4.1 The Traditional Approach

.4 Pedagogy

2.4.1 The ‘traditional approach’

The current approach to delivering and teaching PE, deemed by the literature as the ‘traditional approach’, is believed to be ineffective in promoting LTPA and not beneficial for all pupils (Green et al., 2005; Haerens et al., 2011). The traditional approach typically involves a sport and team game dominated curriculum with an emphasis on competition and skill mastery through teaching skills and drills (Green et al., 2005; Trudeau and Shephard, 2008; Stran and Curtner-Smith, 2010). Trudeau and Shephard (2008) discuss how competitive team games can be viewed as non-inclusive by isolating individuals who lack ability or have an unsuitable body build e.g. not being tall enough to play basketball. They

This is justified by the models’ ability to provide pupils with opportunities to learn about PE in depth, address different pupil interests and needs, and achieve learning outcomes across the four domains of learning – physical, cognitive, affective and social – enhancing the possibility of LTPA (Bailey et al., 2009; Hastie and Casey, 2014; Fletcher and Casey, 2014). Additionally, the models are flexible so teachers can adopt them and design teaching units to suit their specific circumstances (Hastie and Casey, 2014). From reviewing the literature, these models have been implemented and studied in PE contexts, in particular Sport Education and Cooperative Learning, and have mostly yielded positive results such as improvements in self-efficacy, positive attitudes, physical skills and understanding of strategies (Gubacs-Collins and Olsen, 2010; Casey, 2014; Casey and Goodyear, 2015). There has also been positive results from hybridising the models, for example Sport Education and Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) by Pritchard and McCollum (2009) and Sport Education and Cooperative Learning by Dyson

It is agreed that PE cannot meet the full recommendations on its own due barriers such as limited curriculum time (Fairclough and Stratton, 2005; McKenzie and Lounsbery, 2009; MacNamara et al., 2011) therefore the UK Association for Physical Education (afPE) (2015) recommended that pupils should be actively moving for at least 50% of learning time. However, studies have found that PE frequently fails to meet this target (Pate et al., 2011; Sallis et al., 2012; Hills et al., 2015). It is believed that development of fundamental movement skills (FMS) and sport-specific skills, both crucial for LTPA, are receiving more emphasis and time during lessons resulting in reduced MVPA (Pate et al., 2011). This issue has been addressed in the literature as Hills et al. (2015) discuss how interventions for increasing MVPA during lessons have been developed and found to increase it by 24%. It is highly suggested that teachers should provide balanced lessons of teaching, feedback and PA (Sallis et al., 2012; Lonsdale et al., 2013; Hills et al.,