Reconceptualizing Physical Education to Enhance Student Motivation: Overcoming Teacher, Institutional, & Student Barriers

Abstract 

The health and well-being of young people continues to be a growing concern for parents and educators across the country. Sedentary behavior and mental health issues are rising steadily in Canada. Physical education programs aim to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to lead healthy, active lives; however, there continues to be contentious discussion regarding physical education curriculum across Canada, and the low priority of the subject in many schools. Traditional sport-based models within physical education are generating concern regarding the ability of these programs to enhance students’ health and well-being adequately.  With a shift toward wellness education across Canada, there is a need to reconceptualize the teaching and learning processes of physical education. In this critical exploration paper, the Quality Daily Physical Education program outlined by Physical and Health Education Canada will be explored, including the components and benefits that define the program. Teacher, institutional, and student-related barriers toward implementation are discussed, along with notions to overcome the barriers. The significance of the findings in the literature supports the need for action-based research to help physical educators improve the quality of physical education for all students. 

Keywords: physical education, wellness, traditional sport-based, Quality Daily Physical Education, Motivation 

Introduction 

There continues to be a growing concern for the health and well-being of youth in Canada today. The Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP) 24-hour movement guidelines recommend that youth accumulate 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous daily physical activity (2021). Moreover, sedentary behavior, including screen time and extended periods of sitting, should be limited to no more than two hours per day. In addition to improving the physical functions of the human body and preventing many diseases, it is well-documented that regular physical activity significantly improves cognitive and affective functions, enhancing mental health, quality of life, and overall well-being (World Health Organization [WHO], 2022).  However, given these benefits and guidelines, the WHO reports that more than 80% of the world's adolescent population is insufficiently physically active (2022). In Canada, only 43.9% of youth meet the physical activity target recommended by CSEP (Government of Canada, 2021). Moreover, mental health concerns are rising steadily, with increases in youth hospitalizations, medications, and mental health disorders (Canadian Institute for Health Information, 2022). The results include negative outcomes on health systems, the environment, economic development, and community well-being (WHO, 2022). The data can be attributed to the increased use of technology, changing cultural values, transport patterns, and shifts in attitudes, values, and family structure. 

Many physical education programs in Canada aim to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to live healthy, active lifestyles. However, for several years, there has been a contentious discussion regarding physical education curriculum, programming, and the resulting outcome. Traditional programming, including sport-based and multi-activity curriculum models, has rightly generated concern (Ennis, 2014). Unfortunately, physical education has often been viewed as simply organized physical activities that are low-status or unimportant (Fitzpatrick, 2022). Scholars continue to debate whether the current curriculum models are achieving the desired outcome of teaching students how to lead healthy lives. Chen (2022) explains that the models focus primarily on the physical capacity, fitness, and sports performance of students, neglecting the cognitive and affective aspects of physical education. Perhaps now more than ever, the most vital needs of our students are no longer being met; many students are unable to connect to the curriculum and become unmotivated and discouraged from participating in the lessons that are planned for them. Consequently, physical education programs are deteriorating, losing relevance, meaning, and value (Chen & Garn, 2018). 

There are many organizations, global and local, such as the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and Physical and Health Education (PHE) Canada, describing and advocating for curriculum reform and reconceptualization to provide quality physical education programs; nonetheless, there is a lack of influence on physical education programming in schools. Traditional programming, which is often a multi-activity-based approach, is prevalent in most primary and secondary physical education classes. UNESCO speaks to quality physical education as a global issue, promoting and highlighting key components. 

Quality physical education (QPE) is distinct from physical education. The main differences relate to frequency, variety, inclusivity, and value content. Quality physical education is about peer-led learning and rounded skill development, which can enhance educational and employability outcomes. It is also about whole body health, which includes physical and psycho-social well-being. QPE supports students in developing the physical, social, and emotional skills that define healthy, resilient, and socially responsible citizens (2015, What is QPE, para 1 & 2). 

