European Physical
Education Review
http://epe.sagepub.com/
University students' conceptions of an excellent physical education teacher in
China
Lihua Song and Junjun Chen
European Physical Education Review 2013 19: 110 originally published online 6 December 2012
DOI: 10.1177/1356336X12465512
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://epe.sagepub.com/content/19/1/110
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
North West Counties Physical Education Association
Additional services and information for European Physical Education Review can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://epe.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://epe.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://epe.sagepub.com/content/19/1/110.refs.html
>> Version of Record - Feb 21, 2013
OnlineFirst Version of Record - Dec 6, 2012
What is This?
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Article
University students’
conceptions of an
excellent physical
education teacher in
China
European Physical Education Review
19(1) 110–126
ª The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1356336X12465512
epe.sagepub.com
Lihua Song
Jilin Normal University, China
Junjun Chen
The Hong Kong Institute of Education, China
Abstract
This study investigated how university students perceive an excellent physical education (PE)
teacher at the university level. A sample of 2000 university students at four universities in China
responded to a 53-item questionnaire. A 6-factor, 28-item model of an excellent teacher in PE
was subsequently generated with a statistical good fit, using exploratory factor analysis and
confirmatory factor analysis. The model included two traditional Chinese concepts, best defined
as ‘Caring For Students’ and ‘Being Responsible.’ The other four concepts were: ‘Being A Subject
Expert, Being Student-Focused, Prompting Students’ All-Around Growth’ and ‘Being A Lifelong
Learner.’ Multivariate analysis of variance showed that students’ grade level and major contributed to statistically-significant differences in their conceptualisation of excellent PE teaching.
Study findings were compared with those in other relevant literature.
Keywords
Chinese education, physical education, student expectations, questionnaire, PE instructors,
teaching excellence, college students, student grades, student major
Corresponding author:
Junjun Chen, Department of Education Policy and Leadership, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, 10 Lo Ping Road, Tai
Po, NT, Hong Kong, China.
Email: [email protected]
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Song and Chen
111
Introduction
Research on teacher effectiveness conducted in Western countries has provided a wealth of
information; however, the majority of this research concentrated on more traditional core subjects
such as mathematics, science and language arts. There are relatively few studies in the area of
physical education (PE), especially considering China within the Eastern countries. Consequently,
there is a lack of knowledge of what constitutes excellent PE teaching and how this supports
student progress and learning in the PE classrooms at the university level in China.
Chen (2010) reports that 67.0% of Chinese teenagers do not participate in any physical exercise;
one reason cited was the lack of interest in physical exercise. More specifically for university
students, a 50-university survey in China shows that many university students seldom perform
additional exercise after their compulsory PE courses. Some of them would prefer to be spectators
at sporting competitions, rather than participants, because they lack guidance and encouragement
from university PE teachers. This resulted in the fitness of university students declining dramatically in recent years, with female university students being the most affected (Chen, 2010).
To address the lack of physical activity and apparently sedentary lifestyles led by some young
people, there has been an increased coupling between the previously-separate disciplines of PE and
health, as measures of PE curriculum reform at the school and university level in China. These
reforms attempt to transform the current Chinese education into a more student-oriented, quality education (Su Zhi Jiao Yu) (Ding, 2001; Hughes and Yuan, 2005). Under this curriculum, the emphasis
in PE is shifting from distinguishing students who are highly capable in specific sport skills to a more
general focus, based on the contribution of PE to physical, mental and social health. University-level
PE teachers are expected to not only contribute to the proximal goals of students’ physical activity
and health during their university years, but also to contribute to the more desirable outcomes regarding how they elect to live a physically-active lifestyle (Hickey and Jin, 2007; Li and Li, 2010).
Therefore, PE curriculum reforms require that PE taken at the university level focus on increasing
the students’ interest in physical exercise, nurturing their lifelong habits of involvement (Wang et al.,
2008). A key to this fundamental curriculum change is the teachers themselves, the quality of their
teaching, and their specific teaching methods (Zhang and Collis, 1995). It is the teacher who translates
curriculum changes into their practice (Thorburn et al., 2011). Hence, what constitutes PE teaching and
excellent teaching should be changed. Before improving the quality of teaching and student intended
learning, as well as stimulating students’ interest in PE at the university level, it is important to
understand the nature of excellent teaching in PE. From a learner’s perspective, students who directly
witness the changes in teaching could offer some valuable recommendations about how to improve
learning, teaching, and schooling (Smith et al., 2005); therefore, the significance of listening to students’ voices in relation to their understanding of excellent teaching may be profound. This is also
consistent with the proposal for more research on ‘what makes for effective teaching of science in the
eyes of the pupil’ (Osborne et al., 2003: 1067). On the other hand, understanding excellent teaching is
more than understanding the basis for enhancing student learning and achievement (Rowe, 2004). It
can assist in designing teacher professional development programmes, in achieving the aims of various
reforms, and in developing teaching standards in PE (Betoret and Artiga, 2004).
PE in China
To address the needs of the curriculum changes and push the shift from ‘sports education’ into
‘health, sport and PE’ at Chinese universities, these universities adjusted the structure of their PE
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
112
European Physical Education Review 19(1)
Table 1. Course information in the university, in China.
Non-PE major
Times/week
Type of course
Course structure
Times/week
Type of course
Course structure
PE major
Y1/Y2
Y3/Y4
1
Compulsory
PE and theory
4–7
Compulsory
PE and theory
1
Optional
PE and theory
4–7
Compulsory
PE and theory
PE: physical education; Y: year.
curriculum; however, given that PE is compulsory in both schools and universities (for the first 2
years), this shift may perhaps best be explained by first describing the structure of education at
large, in China. China’s compulsory school education programme is comprised of primary school
(grades 1–6), middle school (grades 7–9) and high school (grades 10–12). During the 12 years of
compulsory school education, students must receive at least 2 hours of PE classes and spend at least
1 hour exercising per week. Student assessment at the end of each semester includes both performance of sports and attendance. Additionally, students at the end of each school level must pass
the ‘National Physical Culture Training Standards’ test (e.g. muscle flexibility, endurance and
motor skills) in order to enter the higher school level or the university (Guan, 2005).
