Neoliberalism

and Play: How Neoliberalism effects PE, Recess, & Outdoor Education
Summary of Findings
By Cameron Potter

Introduction

Over the course of the last semester I have had the opportunity to invest my time and

energy into researching the effects that neoliberalism has on play; demonstrated by its impact

specifically on PE, Recess, and Outdoor Education. While what I found was fascinating, by no

means is my research on this area comprehensive. If anything, my efforts have uncovered more

areas that require research than discovering findings themselves. In summarizing my findings

over the course of the semester, I will address the following areas: Research & Play, Resources

& Play, the contested ground of play, and finally suggest some action steps or areas for further

research.

Research & Play

Play is good for the brain

Hillman (2014) researched 200+ 7-9 years olds for 9 months, with half of them

participating in a 2 hour long after-school physical activity intervention, and the other half as

the control group. Over the course of the school year, students in the study would attend this

intervention 5 day a week, 4 weeks a month. Hillman notes that the intervention included at

least 70 minutes of vigorous activity, as verified by heartrate monitors. It’s fair to say that

students involved in this intervention played hard. The goal of Hillman’s research was not

simply to test student’s stamina, but to compare brain activity in two main areas between the

test and the control groups. The findings were significant, students that were involved in

regular physical activity outperformed their peers in both testing areas. For more information,
see the research article notes under the heading titled similarly. The image below is brain

activity scans taken from the test group (left) and the control group (right). While the tests

were not scored, and therefore impossible to determine who did ‘better’ – it’s clear that there

is much more brain activity taking place with students that participated in the physical activity

intervention.

The implications for this are huge, both for the educational setting as well as the

workplace. Dr. Debbie Rhea, a TCU professor in the Kinesiology department, spoke to the

FWISD Counsel of PTA’s (one of my events linked in the Field Notes tab), and shared the

statistic that every hour of sitting takes as much time off your life as smoking a cigarette. Her

quote was, “sitting is the new smoking”. She also suggested that there is an increase in early
onset Alzheimer’s due to a lack of strengthening the brain through regular activity. For

students, the irony of course is that recess times have gotten less and less as schools become

more and more concerned about test scores and emphasizing academic performance.

Play Increases Executive Function

Best (2010) provides some insightful research in the same vein. Best argues that physical

activity increases children’s ability to use executive function. Executive function is the ability to

set long-term goals, and the mental and emotional fortitude to sacrifice to reach those goals.

Best connects this ability with different age groups, and different intensities of play.

In addition to executive function being a necessary and useful attribute for succeeding

in the world, it also counters behaviors that are considered ADD or ADHD. Best explains

physical activity’s importance by saying, “Whereas physical activity may not naturally facilitate

rote memorization or associative learning, it likely does facilitate the emergence and

development of adaptive, goal-directed problem solving skills, which is one of the hallmarks of

human development.” (p. 348).

Here Best provides the crux of the value of play – it’s good for human development. The

unfortunate reality, as we will discuss more later, is that neoliberalism and standardized testing

are more concerned with rote memorization than they are with human development.

PE is effected by Neoliberalism

PE is effected by Neoliberalism. That is the point that Macdonald (2011) argues in her

article. She begins with a succinct definition of neoliberalism that captures the essence so well:

“Neoliberalism can be understood as an approach to governing society in such a way as to

reconfigure people as productive economic entrepreneurs who are responsible for making
sound choices in their education, work, health, and lifestyle. Underpinning neoliberalism is a

core belief that free marketing (of schools, educational services, employment, etc.) will result in

more efficient and effective outcomes” (p. 37). Using this definition, it’s easy to understand

why neoliberalism has spread so quickly into so many corners of the country. It truly is a culture

– perhaps even a worldview – more than it is an economic system. Viewing individuals as

‘productive economic entrepreneurs’ sounds like a great system – assuming everyone is ready

to take on the risks and responsibilities of entrepreneurship. Of course, some are more

prepared than others, and by the very nature of entrepreneurship, individuals are eternally in

competition with each other. Sharing information is counterproductive as it releases ‘insider

knowledge’. Truly, it is in the individual’s best interested to be incredibly well educated, and

ensure that no one else is educated at all.

Macdonald argues that this same philosophy has taken root within PE curriculum.

Private outside organizations market their products to school districts who are concerned about

meeting the standards and measuring up to every other school in the nation – regardless of

unique challenges or demographics. Macdonald also speaks about the “increasing porosity of

the public private divide” (p.41), and how PE is not immune. Students are ‘for sale’ within a

neoliberal context. Their information, standardized scores, fitness test results, and BMI are all

sought after by private companies seeking a competitive (and financial) edge.

