Content uploaded by Samantha Kahts-kramer
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Samantha Kahts-kramer on May 28, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Guidelines for action learning as professional development to transform Physical
Education in low resourced primary schools in South Africa
Samantha Kahts-Kramer and Lesley Wood
Continuing professional development (CPD) within a low resourced
education environment necessitates context specific and needs-driven
learning, particularly in Physical Education (PE) where personal and
systemic barriers impede negatively on teachers and children’s educational
experiences. This paper provides evidence-based guidelines as to how an
action learning approach to CPD for PE might empower teachers to direct
their own learning within low resource environments. A participatory action
learning and action research design, using qualitative data generation
methods, guided the inquiry. Ten teachers from two low resourced schools
in South Africa, through participation in an action learning process,
ultimately deduced five guidelines from their reflective enquiry to guide
teachers to collaborate to transform their teaching of PE. The action learning
approach to CPD supports teachers to take ownership of and responsibility
for their CPD within the subject of PE. Ultimately, learning how to learn,
enables teachers to champion sustainable change through establishing
ongoing communities of practice.
Keywords: action learning, continuing professional development;
participatory action learning and action research; physical education; action
transformative learning
Introduction
Rich and poor school divides exist globally, regardless of how wealthy a country is (Rees
et al. 2018). An under-resourced school, as conceptualized in this paper, primarily
comprises children whose parents cannot afford to pay for education, provides a feeding
scheme and is reliant on government funding for basic infrastructure and payment of staff
(Veriava 2012). In South Africa, the context of the study we report on in this paper, over
80% of children attend non-or minimal fee-paying, under-resourced schools (Statistics
South Africa 2022).
2
One persistent source of inequality in education resides in Physical Education (PE)
teaching (Hardman et al. 2014). PE facilitates children’s social, physical, cognitive and
affective development (Bailey 2018); aids in decreasing childhood obesity (Pérez
Rodrigo 2013); and contributes to their academic success (Zach, Shoval, and Lidor 2017).
Since most development takes place in the early years, it is important that children
experience these benefits as early in their lives as possible. Unfortunately, in South Africa
(Burnett 2020) and some developed countries (Dauenhauer et al. 2019), not all children
have the opportunity to experience PE teaching, particularly in low resourced schools in
communities with high poverty rates.
South Africa has for many years fallen short of the national (Draper et al. 2019) and
international (Bull et al. 2020) physical activity and PE policy guidelines (Burnett 2020).
This situation has negatively affected children’s physical activity levels, with only half
of South African children achieving these recommendations (Draper et al. 2019).
Empowering teachers to improve PE teaching could assist with achieving favourable
health outcomes for children, particularly in impoverished areas where PE is not well
established in schools (Burnett-Louw 2020). In the Eastern Cape of South Africa, where
this study took place, 95% of schools are regarded as low resourced schools (Ncanywa
2015). Children in these communities are not likely to belong to out of school sports clubs
or have hazardous-free recreational facilities. Therefore, it is even more important that
the teachers working in these schools need to learn how to integrate PE into their teaching.
Primary school teachers are generalists, unlike in secondary schools and more affluent
primary schools where specialist sports teachers are employed (Stroebel et al. 2017). In
earlier collaboration with teachers in low resourced schools (Kahts-Kramer, du Randt and
Wood 2022), we identified many personal and systemic barriers to teaching PE among
this population. These included perceptions that PE was not an important subject; low
teacher self-efficacy beliefs; insufficient infrastructure and equipment; large classes of
differently abled learners; a general absence of parental support; a lack of safety; high
workloads; and limited time allocated in the curriculum to the subject. In addition,
children who attend these low resourced schools come from families living on or below
the poverty line (Statistics South Africa 2018), meaning that they are in need of additional
physical, psychological and economic support to deal with the challenges that abject
poverty brings (Jamieson and Richter 2017). Teachers must know how to accommodate
3
for the many “physical, cognitive, behavioral, and psychosocial problems” of children
who live in poverty during physical activity (Orr et al. 2018, 403). The irony is that
although these schools cannot afford the specialist input required to meet the many
different needs of learners, such children are most in need of it. Therefore CPD has to not
only support teachers in becoming PE specialists, but also help them to develop agency
to support learners holistically where they can (Kennedy 2014).
Limited research in a South African context exists on how CPD could be operationalized
for generalist teachers working in low resourced schools (Burnett-Louw 2020). In South
Africa CPD content tends to be decided-on without teacher consultation (Zeller and Roux
2021; Stroebel et al. 2019). Inequality in education is a pervasive problem that requires
multi-sectoral responses (Jez, Hauth, and Ramers 2022) but we argue that if CPD is based
on the principles of action learning (rather than being standardized and uniform
offerings), including teachers in all stages of its design, they would be better placed to
navigate the complexity of under-resourced teaching environments.
