It is a fact that PE was influenced and used by external factors that were not
related to education. It is also a fact that PE has conscious or unconsciously
collaborated to support or preserve the dominant ideology and of the presiding
governing system. This is easy to prove. We just have to take a critical look at
the history of PE and compare it to the social-political situation in a certain
period.
In accordance to the historical context, PE methodological models and actions
have developed severe and disciplinary values. These have contributed to the
stagnation and disintegration of knowledge and to disagreement with social and
political reality. These elements of conservation will be weaker as the presence
of analysis and critical thinking become stronger.
The history is defined by its subordination to misrepresented objectives, body
instruction, socially alienating practices, athlete worship, lack of
individuality, and maintenance of social inequity.
In the past, PE classes have consisted of sportive activities. Precocious sport
initiation, performance and immediacy do not consider the individual, and the
individual is the only one who knows his or her own possibilities and limits.
The movements are stereotyped and create conformity because they do not exercise
and do not give space for creation.
It is necessary to reflect and question the presence and place of PE in school
and in the social-political-economic-cultural context. We must rethink practical
methodologies and develop a conscious and critical vision of the non-neutrality
of the actions. We must also make agreements to collaborate in the education of
the people that will act in the process of changing the society.
Meaning
of the research
The critical research of the socio-political roles of PE and Sport is conducted
through the following meanings:
-
Until
now, PE and Sport have often been criticized as conservative organizations.
This same characteristic is present in all countries throughout the world.
However, the contents and causes have not sufficiently been examined. So
far, there has been a great deal of research that investigated comparative
general remarks. Analytical research was not significantly developed.
Consequently, it was difficult to make connections between concrete
practices. In regard to this fact, this research paper emphasizes the
importance of developing such a line of research.
-
Contemporary
society has historical connections to many difficulties that originated
through time. These problems have relation to several problems concerning
the maintenance of the planet. Therefore, disputes, controversies and
confrontations have often occurred within the field of PE and Sport; PE and
Sport were never a place for peaceful stability. Many people -- citizens,
teachers and researchers -- criticize these facts. They question the
relation between these facts and reform of society. Because of that, it is
very important to develop critical research about the socio-political roles
of PE and Sport.
What
can be changed? How to change?
Questions like these are and should be present in everyone's theoretical and
practical activities, since PE is going through a period of identity crisis.
After this long process of questioning and reflection, still no one seems to
know how to cause any effective change in the hegemonic ideology that guides PE.
It is necessary to elaborate a PE compromised with the social and cultural
characteristics of the society as well as with the characteristics of the
socio-historical context in which PE and society exist and interact. In this
context, problems that demand specific and deep analysis will be generated. But
PE must be understood as a suggestion to approach 'movement' and 'body culture'
as a means of expression, awareness, freedom, social fairness, social equity,
nature prevention, political and social consciousness. PE should present a
pedagogic subject to diffuse the theme and ways to express this 'body culture'.
Its subject of study should be the meaning and significance of body expression
wherein humanity's and society's intentions and objectives are dialectically
intertwined. Also, PE should make possible the recognition and establishment of
the 'social body', that is , a body that is aware and conscious of its presence
and importance in any situation. Its movement or non-movement always represents
a certain political intention or political positioning.
The term 'movement' contains other meanings besides PE or physical movement. It
contains possibilities such as social movement and political movement. These are
not emphasized and assume characteristics that stagnate and reduce their
powerful capacity of producing contradiction and critique. Therefore, along the
history of education, we can verify that the existence of PE has been justified
by needs such as performance, physical training, the search and formation of
athletes. Such needs characterize a tendency to instrument, separate and
specialize the body. What reinforces this tendency is the unhistorical approach
to physical exercise, which is an end in itself and ruled by the laws of
physics. It also has been justified for supposedly being capable of attending to
needs related to the development of ideal virtues and qualities that are
socially relevant to the 'System'. Such positions do not consider body
expression through its anthropological approach; that is, through man's own
nature and the historic-cultural factors expressed in cultural movements. It is
necessary to consider that body expression reflects the 'indoctrination'
imposed, by the relations of power with the dominant ideology to society's daily
life, work and leisure. It is also necessary to comprehend the true significance
of PE practices. That implies a reflection over the relations of interdependence
between PE and contemporary and important socio-political problems like ecology,
gender differences, public health and education, social relations of work,
racial prejudice, garbage and recycling, technology and science.
A
Model for Social Changes
Betti's (1991) main aim in establishing the Sociological Model – represented
only by the black lines in Fig. 1; red lines should be disregarded – was to
conceive and to explain the pedagogical options taken in the instruction of PE.
As he pointed out, the model is not reality itself, but a means to explain
reality.
Through the analysis of the sociological model, it is possible to verify strict
hierarchical connections between its different levels. Since there is hierarchy
involved, it is probable that difficulties are to be faced regarding the
feedback to proposals offered by the superior levels. However, it would also be
possible for social changes to occur at the lowest hierarchical level. Here,
teachers and students, outside their school environment, would create different
social discourses that could trigger a change on society and educational
politics. This process could be understood as 'changes from outside of the
school environment'.
Considering the similarities between society and educational politics, and that
both are regulated by external political powers, the changes described above are
possible, although not very effectively. If trying to contribute to the
formation of a new social order, then the Sociological-Educational Model (see
Fig. 1, below) is an interesting model to consider. This model should also be
considered as a means of expressing various ideas and intentions. Through its
analysis, we can critique the political role played or not played by PE and
Sport, and see the imposition of social ideology and values into the discourses
of PE and Sport.