The distinction presented above speaks to the value of content and recognition of the whole body. More recently, the term ‘wellness’ has been used to describe the physical, social, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual dimensions that constitute health. In Alberta, Canada, there is progress toward new curriculum documents, shifting from physical education and health to wellness education. Within the new structure, it is important to note that physical activity remains one of the priorities, in addition to healthy eating and psychosocial well-being (Government of Alberta, 2009). Therefore, preservice and in-service physical educators must reconceptualize how they approach teaching physical education in a wellness-oriented curriculum. 

In this paper, a critical literature review on physical education programming is shared, and suggestions on how physical educators can implement quality physical education are offered. In this review, there is a focus on physical activity; however, it is acknowledged that the physical dimension is only one component that contributes to the overall health and wellness of students. Pedagogical strategies related to traditional programming will be compared to alternative models of instruction. Specifically, the Quality Daily Physical Education (QDPE) program, outlined by PHE Canada, will be examined to understand the critical difference between the models of instruction. Most importantly, a closer look at the barriers to implementing QPE programs, including teacher, institutional, and student-related barriers, will be examined along with notions regarding change to provide insight for future research and initiate changes to foster motivation and participation among the students. 

​

A Shift Toward Wellness Education 

The current physical education curriculum in Alberta, Canada, has been in place since 2000, however, a new PE and Wellness curriculum for K-6 and 7-10 is being piloted at present.  Separate from the health and life skills curriculum, the physical education program of studies focuses on participation in physical activity as a critical part of leading a healthy, active lifestyle. Although the program's rationale and philosophy place physical activity within a broader understanding of total fitness and well-being, including emotional, mental, and social health, each aspect highlights the role of physical activity. For example, under the Benefits of Health general learning outcome, self-confidence, and self-esteem (aspects related to mental health), the program states, “Physical activity can instill a strong sense of self-worth in students. They can become more confident, assertive, and independent” (Government of Alberta, 2000).  

In 2009, the Government of Alberta published the framework for the new K-12 wellness curriculum that aims to combine the physical and health education curricula. The vision features the definition of wellness and its emphasis on balance between the physical, mental, social, and emotional dimensions. Within the framework, it must be noted that physical activity remains one of the priority outcomes in addition to healthy eating and psychosocial well-being. 

As physical educators, understanding this shift toward a wellness-oriented curriculum is essential as we reconceptualize our pedagogical strategies moving forward. While physical activity remains a priority outcome, it is imperative that current practices are reconsidered, and lessons are taught in a manner that truly allows the student's whole self to flourish.  

The Importance of Motivation 

The study of motivation has increasingly been applied to the field of physical education over the past number of years (Fernández-Espínola et al., 2020). Understanding the processes that empower students to perceive physical education as a valuable learning experience is an extremely important part of achieving curricular outcomes (de Bruijn, Mombarg, Timmermans, 2022). 

The Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 2000) is a commonly used theory to study student behavior about motivation (Pereira et al., 2021; Sulz et al., 2020; Van den Berghe et al., 2014). “SDT is a broad framework for understanding factors that facilitate or undermine intrinsic motivation, autonomous extrinsic motivation, and psychological wellness, all issues of direct relevance to educational settings” (Ryan & Deci, 2020, p. 1). Emphasis is placed on aspects of intrinsic and autonomous motivation to foster learning and growth. The application of this theory related to the physical education curriculum will support teachers and other stakeholders in implementing effective pedagogical practices to increase the intrinsic motivation of students, providing students with the tools they need to be active for health and enhance their well-being. 

The framework describes three essential psychological needs that create the foundation for healthy development to occur: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000).  There is a valuable connection between these psychological needs and understanding students as relational and becoming, rather than objective. In a physical education setting, students are more likely to experience intrinsic and autonomous forms of motivation if they feel the ability to take control of their actions (autonomy), feel successful in the proficiency of the skills being learned (competence), and feel connected and accepted (relatedness). These basic psychological needs should be supported by the teacher and can be developed by providing opportunities for students to engage in activities of interest and value, implementing appropriate tasks offering constructive, positive feedback, and creating a safe and caring learning environment where students belong. Understanding the psychological needs that increase students' intrinsic motivation informs the effectiveness of physical education programs and demonstrates the need to reassess the curriculum models being used. 

