INTRODUCTION

The benefits of regular physical activity (PA) are well known for students in physical education. These include a reduced risk of obesity, cardiovascular health, maintenance of bone mass, and lowered blood pressure (Hills, Dengel, & Lubans, 2015). When students are not actively engaged, are not receiving the knowledge and skills to recognize the personal application and benefits of PA, or feel alienated during physical education instruction, it does not intrinsically motivate them to engage in PA (SHAPE America, 2014). Positive physical education experiences can instill the confidence, competence, and motivation to take part in regular PA long after the school-aged years. High-quality physical education instruction equips students with the knowledge and ability to appreciate PA and its benefits. These include lifetime health and wellness, reduced anxiety, reduced depression, and overall well-being (McMahon et al., 2017).

Just as positive physical education experiences contribute to positive behaviors in PA, negative physical education experiences can promote a long-term hatred of PA and deter students from engaging in any PA as adults. Many adults have expressed their feelings of inadequacy, embarrassment, abuse, neglect, isolation, and humiliation. All of which occurred during physical education classes (Stream, 2009).

Some research suggests a consistent decline in the quality of physical education instruction which has failed to provide students with a beneficial learning experience (Saffici, 2015). Role conflict between teaching and coaching responsibilities contribute to this decline (Saffici, 2015). Additional factors include an inability to increase motivation (Franco & Coterón, 2017), learned helplessness and failure to recognize poor skill development (Pangrazi, 2010). These build negative experiences, frustrations, and ultimately hatred toward physical education and activity.

Whether within a physical education program or outside of school, U.S. children are not meeting the PA recommendations (National Physical Activity Plan Alliance, 2016). The goal for physical education teachers is to increase activity levels while developing “physically literate individuals who have the knowledge, skills and confidence to enjoy a lifetime of healthful physical activity” (SHAPE America, 2014, p. 11). Student experiences received during their high school physical education class can have a tremendous impact on meeting these goals.

The Society of Health and Physical Educators has developed Appropriate Instruction Guidelines for K-12 Physical Education (SHAPE America, 2009). This document identifies guidelines for providing quality, developmentally appropriate, standards-based physical education instruction to high school students.

Reflecting on the SHAPE America guidelines from a students’ perspective can help to identify instructional behaviors that may contribute to negative experiences. Comparing the guideline objectives with student perceptions can also reveal disconnections between teaching and learning and pedagogical approaches in need of improvement. Investigating student opinions and recognizing the factors that contribute to poor experiences can assist in curriculum and instruction revisions, with the goal of offering the highest quality, standards-based instruction possible (Barney, Pleban, Wilkinson, & Prusak, 2015).

Using the SHAPE America guidelines for high school physical education, this study seeks to obtain student perceptions on the quality and effectiveness of their high school physical education instructional experiences and reveal any pedagogical concerns or factors related to student disengagement which can also contribute to avoidance of lifetime PA.

METHODS

After Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, the researcher contacted nine Kinesiology instructors at six different colleges and universities including CSU Fresno, CSU Bakersfield, CSU Northridge, University of La Verne, Taft College, and Bakersfield City College. Kinesiology instructors and institutions were selected because they provide an introductory kinesiology course designed for prospective physical education teachers. They also serve a freshman population of students from different geographic locations and socioeconomic backgrounds.

Instructor contact information (department, name, phone number, and email address) was obtained from the website of each institution. An initial email was sent to selected instructors to briefly inform them of the study and verify contact information. A second follow up email was sent 2 weeks after the initial email.

Four of the nine instructors representing three of the solicited institutions responded to the initial email and agreed to assist in the study by disseminating the surveys to their students. A second email was sent to instructors providing further details of the research study. This message also included a copy of the survey tool, as well as a link to complete the survey using Google Forms. The survey, a modified version of the Likert-Type instrument validated by Stapleton and Bulger (2015), was designed to solicit opinions in learning environment, instructional strategies, assessment practices, and curriculum of physical education. The survey also included an option for participants to include their email to be contacted for further questions and participate in an interview. To ensure clarity, understanding, and content validity, the survey was reviewed and evaluated by two physical educators with expertise in teaching K-12 physical education and one higher education kinesiology instructor. The reviewers agreed that the survey tool serves the purposes for this study. However, they noted that participants may be unfamiliar with the language of the standards used in the Appropriate Instruction Guidelines for K-12 Physical Education (SHAPE America, 2009). The researcher noted this as one of the limitations of the study. The survey was once again reviewed for grammar, punctuation, understanding of instructions, and procedures of administration. The survey targeted college freshmen who stated that they had a clear recollection of their high school physical education experience and identified an interest in pursuing a career as a physical educator.

