Machine Translated by Google

Article

European Physical Education Review 1–18

©
Formative assessment in physical education: The Author(s) 2024

teachers' experiences when designing and Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI:
10.1177/1356336X241237398
implementing formative assessment activities
journals.sagepub.com/home/epe

Menno Slingerland
Fontys University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands

Gwen Weeldenburg
Fontys University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands

Lars Borghouts
Fontys University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands

Abstract
Formative assessment (FA) is an effective educational approach for optimizing student learning and is considered as a
promising avenue for assessment within physical education (PE). However, implementing FA is a complex and demanding
task for in-service PE teachers who often lack formal training on this topic. To better support PE teachers in implementing
FA into their practice, we need better insight into teachers' experiences while designing and implementing formative
strategies. However, knowledge on this topic is limited, especially within PE. Therefore, this study examined the
experiences of 15 PE teachers who participated in an 18-month professional development program.

Teachers designed and implemented various formative activities within their PE lessons, while
experiences were investigated through logbook entries and focus groups. Findings indicated various
positive experiences, such as increased transparency in learning outcomes and success criteria for
students as well as increased student involvement, but also revealed complexities, such as shifting
teacher roles and insufficient feedback literacy among students. Overall, the findings of this study
underscore the importance of a sustained, collaborative, and supported approach to implementing FA.

Keywords
Formative assessment, physical education, assessment literacy, professional development, feedback
literacy

Corresponding author:
Menno Slingerland, School of Sport Studies, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Theo Koomenlaan 3, Eindhoven 5644 HZ, The
Netherlands.
Email: m.slingerland@fontys.nl
Machine Translated by Google

2 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

Introduction
Assessment plays a crucial role in education as it enables teachers to make decisions on learning
progression and selection, while evidence of learning can also be used for accountability measures.
For teachers to successfully engage with assessment, various authors propose that teachers develop assessment
literacy (DinanThompson and Penney, 2015; Hay and Penney, 2013; Pastore and Andrade, 2019), which can be
defined as an interrelated set of knowledge, skills, and dispositions that a teacher can use to design and implement a
coherent and appropriate approach to assessment within the classroom context and the school system (Pastore and
Andrade, 2019). More specifically, teachers should be able to:

• define learning targets and assessment criteria and align them with the assessment objectives; •
select and differentiate strategies and tools to gather data on student learning; • collect
and interpret evidence of student learning; • use data on
learning to adjust instruction and adapt curriculum (Pastore and Andrade, 2019).

Research shows, however, that within physical education (PE), assessment is primarily employed for
performance grading and testing (Krijgsman et al., 2017; Ní Chróinín and Cosgrave, 2013), which is often
referred to as summative assessment (SA) ( Black and William, 2009). Although SA is essential to gain
insight into the results of the learning process and to make decisions about progression or quali-fication,
it does not provide learners with rich information to support further learning (Black and Wiliam, 2009).
Also, SA can be perceived by students as being 'high stakes', resulting in feelings of external pressure
and anxiety (Danthony et al., 2019; Krijgsman et al., 2017). A more integrated and ongoing mode of
assessment aimed at guiding and supporting student learning, while simultaneously providing teachers
with insights into the effectiveness of their teaching, is formative assessment (FA) (Black and Wiliam,
2009; Wiliam, 2011).
FA has been widely recognized as an effective approach for optimizing student learning and promoting
self-regulated learning (Panadero et al., 2018). It has been suggested that FA has a larger impact on the
teaching–learning process than any other educational intervention (Wiliam and Leahy, 2018). In PE, FA
also has the potential to enhance students' motivational functioning and well-being (Haerens et al., 2018;
Krijgsman et al., 2021; Slingerland et al., 2016). As a result, and in line with contemporary views within
the broader educational domain (Birenbaum et al., 2015), a growing emphasis on FA in PE has been
recognized as a promising avenue for enhancing student learning (AIESEP, 2020; Hay et al. ., 2013;
Leirhaug et al., 2016; Moura et al., 2020; Ní Chróinín and Cosgrave, 2013). However, although PE
teachers endorse the importance of FA (Barrientos Hernán et al., 2022; Ní Chróinín and Cosgrave, 2013),
examples of successful implementation remain scarce (Borghouts et al., 2017; López-Pastor et al., 2013;
Moura et al., 2020; Yan et al., 2021). To better position FA as a meaningful mode of assessment in PE, it
is crucial to gain a deeper understanding of PE teachers' experiences of engaging with FA in their lessons.

At its core, FA consists of three elements (Black and Wiliam, 2009; Hattie and Timperley, 2007; Leahy
et al., 2005): (1) feed-up to establish 'where the learner is going' (ie the learning goals and criteria for
success), (2) feedback to establish 'where the learner is now' (relative to the success cri-teria), and (3)
feed-forward to establish for the learner 'how to get there' (ie what does the learner need to progress
learning?). A key characteristic of FA is the active involvement of students in the assessment process, for
example, through self-assessment or peer assessment. This results in five key strategies for FA, which
are shown in Table 1.
Machine Translated by Google

Slingerland et al. 3

FA in PE
To date, there is little evidence to suggest that PE teachers frequently engage in FA activities (Chng and Lund, 2018;
Leirhaug and Annerstedt, 2015) while studies that specifically examined the design and implementation of FA in PE are
scarce. MacPhail and Halbert (2010) studied the development and implementation of authentic learning tasks in
secondary school PE, which included aspects of FA. Despite concerns around increased planning and reduced
movement time, teachers in the study indicated that learning in PE became more meaningful for students, while students
perceived an increased focus on learning and experienced more involvement and ownership during lessons. Ni Chroínín
and Cosgrave (2013) captured the experiences of five primary generalist teachers who were engaged in FA. They found
that, although FA enhanced the quality of teaching and learning, it also confronted teachers with specific challenges,
such as the need to differentiate in assessment to meet different ability levels, the need for access to sample
assessments, and the perceived lack of time for planning and preparation. Moura et al. (2022) examined to what extent
a scaffolding process influenced pre-service teachers' assessment literacy. They found evidence that comprehension
and application of assessment improved gradually over time with a shift in focus from assessment for grading to
assessment for the benefit of student learning. In a similar study, Tolgfors et al. (2021a, 2021b) examined the transfer
of skills and knowledge obtained during a university course on FA to a consecutive school placement period. They
concluded that the use of FA was constrained by a profound focus on SA and a lack of critical engagement with PE
teaching traditions. A follow-up study then focused on the implementation of FA during the induction phase of three PE
teachers and found that the five key FA strategies (Table 1) were implemented differently according to challenges in the
specific school context of each teacher (ie type of students and professional learning opportunities) (Tolgfors et al.,
2021b). Macken et al. (2020) examined the extent to which four pre-service primary education teachers engaged in FA
during school placement. It was found that, despite increases in assessment literacy and engagement with FA, teachers
encountered difficulties analyzing student responses and found the implementation of self-and peer assessment
challenging. Taken together, the above-mentioned studies present an image of FA as a valued teaching practice that is
challenging to implement within PE due to con-textual and personal factors (Yan et al., 2021).

Table 1. Key strategies of formative assessment (Black and Wiliam, 2009; Hattie and Timperley, 2007; Leahy et al., 2005).

Where is the learner going? (feed- Where is the learner now? How will the learner get there?
up) (feedback) (feed forward)

Teacher 1. Clarifying learning intentions and criteria for
success
Peer Understanding and sharing learning
intentions and criteria for
success
Learner Understanding learning intentions
and criteria for success
2. Engineering learning tasks 3. Providing feedback that
that elicit evidence of student moves learners forward
learning
4. Activating students as learning resources for one another
5. Activating students as the owners of their own learning
Machine Translated by Google

4 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

FA and professional development

Teachers are often unwilling to implement new teaching strategies until these have proven their added
value to their daily educational practice (Borko et al., 2010; Clarke and Hollingsworth, 2002; Guskey and
Yoon, 2009). Within this line of reasoning, teachers are more willing to employ FA activities if they have
personal experiences that provide them with valuable insights into student learning and the effectiveness
of their teaching (Black and Wiliam, 2010). Also, teachers are more likely to invest themselves in and
engage with FA when they feel confident in their abilities to design and implement FA (Yan and Cheng,
2015; Yan et al., 2021). However, many in-service teachers lack the knowl-edge and skills to successfully
integrate assessment into their daily teaching practice (DinanThompson and Penney, 2015; Pastore and
Andrade, 2019), and the implementation of FA is often incomplete or suboptimal (Wylie and Lyon, 2015;
Yan and Cheng, 2015). Therefore, to implement FA within PE lessons, PE teachers need support
mechanisms such as professional development opportunities, train-ing, and guidance (DinanThompson
and Penney, 2015; MacPhail and Murphy, 2017; Ní Chróinín and Cosgrave, 2013; Yan et al. , 2021).
However, current professional development activities, often in the form of one-off 'workshops', have been
found to be ineffective in changing teacher behavior in the classroom and impacting student learning
(Armour et al., 2015; Borko et al., 2010 ). For professional development to have a more meaningful impact
on PE practice it has been suggested that a 'hands-on' approach is most effective, in which learning is
situated in the workplace, learning content is aligned with the needs and interests of teachers, and where
teachers have an active and collaborative role (Armour and Yelling, 2007; Parker and Patton, 2017). This
supports the notion of organizing professional learning around cycles of experimentation and reflection
(Bakkenes et al., 2010; Korthagen, 2017) and warrants the involvement of a facilitator (ie an external
expert) as an important catalyst to further support and empower PE teachers in the process of educational
change (Goodyear and Casey, 2013; Slingerland et al., 2021). Largely in line with these recommendations,
Wiliam and Leahy (2018) propose working in teacher learning communities to implement FA effectively.
To date, the amount of research aimed at identifying successful approaches to enhance teachers' FA
skills and improve teachers' FA practices is limited, especially for in-service teachers, who often lack
formal training on this topic (Pastore and Andrade, 2019). Building on valuable insights from studies on
engaging pre-service PE teachers with FA (Macken et al., 2020; Moura et al., 2022; Tolgfors et al., 2021a),
our study seeks a better understanding of how in-service secondary school PE teachers engage with FA.
The objectives of this study are:

1. To examine secondary school PE teachers' experiences when designing and implementing

FA activities.
2. To examine how FA strategies are implemented within the individual teaching context of
secondary school PE teachers.

We expect this study to yield results that can be used to inform the design of professional development-
opment activities aimed at improving (formative) assessment literacy and implementation of FA into PE
practice.

Methods
Participants
Participants were recruited from six schools that took part in a one-day professional development activity
on the topic of assessment in PE,1 led by the authors of this paper. Upon board approval
Machine Translated by Google

Slingerland et al. 5

from the school director (responsible for all schools), all six PE departments were offered the opportunity to
take part in a continuous professional development project on FA. Three schools agreed and from these
schools, 15 PE teachers were willing to participate and signed informed consent.
The teachers' average age was 41 years (standard deviation (SD) =16), while their average PE teaching
experience was 19 years (SD =12). The project was launched in September 2019 and ran for 18 months.
Unfortunately, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, all schools in the Netherlands closed between March and June
2020, and upon re-opening mostly offered adapted PE lessons with restricted possibilities for teachers to
conduct project-related activities as planned (ie outside lessons only and non-contact activities ensuring social
distancing). This caused a delay and might have impacted the first phase of the project, restricting some
teachers in their possibilities to engage with FA as planned.

Study design
To successfully embed FA within PE practice, it is essential that knowledge acquired during formal training is
adapted to teachers' specific contexts and that learning occurs within an authentic setting (Moura et al.,
2022). Therefore, this project was situated within the schools through a school–university partnership (Kershner
et al., 2013). The project was divided into two phases (Figure 1). The aim of the first phase was to provide
training and guidance for all teachers around the topic of FA and to establish teacher learning communities in
which FA activities were to be designed, implemented, and evaluated. During the second phase, teachers
again designed and implemented FA activities, albeit with gradually fading support. To provide teachers with
a clear framework on how to engage with the design and implementation of FA activities the learning
community approach was structured around elements of lesson study, which is an inquiry-based, practice-
oriented approach to continuing professional development (CPD) in which a group of teachers work together
to improve educational practice, working in iterative cycles of design, implementation, and reflection and
involving student voices (Dudley, 2014).

As an 'all-out approach' to lesson study has been found to be quite demanding for PE teachers in terms of
time and resources (Slingerland et al., 2021), we adopted a more flexible approach as proposed by Takahashi
and McDougal (2016). ), which includes: (1) working with clear goals and outcomes; (2) informing teachers
and encouraging them to study materials; (3) working towards a written lesson plan; (4) implementing the
lesson plan, reflection, and discussion; (5) involving knowledgeable others, collaborating; and (6) sharing of
results.

Figure 1. Study design. M1 is meeting 1, M2 is meeting 2, etc. M4 was a joint meeting with all three physical
education (PE) departments together. M5 was an online meeting through Microsoft Teams.
Machine Translated by Google

6 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

All three PE departments were assigned a facilitator, which is regarded as an essential component in
the process of teacher-learning communities (Goodyear and Casey, 2013; Slingerland et al.,
2021). Facilitators in this project were the three authors who are experienced teacher-educators and
experts on FA in PE, and all had prior experience in supervising lesson study groups. The role of the
facilitator during this project was to chair project meetings, provide theory and examples of FA, and
to support teachers during the development and preparation of FA activities. As proposed by
Wiliam and Leahy (2018) facilitators provided (1) choice and flexibility (ie teachers could
adapt FA activities to their specific context), promoted taking (2) small steps while providing
(3) ample support and urged teachers to (4) base their FA activity designs on contemporary
views and to capture this within a clear lesson plan.
Additionally, facilitators provided intermediate feedback on lesson plans and FA activities by
e-mail. In the first phase of our project, we organized and supervised three small group project meetings
every four to eight weeks in each school and one joint meeting with all three schools and facilitators
present, while PE departments were also expected to organize one non-supervised small
group meeting per month. During Phase 2, we organized two meetings on the assumption that tea-chers
would be able to engage in FA activities with diminished external support. An overview of the
main topics per meeting is included in the supplemental material.

Data collection
Teachers described their (learning) experiences in a digital logbook, which forms a good entry point
into teachers' personal experiences (van Meerkerk, 2017). The logbook used in this study was
structured around a fixed set of questions based on Bakkenes et al. (2010) digital learning log,
supplemented with questions based on professional reflection (Korthagen and Vasalos, 2006). The
logbook was accessible through a protected cloud service within a personal folder, so teachers
only had access to their own logbooks while the researchers had access to all logbooks.
Teachers were asked to fill in a set of questions (see Table 2) before and after completing their
FA experiment. Additionally, teachers were asked to upload their lesson plans in the same cloud
folder and include any additional material they had used, such as success criteria, rubrics, and
peer feedback forms.
Logbooks are preferably complemented by other research methods to prevent decontextualisa-tion
caused by the potential subjectivity of the log (van Meerkerk, 2017). Therefore, focus groups
with each PE department separately were planned at the end of Phases 1 and 2. Unfortunately, due
To newly installed COVID-19 restrictions, we could not organize the Phase 2 focus groups. focus
groups are useful for investigating what individuals believe or feel, and revealing underlying
motives (Rabiee, 2007). To generate insights into how FA strategies were adapted to each teacher's
educational context as well as teachers' experiences when engaging with FA, focus groups were
thematically split into two parts. The first part focused on how the key FA strategies were implemented
(Black and Wiliam, 2009). Examples of questions were: How did you employ feed-up/feed-back/
feedforward within your lessons? How did you employ students as learning resources for
each other/themselves? The second part focused on capturing the dynamics of teachers' experiences
when engaging with FA for which we relied on the Extended Interconnected Model of
Professional Growth (EIMPG; Clarke and Hollingsworth, 2002; Coenders and Terlouw, 2015).
The EIMPG recognizes the interactive and dynamic process of teacher learning through reflection and
implementation between five distinctive domains of professional development: (1) the
external domain, which entails all external resources used by the teachers (such as workshops,
Machine Translated by Google

Slingerland et al. 7

Table 2. Pre- and post-lesson logbook questions.

Pre-lesson questions Post-lesson questions

1. Descriptive questions: name, date, school, what
class(es), subject to be taught.
2. Are any colleagues involved in the preparation
of this FA activity? In what way?
3. Describe the experiment, and involve the key
strategies that you would like to employ.
4. What outcomes would you like to experience:
(1) for yourself and (2) for your students?
5. Describe the expectations that you have:
How will the students react?
Which pitfalls do you see?
What feelings do you have about the
experiment? (eg insecure, enthusiastic, etc.).
6. How did the experiment
go?
7. Have you reached the predefined outcomes (see Q4).
Why (not)?
8. What did you learn? What are you retaining, and what
changes will you make?
9. How did you feel during the experiment and why? (eg
frustrated, happy, angry, disappointed, insecure, etc.).
10. What advice would you give to your colleagues based
on your experience?
11. If you have involved students in your lesson evaluation,
briefly describe (per student) their opinions.

books, and literature), (2) the development domain, in which teachers discuss and select an appropriate
approach and design a lesson plan, (3) the practice domain, in which ideas are put into practice and
outcomes are observed , (4) the domain of consequence, in which it is decided to what extent the
approach was effective and which adaptations are needed, and the (5) personal domain, which reflects
sustained changes in teachers' knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes. Questions were organized along these
five domains to gain insight into teachers' learning experiences. The average Fg duration was 85.7
minutes (range 80–91 minutes).

Data analysis
The present study employed the framework method for analyzing qualitative data obtained from logbooks
and focus groups. The framework method is a systematic and flexible approach to quali-tative data
analysis that allows for both inductive and deductive approaches to the data (Gale et al., 2013; Ritchie
and Lewis, 2003). The Fg data was transcribed verbatim and analyzed using Atlas.ti Mac Version 9.1.3,
while the logbook data was first thematically organized and then entered into Atlas.ti for further analysis.
The data analysis process was carried out by the first and second authors, who followed a systematic
procedure to ensure transparency and optimize the trustworthiness of the data. With the pre-defined
themes from the focus groups and teacher logbooks as a start-ing point, both authors independently
constructed an initial set of codes (for focus groups and logbooks separately). Then, both authors
independently applied these codes to the same logbook and Fg and subsequently compared and
discussed the outcomes. This initial coding was done deductively while also providing room for new
codes to be constructed from the data. This resulted in a provisional set of codes, the analytical
framework, which was applied to the whole dataset.
Next, both authors independently coded all focus groups and logbooks, again having the possibility of
adding newly emerged codes. The resulting set of codes was again compared and discussed.
During the final stage of the analysis, two Excel matrices were constructed, with participants on horizontals
and codes on verticals, in which both authors filled their own matrix accordingly (sep-arate ones for
logbook and Fg data) and compared the results, focusing on differences and similar-ities. This resulted
in a final matrix which formed the basis for the main findings and discussion.
Machine Translated by Google

8 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

For dissemination purposes, the final matrix was translated into English by the first author and sub-
sequently checked for content, spelling, and grammar by the second and third authors.

