Abstract
In 2008, the Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training implemented a new circular with directives for water activities in schools and with a call for testing teachers’ water competence. This circular seems to align with international school safety policies, where additional regulations and safety guidelines are put into practice in school programs such as physical education. Despite this, studies that have applied a critical discourse perspective on regulative texts in physical education seem scarce. The purpose of this article is to examine how teachers’ risk and safety management in physical education is constructed in five regulative documents governing primary and secondary schools in Norway. Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse methodology has been applied to conduct a linguistic and contextual analysis of language. The analysis seems to reveal a discourse that challenge teachers’ autonomy and position. Because the discourse can appear to be neutral and imperative, it might be taken for granted in the field. The entrancement of a controller in examining teachers’ water competence seems to reflect ideals of revision and central control. This article therefore contributes to the understanding of regulative discourses and their power, in education and physical education.
Highlights
Schools and teachers have a special obligation and mandate to prevent injuries and harm to students but sometimes fail
There might be good reasons for their implementation, because inadequate risk assessment has been related to the death of students in Australia, for example (Dallat, Salmon, & Goode, 2015)
An emerging regulative discourse of teachers’ risk and safety management Looking at international physical education (PE) policy, it seems plausible that accidents would impose more regulation.This practice seems legitimate if it was shown to be an effective method in preventing or reducing student injuries
Summary
Schools and teachers have a special obligation and mandate to prevent injuries and harm to students but sometimes fail. There are signs of an established practice of enforcing increased regulation following accidents, injuries, and deaths of students in schools. There might be good reasons for their implementation, because inadequate risk assessment has been related to the death of students in Australia, for example (Dallat, Salmon, & Goode, 2015). A current range of new requirements has Citation: L. «The reconstruction of physical education teachers: A critical discourse analysis of regulative texts». Journal for Research in Arts and Sports Education,Vol 4(1), 2020, pp.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