The researcher, who used one of his courses to pilot the study and test the administration of the survey, recruited additional students to participate in the study. A final population of 306 students (162 females and 144 males), representing 150 high schools throughout 108 cites, participated and were used in the study.

Survey responses in which participants included their email and stated that the researcher could contact them with additional questions, were followed up via email. 15 of the students who completed the survey participated in an optional interview in which the researcher contacted the participants via email, informed them of the research, and attached a copy of interview questions. Participants responded to the following questions.

1. How would you summarize your high school physical education experience and why?

2. In your experience, what were some of the pros and cons of your physical education experience?

3. How did your physical education instruction contribute to your current level of participation in physical activity?

4. If you could summarize your physical education experience in one word, what would it be and why?

5. How can physical education help you become more physically active?

All interviews were conducted via phone, recorded, transcribed, and coded to categorize responses based on student experiences (Saldana, 2013). Each participant was assigned an interview participant number for confidentiality and identification purposes. Interviews were designed to solicit additional perceptions, views, opinions, and centered on the focal topic (Rubin and Rubin, 2005) of student perceptions of physical education instruction.

Coding Interviews

Coding is a form of data analysis. It is a process that begins with viewing data carefully and ending with a theory that emerges from the data. According to Charmaz (2006), the coding process extracts meaning from qualitative data. Coding of interviews helped to reveal consistent, ideas, thoughts, and issues through carefully and systematically reviewing data (Charmaz, 2006). Transcribed interviews were carefully viewed, and notes were taken. Repeating and similar words and phrases that were consistent with the research topic were highlighted. These words and phrases were then categorized into major themes obtained from the SHAPE (2009) Appropriate Instruction Guidelines for K-12 Physical Education. Major themes include learning environment, instructional strategies, curriculum, and assessment. These major themes relate to the overall topic of investigation and used in conjunction with survey responses to provide reliability.

Research Design

A non-experimental, qualitative, descriptive survey research design was used. The online survey administration app, Google Forms was selected as the survey administration tool. A focused population of freshmen students from three universities were recruited to complete a survey and an interview. Careful design and review of the survey and administration procedures was conducted and some potential concerns within the research design were addressed.

Survey Pilot Test

A pilot study was conducted using Google Forms as the survey administration and information collection tool. The purpose of the pilot test process was to check the functionality of Google Forms, check the procedures for distributing, receiving, completing, and collecting data, and to evaluate data management and analysis.

The researcher sent students an online link, distributed via email, including instructions as well as a notice of consent for completing the survey. The electronic survey was distributed to a random sample of 28 participants, selected from the researchers’ freshman class.

Participants identified their consent to participate by completing the survey. All completed survey data was securely stored in the researchers Google Forms account, which also recorded and stored response data as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for analysis.

Learning Environment

Never

Rarely

Sometimes

Often

Always

1.1.2 The environment is supportive of all students and promotes the development of a positive self-concept. Students are given chances to try, to fail and to try again, free of criticism or harassment from the teacher or other students.

(2.3%)

(21.2%)

(30.7%)

(30.1%)

(15.7%)

1.1.4 Fair and consistent classroom management practices encourage student responsibility for positive behavior. Students are included in the process of developing class rules/agreements.

(10.5%)

102

(33.3%)

(27.5%)

(20.3%)

(7.5%)

1.2.1 Teachers promote exercise for its contribution to a healthy lifestyle, encouraging students to participate in physical activity and exercise outside of the physical education setting for enjoyment, skill development and health reasons.

(10.5%)

(22.5%)

(28.8%)

(24.5%)

(13.7%)

1.3.2 Activities are selected carefully to ensure that they match students’ ability levels and also are safe for all students, regardless of ability level.

(31.7%)

(28.4%)

(20%)

(15.3%)

(4.6%)

1.4.1 The physical educator creates an environment that is inclusive and supportive of all students, regardless of race, ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, religion or physical ability. These differences are acknowledged, appreciated and respected.