This article explains how we adopted an action learning approach to implement and
evaluate participatory, needs-driven and transformative CPD to foster collaboration
between teachers, colleagues, and management for the application of their learning. The
guiding research question was: What CPD guidelines can primary school teachers
generate to enable them to learn how to teach PE more effectively in low resourced
schools? The findings revealed the need to: 1) create a safe space to 2) identify learning
needs, 3) collaboratively develop action plans; 4) share plans with colleagues to gain
support; and 5) form their own communities of practice for ongoing learning and support.
Although the context of this study is South Africa, similar problems are experienced in
low-income communities throughout the world, including those in developed countries.
We now proceed to explain critical action learning as the theoretical framework and
action research as methodological approach, before discussing the guidelines derived
from the findings.
Critical action learning and action research as paradigm and methodology
Zuber-Skerritt (2009, 6) defines action learning and action research (ALAR) as an
integrated paradigm, theory of learning and methodology:
4
‘Action Learning’ means learning from and through action or concrete experience, as well
as taking action as a result of this learning. Similarly, ‘Action Research’ is a cyclical
iterative process of action and reflection on and in action. Through the careful thought of
collaborative reflection we conceptualize and generalize what happened (action). We can
then investigate (research) whether our conceptions hold ground in new situations; that is,
we try to find confirming and disconfirming evidence to inform our assessment and further
reflection. The main difference between ‘Action Learning’(AL) and ‘Action Research’
(AR) is the same as that between learning and research generally. Both include active
learning, searching, problem solving and systematic [cyclical and reflective] enquiry.
However, Action Research is more systematic, rigorous, scrutinizable, verifiable, and
always made public [after peer validation].
We also view AL and AR as similar processes grounded in a critical paradigm. Trehan
and Rigg (2015) explain critical action learning (CAL) as an approach that highlights
power relations and the emotional dimensions of learning. As praxeology, or theory of
practical knowing, this approach to AL requires participants to critically reflect on, and
make explicit within the group, their learning through reflexive dialogue (Frantell, Miles,
and Ruwe, 2019), their assumptions and emotions. They also need to reflect on the
influence their participation or non-participation may have on the group’s ability to
collaborate towards a common goal. The first author, as facilitator of the group, asked
critical questions to enable the teachers to identify and share their attitudes and beliefs
that might hinder their ability to integrate PE into their teaching, before focussing on the
technical or practical barriers to implementation. Participants learnt to find ways to
overcome the power relations inherent in a hierarchic school system, as explained in later
sections. In CAL, tensions are embraced and explored as important sources of learning.
Thus, it can be compared to transformative learning which Mezirow (2003, 59) describes
as “learning that transforms problematic frames of reference to make them more
inclusive, [non-]discriminating, open, reflective and emotionally able to change.” The
goal is to transform meaning schemes or values, beliefs, feelings, expectations,
interpretations, and meaning perspectives or assumptions based on past experiences, so
as to positively influence subsequent actions (Kitchenham 2008). CAL is an inherent
component of critical action research (Wood 2019). According to Kemmis, McTaggart,
and Nixon (2014, 64) solving complex problems requires “transforming a practice and
securing its transformation [through] thinking about, making changes to, and monitoring
and documenting [a] variety of things.” Critical ALAR enabled teachers to examine their
current meaning schemes and perspectives to first bring about personal change before
becoming leaders of the change they want to see (Bond 2015). Critical reflection on self
and group interaction is thus at the heart of transformative and critical ALAR (Singleton
5
2015).
In this instance, critical action learning within research cycles of planning, acting,
observing and reflecting (Kemmis et al. 2014) required carefully designed activities.
These activities supported teachers in learning to understand how social structures and
personal belief systems influence their PE teaching. The process of CAL consisted of
facilitating teachers to: 1) share their experiences about PE; 2) critically reflect on why
and how they implement PE; 3) engage in reflective dialogue with colleagues and/or key
stakeholders involved in PE; 4) express their feelings through numerous artistic mediums
(singing, art, dance, posters etc.) to enable holistic learning and expression; 5) analyze
their context of teaching and what may hinder or foster change (such as the time, policy,
history and social relations within a given construct); and 6) engage in authentic learning
experiences to build trust and foster genuine interests in meeting each other’s needs
(Mezirow and Taylor 2011). In this way, teachers participated in communicative action
(Habermas 2015) aimed at achieving mutual understanding and agreement via democratic
dialogue (Gustavsen 1992). Democratic dialogue has delivered promising findings for
transformative learning and engagement for positive change among PE teachers (King
and Holland 2022).
Zuber-Skerritt (2011) added the ‘P’ to ALAR to create PALAR to emphasise the benefits
of participatory engagement in improving professional practice, although the process is
the same as ALAR, in that participants collaborate within small action learning groups,
normally referred to in the field of Education as communities of practice (Wenger 1998)
to create knowledge through reflexive dialogue (Wood 2019) and social participation.