According to the sociological-educational model, influences such as
manipulation, imposition, regulation and ideological use inflicted by political
powers over society should be emphasized. The model would also follow the same
direction designated by Betti's (1991) sociological model. However, it would not
only break hierarchical differences, but also activate changes that originated
'inside of the school environment'. Such changes derived from the lower
hierarchical levels of Betti's model, that is, the teacher-student-subject
trinomial and the educational objectives of PE.
The sociological-educational model proposes to flow not only on a single
hierarchical direction, but would pursue both directions, by including the
anti-hierarchical as well.
The anti-hierarchical direction is not stressed in Betti's model although it
plays effective and discriminative conservative roles. Thus, the main difference
between the two models is that the anti-hierarchical direction should be one of
the main sources for socio-political transformation. It could be done by setting
new definitions for PE to affirm itself, which means to create conditions to a
sociological-philosophically oriented debate, in which the central theme would
be the objectives, beliefs and values of PE.
Fig.
1. Sociological-Educational Model
Sport
and Alternative Physical Practices
It is necessary for PE to initiate alternative approaches to physical culture
and to society. Alternative approaches to physical culture have been attempted
world-wide. Examples are the "New Games" in the U.S., the
"Cooperative Games" in Canada and "Trops" – Sport read
backwards – in Japan. However, neither one of these caused institutionalized
changes nor were they able to establish different approaches to Sport at social
levels. The absence of connections to social and cultural facts may have been
responsible for the unsuccessful attempt of the first two. Trops is said by its
organizers to present strong relationship to major cultural, social, political
and ecological problems. Trops also has remote chances to survive and have its
philosophy diffused among society. Why is that? Why cannot we break with the
hegemony of the sportive culture? The fact is that there are many possible
approaches to Sport. Amusement, health promotion, fitness, leisure, fun, social
interaction, "de-stressing", hobby or professional reasons are the
most professed ones. To break from this powerful ideology is not easy.
Objectivity, will power and strong social conscience are necessary to put forth
alternative approaches that are not Sport-oriented. One of the challenges to be
faced by PE is how to maintain and diffuse the philosophy and social objectives
of alternative physical cultures.
The following three examples of alternative areas can be used by PE to approach
society:
-
Sport
is an internationally spread "language". However, there are many
people who do not play, participate, watch or have interest in Sport. Why
does Sport have such international and deep influences in every nation and
in all political systems?
-
In
rural areas, students face many troubles to continuing their education. Some
drop out and only a few reach the university. After they reach the
university they will never return to work in their home towns or other rural
areas. This phenomenon is creating big problems and differences in both
rural areas and big cities. Why have not Sociology of PE/Sports and Pedagogy
paid enough attention to these facts?
-
The
Sport structure is well defined in present-day society. Sport has its
objectives, use, social acceptation, and offer fun, amusement, leisure and
professional possibilities. On the other hand, society is not a clear
structure yet. The interaction between the social structure and PE and Sport
is not well defined either. It is necessary to clarify the social structure
and the social objectives of PE and Sport within society. The aim is to
socialize instead of only promoting momentary situations of social
interaction. An example is the introduction of PE and Sport in socially
marginalized contexts such as asylums, mentally and physically disabled
people's institutions or children's reformatories. PE and Sport are not used
to socialize these people. The people only leave their 'homes' for a short
period of time in which they are exposed to social interaction. After the PE
or Sport event is finished, they return 'home' and stay apart from society.
Thus, we can say that PE and Sport are used as a leisure activity that offer
a few hours of cooperation, competition, friendship and fun. PE and Sport
neither socialize nor reintegrate people into their social life. Why are not
we aware of that? If PE is aware, why does it keep this practice?
The
development of a Critical Pedagogy of PE
A possibility to stimulate or cause effective social change is the development
of a critical pedagogy of PE. PE teachers, researchers and society as a whole
should make effort to define what societal model is to be implanted, what
objectives are to be achieved and how these objectives are to be achieved.
Present-day PE is going through a period of identity crisis. This period does
not have a bad connotation at all. It is implicit that those involved in the
field are striving to reach a consensus. There are many reasons why a critical
pedagogy of PE is necessary. Three reasons are indicated as follows:
-
To
promote critical considerations on the socio-political functions of PE.
-
To
establish critical considerations on the institutionalization of PE.
-
To
promote critical considerations on PE discourses, practices and social
structures related to PE and Sport.
An important factor that has to be determined is what functions are to be
performed by individuals, professionals and institutions. Until now, what has
been done in the field of PE is the development of disintegrated activities and
tasks. Theoretical and practical contents do not reflect one another. Also,
researchers act inside of the scientific fields, teachers inside the school
environments and citizens within society. What has to be emphasized is that we
all have to interact and integrate our knowledge, experiences and possibilities.
Teachers and researchers have to be conscious that we are members of society
too. We have to develop our professional activities within society.
Participation and engagement in civil and political movements may represent a
possibility for us to be citizens and qualified professionals at the same time.
Citizens should take part in civil and political movements whether they are
organized or not by researchers and teachers. Their activity should not be seen
as variables of a research project, but as active participation in a
socio-political event. As for the theory and practice of PE, they have to be
'connected' and represent one another. Misrepresentation and uncritical
approaches to objectives, socio-political functions and social values leads to
the contradictions that are present within the field. Kageyama et al. (1993)
states that there are three main areas that has to be considered in the
construction of a new PE. They are as follows:
-
The
socio-political functions of PE – the research of the "shadow
curriculum" of PE.
-
The
influences of PE which are inflicted on children – the research of the
"hidden curriculum" of PE.
-
The
socio-political formation of the PE institution – the research of the PE
institution as "hidden coercion".
Concluding
phrase
In order to contest, change or improve PE, Sport and society it is necessary to
inquire, examine and approach PE and Sport as areas in which values, practices,
ideologies, beliefs and meanings are contested.
