., Novak, L., Planinsˇec, J., Hrastar, I., . . . Muha, V. (2011). Education plan: Program for elementary school. Physical education. Ljubljana, Slovenia: Ministry for Education and Sport: The National Education Institute of the Republic of Slovenia. McKenzie, T. L., & Lounsbery, M. A. (2013). Physical education teacher effectiveness in a public health context. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 84, 419–430. National regulations on assessment and knowledge evaluation and students promotion in primary school. (2013, June 21). Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, (1988), 6025 (Uradni list RS, n. 52/2013). Retrieved from http://uradni-list.si/1/content?id=113609#!/Pravilniko-preverjanju-in-ocenjevanju-znanja-ter-napredovanju-ucencev-vosnovni-soli Rink, J. E. (2013). Measuring teacher effectiveness in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 84, 407–418. Sˇtemberger, V. (2004). Planning of physical education as an indicator of quality of physical education. Didactica Slovenica, 2, 100–111. Sˇtemberger, V. (2011). Analysis of physical education planning. In V. Manfreda Kolar, B. Sicherl Kafol, & D. Skribe Dimec (Eds.), Special didactics: What we have in common and where are the differences between us (pp. 181– 200). Ljubljana, Slovenia: University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education. Ward, P. (2013). The role of content knowledge in conceptions of teaching effectiveness in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 84, 431 –440.
