Physical education in alternative provision schools: A case of spatial (in)justice?

Anthony J. Maher, Thomas Quarmby, Oliver Hooper, Victoria Wells, Lucy Slavin
{"title":"Physical education in alternative provision schools: A case of spatial (in)justice?","authors":"Anthony J. Maher, Thomas Quarmby, Oliver Hooper, Victoria Wells, Lucy Slavin","doi":"10.1002/berj.4064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Physical education has the potential to achieve the desired outcomes of alternative provision schooling by re‐engaging young people in learning, supporting their social and emotional development and facilitating their reintegration into mainstream schooling. To do so, however, it requires sufficient and appropriate space because, unlike other subjects, its focus on embodied curriculum, embodied pedagogy and embodied learning requires the mind–body–self of young people to move across, within and between space(s). As such, we embrace what Soja (<jats:italic>Seeking Spatial Justice</jats:italic>, University of Minnesota Press, 2010) termed the ‘spatial turn’ in research and draw on the concept of spatial (in)justice to explore social, economic and environment inequalities in the education and alternative provision landscapes in England. To do so, we gathered empirical evidence via individual interviews with 13 physical education practitioners working in alternative provision schools in England. With the permission of participants, interviews were audio‐recorded and audio transcribed, and the transcripts subjected to reflexive thematic analysis. We discuss spatial injustices in alternative provision physical education through the following themes: (1) accessing space for physical education off‐site; (2) low expectations for appropriate space and making the most of the limited space available for physical education; and (3) weather determining usage of outside space and difficulties gaining external funding for on‐site spaces. We end this article by calling on others to join our efforts to lobby government to ensure that alternative provision settings, new and old, are not exempt from the School Premises Regulations so that a clear, legally binding expectation is created so that sufficient space is provided to teach physical education.","PeriodicalId":501494,"journal":{"name":"British Educational Research Journal ","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Educational Research Journal ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.4064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Physical education has the potential to achieve the desired outcomes of alternative provision schooling by re‐engaging young people in learning, supporting their social and emotional development and facilitating their reintegration into mainstream schooling. To do so, however, it requires sufficient and appropriate space because, unlike other subjects, its focus on embodied curriculum, embodied pedagogy and embodied learning requires the mind–body–self of young people to move across, within and between space(s). As such, we embrace what Soja (Seeking Spatial Justice, University of Minnesota Press, 2010) termed the ‘spatial turn’ in research and draw on the concept of spatial (in)justice to explore social, economic and environment inequalities in the education and alternative provision landscapes in England. To do so, we gathered empirical evidence via individual interviews with 13 physical education practitioners working in alternative provision schools in England. With the permission of participants, interviews were audio‐recorded and audio transcribed, and the transcripts subjected to reflexive thematic analysis. We discuss spatial injustices in alternative provision physical education through the following themes: (1) accessing space for physical education off‐site; (2) low expectations for appropriate space and making the most of the limited space available for physical education; and (3) weather determining usage of outside space and difficulties gaining external funding for on‐site spaces. We end this article by calling on others to join our efforts to lobby government to ensure that alternative provision settings, new and old, are not exempt from the School Premises Regulations so that a clear, legally binding expectation is created so that sufficient space is provided to teach physical education.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
替代性学校的体育教育:空间(不)公正?
体育教育有可能通过让青少年重新参与学习,支持他们的社会和情感发展,促进他 们重新融入主流学校教育,从而实现替代性学校教育的预期成果。然而,要做到这一点,体育教育需要足够和适当的空间,因为与其他学科不同,体育教育注重具身课程、具身教学法和具身学习,这就要求青少年的身心自我在空间之间、空间之内和空间之间移动。因此,我们接受 Soja(《寻求空间正义》,明尼苏达大学出版社,2010 年)在研究中提出的 "空间转向",并借鉴空间(不)正义的概念,探讨英格兰教育和替代性教育中存在的社会、经济和环境不平等现象。为此,我们通过对 13 名在英格兰替代教育学校工作的体育教育从业人员进行个别访谈,收集了经验证据。在征得参与者的同意后,我们对访谈进行了录音和录音誊写,并对誊写内容进行了反思性专题分析。我们通过以下主题讨论了替代性体育教育中的空间不公正问题:(1) 获得校外体育教育空间;(2) 对适当空间的低期望值和充分利用有限的体育教育空间;(3) 天气决定校外空间的使用和为校内空间争取外部资金的困难。在本文的最后,我们呼吁其他人与我们一起努力游说政府,确保新老替代性教育机构都不在《校舍条例》的豁免之列,从而建立一个明确的、具有法律约束力的预期,以便为体育教学提供足够的空间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reshaping curriculum adaptation in the age of artificial intelligence: Mapping teachers' AI‐driven curriculum adaptation patterns Physical education in alternative provision schools: A case of spatial (in)justice? The ‘Friday effect’: School attendance over the weeki From challenge to innovation: A grassroots study of teachers’ classroom assessment innovations Math task experiences and motivation to learn more: How prior knowledge and interest interact with Task‐Interest & Task‐Difficulty perceptions and feed a desire to reengage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1