A Response to the Washington Post

There was an article published in the Washington Post titled, “What Happened to PE? It’s Losing Ground in Our Push for Academic Achievement.” In it, Jay Mathews makes the case that when schools are looking to cut the budget, PE is the first to go, despite the fact that there is a positive correlation between PE and academic achievement. He recounts overcoming his aversion to PE by joining the cross-country team, which enabled him to thrive in a running-based PE class later that year. He believes after school sports could rescue the downward trend of reduced PE in school. His call to action included lobbying teachers and administrators to increase PE in school, and to develop a lifelong exercise habit like hiking. At the end of the article, he coyly suggested that technology could be the savior of PE (a subtle nod to his boss Bezos).

So if there is a positive association between PE and academics, why is PE getting cut? The unspoken truth and sad reality is that administrators and school boards don’t believe that PE has enough benefit to justify its cost, especially when cost cutting measures need to be implemented. It is not clear where the positive academic benefit of PE comes from, and that uncertainty makes school leadership question its validity. The same thing happens to other programs like music, art, or drama. Despite the fact that these programs all support academic achievement, they get the axe if money is tight. This is the unfortunate legacy of No Child Left Behind. Teachers have to spend time teaching towards the test, and anything that doesn’t directly improve test scores is expendable.

Unfortunately, many administrators and teachers think the most useful aspect of PE is it provides an energy dump for riled up kids. Classes filled with high energy students (especially as the school year is coming to an end) need an outlet to get that chaotic energy out. When they can come back to the classroom tired, this allows them to be peaceful. If teachers think this is the best part of PE, how is this different than having an extra recess? You can pay assistants and floats (must less than PE teachers) to watch the kids for recess, which seems like an attractive option for saving money in the budget.

In a world where PE is expendable, why are after school sports thriving? The jaded answer is they increase enrollment, which means money. When it was time for me to pick a high school when I was younger, the deciding factor between two schools was that one had a football team and the other did not. The strength of a school’s sports program can influence enrollment far greater than the strength of the school’s physical education curriculum. The less pessimistic answer is that after school sports promote school spirit and enhance the community. Families come together to cheer on their children as they play. These families bond and create and meaningful adult friendships, which is not easy to do juggling work and family.

So how do we save PE? The last SHAPE conference I attended seemed to suggest that SEL was the answer. Many PE teachers have pivoted to SEL practices to improve the wellbeing of the students, which in turn positively impacts the school community. While I believe that this is a noble cause, when the main focus of PE is SEL, it begins to transform PE into a counseling class, and we lose the physical exercise, which is is still important. If PE classes included components of SEL, while retaining the physical exercise, that would be superior.

So how does PE get the respect it deserves? Like modern NBA super teams, when you can’t beat them, join them. We make the academic portion of PE so obvious that it is crystal clear to administrators and teachers that PE class is also supporting academics. The way we do this is through integration with the classroom curriculum. When an administrator observes a class learning about subatomic particles by playing a game of dodgeball, how can they deny the validity of PE? What about a kickball game that teaches the pathway of blood through the heart and lungs? If the students are learning classroom concepts in PE, it becomes a true extension of the classroom, and a genuine co-curricular. Additionally, as PE was always intended to do, we are getting the gross and fine motor movements practice, we are getting the exercise, and the students are having fun.

Here is the catch: we need a lot more research to back up this integrated PE model. This concept is still in its infancy. When I did my Masters thesis on the subject years ago, there was very little literature I could find on physical education and classroom integration. Through my own research, the data shows significant benefits for the student, including learning the classroom curriculum more effectively. If this concept is going to catch on and save physical education as we know it, we will need many more experiments, and meta analysis to show a positive correlation between integrated PE and academics. If this positive association can be scientifically demonstrated, then this is how we save PE. Not with technology gimmicks or new inventions. If we make the teaching and learning component undeniable, PE will get the respect it has always deserved.

Here are some links to blog articles and research that supports the integrated PE model: