Asia-Pacific Journal of Health,

Sport and Physical Education

Volume 1 (1) 2010

Promoting Active & Healthy Living

Print Post Approved PP 535822/0009
MEMBER AREA NOW AVAILABLE
www.achper.org.au

VIEW: UPDATE: PAYMENTS:

• Membership • Membership • Pay Your
Details Details Renewal Online
• Whats New • Password
• Membership Details
Benefit
Information
• Past Ezines
& More
 Contents
Asia Pacific Journal of Health,

contents
Sport & Physical Education
The Journal of the Australian Council for
Health, Physical Education and Recreation Inc (ACHPER)

Editor
Christopher Hickey
Deakin University, Australia
3 Editorial
Reviews Editor
Lyn Harrison
Deakin University, Australia
5 Health and Physical Education in Australia: A defining time?
Editorial Board Dawn Penney
Richard Pringle - Auckland University, New Zealand
Dawn Penney - University of Waikato New Zealand
Mike McNeill - National Institute of Education, Singapore
Robyn Garrett - University of South Australia, Australia 13 Physical Education and Health in Singapore Schools
Richard Light - Leeds Metropolitan University, UK Michael C McNeill & Joan M Fry
Peter Kelly - Monash University, Australia
Tania Cassidy - Otago University, New Zealand
Trent Brown - Monash University, Australia
John Quay - University of Melbourne, Australia 19 ‘I think it’s a good idea, I just don’t know how to do it’:
Walter Kin Yan Ho - University of Macau, China
The struggle for PE reform in China
The Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Christopher Hickey & Dr Aijing Jin
Education (ISSN: 1837-7122, print, 1837-7130, online) is
published by the Australian Council for Health, Physical
Education and Recreation Inc., three times a year in April,
August and December. 27 The New Zealand Curriculum:
emergent insights and complex renderings
Manuscript Correspondence
The Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Alan Ovens
Education has a particular focus on social science research-
based articles (approximately 6000 words) that make
reference to other critical work in the field and/or discuss
particular issues of practice-focused research within the
specific professional fields of health, sport and physical
education. Editorial will privilege those articles that
explore and provide a depth of understanding of the
complex inter-relationship between developing/improving
practice through the production of knowledge. The Journal
will focus on the forms, contents and contexts of health
education, sport and physical education as they relate to
schools, universities and other forms of educational
provision. While the Journal will give primacy to articles
from, or focused on, the Asia-Pacific region, manuscripts
from beyond this region are welcome - providing they have
relevance to the readership.

The Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical

Education encourages submissions from social science
researchers, academics and other commentators seeking to
make contributions to the educational development of
health, sport and physical education.

Guidelines for Authors can be located on the ACHPER

website at www.achper.org.au.

Correctly formatted manuscripts should be sent

electronically to Editor Dr Chris Hickey
chick@deakin.edu.au or by surface address at:
School of Education, Deakin University, Waurn Ponds, Asia-Pacific Journal of Health,
Victoria, 3217, Australia.
Sport and Physical Education
All manuscripts are read by the Editor and by two expert
peer reviewers through a blind review process.

Views expressed in the Journal are those of the author’s and

do not necessarily reflect those of ACHPER or the Editors.
Author Guidelines
Books for Review
can be found on the ACHPER website
Should be sent to Dr Lyn Harrison at
lyn.harrison@deakin.edu.au or to:
School of Education, Deakin University,
www.achper.org.au
Waurn Ponds, Victoria 3217, Australia.
• Publishing
Subscription Information
For subscription rates for print or electronic access, contact • Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education
ACHPER at PO Box 304, Hindmarsh, South Australia 5007.
Ph: (08) 8340 3388 • Guidelines for Authors
Fax: (08) 8340 3399
Website: www.achper.org.au
Email: publishing@achper.org.au

Change of Subscriber Details

Notification of change of detail, including e-mail address,
is the responsibility of the subscriber. Claims for print
copies must be made within six month of the date of
publication or a back copy fee will apply.

Duplicate copies will not be sent to replace those

undelivered through failure to send advance notice.

Typeset and printing by Reflex Printing.

Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 1

 ACHPER moves to e-publishing in 2010

ACHPER’s National Board has undertaken a significant review of ACHPER’s two National
publications for members and subscribers, the Healthy Lifestyles Journal and the Active and
Healthy Magazine.

The ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal will be re-launched in 2010 with a new name
(Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education) and design offering wider
representation throughout the region.

Both the Journal and the Active and Healthy Magazine will move to an electronic format
from the first issue of 2010.

ACHPER is committed to finding ways to reduce any negative environmental impact of its
practices and seeks to enhance the environment we live in. The Board believes this move
to e-publishing is a decision taken in the best interests of members and subscribers. It will
also help to minimise membership and subscription fee increases over time.

ACHPER appreciates that this is a significant change to what members and subscribers are
used to. However, it is a fact that most contemporary organisations have moved in this
direction.

Should you wish to still receive a hard copy we will be pleased to make this available on a
cost recovery basis only. For further details please contact Megan Cowper, National
Membership Coordinator, on phone 08 8340 3388 or email membership@achper.org.au.

2 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010

 Editorial

editorial
Chris Hickey
Editor

W
elcome to the first edition of the Asia-Pacific
Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education.
As editor I am excited to finally have the
Journal out in the public domain and am grateful to the
efforts of all of the people that have helped with this
transition. Driving this initiative has been an intention to
strengthen existing links between social science researchers
across the interacting sub-disciplines of Health, Sport and
Physical Education, throughout the Asia-Pacific region.
This first edition of the Journal provides an overview of
Health and Physical Education around the Asia-Pacific
region. The main purpose of the collection is to focus on
the contemporary status and practice of Health and
Physical Education as curriculum practices in schools. The
authors give particular focus to the implications of current
trends and policies on HPE teachers and learners in schools.
Book Reviews will be a feature of the Journal, going
forward. We intend to publish reviews of books of between
650 and 900 words. We encourage diversity within reviews
and will consider publishing jointly-authored reviews and
paired reviews comparing two or more books.
Reviews will be carried out by people studying or working
in relevant areas. The reviews editor actively encourages
people who are new to reviewing and to journal
publication. If you would like to review for the journal then
you should email the Reviews Editor directly. Reviews do
not go through a formal peer review process but are edited
for style and content by the reviews editor.
Full details of guidelines for contributing authors and
reviewers are available on the ACHPER website.

Chris Hickey (PhD)

School of Education
Deakin University

Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 3

 Special Offer
When you order 10 or more
copies of the same text you will
receive 5% discount and free
postage to anywhere within
Australia

$59.95

O rder O nline www.healthylifestylesbookshop.com.au

Phone 08 8340 3388
Fax 08 8340 3399
Email sales@healthylifestylesbookshop.com.au

4 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010

Health and Physical Education in Australia:

curriculum
A defining time?

Dawn Penney - University of Tasmania

T his paper explores contemporary Health and Physical Education (HPE) curriculum in Australia in the context of the
ongoing development of a new national curriculum. Drawing on policy documents and academic commentaries it
reviews and problematises the current position and prospective development of HPE in the Australian Curriculum,
examining key aspects of the policy terrain upon which curriculum development will occur and by which it will be shaped.
The current HPE curriculum context across Australia is identified as featuring both clear commonalities in curriculum
structure and content and notable variations. Attention is drawn to curriculum strengths that have emerged from state and
territory based development in recent years, but also, ongoing tensions relevant to prospective national consensus. The
paper highlights the need for productive collaboration across interest groups, between states and territories, and between
academic and professional communities in order to secure a prosperous curriculum future for HPE across Australia.

Introduction in recent years, but also, ongoing tensions inherent in ‘HPE

This paper arises amidst ongoing moves towards a new
national curriculum in Australia, with the development of
the Australian curriculum. As I discuss further below, while
this is not the first time that national consensus and
consistency in relation to curriculum has been pursued, the
current development represents a significant shift towards
far greater centralisation and standardisation of curriculum
requirements for schools throughout Australia than is
currently the case. What this development will mean for
Health and Physical Education (HPE) across Australia
remains somewhat unclear, with HPE seemingly assured of
some place in the new national curriculum, but with
substance in terms of curriculum structure, content and
requirements all yet to be defined. This paper reflects my
view that this may well prove to be a ‘defining time’ for HPE
in Australia; a time when the stakes are high in curriculum
development and when that development remains highly
political.
Drawing on policy documents and academic
commentaries relevant to the curriculum and policy
context, the paper reviews and problematises the current
position and prospective development of HPE in the
Australian curriculum. It progressively examines key
aspects of the policy terrain upon which curriculum
development will occur and by which it will be shaped,
starting with the national education policy arena. The focus
then shifts to the current HPE curriculum context across
Australia. Attention is drawn to the curriculum strengths
that have emerged from state/territory based development
curriculum’ that are relevant to prospective national
consensus about a new national framework for HPE
curriculum and/or associated assessment requirements.
Exploration of both the national and state/territory
arenas is directed towards critically engaging with policies,
curriculum and contexts that can be expected to serve as
reference points in the development of HPE in the
Australian curriculum. Analysis focuses on the discourses
and interests that are currently, and may in the future be
variously embedded in, promoted by, or in contrast,
marginalised in HPE curriculum. Key issues raised in this
regard are:
(i) the positioning and representation of discourses
associated with and seen as defining the learning area,
and broader political, social and educational discourses
that may or may not underpin and inform HPE in the
new Australian curriculum. In this latter respect,
attention focuses on the influence of wider political
discourses on the development of the Australian
curriculum as a whole and specifically in HPE.
(ii) the historical and ongoing distinction in discourses
and practices associated with HPE curriculum for years
K-10 of schooling, as compared to senior secondary
education (years 11 and 12); and
(iii) the representation of state and territory discourses
within national curriculum proposals for HPE.
HPE curriculum development in a national arena is thus
acknowledged as destined to involve considerable
contestation. The paper also emphasises, however, the

Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 5

critical need for productive collaboration across interest
groups, between states and territories, and between
academic and professional communities in order to secure a
curriculum future for HPE that will enable the
commitments and aspirations articulated in a national
statement produced by the Australian Council for Health,
Physical Education and Recreation (ACHPER, 2009, see
below), to be realised. In conclusion, while decisions
pending at national policy level are reaffirmed as
undeniably significant for HPE curriculum in Australia,
achieving the goals set out in the ACHPER statement is
identified as a matter that will remain heavily dependent on
local and individual curriculum advocacy and action.
Towards a national curriculum
Many people involved in the HPE field in Australia will
currently be reflecting back to the early 1990s, and identifying
with the development and publication of a national statement
and curriculum profile for Health and Physical Education for
Australian schools (Curriculum Corporation, 1994a, 1994b).
Moves towards national consensus and consistency in relation
to curriculum in Australia thus need to be acknowledged as by
no means new, and as I discuss below, the national statements
and profiles produced for HPE and other learning areas in
1994 have represented a significant common reference point
for subsequent curriculum development across the states and
territories of Australia. Amidst collaboration between states
and territories, however, responsibility for curriculum
development and implementation across Australia has lain
very clearly with state and territory education systems and
individual schools. As a consequence, there have been
similarities in curriculum design, content and requirements
across the various state and territory systems, but also distinct
differences.
In 2007, the differences in curriculum content and
requirements across Australia appeared in political circles at
least, to have been deemed unsustainable. Prior to the
current Commonwealth Labor government coming to office
in 2007, it was clear that irrespective of the outcome of the
pending federal election, development of a national
curriculum would be a key aspect of future education policy.
Both of the major political parties at a federal level, and the
state and territories had all signalled their agreement to the
pursuit of greater consistency in curriculum requirements
across state/territory jurisdictions (Rudd & Smith, 2007;
The Council for the Australian Federation, 2007; see also
Penney, 2007). Kevin Rudd, who was subsequently elected
as Prime Minister, stated that “Australia needs a national
curriculum. This is one of the conditions for higher
standards of achievement for young Australians” (Rudd and
Smith, 2007, p. 18). Rudd and Smith (2007, p. 18) added
that; “A national curriculum needs to be a clear and explicit
agreement about the essentials that all young Australians
should know and what they should be able to do” and also
clarified, that “Labor believes the starting point for a
national curriculum is the core areas of maths, the sciences,
English and history” (ibid, p. 18).
Since these statements were made, work to develop ‘the
Australian curriculum’ has progressed under the direction of
firstly, the National Curriculum Board (NCB) and
subsequently, the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and
6 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1)
2010
Reporting Authority (ACARA). ACARA is the agency
now charged with responsibility for development of the
Australian curriculum from Kindergarten to Year 12; a
cornerstone of the Rudd government’s (so called)
‘Education Revolution’. The ‘Melbourne Declaration on
Educational Goals for Young Australians’, made by all
Australian Education Ministers in December 2008
(Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training
and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), 2008), is identified as the
prime reference point for the development of the Australian
curriculum. Yet as Reid (2009) identified and I discuss
further below, the extent of alignment between the
curriculum being developed and the goals and intent of the
Melbourne Declaration, is certainly questionable.
The scope, structure and detail of the curriculum are
progressively emerging in the context of a phased
development process. Phase 1 has focused on Rudd’s
identified curriculum priorities and consultation on proposals
for K-10 curriculum in English, mathematics, science and
history is currently underway1, with development of material
for the senior secondary years (years 11 and 12) following.
ACARA (2010) has stated that:
The Australian curriculum for English, mathematics,
science and history (K-12) will be completed in the third
quarter of 2010. Planning for implementation by the states
and territories will take account of the differences between
the Australian curriculum and existing state and territory
curriculum. Planning for implementation will be
coordinated nationally.
It is expected that the implementation of the Australian
curriculum (K-10) will be well underway in 2013 across the
country. For some states and territories, 2011 will be a pilot
year, with the experience and advice from participating
schools used to guide implementation in the remaining
schools in subsequent years (ACARA, 2010a). These
comments allude to the fact that embedding the Australian
curriculum into state and territory contexts will be far from
a simple process and that necessarily, it will be a process that
is negotiated within each state and territory. Phase 2 of
development is also underway, encompassing languages,
geography and the arts. Production of initial ‘shaping
papers’ is currently in process for these learning areas.
In relation to the prospective inclusion and development
of HPE in the Australian curriculum, Phase 3 is, therefore,
the focus. Notably, at the time of writing, detailed plans for
what that phase will encompass and what the timelines for
development will be, have not been released. ACARA’s
position has been to simply state that it has:
…been asked by the Ministerial Council on Education,
Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs
(MCEECDYA) to provide advice on how the remaining
learning areas and subjects listed in the 2008 Melbourne
Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians
might best be addressed. (ACARA, 2010b)
In 2009 and amidst ongoing uncertainty in relation to
whether and/or when development of HPE within the
Australian curriculum would be addressed, an ACHPER
1 The period for consultation on K-10 draft documents commenced in
March 2010 and lasts until May 2010.
National Working Group worked to produce a national content, achievement standards and a reporting framework”
statement, outlining the importance of HPE in a national (ACARA, 2009, p. 5). Extracts from the technical
curriculum and the potential role of HPE in realising the specifications detailing each element as applicable to
goals articulated in the Melbourne Declaration (ACHPER, writing for the K-10 curriculum are provided in Figure 1.
2009). The publication of the statement was an openly The specifications serve to identify what writers for HPE
political move, designed to signal the commitment of the can be expected to produce as proposals for HPE K-10 in the
HPE community nationally to the inclusion of HPE in a Australian Curriculum. They will also address similar design
national curriculum, and its readiness to take that specifications for HPE in the senior secondary curriculum.
development forward. ACARA’s design specifications and the developments to
In a published brochure presenting an overview of the date (relating to learning areas incorporated in phases 1 and
Australian curriculum, it has been clarified that Phase 3 2), confirm that development of a K-12 Australian
work will include “health and physical education, curriculum will maintain an explicit distinction between
information and communication technology and design the K-10 and senior secondary curriculum. Yet, linkages to
technology, economics, business, and civics and senior secondary courses clearly remain a critical issue for K-
citizenship” (ACARA, n.d), such that the three phases 10 curriculum development and as I discuss below, in the
encompass all of the learning areas identified in the case of HPE, pose considerable challenges if curriculum
Melbourne Declaration2. In April 2010 ACARA also coherency and continuity K-12 is to be achieved.
advertised for a senior project officer to provide curriculum
expertise in HPE and to lead and manage projects relating
to the development of the Australian curriculum. In a
communiqué released on 15 April, MCEECDYA gave the
most direct indication yet that curriculum development
work relating to HPE in the Australian curriculum will be
progressed in the near future. Specifically, it was reported
that Ministers had agreed to:
The prioritisation of Health and Physical Education
(HPE) within phase three of the curriculum development
plan; the inclusion of HPE as a core learning requirement
for all students in each year from K-10; and to maximise
within an overall package of required school learning the
number of school hours that students participate in quality
physical education and sport each week.
(MCEECDYA, 2010, p.2)
Below I explore further aspects of this statement. At this
point, I merely wish to signal that it points to the likelihood
that curriculum development work will proceed with the
production of a ‘shaping paper’ for HPE in the Australian
curriculum, public consultation, appointment of a writing
group, development of a consultation draft curriculum, and
modification of that draft for publication and
implementation across all states and territories. These are
then important and potentially exciting times for HPE
curriculum development in Australia. They will
undoubtedly also be challenging times. Work associated
with Phases 1 and 2 has reaffirmed that achieving national
consensus about curriculum amongst subject and discipline
groups that inevitably, represent and bring to the table
contrasting viewpoints, is not an easy process.

HPE in the Australian curriculum:

Matters of design
In 2009 ACARA published a ‘Curriculum Design’ paper,
providing specifications to guide writing for the Australian
curriculum. ACARA explained that “The three key
elements of the national curriculum will be curriculum

2 The Melbourne Declaration identified the following as learning areas

to be incorporated into the curriculum: English; Mathematics; Sciences
(including physics, chemistry, biology); Humanities and social sciences
(including history, geography, economics, business, civics and
citizenship); The arts (performing and visual); Languages (especially Figure 1 - Curriculum Design: Extracts from Technical
Asian languages); Health and physical education; and Information and Specifications for K-10 (ACARA, 2009).
Communication Technology and design and technology.

Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 7

 While these specifications set a frame for curriculum
writing in a technical sense, it is equally important to realise
that they do so in a discursive sense, and that they reflect
particular thinking about curriculum. In drawing attention
to this, I point to a need for critical engagement with
ACARA’s text and more specifically, for curriculum
development to not lose site of the declaration that
purportedly remains the prime reference point for the
advancement of a national curriculum.
In the Melbourne declaration, the Australian federal, state
and territory governments, in collaboration with all school
sectors, made a commitment to the pursuit of two goals: (i)
equity and excellence in Australian schooling; and (ii) all
young Australians becoming successful learners, confident
and creative individuals, and active and informed citizens
(MCEETYA, 2008). “Promoting world-class curriculum and
assessment” was one of eight areas of action that were seen
as fundamental to achieving these goals and that all
governments committed toi. In accordance with the goals, it
was stated that “Curriculum will be designed to develop
successful learners, confident and creative individuals and
active and informed citizens” (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 13).
In his address to the Australian Curriculum Studies
Association (ACSA) biennial conference in 2009,
Professor Alan Reid highlighted that we might well have
anticipated debate about a number of fundamental
curriculum design matters, including:
…how the curriculum should be shaped to deliver these ends
[successful learners, confident and creative individuals and
active and informed citizens], canvassing such questions as:
what kind of knowledge should be in it?, how important is it
to move across traditional knowledge boundaries?, how and
why should knowledge be organised? (e.g., subjects or
learning areas), what theories of learning will form the basis
of the curriculum, and so on.
(Reid, 2009, p. 13)
With attention at first being devoted exclusively to the
development of curriculum for four learning areas, Reid
(2009, p. 13) expressed the view that “There is a serious
disconnect between the stated aims and goals of Australian
Schooling (MCEETYA, 2008) and the curriculum itself”,
adding that the incremental addition of further learning
areas does nothing to amend a fundamental flaw in design.
…drip feeding subjects is no way to design a futures oriented
national curriculum. It is a basic principle of curriculum
development that it is important to understand the whole
(and the connections within it) before focusing on the detail
of the component parts.
(Reid, 2009, p. 14)
Over two decades ago, a very similar point was evident in
relation to the initial development of a National
Curriculum in England and Wales. Duncan Graham,
appointed as chair and chief executive of the National
Curriculum Council that was to be charged with ‘driving’
that curriculum development, has reflected that even at the
time of accepting this job, he saw the problems that were set
to arise.
I began to realise that the scope and intensity of the national
curriculum would undoubtedly lead to difficulties. It was
obvious to me even then that the subject by subject approach
8 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
and the detail contained within each subject would inevitably
lead to conflict between the various subjects and put pressure
on the curriculum if other subjects were added.
(Graham with Tytler, 1993, p. 10)
Reid has suggested that a further critical disconnection
seems apparent in the development of the Australian
curriculum, specifically in the emphasis of a need for a
curriculum response to societal changes and challenges in
the 21st century, and the parallel adoption of a curriculum
structure that mirrors that long established across the states
and territories and reflected in the Statements and Profiles
produced in 1994. As Reid (2009, p. 14) noted “There may
be nothing wrong with that, but it behoves the developers
to state why maintaining the status quo, or returning to the
past, will address the challenges identified”. Once again,
Reid’s comments echo critiques of the National Curriculum
in England and Wales during the 1990s, with Griffith
(2000) having expressed the view that:
…the aims are dissonant with the content of the National
Curriculum; …the aims imply an education typified by
experiential learning and whole-person growth, whereas the
National Curriculum, in operation, enforces a limited
academic course restricted to the rote-learning of subject-
specific knowledge… (p.xvii)
Griffith (2000) argued that in contrast to the
‘acceptance epistemology’ presented via the National
Curriculum, “Contemporary pupils, citizens and workers
need a critical reflective epistemology. Such an
epistemology would not reject other ways of knowing, but
rather, would use them selectively as appropriate to
different circumstances” (p. 207).
Amidst pressured timelines that reflect political
imperatives there are then, very real dangers that
opportunities for the critical engagement with the emerging
structure and content of the Australian curriculum will be
notably limited and, in turn, boundaries set in relation to
the discourses that can fund expression in and through HPE
in that curriculum. In the sections that follow, my intention
is to prompt such engagement and encourage members of
the HPE community within Australia and across the Asia-
Pacific to seek to ensure that the development of HPE in
the Australian curriculum is not overly constrained by
politics and/or pragmatism.
HPE in the Australian curriculum:
Discourses and design
Since the official curriculum represents a small selection of
knowledge from all that is available, and since the outcomes
of education have important political, cultural and
economic effects, it should come as no surprise that
curriculum-making is a hugely political process. The
question for those interested in curriculum policy and
enactment is: whose knowledge is privileged by this political
process and whose is silenced or marginalised?
(Reid & Johnson, 1999, p. xiv)
The recent HPE curriculum history in Australia, current
HPE curriculum contexts and associated policy documents
will all be key reference points for the development of HPE
in the Australian curriculum. As reflected in Reid’s (2009)
comments, the Statements and Profiles produced in 1994
for each of eight learning areas3 retain considerable status
and authority in relation to curriculum structure and
content in Australia. This is not surprising given that they
represent the most recent direct collaboration between the
states, territories and commonwealth on curriculum
matters, and their influence upon curriculum and
assessment frameworks across the states and territories was
substantial. Yet, it seems equally important to acknowledge
the significant curriculum developments that have occurred
since 1994 in state and territory arenas, and furthermore,
recognise this as an opportunity for informed curriculum
review and re-design. We should surely not merely be
seeking reproduction of established curriculum frameworks
and/or content. I therefore concur with ACHPER’s (2009)
emphasis that “Enhancing HPE nationally in Australia
should draw upon best practice across all the States and
Territories”, but also regard this as a time when we should
identify and endeavour to address curriculum tensions that
have become apparent amidst the implementation and
adaptation of the 1994 Statement and Profile for HPE.
Those involved in the events leading to the production of
the Statement and Profile for HPE (Curriculum
Corporation, 1994a; 1994b) will be all too aware that the
development vividly revealed multiple interests in and
agendas for HPE, while also highlighting the need for strong
political lobbying to achieve particular outcomes. It was a
time quite deliberately described as one of crisis for a
community embracing interest groups from within and
beyond education (Dinan-Thompson, 2001; 2006; Glover,
2001; Swabey, 2006; Swabey & Penney, in press; Tinning et.
al., 1994). It is not possible in this paper to capture the
scope and complexity of the debate and events associated
with the development of the 1994 texts. Nor am I able to
document the detail of debates that subsequently occurred
across Australia in state, territory, education system and
individual school contexts, as the processes of adoption,
adaptation and implementation progressed. Rather, I wish
to emphasise the need to acknowledge that achieving
consensus on curriculum matters in relation to HPE has
historically not been easy, and inevitably, is only ever
partially achieved. In this respect, Australia is not unique,
but the policy context is arguably complicated by the fact
that since 1994 there has been ongoing, varied curriculum
development in state and territory arenas, such that as we
are set to embark on national curriculum development
work, it remains inappropriate to talk in a generalised way
about ‘HPE’ ‘across Australia’.
While there are undoubtedly dangers in reading too much
into nomenclature, significance goes beyond the words
themselves. Differences in terminology carry, and
simultaneously promote or deny particular meanings, and
‘slippages’ in terminology can therefore either open up or
close down possibilities for recognition and expression of
various discourses. Thus, I suggest that it is notable that a
media report published in April 2010 in The West Australian
stated that “A high-powered coalition of health groups is
worried that physical education is being neglected in the
Rudd Government’s drive to introduce a national
3 The eight learning areas were: English, mathematics, science,
technology, languages other than English, health and physical
education, studies of society and environment, and the arts.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
curriculum for kindergarten to Year 10 classes” (Tillet,
2010, p. 9, my emphasis), and similarly that the recent
MCEECDYA (2010) communiqué explicitly referred to
“quality physical education and sport” (my emphasis).
The name of the learning area serves to convey a
particular rationale for the learning area and to anticipate
what content will be deemed legitimate and accorded status
in curriculum. The nomenclature associated with the
learning area was a matter of contestation and intense
lobbying in 19944, and currently varies across Australia in
relation to the K-10 curriculum and senior secondary (year
11 and 12) courses. Most notably, ‘Personal Development,
Health and Physical Education’ (PDHPE) is the
terminology adopted in New South Wales, and since 2007,
‘Health and wellbeing’ has been used in Tasmania. Overt
differences such as these should prompt renewed reflection
about the rationale that should be linked to HPE in an
Australian curriculum and in turn, the learning outcomes to
be identified with the learning area, and the content
deemed essential to the achievement of those outcomes. As
Reid (2009, p. 12) stressed, “The design of any curriculum
is always strongly influenced by its rationale”, and I would
argue, will shape possibilities in relation to whether and
how particular discourses are reflected in that design. The
onus will thus be upon the HPE community to consider
whether rationales variously developed and presented in
curriculum documents since 1994 still hold currency in
2010 and more specifically, will connect with the goals
established in the Melbourne Declaration.
In its national statement, ACHPER went some way
towards engaging with this issue, presenting three points
which in time may (or may not) provide a starting point for
curriculum writers:
HPE is the area of the curriculum that provides education for
children to learn how to lead healthy lifestyles now and in the
future; that is, lifestyles characterised by and recognising the
importance of health and physical education and physical
activity for physical, social, emotional and spiritual
wellbeing;
HPE is the area of the curriculum that is directly concerned
with the development of skills, knowledge, understandings,
values and attitudes that will counter so called lifestyle
diseases that are widely acknowledged as representing an
unprecedented threat to the health and economic future of
Australia; and
HPE is the area of the curriculum that engages students in
learning related to contemporary, adolescent health issues
(ACHPER, 2009)
As a member of the working group who produced the
statement, I can confirm that this was always a politically,
not merely educationally, oriented endeavour. The
prominence of health discourses is notable, as is the overt
clarification that those discourses should encompass
“physical, social, emotional and spiritual wellbeing” and the
indication that learning area can connect with the
economic imperatives that are arguably the dominant driver
4 The proposal for one of the eight learning areas in the curriculum to
be named ‘Health’ was successfully challenged, and the learning area
renamed Health and Physical Education (see Dinan-Thompson, 2001;
2006; Glover, 2001; Swabey, 2006).
9
of the Commonwealth government’s education policy (see
Reid, 2009). In the context of progressing a rationale for
HPE, any and potentially all of the above points can be
expected to be contested within the field. Challenges posed
will reflect Reid’s (2009) earlier point, that a rationale has
significant curriculum implications, framing decisions about
structure and content. Furthermore, they may justifiably
highlight that from a curriculum and pedagogical
perspective, there are risks inherent in HPE engaging with
discourses of health, obesity, overweight and inactivity and
more specifically, with those discourses framed as crisis
discourses. Evans (2009) provides a timely reminder that
amidst a dominance of health and sport discourses, physical
education is being defined internationally “as forms of
compensatory education” (p. 171, original emphasis). His
emphasis is that “PE cannot compensate for society’s ills,
either in its own right, or trading as sport and health”
(Evans, 2009, p. 171). As Swabey and Penney (in press)
discuss, whether or not health and physical educationalists
in Australia should now seek appropriate crisis discourses as
a means of achieving an enhanced policy position in
education arenas, thus raises important issues for the
profession to consider:
…such appropriation may enable particular curriculum and
pedagogical opportunities to be pursued. We suggest,
however, that before pursuing what may be perceived as an
opportunity for the learning area to again profit from
engaging with crisis discourses, health and physical educators
need to carefully consider what those opportunities,
underpinned by discourses of overweight, obesity and
inactivity might be, and in parallel, also consider curricular
and pedagogical discourses that may be marginalised as a
consequence.
(Swabey & Penney, in press, original emphasis)
Macdonald and Penney (2009) similarly emphasised the
prospective curriculum and pedagogical tensions inherent
in a connection with the political discourses that are
currently dominant in Australia, explaining that:
…we can clearly see the tensions between a curriculum that
values physical culture and the joy of movement for its own
sake and a curriculum that aspires to produce self-managing,
healthy (and/or high-performance) citizens who can add
economic value to their country. (p.251)
As Macdonald and Penney (2009) identified, in
important respects the current political context of
Australia, characterised by “various tenets of neoliberalism”
(p.251), is at odds with the directions that have been
pursued in many curriculum developments both within
Australia and in New Zealand.
More pragmatically, the need for decisions about an
organisational framework will bring to the fore matters of
legitimation, expression and marginalisation of various
interests in and for HPE. Structural decisions about HPE
curriculum will also shape prospective connections between
the ‘different knowledges’ that those interests represent. In
this respect it is notable that the ACHPER statement
(above) openly reaffirmed connections between ‘health’
and ‘physical education’ in ‘HPE’. In 1994, the Statement
and Profile laid out a framework for the learning area that
similarly sought to prompt the potential for curriculum
10 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
development and delivery in schools to feature the
integration of traditionally separate subject areas (including
health education, physical education, home economics,
outdoor education, and personal development). The three
strands that served as content organisers at that time
(Communication, investigation and application; Human
functioning and physical activity, and Community
structures and practices; Curriculum Corporation, 1994a)
were not explicitly subject orientated. Experiences across
the states and territories, however, variously confirm
ongoing tendencies for subject-based division of curriculum
(reflected in curriculum structures in schools, lesson
timetabling, staffing and pedagogy) as well as moves towards
more integrated curriculum and pedagogy (see Dinan-
Thompson, 2006; McCuaig, 2006). Tensions associated
with subject-based interests, expertise and content being
embraced within a learning area, thus remain to be
addressed amidst the development of HPE within the
Australian curriculum.
In Reid’s (2009) view,
…one of the features of the contemporary world is that the
approach to issues, problems and challenges requires us to
cross established disciplinary boundaries, not remain trapped
within them. This should be a central feature of a
contemporary curriculum. (p. 16)
If there is agreement amongst the professional community
that the statement presented by ACHPER appropriately
conveys the essence and focus of the learning area, we
should arguably be seeking to learn from and extend
practice that has promoted integrated approaches to
curriculum planning, teaching and learning. A crucial point
to confront, however, is a matter that Garrett and Piltz
(1999) highlighted as a critical omission in 1994, “the lack
of clarification about what holds these different subjects and
their associated learnings together” (p. 204).
Endeavours to cross established subject-based boundaries
within the field seem, however, destined to be compromised
amidst a situation whereby disciplinary boundaries remain
overt in the senior secondary curriculum. Currently, senior
secondary courses are invariably subject-oriented focusing,
for example, on Health or Physical Education or Outdoor
Education. In parallel, courses in many of the states and
territories continue to have a distinct tertiary, or
alternatively, vocational and/or recreational orientation. As
such, courses are designed for and accessible to specific
students, and differ dramatically in terms of perceived
educational value (see also, Brown & Macdonald, 2009). I
suggest that both this established hierarchy of knowledge
and the subject-orientation in senior secondary curriculum
present notable challenges in relation to prospective
continuity and coherency in curriculum ‘K-12’ in HPE.
Arguably, the development of the Australian curriculum
presents the HPE community with an important
opportunity to seek a degree of curriculum cohesion and
continuity K-12 that from teaching and learning
perspectives, has not always been evident in K-10 and
senior secondary curriculum texts and/or experiences.
Achieving such cohesion will, however, require a clear and
early commitment to review and development of
curriculum K-12, not merely K-10, amidst national
curriculum development work in HPE.
 In my view we can not assume that such a commitment
will be forthcoming, or necessarily sought in the wider
political context. ACARA’s progress to date and the plans
it lays out for senior secondary curriculum development
reflect that year 11 and 12 curriculum remains ‘high
stakes’ from state and territory perspectives and
furthermore, points to the likelihood that national
curriculum development for these years will feature
considerable accommodation of state/territory interests
(which may be focused on retention of existing courses
rather than reform). Yet, I contend that the ‘high stakes’
arena of senior secondary curriculum is the arena where
attention should be focused if the development of a
national curriculum is to prove a catalyst for seriously
engaging with longstanding inequities in HPE
curriculum. State-based reform of senior secondary
schooling such as that embarked upon in Western
Australia (WA) have arguably represented very
significant challenges to historical disparities in the status
accorded to different knowledges and abilities
(Curriculum Council of Western Australia, 2002; Penney
& Walker, 2007). While political pressures ultimately led
to some aspects of the WA reforms being reworked,
material that was produced in the context of the reform is
nevertheless a valuable resource for future curriculum
development in the field. Most notably, the senior
secondary reform in WA acknowledged the powerful
influence that curriculum, pedagogy and in particular,
assessment in years 11 and 12, can have in relation to
curriculum opportunities and experiences in preceding
years. From a course design perspective, there was thus
recognition that the reform was a chance to prompt
renewed thinking in HPE about the ways in which
curriculum, pedagogy and assessment can better engage
with the diversity of knowledges and abilities that
students bring to HPE and furthermore, ensure that
students are able to develop, and will be recognised for
those different knowledges and abilities (see Penney &
Walker, 2007; Penney & Hay, 2008).
Thus, in now looking to national curriculum
development in HPE, I suggest that as a professional
community we have a responsibility to engage with the
sorts of questions that Evans (2009) poses of physical
education:
We should ask not only how ‘ability’ is configured within
the practices that define PE but how thinking about
‘ability’ as teachers and teacher educators is influenced by
the knowledge/s that define our fields, how it is encoded by
the interests of sport, health and science and how physical
capital is Freflected, reproduced and perhaps reconfigured
and challenged in schools.
(p. 177)
In raising these issues as important for HPE to address
amidst national curriculum development, I again
highlight, however, that such dialogue is seemingly not
part of the development agenda for the curriculum as a
whole. As Reid (2009) explains, currently there seems as
assumption of neutrality, with a failure to acknowledge
“the ways in which the very structures of the curriculum
can discriminate against certain groups of students” (p.
18). I concur with Reid’s (2009) view that, “to the extent
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
that curriculum contributes to producing inequitable
educational outcomes, it is incumbent on ACARA to
declare its stance on equity and the curriculum” and “do
more than produce the standard list of ‘disadvantaged’ or
marginalised groups and urge that their perspectives are
taken into account” (p. 18).
The points that ACARA has identified as needing to
be addressed in relation to languages in the Australian
curriculum include “How is the diversity of learners and
their distinctive learning pathways understood?”
(ACARA, 2010c). In one sense this seems encouraging,
signalling positive recognition of diversity amongst
learners and an acknowledgement in official curriculum
that they bring different abilities to their learning
experiences. At the same time, however, there are clearly
dangers that the questions posed may equally lead to an
official curriculum inherent in which is a hierarchical
labelling of abilities and that is destined to position
students as more or less deficient in relation to that
hierarchy.
Health and physical educationalists and HPE
developments across Australia and in New Zealand
arguably stand out internationally for the contribution
that they have collectively made to extending thinking
about equity, inclusion and social justice in relation to
curriculum, pedagogy and assessment in the learning
area 5. The development of HPE in the Australian
curriculum is undoubtedly a very significant opportunity
for that work to find greater expression in official
curriculum. While it is perhaps tempting to take a passive
stance and say that time will tell the extent to which
those opportunities were forthcoming, I would argue that
only a proactive stance will ensure that the curriculum
development takes a progressive path. The onus is
therefore particularly upon those members of the
profession who prospectively have the credibility in
policy and political arenas that may accord them ‘policy
influence’6, to adopt such a stance.
Conclusion
This paper has focused specifically on the production and
prospective scope for negotiation of official curriculum.
HPE curriculum history across Australia and
internationally has repeatedly reaffirmed that official
curriculum is undoubtedly crucial in shaping curriculum
opportunities and experiences, but it is far from a defining
influence. Curtner-Smith’s (1999) critique of the
implementation of the national curriculum in England
and Wales serves as a vivid reminder that national
curriculum development may or may not produce notable
changes in the HPE curriculum as experienced by
students in schools. Thus, it is the profession as a whole
who will determine if the Australian curriculum is to be a
catalyst for curriculum renewal and from future students’
perspectives, a genuinely defining time in the curriculum
history of HPE in Australia.
5 This point has been reflected in numerous journal papers,
contributions to international academic texts and the production of
collections specifically bringing together the work of Australian and
New Zealand scholars in the field.
6 See Gale (2003) for further discussion of policy actors and influence.
11
Endnote
i. The eight areas of action identified were: developing
stronger partnerships; supporting quality teaching and school
leadership; strengthening early childhood education;
enhancing middle years development; supporting senior years
of schooling and youth transitions; promoting world-class
curriculum and assessment; improving educational outcomes
for Indigenous youth and disadvantaged young Australians,
especially those from low socioeconomic backgrounds; and
strengthening accountability and transparency.
References
ACARA (n.d.) Australian Curriculum. An overview. ACARA
(www.acara.edu.au)
ACARA (2009) Curriculum Design (updated version November
2009). ACARA (www.acara.edu.au)
ACARA (2010a): Timeline Phase 1 curriculum, retrieved 10/04/10
from http://www.acara.edu.au/timeline__phase_1_curriculum.html
ACARA (2010b) ACARA, retrieved 10/04/10 from
http://www.acara.edu.au/curriculum.html
ACARA (2010c) Languages position paper and reference group,
retrieved 10/04/10 from http://www.acara.edu.au/languages.html
ACHPER (2009). The ACHPER National Statement on the
curriculum future of Health and Physical Education in Australia.
Adelaide, Australia: ACHPER.
Brown, S., & Macdonald, D. (2009). Physical education as vocational
education: A marginalising curriculum space? In M. Dinan
Thompson (Ed.), Health and physical education. Issues for curriculum
in Australia and New Zealand. Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford
University Press Australia & New Zealand.
Curriculum Council of Western Australia (2002) Our Youth, Our
Future. Post-Compulsory Education Review. Perth: Curriculum
Council of Western Australia.
Curriculum Corporation. (1994a). A statement on health and physical
education for Australian schools. Carlton: Curriculum Corporation.
Curriculum Corporation. (1994b). Health and physical education -A
curriculum profile for Australian schools. Carlton: Curriculum
Corporation.
Curtner-Smith, M. D. (1999). The more things change the more they
stay the same: Factors influencing teachers’ interpretations and
delivery of national curriculum physical education. Sport,
Education and Society(4,1), 75-97.
Dinan-Thompson, M. (2001). Curriculum construction and
implementation: A study of Queensland health and physical education.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Queensland, QLD.
Dinan Thompson, M. (2006). Why the KLA? and why now? In R.
Tinning, L. McCuaig & lisahunter (Eds.), Teaching health and
physical education in Australian schools. Frenchs Forest, NSW:
Pearson Education Australia.
Evans, J. (2009). Making a difference. Education and ‘ability’ in
physical education. In R. Bailey & D. Kirk (Eds.), The Routledge
physical education reader. Abingdon, Oxon.: Routledge.
Gale, T. (2003). Realising policy: the who and how of policy
production. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education,
24(1), 51-65.
Garrett, R., & Piltz, W. (1999). A case study of curriculum control:
Curriculum reform in health and physical education. In B.
Johnson & A. Reid (Eds.), Contesting the curriculum. Australia:
Social Science Press.
Glover, S. (2001). The social construction of pedagogic discourse in health
and physical education: A study of writing the national statement and
profile 1992-1994. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University
of Queensland, QLD.
Griffith, R. (2000). National curriculum. National disaster? Education
and citizenship. London: Routledge Falmer.
Graham, D., & Tytler, D. (1993). A lesson for us all. The making of the
national curriculum. London: Routledge.
Macdonald, D. & Penney, D. (2009). Contemporary issues and future
agendas for Health and Physical Education. In M.
DinanThompson (Ed.), Health & Physical Education. Issues for
curriculum in Australia and New Zealand. Melbourne, Victoria:
Oxford University Press Australia & New Zealand.
McCuaig, L. (2006). Getting started and planning from outcomes. In
R. Tinning, L. McCuaig & lisahunter (Eds.), Teaching health and
physical education in Australian schools. Frenchs Forest, NSW:
Pearson Education Australia.
Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth
Affairs (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for
Young Australians. Canberra: MCEETYA.
12 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and
Youth Affairs (2010). Third MCEECDYA Meeting. Communique.
15 April 2010. Sydney: MCEECDYA.
Penney, D. (2007). Health and Physical Education and the
development of a national curriculum in Australia. Policies,
position and prospects. ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal,
54(3/4), pp.17-23.
Penney, D. & Mr. Walker (2007). Senior secondary schooling in
Western Australia: Transforming curriculum, lives and society?
Curriculum Perspectives, 27(3), pp.22-35.
Penney, D. & Hay, P. (2008). Inclusivity and Senior Physical
Education. Insights from Queensland and Western Australia.
Sport, Education and Society, 13(4), pp.431-452.
Reid, A. (2009) Is this a revolution?: A critical analysis of the Rudd
government’s national education agenda. ACSA. Retrieved
12/04/10 from
http://www.acsa.edu.au/pages/images/ACSA Boomer address.pdf
Reid, A., & Johnson, B. (1999). Introduction. Contesting the
curriculum. . In B. Johnson & A. Reid (Eds.), Contesting the
curriculum. Katoomba, NSW.: Socila Sciences Press.
Rudd, K. & Smith, S. (2007). New directions for our schools. Establishing
a National Curriculum to improve our children’s educational outcomes.
The Australian Labor Party.
Swabey, K. (2006). The 1992 Australian Senate Inquiry into physical and
sport education: Representations of the field. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Queensland, QLD.
Swabey, K. & Penney, D. (in press) Using discursive strategies, playing
policy games and shaping the future of physical education. Sport,
Education and Society.
The Council for the Australian Federation (2007). Federalist paper 2.
The Future of Schooling in Australia. Revised Edition. A Report by the
Council for the Australian Federation. September 2007. Melbourne:
Department of Premier and Cabinet.
Tillet, A. (2010). Schools urged to get physical. The West Australian,
April 15, p.9.
Tinning, R., Kirk, D., Evans, J., & Glover, S. (1994). School physical
education: A crisis of meaning. Changing Education, 1(2), 13-15.
Author’s note
Dawn Penney has just joined the University of Waikato as
Professor of Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy.
Dawn’s research career has focused on policy and
curriculum development in Health and Physical
Education in the UK and Australia. Her work has
particularly addressed developments in secondary and
senior secondary curriculum and has used multiple
methods in seeking to explore the dynamics between
curriculum, pedagogy and assessment in HPE. A strong
theme of Dawn’s work has been the pursuit of equity and
inclusion.
Correspondence
Professor Dawn Penney, Department of Sport & Leisure
Studies, Faculty of Education, University of Waikato,
Box 3105, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand.
Keep Up-to-date with ACHPER National News
ACHPER National sends bi-monthly e-news to all
Members. It is designed to keep you informed about
the issues that your professional association is
involved in at a National level.
The e-news is sent automatically to all ACHPER
Members who have provided their email address.
Please contact the Membership Department (08)
8340 3388 or membership@achper.org.au if you
would like to provide or update your email address.
 Physical Education and Health

