PE is neither good nor bad. It is an empty vessel and all stakeholders involved in the subject have a duty to act ethically as we have the potential to do harm. What we get out of PE is dependent on how we craft it, what we fill it with, and who we get to do that. Scholars have attempted to address this concern through contemporary approaches such as Models-based Practice, Meaningful Physical Education and Pedagogies of Social Justice. Whilst these approaches are based on sound moral and ethical justifications, they are not underpinned by any legal imperative such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Could using the UNCRC as a vision to craft and fill the empty vessel of PE lead to a more moral and ethical approach?
The CRC is an international and widely supported human rights treaty with 195 state signatories, including the UK. The convention consists of 3 parts and 54 articles, with the rights of the child falling into three broad categories of provision, protection and participation. Provision is the right to get one’s basic needs fulfilled, for example education, recreation and play. Protection is the right to be shielded from harmful acts or practices. Participation is the right to be heard of decisions affecting one’s own life. What might this mean for us if we start to use the CRC as a lens for thinking about the purpose, the content and the processes of physical education?
A rights respecting view of the child in PE
We need to see a child within PE as a rights holder. Children who pass the school gate do not lose their rights. Neither do they when they go to the changing room, the sports hall, the playing fields or any other place within school that PE takes place in. PE needs to be rights respecting first and foremost, not just to meet its supposed aims, but because of the ethical, moral and legal obligations PE Teachers have, which means they need to treat each and every child with dignity, equality and respect. We need to view children as full-status holders of a complete range of human rights.
A rights respecting view of the PE teacher
A PE Teacher needs to view themselves as a duty bearer. As with other professionals who work with children this means we have a responsibility to respect, protect, and fulfil the rights of children within our care. As a duty bearer, PE teachers are obligated to create an environment where they uphold and promote children’s rights in their daily teaching practice. Therefore, the role of PE teachers extends beyond the teaching of declarative and procedural knowledge; they become instrumental in fostering an environment that respects and promotes children’s rights.
A rights respecting PE curriculum
Whilst the rights to education is not only for children, the CRC provides bespoke rights for those who are under the age of 18. Articles 28 and 29 specifically address this and in combination with other provisions in the CRC provide a ‘series of inter-related entitlements’ of ‘education rights’. Whilst Article-28 focuses on the provision of education, Article 29 offers direction to the values and principles about that provision. Any form of rights respecting PE curriculum should be informed by the purpose, content and quality of education proposed in Article 29.
Article 29 challenges instrumentalist visions of (physical) education that focus on economic outcomes and social cohesion by proposing that education is inadequate unless it is primarily directed to ‘the development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential.’ Therefore rights that offer children provision, protection and participation should be in service to the development of their potential.
A rights respecting PE pedagogy
Whilst there are a number of Articles from the UNCRC that would inform the pedagogy in PE the most salient is Article 12. This guarantees two rights: to express a view and to have the view taken seriously. Therefore if PE curriculum and pedagogy is to be consistent with children’s rights, this position the learner as an active participant in the educational process, which requires a sharing of power.
This needs to be more than just a form of ventriloquism (where the PE Department gets the child to say what they want to further their own aims) or consumer feedback (where the PE Department gets the child to judge the effectiveness and efficiency of compulsory provision). It needs to be about genuine dialogue between children and adults and responding to them, not just getting them to take surveys. Having adults provide feedback to the children as part of the process is where ‘due weight’ is given to their views. PE needs to be better at involving pupils in the decision making process, much more so than it currently is, if it wishes to be rights respecting.
Rights Respecting PE
PE is neither good nor bad. Whether it helps children to flourish or causes them harm is dependent on the actions of its stakeholders. Children’s rights can become a lens, a particular way to frame issues, problems and pedagogical reasoning within the subject. They could shine a torch on PE and see what hasn’t been found and what is already there in a new light.
PE Teachers (and the wider PE profession) can draw upon the CRC and respecting rights as an alternative way to conceptualise their practice. If PE truly wishes to be child friendly, to treat all with dignity, equality and respect, to support them to realise their potential and do this in a way that causes no harm, then perhaps it needs to go on a rights respecting journey.
drowningintheshallow 