Themes and axis
In order to take into account the diversity of the fields of intervention of physical educators, four axes were proposed:
Axis 1 – Healthy schools: which missions for the physical education teachers
In 2015, the United Nations adopted “a call for action by all countries to promote prosperity while protecting the planet”. Among the 17 objectives pursued are the establishment of quality education and access to good health and well-being. Like the US Whole School Whole Community Whole Child (WSCC) model developed by the CDC, several countries have developed coordinated approaches to school health. Based on the socio-ecological model, they are based on multisectoral actions involving the school, the family and the community.
Through their training in teaching and biomedical sciences, teachers in physical education are generally presented as preferred partners for this type of project. Their role as potential coordinators is emphasized by the school authorities. Proposed communications in this area will address the following questions: How do physical education teachers meet these expectations? Do the other actors in the school collaborate with the projects implemented? Does the training of physical education teachers prepare them to take on this kind of mission?
Axis 3 – Beyond performance: what contributions of coaches to their athletes?
Physical education feeds and nourishes in return the sport practice organized by federal structures (in Europe) or school sport (in North America). This other context offers participants many opportunities to develop their motor skills, harness their physical qualities, enrich their social capital and / or express their personality. In this context of practice, the quality of the coaching and the quality of the coaches education are just as important as in the school environment. However, it is clear that research on sport pedagogy in the sport context is not yet considered to its true value.
It deserves more attention in order to answer the following questions: How are coaches prepared to develop the life skills of their athletes? How do they get athletes to surpass themselves? What links do they establish with those around them (parents, school, etc.)? How do coaches go about giving their athletes a taste for practice and encourage them to integrate sport into their lifestyle? What relationships do they develop with their athletes? How do the athletes invest in their practice? What do they remember from their sports experience?
Axis 2 – Towards quality physical education: what practices and perspectives?
The concept of Inclusive Quality Physical Education (EPQ) was popularized by UNESCO in 2015. Although its significance is culturally variable, it broadly emphasizes the need to tailor practices to the specific needs of each child / adolescent and calls for an evolution of the subject matter. At the centre of the model is the development of physical literacy. It provides the fundamentals that the child needs to acquire the motor skills and physical qualities that allow him/her to appreciate the practice and to adopt an active lifestyle. Welcoming the vast majority of school-aged children, physical education is the backbone of any project to prepare physically educated citizens
In the context of a societal anchoring of the course, this implies that physical education teachers should focus as much on the practice of the reference sports/physical activities as on the improvement of the knowledge and the development of attitudes that will be useful to their students lifelong. Referring to the concept of accountability, it is still necessary to determine whether teachers in physical education really influence the lives of young people entrusted to them.
Several non-exhaustive questions are asked: How do physical education teachers go about encouraging their students to practice outside the school in a lucid and enlightened way and teach them how to manage their “health capital” through their physical life? What didactic tools do they mobilize to achieve their goals? How do they differentiate their practices to take into account the uniqueness of their students? How does their initial/continuing training help them to fulfil their missions? What changes do they bring to their students? How do the pupils/students live their lessons?
Axis 4 – (R)evolution of active leisure: what contribution of physical educators?
For several decades, the world of active leisure knows a particularly rapid evolution. This was particularly marked by the appearance of ‘fun culture’ and the diversification of practices. After the activities of “glide” and those proposed by the industry of the form, one notices today the emergence of connected disciplines (exergames, e-sport …). Indeed, the beginning of the 21st century is characterized by an explosion of technology and its revolutionary applications that are increasingly integrated in the promotion and practice of physical and sports activities.
Moreover, in the field of adapted physical activities (activities for people with disabilities or populations at risk, promotion of physical activity …), social integration or health (rehabilitation, sports on prescription …), an increasing emphasis is placed on the quality of the physical educator’s intervention. One consequence of this evolution is that active leisure occupies a growing number of professionals who supervise participants from very different backgrounds. Here are also many questions: Does the mode of intervention of these physical educators differ from that of their colleagues involved in other practice contexts? Why and how do ‘customers’ engage in these activities? What qualities do they expect from those who coach them? How are these prepared? What lessons can school and sport stakeholders learn from what is happening in the free time sector?