p hy s i c a l e d u c a t i o n
in Singapore Schools

Michael C McNeill & Joan M Fry - National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

A s a school subject, physical education (PE) in Singapore took on its own shape with the introduction of a conceptual
games teaching approach in response to the national government’s ‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’ policy of the
late 1990s. With the recent media attention on hosting two main international events (Asian Youth Games and the
inaugural Youth Olympic Games), aspects of PE as a school subject have been scrutinised. Particularly, the isolation of
physical fitness training and testing from a sound pedagogical base has undergone review. Hence, school-level developments
that either prioritise physical activity within a holistic health framework or promote positive social values through Olympic
education, as well as the introduction an O-level examinable subject have broadened the possibilities for the subject.
Drawing on local empirical evidence, this paper examines Singapore PE against regional and global events that have marked
its development.

Introduction Education in the World-Class City-State

Singapore: latitude, 1°17 ´ N; longitude, 103°50 ´ E;
total land: ~710 km2; mean temperature, 22-26°C (low),
32-34°C (high), humidity, 80-100%; population,
<4.9 million, citizens >3.8 million, 75% Chinese,
17% Malay, 11% Indian, 2% other, expatriate ~ 0.8
million (>100,000 professional) (Encyclopedia Britannica,
2010; The Macmillan world atlas, 1996; Singapore
Government, 2010)
It is generally accepted that with such a small land mass
(only 70% of the Australian Capital Territory), The
Republic of Singapore has only two natural resources—its
strategic location and its skilful people (British Council,
2009). Driven by pragmatism to produce a competent,
adaptive and productive workforce (Yip, 1997), education
has been second to defence in the Republic’s budget since
independence. Increasing the education standing of all
has helped bring the diverse ethnic groups together.
According to a physical education (PE) pioneer cited in
Aplin, Quek and Kunalan (2009), “Physical education
and sport were emphasised to produce a strong health [sic]
nation” (p. 29). In order “to help fuse the new nation”,
formerly separate ethnicity-based sports competitions
were brought together when the separate groups
combined (ibid). This instrumentalist discourse
promulgated during the early days of self-governance is
still constructing Singapore’s PE today.
Singapore achieved United Nations developed-nation status
in 1990. By international standards today, it is a wealthy
nation. Ranked fifth in the world in terms of gross domestic
product per capita and with burgeoning official reserves (A.
Tan, 2010), it was one of the first Asian economies to show
signs of recovery from the 2008-2009 global financial
meltdown. Second only to defence spending, the
Government in 2009 announced a 5.5% education budget
increase to S$8.7billion, a figure expected to rise another
19.5% by 2013 (The Straits Times, February 10th 2009).
With 667,900 Singaporeans below 15 years of age
(Singapore Government, 2010), Singapore’s schools have
large populations averaging around 1,400 students, and large
class sizes averaging 40 students. Because of the population
density, not all primary schools can accommodate their
enrolment in a single session, so many have two sittings; for
example, three or four grades attend in the morning, while
two or three attend in the afternoon. However, with recent
upgrading, 43% of primary schools are now conducted in a
single session (Primary Education Review and
Implementation [PERI], 2009). Although double-session
scheduling is planned to be eliminated by 2016, currently,
difficulties occur when co-curricular activities (CCAs, ‘after-
school’ clubs) for one session are held during lesson-time of
the other. The quality of facility, equipment and staffing is
affected by compromises in such resource distribution.

Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 13

 Six years of compulsory primary (P1-P6) schooling for a
Singaporean child begin at age 6. Then follow four or five
secondary (S1-S4/5) years that are academically streamed as
advanced, normal and normal-technical levels to national
certificate examinations. Although some students transfer to
gain a vocational qualification at an institute of technology,
most then take either a two-year route through a junior
college (JC1-2/3) to university or a three-year polytechnic
diploma. Today, Singapore’s literacy rate (95.7%) is one of
the highest in the world (Singapore Government, 2010).
The value that the Nation places on an academic education
is substantiated by 24% of a previous P1 cohort entering
university in 2008 (Singapore Government, 2010). With
policy driven by meritocracy to maintain transparency and
sustain a productive and progressive economy, competition
is at the heart of all education endeavours. Coupled with
strong Asian respect for education, meritocracy has led to
achievement on internationally recognised high-stakes tests.
In the 2007 Trends in International Mathematics and
Science Study (TIMSS & PIRLS International Study
Center, 2008), Singapore’s Year 4 and 8 students ranked first
in science, while Year 4 and Year 8 respectively ranked
second and third in mathematics. With such international
recognition, a Singaporean education has been in demand: in
2009, 97,000 (13% increase from 2008) foreigners
‘parachuted in’ for studies (Yeo, 2009).
As schools play a highly significant role in national
development, they are evaluated on various aspects of
achievement. The Ministry of Education (MOE) publishes
annual performance results on its website through school
banding tables (previously ranking, which began in 1992).
The key criteria are: (a) academic, (b) ‘after-school’
co-curricular activity (CCA), and, since 2007 when it
subsumed physical fitness, (c) a holistic health framework, a
school-wide set of process indicators. Each criterion is
briefly outlined below.
Academic high-stakes testing is central to establishing
schools’ productivity. Such is their status that national
examinations equivalent to Australian Year 10 and Year 12
assessments are still conducted in conjunction with the
University of Cambridge International Examinations
authority. From the early primary grades onward,
Singapore’s students in most government schools are tested
every semester.
The CCA scheme is designed to enhance social interaction,
as well as confidence and leadership in multi-racial and multi-
lingual Singapore. Given Singapore’s diversity within a
potentially volatile region, decades of policies promoting
racial and religious harmony have been successfully enacted.
Students above P2 are required to participate in a CCA: they
choose from four categories, one of which is sports. An elitist
emphasis pervades the school sports culture and gears the
CCA sport to competition. Even for university admission,
sports participation translates into academic points. A school’s
activity listing tends to be influenced by the likelihood of
doing well in associated interschool competitions. CCA sport
is analogous to Australian interschool sport conducted outside
school hours, and schools do their utmost to recruit talent in
their niche areas. With the current funding model, schools
have autonomy to employ expert coaches and elite schools
also buy-in foreign coaching talent.
The current third school-achievement criterion is derived
from the National Physical Fitness Award (NAPFA),
introduced in 1982. Because national service follows JC and
polytechnic studies for Singaporean men, the pressure is on
schools to provide a fit, productive cohort for the defence
14 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
services. When, in response to rising national health
concerns, the Trim and Fit (TAF) program started in 1992, it
drastically changed schools’ approach to reducing youth
obesity. For several years a combined physical fitness index
(percentage of student obesity and NAPFA awards) became
the indicator of a school’s performance. The TAF scheme was
intended to improve the physical health status of children,
categorised as obese or under-weight, through increased
school-based exercise and diet-monitoring. Reportedly TAF
held the school-aged obesity rate steady at 9.3%. Perhaps
unavoidably, schools became engaged in a competition that
had community implications. However as a ranking criterion,
the physical fitness index was a narrow indicator of the health
status of Singapore’s children and schools.
In 2002, a more comprehensive approach to health
management was initiated: the Championing Efforts
Resulting in Improved School Health (CHERISH) award
(originally a Health Promotion Board design). In 2007 this
award was refined and incorporated into the schools’ holistic
health framework (HHF) which includes fitness achievement
with other WHO health promoting criteria. This framework
has been expanded to encompass social and mental health
with emphasis given to students’ character development. It is
now flagged as a process, rather than product-oriented
approach to shaping schools’ ‘well-being’. The latest
Ministerial announcement (Yeo, 2010) is that, after many
years of using international obesity norms, an age-sensitive
body mass index (BMI-for-age) will be in effect from July.
Given that this measure in childhood is highly correlated to
health status in adulthood, it will afford a more reliable
indication of young Singaporeans’ health-risk status.
Images of Physical Education in World-Class
Singapore
As a school subject, Singapore PE took its own shape on
implementation of the national government’s ‘Thinking
Schools, Learning Nation’ (TSLN) policy which was
designed to engineer a critical change in educational output
in response to changing world economics. Through TSLN
the government wanted to “bring about a spirit of
innovation, of learning by doing …” (Goh, 1997) and PE
was to play a part in the reform. The 1999 revised syllabus
announced a games-centred-approach that was reiterated in
2006 (Curriculum Planning and Development Division
[CPDD], 1997, 2005). In this section, we discuss the social
meanings of various constructs of Singapore physical
education as regulated, resourced, revered or reviled, in rigor
mortis, revived, remote and under review.
Physical Education as Regulated
The government vision is that, “every child will be physically
educated” (CPDD, 2005, p. 1). The official PE curriculum
aims to, “develop motor and games skills and equip [students]
with the knowledge, skills and attitudes to pursue and enjoy
a physically active and healthy lifestyle” (op cit, p. 2). The
current syllabus covers three compulsory levels (primary,
secondary and pre-university [JC]) and expected learning
outcomes are identified at six key stages—each alternate year
of schooling. The subject matter is organised around physical
“activity components”. (See Table 1.) At the relevant key
stage, skills and either concepts or topics are defined in terms
of their technical content (conceptual or movement); for
educational gymnastics and games a conceptual approach,
the implications of which will be later highlighted to
teaching, is made clear; for dance creativity and social
interaction are emphasised; and technical skills and concepts
generally define the other content fields. It is through the
component, health and fitness development that PE is
formally linked to health education. Other school options
identified include a selection of outdoor pursuits. The current
syllabus shows a shift from the previous revision (CPDD,
1999) in that it includes a list of student assessment strategies
for making judgments about PE program quality, whereas
previously fitness assessment was implied as the means of
program evaluation.
Activity Component Level of Schooling
Primary Secondary
Yr 1-6 Yr 7-10
Fundamental movements 3
Educational gymnastics 3 3
Dance 3 3
Gamesa 3 3
Health & fitness management 3 3
Athletics 3 3
Swimming 3 3
a
Territorial, net/wall, striking & fielding
Table 1 - Broad activity areas of syllabus at schooling level
In contrast to reflecting the government-sponsored role,
children’s everyday meaning of PE, determined through
open-ended survey, is that “PE is not for learning, it’s our
time! [our emphasis]” and PE “lessons are just playing [our
emphasis]” (Fry & Tan, 2004). Another key indication of
PE’s location relative to the hegemonic academic
curriculum is that the elective O-level PE syllabus was only
implemented in 2007 and since has still only been taught in
a few schools. This slow uptake contrasts dramatically with
the intensity of student response in early 1990s when a new
senior secondary health and physical education curriculum
was introduced in New South Wales, Australia (Fry, 1997).
In reference to the current Singapore syllabus, McNeill, Lim,
Tan, Wang and MacPhail (2009) optimistically remarked that:
…the PE culture in Singapore has been progressively
evolving over the past 20 to 30 years, with the government
advocating the discipline as an important and holistic
vehicle for developing the knowledge, skills and values of a
healthy and active lifestyle (p. 2).
However, although most students do not see significant
cultural capital to be drawn from PE, it plays an important
role in ensuring a fit yearly cohort of young men as they pass
from school to national service.
Physical Education as Resources
In a recent MOE-sponsored study, McNeill et al. (2009) found
that Singapore PE’s status as reflected in its resourcing is similar
to that found elsewhere (Hardman, 2008; MacPhail et al.,
2005). There are physical and human resource shortcomings,
which in some cases limit the scope and depth of school PE.
In a system where all classrooms are internet-wired to
digital data projectors, there is inconsistent resourcing for
PE. Singapore has an equatorial climate so outdoor PE
classes are usually held before 1030 or after 1530 hr. During
monsoon seasons and inclement weather lessons are
regularly forced indoors where the quality of PE often suffers
with schools over-crowding. However, the situation has
improved since early 2007: At a projected cost of S$690
million, the MOE began phasing in its seven-year plan to
provide every school with an indoor sports hall and indoor
teaching areas have doubled in some schools. In terms of
time allocated to PE the scene is also changing. Currently
the subject has a small share of the total curriculum (90 min
per week in lower primary and 60 min from upper primary to
the end of schooling), but recently the minister announced
that an increase of 30 min in primary schools and 60 min in
post primary will be phased in (Ng, 2010).
The MOE maintains a secure supply of qualified teachers
by employing and bonding all student teachers (STs) who
are paid for two years regardless of the duration of their
teacher education program. The sole local route to becoming
a qualified teacher in Singapore is through a course at the
National Institute of Education, Singapore which offers
Pre-University specialist PE qualifications (diploma, degree, and post-
Yr 11/12
graduate diploma). However, McNeill et al. (2009)
identified a severe shortage of specialist PE primary teachers
3
3
(specialist:non-specialist = 1:6); in secondary schools the
3 ratio was reversed; whereas, in all JCs PE was taught by
specialists. Because of the focus on academic achievement,
3
PE is still perceived as a subject for play (McNeill et al.
2004). Without homework and marking, the workload for
PE teachers is perceived as light. Therefore, they must
contribute by having >50% of their timetable filled with an
academic subject. The PERI (2009) committee also found
that some aspects of the primary curriculum were not
realised because of unfavourable staffing distribution. A
recommendation has been to increase the PE component of
a specialist teacher’s work load to 60%. According to
McNeill and Browne’s evidence (unpublished data, 2010),
among schools that strongly advocate PE, specialist teachers
were being optimally deployed (M=63%) in these schools.
Recently a parliamentary announcement caused
excitement with an announcement that the specialist PE,
music and art teacher pool would be increased from 2,500 to
4,500 by 2020 and as such would establish specialist
professional development academies for teachers in these
fields. The Minister stated that “it was through sports that
students learn a range of skills, from acquiring an awareness
of physical well-being and developing a sense of self-esteem,
to picking up important values such as teamwork, fair play
and a can-do spirit” (Ng, 2010). Although any increase in
PE time would be beneficial, McNeill et al. (2009) found
that total instructional time for primary PE was regularly
eroded by transitions to and from the PE teaching area
and/or occasionally absorbed by classroom teachers making
up class-work, or revising prior to key tests. With shortened
lesson-time, novice teachers have been reluctant to
introduce complex teaching and learning strategies that take
time to establish because they often fall back on direct
teaching approaches and their pedagogy remains limited. For
the anticipated increase in PE time to be maximised, many
current practices in schools need to be carefully evaluated. In
addition, Tan, Chow, Wang and Koh (2009) found, in
videotape analysis of 35 PE specialists teaching at primary,
secondary and pre-university levels, that teachers tended to
overtalk, amounting to at least 45% of lesson time. Less talk
was prevalent at the primary level but increased
incrementally as the students advanced through to JC.
However, teachers were found to be task-oriented, which
corresponds with previous evidence from Singapore PE
teacher analysis (Morgan et al., 2006) and had to spend little
time with disciplinary concerns, although the time available
for pupils to work on skills practice, concepts, teamwork and
sportsmanship was limited (range between 7>14%). The
analysis revealed that much of the teaching was traditional
with a technical emphasis and little decision making or
problem solving was evident.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 15
Physical Education as Revered or Reviled —
Fitness Training and Testing
Singapore PE has been shaped by the significant role that
fitness development plays in the national agenda; and it
becomes increasingly important through JC. Indeed, fitness
training and testing are often synonymous with the subject.
McNeill et al. (2009) inferred from survey data that in some
schools there has been year-round fitness training. When
students, usually the over-weight ones, fail the NAPFA they
are required to retrain and retest until a satisfactory result is
achieved. Although well-intentioned, the associated
labelling and stigmatisation experienced by those
overweight have had a negative effect on personal and
public perceptions of the subject. In terms of physical
activity (PA) in PE lessons, Wang and Chia (2008) reported
that, even when PA (step-count, measured by pedometer)
accumulated in scheduled PE lessons at a primary school was
supplemented by recess time activities, total PA did not
meet levels recommended to maintain a healthy lifestyle.
Initiatives associated with redeveloping health promotion
of schools have increased the administrative load for their PE
departments; conversations with PE department heads and
teachers suggested that previously all their efforts in fitness
and ‘health’ contributed to the whole of the Fitness Award.
Now, the same amount of physical ‘effort’ is contributing only
a small percentage within the CHERISH award.
Physical Education in Rigor Mortis —
Aesthetics
TSLN policy also initiated local debate about the extent to
which Singaporeans could be taught to ‘think outside the
box’ (Ng, 2001). One argument was that because schools
have such a strong emphasis on mathematics and science,
coupled with the dominance of physical fitness training,
young people have very few opportunities to develop
divergent problem-solving skills in PE. However, Leong and
Hunt (2006) undertook a study of creative dance among
lower primary children and found that when provided with
structured opportunities to engage in creative movement
their problem-solving skills were enhanced.
In official documents PE falls within parameters of the
“Aesthetics, health and moral education” section of the school
curriculum. It is also depicted within “Lifeskills”, centrally
located in the Singapore curriculum pie (MOE, 2006, pp. 5, 7)
and coursework in these fields is included in PE teacher
education (PETE) programs. However, Wang, et al. (2009)
have reported that both novice and experienced Singaporean
teachers consistently indicate that they have least pedagogical
confidence in teaching these artistic dimensions of PE. Their
findings reflect those of Carney and Chedzoy’s (1998) study of
British student teachers’ perceptions of their competence to
teach gymnastics and dance.
Physical Education as Revived —
Games-Centred Pedagogy
The most significant change in PE came in response to TSLN
policy with introduction of the Games Concept Approach
(GCA) which was advocated in the 1999 syllabus revision
and reaffirmed in 2005. Systematic efforts to promote and
map curriculum change through the introduction of this
constructivist pedagogy have been well documented (Fry, Tan,
McNeill, & Wright, 2010; McNeill, et al., 2004; McNeill, Fry,
Wright, Tan, & Rossi, 2008; McNeill, Johari, & Fry, 2008;
Rossi, Fry, McNeill, & Tan, 2007; Tan, 2005; Wright, Butler,
& McNeill, 2004; Wright, McNeill, & Fry, 2009; Wright,
16 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
McNeill, Fry & Wang, 2005). To introduce the new pedagogy,
the MOE invited Steve Mitchell and Judy Oslin to present
their conceptual-technical model (Griffin, Mitchell, & Oslin,
1997). This workshop officially launched the tactical
approach to games teaching, which was intended to create a
paradigm shift: from technical to tactical. Subsequently Linda
Griffin and Joy Butler have conducted similar MOE seminars.
According to local studies (Rossi et al., 2007; Tan, 2005; Tan
& Tan, 2001), there was no immediate GCA impact. It
seemed that Singapore teachers responded similarly to overseas
peers (Fullan, 1993, 2001; Sparkes, 1988) who were initially
resistant to top-down innovation. However, Rossi et al. (2007)
and Tan (2005) also found that when the GCA is seen as
personally meaningful then teachers are likely to become
involved in the pedagogical change. Over the last few years
there has been a significant shift in terms of awareness of the
GCA and the extent of its application. From PE teacher
education (PETE) course documents (and anecdotal data
from new graduates) STs are expected on internship to be
familiar and compliant with this approach, even when it is
initially perceived to be more of a lesson structural change than
a shift to a situated learning process (McNeill et al., 2004).
Because the pedagogy of many practical and pedagogical PETE
courses is itself constructivist, Singapore’s STs have responded
very favourably to the tactical games approach. Their reported
perceptions are that it offers an interesting structure for pupils
learning games and the GCA is their preferred method of
teaching (Wright et al., 2005). Needless to say, children have
found that this games-centred approach is value-adding to
their PE experiences (Fry, et al., 2010).
PE as Remote from Holistic Health
Education
The repositioning of physical fitness from sole to minor
factor within the school achievement criteria has already
been discussed and the implications for PE already drawn.
Unlike the close, formal relationship between PE and
health education in Australian school curricula. Health
education also exists as a separate curriculum for primary
schools “to provide knowledge and skills to empower pupils
to lead healthy lifestyles and take responsibility for the
health and well-being of others and the environment”
(CPDD, 2007, p. 1). However, there are many aspects of
contemporary health education embedded in the formal
and informal curricula in Singapore. Such dimensions
include: sexuality education, national (citizenship)
education, uniform and service groups, and science.
Physical health has been a key aspect of PE featured as
curriculum content in the 2006 syllabus, and afforded the
status of a curriculum model with learning outcomes clearly
defined as a health management and fitness development
strategy. However, health is not normally an explicit
characteristic of PE lessons in Singapore other than through
implicit reference or teachable moments. A group of
primary pupils from a school with a daily PE HE program,
disclosed (Wang et al., 2009) that the health lesson was
boring as they just sat and listened instead of working out as
per normal. From this example PE teachers must learn to
‘walk the talk’ and make health a lively active experience.
PE under Review
Curriculum development should be seen as process, not
product with a “new” practice delivering change (Kirk, 1988,
p. 83). Sparkes (1991, p. 1) distinguished between “real and
superficial” and suggested that many reforms are superficial,
where essentially little has altered, yet are reified as change. To
emphasise the point, Ruddock (in Sparkes, 1988, p. 2) has
stated, “all too often the new content is conveyed in the
baggage of traditional pedagogy.” This situation may simply
refer to a style of scriptwriting rather than a curriculum reform
per se, and can often be a reflection of school documents, but
rarely enacted, especially by unqualified PE teachers.
In the “Teaching and Learning…” project survey (Wang et
al., 2009), schools were asked about their current best practice
in PE. Although many primary school (n=68) responses were
school-specific, the most frequent was “mass participation”,
which they associated with the MOE’s HHF initiative.
Notwithstanding, several curriculum changes have stood out
as innovative. Because PE is not a school-ranking subject,
assessment of students’ progress beyond physical fitness has
been found generally lacking (McNeill et al. 2009). However,
in post-primary education there was evidence of an evolving
role for assessment across the learning domains in PE. This
most likely reflects the relative percentage of PE specialists at
these levels and addresses the need for a shift from a highly
academic to a holistic education to occur in Singapore.
Olympic education, with its focus on values, has taken on a
new momentum with Singapore’s 2010 hosting of the
inaugural Youth Olympic Games. Using MOE support
material, as well as their own school-designed initiatives,
schools now show evidence of incorporated aspects of
Olympism in their programs, because the government is
encouraging them to develop a values education through PE.
With a new drive on soft skills, the subject is being challenged
to address its holistic role of, by and through the physical. With
Ministerial endorsement:
Sports provide an excellent way of equipping our youths …
for a world of continuous and dynamic change. Through
participation …, [they] learn important values such as
honesty, teamwork, fair play, respect, adherence to rules,
discipline, perseverance, resilience and a strong sense of
purpose. [These] are not skills that can be easily learnt in
the classroom. I believe that we can and must develop these
important soft skills through sports. (Fu, 2010)
Not to be confused with the sport education curriculum
model (Siedentop, Hastie & van der Mars, 2004), Singapore’s
Sport Education Program (SEP) is a funding collaboration
between the MOE and the Singapore Sports Council.
Operating outside the formal PE curriculum, SEP aims to
encourage and enrich active lifestyles, to improve
fundamental skills and provide an avenue for activity
engagement away from school. The scheme was designed to
attract students, not usually engaged in physical activity, by
having them pick up a sport supplied by sports-service
providers. The SEP encourages schools to extend their CCA
programs by bringing in expertise in recreational activities
such as roller-blading, golf and archery. The scheme has four
levels: one-off exposure, beginner, development, and intra-
mural competition. However, in some cases the funds are used
to support PE programs where highly specialist expertise such
as that of a gymnastics coach has been purchased. Because not
all these outside personnel have PE teaching qualifications,
ineffective pedagogical practices (long queues, extreme
technical performance demands) have been observed.
Conclusion
The PERI report included many recommendations to sustain
the quality of primary education (Ng, 2010) and be proactive
in meeting and managing a fast-changing social and workplace
environment. Emphasing the importance of non-academic
programs in holistic education, the review committee
highlighted the role of PE, music, and art in providing
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
curriculum balance. A new program for active learning (PAL)
was proposed for P1-P2: All lower primary children will take
two to three modules, for 2 hr per week (over eight to ten
weeks), in sports and outdoor education as well as visual and
performing arts. As alluded to earlier, these modules are likely
to be delivered by service providers licensed by the Ministry, and
again this area of curriculum content will in most cases be
passed to unqualified PE teachers.
PE, music and art were highlighted for increased emphasis,
because the hard skills of mathematics and science skills alone
are perceived as inadequate in equipping young Singaporeans
for the 21st century. At P3, children will be allowed either to
extend their PAL or to choose another CCA. Schools have
also to focus on developing soft skills through a more
balanced curriculum “to produce more well-rounded
students, who are as adept in teamwork, creativity and
communicating as in solving examination questions” (A.
Tan, 2010). Therefore, more optimally-employed specialist
teachers are needed to provide quality PE on a broader front.
We have traced the recent development and change which
has been significant for PE in Singapore. Associated school-
wide health-promoting initiatives have also been substantive,
and are no longer the sole responsibility of the PE
department. With schools playing a bigger role in meeting
community holistic health needs, there is a greater potential
for PE to impact young people’s active behaviour. Learning to
be active is a lifetime skill with health benefits that are now
accessible by all pupils. Physical education has been widely
acknowledged in political discourse and large amounts of
funding have been secured to increase the prominence of
activity in Singaporean life. Currently there is a significant
opportunity for the PE community to develop humanistic
curricula that embrace personal, social, and character
development and, by doing so, enhance the soft skills, values
and objectives advocated in the latest ministerial directives.
Singapore has invested significant capital (financial as well
as intellectual) to generate a vibrant community. National
policy has acted as a catalyst through the provision of
substantial resources with the goal of promoting healthy,
active lifestyle behaviours. However, much remains to be
done in schools to enact those policy intentions. The PE
profession has now, with every base loaded, to step up to the
plate and deliver on its purpose of addressing the soft skills
needed for the 21st century by better communicating the
syllabus content into more tangible and explicit outcomes.
References
Aplin, N., Quek, J.J. & Kunalan, C. (2009). Creating a collective
memory: Pioneers of physical education in Singapore. In N.
Aplin, (Ed.), Perspectives on physical education and sports science in
Singapore: An eye on the Youth Olympic Games 2010 (pp. 19-37)
Singapore: McGraw Hill.
British Council (2009). Retrieved on 4th April from
http://www.britishcouncil.org/eumd-information-background-
singapore.htm
Carney, C. & Chedzoy, S. (1998). Primary student teacher prior
experiences and their relationship to estimated competence to
teach the national curriculum for physical education. Sport,
Education and Society, 3, 19-36.
Curriculum Planning and Development Division. (1999). Revised
physical education syllabus for primary, secondary, pre-university
levels. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Curriculum Planning and Development Division. (2005). Physical
education syllabus (primary, secondary, pre-university) 2006.
Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Curriculum Planning and Development Division. (2007). Health
education syllabus for primary level. Singapore: Ministry of
Education.
Encyclopaedia Britannica eb.com. (undated). Singapore. Retrieved 3rd
April, 2010 from
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/545725/Singapore
17
Fry, J.M. (1997). Dealing with the powers that be. Sport, Education
and Society, 2, 141-162.
Fry, J.M. & Tan, W.K.C. (2004). PE’s our time, it’s for learning?
Reconciling pupils’ concerns. A paper presented at the
International conference of the Singapore Physical Education
Association, Singapore, June.
Fry, J.M., Tan, W.K.C., McNeill, M.C. & Wright, S.C. (2010).
Children’s perspectives on conceptual games teaching: A value-
adding experience, Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 1742-
5786 doi:10.1080/17408980902813927.
Fu, G. (2010). Senior Minister of State’s speech at the Opening
Ceremony of the Singapore Schools Sports Council, National
School Games, February, Singapore.
Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: probing the depths of educational
reform. London: Falmer.
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.).
New York: Teachers College Press.
Goh, C.T. (1997). Shaping our future: ‘Thinking Schools, Learning
Nation’. Speech by the Prime Minister at the opening of the 7th
International conference on thinking, Singapore. Retrieved 6th
April, 2010 from
http://app.sprinter.gov.sg/dta/pr/1997060209.htm
Griffin, L.L., Mitchell, S.A. & Oslin, J.L. (1997). Teaching sport
concepts and skills: A tactical games approach. Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
Hardman, K. (2008). The situation of physical education in schools:
A European perspective. Human Movement, 9, 5-18.
Kirk, D (1988). Physical education and curriculum study: A critical
introduction. London: Croom Helm.
Leong, L.K. & Hunt, P. (2006). Creative dance: Singaporean
children’s creative thinking and problem-solving responses.
Research in Dance Education, 7, 35-65.
MacPhail, A., Halbert, J., McEvilly, N., Hutchinson, C. &
MacDonncha, C. (2005). The constraints on school provision of
post-primary physical education in Ireland: Principals’ and teachers’
views and experiences. Irish Educational Studies, 24, 77-91.
McNeill, M., Fry, J., Wright, S., Tan, C. & Rossi, T. (2008).
Structuring time and questioning to achieve tactical awareness in
games lessons. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 13, 231-249.
McNeill, M., Lim, B.S.C., Tan, W.K.C., Wang, C.K.J. & MacPhail,
A. (2009). Moving towards quality physical education provision:
Physical education in Singapore. European Physical Education
Review, 15, 201-223.
McNeill, M.C., Fry, J. M., Wright, S.C., Tan, W.K.C., Tan, K.S. &
Schempp, P.G. (2004). ‘In the local context’: Singaporean
challenges to teaching games on practicum. Sport, Education &
Society, 9, 3-32.
McNeill, M.C., Johari, M.H. & Fry, J.M. (2008). Across the tactical
domain: Children’s perceptions of a concept-driven games
approach. Paper presented at the Asia-Pacific Educational
Research Association Conference, November, Singapore.
Ministry of Education (2006). Nurturing every child. Singapore:
Ministry of Education.
Morgan, K., Sproule, J., McNeill, M., Kingston, K. & Wang, J.
(2006). A cross-cultural study of motivational climate in physical
education lessons in the UK and Singapore, International Journal
of Sport Psychology, 37(4), 299-316.
Ng, A.K. (2001). Why Asians are less creative than westerners.
Singapore: Prentice Hall.
Ng, E.H. (2010). Minister of Education’s address to Parliament on 9th March.
PERI (2009). Report of the Primary Education Review and
Implementation Committee. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Rossi, T., Fry, J., McNeill, M. & Tan C. (2007). The games concept
approach (GCA) as a mandated practice: Views of Singaporean
teachers, Sport, Education and Society, 12, 93-111.
Siedentop, D., Hastie, P.A. & van der Mars, H. (2004). The complete
guide to sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Singapore Government. (2010). Singapore statistics. Retrieved 2nd
April, 2010 from http://www.singstat.gov.sg/stats/keyind.html.
Sparkes, A.C. (1988). The micropolitics of innovation in the physical
education curriculum. In J. Evans (Ed.), Teachers teaching and
control in physical education (pp. 157-177). London: Falmer.
Sparkes, A.C. (1991). Curriculum change: On gaining a sense of
perspective. In N. Armstrong & A. Sparkes (Eds.), Issues in
physical education (pp.1-19). London: Cassell.
Tan, A. (2010, 10th March). Schools to develop ‘soft skills’. Straits Times, A1.
Tan, K.S., Chow, J.Y., Wang, C.K.J. & Koh, K.T. (2009). Analysing
PE instruction in school settings. In C.K.J. Wang, Y.H.M. Chia,
M.C. McNeill, K.S.S. Tan & J.Y. Chow (Eds.), Teaching and
learning in physical education: Promoting pupils’ participation in
lifelong physical activity. National Institute of Education,
Singapore: Singapore (pp.77-95).
18 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
Tan, K.S. & Tan, E.K. (2001). Managing change within the physical
education curriculum: issues, opportunities and challenges. In J.
Tan, S. Gopinathan & W. K. Ho (Eds.), Challenges facing the
Singapore education system today (pp. 50-70). Singapore: Prentice
Hall.
Tan, S. (2005). Implementing teaching games for understanding:
Stories of change. In L. L. Griffin & J. I. Butler (Eds.), Teaching
games for understanding: Theory, research and practice (pp. 107-
124). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Tan, S. (2010, 6th March). For the love of football, Straits Times, A2.
The Macmillan world atlas (1996) (p. 162). New York: Macmillan.
The Straits Times (2009, February 10th). ‘Bigger education budget’.
Retrieved 31st March, 2010 from
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/
STIStory_336516.html
TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center (2009). Trends in
International Mathematics and Science Study 2007. Boston: Boston
College. Retrieved from
http://timss.bc.edu/TIMSS2007/intl_reports.html.
Wang, C.K.J., Chia, Y.H.M., McNeill, M.C., Tan, K.S.S., & Chow,
J.Y. (Eds.)(2009). Teaching and learning in physical education:
Promoting pupils’ participation in lifelong physical activity. National
Institute of Education, Singapore: Singapore.
Wang, Y. & Chia, M. (2008). Every step counts: School physical
activity during physical education and recess in Singapore. In
UNESCO Bangkok, Innovative practices in physical education and
sports in Asia (pp. 81-99). Bangkok: UNESCO.
Wright, S.C., Butler, J. & McNeill, M.C. (2004). The role
socialization can play in promoting Teaching Games for
Understanding, JOPERD, March, 46-52.
Wright, S., McNeill, M. & Fry, J.M. (2009). The tactical approach to
teaching games from teaching, learning and mentoring
perspectives, Sport, Education and Society, 14(2), 223-244.
Wright, S.C., McNeill, M.C., Fry, J.M. & Wang, J. (2005). Teaching
teachers to play and teach games, Physical Education and Sport
Pedagogy, 10, 61-82.
Yeo, A. (2009, 20th March). Singapore sees 13% one-year increase in
number of foreign students. Lianhe Zaobao, p.6.
Yeo, C. (2010). BMI-for-age. Seminar presented to PESS faculty by
the Ministry of Education, April.
Yip, J.S.K. (1997). Reflections and renewal in education. In J. Tan, S.
Gopinathan, & W.K. Ho (Eds.), Education in Singapore: A book of
readings. Singapore: Prentice-Hall.
Author’s note
Mike McNeill is Associate Professor in physical education
pedagogy within the National Institute of Education,
Singapore at Nanyang Technological University. As an
advocate of game-sense and creative movement, he
specialises in the teaching of games and curriculum
gymnastics. His current research is looking at pushing the
boundaries of pedagogy in the ‘real’ world of schools by
embracing physical activity and learning within an ICT-
savvy community.
Joan Fry is Associate Professor in physical education
pedagogy within the National Institute of Education,
Singapore at Nanyang Technological University. Her
teaching focuses on primary and secondary methods,
curriculum issues, and constructivist games pedagogy. In
recent years, her research has been on understanding
students’ and teachers’ responses to using a local version of
teaching games for understanding and the implications for
physical education teacher educators.
Correspondence
Michael C. McNeill - Email: michael.mcneill@nie.edu.sg
Joan M. Fry - Email: joan.fry@nie.edu.sg
Main Author: Michael C McNeill, Physical Education &
Sport Science, National Institute of Education, 1 Nanyang
Walk, Singapore 637616.
Email: michael.mcneill@nie.edu.sg
Fax: (+65) 6896 9260 Tel: (+65) 6790 3687
 ‘I think it’s a good idea,

c u r r i c u l u m re f o r m
I just don’t know how to do it’:
The struggle for PE reform in China

Christopher Hickey - Deakin University

Dr Aijing Jin - University of Ballarat

A mong the many changes occurring across Chinese society in the early phase of Y2K is the construction and
implementation of a new physical education (PE) curriculum. Not unlike recent changes in Australia, New Zealand
and the UK, this process has seen a heightening of the emphasis on health. Presented within a wider framework for making
the school curriculum more relevant, PE is more closely aligned with China’s emerging population health concerns around
lifestyle practices of its youth. Foremost here are burgeoning social anxieties about decreased levels of physical activity, poor
dietary practices, risk-taking tendencies, and a general shift in focus from ideology to skills.
This paper reports on a study undertaken to explore the perceptions of Chinese PE teachers and their engagement with the
new PE & Health curriculum. The data reveals a number of structural, personal and cultural factors that work against PE
teachers taking up the opportunities presented in the new curriculum. Prominent here are; low professional status, lack of
resources, lack of training and the grip of deeply rooted cultural values.