Ten female teachers (9 Coloured and 1 Black) from two under-resourced primary schools
in the Eastern Cape (South Africa), participated in the action learning group. As Table 1
indicates they had varying levels of education, ages, and experience. None had engaged
in specialist PE training courses. Each teacher was randomly assigned a number between
1 and 20 for anonymity purposes.
PLEASE INSERT TABLE 1 HERE
Figure 1 depicts the two action learning cycles.
PLEASE INSERT FIGURE 1 HERE
6
Teachers collaboratively created the questions to explore the complex and messy
processes innate to learning about their PE needs to initiate change, namely: 1) What do
we need to learn to be able to implement PE?; and 2) How can we improve our confidence
to teach PE within our school contexts? Data generation included transcriptions of video
recorded sessions, collages (Leavy 2019) and field notes made by the first author (Meyer
and Willis 2019). To adhere to the principles of democratic dialogue (Gustavsen 1992)
she used participatory strategies – such as the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) (Hardina
2012) and the “Circle of Voices”, “Hatful of Quotes” and “Conversational Moves”
(Brookfield and Preskill 2016), to encourage the teachers to engage with each other.
Data analysis took place on both a practical and theoretical level (Wood 2019). To analyse
data collaboratively with the teachers on a practical level, the first author summarized the
main themes on the board during our action learning sessions during the dialogue. To
continue including the teachers in the data analysis process, the verbatim quote transcripts
were shared with them. However, the teachers felt that the volume of written work on the
transcripts was too much to cover, and to overcome this, the first author used the “Hatful of
Quotes” and “Newspaper Dialogue” approaches (Brookfield and Preskill 2016) where
teachers could read a quote, decide on what it represented, and then place these quotes into
themes and categories on a large blank sheet. Each teacher was provided with an opportunity
to reflect on the quotes through applying the “Circle of Voices” approach (Brookfield and
Preskill 2016). After teachers analyzed the data, we then (the first and second author)
thematically analyzed these themes following the steps as explained by Clarke et al.
(2019) to generate the theoretical model (see Figure 2).
Validity was improved throughout the study by providing teachers with an opportunity to
identify when something did not “feel right” – known as a legitimacy deficit (Kemmis et
al. 2014, 39), as well as by sharing findings in public spheres with colleagues at their
respective schools to receive feedback. Outcome, process, and democratic validity criteria
guided the first authors interactions with teachers (Herr and Anderson 2014). This
included the first author continuously posing questions to the teachers related to whether
the learning in the group was helping them to improve their teaching of PE. To improve
dialogic validity experts in the field of PALAR acted as critical friends to help the first
author adhere to the participatory and critical paradigm through constant dialogue,
collaboratively unpacking what was said and done, why it was said and done, who
possessed the power in the group and why (Kemmis et al. 2014).
7
Ethics clearance from the university’s Research Ethics Committee: Human (REC-H) was
obtained (H14-HEA-HMS-015), attesting to the study’s adherence to the required ethical
principles of informed consent, confidentiality and benefits for participants. As the study
was grounded in democratic, inclusive and relational ontological values (Wood and
Kahts-Kramer 2022), teachers formed an integral part of every decision made.
Discussion of findings
In the following sections we explain the five guidelines for collaborative and
transformative CPD that emerged from the analysis of the various data sets. We use
verbatim quotes of our discussion in relation to relevant literature to provide evidence to
support the findings. Figure 2 provides an overview of the sequential order of these
guidelines, with the inner most circle (the creation of a safe space) being the first and
most important step. The circular format reminds us of the cycles of action learning that
must take place within each guideline. Finally, the outer ring identifies the application of
the principles of PALAR, forming the foundation of interactions between action learning
set members (Wood 2019). Figure 2 also suggests the number of sessions it may take to
initiate and complete each action.
PLEASE INSERT FIGURE 2 HERE
Guideline 1: Create a “safe” space for learning through fostering democratic
relationships within the group
It was important to teachers that a safe space be created for learning to occur, where they
had the freedom to make mistakes and engage in critical conversations without fear of
judgement. Evidence of how teachers created a safe learning climate can be seen in how
they transformed their thinking about receiving feedback from their peers. Teachers
initially believed “It’s very difficult to try and… criticise somebody in a good way,
because criticism is criticism at the end of the day” (T19). However, by session five, one
suggested “we take the word critique away” and replace it with “discussion” (T7). These
discussions helped teachers transform their perception of critique (the notion of
judgement), to view collaborative learning as a supportive endeavour: “At the end of the
day… you should be open to criticism… because, I mean from my personal point of view,
that is how you learn and that is how you grow… how else are you going to learn?” (T16).
8
Learning environments inevitably contain moments of vulnerability. Through advocating
for this alternative approach to viewing critique as positive and engaging in democratic
dialogue, the action learning group was re-establishing and confirming their uplifting
group norms and learning how to engage in transformative action learning.