Many studies have presented positive findings related to physical education programs that address the psychological needs outlined above. Reeves (2012) explains that students who find physical education enjoyable and are motivated to participate will engage with more effort, resulting in the development of new skills. In turn, greater perceived competence in their skill ability supports participation in physical activities (Estevan, 2021; Taylor et al., 2010). Van den Berghe et al. (2014) report that autonomously motivated individuals are more likely to participate in physical activity outside of the school setting, during leisure time. For many years, studies have shown the impact and importance of motivation. More recently, Peiro-Velert et al. (2022) reported the complexity of motivational factors toward physical activity. Although a complex issue, it was reinforced through the findings that highly motivated students demonstrated a perception of psychological needs. These findings align with addressing motivation in the reconceptualization of physical education; preparing students to engage in meaningful physical activity throughout their lives continues to be the goal of many physical education and wellness curricula.   

​​​​

Traditional Physical Education Programming 

Sports and gameplay have dominated physical education programming for decades (Chen, 2022). In 1999, Ennis outlined the characteristics of traditional sport-based, multiactivity curriculum models, including: 

Short units of activity with minimal instructional periods, weak or non-existent educational sequences across lessons/units, little or no accountability for using skills strategically in gameplay, little or no instruction or coaching supervision of gameplay, few if any policies to equalize playing opportunities for low-skilled players, required public displays of playing ability, and class control exercised by central authority figure(s), minimizing student ownership and leadership opportunities in large classes and constraining learning (p. 32). 

In many cases, emphasis is placed on the physical aspect, focusing on performance in mainstream sports and cultivating a competitive environment. Males particularly dominate play and are rewarded socially for aggressive behavior (Ennis, 1999). Ennis (1999) acknowledges the success of these curricular models for highly skilled and motivated individuals. This acknowledgment is necessary, as students who have developed the required skills and who find enjoyment in sports outside of the school setting appreciate this traditional model of instruction. However, in these traditional models, “less skilled students report being demotivated, marginalized, and often relegated to the sidelines” (Ennis, 2014, p. 6). This greater focus on skill impacts students' perceived competence, resulting in the psychological need for perceived competence having a more significant effect on motivation (Chen & Ennis, 2004).  Consequently, less-skilled students' motivation is negatively affected. Ultimately, there is little correlation between sport and simple game play in PE classes​,​ impacting students’ desire to be active for life.   

Thorjussen (2021) reports that the social aspects of physical education in traditional programs “lead to the exclusion and marginalization of some students because of their gender, sexuality, ethnicity, race, religion, social class, and/or ability” (p. 385). A sport-based model of instruction leads to specific individuals mattering more than others, often white, male, heterosexual, and able-bodied, contributing to the dominant discourse and hierarchical notions of capitalism. The inequality that exists and is perpetuated through traditional PE programs is unacceptable.   

Research has been conducted to compare traditional PE programming to newer, alternative models of physical education. For example, in a study conducted by Wallhead, Garn, and Vidoni (2014), there was minimal enjoyment in the multiactivity model as compared to other models, such as sports education. In the multiactivity model, students' psychological needs were devalued, therefore limiting students' motivation and enjoyment (Wallhead, Garn, Vidoni, 2014).   

The research and discussion concerning traditional physical education programs support the need for change within the existing structure; more attention must be placed on the educational components of physical education. Analyzing teaching and learning practices is essential to ensure every student is allowed to develop the knowledge, skills, and positive attitudes necessary to lead healthy, active lifestyles.  