Introduction One of the key internal mechanisms governments have at

China is the most populous country in the world with over
1.3 billion citizens. After a sustained period of self-imposed
isolation China’s emergence into world politics and
economics has attracted a huge level of interest and
engagement over the last three decades. As the world’s
fastest growing economy China has experienced a prolonged
period of economic growth (GDP) over the past thirty years
and has undergone a massive phase of infrastructure
development. From 1980 to 2000 China’s level of
urbanisation went from 18% to 40% of its population (Yoa &
Yueh, 2006). Even the so-called Global Financial Crisis saw
only a brief drop in China’s GDP during 2009 but it is back
increasing at a rate of over 10% in 2010. Among the other
markers of the changing face of China have been social and
political transformations from an agricultural to industrial,
rural to urban, planned to market and closed to open society.
While all of these indicators convey a picture of a country
that is rapidly progressing, the change process has not been
without its tensions (Gungwu & Wong, 2007; Tubilewicz,
2006). Through its emergence as a global economic power
China has managed to change the way she is perceived by the
rest of the world. In some ways, the more difficult task has
been to change the way China sees and engages with herself.
It is wrong to think of globalisation as just concerning big
systems, like the world financial order. Globalisation isn’t
only about what is ‘out there’, remote and far away from the
individual. It is an ‘in here’ phenomenon too, influencing
intimate and personal aspects of our lives. (Giddens, 1999)
their disposal when trying to facilitate social change is the
State education system. The Chinese education system is
the largest in the world. Currently, there are in excess of
600,000 schools in its basic education system (comprising
primary and secondary education) within which over
200,000,000 young people are taught (Ye, 2004). In China,
primary and secondary education takes 12 years to
complete, divided into primary (6 years), junior secondary
(3 years) and senior secondary (3 years) stages. Since 1986
the first nine years of schooling, namely primary and junior
secondary, have been decreed compulsory. In 1999 the
Ministry of Education began work on a new basic
curriculum to bring China’s education into the 21st
Century. At that time, the Ministry of Education was
concerned that the existing curriculum was out of step with
the contemporary needs of the nation (Chinese National
Education Ministry 2001a). Foremost here was a shift in
focus from ideology to skills as part of a wider labour market
reform (Mackerras, 2006). The ensuing overhaul would
include significant reforms to educational philosophy,
content and practice (Mebrahtu, et al., 2000).
Not unlike recent changes in Australia, New Zealand,
Singapore and the UK (see Penney, 2004; McNeill et al.,
2009; Cassidy & Ovens, 2009) the new National
Curriculum in China has seen an increased coupling
between the previously discrete disciplines of physical
education (PE) and health (H). Though the experience of
change have been played out quite differently in each of

Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 19

these countries, the impetus for their respective foci has a
measure of commonality. Each of them, to lesser and greater
extents, were driven by widespread concerns about the
social and economic impact of increasingly unhealthy
lifestyle practices of their respective populations. With an
increased focus on health prevention, PE was positioned to
play an increased role in promoting active lifestyle and
exercise practices that will contribute to the development
of strong, healthy and productive citizens. With an
increased focus on mass participation, rather than
individual excellence, these new national curricula
positions PE as a medium through which young people can
learn to appreciate, and benefit from, the value of regular
exercise and healthy lifestyles.
Over the past 20 years research has told us quite a bit
about the tensions and possibilities that PE teachers
experience and deal with during times of curriculum change
(Amour & Jones, 1998; Penney, 1998; Sparkes, Templin &
Schemmp, 1990; Worrall, 1999). However, during this time
we have gained very little insight into the experiences of PE
teachers in China during times of change. Part of this stems
from the fact that there has been relatively little change in
the curriculum over the years and that publically available,
independent reporting of any such change has been scarce.
While there is a small body of quantitative research that
describes percentages of uptake with the new curriculum
based on geography and class there is almost no insight into
the qualitative experiences of the individuals that make up
these large data sets (Dong, et al., 2002; Mackerras, 2006;
Yu, 2004). Using a narrative methodology this paper reports
on a study undertaken in 2007 to capture the voices of
practicing PE teachers, about their engagement with the
new PE&H curriculum. Central here are insights gleaned
through semi-structured interviews with 18 practicing PE
teachers in a coastal city in Northeast China.
Physical Education curriculum reform in
China
The new Chinese National Curriculum Standard
comprising 18 subjects, one of which is Physical Education
& Health (PE&H), was formally released in 2001. Prior to
the release of this document PE had maintained a fairly
stable, stand-alone, place in the Chinese curriculum.
Aligned with China’s close connection with the former
Soviet Union, PE in the school curriculum has long been
focused on the development and demonstration of
physical skill and discipline. Since the establishment of
the New China in October 1949, the main content areas
of the Chinese PE curriculum were focused on gymnastics,
track and field, basketball, football (soccer), and
volleyball. The evaluation system set up around PE was
weighted heavily toward the attainment and recognition
of physical skill and excellence. Within this orientation
student achievement was observed in those who ran
fastest, jumped highest and threw furthest. During this
time pre-service and in-service teacher training programs
were heavily orientated toward the provision of pedagogic
content knowledge, expressed as teacher expertise
(Schulman, 1986). As such, teachers were encouraged to
specialise in one or two sports, usually determined by their
own history of performance excellence.
20 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
The rapid social and economic change that has swept over
China in the past two decades has served to incrementally
dilute the cultural ideology of discipline, control and order that
previously permeated almost all aspects of Chinese life,
including PE. In 2001, the Chinese National Education
Ministry put forward a series of statements outlining the basis
of educational reform for the new millennium. Among these
changes was a recognition that PE needed to undergo a
substantial remake in order to connect with the evolving
needs of Chinese society. Informing this change was
increasing social concern about the increasingly sedentary
lifestyle practices of young people and the rise of lifestyle
related diseases that accompany them. Within this reshaping
skill and excellence would make way for participation and
health. This was not to be seen as a diminution of the status
of PE in the school curriculum, but rather a change of focus
toward population health. The Education Ministry decreed
that, “a healthy body is the basic requirement for young
people to serve the country… healthy bodies are the
foundation of the vigorous vitality of the Chinese nation.
School education should be built on a conception of ‘health
first’, therefore strengthening the place of physical education
in schools” (Chinese National Education Ministry 2001b, p.
1). Similar to the curriculum reforms in Australia, Britain,
Singapore and New Zealand, this shift in emphasis was
accompanied by a corresponding merging of the two formally
discrete disciplines of PE and H. In the preface part of the
new PE&H curriculum the following explanation is provided:
With the rapid development of science and technology,
especially the globalisation of economy, the quality of
human beings’ material and cultural life has improved a
great deal. But a modern style of production and life-
style has meant a decrease in manual work and a
corresponding increase in psychological pressure, which
can seriously threaten and menace human beings’
health. Modern people must realise that focussing on
health is not about illness, but also about how to
maintain good physical, mental and social condition. By
recognising peoples’ health as essential to national
development, social improvement and individual
happiness, physical education becomes a very important
channel to improve health. (Chinese National Education
Ministry, 2001b, p. 1)
Underpinning the new curriculum is an increasing
awareness that China’s rising affluence is being
accompanied by reduced exercise, increased popularity of
fast food, decreased levels of fitness and the marked
increased incidence of diabetes and obesity among young
people (Ji, et al., 2004). Prioritising participation over
performance the new PE&H curriculum encourages PE
teachers to provide students with opportunities to explore,
and experiment with, a wide range of movement
possibilities. Embedded in the uptake of the new curriculum
is a major pedagogic shift from a transmissive orientation
towards a more constructivist one; on the spectrum of
teaching styles. Here the emphasis is shifted from the
function of distinguishing students who are highly capable
in specific sport skills to a focus on participation and its
contribution to the physical, mental and social health of all
students. The conception of ‘health first’ in the new PE&H
curriculum challenges many aspects of the traditional PE
theory and practice. Moving away from its roots in the
biological and movement sciences, the new curriculum
represents a fusion of psychology, physiology, environmental
science, sociology, nutrition and health promotion. As one
of its core educational goals, contemporary PE teachers are
expected to stimulate students’ desire to participate in
sporting and recreational activities and nurture healthy
lifestyle habits.
The research method
Within a qualitative research framework we interviewed 18
practicing PE teachers in a coastal city in the Northeast of
China, with a population of approximately six million.
Within this approach we sought to develop ‘thick’
descriptions of particular teachers engagements with the
new PE&H curriculum within an epistemology of the
particular (Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995). With a focus on
capturing the experiences of real people in real settings we
used an open-ended interview format sought to collect the
stories these teachers tell about being a PE teacher in
China during a time of substantial curriculum change
(Seidman, 2006). From this stand-point, the principles and
practices of narrative inquiry were underpinned by a
research orientation that leans toward recognising the
contingent and contextual nature of meaning (Clandinin
& Connelly, 2000; Elliott, 2005; Webster & Mertova,
2007). At the time of this research all of the participants
were full-time PE teachers with at least ten years teaching
experience. Beyond this, participants were chosen with a
view to establishing a degree of gender balance and
providing a diversity of school contexts spanning the
different socio-economic stratum that exist across the city.
Among the 18 teachers, ten were male and eight female; 12
were from secondary schools and 6 from primary schools; 5
were from relatively prestigious schools, 9 were from
average schools, while the remaining 4 were from low
decile schools. It is from this data set that we set out to
analyse, interpret and make sense of the impact of PE
curriculum reform in contemporary China.
The research participants were recruited to the project
via the regional Education Bureau. Potential participants
were identified and contacted via a letter of invitation to
participate in a one-off research interview. During this
initial contact details about the purpose of the study, the
research process and what would be required of them if they
chose to consent, were clearly outlined. The letter
emphasised that participants would be encouraged to speak
honestly and openly, and that a number of steps would be
taken to assuage their possible fears of recrimination. Given
the cultural tendency among the Chinese not to be seen to
criticise their seniors/superiors (Hofstede & Hofstede,
2005) the potential risk associated with them being
identified were conveyed to each participant in the process
of securing their consent. Protecting their anonymity was
operationalised through the allocation of pseudonyms in all
aspects of recording, transcribing and reporting processes.
Once participants indicated that they were interested in
being involved in the research project a statement of
informed consent was mailed to them. The informed
consent statement clearly outlined how anonymity would
be protected throughout the project. To facilitate this,
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
participants were invited to choose a false name to be used
in the interview. Beneath their pseudonym all aspects of the
data collected about the participant, their teaching
biography and the school(s) they worked in were factual.
In order to encourage frank and open dialogue we opted
for a semi-structured interview format. We stressed at the
outset, that this was in no way an evaluation of their
practice, their school or their professionalism but rather a
means through which to collect contextual and contingent
insights into the lived experiences of Chinese PE teachers
(Seidman, 2006). Within a broad interview schedule we
invited the participants to describe the ways in which the
landscape of social reform had impacted on (i) their day-to-
day existence, (ii) life in schools, and (iii) their practice as
PE teachers. All of these phases were introduced in a
general way, except in the final phase where we asked them
to talk specifically about the impact of the new PE&H
curriculum, in terms of how they understood it and the
implications it had on their practice. In the interest of
projecting the authenticity of the data we include the
undistorted voices of participants in the presentation of the
findings.
Data collection took place at times and locations
convenient to each research participant, outside of school
working hours. All interviews were conducted in Chinese
(Mandarin) and initially transcribed into Chinese. It is well
known that words, meanings and concepts do not always
easily translate across cultures and languages. Therefore, the
translator needed to be skilled in finding ways to convey
concepts from one language into another (Tsai, et al, 2004),
particularly with regard to making decisions about the
cultural meanings which language carries (Temple &
Edwards, 2002). Tsai, et al (2004) suggest that the more
knowledgeable researchers are about the cultural beliefs and
value orientations of the interviewees, the better able they
will be in their interpretations and translations of meaning.
From this point of view, the translator is pivotal to cross
language research because communication across many
languages involves more than just a literal transfer of words.
As a fluent speaker of both Mandarin and English, the
second author of this paper skillfully conducted all
interviews, transcriptions and translations.
We began the process of analysing the data by reading the
transcriptions through several times with a view to
identifying key (poignant or recurring) ideas, opinions, and
issues. To facilitate the initial sorting process, we employed
a colour-code to delineate different issues that emerged from
the transcripts. These colour-codings were then collated
and used as a way of integrating the entire data set. The
determination of themes was facilitated through the
identification of recurring, and distinct, views, experiences
and perceptions emerging from the transcripts. The
processes involved in sorting the individual transcripts into
concepts and categories, and then compiling, naming and
arranging the emergent themes, were highly recursive.
The Findings
The findings presented here focus on some of the key
barriers that the teachers identified to them implementing
the new PE&H curriculum. In other words, the findings are
a representation of the impediments to change. Conditional
21
to this analysis is the fact that all 18 teachers expressed their
support for the fundamental goal to put more emphasis on
health in the new curriculum. While many of the
participants tempered their support for the new curriculum
over the course of their interview it is fair to say that, as a
collective, the teachers overwhelmingly endorsed its broad
direction. However, beyond this rhetorical support there
was little evidence of practical translation. In this section
we outline of the key factors that were seen to constrain the
translation of this support, into practice.
To present the research findings we have organised the
barriers to change into three broad categories, namely
personal, structural, and cultural factors. We recognsise that
these distinctions are artificial and that many of the issues
we describe within them could be extended across several
categories. However, leaning on the scholarship of social
theorists such as Fay (1987) and Giddens (1991 & 1984) we
use them as heuristic devices for understanding and
interpreting the limits to rationality in the pursuit of
change. In exploring the processes of change both Fay and
Giddens help us to make sense of some of the
inconsistencies, ambiguities and resistances that the
teachers revealed during their interviews. Here we are
particularly attuned to the ways history, tradition and habit
inscribe the perceptions and attitudes that teachers have
towards change. To this end, the issues we present here are
not a comprehensive representation of the data but rather
are projections of some of the recurring themes that
emerged from the data.
Personal Factors
During the interviews most teachers talked about the
difficulties associated with their professional life as PE
teachers in schools. Prominent here were feelings of
‘exhaustion’, ‘frustration’, ‘powerlessness’ and a general ‘lack
of support’ and ‘respect’ around implementing the new
curriculum. The interview transcripts revealed that despite
their overt affirmation of the new PE&H curriculum the
teachers were too busy keeping up with the day-to-day
demands of the job to engage meaningfully with the new
curriculum. Their typical working day started between 7:00
to 7:30 am, and for some it was as early as 6:30am, and
finished around 4:30 pm. On average they taught about 13
classes per week with 40 to 45 minutes for each class.
Typical class sizes were around 60 to 70 students for
secondary schools, while none reported class sizes below 40
even in primary schools. As PE teachers, their responsibility
extended beyond formal PE classes to include the
organization and delivery of daily exercise programs,
conducted mornings and afternoons.
Compounding this was each PE teacher’s involvement in
a range of after school activities, such as training school
teams and organizing interschool competitions. As a group
they also spent a lot of time on non-teaching activities such
as meetings, writing reports on practice and performance,
writing teaching diaries, assessing each other’s teaching, and
other administrative duties. Zhang lamented, ‘I think only
half of my energy has been used on teaching, and the other half
is just for so many odd jobs and things, including meetings, term
summary reports, teaching quality analysis, ranking teachers and
students’. Some teachers did confess to thinking about the
22 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
new curriculum reforms and contemplating new practices
but felt that they were too busy or exhausted to actually do
something about them. Xue explained, ‘after a whole
morning of PE teaching I am very tired and don’t think I can do
as well as the first class for the rest of teaching - let alone to
consider the new demands of the curriculum reform’. Adding
weight to this sentiment is recent research that revealed
that PE teachers have an average work-load that is 15% to
20% heavier than in other subject areas (Dong, 2002). The
same research concluded that prolonged overwork was a
source of widespread stress and was a major contributor to
the high levels of reported burnout among PE teachers.
The interview data also revealed that the Chinese system
of ranking teachers is a major source of frustration and
duress among PE teachers. Here, teacher quality is ranked
according to the examination scores achieved by his/her
students. In simple terms, the higher the student scores the
higher the rank given to the teacher. Because PE is not a
subject required for higher education entrance
examination, PE teachers often got low rankings on the
teacher quality scales. Xue complained, ‘no matter how hard
we work, PE teachers are very seldom rated as excellent or even
good. We are always ranked in the latter half or even at the
end….’ As a main vector for promotion and performance
bonus PE teachers we spoke to were unanimous in feeling
undervalued in their schools. Compounding this, amid
phases of teacher retrenchment and dismissal PE teachers
generally felt that the teacher ranking system left them
more vulnerable than teachers in other disciplines.
The interview process also revealed that the PE teachers
felt a strong sense of inadequacy in terms of implementing
the new curriculum. They were in broad agreement that the
discipline knowledge and teaching skills they had
developed through their teacher training, were out of step
with the demands of the new curriculum reforms. All 18
teachers mentioned, to lesser and greater extents, that their
lack of appropriate training was one of the major obstacles
to them implementing of the new curriculum. Summarising
this sentiment Yu commented, ‘my knowledge structure lacks
a lot for today’s PE teaching and today’s community health… I
need to learn new knowledge and skills that I didn’t learn in the
university in order to achieve what I am going to be expected to
do in the New PE and Health curriculum’. She added, ‘the
capacities of teachers do not match the demands of the new
curriculum, so I see an urgent need for reform to PE teacher
education programs’.
Systematic and Structural Factors
An intensely competitive spirit exists as a normal element
of mainstream Chinese culture. In a densely populated
society where access to resources and opportunity is limited,
educational achievement is seen as a direct pathway to
securing a good job and a high salary. In today’s Chinese
education system there are two important examinations for
students – (1) Entrance Examination from junior high to
senior high school and (2) the Entrance Examination from
senior high school to university. In practical terms the
results of the Entrance Examinations are directly coupled to
a schools’ status and students who do well in these exams
gain admission to the superior senior high schools and
universities. The promotion or success rates in these two
examinations are used as the key standards for school
evaluations, and the consequent flow of resources. As a
consequence, the promotion rates achieved through these
examinations has become the key focus of school leaders,
teachers, students and parents.
While PE has a marginal presence in the Entrance
Examination from junior high to senior high school, it is
not a component of the higher education Entrance
Examination process. The heavy focus given to the
promotion rates achieved through this process, functions to
further marginalise the contribution of PE in schools.
According to Yu, ‘PE classes are sometimes replaced by other
classes in order to guarantee high examination results and high
promotion rates’. This situation appeared to be a deep source
of frustration to the PE teachers. Qu, a father and also a
teacher worried that, ‘students now are developing quite an
imbalance between the mental and physical levels. They work
too much on their brain and too little on their body’. Rather
than showing any signs of abating Chen laments that, ‘the
tendency towards examination-oriented education is getting
stronger and stronger - students have no choice, parents have no
choice, teachers have no choice and schools have no choice, and
so the only thing we can do is go further along this direction’.
During the interviews all teachers raised concerns about
pre- and in-service teacher training programs for PE
teachers. The general consensus here was that the training
that was offered through these programs was not well
aligned to the needs of today’s teachers. Further to this, they
generally felt that they had not been effectively prepared to
deal with change. Yu conveyed the very limited and
specialised nature of her teacher training, stating that, ‘my
major was volleyball when I was studying in the university so I
become very good at teaching volleyball and not so good at other
activities. The situation is really embarrassing now for me faced
with the new curriculum reform’. Yu described her experience
during her undergraduate studies as follows:
‘… the huge social change and basic education reform
demand urgent reform to higher education and PE teacher
training programs… Too much emphasis was put on track
and field, basketball, volleyball, football and gymnastics
when I was a student in the university. But we didn’t learn
tennis, bowling, golf, preparation exercises and other fun
activities that are in high demand today. So our knowledge
structure is insufficient for today’s PE teaching’.
Three decades after the implementation of the national
policy of family planning (one couple, one child) China’s
first-generation of ‘only children’ have grown up and have
become young adults. In today’s schools almost all students
are the only child in their family. This unique situation
brings with it a number of challenges to today’s education.
During the interviews all teachers raised concerns around
the negative aspects the ‘only child’ brings to their daily
teaching and the process of educational reform. Their
overwhelmingly negative opinions towards the ‘one child’
generation were very enlightening. Pejorative descriptors,
such as ‘selfish’, ‘spoilt’, ‘lazy’, and ‘disrespectful’ were
littered across the transcripts. Teachers generally felt that
today’s parents pay far too much attention to their only
child’s academic performance and do little to develop their
personal and social development. Wang expressed her
concern about the only child generation saying:
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
The only child in the family has been loved blindly and
spoilt and is called the ‘sun’ or the ‘little emperor’ of the
family. They become very selfish, don’t care about others.
They are too self-centred….
Xue rendered this issue more problematic when trying to
reconcile her competing interests as a teacher and also a
mother:
Parents hope their only child will be a ‘dragon’ or a
‘phoenix’. My daughter, who is only 9 years old, has to
attend some classes outside normal school education. These
are English, dancing, fine art, piano and things….I hope
she would have a better life in the future not like me…….
All parents are willing to give all they have to their only
child including all their money no matter how poor they are.
They invest too much on the child’s education.
Cultural Factors
Traditional Chinese culture enshrined the teacher as a
person of wisdom and honour, to be respected and trusted.
Though teachers were never rewarded well materially their
nourishment was said to be in nurturing the growth of
others. In traditional Chinese culture students were
expected to be obedient and tractable (Hofstede &
Hofstede, 2005). The cultural passing on of the
ability/discipline to self-regulate meant that teacher
authority was rarely challenged. Today, amid rapid social,
political and economic change a competing set of cultural
values has emerged within China (Griswold, 1994).
Embedded in this is an erosion of long held cultural values
and disciplines, many dating back to the philosophies and
teachings of Confucius (circa 500BC). Rooted in these
philosophies were social doctrines of morality, dignity,
respect, responsibility and sincerity. While it is dangerous to
place absolute timeframes or referent points to social
change it is widely felt that the opening up of China, which
gained momentum through the 1980s, has had its largest
social impact on the instantiation of cultural values
(Holton, 1998). It is here that social disruption seems to
have its strongest impetus. It is from this period that
exposure of China to neo-liberal values and the one child
policy appear to have conspired to produce a form of
cultural divide. Importantly, all of the teachers we spoke to
grew up and were educated prior to the advent of these
socio-political changes.
All 18 teachers referred to the notion of cultural change
to describe attitudes and behaviours that they felt marked
contemporary Chinese youth as different. While there was
some reference to attributes such as ‘resourceful,
imaginative, creative and open-minded’, their description
of contemporary youth was quite depreciatory. ‘Selfish,
disrespectful, lazy and spoilt’ were words or sentiments
repeatedly employed to describe them. The teachers were
unanimous in the view that today’s students are much
harder to manage than those that have gone before them.
Indeed, a number of the teachers identified the attitudes
and behaviours of today’s youth as one of the biggest
challenges to teachers. Liu explained, “…it is much more
difficult to manage and organise today’s students because they
don’t obey their teachers like before, they don’t respect their
teachers - not like they did before”. At the heart of their
disenchantment with young people was a seeming inability
23
to manage or control their behaviours. In describing his
current discontent with teaching Cong highlighted the
difficulties in dealing with today’s youth. “Today’s students
are much more difficult to control and manage. They do not
respect what the teacher says. In my day the teacher was always
right but now they think they are. Being a teacher now is much
harder and much less satisfying ”.
The discord between the generations had its most
tangible impact on the teachers in the implementation of
pedagogy. Forefront to this was an increasing realisation
that the pedagogical practices they defaulted to were not
proving effective in dealing with today’s students. Ma
explained, “today’s students are not of a tractable generation,
therefore, it is really necessary for teachers to learn new strategies
to handle them”. However, unlike Ma, most teachers
reflected on the past to reconcile the pedagogic dilemmas
that had emerged for them. Rather than teachers having to
adapt to meet the demands of a changing youth, they
tended to hope that today’s students might adopt the
practices of the past. Chen expressed his ideas for
improving the current situation saying, “…I would much
prefer to teach the students of 10 years ago. It would be much
better if students now were expected to behave like they used to”.
Qu revealed a very similar sentiment in commenting, “at the
beginning of my teacher journey it was not hard to organise a
class because most of the students were tractable. We need to
teach today’s students how to behave properly and respect their
teachers more.” Indeed, most of the teachers we spoke to
viewed the attitudes and practices of today’s youth as a
diminution of traditional Chinese culture.
Further complicating the implementation of the new
curriculum is the demand for teachers to employ more
inclusive and creative forms of pedagogy. The shift in
curriculum emphasis toward participation is progressed
around a demand for PE teachers to connect young people
with the virtues of health and wellbeing. While at a surface
level this change appeared to have the support of the PE
teachers, its implementation requires a fundamental
pedagogic shift that they felt very uncertain about. Wang
believed that the current uncertainty about how PE teachers
should implement the new curriculum was at least in part due
to the lack of training and direction that they have received.
According to Wang, “we hoped the experts of curriculum reform
could offer us the framework or plan on how to teach the new PE
curriculum … but we have had no direction and we do not know
how to teach now”. Zhang reiterated this concern, claiming,
“the new curriculum reform calls for the creative work of teachers.
But the fact is that most teachers are not capable of doing creative
work, they need a lot of support and help”.
One of strongest disablers that emerged in our discussions
about the implementation of the new curriculum was these
teachers’ perceived lack of skills and knowledge. As well as
experiencing no training in this area the teachers shared a
deep concern that they didn’t have the cultural dispositions
required to effectively implement the new curriculum.
Having grown up and been schooled in traditional Chinese
culture underpinned a collective feeling among these
teachers that they were poorly prepared to meet the
demands of new curriculum. Lui captured this sentiment,
stating that, “my teacher training never taught me how to
explore new ways of doing things and I have never been taught
24 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
that in the past 10 years. Curriculum reform asks PE teachers to
offer a relaxed and joyful environment for students in PE class.
I am not quite sure how this should be done”.
At the heart of this, and many similar comments, was a
recognition that the pedagogic demands of the new
curriculum were in direct conflict with many of the
conventions and sensibilities that frame their commonsense
ideas about effective teaching. It was around their
professional ideologies that the teachers expressed their
strongest disharmony with the new curriculum. According
to Chen, “to tell you the truth I feel that I would be leading
young people astray. I would feel ashamed to be failing my duty
as a PE teacher if I didn’t teach my students any sport skills, and
I just gave them freedom!”
Discussion
Being a PE teacher in China is, like all other professions,
framed around the development of a specific relationship to
oneself and others. To be a professional is to be a person
who must do certain, quite specific work on oneself so that
they can be considered to be ‘professional’. While these
relationships (with self and others) are open to change they
exist within a suite of discourses that control how one’s
professional identity can be thought about and measured.
Based on the data presented in this research the successful
implementation of the new PE&H curriculum requires a
considerable measure of (ideological) change to the way
these teachers currently understand and practice their
professional identity. Central to this identity is an image of
themselves as experts or authorities in the provision of PE
in schools. They understand their professional role as one of
an expert who is charged with the responsibility of
transmitting expertise to students in an ordered and
sequential way. The application of a more relaxed (read
inclusive and participatory) pedagogic approach is seen to
be unsettling and destablising of their consolidated
understandings of themselves as PE teachers.
It is around issues of culture that the pursuit of curriculum
change in PE becomes more nuanced in terms of
international experiences with curriculum reform.
Prominent here is a heightened division between the values
and mores of generations that grew up either side of the
1980s. Though the teachers we spoke to identified the
general lack of training, support and equipment as
impediments to the new PE&H curriculum, its perceived
mal-alignment with their long held cultural values also
forged a considerable block. These teachers, themselves
educated under the old (egalitarian) regime, were struggling
to reconcile the differing values and attitudes of
contemporary youth, expressions of a market-driven, one-
child regime. While most teachers expressed overwhelming
support for the broad social change that China had
undergone over the past three decades they collectively
lamented the seeming loss of traditional cultural values
around the unqualified respect of authority and of elders,
namely teachers. While the teachers appear to accept that
change is inevitable, they continue to reflect fondly of the
past students and look back nostalgically. Within their
collective overt support for the changing rhetoric and
practice of a ‘health first’ curriculum they did not endorse
the dilution of traditional values.
 Further compromising the curriculum change process in
China is the perceived lack of support and recognition
given to the place and purpose of PE in schools. As a subject
that sits outside of the Higher Education Entrance
Examination process, the status of PE in the school
curriculum is very marginal. As a consequence there is a
general lack of internal support or resource allocation
directed toward the implementation of the new PE&H
curriculum. School leaders are widely perceived to be
captive to the performance of the school in the Entrance
Examinations and the delivery of the key learning areas that
have the greatest impact on these results. This should not
be interpreted as a personal/ professional disregard for PE by
school leaders but rather understood against a systemic
privileging of the natural sciences to determine funding and
status in the Chinese education system. While schools and
individuals continue to be rewarded for their academic
achievements in only some (examinable) disciplines the
much needed allocation of support and resources toward the
implementation of the new PE&H curriculum is unlikely to
be a priority. In the absence of a direct line of funding
allocated to the advance of the new PE&H curriculum it is
difficult to see an obvious circuit breaker to the structural
barriers that currently marginalise its place in the Chinese
education system.
In seeking to understand the process of curriculum
change in PE in China it is important to situate it within
the wider context of socio-political discourses. Inherent in
this is a broad recognition that many aspects of traditional
Chinese culture are in a process of transition. In the
reflexive process of cultural identity aspects of the old and
new appear to exist simultaneously, albeit in tension.
Unparalleled levels of social and economic change,
coupled with a distinctunique family planning policy (one
couple, one child) make China a unique context for
contemporary curriculum reform. General feelings of being
over-worked and under-valued within the PE profession
only add to the challenges associated with undertaking
major curriculum reformchange at this time. Though the
teachers we spoke to had intentions of honouring their
professional obligations to the new curriculum, there were
many aspects of this process that seemed to run contrary to
their fundamental beliefs about the educative process and
their roles as teachers. Prominent here was their personal
histories and biographies that were steeped in the
Confucian ideals of self-restraint and self-discipline. The
teachers we spoke to revealed little inclination that they
were ready to over-write these ideals to progress the new
PE&H curriculum. At a time when PE teachers are calling
out for greater respect and recognition of their work, any
move that might seem to dilute their expertise and
authority is likely to be met with resistance.
Conclusion
Major curriculum change is well recognised as being a very
complex undertaking wherein numerous personal, cultural
and structural variables will inevitably impact, to lesser and
greater extents, on its carriage (Fullan, 1999; 2001). While
the Chinese cultural disposition for compliance and
deference to authority might suggest that curriculum reform
would be easier to implement across its system, their innate
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
connection with Chinese culture, history and tradition
appears to more than off-set this. The interview data
presented in this paper portrays a view of Chinese PE
teachers as struggling with the uncertainties and
ambiguities that the curriculum change process has put in
front of them. Despite an overt level of support for the
broad aspirations of the new PE&H curriculum, at the point
of delivery the teachers we spoke to clearly felt poorly
placed to enact this change. Prominent here is the recurring
voice that they lack a pedagogic framework and the
necessary institutional support to transport the new
curriculum rhetoric into new curriculum practice. At a
more practical and rational level the teachers noted the
exclusion of PE from the Entrance Examinations, the
relatively low status of the discipline and the lack of
resources and importance given to its provision as major
barriers to change.
While aspects of the curriculum change process in China
appear comparable to like experiences elsewhere in the
world, the magnitude of the change being ushered in across
PE mark it as distinct. The new PE&H curriculum is calling
for the implementation of a more relaxed/inclusive
pedagogy that is predicated on a new philosophy of learning
which emphasizes participation over development. The
magnitude of the change being called for here, particularly
in light of the substantial histories it seeks to overwrite,
make this a very complex undertaking. This is not just
about a change of techniques and processes, but rather it
requires teachers to accept a substantial shift in the mission
and purpose of PE in the school curriculum. On the basis of
the data presented in this paper there appears to be an
urgent need for in-service training to provide PE teachers
with the basic pedagogic building blocks around which they
might take up this challenge. Foremost here is the
development of a new theory of action that engages with
context to transport the goals of the new curriculum.
Expressions of teacher resistance to the introduction of
new curricula, such as those presented in this paper, are not
unexpected (Sparkes, 1990). Among the issues grappled
with here is an acknowledgement that rational persuasion is
not necessarily a forerunner to practical translation. The
challenge to curriculum reformists is to find appropriate
pedagogical ways in which the theory and practice of new
curriculum can engage with the teachers and students it
purports to serve. Rather than being viewed as roadblocks,
the barriers to change uncovered in this research provide
valuable insights into the sorts of interventions needed to
better support the practical translation of this reform. If the
passage of the new PE&H curriculum is going to progress
from rhetoric to reality there is clearly a need for targeted
support for teachers. Failure to attend to structural,
historical and cultural barriers that stand in the way of the
new PE&H curriculum will continue to undermine the
likelihood of success. On the basis of the data presented in
this paper there is clearly a need for stronger conceptual
coherence between the precepts of the curriculum change
on offer and how it can be implemented by real teachers in
real schools. Only then will we be in a position to make any
sort of judgments about the merits of the change being
proffered for Chinese PE.
25
References Webster, L. & Mertova, P. (2007). Using narrative inquiry as a research
method, Routledge, London.
Armour, K. & Jones, R. (1998). Physical education teachers’ lives and Worrall, R. (1999). New curriculum heralds fundamental change. New
careers, Falmer Press, London. Zealand Physical Educator, 1(1), 5-7.
Cassidy, T. & Ovens, A. (2009). Curriculum acoustics: Analysing the Ye, L. (2004). Chinese Basic Education Reform under the Macro
changing voice of the New Zealand Health and Physical Education Background of Globalization and informationlization, East China
Curriculum. In M. Dinan-Thompson (Ed.), Health and Physical Normal University Press, Shanghai.
Education: Contemporary Issues for Curriculum in Australia and New Yoa, Y. & Yueh, L. (2006). (Eds) Globalisation and economic growth in
Zealand (pp. 22-37), Oxford University Press, Sydney. China. World Scientific Publishing, Singapore.
Chinese National Education Ministry (2001a). The outline of national Yu, W. (2004). A Study of the Practice in Actualizing the New PE and
basic education curriculum reform, Beijing. Health Curriculum in Southwest China. Journal of Mianyang
Chinese National Education Ministry (2001b). The new physical Normal University, 23(5), 93-96.
education and health curriculum for the basic education system, Beijing.
Clandinin, D. & Connelly, M. (2000). Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Author’s note
story in qualitative research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Dong, Y., Zhang, Y. & Guo, M. (2002). The Investigation on secondary Chris Hickey is Associate Professor and Deputy Head in the
PE teachers’ occupational stress in regional areas. Journal of Dali School of Education at Deakin University. Much of his
College, 1(2), 91-96.
Elliott, J. (2005). Using narrative in social research: Qualitative and teaching is directed to the provision of research supervision
quantitative approaches. Sage, London. and training at the Doctoral level. Complementing this is a
Fay, B. (1987).Critical social science: Liberation and its limits, Cornell strong research interest in the construction of youth
University Press, New York.
Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel, Teachers College Press, identities. Using qualitative research methodologies his
New York. work has focused on better understand the forces that shape
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change, Teachers
College Press, New York.
the dominant knowledges, attitudes and behaviours of young
Giddens, A. (1999). The Reith Lectures. Lecture 1: Globalisation BBC 4 people in a range of curriculum and community settings.
7/4/99, London.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late
Aijing Jin is a lecturer and course coordinator of HPE in the
modern age, Polity Press, Cambridge.S School of Education at the University of Ballarat.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of Previously, she was an Associate Professor in Liaoning
structuration, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Griswold, W. (1994). Cultures and societies in a changing world, Pine Forge Normal University in China. Her current areas of research
Press, California. and teaching are in curriculum reform, the attributes of
Gungwu, W. & Wong, J. (2007). (Eds) Interpreting China’s development, effective learning and cross-cultural teacher education.
World Scientific Publishing, Singapore.
Hofstede, G. & Hofstede, G. (2005). Cultures and organisations: Software
of the mind, McGraw-Hill, New York. Correspondence
Holton, R. (1998). Globalisation and the nation-state, Macmillan, Hong Dr Christopher Hickey, School of Education,
Kong.
Ji, C., Sun, J. & Chen, T. (2004). Dynamic analysis on the prevalence of Deakin University, Geelong VIC Australia 3217
obesity and overweight school-age children and adolescents in Phone: 61-3-5227 1455 Fax: 61-3-5227 2014
recent 15 years in China. Chinese Journal of Epidemiology, 25, 103-8. Email: chick@deakin.edu.au
(In Chinese, with English abstract.)
Mackerras, C. (2006). Critical social issues. In C. Tubilewicz (Ed) Dr Aijing Jin, School of Education, University of Ballarat,
Critical issues in contemporary China. Routledge, London & Open PO Box 663, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia 3353
University of Hong Kong Press, Hong Kong
McNeill, M., Lim, B.S.C., Tan, W.K.C., Wang, C.K.J., & MacPhail, A. Phone: 61-3-5327 9016 Fax: 61-3-5327 9717
(2009). Moving towards quality physical education provision: Email: a.jin@ballarat.edu.au
Physical education in Singapore. European Physical Education
Review, 15, 201-223.
Mebrahtu, T., Crossley, M. & Johnson, D. (2000). (Eds) Globalisation,
educational transformation and societies in transition, Symposium
Books, Oxford.
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in
education. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Penney, D. (1998).School subjects and structures: Reinforcing
traditional voices in contemporary “reforms” in education,
Discourse, 19(1), 5-17.
Penney, D. (2004). Curriculum construction and change. In Kirk, D.,
Macdonald, D. & Sullivan, M. (Eds) Handbook of physical education,
The Australian Council for Health, Physical
Sage, London. Education and Recreation Inc. (ACHPER) is a
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in
teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14. leading professional, association representing
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for professionals working in the fields of health,
researchers in education and the social sciences, Teachers College Press,
New York. physical education, human movement studies,
Sparkes, A. (1990). Curriculum change and physical education: Towards a sport, recreation, dance and community fitness.
micropolitical understanding, Deakin University Press, Geelong.
Sparkes, A., Templin, T. & Schempp, P. (1990). The problematic nature It is a member based, not for profit organisation
of a career in a marginal subject: Some implications for teacher
education programs. Journal of Education for Teaching, 16(1), 3-28. with a highly credible national profile.
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research, Sage, Thousand Oaks,
California. The Mission of the Council is to promote active
Temple, B. & Edwards, R. (2002). Interpreters/ translators and cross- and healthy living for all Australians and
language research: Reflexivity and border crossings. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 1-12. particularly to support educators and its
Tsai, J. H.-C., Choe, J. H., Acorda, E., Chan, N. L., Taylor, V. M. & Tu,
S. P. (2004). Developing culturally competent health knowledge:
members in the study and of its areas of interest.
Issues of data analysis of cross-cultural, cross-language qualitative
research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(4), 16-27. To find out more about ACHPER go to our
Tubilewicz , C. (2006). (Ed) Critical issues in contemporary China, website www.achper.org.au.
Routledge, London & Open University of Hong Kong Press, Hong
Kong.

