Ben Jones (@benpaddlejones) and I have just completed a research paper looking at his use video analysis in physical education. In an effort to share some of the initial findings with the outside world I have (with Ben’s permission) decided to write a 200 word blog summary of the research. I would like to be able to do this with more of my work and hope that it helps to open the conduit between research and the practice communities.
We’re living in a technological revolution. However, it is awave of progress that is moving away from us with each passing day. In theirsong ‘time’ Pink Floyd wrote “we run and we run to catch up with the sun butit’s sinking” – which in my mind is a good analogy for the distance that isbeing created between what we could do with ICT in our teaching and therealities of what little is actually achieved. To address this Ben chose to usevideo analysis to engage low ability and disaffected kids in physical education.It could be argued that video analysis has occurred in physical education formany years using suitcase size video cameras and bulky players but despite theavailability of this technology it hasn’t caught on in the subject’s teaching.Ben’s project was to see what worked ‘best’ for his students and he tried sevendifferent video analysis techniques only to find that simply recording andreplaying footage on digital cameras andfreezing the frame using pause was the most useful for his students. In thisway immediate feedback was possible which helped students engage with theirlearning while simultaneously wanting to help their peers.
The project sounds well grounded in what most day to day PE teachers will find useful for their own practise. I find, though, that I rarely find myself teaching "pure" PE where analysis of skill is the core business for extended periods of Core PE class teaching time. In elective Sport Science classes this is more the case, and I look forward to reading about what worked and what didn't, and what your collective thoughts are on the way forward.
In my core PE classes, the opportunity for video analysis is more varied. In my school our focus in PE practical lessons is Lifelong Physical Activity - developing options in movement that live on after school. Video analysis isn't as effective here because the emphasis isn't on what happens in movement, more on just doing enjoyable movement. Some kids are reluctant participants in front of their peers, let alone a camera. Horses for courses, I guess.
Interesting some of Vicky's research (@VGoodyear) suggests the same Jonesy. She used the role of camera woman in classes as part of her Masters dissertation and found that kids use the camera as a place to hide. They would be behind the camera and did an excellent job there but they wouldn't take part if it was someone else filming. This comes down to all sorts of other agendas around elite performance, body image and self-worth...which all make the matter much more complicated. However, we need to address these head on and not stonewall them...technology is moving away from us and not everyone is an innovative as some of you guys...
In further response to Ash's comment regarding my work Brendan and his Blog. I am working on the question of legitimising participation. When students who normally disengaged in lessons (refused to participate, didn't bring their kit, often got asked to leave lessons for poor behaviour) were in the role of the camerawoman, although they removed themselves from engaging practically, they engaged in learning: commentating on what their group was doing, editing clips, looking at their teams learning and performance. An improvement from prior disengagement in PE. However, when they were asked to engage practically in a different role in a different lesson during the unit they went back to their normal refusive behaviour. Is it a question of finding a form of engagement, task or role in PE that develops learning rather than everyone being practically engaged, 'moving'. I am presenting a poster on these findings at the AIESEP conference in Limerick in a few weeks. if this is of interest I will be happy to send you the poster over.
I guess that brings us back to what PE actually is. Traditionally it's about movement and understanding movement, so participation -as - cameraman could count toward understanding movement. I wouldn't feel comfortable, however, if the same students remained behind the camera and weren't given the chance to find a niche in movement experiences that suited them. Call me old school, but to appreciate movement you have to engage and establish patterns of movement as part of your life experience. Vigorous competitive activity, vigorous recreational activity, as an individual, as a group....a pattern needs to be established, a love for activity fostered. I don't think you can do that by just watching. We as physical educators have the responsibility to build that capacity in our students.
I guess that is what Vicky found. The students self-selected the roles they wanted to take and excelled in them. Able students wanted to be the coach and not the camerawoman but the less able/disaffected were the opposite. It is now a case of finding roles that encourage students to adopt alternative positions within PE and experience a range of responsibilities rather than just being a performer.