Quality Daily Physical Education 

The QDPE program, launched in 1986 by the Canadian Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance (CAPHERD), currently known as Physical and Health Education (PHE) Canada, is a well-grounded program initiative to support the reform of physical education programs and promote motivation. Although this program is being highlighted, many curriculum models draw on the components of QDPE with effective teaching practices and promote learning (Solomon & Garn, 2014).  

The guiding principles of the QDPE program address student needs and attend to pedagogical strategies. QDPE is a well-planned, inclusive program that provides opportunities for all students to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to lead healthy lives now and in the future (PHE Canada, 2022). Margaret Whitehead's concept of physical literacy is fundamental in a QDPE program, developing the motivation, confidence, and competence to engage in physical activity throughout the life course (2001). Motivation is a key pillar of physical literacy that supports the connection between QDPE and the psychological needs outlined in the SDT. Nine key pedagogical strategies are outlined for educators to foster physical literacy using the acronym “EDUCATION”: enjoyment, diverse forms of activity, understanding, character, ability, totality, imagination, ongoing, and nurturing (PHE Canada, 2022). 

In addition to the pedagogical practices, PHE Canada further outlines components for a successful program. Daily instructional time for a minimum of thirty minutes taught by qualified physical education specialists is essential for a QDPE program. Well-planned, developmentally appropriate lessons incorporating a wide variety of activities, strong assessment practices, and prioritizing engaged participation and enjoyment from students are also key elements. The characteristics of this alternative approach to physical education are distinct from traditional programming as they focus on multiple dimensions of health, directly and indirectly, compared to a traditional, competitive PE learning environment. 

Benefits of a Quality Daily Physical Education Program 

Studying the literature for the benefits of QDPE can demonstrate the value and effectiveness of advocating and implementing these programs. The immediate benefits of physical activity are well known. QDPE intends for students to receive the benefits of engaging in moderate to vigorous physical activity in addition to the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that set them up for success in leading a healthy life in the future in all domains.  

There is minimal literature that refers directly to the QDPE program outlined by PHE Canada; however, scholars have identified the benefits of programs that implement some of the components described above. For example, with increased instructional time and qualified instructors, students demonstrated enhanced skill development, performing better on movement tasks, including motor skills and fitness tests, and overall better physiological outcomes ​​ (Marshall & Bouffard, 1997; McKenzie et al., 1995; McKenzie et al., 1998). More specifically, it appears to facilitate the development of movement competencies in children with lower movement competencies, demonstrating the importance of inclusivity in QDPE programs (Marshall & Bouffard, 1997). Bungum et al. further highlight the benefits by commenting on the role that QDPE can play in offering developmentally appropriate activities, increasing student motivation and self-efficacy (2000). Nesbitt (2021) highlights the benefits of providing students with a choice of content, leading to higher participation, increased motivation, and enjoyment. Together, increased enjoyment and skill competence also lead to students participating in more physical activity during leisure time (Dale et al., 2000).  

Overcoming Quality Daily Physical Education Instructional Barriers 

For all physical educators who are passionate about initiating change in schools, it is imperative to consider the barriers and limitations impacting program implementation and delivery. Barriers range from teacher-, institutional-, and student-related. The following section reviews the barriers that exist and strategies that may be used to overcome them. 

Teacher-Related Barriers.  

PHE Canada (2022) highlights the importance of hiring qualified physical education specialists to deliver QDPE programs. In many cases, especially in elementary schools, generalist teachers are responsible for teaching physical education classes but often lack the expertise and experience required. Physical literacy, a key concept of QDPE programs, is challenging to operationalize (Stoddart & Humbert, 2021). Physical literacy is much more than engaging in movement skills; teachers must have a comprehensive understanding of the term to support development in all domains: psychomotor, cognitive, and affective. Physical education specialists feel more confident and prepared with the necessary pedagogical strategies to develop physically literate students (Mandigo, 2010) and overcome barriers related to implementing quality physical education (Truelove et al., 2021). As a result, students are more likely to receive inclusive and developmentally appropriate programming. Furthermore, students engage in more moderate to vigorous physical activity when being taught by a specialist who understands the necessity to teach the ‘whole child’ (MacKenzie et al., 1995). 

Teachers' perceptions and the widespread narrative of physical education as a physical activity ‘arena’ also present barriers to QDPE implementation. Stoddart and Humbert (2021) found that teachers require more practical information to understand the unique relationship between physical literacy and physical education. Many teachers, parents, and administrators perceive quality physical education simplistically; students are being active and having fun. In addition, traditional, sport-based, technocratic approaches to delivering physical education are still present. William and Pill’s (2019) main findings reveal teachers relying on individual and social habitus, resulting in taken-for-granted approaches. Teachers with passion and enthusiasm toward sports participation are safeguarding these techniques to meet the demands of their program and preventing the acceptance of new theories and ideas. Individual philosophies and practical knowledge are favored over theory. Teachers believe working on sport-specific skills is equivalent to building fundamental movement skills and equates to a quality physical education program. There is a lack of deep understanding about physical literacy and, therefore, quality physical education literature. Furthermore, when allowed to attend professional development (PD) sessions at PE conferences or special PD days, Physical Education teachers are often only provided with “new” games or physical activities to insert into their current PE program.  Research-based frameworks are being ignored, and communities of practice are influenced by social habitus instead of rigorous notions of QDPE programs. 

Overcoming Teacher-Related Barriers.  

Although QDPE components are identified, there are limited guidelines on pedagogical practice.  Teachers are encouraged to understand the model they are implementing and consider how the approach meets the holistic needs of a QDPE program, enhancing all domains of learning, which are psychomotor, cognitive, and affective. Sport-based approaches (SBA) relate to sports literacy to provide students with sports experiences, so they become motivated, confident, and competent to engage in sports (Scott, 2019). Although the SBA may be showcased as a meaningful sports experience, often a passive, non-engaging activity is occurring, especially for students with less skill competence. Furthermore, the model may promote and contribute to a competitive culture that results in some students feeling uncomfortable, disengaged, and, therefore, refraining from participation. Teachers are encouraged to consider a movement-based approach (MBA) that focuses on physical literacy, applying movement skills across a range of activities to improve their physical, cognitive, and social development. The Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model has been described as an effective instructional model that aligns with physical literacy principles (Doozan & Bae, 2016). The model, which was introduced by Bunker and Thorpe (1982), involves a thematic approach to games that allows students to transfer and apply skills to a variety of activities.   

In addition to strategically implementing an effective teaching model, the role of mentorship is another area to overcome teacher-related barriers and improve QDPE implementation. McCluney et al. (2018) describe the benefits of mentoring, including more positive attitudes, higher motivation, and greater job satisfaction. Mentoring often begins during a student teaching experience; however, mentors can provide valuable relationships to proteges as they begin their professional careers. Understanding the variety of roles that mentors can serve will support new physical educators and, therefore, positively contribute to physical education in the future. These roles include: patron, coach, protector, challenger, and opportunity creator.  Four psychosocial roles that mentors can also serve include: friend, role model, counselor, and acceptor. All of these roles demonstrate how mentors can provide opportunities for beginning physical education teachers (McCluney et al., 2018).  

Preservice teachers must be assigned a qualified physical educator as their mentor who is delivering a QDPE program. Preservice teachers will be able to observe well-planned lessons and diverse assessment practices that enhance physical literacy principles, further making connections to the content in their teacher education program. In addition to school mentors, PHE Canada also offers a mentorship program where preservice teachers in the field can connect with distinguished national members to enhance learning and promote QDPE components in their practice (PHE, 2022). This requires partnerships and collaboration with post-secondary institutions, national organizations, and school boards. Teacher-related barriers prevail; governments and school boards can reduce barriers by implementing minimum policy standards mandating specialized physical education teachers and continued professional development opportunities to enhance teachers’ knowledge regarding QDPE components, specifically physical literacy (Jauregui et al., 2020).  

 ​​Institutional-Related Barriers.  