Results
In total, participants provided 27 (series of) lessons in which formative strategies were implemented.
From the outlook of the project, teachers adopted an iterative approach to lesson design with most
teachers preferring to work in pairs during the design process, which allowed them to exchange ideas and
divide tasks. An overview of lesson themes and FA strategies is provided as supplemental material.
Themes resulting from qualitative analysis regarding PE teachers' FA experiences (first research question)
and FA strategies (second research question) are presented in Table 3. Quotes either originate from
logbook (Lb) or focus group (Fg) data and are indicated by the first letter of the school's name (either T,
Z, or M), accompanied by a number for each teacher. For Lb quotes, we also added the project phase,
whereas focus groups were only held in Phase 1. For example, Lb-Z2 Phase 1 is a logbook quote from
Teacher 2 in School Z during project Phase 1.

Teacher FA experiences
Initial concerns and growing enthusiasm. Initial logbook entries indicated that teachers' main con- cerns
revolved around students not taking FA seriously and about students' unwillingness to cooperate, as well
as being anxious about decreasing movement time. 'Students will probably just want to be physically
active. Filling in a rubric and having a discussion with a peer might be difficult for students' [Lb-Z7 Phase
1]. However, post-lesson Phase 2 logbook entries uncovered a remarkable difference over time, from
expressing feelings of unease and insecurity during Phase 1 to most PE teachers being enthusiastic
about their FA experiments in Phase 2. This difference in attitude is aptly illustrated by PE teachers T3
and Z5:

Insecure, tense, I don't really know how it will go. [Lb-T3 Phase 1]

I am really looking forward to this lesson, I am curious how it will turn out. [Lb-T3 Phase 2]

Table 3. Overview of main themes and subthemes.

Teacher FA experiences FA strategies

Initial hesitation and concerns Feed-up

Feelings of unease and insecurity Feedback
Perceived lack of control Feedforward
Changing teaching style Student involvement

Growing enthusiasm and confidence

Need for continued support
External support
Organizational barriers

FA: formative assessment.

Machine Translated by Google

Slingerland et al. 9

I am a little insecure, I worry they will not like it. [Lb-Z5 Phase 1]

I am enthusiastic. [Lb-Z5 Phase 2]

Despite the increasing enthusiasm about the new assessment approach, concerns about how to
combine FA with SA remained:

I think the more proficient students might be disappointed to not be obtaining summative grades
anymore. [Lb-Z6 Phase 1]

I find it very difficult to determine the summative assessment. [Fg-T4]

Several teachers reported experiencing difficulties adjusting to a more student-centered teaching

style, as FA frequently required them to adopt a more passive role during lessons, which contra-dicted
their typical teacher-focused approach. Particularly, teachers struggled to balance the provision of
autonomy and structure without the sensation of losing control over the lesson. Especially during Phase
1, teachers expressed concerns about chaotic and unstructured lessons:

Normally I teach very structured lessons. I had some trouble with that in the beginning, it is now more
loose, more chaotic, but it is structured chaos. [Fg-T6]

I am more within the group, and I have more interaction with students. However, this also sometimes
means more chaos, I need to let go of that I guess. [Fg-T1]

Furthermore, teachers occasionally felt a lack of control over the lesson as they endeavoured to
implement a more formative teaching approach, especially when granting students more options and
autonomy to account for their varying abilities in the classroom. To illustrate, one teacher created a
gymnastics lesson in which students rotated among several workstations tailored to various skill levels.
However, this approach raised concerns about safety management, given the increased autonomy given
to students:

I am kind of a control freak, and I can't be everywhere at once. So, I must trust my students that they
are doing as told and that they will correct each other when it becomes too dangerous. [Lb-T3 Phase 1]

Despite these challenges, teachers expressed an overall favorable attitude towards the results of
incorporating FA into their teaching, particularly following the second phase of the project. A prominent
outcome was that teachers praised the willingness and enthusiasm of students to take up active roles
within the FA process. 'We were positively surprised about the diligence with which students went to
work. They took up the task very seriously' [Lb-T5 Phase 2]. Also, some teachers had the impression that
their students were more aware of their own learning process, they were more motivated, and had more
fun than usual: 'I am involving students much more in the process [...] and for multiple students, their
enthusiasm has increased' [Fg-Z1].
Despite the increasing enthusiasm amongst most teachers, a small number of teachers remained
somewhat hesitant, either because they were uncertain if FA would truly enhance the quality of their
teaching or because they believed that their customary grading methods were crucial for motivating
certain groups of students. Or as one teacher put it:
Machine Translated by Google

10 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

I am still unsure, only if I see that my students are being more active and are having more fun, perhaps
then I will change my assessment practice. But if I see students putting in more effort because they
must obtain a grade, then I would not want to give that up. [Fg-M1]

The project influenced the perspectives and convictions of the teachers concerning FA. They particularly
valued prioritizing the student as the focal point of learning and by supporting the learning-ing process instead
of only teaching out grades:

I am especially happy that I can now value each student on his or her own level of proficiency instead
of just grading a few tricks. [Fg-T2]

We went from grading what we see to valuing growth in students. And that is a beautiful thing, very
rich. [Fg-T5]

Need for continued support. Although teachers gradually grew more confident in applying FA strategies, they
also expressed that they did not yet feel competent enough at the end of Phase 1 to successfully implement
FA without further support. 'Help is certainly still needed on this' [Fg-T1].
'I think I need more support to implement this' [Fg-T6]. It was therefore not surprising that teachers emphasized
the pivotal role of continued external support through the involvement of the facilitator.
Teachers valued the facilitator for transferring new knowledge, answering questions, providing support,
moderating the discussion, and keeping an eye on the objectives. Some teachers pointed out that without this
support, they probably would have never achieved similar results:

That [the facilitator] is like a big stick for us. Without planning these meetings, we would have never
come so far, and each of us would have done their own thing and we would have been stuck in
discussion. [Fg-T4]

They also stressed the importance of the facilitator in uniting the group of teachers to support the same ideas.
'We just need guidance and support to come to something that we all can stand behind' [Fg-M3]. Although
teachers indicated that they were just at the beginning of a process of change in thinking about assessment in
PE, almost all teachers expressed a willingness to continue this development option within their schools.

