Lessons learned . . . about curriculum: Five years on and half a world away

The knowledge, skills, and attitudes manifested in health and physical education school curricula are an arbitrary selection of that which is known and valued at a particular place and time. Bernstein's (2000) theories of the social construction of knowledge offer a way to better understand the relationship among the production, selection, and reproduction of curricular knowledge. This article overviews contemporary knowledge in the primary field (production) on which curriculum writers in the recontextualizing field might draw. It highlights tensions in the knowledge generated within the primary field and, using a case of the USXs National Standards for Physical Education (NASPE), demonstrates how particular discourses become privileged when translated into curriculum documents in the recontextualizing field

Risk reduction: Recontexualizing health as a physical education curriculum

While there is sufficient evidence to suggest that physical activity is inversely related to lifestyle diseases, researchers are far from being certain that this evidence extends to children. Nevertheless, the school physical education curriculum has been targeted as an institutional agency that could have a significant impact on health during childhood and later during adulthood if individuals could be habituated to assume a physically active lifestyle. The purpose of this article is to examine the recontextualization of biomedical knowledge into an ideology of healthism in which health is conceived as a controllable certainty and used as a pedagogical construction to transform school physical education. Using a Foucauldian perspective, we explore how the atomized biomedical model of chemical and physical relationships is constructed, reproduced, and perpetuated to service and empower the discourse and the practices of researchers and scholars. In this process the sociological or cultural aspects of public health are marginalized or ignored. As a result of this examination, alternative approaches are proposed that engage the limitations of the biomedical model and openly consider the insights that are available from the social sciences regarding what participation in physical activity means to individuals.