26 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010

 The New Zealand Curriculum:

curriculum
emergent insights and complex renderings
Alan Ovens - The University of Auckland

T he launch of New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007) brings into question the future of the reforms
introduced in the 1999 curriculum, Health and Physical Education in the New Zealand National Curriculum
(Ministry of Education, 1999). The aim of this paper is to critique recent physical education curriculum policy in New
Zealand and explore some of the discursive dilemmas that work to shape a unique rendering in New Zealand schools. I
draw on the concept of complexity thinking as a basis for conceptualising curriculum as an emergent process, resulting from
the interplay of many different elements operating at multiple levels of the education system. To illustrate this I discuss how
the qualifications framework, socially critical discourse and the recognition of Maori perspectives influence the curriculum
practices that emerge. I conclude by suggesting that contemporary curriculum analysis in New Zealand physical education
needs a broader focus on the structures that enable and constrain particular ways of doing physical education

Introduction ranging revisions of its schooling, curriculum and

In November 2007, the substantially revised New Zealand
Curriculum was launched with the aim of ensuring “that all
young New Zealanders are equipped with the knowledge,
competencies, and values they will need to be successful
citizens in the twenty-first century” (Ministry of Education
2007). It was based on a major revision of previous curriculum
documents and provided an official statement of policy for
teaching and learning in all English-medium New Zealand
schools1. At much the same time, the decision was made to
reduce the support services to schools, a decision that
effectively removed specialist physical education advisors from
helping teachers implement the curriculum. While the
Curriculum document has been analysed for its possible
influence in the shifts it signalled for thinking and practice in
physical education (for example, see Culpan, 2008; Cassidy &
Ovens, 2009; Burrows, 2009), there has been virtually no
attention paid to the influence that the loss of physical
education advisors will have. Likewise, there is little
awareness of the influence that the myriad of discussions,
seminars, in-service courses, conferences, web-based resources,
and school-based initiatives has had on curriculum practice in
New Zealand physical education. Given that Petrie (2008)
found in her study of New Zealand primary school teachers
that professional development was more important than the
curriculum documents in influencing decisions around what
constitutes physical education at the school level, it appears
that attention should also be paid to the structural elements
that mediate the curriculum as constructed and experienced
by students in New Zealand schools.
As curriculum practice in New Zealand, physical
education shares in common with other countries a sense
that the subject area is undergoing significant change. This
change can be observed in the frequency with which the
curriculum is revised and in the impact this had on the
formation of subject related curriculum documents. Over
the past three decades, New Zealand has undertaken wide
1 A parallel document, Te Marautanga o Aotearoa, will provide the
same function for Maori –medium schools
qualifications systems, which have also resulted in
significant shifts in the way the subject of physical
education is framed within policy documents and practiced
within schools.
The aim of this paper is to critique the physical education
curriculum in New Zealand and explore some of the
discursive dilemmas that work to shape its expression as
practice in New Zealand schools. I draw on the concept of
complexity thinking as a basis for conceptualising
curriculum as an emergent process, resulting from the
interplay of many different elements operating at multiple
levels of the education system. I begin by introducing
complexity thinking as a framework for the analysis before
considering the broader socio-cultural context in which
New Zealand schooling is situated. I then discuss three
themes that emerge as unique to the New Zealand context
and the way they are enabled and constrained within the
discursive process of curriculum making.
Complexity as an analytical frame
The uneasy relationship between policy and practice is well
established. The development of new curriculum policy,
which reflects changing social beliefs about what is important
for education of its young people and which is meant to direct
teachers work, does not always lead in a straightforward way
to implementation and changes in practice. Macdonald
(2004) points out that this curriculum change process can be
viewed in two different ways. Those with a modernist view of
education often frame the relationship between policy and
practice hierarchically. Such a view, she argues, carries,
“assumptions of linearity, purpose, control, identifiable
objectives or outcomes and well-articulated plans for
implementation be they at the teacher, subject or systemic
level” (p. 75). From this perspective, the relationship
between policy and practice is hierarchical, with practice
meant to be the practical articulation of policy.
In contrast, those with a postmodern view of education
are drawn to the globalisation of knowledge and culture, the
complexities of power and how teaching, as cultural work, is

Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 27

bound to be ‘messy’. From this perspective, the relationship
between policy and practice is viewed as complex and
constantly in a state of flux. In this sense, the curriculum is
the product of an open system where there are many
interacting and influencing elements. As Macdonald
(2004) suggests, there is a need to develop ways of
understanding curriculum that move past modernist
assumptions and, instead adopt a postmodern view
informed by a complexity thinking approach.
Complexity thinking represents a particular research
attitude that pays attention to the way in which the whole is
greater than the sum of its parts. Ideas often emerge from
when a social collective interacts rather than from individual
actions (Davis & Sumara, 2006; Collins & Clarke, 2008).
The value in this perspective is in considering a social system
as being more web-like in the way individual elements are
connected, rather than being hierarchical and linear. Rather
than information flowing downwards or upwards, through a
system, a web-like analogy suggests information flows
through the system, intersecting with other flows of
information at different nodes on the web. The patterns of
behaviour that emerge from a system are not generated
randomly. Rather the complex interactions of events,
activities, ideas and practices coalesce in a way that are
unpredictable but are nonetheless highly patterned in a
process that is emergent (Collins & Clarke, 2008).
Tinning (2010) has recently used a complexity thinking
approach to understand how physical education has survived
as a cultural practice over so many years, despite predictions
of its imminent demise. Drawing on the ideas of
evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins (1976), Tinning
uses the concept of meme to understand how particular ideas
are propagated and transmitted through complex systems.
According to Tinning, a meme is anything that has the
ability to be reproduced and passed on, such as genes,
knowledge or ideas. From this perspective, physical
education is simply the practical instantiation of a particular
‘meme complex’ or sets of ideas. As he suggests, the future
of physical education may be dependent on which memes
become the ‘best fit’ for the educational culture of the future.
Complexity thinking contends that curriculum should be
viewed as an emergent process resulting from the flow of ideas
through systems that are themselves nested in other systems.
In other words, it recognises that the complex dynamics of a
lesson are themselves embedded within the broader complex
dynamics of schooling, which is itself embedded within the
flux of society (Davis & Sumara, 2006). While each can be
identified, each is also mutually constituting and
interdependent. Curriculum as a pattern of ideas, practices
and texts, emerges at each level in response to the factors that
enable and constrain particular renderings. Based on this, I
now consider the broader socio-political environment in
which New Zealand schooling is situated.
The socio-political environment for the New
Zealand Curriculum
The New Zealand Curriculum, as a policy document, is set
within a broader context which has itself undergone profound
change since the early 1980s. This period of time is broadly
identified as being connected in western economies with the
rise of neo-liberal forms of thinking that have provided the
basis for substantial reforms within the state sector. Neo-
liberalism emphasises the benefits of a market economy
through deregularisation, choice and increased competition
28 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
(O’Neill, 2008). Concomitant with this has been the aim of
reforming the welfare state through the creation of more
flexible workforces with transferable skills (Codd, 2005).
As one of the key state systems, schooling in New
Zealand needed to be aligned with this new imperative.
Starting in the late 1980s, there have been sweeping
reforms in the governance, curriculum and assessment
structures in New Zealand schools. The Department of
Education, which provided centralised control of the
education system, was replaced by a light-weight, policy
oriented Ministry of Education. The governance of schools
was devolved from regional boards to school Boards of
Trustees elected from the parent community. Curriculum
was revised to fit within a coherent framework that
specified key areas of learning (Ministry of Education,
1993). Individual curriculum statements were developed
for each area, wherein the focus shifted from defining the
content to be covered to specifying the outcomes to be
achieved. A new framework was also developed for
qualifications that emphasised the portability of
qualifications across different education settings. In
particular, a standards based framework was introduced as
the basis for assessment in the schooling sector.
While such reforms were originally motivated by the
new-right economic policies oriented around choice and
access, Benade (2009) argues that during the 1990s there
was a shift to the left-modernisers oriented around the ideas
of a knowledge economy and human capital. In particular,
Human Capital Theory (HCT) emerged as a powerful
discourse orienting contemporary educational thinking and
policy making in New Zealand (Brown & Lauder, 1996).
With its strong focus on the linkage between education,
employment and wealth creation, HCT focused on the need
to compete on a global stage in an increasingly technology
driven, rapidly changing, mobile and interconnected world.
Evidence of this discourse is apparent in the rationale
provided by the then Minister of Education, who stated in
the letter accompanying the curriculum,
As a nation, we face new issues and new opportunities.
The pace of social change and economic change is faster
than ever before. We live in a world of globalisation,
cultural diversity, and rapidly changing technologies.
These sentiments are repeated in the document itself when
it stated,
New Zealand needs its young people to be skilled and
educated, able to contribute fully to its well-being and able
to meet the changing needs of the workplace and the
economy (Ministry of Education, 2007, p. 42).
The discourse of HCT is also evident in the structure and
language of the document. Organised in much the same way
as a strategic plan guiding a corporate business, the front
section of the curriculum document begins with a vision
statement, outlines it values and guiding principles, as well as
the key competencies (or outputs) to be achieved. Key words
and phrases through this section emphasise the need for young
people who will be “confident, connected, actively involved,
lifelong learners” (2007, p. 7), capable of seizing “the
opportunities offered by new knowledge and technologies”
(2007, p. 8), and empowered to “achieve personal excellence
regardless of individual circumstance” (2007, p. 9). The back
section of the document specifies a concise set of objectives for
each of the eight learning areas. While each area is recognised
for its distinct learning, schools are urged to explore how these
areas link to the values and key competencies.
 While multiple and competing discourses are evident in the differed dramatically from prior curricula in as much as Health
document, the dominant discourse is of HCT and emphasises held equal status with Physical Education, and it was written
the need for the individual to contribute to the needs of New from an outcomes approach rather than specifying content. In
Zealand in both an economic and social sense. The individual particular, its socio-critical intent was well embedded within a
is identified as needing to be flexible and capable of adapting structural matrix provided by identifying four underlying
to workplaces that themselves may change in response to concepts, seven areas of learning, and four strands. This
forces operating on a global scale. As Benade (2009) points framework would provide the foundation for framing the
out, “the interests being served here are those of global subject in the revision published in 2007.
capitalism and a state that associates itself with the precepts of In its new iteration, the New Zealand Curriculum (2007)
Left modernisation and which has its antecedents in new includes Health and Physical Education as one of the eight
Right economics” (p. 8). specified learning areas necessary for a broad, general education.
In this sense, the earlier concerns of the 1990s about the place
The strategic direction of the Physical of the subject area within what is ‘core’ is addressed, albeit
Education curriculum contingent on its ability to contribute to the attainment of the
As described by Cassidy and Ovens (2009), the changing socio- vision and key competencies. As stated in the the document,
political context over the past three decades in New Zealand In Health and Physical Education, students learn about their
has significantly shifted how physical education is constructed own well-being, and that of others and society, in health-
as a subject within the school curriculum. One key example of related and movement contexts (2007, p. 17).
this was the way curriculum revisions in the 1990s initially did
Unlike most other learning areas that outline their
not include the subject area as being an essential learning area
learning area in relatively straightforward terms, the
but then reinstated it under the broader title of Health and
Health and Physical Education area is framed in four
Physical Wellbeing. The reinstatement had little to do with
different ways. Four concepts are identified as ‘underlying’
appeals for a broad and comprehensive education, but about the
and ‘at the heart’ of the learning area. Four strands are
explicit linking of individual productivity, economic wealth and
identified and provide a way of sequencing individual
health. Within this view, the formerly distinct areas of Health
achievement objectives. Seven key areas of learning are
and Physical Education, as well as aspects of Home Economics,
named and three subject areas listed (see Table 2).
were conflated into one learning area.
In 1995, the two writers employed to lead the development Underlying concepts x Hauora,
of the curriculum statement for the new learning area were x Attutudes and values
x the socioecological perspective
explicit about opposing the neo-liberal conception of x Health promotion
commodifying the healthy body for economic productivity Strands x Personal Health and Physical Development
(Burrows, 2009). Instead, they argued for a socio-critical x Movement concepts and motor skills
Relationships with other people
perspective as the foundation for the learning area (Culpan, x
x Healthy communities and Environments
1996-1997; Tasker, 1996-97). With respect to physical Key areas of learning x Mental health
education, the curriculum writers were, “focussed on shifting x Sexuality education
physical education from a very technocratic imperative to a x Food and nutrition
x Body care and physical safety
position that favoured a more socio-critical pedagogy to the x Physical activity
whole movement culture” (Culpan, 2000, p. 73). The key x Sports studies
aspects of this shift on how the thinking and practice of physical x Outdoor education
education was reconceptualised is summarised in Table 1. Subject areas x Health Education
x Physical Education
x Home Economics
Technocratic curriculum Socio-critical model
Previous curriculum model Revised curriculum model
Focus on physical skill development The focus is on all aspects of movement Table 2 - The four ways of framing Health and Physical
culture and taking into account the Education in the New Zealand Curriculum.
physical, social, spiritual and emotional
aspects of well-being.
Health is conceptualised in deficit terms Health is conceptualised in positive terms Emergent practices
as freedom from sickness, which can be emphasising the holistic nature of health
addressed by the individual through and its interrelationship with society. Turning attention to examining curriculum practice in New
regular physical activity.
Programmes are dominated by focus on Movement is conceptualised and
Zealand settings, I now present three examples of how ideas,
development of techniques involved in experienced in its broadest sense, with initiated at one point in the system, are enabled,
playing sports, usually the sports in the significance of, influence and
society. functions of movement, from both an
constrained and rendered as a particular set of practices.
individual and social perspective, being The analysis is not in-depth since the purpose here is to
studied.
Teaching is characterised by direct styles Teaching is characterised by styles that
demonstrate how particular features may be considered as
that position teacher as expert who encourage critical thought and reflection unique to the New Zealand setting. In particular, I focus on
transmits knowledge to passive and on information being taught. It is the inclusion of physical education in the qualifications
unquestioning learner. sensitive to the diversity of learners, is
emancipatory and focussed on action. framework, the influence of socio-critical ideas, and the
Characterised by a very scientific view of Ensures that a broad perspective, inclusion of Maori perspectives.
movement in which the body, skills and including scientific, economic, political
fitness are studied in order to enhance and cultural, are studied to understand
performance (typically in sporting participation in, construction of human Qualifications
contexts) movement culture
One of the key factors shaping physical education at the
Table 1 - The shifting strategic direction of physical education upper secondary school level is its inclusion within the
(adapted from Culpan & Bruce, 2007). qualifications framework. Prior to the education reforms of
the 1980s, the examination system of the upper secondary
The essence of this strategic shift resulted in the production school was the preserve of a few subject areas. As part of the
of a curriculum titled Health and Physical Education in the reforms, The New Zealand Qualifications Authority
New Zealand Curriculm (Ministry of Education, 1999) and was (NZQA) was set up in 1989 and took responsibility for the
mandated for use in schools from 2001. This new curriculum qualifications existing at the time, such as School

Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010 29

Certificate (Yr 11), Sixth Form Certificate (Yr 12), Bursary
and Scholarship (both Yr 13). Prior to 1989 physical
education only had a presence at the Sixth Form Certificate
level. The way in which the subject area had addressed
issues of assessment meant that it was seen as a vehicle for
implementing broader assessment reforms and saw its
inclusion in the Bursary qualification (Cassidy, 1997).
The initial Bursary programme offered the opportunity to
move away from the more sports science oriented courses
that typified the earlier Sixth Form Certificate course. In
comparison, the Bursary course required the students to
study a compulsory Lifestyles Concepts module and then
two more modules from a choice of seven options, such as
Movement Education, Outdoor Education, Sports Studies,
Aquatics, Dance, Te Reo Kori, and Leisure Studies. One of
the consequences of gaining Bursary status for physical
education was that, by default, it was also included as a
Scholarship subject. Originally introduced in the early
1960’s as a way of rewarding and fast tracking academically
able students, The New Zealand Scholarship was the
highest school qualification students could be awarded.
The unique feature of both Bursary and Scholarship
Physical Education was that students’ work was graded using
an achievement based system rather than by using a written
examination that typified other Bursary subjects.
As part of a second round of reforms in the late 1990s the
government announced its intention to develop a National
Certificate in Educational Achievement (NCEA). This
new strategy was phased in from 2002 and eventually
replaced Bursary Physical Education in 2004. In its current
form, NCEA covers all three levels of senior secondary
schools; starting with NCEA level one in Year 11 and
culminating in NCEA level three in Year 13 (MOE, 2004).
Students may study physical education at all three levels of
NCEA. Scholarship continues to be an option for top
performing students within NCEA, although in its current
form Scholarship candidates must now sit an external exam.
Critical orientation
The notions of social justice and critical pedagogy are ideas
that are evident in contemporary curriculum discourse and
gain particular traction with those with an emancipatory
form of politics (Ovens & Tinning, 2009). The groundings
of a sensitivity to issues of social justice can be seen in a
range of influential writings, such as those by Friere (1970),
Shore (1992) and Smyth (1992) as well as in the physical
education field in Sage (1993), Tinning (1991) and Kirk
(1989). As outlined earlier, the writers of the 1999
curriculum deliberately set out to introduce a socially-
critical orientation to their revision of the curriculum and
were explicit about grounding critical thinking and action
into pedagogical practices (Gillespie & Culpan, 2000). In
terms of policy directing practice, the explicit aim was for
physical education teachers to adopt a critical pedagogy as a
way of redressing the oppressive effects of scientisation,
individualism and functionalism that were seen as woven
into previous curriculum documents (Culpan & Bruce,
2007). This intent can also be seen in statements such as,
Students will develop skills for identifying and critiquing the
contributions that science, technology and the environment
make to sporting performance (Ministry of Education,
1999, p. 42)
Students are encouraged to question their own decisions
critically and work towards improving practices relating to
physical activity within the school and wider community.
(Ministry of Education, 1999, p. 42)
30 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1)
2010
While the critical orientation of the curriculum has been
acknowledged for its intent, it has also been observed that
this intent competes with other discourses present within
the sites of policy and practice. For example, Burrows
(2009) observes that while the socio-ecological perspective
allows for acknowledging the interdependence of the
individual with their environment, “the dominant theme
threading through the statements made in the HPE
curriculum is one that foregrounds the role of determination
and free will in the production of ‘health’” (p. 155).
A similar situation exists at the point when teachers
interpret the curriculum intent and construct classroom
curriculum. This is most commonly observed in how the
concept of critical thinking is applied in NCEA physical
education. As Gillispie and Culpan (2000) observe, the
concept may be constructed in one of two possible ways.
One way defines critical thinking to be about a set of meta-
cognitive skills to promote higher order thinking. The
other way defines critical thinking as developing a critical
consciousness to the influences of power and stresses the
need to question taken-for-granted assumptions. Both the
teacher’s professional knowledge and disposition play an
influential role in which way they choose (Culpan & Bruce,
2007). As observed in student teachers, the development of
the ability to both understand and practice a critical
pedagogy is not straightforward and is connected to
individual biography and personal politics (Ovens, 2009;
Ovens and Tinning, 2009). A socially critical intent does
not translate unproblematically from policy to practice.
Maori
New Zealand physical educators interest in Maori games
and physical activities has a history dating back over the
past century as various people actively documented and
published the games, dances and songs they observed
(Stothart, 2000). This is also not withstanding the
influence Maori teachers themselves had as they worked in
the profession. However, it has only been in the past two
decades that Maori perspectives have found expression in
the official curriculum documents. While issues around
biculturalism and the role education plays in identity
politics is grounded in a broader socio-political context
(Rata, 2008), the move to include Maori perspectives is also
reflective of the changing educational discourses in the late
1970s and early 1980s that sought to appreciate and
recognise the rich, diverse New Zealand culture, as well as
its multicultural character (Walker, 1994). The two key
dimensions that influence how physical education is
conceptualised are Te Reo Kori and Hauora. As outlined by
Fitzpatrick (2009), both are controversial and subject to
ongoing debate.
Te Reo Kori first appeared as a significant and integral
component of the 1987 curriculum (Department of
Education, 1987). While the term Te Reo Kori literally
translates as “the language of movement”, the content
recommended in the syllabus was a mixture of
contemporary and traditional approaches to movement in
the Maori culture. Salter (2003) clarifies that the Te Reo
Kori refers more broadly to activities that derive from
traditional Maori activities in a way that would, “encourage
students to develop movement skills through a range of
2 The Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840 between Maori and
Pakeha. It is seem as the founding document of New Zealand, although
its legal status and interpretation has been the source of much debate
throughout New Zealand’s history.
Maori activities, develop an appreciation of Maori cultural
values, and use and practice the Maori language” (p. 27). It
was expected that these be placed in a supportive context
where Maori culture and values were practiced and
understood.
Despite its strong social linkage, resource development
and active in-service support, the concept of Te Reo Kori
did not fare well when the curriculum revision of the 1990s.
This was despite the foundation policy framework, the
‘Curriculum Framework’ (Ministry of Education, 1993)
acknowledging the value of the Treaty of Waitangi2, New
Zealand’s bicultural identity and the multicultural nature of
New Zealand society. In the draft version of the 1999
curriculum, Te Reo Kori was named by the writers as one of
the key areas of learning alongside others such as food and
nutrition and sports studies (Fitzpatrick, 2009). However, it
was removed from the final published document and the
term appears only as an example of how to address certain
achievement objectives. This trend was continued when
the 2007 iteration of the New Zealand Curriculum
(Ministry of Education 2007), except this time there is no
mention of Te Reo Kori.
The concept of Hauora was introduced with the
publication of the 1999 curriculum (Ministry of Education,
1999) as one of the four underlying and interrelated
concepts that provided the philosophical foundation for the
document. Hauroa is a Maori philosophy of health which
has been appropriated by the curriculum writers to provide
the means for expressing the multifaceted nature of well-
being. The concept was explained in the document by
drawing on Durie’s (1994) whare tapa wha (four sided
house) model to represent the four interrelated aspects as
different walls of the house. In addition to a diagram, the
four interrelated dimensions that are important in Maori
culture were explained in the following way;
• taha tinana: physical wellbeing: the physical body; its
growth and development and ability to move and ways
of caring for it.
• taha whanau: social wellbeing: family relationships,
friendships and other interpersonal relationships;
feelings of belonging, compassion and caring; and social
support.
• taha hinengaro: mental and emotional wellbeing:
coherent thinking processes, acknowledging and
expressing thoughts and feeling and responding
constructively.
• taha wairua: spiritual wellbeing: the values and beliefs
that determine the way people live, the search for
meaning and purpose in life, and person identity and self
awareness (for some individuals and communities,
spiritual wellbeing is linked to a particular religion; for
others it is not) (Ministry of Education, 1999, p.31)
The use of Hauora in the 1999 document led to much
debate. As explained by Fitzpatrick (2009), much of this
centred on the assertion that Hauora was misrepresented in
the 1999 document. For many, the issue revolved around
understanding the concept outside of its Maori context and
the potential that had for misrepresenting what for Maori
was a rich and deeply profound concept closely aligned to
their world view.
Hauora was named in the 2007 New Zealand curriculum
as one of the underlying principles for the Health and
Physical Education learning area. However, it appears in a
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
much reduced form with no diagram or description of the
individual components. Given the concerns expressed
about the misrepresentation of Hauora in the 1999
curriculum, it is unclear whether 2007 revision provides a
means for adequately expressing a Maori dimension to the
Health and Physical Education curriculum.
Concluding thoughts
Macdonald (2004) suggests that curriculum reform can be
likened to the effect a stone has hitting the iron roof of a
chookhouse. While there is an initial flurry of activity, the
chickens eventually settle again. The analogy implies that
curriculum innovations often have little impact on
teachers’ entrenched knowledge and practice. However,
this is not meant to suggest that change does not happen or
that policy does not influence and set the conditions for
change. As can be observed in recent comments, there are
concerns about the changes currently taking place in New
Zealand physical education (for example, see Ross, 2008;
Culpan, 2005). Rather, the analogy supports the point that
understanding curriculum change needs a perspective that
can accommodate the dynamic nature of a schooling
system.
The point made in the opening paragraph is that the
curriculum analysis in New Zealand has principally been
about critiquing curriculum documents as policy texts. The
effect of this has been to focus much attention on the
production of the physical document and how particular
ideas have been privileged, ignored or reconceptualised.
While such analysis acknowledges that the interpretation of
such texts at the school and classroom level is never
straightforward or pre-determined, the agency of the
teacher is often constructed as either conforming or
resisting policy. The problem with this view is that the
assumption that policy implementation is a linear and
hierarchical process is not challenged. In contrast, I have
suggested that an alternative perspective be used to analyse
curriculum, one that can acknowledge the complexity of
teachers work spaces and the way key ideas are enabled and
constrained by key structures within those spaces.
In this sense, I have discussed three specific examples of
how practices are discursively and structurally shaped by the
contexts of practice in New Zealand. For secondary school
teachers, the curriculum is shaped by the structures created
by the qualifications framework. The nature of physical
education at this level both shapes and is shaped by the
assessment structures provided by the framework. For the
curriculum writers intent on framing a socio-critical
perspective, their intent is thwarted both discursively in the
document text, and potentially in the way individual
teacher’s subjectivity is shaped, by their professional
knowledge and dispositions. Lastly, the ability of the
curriculum to express a Maori dimension was demonstrated
to be limited, as subsequent iterations of the curriculum
removed or diluted this focus from the subject area.
The intent of the examples was to suggest that
contemporary curriculum analysis in New Zealand physical
education needs a broader focus on the structures that
enable and constrain particular ways of doing physical
education. Absent is an understanding of the role key
accountability structures have on teachers’ implementation
of the New Zealand curriculum. Also missing is an analysis
of how curriculum practice is influenced by the growing
range of in-service courses, web-based resources,
31
conferences, in-school professional development. This
signals a key need for those interested in curriculum, such as
teachers, curriculum developers, professional development
leaders, and policy analysts, to acknowledge the emergent
nature of curriculum in complex schooling systems. This
need is not so the nature of the sort of physical education
emerging in the future will be predicated and controlled,
but that the emerging patterns can be understood and
teachers better prepared and supported to manage for
change. It is, as Tinning (2010) suggests, a necessary
precondition to engaging with physical education as a
future school subject.
References
Benade, L. (2009). The New Zealand Draft Curriculum 2006: A
policy case study with specific reference to its understanding of
teaching as an ethical profession. Policy Futures in Education,
7(1), 5-19.
Brown, P., & Lauder, H. (1996). Education, globalisation and
economic development. Journal of Education Policy, 11(1), 1-25.
Burrows, L. (2009). Discursive dilemmas in New Zealand’s Health
and Physical Education Curriculum. In M. Dinan-Thompson
(Ed.), Health and Physical Education: Contemporary Issues for
Curriculum in Australia and New Zealand (pp. 147-164). Sydney:
Oxford University Press.
Cassidy, T. (1997). ‘Insights into the New Zealand Health and
Physical Education (HPE) curriculum from the West Island,
Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 30(1): 18-20.
Cassidy, T., & Ovens, A. (2009). Curriculum acoustics: Analysing
the changing voice of the New Zealand Health and Physical
Education Curriculum. In M. Dinan-Thompson (Ed.), Health
and Physical Education: Contemporary Issues for Curriculum in
Australia and New Zealand (pp. 22-37). Sydney: Oxford
University Press.
Codd, J. (2005). Education policy and the challenges of the
knowledge society. In J. Codd & K. Sullivan (eds), Education
Policy Directions in Aotearoa New Zealand. Southbank: Thompson
Dunmore Press
Collins, S., & Clarke, A. (2008). Activity frames and complexity
thinking: Honoring both public and personal agendas in an
emergent curriculum. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1003-
1014.
Culpan, I. (1996-97). Physical education: Liberate it or confine it to
the gymnasium. Delta, 48(2), 203-220.
Culpan, I. (2000). Getting what you got: Harnessing the potential.
Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 33(2), 16-29.
Culpan, I. (2005). Physical Education: What is this all about? The
muddled puzzle. Paper commissioned by the Ministry of
Education, Wellington, New Zealand.
Culpan, I. (2008). Physical Education and the New Zealand
curriculum: Maximising the potential. Journal of Physical
Education New Zealand, 41(3), 51-61.
Culpan, I., & Bruce, J. (2007). New Zealand physical education and
critical pedagogy: Refocussing the curriculum. International
Journal of Sport and Health, 5, 1-11.
Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2006). Complexity and Education: Inquiries
into Learning, Teaching and Research. London: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Dawkins, R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University
Press
Department of Education. (1987) Physical Education. Syllabus for
Junior Classes to Form 7, Wellington, School Publications.
Durie, M. (1994). Whaiora: Maori Health Development. Auckland:
Oxford University Press.
Fitzpatrick, K. (2009). Indigenous perspectives in HPE Curriculum:
Contradictions and colonisation. In M. Dinan-Thompson (Ed.),
Health and Physical Education: Contemporary Issues for Curriculum
in Australia and New Zealand (pp. 120-144). Sydney: Oxford
University Press.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY:
Continuum.
Gillespie, L., & Culpan, I. (2000). Critical thinking: Ensuring the
‘education’ aspect is evident in physical education. Journal of
Physical Education New Zealand, 33(3), 84-96.
Kirk, D. (1989). The orthodoxy in RT-PE and the research/practice
gap: A critique and alternative view. Journal of Teaching in
Physical Education, 8, 123-130.
32 Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1 (1) 2010
Macdonald, D. (2004). Curriculum change in Health and Physical
Education: The devil’s perspective. Journal of Physical Education
New Zealand, 37(1), 70-83.
Ministry of Education, (1993). The New Zealand Curriculum
Framework, Te Anga Marautanga o Aotearoa Learning Media,
Wellington, New Zealand.
Ministry of Education. (1999). Health and Physical Education in the
New Zealand National Curriculum. Wellington, NZ: Learning
Media Limited.
Ministry of Education. (2003). The New Zealand curriculum
framework. Wellington: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum.
Wellington: Learning Media Limited.
O’Neil, A. (2008). Mapping the field: An introduction to curriculum
reform politics in Aotearoa/New Zealand. In A. St George, S.
Brown & J. O’Neill (Eds). Facing the big questions in teaching:
Purpose, Power and Learning (pp. 25-46). Albany, NZ: Cengage
Learning.
Ovens, A., & Tinning, R. (2009). Reflection as situated practice: A
memory-work study of lived experience in teacher education.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(8), 1125-1131.
Ovens, A. (2009). Personal politics and identity in student teachers’
stories of learning to teach. In A. Mattos (Ed.), Narratives on
Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Perspective.
Gordonsville, VA: Palgrave McMillan.
Petrie, K. (2008). Physical education in primary schools: holding on
to the past or heading for for a different future? Journal of
Physical Education New Zealand, 41(3), 67-80.
Rata, E. (2008). Educating for citizenship in a bicultural society. In
A. St George, S. Brown & J. O’Neill (Eds). Facing the big
questions in teaching: Purpose, Power and Learning (pp. 51-62).
Albany, NZ: Cengage Learning.
Ross, B. (2008). Faking physical education? Journal of Physical
Education New Zealand, 41(3), 62-66
Sage, G. (1993). Sport and physical education: Dare we be agents of
social change? Quest, 45 (2), 151-164
Salter, G. (2003), Maori culture and tradition in the mainstream:
Teaching Te Reo Kori in sport education. Journal of Physical
Education New Zealand; 36(1), 27-41
Shore, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social
change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Smyth, J. (1992). Teachers’ work and the politics of reflection.
American Educational Research Journal, 29(2), 267-300.
Stothart, R. (2000). Pegs in the ground: Landmarks in the history of
New Zealand Physical Education, Journal of Physical Education
New Zealand, 33(2): 5-15.
Tasker, G. (1996-97). For whose benefit? The politics of developing a
Health Edcuation Curriculum. Delta, 48(2), 187-202.
Tinning, R. (1991). Teacher education pedagogy: Dominant
discourses and the process of problem setting. Journal of Teaching
in Physical Education, 11, 1-20.
Tinning, R. (2010). Memes and Physical Education: A speculative
analysis. Keynote paper presented at the International
Conference of Physical Education and Sports Science. National
Institute of Education, Physical Education and Sports Science,
Singapore, 25 - 28 May 2010.
Walker, R., (1994) Te Reo Kori - “A New Direction” Keynote
presentation gien to the National conference of NZAPHER,
“Bodies of Knowledge”, Dunedin, 18-20 May, 1994.
Author’s Note
Alan Ovens is Principal Lecturer in the School of Critical
Studies in Education at the University of Auckland. He is
also the President and Chair of the Board of Physical
Education New Zealand (PENZ). His research is focussed
is on teacher identity and professional learning. In
particular, much of his research focuses on the process of,
and pedagogies for, teacher education. His teaching focuses
on supporting student teachers to implement an inquiry
approach to support their professional development.
Correspondence
Alan Ovens, Faculty of Education,University of Auckland,
Auckland 1035, New Zealand.
Phone: +64 9 623 8899 Extn: 48605
Fax: +64 9 623 8898
Email: a.ovens@auckland.ac.nz
 ACHPER Membership Benefits & Criteria
Benefits Full Member Corporate Affiliation
ACHPER offers members the ultimate benefit - the • Graduates from tertiary institutions with Corporations, organisations and associations
opportunity to contribute professionally through qualifications in education, health, physical which support the Purpose and Objectives of the
areas of focus in a range of educational and education, recreation, sport, dance, fitness, Council and whose employees are generally not
community settings. medicine, physiotherapy, human movement or eligible for individual membership of ACHPER may
any area acceptable to the Executive Committee apply to be affiliated as Corporate Organisations.
Members are entitled to:
of a Branch;
• Discounts on Professional Development Activities Non Working/Retired Member
• Holders of a Grade 1 Fitness Leader Award
including National and Branch conferences, As per Full Members who are • unemployed •
from the Australian Fitness Accreditation Council
seminars and workshops. retired • employed for less than 2.5 days per
or a recognised equivalent award;
• Receive regular Branch newsletters and week.
• Holders of a Level 2 Coaching Award from the
publications.
Australian Coaching Council or a recognised Graduate Member
• Receive an electronic copy of the Active and equivalent award;
Healthy Magazine or the Asia-Pacific Open to all graduates who meet the course
• Persons acceptable to the Executive Committee specifications of student membership.
Journal of Health, Sport and Physical
of the relevant Branch who are employed in one Restrictions apply to the year of graduation and
Education, with reduced rates to subscribe to
or more of the areas of interest. eligibiity for Graduate Membership. Refer to
the publication not selected as the free choice.
• Receive discount on purchases from the Healthy Full-time & Part-time Student Member pricing structure below.
Lifestyles Bookshop, as well as fliers, special Tertiary students studying education, health, physical
offers and annual catalogue.
Attention Schools/Institutions
education, recreation, sport, dance, fitness, medicine, Schools and other institutions are not eligible for
• Receive numerous opportunities to network and physiotherapy, human movement or any area membership, but may purchase library
share ideas, valuable information, and lots acceptable to the Executive Committee of a Branch subscriptions to the ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles
more! receive membership at a reduced fee. Student Journal and the Active and Healthy magazine.
members are not eligible to vote or hold office. Please obtain a subscription form from ACHPER
Joint Member National to subscribe.
Married or cohabiting couples (both eligible for A library subscription does not entitle schools to
full membership) may apply to be Joint Members. ACHPER membership benefits or discounts on other
Please complete separate application forms. ACHPER publications/newsletters.

Application Form MEMBERSHIP FEES 2010

Australia Overseas
Surname: ...............................................................................................................Title: Dr / Mr / Ms / Mrs Includes GST No GST
Full Membership ......................................................................$120.00 $ 143.00
Given Names: .......................................................................................................................................... Graduate Membership
Postal Address: .......................................................................................................................................... 1st year (graduated 2009)...................................................$ 65.00 $ 95.00
2nd year (graduated 2008) ...............................................$ 93.00 $ 115.00
........................................................................................................Postcode : ......................................... Student Membership ............................................................$ 45.00 $ 73.00
Telephone: (H).............................................................. (B) ....................................................................... Joint .................................................................................................$175.00 $ 210.00
Non-working /Retired ..........................................................$ 62.00 $ 48.00
Fax:: ...................................................................... Email: ....................................................................... Corporate Affiliation .............................................................$305.00 $ 365.00
Membership Category Please select your FREE online publication.
❐ Student ❐ Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education OR
Course ............................................................................................................ ...................................................... ❐ Active & Healthy Magazine
Institution ............................................................................................. First year enrolled:: ............................ I also wish to subscribe to:
❐ Graduate Membersip ❐ Active & Healthy Magazine (save 20%)............................................$ 30.00 $ 33.00
❐ Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education (save 20%)....$ 33.00 $ 36.00
❐ Full ❐ Joint (please complete 2 forms ❐ Non-working/Retired
❐ Australasian Leisure Management (save 10%)...................................$ 50.00 $ 55.00
Place of employment ............................................................................................................................
(membership fee plus additional subscriptions) TOTAL $
Job Title .................................................................................................................................................
❐ MY CHEQUE/MONEY ORDER IS ENCLOSED
Qualifications e.g. B.Ed ..........................................................................................................................
(Make payable to ACHPER Inc. )
Principle areas of fInterest (number 1 to 3 only) ❐ Please charge my ❐ Mastercard ❐ Visa
……… Health Education ……… Sport ……… Community Fitness Card Number | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ | __ |
……… Recreation ……… Dance ……… Movement Science
……… Physical Education ……… Outdoor Education Cardholders Name............................................................................................................................

Area of involvement (tick ONE only) Signature ...........................................................................................Expiry Date ............................

❐ Primary Educator ❐ Secondary Educator ❐ Tertiary Educator You will receive your Membership card within 20 days.
❐ Health Service Professional ❐ Recreation Professional ❐ Administrator Your membership fee to ACHPER is a Tax Deduction.
Membership is continuous for one year.
❐ Fitness Service Professional ❐ Student ❐ Other (please specify)
Send to: ACHPER Inc., PO Box 304, Hindmarsh South Australia 5007
............................................................................................................................................................... Email: membership@achper.org.au
Asia-Pacific Journal of Health,
Sport and Physical Education
PO Box 304, Hindmarsh,
South Australia 5007
P (08) 8340 3388
F (08) 8340 3399
E custserv@achper.org.au
www.achper.org.au