Individualism/Neoliberalism vs Outdoor Education

Hale (2006) takes a bit of a different focus on the issues connecting neoliberalism and

play. Hale predominately sees neoliberalism not as an economic system, but as a culture

advocating for the preeminence of individualism. This individualism is seen through a desire for
individuals to better themselves socially, relationally, and economically – independent (or

indifferent) of the position of others. This is in direct contrast to the goals and aims of outdoor

education, which seek to a greater understanding of self, others, and the environment. Hale

suggests some alternative uses of technology that still allow for individual promotion and

betterment, while using outdoor education to promote an alternative to neoliberal

individualism.

Outdoor Education as space for critical reflection

Hale’s focus on the individualism highlighted through neoliberalism is a great transition

to Polistina’s (2015) work on the outdoors (and outdoor education specifically) as space for

critical reflection about neoliberalism. Polistina argues that few, if any, disciplines even at the

university level provide the space and the perspectives away from society to allow for critical

reflection. She argues that as both a formal and a non-formal setting, outdoor leisure and

education are necessary spaces to step outside the cultural confines of neoliberalism, and truly

reflect on, analyze, and move away from neoliberalism.

Polistina didn’t suggest much to accomplish this aim other than “providing space for

critical reflection”, but did imply that outdoor leisure and education make integral contributions

to the social change and sustainability agendas. Due to the expansiveness of neoliberalism’s

reach, including the national parks and outdoor retailers market, getting outside of its influence

is a tricky task. Much like a fish in water, we don’t realize we’re wet until we get out of the

water. Trips to nature, or abroad (to some, but not all other countries) can be very helpful in

this regard, nature being the more affordable and convenient of the two.
 Polistina effectively argues for the benefits of outdoor leisure and education in

providing perspective on neoliberalism, but neglects to connect the dots between the rise of

neoliberalism and the devaluing of play. As a space for critical reflection and pursuit of

alternatives to neoliberalism, outdoor leisure and education are increasingly important and

logically underappreciated by an increasingly neoliberal society.

Play & Resources

Interestingly, though perhaps predictably, I found a strong correlation between those

that have the opportunity to access quality PE, extended recess, and outdoor education and

those with resources. Trinity Valley School is a great example of this. In many ways, TVS is a

model of what good schools can look like. My interview with the experiential education staff

and the middle school principal confirmed this. They quickly adapt their educational

approaches to fit what the best research is saying. They hire “only the best teachers that have

proven themselves in the public school classroom” (recorded interview with TVS

administration). They have elaborate programs that would be considered supplementary at a

more cost conscious school – including a professional chef that designs and oversees all lunches

made for the students. (As I toured the campus, and observed student recess time a wonderful

smell wafted over the play area. It was delightfully garlicy, with soy sauce undertones. When I

commented on the good smell and asked where it was coming from, the staff simply shrugged

and said, “school lunch”). They have a unique play structure of which Dr. Debbie Rhea of TCU’s

LINK project mentioned that “no public school will be getting one of those”. In contrast, the

principal at Benbrook can’t find a way to supervise students walking from the lunch room to the

playground, resulting in a merger 15 minutes of recess per day for K-5th graders.
 The drastic difference is resources and the subsequent effect it has on children’s play

was first brought to my attention by the staff at Trinity Valley School. They strongly believe that

play is important, hold it strongly as a value. This is demonstrated through their choice to

include the fees for outdoor education trips (which grades 3-10 participates in) in students’

tuition. In addition to this, they have chosen to schedule all of their outdoor education trips on

school days – giving up classroom time for students to participate in these trips. While they

were explaining this to me, the TVS staff were clear that they don’t view this as an extraneous

“add-on” for their students. They repeated mentioned that they “feel like every school should

be doing this”, and “we don’t feel that it’s fair to students of families with less resources that

they don’t get to experience these same trips”. They also believe that PE and recess should be

valued to the same degree.

Research, as well as the experience of TVS and Benbrook staff all seem to point to the

value of play, recess, and outdoor education. If play truly is an important part of children’s

growth and development, and it increases brain activity, and executive function, it seems that

play is an important part of a quality education. Perhaps play should be included as part of our

human right to a quality education. The irony, is that, while elaborate play areas or outdoor

education programs like at TVS are costly, unstructured recess time is not costly. In fact, it may

be the opposite! So what is keeping less-resourced schools from investing in more play? As it

turns out, it all connects back to neoliberalism.

The Contested Ground of Play

How does neoliberalism influence less-resourced school’s play? I think it’s best

illustrated by a quote from Shelly Mayer, Principal of Benbrook Elementary. “I’d like, honestly,
for our school day to be a little longer, I know it’s not a popular outlook, but 30 more minutes a

day would really help. And for a lot of our parents who work I don’t think that would be a bad

thing” (Recorded Interview with Shelly Mayer). At first glance this doesn’t look anything like

neoliberalism. Lurking under the surface there are two things which connect this comment to a

neoliberalistic worldview.

First, and more succinctly, an extended school day would benefit working parents who

currently are forced to pay for after school care. Extending the school day adds value to the

school for those parents from a purely economic standpoint. It positions the school to compete

more effectively with private, for-profit businesses (i.e. daycare). In a neoliberal society, value is

often assessed based on economic gains. Through this lens, the school becomes slightly (it’s

only 30 minutes) more valuable.

