The enactment of the Socially-Just Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility (SJ-TPSR) approach in physical education teacher education: Teacher educators’ and pre-service teachers’ perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Research in teacher education practice explicitly highlights how learning to teach teachers is a complex, messy, sophisticated process, filled with uncertainty and perpetual challenges. While this applies to all aspects of teacher education, we focus here on the process of learning to teach pre-service teachers (PSTs) how to teach about, through, and for social justice (pedagogies) by enacting the Socially-Just Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility (SJ-TPSR) approach.Purpose This research was guided by the following research question: What are the realities of enacting a SJ-TPSR approach in physical education teacher education (PETE)?Method Utilising a collaborative self-study approach two physical education teacher educators, supported by two critical friends, enacted the SJ-TPSR approach in a 10-week outdoor and adventure activities module with pre-service generalist primary school teachers. Data included: critical friend meetings, pedagogical decision-making documents and interviews with the teacher educators and PSTs.Findings The findings revolve around three categories: (i) Teaching about teaching and learning about teaching the SJ-TPSR approach; (ii) The importance of learning together; and (iii) A pedagogy of vulnerability needed? The findings demonstrated the need to take a gradual approach to teaching about teaching the SJ-TPSR approach and learning about teaching along with the SJ-TPSR approach. It was a daunting experience but reflection and sharing our thoughts mitigated most of these feelings. The importance of learning together was highlighted by both teacher educators. Co-constructing this new knowledge with the PSTs further supported this process. Finally, when enacting a new pedagogical approach, particularly in the area of social justice, required an additional pedagogical approach that of vulnerability.Discussion Our collaborative self-study on the enactment of the SJ-TPSR approach is an explicit example of reframing pedagogy and practice not only from a social change and social justice perspective, but about, through, and for social justice and change. We first reconceptualised the TPSR approach to the SJ-TPSR approach from a social justice perspective, but then examined our practice and developed practices that also support the teaching and learning about, through, and for social justice. The practices developed have implications for the enactment of the SJ-TPSR approach which hold possibilities for other innovative practices (e.g. layering), and also for self-study research, namely ways in which collaborative self-study can be conducted and in which self-study can work from a social change and social justice perspectiveConclusion We trust that sharing our journey thus far will support others interested in enacting the SJ-TPSR approach, and that we, in turn, can learn from others enacting, examining, and articulating their experiences with the approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".