I agree Brendan that we want students to become movers and learn skills and qualities that will enable them to participate in physical activity for a lifetime. I am wondering whether participation in roles such as the camerawoman allows student's who are not confident within PE to begin to participate in learning, when they were previously disengaged and behaviour was varied in lessons. A reason they may disengage could have been due to prior experiences of PE which they perceived as negative, where they found it difficult to participate due to the other skills their peers possessed, teaching methods or activities they didn't respond well to. Is it a question of students feelings of their competence in PE? They may not feel competent to perform with and against, or coach other members of their teams, groups or class (to begin with). Do we need to facilitate and develop feelings of competence? and if so how? I suppose what I would have liked to have done and possibly should have done was to continue the structure of this unit (cooperative learning using Flip Cameras) beyond this one unit. We may then have seen if their engagement in the role of the camerawoman and their increased confidence in a role in PE that they liked and enjoyed influenced them to become more part of the group that was performing practically and if they then gained confidence to try other roles.
Have you heard of SEPEP (Sport Education in Physical Education Program) ? Here's a link to a NSW Curriculum support document about SEPEP http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/secondary/pdhpe/assets/pdf/pa_004.pdf
I've tried to use the SEPEP philosophy in my faculty, but interestingly the greatest resistance came from the staff, for whom the concept of giving up control of their lessons and traditional roles were apparently threatening. In the end the kids were not sure how to handle their responsibilities (partly because the staff weren't sure how to give them responsibility) and after a couple of seasons (due to me conceding things for staff buy in) the final version was nothing like it was supposed to look (with the control back in the teacher's hands) so I canned it.
In a more supportive environment, with good preparation, it would work well. Kids responsible for their own learning - heaven forbid!
Thanks for the link to the resource.Yes I have used sport education as a method of instruction before. It certainly engaged students in learning. Ash (@DrAshCasey) has also used it as part of his PHD too. A difference between sport education and cooperative learning is that in sport education there is team accountability and in cooperative learning there is individual accountability alongside a group goal. An avenue to consider is accountability and the form of accountability relating to engagement.
It is certainly a challenge to move away from the do-as-I-do pedagogical practice, even with the best intentions. In the beginning phases of the unit, without knowing so I directed learning. The video clips helped me to monitor my behaviour. The question is and what I am hoping to learn is how best can we support physical educators to make a pedagogical change and sustain a change in teaching and learning?
I find the discussion on the use of video analysis interesting and have looked at how to best integrate it into PE lessons in a practical yet effective way. The battle is to not only find the most effective use in terms of enhancing student learning & their experiences within PE, but also how to make its use sustainable as a teacher. When rushing from one venue to the next (field to sportshall, classroom to gym...) it can be difficult to find time to set up equipment. Having aequipment at hand and easy/quick to set up is in my opinion vital. This is something I have tried to achieve by getting fixed projector screens and 2 mobile projectors on trolley's at our 2 venues. These can then be used in changing rooms, gym, sportshall or classrooms thus enabling video projections at multiple venues. Combine this with an excellent WiFi and basic demonstrations form youtube can be shown before, during or after lessons. By adding camcorders & handeld cameras to lessons we then have the ability to capture & replay footage to individuals, small groups or whole classes. In my experiences this, as Ash (@DrAshCasey) & Ben's (@benpaddlejones) research suggests, effectively enhances the students learning & engagement in lessons.
I think you have hit the nail on the head here Dylan. The use of ICT is not an add on to physical education but needs to become part of the infra-structure of the way we teach the subject. You have installed it into the very fabric of the school and worked hard to make it part of daily practice. I think that this is where many people go wrong. They think that by buying a few flip cams and using a few powerpoint presentations that this means using ICT in PE...instead it is about enhancing the environment so that ICT is an integral part of a child's learning. Your department and school are in the 21st century but I fear that you are boldly going where few have gone before. Still, it shows why you have won an award as the best department there is...it is create to be talking to a role model...good on you.