Second, Ms. Mayer’s motivation for extending the school day is to get all the required

subject content accounted for. Only then would an extended recess time be permissible. She

mentioned that there is a state mandated required minimum minutes of each of the core

subjects to be taught, and that recess wasn’t one of them. PE wasn’t even one of them! These

mandated minutes are required to ensure teachers have enough time to teach the materials

that will be covered in the standardized tests each year. These standardized tests have become

a huge deal. Not only are the stakes high for the students (tracking, gifted & talented classes,

honor’s class enrollment, etc.), but these tests have become critical for the teachers, the

principal, and the schools. While I believe the original intent of NCLB was good, the result

seems to be mortgaging students’ educational futures in order to pass grade level tests now.

This system is perpetuated by a private business sector that has become worth over $700
million (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/schools/testing/companies.html ).

This multimillion dollar industry lobby’s politicians and advocates and promotes their product.

While marketing your product is Business 101, these corporations have accomplished the task

of maximizing profits by ensuring the test scores have become THE thing schools are measured

by. As a result, decisions about what is worth investing school time in falls upon the chopping

block of “tested vs. extraneous”. For the subjects that are tested, students (at some schools)

are provided Title 1 tutors, after-school programs, and test prep. For the ‘extraneous’ subjects,

time and funding is cut to provide more of both to the tested subjects. This is what happens

with art and music. By definition, art and music are non-standard, and therefore cannot submit

to standardized testing. PE, in an effort to accommodate an increasingly neoliberal society, has

begun to revamp. The focus is increasingly on fitness testing, FITNESSGRAM’s, and BMI. In an

effort to remain relevant in a culture that ‘speaks’ neoliberal-ese, PE is adapting.

As a result, it’s the less-resourced schools that need to be more concerned about testing

scores. They have funding, staffing, and employment wrapped up in those scores. Schools that

have more resources are often schools that (for a variety of reasons, including resources) have

better test scores to begin with. The result is a freedom to experiment with extended recess,

regular PE, and outdoor education. Schools with less-resources often have lower test scores,

and feel the need to ‘catch-up’. This becomes the focus of their energies, and everything that is

non-essential is sacrificed along the way.

At the end of the day, it seems to come down to the value that is placed on play. Is it a

necessary requirement for learning, growth, and development? Or is it an extra? A perk that

must be earned by completing schoolwork and earning high test scores? Ms. Mayer reluctantly
admitted that many teachers at the local elementary view recess as something earned once

schoolwork was completed. By this standard, it’s no wonder that schools with higher test scores

have kids that play more, while schools with lower tests scores have less recess. Perhaps the

students with lower test scores haven’t worked hard enough to ‘earn’ a break yet.

Of course, that sentiment is completely false – but it does seem to permeate our current

educational system. The value of play is widely contested. Is it a reward for students that have

earned it? Or is it developmentally and educationally necessary?

Summary and Closing Thoughts

In closing, my research has led me to the conclusion that play is a grossly undervalued

asset to the development of children, especially elementary aged students. In an effort to reach

a standard, many expectations have been piled on these young children. School days are

longer, content material is thicker, Pre-K is touted as a panacea for educational ills.

Overwhelmingly, it seems that educational administrators believe that if we could just do more

of what we’re already doing, and do it longer, and quicker – perhaps then we would have an

educational system that meets universal standards. This goal has become paramount, and

education systems seem willing to sacrifice too much in the process – arts, music, recess, often

a love of learning is lost along the way. We must remember that students are people, not just

vessels to be filled, not just computers to program – real individuals with different learning

styles, various needs, and brains housed in bodies that need exercise, breaks, and play.

Bibliography

Hillman, C. H., Pontifex, M. B., Castelli, D. M., Khan, N. A., Raine, L. B., Scudder, M. R., Drollette,
E. S., ... Kamijo, K. (October 01, 2014). Effects of the FITKids Randomized Controlled Trial
on Executive Control and Brain Function. Pediatrics, 134, 4.

Best, J. R. (December 01, 2010). Effects of physical activity on children’s executive function:
Contributions of experimental research on aerobic exercise. Developmental Review, 30,
4, 331-351.

Macdonald, D. (February 01, 2011). Like a Fish in Water: Physical Education Policy and Practice
in the Era of Neoliberal Globalization. Quest, 63, 1, 36-45.

Hales, R. J., James, N., James Neill, & Hales, Robert James. (2006). The rise of individualism. The
implications for promoting relations between self, others and the environment in
outdoor education. Outdoor Council of Australia:
http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=157853;res=AEIPT.

Polistina, K. (January 12, 2015). Outdoor Leisure and the Sustainability Agenda: Critical
Pedagogy on Neo-liberalism and the Employment Obsession in Higher Education.
Tourism Recreation Research, 32, 2, 57-66.