The Quality Physical Education policy made by the UNESCO is paving the way for PE programs around the world to be inclusive, child-centred and flexible. Yes, you heard it right - flexible. “Flexibility” of the PE curricula is one of the most important ingredients towards QPE. Like in my previous article which featured the word inclusive, what does flexibility mean?
The Oxford Dictionary of English defines flexibility as the quality of bending easily without breaking. It is also described as the ability to be modified and willingness to change or compromise. These descriptions and definitions certainly apply to PE.
But first, we have to understand why some PE curricula in Asia and around the world are inflexible. Whether we like it or not, the main reason why there’s this rigidness is because of the academic standards that were developed which are believed to be guides in the learning process. Setting these standards and benchmarks is like setting the norms for what is considered “acceptable status” in the academia. Everything below standard is considered “failure”.
I am not against standard-based education as without them, progress won’t be monitored and measured. However, standard-based education has been causing the inflexibility of PE. For example, certain skills in Basketball should be learned at a certain grade level. Not being able to meet the requirements as a result of the many factors we know, means that the learner fails the subject. Teachers may try to reason out that learners should try harder to meet the requirement. But hey! We’re forgetting something. PE should not be about teaching specific skills and expecting all learners to replicate the same level of adeptness. I’ll cite what Corbin has said again: “We know we can’t teach every student to play every instrument in the band. Why do we think we can teach every child to play every sport?” (Corbin, 2002).
Are you the type of teacher who believes that learners should be excellent at all types of physical activities we introduce in PE class? That the learners’ target should be A+ because that what being “academic” is about? Should we conform to this system even if we already know Physical Education will never be like any other theory-based subjects?
Should we set aside standards then? If so, how do we measure progress? Do we even need to measure progress at all?
The Quality of Bending Without Breaking
True curricular flexibility means that we can bend some rules without breaking them. We don’t have to disregard academic standards. In fact, we can use them to be able to evaluate our learners. This evaluation can help us determine which areas or skills to improve. However, the question is: are the standards flexible enough?
Standards are not laws. I hate to cite an example of this but for academic discussion, let’s look at one of the standards from the US that many schools in Asia adopted in their curriculum. In my opinion, NASPE standards are authoritarian in nature. They impose some sort of national command that must be followed by schools, teachers and students in their country. The physically literate individual demonstrates competency in a variety of motor skills and movement patterns (NASPE, USA). The Philippines adopted it and developed its own which stated “competence in movement and motor skills requisite to various physical activity performances" (DepEd, Philippines). Again, what works in the US might not work in other countries (UNESCO). These may not be like laws like how am exaggerating them to be but unconsciously, schools and teachers might have been using these standards as some sort of authority to be followed. In this case, these standards became laws and not being able to follow them is like a crime (exaggerating again).
How do we make the previously mentioned NASPE standard flexible when we have a diverse type of learners with different learning styles, physical activity preferences, and physical capabilities and incapabilities? Are we firm that all learners must become physically literate individuals who demonstrate competency in a variety of motor skills and movement patterns? I can’t find a way to bend this standard without breaking it. It is just not flexible. Please let me know in the comments below if you have any suggestions or any idea on how to make standards flexible.
The Ability to be Easily Modified
Flexibility is also the ability to be easily modified. To modify something means to make partial or minor changes. From this definition, flexibility allows minor alterations or adjustments to something, in our case, to PE curriculum.
In other words, we are talking about adjusting the standards. One way we are already doing adjustments is through grade level benchmarking. Benchmarks narrow down specific standards to make them relevant to particular age group or grade level on a local standard. However, benchmarks are still standards (only localised and specified). Benchmarks still set norms to what is “acceptable” locally. And for learners to not be able to reach the set academic benchmarks means “failure” in their part.
Willingness to Change and Compromise
This definition of flexibility is my favourite. Basically it encourages educators, policy makers, and curriculum developers to have this willingness to change and compromise. I believe that Physical Education is a unique subject in schools. There is no other subjects that will allow learners to fully develop themselves physically and socially. Maybe we have been too focused on treating PE as an objective academic discipline similar to other subjects like math and science where there are specific solutions to come up with specific answers. In as much as I like to believe and uphold that PE should receive the same status similar to other academic subjects, I am trying to open up my mind to a possibility of compromising its status. Maybe it will not hurt to focus on the main purpose of Physical Education’s existence in schools and not too much on the academic part, which in my opinion, what’s holding it back from being flexible? Or maybe, it’s time to blaze a new trail for PE to fulfil both its purpose and its being academic with those standards and benchmarks.
Flexible PE curricula should allow schools, teachers and learners to customise, modify and adjust their curricular programs, curricular contents, standards and benchmarks, and learning outcome expectations while focusing both on the main purpose of Physical Education - to guide learners to be active for life - and its academic status - an academic subject that develops a total child.
What is your view on flexibility?
No comments:
Post a Comment