Physical Activity vs Physical Educaton

Sourced from Zethus's blog

Last Thursday in our EPE 310 class we talked about the difference between physical activity and physical education.  It was interesting to take the time to differentiate the two and once our group started talking we realized there is overlap, but there are also sharp distinctions.

wiktionary.org defines physical education as: An element of an educational curriculum concerned with bodily development, strength, physical co-ordination, and agility.


wikipedia.org has a page on physical activity that defines it as: any bodily activity that enhances or maintains physical fitness and overall health and wellness. It is performed for various reasons including strengthening muscles and the cardiovascular system, honing athletic skills, weight loss or maintenance, as well as for the purpose of enjoyment. 


I think these definitions are generally accurate, but we talked about a few more things that should be considered.  Obviously physical education has a curriculum associated with it.  But it also has purposeful movement that will help students to develop skills and aptitudes in a variety of areas. It should encourage students to remain active throughout their lives, and it should help students develop social skills.  This does not mean that physical activity does not have those components, but rather that there is more purpose or meaningful content included in education as opposed to activity.


The national association for sport and physical education or NASPE (based in the US) has a page devoted to outlining the differences. They say that : "A quality physical education program provides learning opportunities, appropriate instruction, meaningful and challenging content for all children" whereas  "Physical activity is bodily movement of any type and may include recreational, fitness and sport activities" 
These definitions are very similar to the ones posted above from wikipedia and wiktionary but the page on NASPE is more complete with details on what they consider instruction, meaningful content, and appropriate assessment as well as examples of physical activity.  I found that page to be very helpful in understanding the differences.


The government of Alberta also has some information outlining the differences between physical fitness and physical activity.  To start with, they say "quality physical education always includes physical activity, but the reverse isn’t always true."  This is the same comparison as 'all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares'.  Although there are some similarities and overlap between physical activity and physical education they are not one in the same.


Specifically, from the point of view of education, 
The Alberta curriculum identifies four general outcomes for physical education (the ABCDs):
A: Activity
B: Benefits health
C: Co-operation
D: Do it daily … for life!

The Saskatchewan Curriculum does not have a cute acronym for the overarching goals of physical education but the general sentiments are the same.

The K-12 goals are broad statements identifying what students are expected to know and be able to do upon completion of study in a particular area of study. The goals of physical education are interdependent and are of equal importance. The three goals for students from Kindergarten to Grade 12 are:

• Active Living – Enjoy and engage in healthy levels of participation in movement activities to support lifelong active living in the context of self, family, and community.
• Skillful Movement – Enhance quality of movement by understanding, developing, and transferring movement concepts, skills, tactics, and strategies to a wide variety of movement activities.
• Relationships – Balance self through safe and respectful personal, social, cultural, and environmental interactions in a wide variety of movement activities.

7-Up (sourced from The Pilver's blog)

Again, although there is overlap between physical activity and physical education we can see there are also distinct differences.  Unfortunately I think there are too many teachers who have not taken the time to read and understand the differences and think that anytime students are moving they are "doing phys ed".  I have worked in classes where teachers didn't have access to the gym, or chose not to take students to the gym because they were too loud in the hall way last time, so they tried to do phys ed class in the classroom.  What happened? Students usually ended up playing 7-up or four corners.  Neither of which meets any of the curriculum goals.  It might be fun for the students, but it is definitely not phys ed.

Should Boys and Girls be in segregated PE classes?

Photo taken by Judy Baxter.  Some rights reserved.

On the first day of our EPE 310 (university phys ed curriculum course for K-5 teachers) we all spent a minute talking about who we are and our experience with phys ed in elementary and high school.  Many of the stories from the girls in the class talked about the over competitive nature of phys ed classes and the focus on team sports where there is a clear winner and a clear loser.  Many of the boys seemed to like that format and were successful in their phys ed classes.  This is a very small sample size, but it does lead to the question, should we segregate boys and girls into different phys ed classes that can focus on their interests?


The government of Alberta has an article on their healthy living site that explores the differences in activity preferences between girls and boys in physical education classes.  Although this article is clear to say that not every boy will like competitive team sports, and not every girl will like dancing there is a gender divide in preferred activities.  If this is the case, should we try to work within the interests of our students in the activities we use to meet the curriculum goals?

Photo by Lower Columbia College. Some rights reserved.

In high school there seems to be a movement towards this segregation.  Most of the people in our EPE class talked about having phys ed classes separated by gender in at least grade 9 and 10 (the years it is required in the curriculum). It is easier to do in high school because there is enough variance in classes being taken, and space availability for concurrent phys ed classes.

Is it practical, feasible, or even desirable at an elementary level to have separate boys and girls classes?

As our Saskatchewan society continues to evolve and change with the increase in the Aboriginal population and an increase in immigration there is the potential for cultural traditions to also influence how we teach phys ed.  In Manitoba some recent immigrants have requested exemptions for their children to not participate in physical education classes that are of mixed gender.  However, a local (Winnipeg) Muslim leader says that there is no reason for the separation between genders before the students reach puberty.  The question then becomes how do we fulfill the provincial curriculum objectives while still being respectful of the traditions and beliefs of students and families in the community?

Some studies have been done, and journal articles written on the the benefits (or detriments) to both single gender and co-ed classes.  This summary on the University of Michigan site tells us that single sex female classes allowed the girls to perfect skills more effectively, it actually reduced their overall exercise.  There were no noticeable differences in either skill or exercise level for boys who were in segregated or co-ed classes.  These studies were done on high school students and not elementary students so the results might not translate directly.  Many studies have also found that the most importnat factor in physical activity is having a friend to exercise with.  Regardless of gender it is important that all students have someone in the class that they feel comfortable with and they want to participate with.

