An Interactive Model to Teach Motor Skills

There has been a tremendous increase in our knowledge of hum motor performance over the last few decades. Our theoretical understanding of how an individual learns to move is sophisticated and complex. It is difficult however to relate much of this information in practical terms to physical educators, coaches, and therapists concerned with the learning of motor skills (Shumway-Cook & Woolcott, 1995). Much of our knowledge stems from lab testing which often appears to bear little relation to real-life situations. This lack of ecological validity has slowed the flow of information from the theorists and researchers to the practitioners. This paper is concerned with taking some small aspects of motor learning theory, unifying them, and presenting them in a usable fashion. The intention is not to present a recipe for teaching motor skills, but to present a framework from which solutions can be found. If motor performance research has taught us anything, it is that every individual and situation presents unique challenges. By increasing our ability to conceptualize the learning situation we should be able to develop more flexible and adaptive responses to the challege of teaching motor skills. The model presented here allows a teacher, coach, or therapist to use readily available observations and known characteristics about a motor task and to conceptualize them in a manner which allows them to make appropriate teaching/learning decisions.

From Where Do We Teach? Potential Positions in Public Education

This thesis is a conceptual examination of the positions from which we teach in public education. As it is philosophical in nature, it takes no qualitative or quantitative data. It offers a review of selected relevant literature and an analysis of personal and professional experience, with the intent to pose critical questions about teaching and learning. The framework of this thesis represents the following contentions: First, from its inception, public schooling served capital by preparing skilled labour for emerging industrial markets. This history is the hegemonic shadow that hangs over public education today. Second, movements toward the standardization of funding, curriculum, and evaluation support the further commodification of public schooling. The “accountability” that standardization offers, the “back to basics” that it aims for, is counter to the potential that public education might critically inform citizens and seek social justice. Third, movements toward the privatization of public schooling under the guise of “choice” and “mobility”, brought on by manufactured crisis, serve only to widen socio-economic inequities as capitalist neoliberal interests seek profit in both the product of public schools and in schooling itself. If we recognize and understand the power of public education to inform vast numbers of citizens who will, in turn, either maintain or reform society, we must ask: What do we want public education to be? What are the effects of continuing down historically conventional and increasingly standardized paths? What do progressive pedagogies offer? How might teachers destandardize their pedagogy and pursue equitable opportunities for marginalized students? How might students name themselves and their world, that they might play a part in its reimagining? For whom do we teach, and under what conditions? From where do we teach, and why? For educators to ask these questions, and to employ what they discover, will necessitate taking substantial risks. It will necessitate taking a stand and cannot be done alone. Teachers must seek out the collaboration of their students. They must offer students the time and the space to find their own voices, to create their own selves, and to envision previously uncharted paths on which we might walk together.