Muscularity, the habitus and the social construction of gender: Towards a gender-relevant physical education

This paper begins to develop the concept of gender-relevant physical education, combining the work of Pierre Bourdieu and his notion of the habitus and feminist philosopher Iris Marion Young's analysis of feminine motility. It draws on data generated from a study of young people's articulation of the relationships between muscularity, physicality and gender. The social construction of the body has been of central importance to the construction of femininities and masculinities, and has formed an enduring meta-theme through much of the research on physical education and gender. We build on the young people's insights to argue that Bourdieu's notions of the habitus and the exchange of physical capital provide a useful means of conceptualizing issues of embodiment and gender in school physical education and sport. We conclude by sketching an outline of gender-relevant physical education as a process of interrupting the habitus.

'Please Mr Hay, what are my poss(abilities)?': Legitimation of ability through physical education practices

This paper provides two vignettes that draw on data from projects that interrogate how a student can be positioned by practices within physical education (PE) and directed by the PE teacher in relation to their valued or legitimated ability. Through the use of Pierre Bourdieu's conceptual tools of field, habitus and capital we investigate the complex legitimation processes that shape student poss(abilities) and that are situated in the space of the PE class. The first vignette is from the perspective of a student and draws on data from interviews, a journal, questionnaires and photos of her PE experiences in upper primary and lower secondary school. The second vignette focuses on teacher practices and his constitution of the field of a PE class highlighting the significance of teacher perspectives of 'ability' in informing assessment in senior secondary PE. Using these examples we discuss the symbolic violence that works against each student by positioning them as 'less able' or 'unable' despite their participation in a learning context. We argue that by not attending to the possible abilities of students that could have been recognized, developed and legitimated, and through the misuse of capital assignment by teachers, PE may well be counterproductive to students' ongoing engagement with the subject area and the espoused potential upon which such a subject area justifies itself.