I have been looking forward to this latest book by Prof Ash Casey and Prof David Kirk for quite some time so I grabbed a copy as soon as it was available and devoured it in just a couple of days. Having had a keen interest in Models-based Practice for quite some time and putting my own research and practice into professional development sessions, our Positive Experiences PE pack, and our bitesize course it was good to have some thoughts reaffirmed and a few new nuggets to add to my locker.

As commented by Lars Bjørke in the foreword, “physical education has the potential to equip young people with the competencies they need to live good lives and flourish as moving human beings” (p xii). However, to realise that requires us as practitioners to think carefully about our pedagogical approaches and how best to align them to the needs, motivations and intended outcomes for each specific cohort. The book is broken down into 6 easy to consume chapters that I hope to give you a brief snapshot of here along with a few of my own reflections to try and entice you to:

1. give Models-based Practice a go if you haven’t already
2. experiment with some other perhaps more emergent models
3. Pick up your own copy of the book to read more for yourself

Chapter 1: What is models-based practice?

We are reminded that the idea of ‘models’ as an approach to PE originated in the USA as early as the 1980s and are increasingly well-known on undergrad, postgrad and in-service training courses. |Casey and Kirk worry about the idea of capitalised models such as Sport Education and Teaching Games for Understanding representing a ‘single way of teaching’ (p1) in the same way a Hoover has come to represent all vacuum cleaners here in the UK. Instead, we are encouraged to recognise that every school context is different and hence the pedagogical approach should be bespoke despite drawing ‘a main idea, some critical elements, learning aspirations and pedagogical characteristics’ from a particular model. Hence, you will find that since 2021 Ash has been encouraging me and others to drop the capitation and be less of a purist about particular models. You may have heard me mention his ‘swiss army knife’ approach to them before, selecting the right tool for the right job! It is also important to note that for Ash and David the word pedagogy is seen as where the four elements of teaching, learning, curriculum and assessment interact and hence is a very holistic term: 

As we will go on to explore in more detail later, one of the big ideas with Models-based Practice (MbP) is the suggestion that multiple models could be used as a way to organise the whole PE programme rather than as a mere bolt on to a traditional offer (p3). The argument for change comes from the belief that we are currently failing to realise the educative, health and well-being benefits of physical education for all if we stick to the current traditional and dominant ‘multi-activity, sport-technique-based form of physical education’ (p5). I agree with the authors that pretty much all PE teachers seem aligned on the ambition of providing the knowledge, skills and dispositions to enable every pupil to lead a physically active life and that there is a disconnect between that and the experiences being felt by many young people at present. Ash and David provide three reasons for giving MbP a go:

1. MbP shifts the ‘organising centre’ of PE from a focus on content to one focused on pedagogy (as illustrated above)
2. MbP provides the opportunity to focus on student learning that is often far more meaningful and relevant to individuals than specific sporting rules and techniques
3. MbP enables you to give your programme a ‘distinctive flavour’ that responds to the needs and motivations of your context (p7).

I love the articulation of simple ‘main ideas’ that is articulated and explained in the book. For example:

From a social justice and inclusion perspective we are reminded that our curriculum needs adapting and updating on an ongoing basis as no two cohorts are the same and hence it needs modifying to meet these variable needs and priorities (p9). After all, we are educators not instructors. We are also reminded that creating precise learning outcomes or aspirations within the affective domain is especially problematic as things like motivation, resilience and enjoyment are less tangible but that does not mean they are any less important (p10). In fact, I would argue they are the gatekeepers to continued engagement and hence both psycho-motor and cognitive learning gains so should be even more prominent, celebrated and thoroughly considered for each programme, unit and lesson.

Chapter 2: What pedagogical models exist? 

This chapter provides a great overview of a large number of pedagogical models and categorised them as either established or newly emerging. The models outlined above are unpicked in greater depth and in addition the following models are described and justification is provided for their inclusion as ‘models’ despite having less research associated with each:

Again this chapter reaffirms the message that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach or golden bullet to fix PE in all contexts for all children and young people but if we can support practitioners to be more motivated and confident to experiment with new and unfamiliar ideas then the potential positive impact is well worth it.

Chapter 3: Preparing to succeed with MbP 

This chapter unpicks the idea of ‘full version’, ‘watered-down version’ and ‘cafeteria approach’ to implementing models that was first suggested by Curtner-Smith et al. in 2008 (p29). It encourages the reader to pick a model but also a level of fidelity that feels achievable given local circumstances and importantly clarifying what it is you are hoping to achieve. Changing our practice is hard and best done with others, when you have energy and where it is needed most. You need to take it slow and expect a bumpy ride but it will be worth it. The one page practice architecture illustrations provided on pages 31 to 38 would be incredibly helpful in department meetings or notice boards to raise awareness and appetite to explore further. Two important questions that I too find myself asking subject leaders when supporting their schools are shared on page 43:

Q1. Does the timetable and logistics of scheduling multiple groups have too much influence on our PE programmes of study?

Q2. Do we let inter-school fixtures, inter-house events or district athletics dictate our offer?

Q3. Do half-terms shape our physical education provision?

Chapter 4: Working collectively and collaboratively 

I am repeatedly reminded of how valuable it is to work with others within and beyond your own school when experimenting with changes to your practice. It takes time to master a new way of teaching and it also takes time for students to get used to a new way of learning. Shared reflection and being ‘in it together’ really helps with professional perseverance but also with unpicking what is working, what is not and why. In the past I have advocated for around Christmas time to be a great time to get all physical educators playing around with TPSR because it is a time of poor weather and examinations in the sports hall causing frequent disruptions that make it appropriate to focus learning on something like personal and social responsibility rather than sporting skill progression. Similarly, I think athletics can be such a marmite experience of love and hate from different students as you rotate the track or field event each lesson in a typical summer term so organising it around a sport education season has worked well for me. Ash has helped me before and reiterates on page 51 how you should trial MbP with the groups who are not yet engaging well in your lessons as they have the most to gain from a different approach versus the classes that seem to be eating out of the palm of your hand. The authors remind us that many teachers are their own worst critics and there is no one way of teaching our subject but isn’t that what makes it such a fascinating and additive (yet exhausting) profession to choose? Gathering teacher and student voice as part of the process of evaluating and fine-tuning the adoption of MbP is essential if you want any change to stick. We are often deceived by our own memories and hence creating a collaborative culture of sharing and supporting each other is important.  

Chapter 5: Making a case for MbP at school level 

Earlier in the book Ash shared his painful memories of trying to go it alone and hence it is important that you build support at every level if you want to win with MbP. That includes playing the game with due consideration of:

• The stakeholders who have a vested interest in what you do (including students, parents and colleagues)
• Reconnaissance and preliminary testing to see if it has legs before creating an initial statement of intent
• Evidence gathering about thoughts, feelings and impact from teachers and students

This chapter ends with a reminder to start small but think big (p70).

Chapter 6: Conclusion 

The authors believe ‘MbP has the potential to revolutionise physical education’ (p71) and I am inclined to agree. The potential for more inclusive, more student-centred, more needs-driven and more relevant to the needs and motivations of today’s children feels real. This means that if you haven’t given MbP a go then you absolutely should and if you have gotten out of the habit of utilising models in your practice then maybe it’s the thing you have been searching for to reinvigorate your practice. Remember to ‘try different things with different classes and different year groups and give yourself permission to fail’ (p73).

Grab your own copy from Routledge here and save 20% using code SMA22.