The Teaching of History of Physical Education and Sport …library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/JSH/JSH2006/JSH3303/jsh3303y.pdf · in the European Context: Status, Problems in Methodology,

PEDAGOGY AND METHODS

Fall 2006 387


The Teaching of History ofPhysical Education and Sport

in the European Context:Status, Problems in

Methodology, and ItsImportance in the

University Curriculum

JUAN L. HERNÁNDEZ ÁLVAREZ†

Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

AND

Mª EUGENIA MARTÍNEZ GORROÑO†

Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

THE TEACHING OF HISTORY OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORT (HPES) hasreached a crisis in the European university. Joan Chandler, postulating on the “end ofsport history,” has pointed out that we are in a situation in which there is strong pressureon the university curriculum1 that particularly affects HPES. This pressure is due, amongother things, to the dominance of biology, health, and sports training courses in the prepa-ration of sport and physical activity professionals. The overwhelming domination of these

†The authors are grateful to Dr. Juan M. Fernández-Balboa for his revision of their text.

JOURNAL OF SPORT HISTORY

388 Volume 33, Number 3

courses gives the curriculum its fundamentally technical bias in which humanities or non-technical subjects have little possibility of remaining in the curriculum.

Within that context, this article intends to inform all scholars involved in this fieldabout the teaching of history of sport and physical activity in some European countries.The starting point is the study we have carried out on the history learned by universitystudents who are taking courses related to the field of physical education and sport2 andon the analysis of the programs at selected European universities.3 Reflecting on the teach-ing of this subject comes at a particularly good time when important changes in the Euro-pean university curriculum might contribute to changing the status of the HPES.

The opportunity and timing to begin reflecting on the situation and status of HPEScome after the establishment of the European Higher Education Area.4 This process, whichbegan with the Bologne declaration in 1999 and will end in 2010, has marked the begin-ning of a search for international agreement on the basic curricular requirements (corecurriculum) of physical education and sport professionals at the higher education level.

As far as history is concerned, the process of European convergence of universitystudies has re-opened the old debate of whether or not to include or exclude HPES in theacademic program. The debate about the need for this subject and its status and “useful-ness” for the type of history to be taught5 appears at a time in which HPES has already lostsome of its significance and relevance in the university curriculum and has become “weak”subject matter. Although postmodernism has opened the debate in general history (theend of history), Chandler believes that “postmodernism is not the chief issue [in sporthistory]: we may cease to be sports historians simply because external pressures on collegecurricula are now so great.”6

In addition to the already mentioned causes of the domination of biomedical andtechnical aspects, the European Convergence Process calls for a reduction in the totalnumber of credit hours of HPES in higher education, which particularly affects the hu-manities and non-technical subjects, already in a very precarious situation.

In comparing the teaching of HPES with the impetus and strength of the presenthistorical research as explained by several authors,7 we found that research in HPES hasdeveloped enormously during the last two decades of the twentieth century. This trend issimilar to the development of American sport history that Melvin Adelman has analyzedand discussed.8 Despite the continued fresh impetus of historical research in differentEuropean countries supported by personal interests and by scientific organizations andassociations,9 it is therefore paradoxical that the teaching of history becomes less impor-tant because of its decline within the curriculum as a core subject. In our opinion, thework carried out by the researchers on HPES should not be alien to the circumstancessurrounding the teaching of this subject, but the scientific associations should be workingto improve the status of HPES as a curricular subject in the training of graduates in physi-cal education and sport and to make a commitment to the establishment of more favor-able conditions for its development.

