PE Central: A Possible Online Professional Development Tool

Abstract

Traditional models of professional development (PD) are typically described in terms such as the following: development shall be comprised of professional learning opportunities aligned with student learning and educator development needs and school, school district, and or state improvement (New Jersey Department of Education, 2014, New Definition, see table, row 1, column 2). Sanctioned PD, then is the formal provision of time and resources allocated by the sanctioning body (i.e., school, district, or state) to provide training that the body deems sufficient to meet its criteria and goals to gatherings of educators. Traditionally, these once or twice yearly trainings have involved educators across all disciplines. Recent approaches such as professional learning communities (most often small groups of discipline-specific teachers) that are organized to address local needs and devise, implement, and assess solutions (O'Sullivan, 2007) are also gaining popularity. Nonsanctioned or informal sources of PD include popular online affordances of discipline-specific websites such as PHE America (formerly pelinks4u), PHYSEDagogy, and SHAPE America's Exchange and Teacher's Toolbox. These resources provide ideas about lesson plans and assessment, among other resources, to interested teachers at their convenience via their computers. The focus of this study is whether one particular online resource website, PE Central, is providing more than just resource files to interested teachers. In other words, does it rise to the level of providing teachers with sanctioned PE-specific training that leads to positive changes in learner outcomes and accomplishes school, district, and state goals? Indeed, the existence of PE Central and other such online resource sites is a direct result of PE-specific PD needs having been overlooked. Inspired solely by the notable popularity of this site, we conceived and conducted this study independent of any incentives provided by PE Central.Unfortunately, the unique content and pedagogical needs of physical educators are often overlooked in traditional PD activities offered in school- or district-based teacher in-service trainings that are primarily designed for classroom teachers (Armour & Yelling, 2004). Thus, Bechtel and O'Sullivan (2006) understandably called for more physical education (PE)-specific PD for public school PE teachers. The intent of such PE-specific PD is to promote positive, ongoing teacher change by PE teachers setting personal goals to implement information from training sessions and improve their professional practice (Bechtel & O'Sullivan, 2006). However, the shift from PD to positive teacher change, even for classroom teachers, is not ensured. Rather, positive teacher change is often a voluntary and disjointed process in which teachers can ignore or adopt training as they see fit (Bechtel & O'Sullivan, 2006). Further, we argue that positive teacher change, although laudable, is a necessary but insufficient indicator of the efficacy of PD activities (sanctioned or otherwise). Unless PD also results in positive changes in student learning, achievement, and attitudes, then clearly it falls short in its ultimate purpose. In an attempt to understand these relationships better, Guskey (1986, 2002) proposed that a successful transference is a process that follows a predictable ordering that links (a) PD in-service training to (b) positive teacher change and subsequently to (c) improvements in learner outcomes.Linking Professional Development to Teacher Change and Learner ImprovementsGuskey (1986, 2002) described a four-stage model of teacherchange processes (see Figure 1), positing that ideas from PD (Stage 1) must first be implemented on a provisional basis (Stage 2) so that their value can be evidenced by increased student engagement and achievement (Stage 3), leading ultimately to permanent change in teacher attitudes, beliefs, and practices (Stage 4). …