The safe space created gave teachers the freedom to make mistakes. As one teacher said:
“No-one is perfect. We will make mistakes. Just accept what’s done is done… [When] I
fall, you all laugh” (T5). This shift from a judgemental discourse enabled teachers to
participate more freely, which is vital for fostering collaborative and transformative CPD
(Onrubia, Roca, and Minguela 2022). The incorporation of conversations which help
group members deliberate their expectations and beliefs, according to Kayi-Aydar and
Goering (2019), is an important consideration in AL. By learning to ask critical questions,
they learnt to redefine problems and find creative solutions.
Teachers explained that participation in the group helped them to develop relationship
which in turn enabled them to learn better:
We became active, we became engaged, before we knew it we were talking
to each and every colleague. We were getting to know each other. I mean, we
had food involved, we had laughs involved, we had action involved... we ah,
got to a place where we were like um, friends. We became more friends than
just colleagues. (T12).
Teachers actively engaged in learning about PE together, both indoors and outdoors.
Therefore, they could laugh with each other and experience each other’s mistakes as a
shared learning experience. This form of PE engagement within active and equal
participation is referred to as cooperative learning (Dyson, Colby, and Barratt 2016) and
when done outdoors, is a form of outdoor experiential learning (Kourtesopoulou and
Kriemadis 2020). This active learning experience culminated in the group accepting each
other in a supportive manner: “Sharing is the best part here [in our action learning group].
We have learnt from each other… And the bonding. As you see we start to learn from
each other… “(T4). Prolonged participation within an action learning group creates a
sense of unity and support which in turn helps with the navigation of personal struggles
and differences (Gonçalves et al. 2021).
9
By meeting in a neutral and pleasant environment, free from the stresses of everyday
teaching also promoted interaction: “You now able to communicate outside of that
environment [school]… To just think… And just get lost in it… because there’s more
freedom… You can let your hair down. You can communicate with everybody” (T19).
Wood (2019) backs the need for choosing a learning environment which enables
participants to relax, to concentrate fully on the subject at hand and to see each other in a
new light. Once teachers have created a learning environment conducive to sharing, an
important next step is to assist them to identify their learning needs with regard to PE.
Guideline 2: Assist teachers with identifying their PE learning needs
Teachers were not sure how to practically apply the Curriculum Assessment Policy
Statement (CAPS) document – the primary school curriculum of South Africa
(Department of Basic Education: Republic of South Africa 2011) and so this was a focus
of much of the learning. The ALAR cycles of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting
on learning helped them realize the importance of critical reflection to lead to action for
change:
For me this is a continuation of: I am empowered with knowledge of how to
do Phys Ed better [but]… is it working? How does it fit into our schedule at
school? Can we go out on a regular basis? Did this, this, and this work? Not
the space concerns but the fundamental movement skills? Did it work with
children? Could you have stations? Did the warm-up activities we learnt
about now work? We need to do some of those things [at school]. Otherwise,
we are just adding on and on to our group and knowledge. (T7).
Teachers realized that to apply what they had learnt in their school context, they needed
to learn with and from each other. Teachers also realized that through applying the PE
content at schools and with their learners, and asking critically reflective questions, they
could adapt the content, thus integrating their indigenous knowledge (Ezeanya-Esiobu
2019). The goal of CPD should be for teachers to learn to become reflective practitioners
(Zwozdiak-Myers 2020), open to ongoing learning, a skill developed in AL. It should
also be focused on incorporating teachers’ expertise to work within a given community
and culture. The critical action learning process enabled them to do this.
10
Teachers identified the following process to support their learning: 1) Group-based lesson
planning; 2) Individual and/or group-based implementation of their lesson plans with
their learners at their respective schools; 3) Subsequent action learning group reflection
on the video-taped lesson; and 4) Sharing of what was learnt with others. The process of
learning that the teachers developed can be viewed in the collaboratively developed video
they produced (their faces are blurred to maintain anonymity):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AphVIcJA22E. Deciding on how they would meet
their learning needs resulted in transformation in their thinking about how to teach PE,
and how they viewed their learners, which in turn helped them identify new learning
needs. For example, one method the first author introduced to the teachers was viewing
videos of children performing movements proficiently. When teachers went back to
school, they had a transformed view of how to observe their children and how to help
them improve:
For me the analysis [video analysis of children moving] helped me to see
where the actual problem is and what I needed to learn to help. Because
sometimes we just say, they can’t gallop. But with the analysis and the
breakdown here we can look at the different stages and see where is the actual
problem … Now we know what to look for and what to remediate and go
back. Like you said, be more verbal and instruct them in a game or pairing
up. That was a good learning curve for me (T7).
Once teachers identify their learning needs, the next step is to assist them to put their
learning into action.
Guideline 3: Assist teachers with developing action plans to help them overcome
perceived barriers and improve their teaching of PE
Teachers learnt that planning provided them with “structure” and “to see if what was said
is going to align with the programme we set and have in front of us” (T13). Therefore,
the process of planning, acting, observing, and reflecting helped teachers transform their
teaching to overcome perceived challenges: “I think this process in itself, was the
improvement plan. These are the challenges; this is the improvement plan…” (T19).