Once a week, the universities in China run a 2-hour PE class, which is compulsory for all first
and second-year students who are not PE majors (see Table 1). Specialized PE courses are
available for these first and second year students. The universities provide the third and fourth year
students with elective PE courses, to encourage students to play sports on the basis of their interest,
so hopefully they continue that physical activity after their university lives. The courses may
include sports such as basketball, volleyball, soccer, track and field, martial arts, aerobics, swimming, skating, artistic gymnastics, table tennis, badminton and tennis, but the availability and
choice will vary between universities.
Along with the goal of having PE in the new curriculum, universities have included the theory
of PE as one of components of PE courses, so that students could learn to understand the benefits
and risks of participation in sports and physical activities, their impact on the body, and the
relationship between participation in physical activity and individual well-being. At the end of
each semester, across 4 years, courses on the theory of PE are now provided, such as: sports/physical activity training methods, sports/physical activity health, sports/physical activity injury
recovery, sports/physical activity competition rules, the value and function of sports/physical
activity, leisure sports/physical activity, the technical principles of sports/physical activity, and
individual and national well-being. These courses normally last for 2 hours. Student assessment
at the end of the semester includes performance of sports, the results of the theory of PE and attendance, but the percentages these are given differ between universities.
As for the students from the PE major, who may become a PE teacher at a certain educational
level, a trainer in a sports organisation, or a social worker in a health organisation, these have 4–7
specialised PE courses per week, from the first year to the fourth year. In each term within the first
2 years, the PE major must take compulsory courses such as basketball, volleyball, soccer, track
and field, martial arts and gymnastics. In the third year, PE majors have to take more specialized
PE courses, based on their planned area of expertise. For example, if they choose basketball, they
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Song and Chen
113
must take basketball and basketball-related courses in the third and fourth years. As with non-PE
majors, the courses on the theory of PE are provided across those four years.
In general, the courses provided at high schools and universities are similar; however,
because high school students need to pass the additional assessment to enter the university, PE
classes strongly focus on the development and boosting of motor skills (e.g. muscular
strength, endurance, cardiovascular fitness and flexibility), rather than health promotion and
well-being. Especially in the final year of high school, PE classes are the place where students
practice what they will be tested on in the ‘National Physical Culture Training Standards;’
while the university PE classes aim at introducing a variety of sports and physical activities,
developing student motor skills and encouraging habitual participation in regular physical
activity.
Those who will be PE teachers are trained at specialized ‘normal’ colleges or universities in
China. Primary school PE teachers are trained in these 3-year or 4-year normal colleges, middle
and high school PE teachers are trained at 4-year normal colleges and normal universities, and university PE teachers are trained at 4-year normal universities or at a higher level (Zhou, 2006). The
equivalent years of training at specialized PE institutes also applies to PE teachers, at each level.
Note that the ‘normal’ university in China is a particularly specialized university that trains
students to become teachers, including PE teachers, at different educational levels. In other countries, such an institute may be located within a regular university and may be called a Teachers’
College. PE teachers need to become specialised in at least one PE field and understand the other
fields as well, because they may be assigned to teach courses that are not within their main area of
expertise. PE teachers’ teaching loads range from 4–8 classes per week, at most universities. Each
university can develop a syllabus and choose textbooks and teaching materials, according to their
own situation.
Research on teacher effectiveness in PE, in the West
Influenced by the general teacher effectiveness literature, research in PE has focused on the
characteristics or qualities of successful PE teachers, the behaviours or instruction of successful PE
teachers, and their impact on student learning (Armour et al., 2012; Arrighi and Young, 1987;
Australian Government Preventative Health Taskforce (AGPHT), 2010; Beveridge et al., 1986;
National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE), 2004; Parker, 1995; Schempp,
1985; Silverman, 1991; Wallian and Chang, 2006).
Initially, studies in PE tended to examine the characteristics or qualities seen as essential for a
person to become an excellent PE teacher in schools, even though the characteristics are difficult to
define in a precise manner (Harris, 1999). Arrighi and Young (1987) found that the characteristics
of an excellent PE teacher in schools included dedication, enthusiasm, fairness, fitness and being
skillful. Baley and Field (1976) identified five general characteristics at the school level: health,
competency in a variety of sports, desire to serve others, an attractive personality and concern for
one’s appearance; however, in reality teachers always pay more attention to presenting knowledge
and nurturing their students in learning, rather than having a focus, as is suggested by Kottler and
Zehm (2000: 20), ‘being a teacher is a way of life.’ They claim that a teacher’s human dimensions
are important in being a schoolteacher: charisma, compassion, egalitarianism, a sense of humor,
together with additional desirable traits that give ‘all teachers, whether in the classroom, the sports
arena, or the home, their power as effective influencers’ (Kottler and Zehm, 2000: 2). Similarly,
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
114
European Physical Education Review 19(1)
Kottler et al. (2005) identified ‘being a teacher as a person’ as one of the essential characteristics of
excellent teachers in schools.
In the early 1990s, research on teacher effectiveness in PE focused on investigating the teaching
process in the classroom. Through an extensive review of PE effectiveness literature, Silverman
(1991) suggested nine successful practices for PE in schools, which comprised the planning for
class management and student learning, the anticipation of situations and contingency plans, the
awareness of individual student skill differences, the acquisition of information to plan, the
knowledge of a repertoire of teaching styles, the accuracy and focus of explanation and demonstration, the provision for adequate student practice time, the maximisation of appropriate student
practice and engagement, and the minimisation of waiting time for students.
The findings drawn from the above investigations seem to focus on what teachers do and how
teachers behave personally and professionally, but they ignore the impact of teaching excellence
on a school’s students: for example, how do students feel about the teaching and how does the
teaching affect student progress and outcomes (Hickson and Fishburne, 2004; Mawer, 1995).
Hickson and Fishburne (2002) confirm these results through working with pre-service and inservice teachers. Placek and Dodds (1988) studied pre-service teachers and found that excellent
PE teaching should offer enjoyment, motivation and interest to students.
