Comprehensively Planning Physical Activity Programmes/Experiences

Workshop Overview Warm-up donut activity – sharing stories Introduction to the specifications Previous scholarship questions What the examiners look for Likely scenarios for 2009 Using a debate to explore a scholarship question

Definitions A physical activity programme or experience may include: –A personal fitness programme –An outdoor education experience –A triathlon –Leisure-based activities –Aerobics routine –Dance performance –Stage Challenge –Festivals that involve movement –Other appropriate programmes/experiences

Brainstorm of Experiences What programme or experience did you plan? PAPOE

Sharing Stories – Round 1 1.What programme or experience did you plan for PE 3.1 and evaluate for PE 3.2? 2.What factor had the biggest positive impact on your wellbeing? How did it impact? Why? 3.What factor had the biggest negative impact on your wellbeing? How did it impact? Why?

Sharing Stories – Round 2 1.What programme or experience did you plan for 3.1 and evaluate for 3.2? 2.What were the expected outcomes of the programme? 3.Were they achieved? Why / Why not?

Sharing Stories – Round 3 1.What programme or experience did you plan for 3.1 and evaluate for 3.2? 2.What factors that affected the programme were out of the planner’s control? 3.How could the planning have been improved? 4.Why would it make a difference?

2009 Specification Comprehensively planning physical activity programmes/experiences drawing upon knowledge underpinning achievement standards and & 3.2

Previous Scholarship Questions Scholarship 2008 PAPOE Question 1 Scenario BQuestion 1 Scenario A Class 3km ocean swim. Students plan training over a 5 week period Grant’s Year 13 class is attending an adventure camp that involves last minute planning Evaluate the planning and implementation process used and any issues Consider socio-cultural and biophysical factors to predict outcome

Previous Scholarship Questions Scholarship 2007 PAPOE Question 1 Scenario AQuestion 1 Scenario B Student uses internet to design her PAP programme. Teacher George’s planning for a 3-day tramp. Evaluate the process that took place. Hypothesis of the outcome. Depth & breadth of biophysical and socio-cultural factors Evaluating the process that took place. Hypothesis of the outcome. Depth & breadth of issues related to OE experience, planning, implementation & management processes.

The assessment schedule and examiners report Information on the NZQA Website: Check the assessment schedules from 2007 and 2008 –Content information –Markers schedule Check the examiners report from 2008

Successful candidates in 2008 Question 2: OE context  ability to evaluate the process and outline potential outcomes of the process  good understanding of the nature and types of risk and risk management systems as a process  ability to discuss the benefits of Outdoor Education experiences  ability to portray the importance and provide detail of Safety Management Systems for Outdoor Education  ability to critically evaluate the scenarios given, demonstrating a high level of understanding of planning and implementing programmes  ability to draw on their own learning experiences of planning and implementing programmes.

The examiners report 2008 For Question 1 on Outdoor Experiences, candidates who did NOT achieve scholarship...  inability to evaluate the process  superficial knowledge of the subject  a lack of discussion of the purposes of Outdoor Education or why the group might be going to the rock face  little or no knowledge of the use of RAMS or SAPS in planning and programming Outdoor Education experiences  In relation to risk and the relationship between risk and safety

Possible OE scenarios 2009  A school trip using an outside provider eg OPC, adventure sport operators- rock climbing  School camp planning  Students planning outdoor experience activities

Successful candidates in 2008 Question 1B: PAP context Candidates who ACHIEVED scholarship... Evaluated the planning process AND outlined potential outcomes of the programme Evaluated the planning process AND outlined potential outcomes of the programme Critically evaluated the given scenario Critically evaluated the given scenario Demonstrating a high level of understanding of planning and implementing programmes Demonstrating a high level of understanding of planning and implementing programmes Understood the limitations of the five-week programme for swimmers lacking in confidence Understood the limitations of the five-week programme for swimmers lacking in confidence Gave evidence from their own learning experiences of planning and implementing programmes. Gave evidence from their own learning experiences of planning and implementing programmes.

The examiners report 2008 Question 1B: PAP context Candidates who DID NOT achieve scholarship... Did not identify a lack of specificity of training by only training in a pool rather than the ocean Did not link knowledge specifically to scenario to critique the programme – e.g. no specific ocean swimming in training, five-week programme to build up to a three kilometre swim Did not link knowledge specifically to scenario to critique the programme – e.g. no specific ocean swimming in training, five-week programme to build up to a three kilometre swim Failed to fully discuss a major issue of how a “one size programme fits all” would meet the requirements of the individual participants in the programme. Failed to fully discuss a major issue of how a “one size programme fits all” would meet the requirements of the individual participants in the programme.

Possible focus for PAP scenarios 2009 Effectiveness of a particular aspect of programming –e.g. periodisation, fitness testing, pre-testing, application of training principles The effectiveness of a programme to achieve its outcomes –e.g. Peaking individuals for an event; unexpected outcomes: fatigue, overtraining; injury, illness, dehydration, heat exhaustion The effectiveness of programmes in general –e.g. The value of having a programme plan or goal setting The effectiveness of a programme for a particular: –Person e.g. Individual needs in a team sport or group situation –Purpose e.g. Specificity to a playing position; peaking for an event vs maintaining performance over a season; well-being vs sport

The debate & PMIS tools For the debate, the whole group will split into 1.The OE group 2.The PAP group Each debate will have three groups 1.The Plus group 2.The Minus group 3.The Judge & Jury group The debate is aligned to the essay writing process using PMIS as shown in the next slide

EssayDescriptorsDebate IntroductionKey words  Relevant content  Hard facts Background – own experiences this year Facilitators P luses Positive view point  What do you agree with?  Strengths Own experience  Other points of view  Who benefits?  Why is it worthwhile? Plus group M inuses Negative view point  What do you disagree with?  Weaknesses Own experience Other Points of View What risks are there? Why is it problematic? Minus group Issues/ Interesting Examine bias  Challenge validity Challenge assumptionsJudge & Jury group S uggestions Solving Issues Enhancing programme Alternatives Initiatives New ideas All ConclusionReflect  Main points All