When teachers took action, they began to realise that the things they had regarded as
11
barriers, such as limited space and not having equipment were not real issues. They learnt
to do less with more. These transformations in teachers’ meaning schemes and
perspectives (Mezirow and Taylor 2011), encouraged them to improvise, rather than
avoid teaching PE:
Sometimes you would sit there and think: What am I going to do now? You
know about it [PE] and you were actually procrastinating. Because in our
situation there is no equipment here, so what must I do?... Now you guide
your time and if somebody is out there, you improvise and you make a plan.
(T4).
Reflection on action also helped teachers to take responsibility for transforming their own
attitudes: “We mustn’t always focus on the negative, we must try to focus more to let the
positive flow, even if there is shooting outside, or other problems…” (T7). Teachers
enhanced their personal growth through generating new cycles of learning and reflecting
on their process of learning, The learning process that teachers in this study experienced
aligns with Parkhouse's et al. (2021) conclusion of the positive role that action learning
has in teachers’ professional development. However, to include the “ripple effects” of
action learning, and thus systemic change, the broader community needs to be included
(Parkhouse et al. 2021, 411). In this study, teachers had to learn to strategize the inclusion
of other colleagues.
Guideline 4: Encourage teachers to share their action plans with others in the
school, before implementing them
The teachers identified the lack of understanding among colleagues about the role of PE
in child development as a barrier to the implementation of their action plans. For example,
one teacher believed that “they are going to take us out” (T4) at school when the action
learning group starts to implement their action plans. Many teachers had negative
attitudes towards PE teaching: “here’s something here [in the school] that’s... a feeling to
not want to implement the physical side” (T8). Not wanting to implement PE is a common
cultural barrier globally (Roux 2020). Overcoming this perceptual barrier is important if
PE is to become a normal part of children’s everyday school experiences.
In addition to the lack of support from colleagues, there was a belief that management did
12
not understand the importance of PE to children’s development, and therefore did not
support its inclusion in the curriculum:
From management side... you will get questioned, why you doing that? Is it
curriculum? But they don’t know this is included in the curriculum… It is
very noisy. So, if the principal comes unexpectedly in your class, [they view
it as]: You playing, you supposed to be teaching? (T18).
Thus, teachers were fearful of management:
People are intimidated, somewhat, to a certain degree by management… So,
what happens is that teachers fear, and stay away [from management].
They’re not being themselves … They’re more reserved, they’re more well
behaved (T19).
Having “a good relationship” (T19) with management was deemed essential and teachers
developed strategies to overcome the lack of collegial support and create more interest in
teaching PE. They decided that sharing what they had learnt with their colleagues was an
important first step towards positive change:
My aim would be to invite … my other Grade ones and then to the rest of the
Foundation Phase to come and see my lesson. And then to involve
management to see what we are doing. Then we can take up problems related
to not doing what we want to do… To empower people at schools so that they
can buy-in, because of the fact that we know people are sitting [not teaching
PE] … (T4).
They also decided to use a practical and fun approach as an entry point to initiate change:
… I will never be able to get the whole group [all primary school teachers]
on board, but I would like to expose them to the fun side of it [PE]. And
maybe in the second term, find out in each Grade, who would enjoy [giving]
Phys Ed... And then that teacher takes the class for Phys Ed and the other does
art. So that at least all the aspects [learning outcomes] are being covered and
not to force people to go out and do it [PE]. (T7).
13
Teachers in this study therefore transformed their fear about colleagues being hostile
towards them and management being unapproachable, into a drive to include them in
activities. This realization leads to the next important guideline, ultimately forming a
community of practice with fellow colleagues so that sustainable action is maintained
within the school context.
Guideline 5: Support teachers as they implement, reflect on, and share their progress
in their own community of practice
Teachers had to undergo a mind shift in how they viewed CPD. Initially, teachers viewed
CPD as a once-off event, which stopped as soon as the CPD ’trainer’ left. However, by
the end of the project they realized that they had to take responsibility for continuing with
the action learning groups at their schools. They had to become the future teacher leaders
of PE:
… You can’t say, when is it the end. Cos it’s not going ... [to end]. Because
if you have that mindset, then it’s like… now this is the end of this. And, and
I think, I’m so careful that we want to finish the gaps, finish that. Ok, now it’s
a celebration. This is the end of everything. So, now for me, it’s just take a
half day, celebrate what we’ve done, and move on. And [the facilitator] will
slowly but surely, will withdraw from us. We will still go on. (T7).
To ensure continuation of the initiatives within a teacher-led community of practice, they
had to take responsibility for not only implementing actions, but also creating a more
positive attitude towards teaching PE, as well as reducing systemic barriers. Teachers had
to come to the realisation that “It starts with me” (T4) and that it was their responsibility
to come to school prepared for PE teaching, as participant T16’s slogan for our group
indicated: “high heels off, takkies [sneakers] on”. This mind shift towards teachers taking
ownership of their practice has great potential not only to change how PE is offered in
low-resource primary schools, but also any other subject.
Concluding reflection
Although this study resulted in the collaborative development of guidelines to help future
facilitators of CPD use an action learning process, it was not without its challenges. For
teachers who were used to working within a hierarchic school system and who had not
14
been taught to work in the realities of an under-resourced school or to improvise/be
creative in reaching curriculum outcomes, it was difficult for them to learn how to trust
enough to learn from and with each other. Similarly, as facilitator, the first author also
had to learn how to embody a participatory epistemology, having come from a more
objective paradigm. Both facilitator and participants had to learn how to embrace and
navigate relational tensions. Finally, they also had to learn to be vulnerable, to share their
fears and weaknesses so that they could gain support from others. The word count in this
paper does not allow for us to provide evidence of such challenges and they are the subject
of a separate and as yet unpublished paper. Facilitators of action learning groups in similar
contexts thus need to be prepared to spend time, develop patience and persistence and be
open to sometimes painful learning.
Despite such challenges, the guidelines emanating from this study provide an action
learning framework for initiating and sustaining a collaborative and transformative CPD
approach focused on improving PE teaching in low resourced schools. Although
developed for the facilitation of PE, these guidelines could also be applied to CPD in any
subject. These guidelines therefore inform, guide, explain, and influence future practice
and research on CPD, particularly in low resourced school contexts.
Acknowledgements
We thank the teachers who were part of this study and principals who supported the
implementation thereof. Without them, this study would not have been possible.
References
Bailey, R. 2018. "Sport, Physical Education and Educational Worth." Educational Review
70 (1): 55–66. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1403208.
Bond, N. 2015. The Power of Teacher Leaders: Their Roles, Influence, and Impact. New
York: Routledge.
Brookfield, S., and S. Preskill. 2016. The Discussion Book: 50 Great Ways to Get People
Talking. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Bull, F. C., S.S. Al-Ansari., S. Biddle., K. Borodulin., M.P. Buman., G. Cardon, and C.
Carty, C. et al. 2020. "World Health Organization 2020 Guidelines on Physical
15
Activity and Sedentary Behaviour." British Journal of Sports Medicine 54 (24):
1451–1462. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955.
Burnett-Louw, C. 2020. "Physical Education and Health as a Child’s Right: Reflections
on the Soweto Active Schools Programme."
South African Journal of Childhood Education 10 (1): 1–11. doi:
https://doi.org/10.4102/SAJCE.V10I1.776
Burnett, C. 2020. "A National Study on the State and Status of Physical Education in
South African Public Schools." Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy
26(2):179-196. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2020.1792869
Clarke, V., V. Braun., N. Hayfield, and G, Terry. 2019. "Thematic Analysis." In
Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences, edited by P.
Liamputtong, 843-860. Singapore: Springer Nature.
Dauenhauer, B., X. Keating., P. Stoepker, and R. Knipe. 2019. "State Physical Education
Policy Changes From 2001 to 2016." Journal of School Health 89 (6): 485–493. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12757.
Department of Basic Education: Republic of South Africa. 2011. "National Curriculum
Statement (NCS): Curriculum and Assessment Policy, Foundation Phase Grades
R-3." Government Printing Works. Accessed 22 June 2022.
http://www.oph.fi/english/curricula_and_qualifications/basic_education
Draper, C. E., S.A. Tomaz., S.H. Bassett., J. Harbron., H. S. Kruger, and L.K.
Micklesfield. 2019. "Results from the Healthy Active Kids South Africa 2018
Report Card." South African Journal of Child Health 13 (3): 130–136. doi:
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/:10.7196/SAJCH.2019.v13.i3.1640.
Dyson, B. P., R. Colby, and M. Barratt. 2016. "The Co-Construction of Cooperative
Learning in Physical Education with Elementary Classroom Teachers." Journal
of Teaching in Physical Education 35 (4): 370–380. doi:
https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2016-0119.
Ezeanya-Esiobu, C. 2019. Indigenous Knowledge and Education in Africa. Los Angeles:
SpringerOpen.
Frantell, K. A., J. R. Miles, and A. M. Ruwe. 2019. "Intergroup dialogue: A review of
recent empirical research and its implications for research and practice." Small
Group Research 50, (5): 654-695. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496419835923
16
Gonçalves, L., M. Parker., C. Luguetti, and M. Carbinatto. 2021. "‘We United to
Defend Ourselves and Face our Struggles: Nurturing a Physical Education
Teachers’ Community of Practice in a Precarious Context."
Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 27(4): 1–14. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2021.1891212.
Gustavsen, B. 1992. Dialogue and Development: Theory of Communication, Action
Research and the Restructuring of Working Life. California: Open Library.
Habermas, J. 2015. The Theory of Communicative Action: Reasons and Rationalization
of Society. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
Hardina, D. 2012. Interpersonal Social Work Skills for Community Practice. New York:
Springer Publishing Company.
Hardman, K., C. Murphy., A.C. Routen, and S. Tones. 2014. World-Wide Survey of
School Physical Education: Final Report. Paris: UNESCO.
Herr, K., and G.L. Anderson. 2014. The Action Research Dissertation: A Guide for
Students and Faculty. 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Jamieson, L, and L. Richter. 2017. South African Child Gauge. Cape Town: Children’s
Institute, University of Cape Town (South Africa).
Jez, R. J., C.M. Hauth, and L.H. Ramers. 2022. "Transforming Educators in the United
States and South Africa: An International Collaboration to Enhance Culturally
Responsive Inclusive Practices." Journal of International Special Needs
Education. doi: https://doi.org/10.9782/JISNE-D-20-00009.
Kahts-Kramer, S.A., R. du Randt, and L. Wood. 2022. "Foundation phase teachers’
experiences of physical education in low-resource schools: implications for
continuing professional development." South African Journal for Research in
Sport, Physical Education and Recreation 44 (2): 29-52. doi:
https://www.ajol.info/index.php/sajrs/article/view/238315
Kayi-Aydar, H., and C.Z. Goering. 2019. "Socratic Circles in Professional Development
Sessions: Negotiating Peripheral Participation and Membership in Building a
Community of Practice." Action in Teacher Education 41 (2): 154–171. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2018.1561547.
Kemmis, S., R. McTaggart, and R. Nixon. 2014. The Action Research Planner: Doing
Critical Participatory Action Research. New York: Springer.
17
Kennedy, A. 2014. "Understanding Continuing Professional Development: The Need for
Theory to Impact on Policy and Practice." Professional Development in
Education 40 (5): 688–697. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.955122
King, F., and E. Holland. 2022. A Transformative Professional Learning Meta-Model to
Support Leadership Learning and Growth of Early Career Teachers.
International Journal of Leadership in Education (2022):1–25. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2022.2037021.
Kitchenham, A. 2008. "The Evolution of John Mezirow’s Transformative." Journal of
Transformative Education 6 (2): 104–123.
doi:https://doi.org/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/154134460832
2678.
Kourtesopoulou, A., and A. Kriemadis. 2020. "Exploring The Influence Of Outdoor
Management Development (OMD) Program On Leadership And Teamwork
Competencies." Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning 21(3):
247-260. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2020.1784763.
Leavy, P. 2019. Handbook of Arts-Based Research. New York: Guilford Publications.
Mezirow, J. 2003. "Transformative Learning as Discourse". Journal of Transformative
Education 1 (1): 58–63. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344603252172.
Mezirow, J., and E.W. Taylor. 2011. Transformative Learning In Practice: Insights From
Community, Workplace and Higher Education. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
Ncanywa, T. 2015. A Descriptive Analysis of the Eastern Cape School Indicators.
Africa’s Public Service Delivery and Performance Review 3 (1): 26–54. doi:
https://doi.org/10.4102/apsdpr.v3i1.74.
Onrubia, J., B. Roca., and M. Minguela. 2022. "Assisting Teacher Collaborative
Discourse in Professional Development: An Analysis of a Facilitator’s
Discourse Strategies." Teaching and Teacher Education 113(1): 1-18. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103667.
Orr, A. B., K. Keiver., C.P. Bertram, and S. Clarren. 2018. "FAST club: The Impact of a
Physical Activity Intervention on Executive Function in Children With Fetal
Alcohol Spectrum Disorder." Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 35 (4): 403–
423. doi: https://doi.org/10.1123/apaq.2017-0137.
Parkhouse, H., J. Gorlewski., J. Senechal., & C.Y. Lu., H. 2021. "Ripple Effects: How
Teacher Action Research on Culturally Relevant Education can Promote Systemic
18
Change." Action in Teacher Education 43 (4): 411–429. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2021.1896395.
Pérez Rodrigo, C. 2013. "Current Mapping of Obesity". Nutrición Hospitalaria 28 (5):
21–31. doi: https://doi.org/10.3305/nh.2013.28.sup5.6915.
Rees, G., A. Gromada., J. Cuesta., and Z. Bruckauf. 2018. An Unfair Start: Inequality in
Children’s Education in Rich Countries. UNICEF Office of Research: Innocenti.
Roux, K. C. J. 2020. "The Delivery of Primary School Physical Education in South
African Public Schools: The Perceptions Of Educators." South African Journal
of Childhood Education 10 (1): 1–10. doi: https://hdl.handle.net/10520/EJC-
1fa2087081.
Singleton, J. 2015. "Head, Heart and Hands Model for Transformative Learning: Place as
Context for Changing Sustainability Values". Journal of Sustainability in
Education 9: 1–14. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/head%2c-heart-and-
hands-model-for-transformative-as-
singleton/3106f390b35648d149ec6a1117c92008671e9eb1.