Parker (1995) identified four categories of excellent teaching through studying 14 secondary
teachers: student success, teaching strategies, teacher-student interactions and evolution. Student
success mainly comprised skill development and improvement, student achievement and task completion. A study of an excellent PE teacher (Hickson and Fishburne, 2005) gives emphasis to student evaluation and teacher reflection at the primary school level. These include: determination of
needs, planning for student learning, selecting teaching methods, creating a positive and managed
environment, student engagement, lesson reflection and effective evaluation. The teacher’s role
has been discussed in the literature. For example, the Handbook of PE points out that the role
of the teacher is to encourage students to become a creative, rather than a reproducing/
replicating-type student (Wallian and Chang, 2006). Teachers provide support and allow student
decision-making to increase their sense of responsibility during the class. Students may engage
in the class more, because they have a greater voice in class decisions and events, and feel an
increased sense of belonging (Brock et al., 2009). Providing a supportive environment could meet
students’ individual needs (Hagger and Chatzisarantis, 2007). In addition, teachers are expected to
support student interactions, such as allowing students to develop teamwork and cooperation,
affording opportunities for students to develop small group discussions and social skills, and promote team affiliation (Jenkins and Alderman, 2011; MacPhail et al., 2004). On the other hand, it is
believed that the teachers themselves need to behave like a reflective practitioner, rather than a
manager (Wallian and Chang, 2006). More specifically, Armour et al. (2012) argues that PE teachers’ reflective practice is important for their professional learning.
Apart from focusing on the process-product effectiveness categories, the US national content
standards for PE propose six areas that are critical to the development of a physically-active lifestyle at the school level (NASPE, 2004). They comprise: developing motor skills, imparting the
knowledge needed for a physically-active lifestyle, encouraging regular participation in physical
activity, facilitating the development and maintenance of fitness, cultivating responsible personal
and social behaviours, and developing an appreciation of participation. These standards seem to
move the focus on PE teaching away from the instant outcomes of promoting students to master
motor skills and engagement, into the more desirable outcomes of promoting students to adopt
a physically-active lifestyle. Similarly, AGPHT (2010) proposes that there are three components
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Song and Chen
115
for establishing effective PE pedagogies: promoting high levels of physical activity participation,
movement skill instruction and practice, and active learning strategies with an emphasis on enjoyment. These seem to align more with the aforementioned PE curriculum in China.
Research on teacher effectiveness in PE, in China
Research into understanding of excellent PE teaching in China is still in its infancy. A classic,
traditional Chinese view of excellent teachers is that they should be completely devoted (in
Chinese, the phrase is Hui Ren Bu Juan) (Watkins and Zhang, 2006). Han Yu, one of the most
celebrated educators in the Tang Dynasty said, ‘A teacher is the one who shows you the way of
being human, teaches you knowledge and enlightens you while you are confused’ (Liu, 1973).
Among the old sayings to describe traditional teaching is the Chinese phrase, ‘Yin cai shi jiao,’
which means that teachers should ‘teach students in accordance with their aptitude.’
In the modern PE effectiveness literature, Chow and Louie (1992) investigated teaching
excellence in detail, through surveying 137 pre-service PE teachers at universities and 80 inservice PE teachers in Hong Kong schools. Five categories of excellent PE teachers and their work
are reported: personal qualities, professional qualities, classroom instruction, human relations and
management. This study integrated teacher qualities with the teaching process, to form a picture of
an excellent PE teacher. In mainland China, Du (2010) proposed that, under the new PE curriculum
framework, PE at the high school level should focus on stimulating students’ interest and in implementing ‘healthy and lifelong PE.’ Li and Li (2010) examined the possible elements of excellent
teaching in middle schools, identifying that teachers should present clearly and prepare well for
their lessons, understand their students, encourage students to form good habits and work cooperatively, provide immediate feedback, and increase the teacher/student and student/student
interactions.
A range of Western studies examine what constitutes excellent PE teaching at the school and
university level. There are similar studies in China at the school level, showing that aspects such as
personal and professional characteristics, classroom instruction, student engagement and student
learning gains contribute toward excellent PE teaching; however, it is hard to find studies that
focus on excellent PE teaching at the university level, especially in China. Concepts regarding
excellence are bound to the context; thus, it is important to further explore excellent teaching
concepts, especially when the teaching environments differ greatly from that of Western studies
(Gao and Watkins, 2002). This is particularly relevant for China, which has one of the largest
educational systems in the world. Furthermore, understanding PE teaching excellence is important
to be able to achieve a quality-oriented education aligning with these education development aims,
within the next 10 years, and meet the needs of education reform in China (Ministry of Education
of the People’s Republic of China (MOE), 2010).
The current study investigated how university students perceived excellent PE teaching at the
university level in China. Apart from examining university PE teaching, this present study,
together with a parallel study that was examining university PE teacher’s conceptions of excellent
PE teaching, was aimed at providing a platform for the establishment of PE teaching standards at
the university level and gaining potential ideas for improvement. From our findings in the literature, the present study adopted four categories as the basis for constructing the instrument and for
guiding analysis. These were: personal and professional characteristics, teacher behaviours, student engagement and student learning gains identified in the literature. These were utilized to
construct the instrument and guide analysis in this study.
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
116
European Physical Education Review 19(1)
Methods
Sample
A sample of 2000 students, who were being taught by 25 PE teachers at four universities in two
provinces in China, was approached to consider participation in the study. Two research assistants
contacted the head of the PE department at these four universities though mail and follow-up phone
calls. The two research assistants visited these four heads at the four universities that agreed to
cooperate. They briefed each head with a written Participant Information Sheet, asking for permission to conduct the research within their departments. Once each head signed a consent form, they
were asked to call for teacher volunteers within their department. Teacher Participant Information
Sheets and consent forms were then distributed to the teacher volunteers by the department heads.
Once teachers signed the consent forms, they were asked to distribute both Student Participant
Information Sheets and the questionnaires to their students. Students were asked to return the
questionnaires directly to the research assistants within 3 weeks, using the addressed stamped
envelopes supplied with the questionnaires. After 3 weeks, 1097 of the 2000 potential student participants provided valid questionnaires, giving our study a response rate of 55.2%. Out of the 1097
respondents, 62.1% of the students were male. Results show that 55.2% of the participants were in
Grade 2, while 44.8% were in Grade 1, yet only 44.1% of them were from the major of PE, while
the other participants were from non-PE majors as diverse as mathematics, English, Japanese,
Chinese, arts, social science, computing and politics. We found that each of the four participating
universities contributed approximately the same number of students.