The one area within the Saskatchewan curriculum that I think might be missing if we create segregated phys ed classrooms is Relationships.  Students would be able to develop good working relationships with others in the class, but it is not realistic to think that in their everyday lives they would only have interactions with others of the same gender.  These students will, in most cases, still be taking other classes in a co-ed setting, so perhaps they will gain relationship understanding in those classes which will be sufficient. However, they are not really fulfilling all of the curriculum goals of phys ed.  We then have to ask do the benefits (if there are any) outweigh the harms (if there are any).  The opinions on this topic are diverse and the studies inconclusive, especially at the elementary level.

This issue does, however, provide something to consider as we plan the physical education component of our future classrooms.

Why I *HATE* when teachers us Phys Ed as punishment

Image courtesy of Ed Yourdon (Some Right Reserved)

One of my biggest pet peeves in schools that I see regularly is teachers using physical education classes as a punishment (or reward).  Teachers take away phys ed class (or a portion of the class) and make them sit on the sidelines, or maybe stay in the classroom doing other work.
There are a few specific issues I have with phys ed as a specific reward or punishment.

1 - students are usually not physically active for the 30-60 minutes per day recommended by Participaction. If teachers take away a 30-45 minute phys ed class they are not helping their students become healthy, active children that will grow into healthy, active adults.

2 - When we use running laps as a punishment for bad behaviour students will start to hate going to phys ed class, and it might turn them off physical activity all together.  Being physically active should be an enjoyable lifestyle choice, and not a chore or punishment.

3 - Physical education is a curriculum subject the same as math, science, language arts, etc.  I have never seen a teacher threaten to take away math or science if students are not listening or are misbehaving.  There are reasons for all subject areas to be in the curriculum and I don't think it's appropriate for a teacher to omit one subject area because they are using it for classroom management.

Are video games appropriate in phys ed classes?

A few days ago Dylan posted a video to twitter (shown below) where a school has started having their students wear heart monitors in phys ed so they could "properly track their activity".  They also shifted the focus away from what we would traditionally see as ganes and activities in phys ed towards video games like Dance Dance Revolution.

Around the same time I got a tweet from Edutopia linking to an article talking about the same techniques. Using DDR and other video games to get students moving in phys ed.

Both the video and the article are somewhat dated (the video from 2007, and the article first appeared in 2008) so I am interested to know if these techniques are still being used today.  If so, what successes (or failures) are being observed?

The idea of using video games is one that I worked with a few years ago as the executive director of the Duke of Edinburgh's Award in Saskatchewan.  One of the components of the Duke of Ed program is physical fitness and we had an applicant who listed wii fit as their physical activity.  Does that, or should it qualify?

I think that as long as children are up and moving there is a positive physical gain. I have participated in DDR games and played Wii Fit and worked up a sweat.  It is entirely possible to get a good workout by following along to video games and dances.  If this is what it takes to motivate students to get active why would we put the kibosh on any opportunity for physical activity?

The one caution I would have though is that this type of activity in phys ed class can't be at the exclusion of all else.  If as phys ed instructors we rely solely on video games to get students moving what will happen when they go home and don't have these tools to use?  What about students who come from lower socio-economic situations and will never be able to afford expensive video game systems?  How will we create lifelong active individuals if ALL they know is playing video games.  I think this is a tool in our arsenal and if we can use this tool to get students up and moving, and sweating and increasing their physical fitness then that is GREAT!  We should not forget about games and activities that can be played outside in the fresh air using few or no supplies.  We need to be able to supplement a video game activity with something that all students can do together even if they don't have hundreds (thousands) to spend on technology.

Agree? Disagree? Please share your thoughts with me on using video games in phys ed.

First Class of EPE

Our first EPE 310 class was last Thursday night.  It is because of that class that I have started blogging and signed up for twitter, but our class wasn't just about technology.  It is a phys ed class after all.

We played a number of games that were interactive and got us moving, but didn't focus specifically on competition or on excluding anyone from the process.  No dodgeball for us. :)  I tried to find examples of the games we played online so that I could add links to the specific activities, instead of trying to explain them all, but I was unsuccessful in my search.  I will keep looking for online resources to share, but am also planning on drawing out the activities and scanning them so I can update this post with more details in the near future.

The best part about all of the activities that we did was that they were active and inclusionary.  There weren't long periods of time where anyone was standing around waiting to participate, or where they had been eliminated from the game and were waiting to get back in to play.  The games were not set up as a direct competition where one team would clearly win and another clearly lose.  The games did not single anyone out where the whole class would be watching that person perform the task and be able to judge them on their aptitude.  Too often I have seen teachers who don't take the time to plan, or don't know where to go for resources to plan their phys ed class and consequently they end up playing the same games we did when we were in school.  Dodgeball, king's court, tag, four corners, octopus, etc.  Many of these games have an active physical component, but they single people out and contribute to some students not liking phys ed because they are always eliminated.

I loved phys ed when I was in school (even though I wasn't always the best athlete) because I was competitive and I was one of a handful of girls in my elementary school class that participated in sports outside of school.  There were others who danced, were in gymnastics, or figure skated but those activities didn't translate as well to the sport based competitive style phys ed classes that were prevalent 20-25 years ago.  Although I was "good" at phys ed and always liked it I can now understand why so many of my peers did not enjoy spending time in the gym.  At the time I was shocked that people didn't want to run around and play games, but now I can see that if students are not feeling included, and are not having any form of success they will be less likely to want to continue.

After one class and an handfull of phys ed activities I am already looking forward to more interaction with my peers in the gym and more interesting and inclusionary activities to be able to draw upon when I start teaching.