No abstract

This article explores the importance of critical discourse in physical education (PE) that focuses on how understandings of ability are defined, practised, and potentially altered. Research continues to indicate that physical educators continue to draw on narrow notions of ability which are influenced by the presence of a pervasive performative culture. Traditional understandings of ability often fail to reflect the wider aims of PE such as developing young people's physical literacy. The theoretical concepts of Bourdieu have been used to explain processes that serve to reinforce 'legitimate' notions of ability. The significance of the field of PE has been highlighted where habitus and capital inform understandings of ability in PE, and reinforce practices that privilege certain students. The data for this article are based on in-depth, semi-structured interviews with six PE teachers who were part of a yearlong study on young people's experiences of ability in secondary PE in England. Within interviews PE teachers defined ability in broad terms and differentiated between the purpose of PE and sport. In practice, teachers placed a distinct emphasis on defining ability in terms which privileged students who either had a reputation for sporting excellence or who demonstrated desired forms of sport-related physical capital in lessons. These discourses and practices were reinforced through individual habitus and through a sense of shared 'mastery of the common code' among the teachers. The findings have implications for understanding the tensions within the field of PE that have evolved from previous, and continuing, debates on the distinction between PE and sport and understandings of the purpose of PE. In addition, they highlight the challenges that teachers can experience in aligning their wider views of ability with their 'legitimate' ability-based practices and working towards supporting more equitable and inclusive PE experiences.

Background: This paper examines physical education (PE) teachers' perceptions of talent in PE and sport within the context of English policy, where the process of identifying talent has been formalised and supported through specific resources (YST 2009). English policy has merged educational and sporting targets, which has resulted in a shift in foci away from educational objectives towards supporting elite development. Combining the aims of PE and sport contributes to longstanding debates over the nature and purpose of PE. Despite specific initiatives, there remains limited understanding of talent identification (ID) and as such, a danger for talent in PE and sport to be considered synonymous, resulting in a lack of clarity over the methods, purpose and focus of talent ID, and consequently notions of ability in PE. Purpose: In order to gain insight into the processes involved in talent ID in PE an electronic survey was conducted on PE departments' practices and perceptions within London boroughs. The survey aimed to establish a regional picture of respective practices as well as determining how PE teachers define talent in PE and sport. It also attempted to supplement related findings of the national survey on talent in PE (Bailey, Morley, and Dismore 2009). Method: Where an email address was available, an electronic survey link was sent to 400 state secondary schools across all London boroughs during the latter part of the summer term, 2008. A total of 84 (21%) responses were received. Data were collected using an electronic survey consisting of both quantitative and qualitative questions. Questions related to: Gifted and Talented (G&T) Policy; talent ID processes; staff training; and PE teachers' definitions of talent in PE and sport. Analyses of quantitative data were conducted using SPSS (version 15.0) and descriptive frequencies were obtained and reported. Open-ended responses were entered into N-Vivo (#Sage, version 7) and responses were coded into categories in order for themes to be identified. Results and discussion: Talent ID practices are compared to those reported in the national survey on talent development in PE. They reflect limited development in PE specific policy, training, awareness and use of available resources. PE teachers continue to predominantly utilise physical ability as a key indicator of talent; however, there is some indication that perceptions of talent are widening. The findings reveal inconsistencies in PE teachers' definitions of talent in PE and sport, where some are able to distinguish between the two whilst others are not. This is a concern for stakeholders and raises questions on the conceptual clarity of talent in PE. Conclusion: Defining talent in PE remains a contentious issue. The apparent merging of PE and sport, in policy and practice, reinforces the association of talent with physical performance which has re-catalysed debates on whether this is an appropriate way to conceptualise talent within PE. In working towards educational objectives, the

Competitive sport is often a gender-segregated activity underpinned by binary thinking that associates sporting talent with masculinity. In response to political, internal and grassroots activism, the English Football Association conducted a series of pilots to ascertain whether they should raise the age limit for competitive mixed football from Under-11 to Under-14. This paper presents an analysis of these trials using the concepts of accountability, doing and undoing gender to explore participants’ support for policy change, and the ways that normative notions of gender were negotiated, reproduced and disrupted during the trials. Typical rationale for segregating sports which constitute gender accountability frameworks such as physical differences between boys and girls, perceived differences in ability, and concerns about risk of injury for girls were undone as girls demonstrated they could make the team, enjoy the experience and develop their skills in a safe environment. Key arguments in favour of mixed football included the benefit to female players, the importance of friendships between boys and girls, and the similarities in boys’ and girls’ footballing skills. Support for mixed football and policy change reflected participants’ expectations that girls should be assessed on their capacity to play football and ‘fit in’ rather than expectations of gender difference. This article contributes to the limited research on mixed competitive youth sport and provides unique insights into gender-based policy change.