Instrument: Questionnaire
The content validity of the instrument was evaluated to examine whether all important aspects of
excellent PE teaching were covered, to identify whether all items were essential and to eliminate
items undesirable to a particular construct domain (Straub et al., 2004). Lynn (1986) describes a
2-stage process for the establishment of instrument content validity, which has been adopted by
many researchers (e.g. Meurer et al., 2002; Stewart et al., 2005). This 2-stage process involves
a development stage and a judgment stage. At the development stage, the content domains (categories) concerning excellent PE teaching were established after reviewing the above literature.
These domains included personal and professional characteristics, classroom instruction, student
engagement and student learning gains. Next, the items were generated to assess each specific content domain examined by the literature and the authors’ former qualitative study, which examined
excellent PE teaching from the same sample population (draft under preparation for publication).
We developed a 50-item questionnaire, to examine the strength of agreement towards various
concepts of excellent PE teaching at the university level in China. Of those, 15 items were identified from the former qualitative study, and 35 items were derived from the reviewed literature.
Item validity concerning excellent teaching was checked qualitatively by four university students acting as the judges, for the judgment stage. Two were PE majors and the other two were
non-PE majors. The four judges were asked to ascertain whether each statement was sufficiently
clear and relevant to be involved in excellent PE teaching at the university level, and whether any
important points were omitted from the statements. As a result, five items were revised, one was
discarded, and four items were recommended; therefore, 53 items were kept in the survey.
This questionnaire contained two parts: Part 1 included statements about the nature of excellent PE
teaching in Chinese universities. The participants were asked to indicate how strongly they agreed with
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Song and Chen
117
each statement describing excellent PE teaching at Chinese universities. They were asked to respond to
a 6-point, positively-packed agreement rating scale. This response scale included two negative and
four positive agreement responses with identical scores (e.g. strongly disagree ¼ 1, mostly disagree
¼ 2, slightly agree ¼ 3, moderately agree ¼ 4, mostly agree ¼ 5, and strongly agree ¼ 6).
Positively-packed rating scales are known to generate discrimination in the context of social desirability (Brown, 2004; Lam and Klockars, 1982). In Part 2, students were asked to give their personal demographic information. Completion of our questionnaire was estimated to take about 30 minutes.
Students were asked to return the questionnaires to the research assistants within 3 weeks, using the
addressed, stamped envelopes supplied with the questionnaires.
Analysis
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with maximum likelihood estimation and oblique rotation was
utilized to generate the model of excellent PE teaching (Costello and Osborne, 2005), using
Predictive Analytics Software (PASW 18). Items were removed that had loadings > 0.30 on their
intended conceptual factors, or which had cross-loadings < 0.30 on other factors, or which did not
match logically and theoretically with other items in the same factors. During this procedure, 20
items were discarded and 33 items were kept for further analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) was employed to test the 33-item model using Amos 18 within the same sample of participants (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). Items were removed in CFA that still had low loading
(< 0.30) on their conceptual factors or that had strong modification indices to other factors. During
the CFA procedure, 28 items were kept. Estimates of reliability (a) within the range of 0.70–0.89,
with an average value of 0.78 were considered good or close to good, which indicated that the
items had sufficiently robust reliabilities such that the total of these items could be meaningfully
used in further analysis. This analysis procedure was guided by the four categories (e.g. personal
and professional characteristics, classroom instruction, student engagement and student learning
gains) identified in the reviewed literature. Except for the category called personal characteristics,
three of these four categories were identified in the final model of excellent PE teaching. One
category, professional characteristics, was split into two categories on the basis of the participants’
responses, but Chinese elements were added. One new category, ‘Being Responsible,’ was also
identified by these participants.
In this study, model fit indices can be seen as representing two categories of fit measurements: (a)
the w2 package, including w2, df, w2/df, Root Mean Square Residual (RMR), Standardised Root Mean
Square Residual (SRMR), Root Mean Square Error of approximation (RMSEA) and 90% CI, where
the values decrease as fit improves; (b) Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and gamma hat, where the values
increase as fit improves. For the w2 package, it is expected that a w2 that is roughly equal to its df
indicates a perfect model fit. When RMSEA and SRMR are < 0.50, it is a good fit. When RMSEA,
RMR, and SRMR are < 0.80, it is acceptable (Browne and Cudeck, 1989; Byrne, 2010; Hu and Bentler,
1999). When 90% CI is within the range between 0.50–0.80, it is acceptable. For goodness-of-fit indicators, the fit was deemed good when CFI and gamma hat are > 0.95. When CFI and gamma hat are >
0.90, the fit is considered acceptable (Byrne, 2010; Hoyle, 1995; Hoyle and Duvall, 2004).
Results
As seen in Figure 1, we generated a 28-item model of students’ concepts of what excellent PE teaching
is (w2 ¼ 1723.46; df ¼ 335; w2/df ¼ 5.2; RMSEA ¼ 0.06, 90% CI ¼ 0.059 * 0.064; RMR ¼ 0.045;
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
118
European Physical Education Review 19(1)
Figure 1. Model of Chinese students’ concepts of excellent physical education teaching at the university level.
Note: Correlations and error terms were removed, for simplicity.
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Song and Chen
119
Table 2. Descriptive statistics for scales.
Inter-correlations
Scale
I. Caring For Students
II. Being Responsible
III. Being A Subject Expert
IV. Being Student-Focused
V. Promoting Students’ All-Around Growth
VI. Being A Lifelong Learner
M
SD
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
5.10
4.87
5.06
5.09
5.22
4.25
.77
.80
.81
.80
.74
.77
–
.51
.63
.69
.52
.73
–
.54
.44
.57
.49
–
.49
.50
.54
–
.47
.86
–
.50
–
SRMR ¼ 0.07; CFI ¼ 0.91; and gamma hat ¼ 0.91). These indices indicated our model was well-fitted.