(11.8%)

(12.1%)

(26.5%)

(25.2%)

(24.5%)

1.6.2 Lessons/activities are adapted for overweight students (e.g., distance and pace runs are made more appropriate). Students are encouraged to undertake appropriate levels of activity for their own improvement.

(31%)

(29.7%)

(26.5%)

(12%)

(5.2%)

Table 2. Student responses to appropriate practice guidelines relating to instructional strategies.

Instructional Strategies

Never

Rarely

Sometimes

Often

Always

2.1.1 Clear goals and objectives for student learning and performance are communicated to students, parents/guardians and administrators. Students are held accountable for these expectations through various strategies (e.g., goal setting, teacher monitoring, assessment and evaluation).

(23.2%)

103

(33.7%)

(22.5%)

(12.7%)

(7.8%)

2.3.1 The physical education class begins with an anticipatory set and physical warm-up, proceeds to the instructional focus and fitness activities, and closes with a physiological cool-down and a review of instructional objectives.

(23.2%)

103

(33.7%)

(22.5%)

(12.7%)

(7.8%)

2.4.1 The physical educator plans for skill and concept instruction and provides adequate time for practice, skill development and feedback based on appropriate skill analysis.

(12.1%)

(31.7%)

(29.4%)

(18%)

(8.8%)

2.6.1 The teacher uses a variety of direct and indirect teaching styles to provide for student success, depending on the lesson objectives and content and students’ varied learning styles.

105

(34.6%)

100

(32.8%)

(15.3%)

(12.4%)

(5%)

2.6.3 The physical educator emphasizes critical-thinking and problem-solving tactics and strategies by using higher-order questions.

(6.2%)

(28.4%)

(32.4%)

(21.2%)

(11.7%)

2.9.1 The physical educator provides specific feedback on a consistent basis (e.g., “Be sure that you follow through in the direction of the basket”).

(20%)

103

(33.7%)

(22.5%)

(16%)

(7.8%)

Table 3. Student responses to appropriate practice guidelines relating to curriculum.

Practice Guidelines

Never

Rarely

Sometimes

Often

Always

3.1.2 The physical educator includes motor skill development, physiological and biomechanical concepts, health-enhancing physical activities that lead to a physically active lifestyle and opportunities to develop appropriate social behaviors.

(23.2%)

103

(33.7%)

(22.5%)

(12.7%)

(7.8%)

3.1.4 The teacher designs progressions that allow students to build on previously learned content and skills, by focusing on lifetime activities.

(29.7%)

(31.4%)

(16.7%)

(15.4%)

(6.9%)

3.3.1 The physical educator extends experiences from in-class activity lessons to community and family activities, promoting a physically active lifestyle.

(12.1%)

(31.7%)

(29.4%)

(18%)

(8.8%)

3.4.2 The physical educator helps students interpret and use assessment data to set goals and to develop a lifelong fitness plan

105

(34.6%)

100

(32.8%)

(15.3%)

(12.4%)

(5%)

3.5.1 Teachers intentionally design activities that allow students to work together in developing social skills (cooperative and competitive) and responsible behavior. Situations are designed for teaching these skills purposefully; they’re not left for “teachable moments” only.

(6.2%)

(28.4%)

(32.4%)

(21.2%)

(11.7%)

Fifteen students participated in open-ended interviews. All students shared positive and negative views of their high school physical education experience. A summary of question responses is included in Table 5. Interview participants expressed mostly negative views of high school physical education. As one student stated, “I did not learn much of anything during my high school physical education class.” Another student stated, “my inability to become bilingual as a result of my foreign language instruction is synonymous with my inability to become more physically active as a result of my physical education instruction.”

Although many students discussed unfavorable memories, positive responses included exposure to various games, opportunities to socialize with friends, and having a fun teacher. Additionally, one student stated that a positive experience was “getting to play a lot of sports.” Students suggested more time to learn skills as a way to improve their experience. In addition, more teacher patience and understanding of various student abilities was recommended. This was a suggestion to make their physical education instruction meaningful. In defense of their physical education teacher, one student added, “I had a nice teacher, but large class sizes and minimal equipment contributed to poor instruction.” Proposing that with these conditions, it is difficult for physical educators to provide standards-based instruction. There was a consensus among students that physical education has value. However, students agreed that value was minimized by more attention being given to athletic students. Students also suggested that confusion with grades and a heavy focus on fitness testing decreased the value of physical education.