Stastistics South Africa. 2022. "General Household Survey, 2021." Statistics South
Africa. Accessed 15 February 2022. https://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=15482
Statistics South Africa. 2018. "Men, Women and Children: Findings of living condition
survey, 2014/2015." Accessed 20 August 2022. www.statssa.gov.za
Stroebel, L. C. E., J. Hay., and H.J. Bloemhoff. 2017. "Needs and Challenges of
Foundation Phase Life Skills Teachers in Delivering Physical Education: Jack of
All Trades and Master of None." South African Journal for Research in Sport,
Physical Education and Recreation 39 (3): 163–177. doi:
https://journals.co.za/content/journal/10520/EJC-c38084832.
Stroebel, L. C. E., J. Hay., and H.J. Bloemhoff. 2019. "An Approach to Re-Skilling of in-
Service Teachers in Physical Education in South African Schools." South African
Journal of Education 39 (2): 1–12. doi: https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v39n2a1643.
Trehan, K., and C. Rigg. (2015). Critical action learning research: opportunities and
challenges for HRD research and practice. In Handbook of Research Methods on
Human Resource Development, edited by N.K.M. Sauders and P. Tosey, 155-167.
Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing
Veriava, F. 2012. "Rich School, Poor School: The Great Divide Persists." Mail and
Guardian: Africa’s Best Read, Accessed 28 September 2022.
19
https://mg.co.za/article/2012-09-28-00-rich-school-poor-school-the-great-
divide-persists.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wood, L. 2019. Participatory action learning and action research: Theory, practice and
process. London: Routledge.
Wood, L. and S.A. Kahts-Kramer. 2022. “But how will you ensure the objectivity of the
researcher?” Guidelines to address possible misconceptions about the ethical
imperatives of community-based research." Research Ethics 19 (1): 1-17 doi:
https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161221135882
Zach, S., E. Shoval., and R. Lidor. 2017. "Physical Education and Academic Achievement
- Literature Review 1997 - 2015." Journal of Curriculum Studies 49 (5): 703–721.
doi: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2016.1234649.
Zeller, D., and C.J. Roux. 2020. "Experiences of Sport Coordinators in a Physical
Education Professional Development Programme." African Journal for Physical
Activity and Health Sciences 26 (2): 212–226. doi:
https://doi.org/https://journals.co.za/content/journal/10520/EJC-1f519dc1f5.
Zuber-Skerritt, O., 2009. Action learning and action research: Songlines through
interviews. Netherlands: Brill.
Zuber-Skerritt, O. 2011. Action Leadership: Towards a Participatory Paradigm. New
York: Springer.
Zwozdiak-Myers, P. N. 2020. "Teachers as Reflective Practitioners/Researchers." In
Learning to Teach Physical Education in the Secondary School: A Companion to
School Experience, edited by S. Capel, J. Cliffe and J. Lawrence, 337-359. New
York: Routledge.
20
Table 1: Teachers’ demographic profile
Code
Grade
nL
School
Age
YT
Highers Qualification
Home language
T4
1
33
2
59
30
B.Ed Honours
Afrikaans
T5
1,3
30+
2
52
19
National Professional
Diploma in Education
Afrikaans
T6
R
34
1
44
7
Early learning course (NQF
Level 5)
Afrikaans
T7
3
44
1
50
30
B.Ed Honours
Afrikaans
T8
1
35
2
59
13
Diploma (3 years)
isiXhosa
T9
2
38+
1
60
33
Diploma (3 years);
Honours in Special Needs
Education
Afrikaans
T12
1
38+
1
47
10
B-Ed Honours
Afrikaans
T13
3
30
2
35
5
B-Ed Honours
Afrikaans
T16
1
34
1
52
30
Diploma (3 years);
Advanced Certificate in
Education (Senior and
Intermediate phases)
Afrikaans
T19
3
38
2
35
11
B.Ed Honours
English
Keys: nL (number of learners); YT (Years teaching)
21
Figure 1: Two PALAR Cycles
Cycle One (Sessions one to four; 6
months)
Focus of sessions
- Forming an action learning group
through building trust and relationships
- Identifying knowledge teachers need
and developing personally by sharing
knowledge and skills with each other
- Defining mutual purpose
- Conducting in-depth context analysis
- Forming vision
Individual action by participants between
sessions: Sharing PE content with
colleagues. Implementing PE classes and
inviting colleagues to watch, encouraging
them to implement lessons. Taking videos
of classroom sessions to share with others.
Cycle Two (Sessions five to fourteen; 15
months)
Focus of sessions
- Developing a research question
- Exploring team roles and responsibilities
and each members’ purpose
- Identifying ethical conduct
- Putting action plans in place based on
building teachers’ confidence to teach PE
- Collaboratively creating PE lesson plans
and videos and presentation to teach
colleagues
- Deciding on dissemination of findings
- Reflecting on learning and development
and deciding on next steps
Individual action by participants between
sessions: Same as Cycle One
22
Figure 2: Visual representation of CPD guidelines
23