Instructional time is a key component of PHE Canada’s (2022) QDPE initiative, daily curricular instruction for all students for a minimum of 30 minutes. Institutional barriers exist, presenting challenges to providing students with daily physical education. It is difficult for anyone to argue the importance of physical activity and health for all Canadian youth; however, reading literacy and numeracy seem to hold unparalleled value in the education system (Ennis, 2006). The demand placed on increasing standardized testing and core curriculum time negatively impacts physical education, with less time being allocated to the subject (Kohl & Cook, 2013). Provinces across Canada also have daily initiatives that differ based on grade level, intensity, number of minutes, and distribution (Olstad et al., 2015). In many cases, school boards and authorities are responsible for monitoring the implementation of the programs. However, statistics show that only 33% of K-8 students in Canadian schools are receiving 150 minutes of physical education per week (ParticipACTION, 2018). The low percentage of students receiving 150 minutes of physical education demonstrates the shortfall in many of these initiatives. Institutional barriers will vary depending on the school; however, insufficient facilities and equipment and, more importantly, a lack of time designated in teachers' and students’ schedules for physical education may be identified through action research. Decreased instructional time makes it difficult for teachers to engage in meaningful learning opportunities with students, in addition to less time participating in moderate to vigorous physical activity. 

Overcoming Institutional-Related Barriers.  

To develop healthy habits and meet the aim of QDPE programs, frequent and positive physical education experiences are essential (Ries, 2020). Support from school administrators to be creative with schedule building and recognize the benefits that physical education offers each student is critical. Physical educators must continue to advocate for and display the value their programs have to offer. Assessment is one component of QDPE programs requiring attention.  There is an important discussion emphasizing the role quality assessment can play in increasing the perceived value of physical education (Sundaresan et al., 2017). There is a distinct difference between the high-stakes assessment for core subjects and assessment practices in physical education; quality physical education assessment practices are often ignored. Physical Education curricular outcomes outline a comprehensive, skill-based curriculum (Government of Alberta, 2022). A grade for physical education is often assigned with limited or low-quality evidence, which threatens credibility and may contribute to reduced instructional time.  McAfee et al. (2016) draw attention to the purposes of assessment, monitoring development, guiding planning and decision-making, and reporting to stakeholders. Formative and summative assessments should be part of QDPE programs, with clearly defined criteria and standards that students are aware of. These standards must address students’ ability to learn and perform fundamental movement skills, but also address the cognitive domain of learning and place an equally important value on affective aspects of learning within a quality PE program as well. Physical educators must explore and implement assessment strategies in all domains of learning. In addition to supporting student learning, assessment serves as vital communication to stakeholders about progress.   

Student-Related Barriers.  

Motivation is a key factor affecting students' desire to improve their skill competence, increase their physical activity intensity, and choose to engage in healthy lifestyle choices beyond grade 12. Participation and engagement in physical activity contribute to preventing and managing diseases in addition to reducing depression and anxiety (WHO, 2022). Sedentary time is increasing as students are spending less time engaged in movement activities and more time on their phones and personal electronic devices. Physical education classes should offer students opportunities to participate fully and enjoy meaningful activities while developing the knowledge and skills to live an active, healthy lifestyle after graduation.  

Overcoming Student-Related Barriers.  

The components QDPE has to offer serve to overcome the student-related barriers of motivation. There are several reasons why students may be unmotivated, including a competitive culture or a previous negative physical education experience. Physical educators have a unique responsibility to support students' desire and motivation to lead healthy, active lives. Fostering a positive motivational climate is an essential component of increasing meaningful participation (Pereira et al., 2021). Students must be intrinsically motivated; they participate because it is important to them, and they understand the value of being active. Skill development and competence alone are insufficient to increase lifelong activity. Pereira et al. (2021) highlight insightful strategies to overcome challenges with unmotivated and extrinsically motivated students. Goal setting, increasing success, listening to student narratives, and providing leadership opportunities are some strategies to support physical educators in providing QDPE.  Each student brings different experiences that can positively contribute to their success when they are acknowledged. Paying attention to intrinsic motivation supports student-centered learning environments and attends to QDPE’s goal of inclusivity.   