DISCUSSION

Results of this study indicate that students did not feel their physical education experience strongly adhered to the Appropriate Instruction Guidelines for K-12 Physical Education (SHAPE America, 2009). Pangrazi (2003) states that feedback is a vital component in teaching and learning in physical education. Kangalgil and Ozgul (2018) suggest that feedback is one of the most crucial and effective elements of learning. However, for survey responses that address instructional strategies, 20% selected “never” and 33.7% of students indicated that consistent feedback was “rarely” provided. Another 22.5% selected “sometimes” and 16% selected “often.” Implying that their experience in physical education fell short of meeting the stated instructional guideline goals. Consistent with previous and current research, this study reveals the need for reform in high school physical education. It is important to address guidelines and better equip students with the knowledge and skills to lead a physically active lifestyle.

With childhood obesity and hypokinetic diseases being a serious concern in the United States (NCHS, 2012), quality physical education instruction can be a vital component in combating these ongoing health epidemics. Ennis (2010) stated, “One of the most reliable predictors for lifelong physical activity is the power of early physical activity experiences to shape future attitudes and expectations toward physical activity” (p.17). If students do not believe they are receiving high quality physical education instruction, they are less likely to see value in being physically active. This can have a profound impact on their engagement in PA as adults. Exceptional physical education instruction could possibly be the primary component to minimizing hypokinetic diseases and eliminating obesity (Davis, 2015). Exceptional instruction includes motor development, motor learning, focusing on skill instruction, and addressing all of the appropriate guidelines.

Most interview respondents indicated that their high school physical education experience not only failed to adhere to the Appropriate Instruction Guidelines but provided little to no clear instruction. One student stated, “Even though we were required to play a bunch of sports, we never learned how to play them.” Another student said, “The teacher seemed to pay more attention to the already knew how to play.” Students desire to receive quality physical education instruction and exposure to lifetime physical fitness activities (Barney, Pleban, Wilkinson, & Prusak, 2015). However, current practices suggest that students do not receive quality instruction. This further implies that positive health outcomes and lifetime PA recommendations are not being met (National Physical Activity Plan Alliance, 2016).

It is important to note the challenges high school physical educators face in trying to meet the goals outlined by the Appropriate Instruction Guidelines (SHAPE America, 2009), as well as the national and state standards. Many high school physical education teachers also serve as athletic coaches. This causes role conflict challenges as they attempt to effectively serve both roles (Iannucci & MacPhail, 2017). Class size is also an important factor in determining teacher effectiveness, reaching student outcomes, student performance, time on task, and the opportunity for the teacher to tailor instruction (Schanzenbach, 2014). Excessively large class sizes are normal in physical education, thus magnifying the difficulties of meeting instructional guidelines.

Learning Environment

Barney & Strand (2008) suggest a significant number of students have negative feelings about the way physical education is generally conducted. These negative feelings can result from a lack of developmentally appropriate instruction. This includes recognizing a students’ developmental level, abilities, fitness levels, and knowledge. Developmentally appropriate instruction also includes understanding physical experiences as well as designing instruction and activities for individual learning and personal success.

Students seemed to agree that the teaching environment is supportive of all students and promotes the development of a positive self-concept. In response to the survey statement on a supportive environment, 30.7% selected “sometimes” and 30.1% selected “often.” About 67% of the respondents stated that in their experience, teachers “sometimes,” “often,” or “always” promoted exercise for its contribution to a healthy lifestyle. According to students, it appears that teachers are meeting the goal of encouraging students to participate in PA and exercise outside of the classroom. However, 60% indicated that instruction “never” or “rarely” matched ability levels. Survey responses on developmentally appropriate instruction imply a disconnect between the promotion of exercise and the teaching of skills needed to engage in activities outside of school.

Within the learning environment, when rating whether or not lessons and activities have been adapted for overweight students, 60.7% of respondents selected “never” or “rarely.” Failing to provide lessons at students’ ability levels can contribute to frustration, learned helplessness, and a decline in motivation (Pangrazi and Beighle, 2010). All of which can impact how a student views physical education and PA. Furthermore, this can also affect student participation in activities long after school years.

