Alice, I question the premise that curriculum is too crowded. However I agree that teachers and schools have been positioned (by politics mainly) to feel that they have to do more & more and expect more & more.The syllabi themselves allow for more flexibility than we realise. In essence, the problem is political and social, not built into the curriculum itself. In Some ways, it is worse. MisunderstandIng the syllabus is amenable to PD, where social attitudes is a more intractable problem, I remember discussions about increasing physical activity from 30 years ago. South Australia's universities had to explicitly show that increasing physical activity improved other academic outcomes to get politicians involved. Increased PE was mandated but I don't remember what happened in S.A. after that.

Hi Mark and thanks for your response. I suppose my question was posed more in terms of being a "devil's advocate" or a common response posed by those in the field, particularly as children move into Prep and more formal schooling. So, I would in principle definitely agree with your point about the curriculum not necessarily being over-crowded with the possibility and potential for great integration and authentic opportunities for providing meaningful active play and PA experiences for children. Being a lecturer in education and helping pre-service teachers to unpack and understand the draft HPE Australian curriculum as well as the PA/health/wellbeing/social aspects of the Early years learning framework, the key point that helps with ensuring that we are proactive in providing PA experiences for children is to have a strong rationale for its place and importance. Another significant point that I reinforce is the need to contextualise the experiences that we offer to children so that these are meaningful and relevant to children and other key stakeholders in the present and for their future trajectory.

Finally, your point about misunderstandings raises another significant point where I support your position, in that in order to support educators in providing regular meaningful PA and active play opportunities for children we need to account for and support teachers through a social ecological framework where we appreciate the various environments that have influenced their position both from the micro and macro system and across time. Again, thanks for your thoughts Mark. Cheers, Alice

I do agree that syllabi have become very crowded (and rigid), but lessons from almost any class/subject can be modified to take the classroom outdoors. Then, the students get a moderate amount of physical activity and see more than just the inside of the classroom. Of course, this is quite a time-intensive endeavor for the teacher; however, it offers a better learning environment for many students, including tactile-kinesthetic learners, that goes beyond simple classroom learning. I especially liked taking my students outside for math classes, where I incorporated PA (of course!).

The benefits of exercise/physical education in terms of brain function and social development are obvious answers for the reason PA should be incorporated into the curriculum (in fact, the elementary schools in my area allow multiple recess periods/day [with more in the lower grades]). But until curricula is better developed to incorporate regular PA, I don't see this being implemented more than sporadically (at least in the US)...

Hi and thanks for your thoughts and contextual insights. I agree that integration of PA into the curriculum is definitely of value and helps to ensure that children are able to engage in activity whilst learning. As you point out this is particularly important for those children who prefer to learn kinaesthetically (including a high level of indigenous children). And yes, it may take a bit more thought to consider what opportunities are available for authentic integration of school content, but I believe in terms of the optimum learning these are powerful experiences for children.

You may find the following research particularly pertinent and interesting to the points you have raised:

http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/health_and_academics/pdf/pa-pe_paper.pdf

Early Childhood Movement and Learning:

Rack-Wildner and Boucher found evidence for keeping recess in curriculum. With only 15 or 30 minutes of walking, children had improvements in concentration, attention, memory, achievement, physical and verbal skills as well as reduced fidgeting after this period of exercise. In my opinion, there is no justification for the current practice of removing recess from grade school, including pre-K!! More evidence continues to justify the value of recess.

***and another :)

http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2209&context=etd

All the best, Alice Brown