The model consisted of six conceptions of teaching excellence in PE: Caring For Students, Being
Responsible, Being A Subject Expert, Being Student-Focused, Promoting Students’ All-Around
Growth, and Being A Lifelong Learner. Caring For Students focused on understanding students, solving students’ personal problems, and generally helping the students to solve problems. Being Responsible was more likely to encompass the professional qualities of an excellent teacher, such as preparing
for the lessons carefully and arriving on time to every class. Within the concept of Promoting Students’
All-round Growth, excellent teaching developed students’ motor skills, and created positive attitudes
and awareness for physical activities. Being A Lifelong Leaner focused on keeping professional
knowledge and skills up-to-date, staying current with research and adapting research findings into their
teaching, reflecting on teaching with colleagues, and trying to improve teaching.
All remaining item loadings in the figure were > 0.30 and each scale included at least four items.
Item loadings indicated that the items were related to each other as separate factors in the model. The
inter-correlations between the four major practices were moderate, ranging from 0.44–0.86, with an
average of 0.57, which indicates that the concepts were relatively independent of each other.
Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics for the six scales. Generally speaking, these Chinese
students agreed positively with the six concepts identified in the current study, with an average
mean of 4.93. Students accorded most importance to Promoting Students’ All-Around Growth
(M ¼ 5.22) and gave the least importance (albeit still positive) to Being A Lifelong Learner
(M ¼ 4.25). This model portrayed students in China as being highly student-oriented in their
conceptions of excellent PE teaching, without neglecting Caring For Students (M ¼ 5.10),
Being Student-Focused (M ¼ 5.09), and Being Responsible (M ¼ 4.87). The traditional Chinese
concept of excellence as Being A Subject Expert was ranked in the middle (M ¼ 5.06).
The students’ characteristics (e.g. student gender, grade level, major and university) were
examined as a possible source of variance in their concepts of excellent PE teaching. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to test whether participants’ characteristics
caused any statistically-significant mean difference for the concepts and Cohen’s d effect size
was used to examine the degree of mean difference. Multivariate statistics shows that students’
grade level and major had contributed to statistically-significant mean differences in their
concepts of excellent PE teaching at the university level (Grade: Wilks’ l ¼ 0.99, F (6, 1091)
¼ 2.07, p ¼ 0.049, effect size ¼ 0.11; Major: Wilks’ l ¼ 0.97, F (6, 1091) ¼ 4.84,
p < 0.001, effect size ¼ 0.33). Although the p value shows the significant mean differences
between the students in Grades 1 and 2, the effect of size for the grade level is small (Cohen,
1988). When the means for different groups of the participants were examined, the students in
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
120
European Physical Education Review 19(1)
Grade 2 were found to hold lower mean scores for all six concepts, compared with their peers in
Grade 1. This indicates that the students in Grade 2 were less likely to agree with the excellent PE
teaching statements than their peers. In regard to the major, effect size was medium. The students
who were PE majors agreed more with two concepts, as compared with their counterparts who
were non-PE majors. These two concepts were: Being A Lifelong Learner and Being StudentFocused. Being A Lifelong Leaner held the largest mean difference among these six dimensions.
The possible reasons were explored in the discussion section.
Discussion
The concepts of excellence in PE teaching at the university level identified in this questionnairebased survey study were very much focused on the teachers’ responsibility, being a subject expert
and a lifelong learner, being student-oriented, and the student outcome, including positive attitudes
towards physical activities. Generally speaking, these findings represented the traditional Chinese
views of excellent teachers (e.g. being subject experts; devoting to teaching, caring; and adopting a
range of teaching methods) and the emerging ideologies (e.g. engaging students through studentfocused methods, encouraging students to form the habit to do physical activities, positive attitudes
towards physical activities, lifelong PE awareness and being a professional learner), which seem to
meet the needs of the new PE curriculum in China.
In general, this study showed that Chinese students’ conceptualisation of excellent PE teaching
at the university level was consistent with the results previously reported in the Western research
literature, which covers student engagement, teacher characteristics, classroom instruction and
student learning gains. In addition, this pattern has strong traditional Chinese features, such as the
nurturing and facilitative perspectives and the teacher reasonability, which are also advocated by
the studies conducted in the West. Under the influence of the Confucian culture, Chinese people
believe that, except for the hard work of the students themselves, the secret of student success lies
in having devoted teachers (Feng, 1994; Smith, 1992; Watkins and Zhang, 2006). One of the
central themes in this model was teacher responsibility, which is an old Confucian conception
advocated widely in China. In the traditional Chinese view, the teacher is expected to be completely committed to the job. Chinese people have high expectations for their children’s education,
which results in a high demand for teacher responsibility. Chinese teachers in this study were
identified as being responsible for their teaching role, which includes a commitment to the teaching
task, lesson preparation, arriving on time to lessons and classroom management. These align
partially with the findings relating to preparation and the role of the teacher in the Li and Li study
(2010), at the middle school level. Similarly, some ideas relating to this concept, such as classroom
management (Hickson and Fishburne, 2005; Silverman, 1991) and dedication (Arrighi and Young,
1987) were also identified in Western studies.
‘Caring For Students,’ another traditional Chinese concept, had a mean score ranking it
second. Maintaining a positive relationship between teachers and students was one of the
features. Excellent Chinese university PE teachers identified in this study acted as a friend to
their students. Aligning with the traditional Chinese view, one of the influential Chinese educational sayings, ‘the teacher should be a good teacher and friend’ (in Chinese the phrase is
‘Liang Shi Yi You’) is commonly used to describe the traditional Chinese teacher-student relationship. The students in this study attached importance to student-teacher interactions and
behaviours, such as caring for students, communicating well with students and encouraging
students to solve problems. This concept was identified by other Chinese research related to
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Song and Chen
121
PE (Li and Li, 2010), English and science subjects in schools (Cortazzi and Jin, 1996; Gao and
Watkins, 2002), which indicates that the nurturing concept might be required across all educational levels in China. In the Western literature, PE teachers were expected to interact with students as well, such as helping students choose the right physical activities, listening to their
concerns and providing constructive feedback (Zhang et al., 2011). Teachers provide support,
and allow student decision-making and student interactions (Brock et al., 2009; Jenkins and
Alderman, 2011; MacPhail et al., 2004)
Similar opinions of the other four concepts are reported in the Western literature (e.g. Being A
Subject Expert and Being A Lifelong Learner were identified in this study). These students thought that
excellent PE teachers were subject experts, had a good understanding of student psychology, and were
good at one physical activity at least. The ideology of being a subject expert could be regarded as a
common theme for being an excellent PE teacher (e.g. Chow and Louie, 1992; Hickson and Fishburne,
2005; Siliverman, 1991). Tsangaridou (2006) also stated that in-depth subject matter knowledge and
skillfulness are essential features of expert PE teachers. The idea of being a professional learner aligned
with the teacher effectiveness literature. For example, the National Board for Professional Teaching
Standards (2009: 4) in the United States says that accomplished teachers ‘critically examine their practice, seek the advice of others, and draw on educational research and scholarship to expand their repertoire, deepen their knowledge, sharpen their judgment and adapt their teaching to new findings, ideas
and theories.’ This concept suggests that PE teachers need to be professional lifelong learners (Armour,
2010; MacPhail, 2011), including upgrading of sports skills, theoretical PE knowledge, educational
knowledge and teaching pedagogies. In doing so, PE teachers may be capable of engaging their students in learning and form positive views towards physical activities.