Instructional Strategies

According to SHAPE guidelines (2009), instructional strategies include class design, organization, and learning time. Within these areas, teachers are expected to begin class by connecting learning to prior knowledge. An introduction of the lesson is followed by an appropriate warm-up, a physical fitness component, time for teaching and learning, and ending with closure. During the closure, objectives should be reviewed and an application to lifetime activity is made. Throughout the entire lesson students are taught new skill concepts progressively, given an opportunity to practice those skills, and learn how to apply them in realistic situations. Consistent and constructive feedback is an essential component within the lesson. About 57% of students stated that instruction “rarely” or “never” followed these instructional guidelines.

There exists a body of research investigating the association between PA and academic achievement, as a result of quality instruction. Research suggests that when appropriate instructional strategies are followed, students become more motivated to engage in PA. Additionally, with more PA, students can experience improved cognitive and academic performance (Ruiz-Ariza, Grao-Cruces, de Loureiro, Martínez-López, 2017). With this in mind, physical educators should spend a significant amount of time planning and developing instruction to not only support the link to cognitive development but to ensure that they are developing physically literate students.

When asked if clear goals and objectives were communicated, 79.4% of survey respondents indicated “rarely,” “never” or “sometimes.” Interview respondents agreed that expectations could be better addressed. They mentioned that if the purpose of activities were explained well, it would help to improve physical education and PA in students. Interview respondents did not feel that teachers planned for skill instruction and development. They also felt that instruction was not varied, nor did it emphasize problem solving strategies. When addressing this area, 67.4% of the survey respondents selected “never” or “rarely.”

High quality instruction is at the core of physical education and essential to meeting the SHAPE instructional guidelines, providing students with meaningful learning opportunities, and developing physically educated students. Unfortunately, students regularly state that their high school physical education experience is “irrelevant” (Barney, Pleban, Wilkinson, Prusak, 2015, p. 289). Based on participant responses, this study is consistent with the position of previous research. Attention should be given to the development and delivery of instruction, considering methods to engage students, and challenge students to think critically.

Curriculum

The physical education curriculum provides the foundation of instruction. It outlines what content is important and should be included within the instruction provided. Physical education curriculum is guided by the National Standards and Grade-Level Outcomes for K-12 Physical Education (SHAPE, 2014) and Appropriate Instruction Guidelines for K-12 Physical Education (SHAPE, 2009). Curriculum should be designed to address the development of motor skills, help build self-confidence, utilize data to modify and improve instruction, include health and nutrition, the importance of physical fitness and lifelong PA, ultimately promote student learning (Meltzer, 2017).

Learning the basic motor skills to enjoyably participate in various games and activities was a strong desire of interview participants. Based on responses, this contributed to or minimized students’ desire to engage in PA outside of school. Almost 57% of survey respondents indicated that motor skill development designed to help students lead a physically active lifestyle was “never” or “rarely” provided. Another 22.5% indicated that this occurred “sometimes.”

Within the area of curriculum, appropriate guidelines recommend using assessment data to set goals and assist students in developing a lifelong fitness plan. Over 67% of survey respondents indicated that this was “never” or “rarely” the case. Also, interview respondents stated that interpreting and using data was not part of their curriculum or instruction. Data guides the curriculum development process. It aids teachers in the development of student goals and the creation of personalized fitness plans. Without understanding the outcomes of their performance and how to improve, adulthood behaviors related to PA can be affected (Yang et al., 2017).

Assessment

Quality instruction and assessment are uniquely connected and important for students to understand. Students should be familiar with the assessment process and criteria that teachers use to assess skill development. Physical educators are expected to inform students on the assessment administration process, clearly discuss and explain expectations, describe levels of performance, and scoring methods (Lacy & Williams, 2018). Quality instruction, reflection on performance goals, and a clear understanding of the assessment process helps to equip students with an unbiased expectancy of grading outcomes and increases motivation and a desire to improve (Miller, 2014).

According to data obtained through surveys and interviews, all domains (cognitive, affective and physical) are insufficiently addressed. Over 66% of survey respondents indicated that “never” or “rarely” were all domains taught. Also, students did not feel they were properly prepared and assessed within fitness testing. When asked if they felt properly prepared and testing in each fitness component, 69% selected “never” or “rarely.” Overall, students did not feel as if grades were fair or clearly determined. One student interviewed felt that all of her grades were subjective. She stated, “there were no clear expectations. As long as I dressed and was cooperative, I got good grades.” Lacy and Williams (2018) point out that assessment practices in physical education fail to link with actual student performance. Being informed on all grading criteria and performance outcomes contributes to positive attitudes and motivation regarding physical education and PA (Mercier & Silverman, 2014).

It is important to note that this study is not intended to identify what teachers are doing in the physical education classroom or the reasons why students perceive their physical education experience to be positive or negative. However, this study supports literature and previous studies in which students have expressed their displeasure with physical education instruction and experiences.

Assumptions and Limitations

For this study, the researcher noted several assumptions and limitations. The participants of the study were required to reflect on past physical education instructional experiences. With this in mind, it is assumed that participants responded to survey items accurately and honestly. It is also assumed that participants possess a complete understanding of the SHAPE Appropriate Instructional Practice Guidelines. The accuracy of the responses relies heavily on this assumption.

A limitation of this study includes the design of the survey. Analysis of the research is dependent primarily upon the Likert-type survey responses. Additional information from participants was optional. Without including mandatory open ended questions or a section to provide required additional comments, reasons, clarifications, or justifications for participant response are not obtained. An additional limitation is the sample population. Only college students listed as kinesiology majors, and who identified an interest in pursuing a career in teaching physical education, were surveyed. Responses from students who majored in other fields or who are not enrolled in college may have differed.

It is suggested that athletic students demonstrate an intrinsic and increased motivation in physical education (Sulz, Temple, Gibbons, 2016), and therefore are more likely to enjoy their physical education experience regardless of the instruction. The survey does not identify the differences in responses between student-athletes and non-athletes, which could have an impact on survey responses.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this study was to provide students with a voice. This was an opportunity for students to rate their high school physical education experience in relation to instructional expectations and identify areas in which they believe their physical education instruction fell short. Results from this study should be used to contribute to research related to the improvement of physical education instruction and practices.

The goal of physical education, as stated in the National Standards and Grade Level Outcomes for or K-12 Physical Education, “is to develop physically literate individuals who have the knowledge, skills, and confidence to enjoy a lifetime of healthful physical activity” (2014, p. 11). The SHAPE Appropriate Instructional Practice Guidelines provides a framework for addressing these goals and clearly outlines what appropriate high school instructional practices in physical education should include.

Results of this study indicate that students did not perceive their high school physical education instruction to adhere strongly to all appropriate guidelines for practice. This is supported by a higher response rate of Never, Rarely, or Sometimes in comparison to selecting Often or Always on the survey. Additionally, students who participated in interviews overwhelmingly rated their high school physical education experience negatively stating that it was, “displeasing,” “a waste of time,” “meaningless,” and even “unnecessary.” Also, students suggested that high school physical education did not contribute to their current level of PA. Although many students desire to attain the physical skills and knowledge in high school that they can apply throughout their lives (Barney, Pleban, Wilkinson, Prusak, 2015), there exists a disconnect between what students expect and the instruction they actually receive.

The body of research on high school physical education clearly reveals that students are dissatisfied with their experience. High school physical educators have a responsibility to provide quality instruction by meeting the goals identified by the National Standards (SHAPE America, 2014). Students, consistently, do not think their high school physical education experience is beneficial (Pangrazi,

Barney, D., Pleban, F., Wilkinson, C., Prusak, K. (2015). Identifying high school physical education physical activity patterns after high school. The Physical Educator, 72, 278–293.

Barney, D., & Strand, B. (2008). Do high school students know what practices are appropriate in physical education. The High School Journal, 92(1), 33–39.

Cardinal, B., Yan,Z., & Cardinal, M. (2013). Negative Experiences in Physical Education and Sport: How Much Do They Affect Physical Activity Participation Later in Life? Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 84(3), 49-53.

California State Board of Education. (2005). Physical education model content standards for

California public schools. Sacramento, CA: Department of Education.

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.

Davis K. (2015). Physical education teacher education: The key to eliminating childhood obesity. Obesity Research Open Journal, 2(1), 42-45.

Ennis, C. D. (2010). On their own: Preparing students for a lifetime. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 81(5), 17-22.

Franco, E. & Coterón, J. (2017). The effects of a physical education intervention to support the satisfaction of basic psychological needs on the motivation and intentions to be physically active. Journal of Human Kinetics, 59(1), 5-15 DOI: 10.1515/hukin-2017-0143

Hills A.P., Dengel D.R., & Lubans D.R. (2015). Supporting public health priorities:

recommendations for physical education and physical activity promotion in schools. Progress in Cardiovascular Disease. 57(4), 368–74.