Conclusion 

The health and well-being of today’s generation of youth continues to be a concern for professionals in the fields of Physical Education and Health Education. Physical educators have a unique opportunity to change the narrative of physical education and implement quality experiences for all students. Many scholars are invested in the reconceptualization of physical education. Through the literature, it is understood that student motivation is an underlying component related to a quality physical education experience. Although traditional, sport-focused models may be favorable for highly skilled and motivated students, they do not meet the needs and consider the experiences of all students. QDPE, outlined by PHE Canada, is a credible program that focuses on pedagogical strategies to promote participation and motivation in all students. The framework provides support for enhancing the physical activity dimension of wellness. The field requires more support in implementing QDPE components to be able to explore the benefits.   

Action-based research is imperative to address the teacher, student, and institutional barriers. This type of research will allow site-specific growth and encourage reflection about the school community. Students, parents, administrators, and governments must begin to recognize the extensive benefits physical education can provide, which are far beyond just having fun and participating in activities. The “education” part is truly what physical education is about: providing students with opportunities to develop knowledge, skills, and attitudes to lead healthy lives beyond grade 12.                                       

References 

• Aoki, T. (1986). Teaching as indwelling between two curriculum worlds. In W. Pinar & R. Irwin (Eds., 2005), Curriculum in a new key: The collected works of Ted T. Aoki (pp. 159-165). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 
• Aoki, T. (2005). Curriculum in a new key: The collected works of Ted T. Aoki. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 
• Bungum, T., Dowda, M., Weston, A., Trost, S. G., & Pate, R. R. (2000). Correlates of physical activity in male and female youth. Pediatric Exercise Science, 12(1), 71-79. https://doi.org/10.1123/pes.12.1.71 
• Bunker, D., & Thorpe, R. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. 
• Bulletin of Physical Education, 18(1), 5-8. 
• Canadian Institute of Health Information. (2022). Children and youth mental health in Canada. https://www.cihi.ca/en/children-and-youth-mental-health-in-canada 
• Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology. (2021). Canadian 24-hour movement guidelines for the children and youth (5-17 years): An integration of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and sleep. https://csepguidelines.ca/guidelines/children-youth/ 
• Chen, A., & Ennis, C. D. (2004). Goals, interests, and learning in physical education. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(6), 329-338. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.97.6.329-339 
• Chen, S., & Garn, A. (2018). Student learning in physical education through the lens of a “curriculum specialist.” Kinesiology Review, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.1123/kr.2018-0017 
• Dale, D., Corbin, C. B., & Dale, K. (2000). Restricting opportunities to be active during school time: Do children compensate by increasing physical activity levels after school? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71(3), 240-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2000.10608904 
• Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘What’ and ‘Why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 
• de Bruijn A.G.M., Mombarg, R., & Timmermans, A.C. (2022). The importance of satisfying children’s basic psychological needs in primary school physical education for PE motivation and its relations with fundamental motor and PE-related skills. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 27(4), 422-439. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2021.1906217 
• Doozan, A., & Bae, M. (2016). Teaching physical literacy to promote healthy lives: TGfU and Related Approaches. Physical Educator, 73(3), 471-487. https://doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2016-V73-I3-6364 
• Ennis, C.D. (1999). Creating a culturally relevant curriculum for disengaged girls. Sport, Education, and Society, 4(1), 31-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357332990040103 
• Ennis, C. D. (2006). Curriculum: Forming and reshaping the vision of physical education in a high-need, low-demand world of schools. Quest, 58(1), 41-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2006.10491871 
• Ennis, C. D.  (2014). What goes around comes around...or does it?  Disrupting the cycle of traditional, sport-based physical education. Kinesiology Review, 3(1), 63-70. https://doi.org/10.1123/kr.2014-0039