In our view, innovative and quality teaching should be supported by research, butresearch itself needs curricular teaching as a broadcasting tool that can attract new talent totrain new researchers. The progress of a subject or a field of knowledge is based upon theexistence of scientific personnel who focus their research on the core knowledge of the


Fall 2006 389

EXAMPLE OF THE WORKLOAD IN NUMBER OF CREDITS

OF THE HISTORY OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORT INDIFFERENT EUROPEAN UNIVERSITIES

Institution Country Subject Credits13

ECTS

UNIVERSITÉ DE ROUEN, France Histoire de LÉducation Physique 4,5

FACULTÉ DES

SCIENCES DU SPORT

UNIVERSITÉ DE REIMS, France Histoire de LÉducation Physique 3

FACULTÉ DE SCIENCES ET Histoire, Societé et Sport. 4,5

TECHNIQUES DES

ACTIVITÉS PH. ET S. CONT’D

particular subject in question and who, at the same time, have access to appropriate outletsto showcase their results. In this sense, the teaching of HPES should be a “growing me-dium” for research and a place for spreading the results of that research.

Presently, the curricular debate within the framework of the European Convergenceshould be used to improve the status and to revise the characteristics of teaching HPES.We are in need of self-criticism of those factors that might have influenced the diminish-ing presence of the subject in the university curriculum and the dissatisfaction with itsdevelopment among students and professionals.10 The purpose of this study is to showsome of the causes that have contributed to an inappropriate perspective of the “value” ofHPES in the preparation of professionals in physical education and sport and to makesome suggestions for a renewed interest in the teaching of this subject.

However, it seems advisable to include some data about the current workload (num-ber of contact hours plus hours of study) of HPES in the university curriculum becausethis information will help us to understand the present situation more fully.

Workload of History of PE&S (HPES) in the University CurriculumThe workload (number of credits/hours) in the university curriculum is one of the

measures that indicates the importance of a subject. It is useful, however, to know theactual workload of HPES in the university curriculum. This is a difficult task because ofthe diversification and lack of clearly defined limits of course contents. Using the analysisof the curricula of selected European institutions as a basis of information, the data andreferences collected confirm how unimportant the history of physical education and sportis in the present university curriculum. In a great number of colleges and universities,HPES has disappeared altogether from the core curriculum.11

The table below shows the selected European universities that still include History ofPE&S in their curriculum.12 At these institutions, the credit hours allocated for History ofPhysical Education and Sport (with various names) within the curriculum are very small.It varies between 1.1 and 3 percent of the total in higher education, which allows very little



opportunity for stimulating student interest for this subject, nor does it make the subjectan attractive field for graduate research.

As mentioned previously, one of the causes for this absence, or for the scant represen-tation of HPES in the curriculum, is the tendency to increase biomedical (e.g., physiologyof exercise and biomechanics) and other technical subjects (e.g., sports tactics) in theuniversity curriculum. In this context, subjects related to the humanities lose their impor-tance,15 and the small credit allocation given to them starts to be occupied by subjects thatrefer to the sociology of sport or the sociology of the body at the expense of HPES.

In this confrontation between the sciences and their social “value,” without any doubtsport and physical education has been placed “in the negative side of the traditional di-chotomies found between ‘work’ and ‘leisure,’ ‘mind’ and ‘body,’ ‘good sense’ and ‘plea-sure,’ ‘economical’ and ‘not economical’ activities.”16 From this point of view, sport andphysical education’s contribution to collective historical memory is not relevant and, there-fore, not that important for the preparation of physical education and sport professionals.

TABLE CONT’D

INSTITUT FÜR SPORT- Germany Sportgeschichte 2

WISSENSCHAFT DER

UNIVERSITÄT STUTTGART

UNIVERSITÁ DEGLI STUDI DI Italy Storia delleéducazione física 3

URBINO “CARLO BO,” e dello sport

FACULTÀ DI SCIENZE

MOTORIE

UNIVERSITY OF EXETER, United (Historical and contemporary (2)

SCHOOL OF SPORT AND Kingdom perspectives of the body), in 15

HEALTH SCIENCES Body, Identity & Achievement

in Physical Activity & Sport

(optional)

UNIVERSITÁ DI BOLOGNA, Italy Storia delleéducazione 3

FACULTÀ DI SCIENZE física

MOTORIE

UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE