dc.contributor.author | Tolgfors, B. | |
dc.contributor.author | Barker, Dean | |
dc.contributor.author | Nyberg, Gunn | |
dc.contributor.author | Larsson, Nils Håkan Olof | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-10-18T07:16:47Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-10-18T07:16:47Z | |
dc.date.created | 2023-08-30T14:31:43Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 2023, 1-14. | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1740-8989 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11250/3159448 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Principles such as instructional alignment and step-by-step
progression are often seen as crucial features of good assessment
practices in school physical education (PE). These features are
problematic from nonlinear educational perspectives, which are based
on the idea that movement learning cannot be expected to take place
in the same manner for all students. Without some resolution of the
contradiction between nonlinear pedagogies and principles of good
assessment, the likelihood of physical educators fully embracing any
kind of nonlinear approach to movement education remains doubtful.
Purpose and research question: Our purpose in this paper is to illustrate
how assessment for and of learning (AfL and AoL) can look when
implemented in nonlinear movement education practices.
Methods: Illustrations of AfL and AoL are drawn from an investigation in
which one educator implements a nonlinear movement education module.
The module focuses on juggling for students at high school (grade nine
students aged approximately 15 years). The module provided students
with 10 × 50-minute lessons to explore juggling. Data were generated
through observations (film clips and field notes) and ethnographic-type
interviews that were conducted with the students during the lessons.
Findings: In the context of the nonlinear movement education module, AfL
became: Interacting with students in joint exploration; Introducing learning
strategies; Encouraging students to clarify and verbalise the object of
learning; Helping students identify critical aspects of the movement activity,
and; Inviting students to consider alternative learning trajectories. The
educator then evaluates the students’ learning experiences in the context
of a group performance at the end of the module. This performance can
be seen as an instance of holistic assessment within a nonlinear
movement education practice.
Conclusions: The suggested holistic perspective on PE assessment could
help educators to: circumvent dichotomies such as mind-body and
theory-practice; approach students as active meaning-makers; re-frame
students’ actions as emergent and context-dependent; and replace direct
instruction with explorative teaching and learning methods. The major
contribution of this study is that it shows how assessment for and of
learning can be implemented in nonlinear movement education practices
within a linear, goal-related and criterion-referenced, education system. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.rights | Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no | * |
dc.title | Assessment for and of learning in nonlinear movement education practices | en_US |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | en_US |
dc.type | Journal article | en_US |
dc.description.version | publishedVersion | en_US |
cristin.ispublished | true | |
cristin.fulltext | original | |
cristin.qualitycode | 2 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/17408989.2023.2230244 | |
dc.identifier.cristin | 2171049 | |
dc.source.journal | Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy | en_US |
dc.source.pagenumber | 1-14 | en_US |