Planning and Evaluating 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 2008 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 A.S. 3.1 and evaluate for A.S. 3.2? 2.Was it a physical activity plan or an outdoor experience plan or something else? 3.Share some of the pluses and minuses of the experience.

Sharing Stories – Round 2 1.What programme or experience did you plan for A.S. 3.1 and evaluate for A.S. 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 A.S. 3.1 and evaluate for A.S. 3.2? 2.How could the planning have been improved? 3.Why would it make a difference?

Sharing Stories – Round 4 1.What programme or experience did you plan for A.S. 3.1 and evaluate for A.S. 3.2? 2.What factor had the biggest positive impact on success of the programme? 3.How did it impact? Why?

Sharing Stories – Round 5 1.What programme or experience did you plan for A.S. 3.1 and evaluate for A.S. 3.2? 2.What factor had the biggest negative impact on your wellbeing? 3.How did it impact? Why?

2008 Specification Planning and/or evaluating physical activity programmes/experiences drawing upon knowledge underpinning achievement standards and A.S. 3.1 & 3.2

Previous Scholarship Questions Scholarship 2007 (A.S. 3.1 & 3.2) 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.

Previous Scholarship Questions Scholarship 2006 (A.S. 3.1 & 3.2) PAP (+ A.S. 3.3)OE (+ A.S. 3.5) Question 3Question 2 PE teacher Taylor Smith provides a programme for his PE class to train for a 10km run. Principal’s decision to review place of school camps due to associated risks. Evaluate the one size fits all method of programming Depth & breadth of biophysical and socio-cultural factors (specific aspects are identified in the question) Evaluating the principal’s concerns Consider benefits & problems, the nature of risk, risk management planning tools, principles of risk management.

The assessment schedule and examiners report Information on the NZQA Website: Check the assessment schedules from 2006 & 2007 –Content information –Markers schedule Check the examiners report from 2006

The examiners report 2006 The best performing candidates most commonly demonstrated the following skills and /or knowledge: –Ability to take a position in regards to the statements and argue it convincingly –Critical examination of the examination statements / positions –Evidence of higher level content and wide reading –Excellent essay writing and time management for 3 essays.

The examiners report 2006 Candidates who did NOT achieve scholarship... –Used prepared answers that were irrelevant to questions provided –Lacked content knowledge and/or depth of knowledge –Used incorrect or incorrectly applied PE terminology –Lacked ability to critique statements

The examiners report 2006 For Question 2 on Outdoor Experiences, candidates who did NOT achieve scholarship...  Lacked ability to comment on aspects of risk and did not always distinguish between the nature of risk or types of risk  Focused more on risk and did not address the benefits and / or issues relating to schools providing OE opportunities  Did not address safety management

The examiners report 2006 For Question 3 on Physical Activity Programmes, candidates who did NOT achieve scholarship... Did not make a case for whether or not it was a good thing to have a one size fits all programme Did not make a case for whether or not it was a good thing to have a one size fits all programme Assumed that physical activity was sport Assumed that physical activity was sport

Successful candidates in 2006 Question 2: OE context  Identified that for the principal the key factors were the risk of injury / consequences for school / school responsibility & time out of class.  Discussed Safety Management Systems beyond just completing SAPS / RAMS  Drew on own experience to justify their stance e.g. about the benefits of outdoor education  Provided a good reasoned argument about the role & place of outdoor education  Applied a good reasoned argument about the nature of risk, types of risk & ways of managing risk

Successful candidates in 2006 Question 3: PAP context Used the scenarios of the four students to explain the different needs and goals and the effects of overtraining for the swimmer / sportsman Used the scenarios of the four students to explain the different needs and goals and the effects of overtraining for the swimmer / sportsman Discussed the specificity of training i.e. while the swimmer would have a good aerobic endurance the muscle development would be specific to swimming not running Discussed the specificity of training i.e. while the swimmer would have a good aerobic endurance the muscle development would be specific to swimming not running Provided a sound argument against a one size fits all programme Provided a sound argument against a one size fits all programme Acknowledged some good points of everybody doing a programme together but then provided ways of still catering to individual needs Acknowledged some good points of everybody doing a programme together but then provided ways of still catering to individual needs

Possible OE scenarios 2008 Risk & Crisis management Prevention of risk Emergency procedures Examples Extreme surf skier Tasman crossing kayakers

Possible PAP scenarios 2008 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 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 (small room) 2.The PAP group (main room) 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? Own experience  OPV  Strengths Plus group M inuses Negative view point  What do you disagree with?  Weaknesses Who benefits?  Errors of logic  OPV  Own experience Minus group I ssues Examine bias  Challenge validity Challenge assumptions Judge & Jury group S uggestions Initiatives  New ideas AlternativesAll ConclusionReflect  Main points All