Even though teachers were generally positive about implementing FA within their PE practice, they also
identified certain barriers to further engaging with FA. For example, teachers expressed that time constraints
due to other school demands limited the options to work collaboratively with colleagues on developing and
implementing FA:

We have to walk so many side paths, everyone has that, and it prevents us from collaborating. [Fg-M4]

While this is very important, it is challenging to do this on top of my regular tasks. [Fg-M3]

Other concerns were paperwork and reduced movement time due to longer instruction.

It generates so much paperwork if you have three classes in a row. [Fg-Z6]

What I sometimes regret is that it is at the expense of movement time. [Fg-Z3]

Machine Translated by Google

Slingerland et al. eleven

FA strategies
Despite early project meetings that aimed to assist teachers in creating and implementing FA, the findings
revealed that many teachers were encountering difficulties in applying these strategies. For instance,
when asked to identify the methods they used during Phase 1, instead of naming one of the FA strategies
by Black and Wiliam (2009) that were central to the project, teachers often responded 'working with
rubrics', while neglecting to explain the rationale behind their actions (eg to give substance to FA
techniques such as providing feedback and feedforward). However, during Phase 2, it seemed that most
teachers started to grasp the essence of FA during lessons as they much more explicitly mentioned FA
strategies and the student learning process within their logbook entries. 'I am trying to provide more
feedback and to provide insight into the learning process by using rubrics' [Lb-T3 Phase 2]

Feed-up, feedback, and feedforward. A particular challenge for teachers, as part of learning to employ
effective feed-up, was to define clear learning outcomes and success criteria. We therefore shifted the
focus of the second project meeting to accommodate for support on designing learning out-comes and
criteria. Teachers indicated that defining and communicating learning outcomes and success criteria to
students were not a common part of their regular PE practice. This changed further into the project: 'What
I started doing completely differently is being very clear in what the learning outcome is, and what their
[students'] own goal is and how to get there' [Fg-M3].
Teachers valued being more transparent to their students about the learning outcomes, even though it
was at the expense of lesson time:

The students gained more insight into the goals and the way they were being assessed. [Lb-M1]

It was really time-consuming [….] but in the end, it paid off, especially for students in determining their
starting point. [Fg-T5]

Most teachers experimented with peer feedback strategies, for example, by employing video feedback
with iPads, or students working in pairs while alternating between an observer and a movement role.
However, various teachers indicated that they still provided feedback to them-selves, leading to a mix of
teacher- and peer feedback: 'I used video feedback for gymnastics.
Students self-regulated this, but I still pointed out certain important aspects' [Fg-T5].
Interestingly, feedforward was not mentioned specifically by teachers as a separate formative strat-egy,
probably because teachers did not discern between feedback and feedforward.

Active student involvement. A key aspect of FA that teachers quickly embraced was to actively involve
students in the teaching–learning process. Teachers were especially enthusiastic about com-bining
elements of feed-up with self-assessment by asking students early in the learning process to evaluate
their skill level relative to one or more success criteria of the learning outcome. As a result, students
became more involved in their own learning according to the teachers: 'All in all, I think students were
more self-critical because they were more aware of the criteria and what goals they have' [Fg-T5]. Also,
students demonstrated aspects of self-regulating their learning: 'Students were very well able to reflect
on their skill level or what they wanted to learn' [Lb-T2]. Another approach to actively engage students
was to facilitate peer feedback, usually by pairing students together so that they could observe and
provide feedback to each other using success criteria within a
Machine Translated by Google

12 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

condensed rubric. Although various teachers reported positive experiences, peer feedback was not without its
limitations as teachers indicated that limited domain expertise in students impeded the provision of accurate
and adequate peer feedback. 'The feedback didn't really contribute to what they were doing technically' [Fg-T3].
Also, students did not want to spend too much time providing and receiving feedback: '…they just wanted to
move on and play' [Fg-T3]. Although the overall feedback experience was valued by teachers, they were also
cautious not to employ it too often.

Discussion
The objective of our study was to investigate secondary school PE teachers' experiences of employing FA
activities in their respective teaching settings. Using the five key FA strategies (Black and Wiliam, 2009; Leahy
et al., 2005) as a starting point, all teachers in our study designed and implemented various FA activities. Our
findings indicate that our professional development program effectively promoted critical engagement with
assessment among PE teachers (Hay and Penney, 2013), leading to enhanced assessment literacy, particularly
in terms of selecting and differentiating strategies for gathering data on student learning (Pastore and Andrade,
2019). However, this study also identified challenges in defining learning targets and success criteria, with
limited evidence of using assessment data to inform instruction and curriculum adjustments (Hay and Penney,
2013; Pastore and Andrade, 2019). Below we first unpack findings on teachers' experiences and then focus on
how FA strategies were implemented.

Teacher experiences In

general, teachers in our study indicated that they learned a lot about FA and emphasized the added value it
brought them in terms of PE lesson quality, student learning, and student involvement. The collaborative,
systematic, and cyclical approach to professional learning in the present study aligned well with elements of
effective professional development (Parker and Patton, 2017), which may have kindled a sense of ownership.
Teachers also appreciated the opportunities for professional dialogue, sharing experiences and learning from
each other, which is another important aspect of successfully engaging with FA (Black, 2015; Black and Wiliam,
2010; Yan et al., 2021). However, implementing new elements into educational practice is not an easy task for
teachers (Thurlings et al., 2015). Most teachers started to grasp the essence of FA only during the second
phase of the study, which corresponds with earlier findings on implementing FA and developing assessment
literacy (Macken et al., 2020; Yan et al., 2021). Teachers expressed the feeling that they were only at the
beginning of a change in thinking and engaging differently with PE assessment. Our findings therefore confirm
that educational change, and the implementation of FA in particular, is a gradual process that needs to be
supported and often accelerates when teachers have experienced the benefits of a new approach, in turn
leading to changes in professional opinions and beliefs (Clarke and Hollingsworth, 2002; Guskey and Yoon,
2009).