Iannucci, C. & MacPhail, A. (2018) One teacher’s experience of teaching physical education and another school subject: An inter-role conflict? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 89(2), 235-245.

Lacy, A., & Williams, S. (2018). Measurement and evaluation in physical education and exercise science. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.

McMahon et al. (2016). Physical activity in European adolescents and associations with anxiety,

depression and wellbeing. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 26(1), 111-122.

Mercier, K., & Silverman, S. (2014). High school students’ attitudes toward fitness testing. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 33, 269–281.

Metzler, M. (2017). Instructional models in physical education. Routledge. Doi:

10.4324/9781315213521

Miller, D. (2014). Measurement by the physical educator: Why and how. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. National Physical Activity Plan Alliance. (2016). The 2016 United States report card on physical activity for children and youth. Columbia, SC: National Physical Activity Plan Alliance.

Nicaise, V., Cogerino, G., Bois, J., & Ambrose, A. (2006) Students’ perceptions of teacher feedback and physical competence in physical education classes: Gender effects. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 25, 3-57.

Pangrazi, R. (2003). Physical education K–12: “All for one and one for all.” Quest, 55, 105–117.

Pangrazi, R. & Beighle, A. (2010). Dynamic physical education for elementary school children (18th Ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Benjamin Cummings.

Rikard, L., & Banville, D. (2006). High school student attitudes about physical education. Sport, Education, and Society, 11(4), 385-400.

Ruiz-Ariza, A., Grao-Cruces, A., de Loureiro, N. M., & Martínez-López, E. J. (2017). Influence of physical fitness on cognitive and academic performance in adolescents: A systematic review from 2005–2015. International Review of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 10(1), 108-133.

Saffici, C. (2015). Teaching & coaching: The challenges and conflicts of dual roles. The Sport Journal, doi:10.17682/sportjournal/2015.005

Saldaña, J., (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers, 2nd ed., Sage, London.

Schanzenbach, D.W. (2014). Does Class Size Matter? Boulder, CO: National Education Policy

Center. Retrieved [1/25/19] from http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/does-class-size-matter.

Society of Health and Physical Educators [SHAPE]. (2009). Appropriate instructional practice guidelines, K-12: A side-by-side comparison. American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance.

Society of Health and Physical Educators [SHAPE]. (2014). National standards and grade-level

outcomes for K-12 physical education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Stapleton, D. & Bulger, S. (2015). Adherence to appropriate instructional practice guidelines in U.S. colleges’ and universities’ physical activity programs. Journal of Physical Education and Sport Management, 6(7), 47-59. Doi: 10.5897/JPESM2015.0237

Strean, W. B. (2009). Remembering instructors: Play, pain and pedagogy. Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise, 1, 210–220.

Subedi, B. (2016). Using likert type data in social science research: Confusion, issues and challenges. International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences, 3(2), 36-49

Yang X., Kaseva K., Keltikangas-Järvinen L., Pulkki-Råback L., Hirvensalo M., Jokela M. (2016). Does childhood temperamental activity predict physical activity and sedentary behavior over a 30-year period? Evidence from the Young Finns study. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 24(2), 171-179.

Question	Responses
1. How would you summarize your high school physical education experience and why?	A waste of time, uneventful, okay, fine, it was boring, basically pointless, something that was required, a fun time, too much fitness
2. In your experience, what were some of the pros and cons of your physical education experience?	Pros Socialize with friends, playing different games, fun/cool teacher, sports, weight training, free time	Cons Only played sports, too much running, fitness testing, didn’t learn how to play games/sports, grading made no sense, focus on the athletic students, mean teacher, I didn’t know how to play the games, no clear expectations
3. How did your physical education instruction contribute to your current level of participation in physical activity?	It didn’t, I played sports then and I play them now, I didn’t have a choice then but I’m not active now,
4. If you could summarize your physical education experience in one word, what would it be and why?	Fun, poor, boring, useless, meaningless, hard, awesome, bad, worthless, awful, painful
5. How can physical education help you to become more physically active?	Select games that everyone knows how to play, I don’t think it can, people are only going to be active if they want to be, if you like PE you’re going to be physically active anyway, PE is not going to make anyone more active, make it more fun, clear teacher goals and expectations, grading that makes sense, teach the whole class and not only the good kids, change fitness test and expectations, do something other than sports, more time learning