Parry, S.J. (1998) Reid on knowledge and justification in Physical Education. European Physical Education Review, 4 (1). pp. 70-74. ISSN 1741-2749Full text available as:
[FIRST PARAGRAPHS] To my knowledge, very little has been written on the educational justification of PE activities for the last decade. Since PE now does have a place on the National Curriculum, albeit arguably a minor one, the justification issue does seem to have been put on the back burner by the profession.
In a recent and welcome addition to the literature, Reid revisits the debate, outlining two ‘conventional assumptions’ made by what he calls the ‘new orthodoxy’ in PE:
1. The ‘early Hirstian’ account3, which sees knowledge as propositional, and education as academic. When applied to PE, this suggests:
2. The distinction between practical performance and the ‘theory’ related to it - i.e. the propositional knowledge of Human Movement Science (HMS).
The paper is a critique of these two assumptions, and a defence of the claim that PE ‘can indeed satisfy the knowledge requirements of education; but ... without making claims to academic significance’ (p95).
|Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information:||© 1998 Sage publishing. This is an author produced version of a paper published in European Physical Education Review. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy.|
|Academic Units:||The University of Leeds > Faculty of Arts (Leeds) > School of Humanities (Leeds) > School of Philosophy (Leeds)|
|Depositing User:||Leeds Philosophy Department|
|Date Deposited:||05 Oct 2007 09:42|
|Last Modified:||08 Feb 2013 16:55|
|Identification Number:||doi: 10.1177/1356336X9800400107|
Actions (login required)