Teachers in our study noted a significant shift in their teaching role when designing and implementing FA
activities (Black, 2015). This shift involved a move away from directive teaching towards a more guiding-oriented
approach, similar to an earlier study of FA in PE (MacPhail and Halbert, 2010). This in turn provoked a sense of
losing control over the lesson and probably contributed to the initial feelings of unease and insecurity in certain
teachers, which is not uncommon during educational innovation (Korthagen, 2017). Providing students with
more autonomy during lessons without establishing a clear structure within the lesson could easily result in such
Machine Translated by Google

Slingerland et al. 13

feelings (Aelterman et al., 2019). It was encouraging to see that these sentiments mostly disappeared during Phase 2,
which emphasizes the need for prolonged and ongoing hands-on pro-fessional development on the topic of assessment.

Similar to Moura et al. (2022), teachers in our study became increasingly aware of supporting student learning
through FA, rather than solely viewing assessment as the concluding (summative) activity within a learning process
(Hay et al., 2013). Nonetheless, some teachers expressed that they maintained a predominantly summative-oriented
assessment practice, relating to Tolgfors' (2018) notion of FA as grade generation. Teachers may still have had a limited
view of FA and not fully realized that the main goal of FA is to support learning (MacPhail and Halbert, 2010). Teachers'
beliefs and opinions on assessment in PE are influenced through acculturation experiences as a student, through formal
training, and through years of experience in teaching PE (Richards et al., 2019; Starck et al., 2023). Professional
development should therefore encourage in-service PE teachers to challenge their views on assessment, but also
provide them with enough time to explore how these for-mative strategies would work within their educational context
(ie experiment).

FA strategies All

teachers designed and implemented feed-up activities, either by simply communicating learning outcomes and success
criteria at the beginning of a lesson or by using more elaborated worked examples. Since transparency of learning
outcomes and success criteria in PE assessment leaves much to be desired (Borghouts et al., 2017; Redelius et al.,
2015) it is promising that all teachers in our study focused on this in some form. However, we also, and somewhat
unexpectedly, found this expertise to be underdeveloped in our participants. This is problematic because defining
learning outcomes and success criteria is considered foundational to working formatively (Black, 2015; Wylie and Lyon,
2015) and without clear outcomes, learning activities cannot be explicitly connected to overarching PE goals (Tolgfors,
2018). This finding is not unique to this study (Huizinga, 2014; Tolgfors, 2018), but it is nevertheless worrying, as the
Dutch education system is driven by broadly defined attainment goals in which further interpretation and contextual
adaptation are placed in the hands of the teachers (Nieveen et al., 2013). This finding warrants further investigation into
the design expertise of PE teachers as well as into the content and focus of PE teacher education (PETE) programs
and professional development opportunities.

Another prominent aspect of FA is to actively involve students in the assessment process. In our study, teachers
frequently encouraged student involvement by organizing peer feedback and by offering students choices in the
assessment process. This might reflect a shift towards a more demo-cratic approach to teaching and learning, in which
the student is placed more at the center of learning and is encouraged to take self-responsibility for learning (Hay and
Penney, 2013; Lorente- Catalan and Kirk, 2014). Nonetheless, the implementation of peer feedback also raised
concerns about the quality of feedback and the seriousness towards assigned feedback tasks, either as a provider or a
receiver of feedback. This relates to the concept of developing feedback literacy, which is the ability to understand
feedback and use it effectively to enhance learning (Winstone and Carless, 2020). Students need a general understanding
of the purpose of feedback (Winstone and Carless, 2020) and what constitutes a quality performance (Black, 2015). In
addition, Lorente-Catalan and Kirk (2014) highlight the importance of a favorable and safe learning environment since
social and physical relations within classes and between students could compli-cate peer feedback tasks (Backman et
al., 2023). To enhance peer feedback quality and to counter-act any lack of subject-specific expertise, teachers can
supply feedback scaffolds, such as task cards
Machine Translated by Google

14 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

containing common errors and their corresponding solutions (Iserbyt and Byra, 2013), or employ prompts and rubrics
containing success criteria (Alqassab et al., 2017). Also, PETE programs could highlight how to identify and manage
physical and social relations surrounding peer feedback activities (Backman et al., 2023). Although a key FA strategy,
there was little evidence in our study that teachers explicitly planned or implemented feed-forward ('how to improve'),
which might reflect the notion that learning is usually more visible during PE class; Therefore, feedback often takes the
form of process feedback, which includes both a judgment on performance as well as relevant cues for improvement
(Krijgsman et al., 2019).

Conclusions
Our study shows that adopting an inquiry-based, practice-oriented approach to professional devel-opment on FA can
lead to a teacher-perceived increase in PE lesson quality, student learning and student involvement. Because of the
longitudinal approach, we were able to note a significant shift in the participating teachers' role from a directive to a
more guiding-oriented approach when applying FA. This coincided with teachers' feelings gradually changing from
apprehensive to more confident. Despite the sustained, collaborative, and supported approach to FA implementation,
teachers struggled with the design and implementation of key FA strategies such as feed-up and student involvement.
Some teachers maintained a predominantly summative-oriented assessment practice.

This further highlights the urgency of investing in (formative) assessment literacy for both initial teacher education and
CPD.

Declaration of conflicting interests The authors

declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication
of this article: This work was supported by the Fontys TEC for Society.

ORCID iDs

Menno Slingerland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6985-9356

Gwen Weeldenburg https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9707-1352
Lars Borghouts https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6899-0555

Supplementary material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.

note

1. This one-day professional development activity was not part of this study. The content of the workshop
was on quality aspects of PE-assessment (eg validity and transparency), a stepwise guide to developing
a new assessment system, and briefly touched upon FA (we mentioned the key strategies by Black and
Wiliam (2009) without going intodepth).
Machine Translated by Google

Slingerland et al. fifteen

References

Aelterman N, Vansteenkiste M, Haerens L, et al. (2019) Toward an integrative and fine-grained insight in motivating
and demotivating teaching styles: The merits of a circumplex approach. Journal of Educational Psychology
11(3): 497–521.
AIESEP (2020) AIESEP position statement on physical education assessment. Available at: https://aiesep.org/
scientific-meetings/position-statements/.
Alqassab M, Strijbos JW and Ufer S (2017) Training peer-feedback skills on geometric construction tasks: Role of
domain knowledge and peer-feedback levels. European Journal of Psychology of Education 33(1): 11–30.

Armor K, Quennerstedt M, Chambers F, et al. (2015) What is 'effective' CPD for contemporary physical education
cation teachers? A Deweyan framework. Sport, Education and Society 22(7): 799–811.
Armor KM and Yelling M (2007) Effective professional development for physical education teachers: The role of
informal, collaborative learning. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 26(2): 177–200.

Backman E, Quennerstedt M, Tolgfors B, et al. (2023) Peer assessment in physical education teacher education
– a complex process making social and physical capital visible. Curriculum Studies in Health and Physical
Education 21(6): 616–631.
Bakkenes I, Vermunt JD and Wubbels T (2010) Teacher learning in the context of educational innovation: Learning activities and
learning outcomes of experienced teachers. Learning and Instruction 20(6): 533–548.

Barrientos Hernán EJ, López-Pastor VM, Lorente-Catalán E, et al. (2022) Challenges with using formative and
authentic assessment in physical education teaching from experienced teachers' perspectives. Curriculum
Studies in Health and Physical Education 14(2): 109–126.
Birenbaum M, DeLuca C, Earl L, et al. (2015) International trends in the implementation of assessment for learning:
Implications for policy and practice. Policy Futures in Education 13(1): 117–140.
Black P (2015) Formative assessment – an optimistic but incomplete vision. Assessment in Education: Principles,
Policy and Practice 22(1): 161–177.
Black P and Wiliam D (2009) Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment,
Evaluation and Accountability 21(1): 5–31.
Black P and Wiliam D (2010) Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta
Kappan 92(1): 81–90.
Borghouts LB, Slingerland M and Haerens L (2017) Assessment quality and practices in secondary PE in the
Netherlands. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 22(5): 423–489.
Borko H, Jacobs J and Koellner K (2010) Contemporary approaches to teacher professional development.
In: Peterson P, Baker E and McGaw B (eds) International Encyclopedia of Education, Vol. 7. Oxford: Elsevier,
pp.548–556.
Chng L and Lund J (2018) Assessment for learning in physical education: The what, why and how. Journal of
Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 89(8): 29–34.
Clarke D and Hollingsworth H (2002) Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education 18: 947–
967.
Coenders F and Terlouw C (2015) A model for in-service teacher learning in the context of an innovation.
Journal of Science Teacher Education 26(5): 451–470.
Danthony S, Mascret N and Cury F (2019) Test anxiety in physical education: The predictive role of gender, age,
and implicit theories of athletic ability. European Physical Education Review 18(1): 128–143.
DinanThompson M and Penney D (2015) Assessment literacy in primary physical education. European
Physical Education Review 21(4): 485–503.
Dudley P (2014) Lesson study: A handbook. Cambridge. Available at: https://www.lessonstudy.co.uk.
Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, et al. (2013) Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in
multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology 13(1): 1.
Machine Translated by Google

16 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

Goodyear VA and Casey A (2013) Innovation with change: Developing a community of practice to help tea-
chers move beyond the 'honeymoon' of pedagogical renovation. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy
20(2): 186–203.
Guskey TR and Yoon KS (2009) What works in professional development? Phi Delta Kappan 90(7):
495–502.
Haerens L, Krijgsman C, Mouratidis A, et al. (2018) How does knowledge about the criteria for an upcoming
test relate to adolescents' situational motivation in physical education? A self-determination theory approach.
European Physical Education Review 25(4): 983–1001.
Hattie J and Timperley H (2007) The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77(1): 81–112.
Hay P and Penney D (2013) Assessment in Physical Education: A Sociocultural Perspective. Abingdon,
Oxfordshire: Routledge.
Hay P, Tinning R and Engstrom C (2013) Assessment as pedagogy: A consideration of pedagogical work and
the preparation of kinesiology professionals. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 20(1): 31–44.
Huizinga T (2014) Developing Curriculum Design Expertise Through Teacher Design Teams. Enschede:
University of Twente.
Iserbyt P and Byra M (2013) Design and use of task cards in the reciprocal style of teaching. Journal of
Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 84(2): 20–26.
Kershner R, Pedder D and Doddington C (2013) Professional learning during a schools–university partnership
master of education course: Teachers' perspectives of their learning experiences. Teachers and Teaching
19(1): 33–49.
Korthagen F (2017) Inconvenient truths about teacher learning: Towards professional development 3.0.
Teachers and Teaching 23(4): 387–405.
Korthagen F and Vasalos A (2006) Levels in reflection: Core reflection as a means to enhance professional
growth. Teachers and Teaching 11(1): 47–71.
Krijgsman C, Vansteenkiste M, van Tartwijk J, et al. (2017) Performance grading and motivational functioning
and fear in physical education: A self-determination theory perspective. Learning and Individual Differences
55: 202–211.
Krijgsman C, Mainhard T, van Tartwijk J, et al. (2019) Where to go and how to get there: Goal clarification, process feedback and
students' need satisfaction and frustration from lesson to lesson. Learning and Instruction 61: 1–11.