The central idea of ‘Being Student-Focused’ entailed stimulating students’ interest to learn,
such as using a variety of teaching strategies, creating an interesting and challenging atmosphere,
and teaching students in accordance with their aptitude. This notion is congruent with one of the
educational aims of China, that is, ‘doing when learning’ (in Chinese, the phrase is ‘Zuo Zhong
Xue’) and ‘learning when enjoying’ (in Chinese, that phrase is ‘Yu Xue Yu Le’). Also, it was
expected that excellent PE teachers create instructional settings, using more appropriate teaching
strategies to capture and sustain students’ interest and to maximize their potential, by recognizing
individual differences within a challenging and encouraging learning environment (Byra, 2006;
Hagger and Chatzisarantis, 2007). Thus, PE teachers in China are expected to try by all means to
increase student enjoyment and engagement in physical activities, so that students’ intrinsic
motivation is promoted, which leads to students actively participating in physical activities within
and beyond the school setting and appreciating lifelong participation in physical activities (Zhang
et al., 2011). In general, this instructional and pedagogical concept of excellent PE teachers aligns
with other Western literature (Beveridge et al., 1986; Hickson and Fishburne, 2005), but it also
aligns with one of the aims of the PE curriculum reform in China, which is to increase students’
interest in physical activities (Chen, 2010).
Promoting Students’ All-Around Growth was the concept of an excellent Chinese PE teacher
that had the highest rating. This developmental, student-oriented perspective embraced teachers’
proficiencies in developing students’ personal growth with positive outcomes, including motor
skills and abilities, lifelong awareness of physical exercise, and positive attitudes towards physical activities. From the traditional Chinese view, excellent teachers ‘teach as well as cultivate
good persons’ (in Chinese, the phrase is ‘Jiao Shu Yu Ren’). This conceptualisation focused on
promoting students’ physical, spiritual, and social health and a physically active lifelong awareness, which aligns with the aims of PE curriculum reform in China (Du, 2010) and the major goal
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
122
European Physical Education Review 19(1)
of NASPE (2004). This dimension encourages students to promote physical development and
movement, as well as healthy and lifelong PE awareness, to achieve personal and social development (Kougioumtzis et al., 2011). The only-one-child policy in China has led to a society
where many adults (e.g. parents and grandparents) dote on their only child, who is more likely
to have been brought up in isolation from their peers or others (Wang et al., 2008). PE is now
expected to foster students’ physical, social, and emotional development; and also to promote
a healthy lifestyle, lifelong learning and social inclusion (Atencio et al., 2012). Therefore, the
findings in this study reflect the shift from the previously sports-focused or competitionfocused PE into the new form of PE, which includes ‘health, sport, and physical education work,’
which is advocated by Kirk (2010), and this also aligns with the requirements in the new PE curriculum at the university level in China.
Chinese university students’ concepts of excellent PE teaching in this study mostly reflected the
findings of Western literature, and in part the traditional Chinese and Confucian concepts of excellent
teaching. These concepts focus more on instructional, pedagogical, nurturing, developmental and
professional perspectives. The absence of evaluation and curriculum should be noted, although the
relevant questions were provided in the questionnaire. These two aspects were expected to be
identified in the model, because individual universities in China have a large proportion of freedom
to make choices. More questions will be needed to explore this issue further in subsequent studies.
Moreover, although the items related to teacher personal qualities (e.g. dedication, charisma, compassion and fairness) were included in the questionnaire, they were still missing in this study’s
results, whereas these personal characteristics were advocated widely by the Western studies. This is
probably because these students attached more importance to pedagogical and instructional perspectives, which needed further investigation to fully understand the responses.
In terms of students’ characteristics, as compared with the non-PE majors, the students who were
PE majors agreed more with two concepts: Being A Lifelong Leaner and Being Student-Focused.
The following reasons might be the possible cause: Normally, university PE teachers in China have
expertise in at least one PE field; however, they may not pay so much attention to upgrading the theory of PE and involving themselves in research. They may not develop expertise in PE pedagogies,
since some of them may be busy with sport competitions when they are at the university. The students in this study, especially those who were studying in the PE major, thought that it is important
for PE teachers to stay up-to-date with current research, to upgrade their professional knowledge, and
to make PE class more interesting. As for students’ grade level, the reasons why the students in Grade
2 were less likely to agree with the statements of excellent teaching are not clear. Our aim, however,
was to begin research on this topic of excellent PE teaching, so replication and other studies are worth
pursuing to extend the current findings at the university level in China.
A substantial implication is that these findings about excellent teaching may contribute to the
development of advanced teaching standards in PE at the university level, standards which are
currently absent in China. Those students who are currently experiencing PE teaching can provide
valuable information for the construction of excellent PE teaching. Moreover, the model of an
excellent university PE teacher was established through a relatively large sample of students. Thus,
together with our parallel ongoing project, which is surveying PE teachers’ concepts of an
excellent university PE teacher, both studies will serve as a starting point and a sound baseline for
designing advanced PE teaching standards at the university level, for the purpose of PE teacher
promotion and evaluation. However, when designing such teaching standards, policymakers and
researchers may pay more attention to the concepts identified and those missed in this study, but
advocated in Western studies.
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Song and Chen
123
The findings of this study may make a contribution to the professional development and
teaching improvement for PE practitioners. As for university PE teachers, the current guidelines
for university PE teachers comprise four sections (i.e. Chinese nationality, good personality and
morality, professional spirit and attitude of serving education, degrees in line with education at
the university level or above, and ability and skill in educating and teaching) (MOE, 2000),
with the first three sections dominating the document. Academic requirements do not address
details about teaching practice. It is expected that the concepts, especially regarding the
teaching strategies and professional improvement, that we identified in this study may provide a
lens for PE teachers who tend to improve their teaching practices and deliver excellent teaching.
These innovations are expected to enhance students’ interest and attitude towards physical
activities. This study will also provide useful information to high school PE teachers who wish
to prepare their students to fit well into PE classes at universities. They may adjust their
teaching, based on the findings in this study, to optimize their students’ motivation in PE across
this transition.
Each set of existing advanced teaching standards (e.g. the Performance Threshold for advanced
teaching in England and Wales, the Level 3 Classroom Teacher Position for exemplary teaching in
Australia, and the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards for highly-accomplished
teaching in America), despite their prevalence, has risks in its adoption; hence, once such PE teaching standards are established in China, university management personnel and teachers need some
very careful consideration when implementing them into practice. As for the university management, they need to think carefully and may modify the standards to suit their staff capabilities
(e.g. motor skills and teaching level) and their university situations (e.g. availability of facilities
and ease of staff evaluation). As for PE teachers, they need to consider the nature of courses
(e.g. the teaching practice for basketball and aerobics could be different) and their students’ situations (e.g. motor skill levels), to improve their teaching practices.
This study also alerts us to the fact that these students did not perceive that university PE
teachers need to become involved in curriculum development, even though this is potentially an
important aspect of a teacher’s work. This may be because the students in this study apparently
believed that university PE teachers have little opportunity and limited autonomy in terms of
curriculum decision-making (Wang et al., 2008) and this is, in fact, the reality in China. Perhaps it
is time for policy-makers and researchers to think carefully about this. University management
needs to consider adding curriculum development to the professional development programmes
and they may need to tend to teachers to help them become much more involved in curriculumrelated decision making.
It is recommended for further research that student focus group discussions and/or interviews be
conducted, to explore the reasons for the key findings in this study. It might be valuable to
investigate the concepts about excellent university PE teachers from combined perspectives, such
as a university’s PE teachers and its PE management team, as this joint effort could serve to further
validate our findings. In short, enhancing the quality of PE teaching and student learning
experiences is a complex matter that requires the involvement of a range of stakeholders.
References
Anderson JC and Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended
two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 103(3): 411–423.
Armour KM (2010) The physical education profession and its professional responsibility, or why ‘12 weeks
paid holiday’ will never be enough. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 15: 1–13.
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
124
European Physical Education Review 19(1)
Armour KM, Makopoulou K and Chambers F (2012) Progression in physical education teachers’ careerlong professional learning: Conceptual and practical concerns. European Physical Education Review
18: 62–77.
Arrighi MA and Young JC (1987) Teachers’ perceptions about effective and successful teaching. Journal of
Teaching in Physical Education 6: 122–135.
Atencio M, Jess M and Dewar K (2012) It is a case of changing your thought processes, the way you actually
teach: Implementing a complex professional learning agenda in Scottish physical education. Physical
Education and Sport Pedagogy 17 (2): 127–144.
Australian Government Preventative Health Taskforce (2010) The healthiest country by 2020. Discussion
paper. Report, Canberra, Australia: Australian Government.
Baley JA and Field DA (1976) Physical Education and the Physical Educator. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Betoret FD and Artiga AG (2004) Trainee teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning, classroom layout
and exam design. Educational Studies 30(4): 355–372.
Beveridge SK, Gangstead SK and McElroy L (1986) A cross sectional comparison of the perceptions of the
role of the physical educator. The Physical Educator 43 (2): 75–81.
Brock SJ, Rovegno I and Oliver KL (2009) The influence of student status on student interactions and experiences during a sport education unit. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 14 (4): 355–375.
Brown GTL (2004) Measuring attitude with positively packed self-report ratings: Comparison of agreement
and frequency scales. Psychological Reports 94: 1015–1024.
Browne MW and Cudeck R (1989) Single sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research 24: 445–455.
Byra M (2006) Teaching style and inclusive pedagogies. In: Kirk D, Macdonald D and O’Sullivan M (eds)
The Handbook of Physical Education. London: Sage, pp. 449–466.
Byrne BM (2010) Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. New York: Routledge.
Chen Y (2010) Analysis and strategies of college physical education reform. Asian Social Science 6(11): 209–212.
Chow B and Louie L (1992) A comparison of role perceptions of a successful physical education among physical educator majors and established physical education in Hong Kong. Chinese University of Hong Kong
Education Journal 20(2): 65–73.
Cohen J (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cortazzi M and Jin L (1996) English teaching and learning in China. Language Teaching 29(2): 61–80.
Costello AB and Osborne JW (2005) Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for
getting the most from your analyses. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation 10(7): 1–9.
Ding G (2001) Nationalization and internationalization: Two turning points in China’s Education in the twentieth century. In: Peterson G, Hayhoe R and Lu Y (eds) Education, Culture, and Identity in TwentiethCentury China. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press, pp.161–186.
Du J (2010) Analyzing current physical education curriculum situations at high schools in Taiyuan. Taiyuan
Technology University Journal 10: 25–30.
Feng J (1994) Asian-American Children: What Teachers Should Know? Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Elementary and Early Childhood Education.
Gao L and Watkins DA (2002) Conceptions of teaching held by school science teachers in P R China: Identification and cross-cultural comparisons. Science Education 24(1): 61–79.
Hagger MS and Chatzisarantis NLD (2007) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Exercises and
Sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Harris A (1999) Teaching and Learning in the Effective School. Brookfield, Vermont: Ashgate.
Hickey C and Jin A (2007) Contemporary PE reform in China: Teachers’ talk. In: 37th Australian Association
for Research in Education conference, Fremantle, Australia, 2 December 2007.
Hickson C and Fishburne G (2002) Effective teaching in elementary schools: Subject area differences. In:
Annual Convention of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, San
Diego, CA, 28 April 2002.
