The value of Primary physical education (PE) has been a ‘hot topic’ for decades, as the subject has become awash, within the UK context, with government interest, policy and funding. Significantly, Primary PE has received investment in excess of £2.5 billion, in the form of the Primary PE and Sport Premium, since London hosted the 2012 Olympics and Paralympics (Allen et al., 2023). Without question, PE has become the most additionally funded subject in the primary curriculum, yet still remains undervalued in many schools.

In this blog post we draw on our study with 44 Primary head teachers to understand their beliefs about PE in their school. Despite head teachers playing an important role in curriculum decision-making, there exists a paucity of research about their views on the curriculum, particularly regarding PE. In a review of 95 qualitative studies published between 2000–2017, Ní Chróinín et al. (2019) recognised a lack of representation of school leaders and policymakers on the purposes of PE. Their conclusions highlighted the need to further examine the perspectives of head teachers, as underrepresented stakeholders, in order to shape Primary PE’s future.

From our research, head teachers explained that Primary PE has become an increasingly complex landscape to lead in schools. The subject attracts multiple stakeholders from within and outside of education, notably with conflicting and competing messages from health and sport. Consequently, head teachers said they found themselves navigating through a ‘maze of policy and initiatives’ while managing wider educational changes and increased accountability. The head teachers we spoke to shared that they were having to make difficult decisions to raise the standards in other priority subjects (identified as maths and English), while still showing value for money.

Over two-thirds of head teachers involved in the study agreed that national policy, including the PE and Sport Premium and the Obesity Strategy, influenced how and what is taught in their school. Participants drew a direct connection between fitness and stamina, and the development of health and wellbeing, which they described as the main purpose of Primary PE. These reflections go some way towards explaining an increase of intervention-based approaches, such as the Daily Mile, to address concerns about health and the prevalence of outsourcing the teaching of PE to sports coaches.

Head teachers also explained how poor preparation to teach Primary PE during initial teacher training (ITT) has led to low staff efficacy. While it is easy to point the finger at the damage caused by poorly conceived policy and outsourcing, the findings of this investigation also draw attention to the inadequacies of teacher training over the years and the role ITT has played in exposing PE to an external market. Many of the head teachers felt their own ITT experience did little to prepare them for teaching. One participant stated that most teachers are not equipped to teach PE ‘unless they have a background in some sort of physical activities themselves’. Another head teacher described an occasion during their ITT when they delivered what they felt was ‘a bog standard’ lesson. The participant said it ‘wasn’t a brilliant lesson by any stretch of the imagination, but because the lesson was well managed, and the children were active and under control, it was deemed a success’.

‘Head teachers are caught in a policy trap, navigating complex neoliberal agendas in Primary PE alongside the inadequacies of pre- and in-service teacher training.’

Our thoughts concluding from this research have led us to understand that head teachers are caught in a policy trap, navigating complex neoliberal agendas in Primary PE alongside the inadequacies of pre- and in-service teacher training. We support previous calls to grow the profession’s understanding of how head teachers ‘interpret, read, or perceive the subject [PE]’ (George & Curtner-Smith, 2017) and in the absence of clear policy direction, training and development for head teachers is essential. Funding and policy alone will not be a solution to raising Primary PE’s value if senior leaders in school are not heard or supported.

References

Allen, J., Quarmby, T., & Dillon, M. (2023). ‘To a certain extent it is a business decision’: Exploring external providers’ perspectives of delivering outsourced primary school physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2023.2264319

George, M. L., & Curtner-Smith M. D. (2017). School principals’ perceptions of and expectations for physical education. The Physical Educator, 74(3), 383–404. https://doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7354

Ní Chróinín, D., Fletcher, T., Jess, M., & Corr, M. (2020). A major review of stakeholder perspectives on the purposes of primary physical education. European Physical Education Review, 26(2), 322–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X19856381