Krijgsman C, Mainhard T, Borghouts L, et al. (2021) Do goal clarification and process feedback positively affect
students' need-based experiences? A quasi-experimental study grounded in self-determination theory.
Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 26(5): 483–503.
Leahy S, Lyon C, Thompson M, et al. (2005) Classroom assessment: Minute by minute, day by day.
Educational Leadership 63(3): 19–24.
Leirhaug PE and Annerstedt C (2015) Assessing with new eyes? Assessment for learning in Norwegian phys-
ical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 21(6): 616–631.
Leirhaug PE, MacPhail A and Annerstedt C (2016) 'The grade alone provides no learning': Investigating literacy
assessment among Norwegian physical education teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and
Physical Education 7(1): 21–36.
López-Pastor VM, Kirk D, Lorente-Catalán E, et al. (2013) Alternative assessment in physical education:
A review of international literature. Sport, Education and Society 18(1): 57–76.
Lorente-Catalan E and Kirk D (2014) Making the case for democratic assessment practices within a critical
pedagogy of physical education teacher education. European Physical Education Review 20(1): 104–119.
Macken S, MacPhail A and Calderón A (2020) Exploring primary pre-service teachers' use of 'assessment for
learning' while teaching primary physical education during school placement. Physical Education and Sport
Pedagogy 25(5): 539–554.
MacPhail A and Halbert J (2010) 'We had to do intelligent thinking during recent PE': Students' and teachers'
experiences of assessment for learning in post-primary physical education. Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy and Practice 17(1): 23–39.
Machine Translated by Google

Slingerland et al. 17

MacPhail A and Murphy F (2017) Too much freedom and autonomy in the enactment of assessment?
Assessment in physical education in Ireland. Irish Educational Studies 36(2): 237–252.
Moura A, Graça A, MachPhail A, et al. (2020) Aligning the principles of assessment for learning to learning in
physical education: A review of literature. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 26(4): 388–401.

Moura A, MacPhail A, Graça A, et al. (2022) Providing physical education preservice teachers with opportunities
to interrogate their conceptions and practices of assessment. European Physical Education Review 29(1): 162–
179.
Ní Chróinín D and Cosgrave C (2013) Implementing formative assessment in primary physical education: Teacher
perspectives and experiences. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 18(2): 219–233.
Nieveen N, Hoeven M, Voorde MT, et al. (2013) Docent als ontwerper: Raamwerk voor doordenking ont-werptaken
[Teacher as Designer: Framework for Reflection on Design Tasks]. Enschede: SLO.
Panadero E, Andrade H and Brookhart S (2018) Fusing self-regulated learning and formative assessment: A
roadmap of where we are, how we got here, and where we are going. The Australian Educational Researcher
45(1): 13–31.
Parker M and Patton K (2017) What research tells us about effective continuing professional development for
physical education teachers. In: Ennis CD (ed). Routledge Handbook of Physical Education Pedagogies.
Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, pp.447–460.
Pastore S and Andrade HL (2019) Teacher assessment literacy: A three-dimensional model. Teaching and Teacher Education 84:
128–138.
Rabiee F (2007) Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 63(04):
655–660.
Redelius K, Quennerstedt M and Öhman M (2015) Communicating goals and learning goals in physical education
cation: Part of a subject for learning? Sport, Education and Society 20(5): 641–655.
Richards KAR, Pennington CG and Sinelnikov OA (2019) Teacher socialization in physical education:
A scoping review of literature. Kinesiology Review 8(2): 86–99.
Ritchie J and Lewis J (2003) Qualitative Research Practice. London: Sage Publications.
Slingerland M, Borghouts L, Jans L, et al. (2016) Development and optimization of an in-service teacher train-ing
program on motivational assessment in physical education. European Physical Education Review 23(1): 91–
109.
Slingerland M, Borghouts L, Laurijssens S, et al. (2021) Teachers' perceptions of a lesson study intervention as
professional development in physical education. European Physical Education Review 27(4): 817–836.
Starck JR, O'Neil KM and Richards KA (2023) Preservice teachers' perceptions of and intentions to use assessment. Curriculum
Studies in Health and Physical Education: 1–16. Available at: https://www. tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25742981.2023.2240300

Takahashi A and McDougal T (2016) Collaborative lesson research: Maximizing the impact of lesson study.
ZDM Mathematics Education 48(4): 513–526.
Thurlings M, Evers AT and Vermeulen M (2015) Toward a model of explaining teachers' innovative behavior.
Review of Educational Research 85(3): 430–471.
Tolgfors B (2018) Different versions of assessment for learning in the subject of physical education. Physical
Education and Sport Pedagogy 23(3): 311–327.
Tolgfors B, Backman E, Nyberg G, et al. (2021a) Between ideal teaching and 'what works': The transmission and
transformation of a content area from university to school placements within physical education teacher
education. European Physical Education Review 27(2): 312–327.
Tolgfors B, Quennerstedt M, Backman E, et al. (2021b) Enacting assessment for learning in the induction phase
of physical education teaching. European Physical Education Review 28(2): 534–551. van
Meerkerk E (2017) Teacher logbooks and professional development. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods 16(1): 1–8.
Wiliam D (2011) What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation 37(1): 3–14.
Machine Translated by Google

18 European Physical Education Review 0(0)

Wiliam D and Leahy S (2018) Formatieve assessment integraren in de praktijk [Embedding Formative
Assessment: Practical Techniques for K12 Classrooms]. Rotterdam: Bazalt Educatieve Uitgaven.
Winstone N and Carless D (2020) Designing effective feedback processes in higher education. A learning
focused approach. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Wylie EC and Lyon CJ (2015) The fidelity of formative assessment implementation: Issues of breadth and
quality. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 22(1): 140–160.
Yan Z and Cheng ECK (2015) Primary teachers' attitudes, intentions and practices regarding formative assess-
ment. Teaching and Teacher Education 45: 128–136.
Yan Z, Li Z, Panadero E, et al. (2021) A systematic review on factors influencing teachers' intentions and
implementations regarding formative assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice
28(3): 228–260.

Author biographies Menno

Slingerland is a physical education teacher educator, educational designer, and researcher at Fontys University, School of Sports
Studies. His teaching and research interests mainly focus on (formative) assessment-ment, student motivation, teacher professional
development, and teacher education within the context of physical education.

Gwen Weeldenburg is a physical education teacher educator, educational designer, and researcher at Fontys
University, School of Sports Studies. Her teaching and research interests mainly focus on motivational learning
climate, curriculum development, teaching games, assessment, and teacher education within the context of
physical education.

Lars Borghouts is a physical education teacher, educator and researcher at Fontys University, School of Sports Studies. He
supervises the PE master programme. His research revolves around (formative) assessment, student motivation, teacher professional
development, and teacher education within the context of physical education.