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
Song and Chen
125
Hickson C and Fishburne G (2004) What is effective physical education teaching and can it be promoted with
generalist trained elementary school teachers? In: 34th Australian Association for Research in Education
conference. Melbourne, Australia, 4 December 2004.
Hickson C and Fishburne G (2005) Teacher development: Enhancing effective teaching in elementary school
physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 76(1): 32–40.
Hoyle RH (1995) The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues. In:
Hoyle R H (ed) Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage, pp.1–15.
Hoyle RH and Duvall JL (2004) Determining the number of factors in exploratory and confirmatory factor
analysis. In: Kaplan D (ed) The SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methodology for Social Sciences.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp.301–315.
Hu L and Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 6: 1–55.
Hughes I and Yuan L (2005) The status of action research in the People‘s Republic of China. Action Research
3(4): 383–402.
Jenkins JM and Alderman BL (2011) Influence of support education on group cohesion in university physical
education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 30(3): 214–230.
Kirk D (2010) Physical Education Futures. London: Routledge.
Kottler JA and Zehm SJ (2000) On Being a Teacher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Kottler JA, Zehm SJ and Kottler E (2005) On Being a Teacher: The Human Dimension. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Kougioumtzis K, Patriksson G and Strahlman O (2011) Physical education teachers’ professionalization: A
review of occupational power and professional control. European Physical Education Review 17(1):
111–129.
Lam TCM and Klockars AJ (1982) The influence of labels and positions in rating scales. Journal of Educational Measurement 19: 312–322.
Li ZX and Li CF (2010) The construction of effective teaching in middle school physical education class.
Jinlin Normal University Journal 4: 40–45.
Liu Z (1973) The Way of Being a Teacher in China - The Way of Teachers. Taipei: Chung Hwa Book Co.
Lynn MR (1986) Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research 35: 382–385.
MacPhail A (2011) Professional learning as a physical education teacher educator. Physical Education and
Sport Pedagogy 16 (4): 435–451.
MacPhail A, Kirk D and Kinchin G (2004) Sport education: Promoting team affiliation through physical
education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 23: 106–122.
Mawer M (1995) The Effective Teaching of Physical Education. London: Longman.
Meurer SJ, Rubio DM, Counte MA, et al. (2002) Development of a healthcare quality improvement measurement tool: Results of a content validity study. Hospital Topics 80: 7–13.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China (2000). Outline for Reform and Development of
Education in China. Beijing: the People’s Republic of China.
Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China (2010) National Outline for Mid and Long-Term
Education Reform and Development 2010–2020. Beijing: the People’s Republic of China.
National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) (2004) Moving into the Future: National
Content Standards for Physical Education. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) (2009) What teachers should know and be able
to do: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Available at: http://www.nbpts.org/resources/
publications (accessed 2 December 2011).
Osborne J, Simon S and Collins S (2003) Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education 25(9): 1049–1080.
Parker J (1995) Secondary teachers’ views of effective teaching in physical education. Journal of Teaching in
Physical Education 4(2): 127–139.
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013
126
European Physical Education Review 19(1)
Placek JH and Dodds P (1988) A critical incident study of preservice teachers’ beliefs about teaching success
and nonsuccess. Research Quarterly 59(4): 351–358.
Rowe KJ (2004) Submission to inquiry into the sex discrimination amendment (teaching profession) bill 2004
by the Australian senate legal and constitutional legislation committee. In: 34th Australian Council for
Educational Research, Adelaide, Australia, 24 October 2004.
Schempp PG (1985) Becoming a better teacher: An analysis of the student teaching experience. Journal of
Teaching in Physical Education 4: 158–166.
Silverman S (1991) Research on teaching in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
62(4): 352–364.
Smith DC (1992) The Chinese family in transition: Implications for education and society in modern Taiwan.
In: Comparative education association and World Bank seminar, Annapolis, Maryland, 12 March 1992.
Smith P, Petralia J and Hewitt K (2005) Tuned in: Listening to student voices. Principal Leadership 6(3): 28–33.
Stewart JL, Lynn MR and Mishel MH (2005) Evaluating content validity for children’s self-report instruments using children as content experts. Nursing Research 54: 414–418.
Straub D, Boudreau MC and Gefen D (2004) Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Communications
of the Association for Information Systems 13: 380–427.
Thorburn M, Jess M and Atencio M (2011) Thinking differently about curriculum: Analyzing the potential
contribution of physical education as part of ‘health and wellbeing’ during a time of revised curriculum
ambitions in Scotland. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 16 (4): 383–398.
Tsangaridou N (2006) Teachers’ knowledge. In: Kirk D, Macdonald D and O’Sullivan M (eds) The Handbook
of Physical Education. London: Sage, pp. 502–515.
Wallian N and Chang CE (2006) Development and learning of motor skill competencies. In: Kirk D, Macdonald D and O, Sullivan M (eds) The Handbook of Physical Education. London: Sage, pp. 292–311.
Wang LH, Wang JJ and Liu ZH (2008) A research of students participating in the evaluation of sports teaching in general colleges. Journal of Beijing Sport University 4: 527–528.
Wang XZ, Liu J, Huang CQ, et al. (2008) School physical education reform and development in the people’s
republic of China. In: Haddad C and Tan LL (eds) Innovative Practices in Physical Education and Sports
in Asia. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education, pp.59–71.
Watkins DA and Zhang Q (2006) The good teacher: A cross-cultural perspective. In: McInerney D, Dowson
M and Van Etten S (eds) Effective Schools. Greenwich, CT: Connecticut Information Age Publishing,
pp.185–204.
Zhang J and Collis B (1995) Comparison of teaching models in the West and in China. E-Journal of Instructional Science and Technology 1(1): 3–11.
Zhang T, Solmon MA, Kosma M, et al. (2011) Need support, need satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, and physical activity participation among middle school students. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 30
(1): 51–68.
Zhou N (2006) An International Perspective on Teacher Education: Teacher Education Reform, Teacher
Professional Standard and School-based Teacher Development. Shanghai, China: East China Normal
University Press.
Author biographies
Lihua Song is a lecturer at the College of Physical Education, Jilin Normal University in China.
Junjun Chen is a lecturer at the Hong Kong Institute of Education in China.
Downloaded from epe.sagepub.com at Hong Kong Institute of Education on April 4, 2013