Matt Curnter-Smith suggested that there were three types of Sport Education - full version, watered down and cafeteria - the later two were basically a traditional approach with the teacher in control but with the name changed to include the name 'Sport Education.' Pedagogical change takes time even for the most dedicated (took me seven years from the start of my MSc to the end of my PhD) but research suggests that university support is really important (that is one of my ongoing research projects and a future blog) as it helps teachers to learn how to use this approaches. We are going to be starting some professional development stuff soon for teachers in models-based practices like Sport Education and Cooperative Learning. So watch these spaces as we would love to have you guys on board.
Unfortunately Jonesy there are expectation beyond the desire of the department (another paper and another blog) that we have to change if we are really series about improving the ways in which we teach physical education...and part of that process is learning to be a different teacher to the one everyone else expects you to be...
From the research that i have been doing for my Masters dissertation, it agrees with Ben that filming students perform and replying them the video is the best way for them to learn but if you have access to more cameras then why not go one step further. For example, students are using mobile phones to create and upload videos of their lives (YouTube) so why not give them the autonomy in PE. I recently had Yr 7 students create their own Vlog in Gymnastics, allowing them to document their learning each week as they progressed towards the learning outcomes. Allowing them to use a everyday skill within PE and engage all ability students. At the end of the scheme of learning the students then edited the videos (in a class outside of PE) and reviewed their learning over the 4 weeks. Giving the students a sense of purpose of using video analysis in PE and giving them a tool that can be showcased to parents/ new class teacher in Yr 8 and the students themselves in Yr 8. I agree with Ash that just because you have flip cameras doesnt mean you are using ICT to engage learning and teaching. You must remember that Video analysis doesnt always suit every activity and the pedagogy chosen is down to the teachers professional judgement.
I love hearing about all this innovation with ICT, some great ideas for practice. Organisation, the prior planning and extended work behind the scenes of a lesson is key to ICT and student-centred approaches, such as sport education and cooperative learning. I know from my own experience this is sometimes a challenge within the busyness of school life, my time management and organisation skills were taken to another level. Was the prior work before lessons something that discouraged the teachers from using sport education effectively Brendan? Or is this a reason you know why some teachers are reluctant to engage with models or change pedagogy?
I also agree that purpose and not merely just using ICT for the sake of it is important. Unfortunately, Ash has stated previously that teacher's use it often to 'tick government boxes' ( Hastie, Casey & Tarter, 2010). Student's and teacher's need purpose. This links back to my previous point on accountability (learning/ participation is assessed or recorded). Hastie & Siedentop (2006) suggest that without accountability students will only do what they are motivated to do by their own interests . Moreover, Doyle (1983) claimed if no answers are required then few student's attend to the content. So just using ICT and believing students will just learn because it is in lessons doesn't work.
We have all had purpose with our ICT in lessons and structured lessons effectively to promote learning using such technology. Like Pat I had student's use cameras to record performance and develop their learning. Followed by the creation of their own team movies of their learning and opinions of PE, presented to the head of department. I am wondering whether the differences in our own research is related to accountability and student's motivation. I am making a generalization here, from own experience, that KS3 are more engaged in PE than KS4. I used KS4 girls and I suggests some of them engaged less practically due to their motivation, yet found a role for engagement through being a camerawoman, something that interested them. Moreover, one of the findings I have stated is that my form of accountability was not strong enough, which was their performance being recorded on camera in relation to the learning outcomes of lessons. If their learning was assessed in a different way would this have meant they engaged practically when they were in a role of a coach, it's possible.
So I wonder, do you agree? What methods have you used to ensure every student is accountable and is this why ICT worked? Do you think their engagement and learning was related to motivation of their own interests?
In order to add your comments, you must login or register as a member
You can login or register here