Zack Beddoes

This study examined teacher implementation practices to meet a state mandate requiring 135 minutes of student physical activity (PA) weekly. Teachers were required to implement a video-based movement integration (MI) program. Using an embedded mixed-methods design, provider characteristics of 42 teachers and the organizational capacity of six schools were developed from interviews, surveys, observations, and artifacts. Data analysis revealed three teacher profiles (a) <i>Dynamic Experientialists</i>, (b) <i>Coachable Constructivists</i>, and (c) <i>Cautious Behaviorists</i>, and three school profiles (a) <i>Whole Child Approach</i>, (b) <i>Grade Level Champions</i>, and (c) <i>Back to Basics</i>. Findings suggest that school, teacher, and student factors affect MI implementation.

Professors in teacher education are positioned to be significant socializing agents to their students. In turn, teacher education faculty members undergo their own unique brand of socialization through association with faculty peers, students, and others. This self-study by a visiting faculty was improvement-oriented and influenced by a personal drive to be an effective instructor for students who were not majoring in physical education. I analyzed my journey via a range of data sources including: a reflective journal, critical friendship discussions, and student course ratings. These sources helped me view my teaching practice through my own lens and through the eyes of my students. Data analysis focused on identifying turning points and critical incidences that changed or challenged my thinking and/or practice. Two interrelated themes were developed: (a) A Journey from Seeking Role Model Status to a More Authentic Focus on Students; and (b) Navigating Mounting Internal Pressures. I discuss my results from a socialization lens. I found it particularly impactful to my self-study journey to have the support of a faculty team invested in my growth and development as a professional.

<i><b>Purpose</b>:</i> To investigate school principals’ perceptions and applications of professional learning communities (PLCs) and how they interpret the roles of physical educators within these structures. <i><b>Method</b>:</i> This study was conceptualized as an exploratory interview study. Eight elementary and two secondary school principals across four districts participated in semistructured interviews. Each principal had been trained and was currently utilizing the same PLC framework within their respective schools. <i><b>Result</b>:</i> Data analysis revealed three overarching themes with supportive subthemes: (a) PLCs are Centered on and Structured for Student Learning, (b) The Roles of Physical Educators Differ in Perception and Function, and (c) Successful PLCs are Facilitated by Team Trust and Disrupted by Drift. <i><b>Discussion</b>:</i> The findings carry implications for principals, physical educators, and physical education teacher education programs. Principals and physical educators have mutually reinforcing responsibilities in creating an equitable space for physical education in the school PLC community.

<i><b>Purpose</b>:</i> Drawing from occupational socialization theory and social capital theory, the purpose of this study was to investigate the socialization of physical education teachers in a professional learning community during induction. <i><b>Method</b>:</i> Because this investigation consisted of a single school, a single instrumental case study design was utilized. The school was purposely chosen given its status as a “model professional learning community.” Two physical education teachers, three school administrators, and the founding principal participated in this study. Data collection consisted of a combination of dyadic interviews, focus groups, observations, and documents. <i><b>Results</b>:</i> Data analysis revealed three overlapping themes with supportive categorical subthemes: (a) Dispersed and Inclusive Leadership, (b) Teacher Empowerment, and (c) Culture of Belonging. <i><b>Discussion</b>:</i> Implications for physical education teachers include the necessity of ongoing collaboration with administrators, cross-curricular colleagues, and physical education teaching peers. Physical educators should seek to develop strong social capital within the school professional learning community.

Teachers in contemporary schools carry a host of work-related responsibilities. As such, the act of teaching (delivering content) is only one aspect of being a teacher. Interactions with colleagues, administrators, and students combine to form a complex socialization process as teachers, especially novice teachers in their induction years, learn to navigate the sociopolitical climate and culture of schools. In many schools, professional learning communities (PLCs) are utilized as one method for continuous professional development, but these formations introduce unique considerations for a teacher’s socialization because of the various ways they are structured. Guided by Occupational Socialization Theory, this self-study explores Molly’s experiences navigating two school cultures during her induction years. Molly’s graduate school experience coincided with her induction years of teaching in the K-12 setting. As Molly learned more about PLCs in her master’s program, she desired to learn how she could more fully contribute to them. Molly found her reflections returning repeatedly to the notions of belonging and community while striving to find her way as a beginning teacher. Implications from this study include the necessity to conceptualize teaching as more than delivering content. Schools are political spaces with built-in mechanisms designed to reproduce the culture. Teachers in physical education have often reported feeling marginalized within the school community. Physical education teachers may need more experience with cross-curricular collaborative work designed to improve the learning and well-being of young people. Learning how to specifically contribute to and navigate PLC school structures is perhaps underemphasized in teacher preparation programs.

Improvement efforts in physical education have often targeted complex issues through a singular, unidimensional lens. This strategy is less effective given the interrelated and complex relationship among the physical education systems and its components. Systems planning dynamics are underrepresented in the literature, but considerations for the interrelated physical education system components using this framework may help in shaping a more desirable future. Framed by systems thinking, a collective action approach focuses on various systems components that can lead to innovation and improvement. This analysis revisits the idea of a “physical education system” as an analytical, action-oriented centerpiece. The purpose of this theoretical paper is to present and justify collective action as an essential aspect of improving physical education teacher education (PETE) and to recommend a three-pathways approach for collective action strategies across and within PETE programs. If physical education is to function as a unified entity, PETE programs will need to model collective action and prepare students for this important work.

Drawing from a variety of conceptual and theoretical frameworks, this article provides a summary of decades of research into a university–district partnership that in multiple ways could be considered a systemic success. It describes the practices and processes of how two sectors of the broader physical education system (i.e., in-school physical education and teacher education) have complemented each other in the pursuit of the ongoing workforce development of physical education professionals. Physical education professionals belonging to the participating school district and teacher preparation program have sustained a working partnership based on sound professional learning community (PLC) principles (e.g., ongoing professional development, collaborative teaming, common vision, mission, and language, strong support from the central office) long before PLCs became fixtures in districts and schools. Indeed, this partnership could, in many respects, be described as a PLC before its time. This article highlights the partnership’s early days and several features that have supported its success and longevity. It also offers supporting evidence from the perspectives of the students, parents, and teachers who have been associated with this partnership.