This presentation focuses on Interdisciplinary Curriculum in Physical Education: Possibilities and Problems. (Book Chapter)

1. PLACEK, J. (2003). INTERDISCIPLINARY CURRICULUM IN PHYSICAL
EDUCATION: POSSIBILITIES AND PROBLEMS. IN S. SILVERMAN AND C.
ENNIS (EDS.), STUDENT LEARNING IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION: APPLYING
RESEARCH TO ENHANCE INSTRUCTION. CHAMPAIGN, IL: HUMAN
KINETICS. (PP. 255-274)
Renee Brown
Adam Keath

2. Purpose
• What?
– Book chapter
• Why?
– The chapter explored how integrated and interdisciplinary curriculums
are being used in physical education.
– What constitutes integrated vs. interdisciplinary
• How?
– Integration
• Concept driven curriculum (e.g., focus on big ideas without regard for subject
area boundaries)
– Interdisciplinary
• Curriculum that correlates multiple subject’s across an activity or lesson
framework but stays within the bounds of the subject matter (e.g., Theme
lesson that incorporates physical activity and dinosaurs contains content from
multiple subject areas).

3. Background
• Eight Year Study (1933-1941)
– Positive results for integration
• Post World War II (1950s & 1960s)
– Back to Basics
• Vietnam War (1960s)
– Called for Curriculum “Relevance”
– Basic curriculums stayed the same

4. Background
• Japanese Challenge (1980s-90s)
– Isolation of disciplines
• High Stakes Testing (90s-present)
– Preparation programs emphasize integration and
interdisciplinary education.
– Political reality of subject matter is that test drive
curriculum.

5. Significance
• NASPE- national content standards
– Emphasis of the NASPE standards on a variety of
objectives besides sports and games, was
influential in promoting interdisciplinary
PE(PLACEK, 2003).
• Research
– Literature and resources for interdisciplinary
teaching are now readily available and research in
the area is still increasing.

6. Methods
• Literature review
– Focused primarily on useful resources for teachers
as practical text for application.
• Internal vs. external
– Internal - combining multiple topics within the
same subject matter
– External- Combining physical education content
with other subject area content knowledge.

7. Analysis Methods
Literature review by NASPE standard
• Standard 2 Movement concepts and principles
– Physiology and fitness(most common)
– Wide base of research, however not geared towards how
to teach the sub disciplines.
• Standard 5 Responsible personal and social behavior
– Wide research base with useful practitioner suggestions in
JOPERD
– Hellison’s TPSR (best known model)
– Character education has a muddy definition

8. Analysis Methods
• Standard 7 Enjoyment, challenge, self
expression and social interaction
– Best known model Adventure education
– Five concepts of adventure education
• Risk
• Trust
• Problem solving
• cooperation
• challenge
– Individual and group activities

9. Findings/Main arguments
• Three possible Outcomes
– Integrated curriculum should “condense” the subject
matter
– Traditional curriculum does not match real life
– Make school relevant to students lives
• Potential Problems
– TE Disagreements can be seen as personality conflicts
– TE fear subject wash-out (not covered)
– SI Students expectations of PE as a non-academic
subject may be the most difficult barrier to overcome

10. Conclusions/implications for practice
and/or future research
• Interdisciplinary education has been proven to
be effective , however potential problems
such as high stake testing and teacher
specialization have limited its use in schools
• You don’t need to re-invent the wheel
• Interdisciplinary curricula, make natural
connections between subject—don’t force a
relationship

11. Questions?
• When the words interdisciplinary curriculum
in PE are used, what type of curriculum is
envisioned? Please come up with an example
• You can work in pairs =)
• Ex. Teaching a Korean folk dance in a fifth-grade
social studies unit on other cultures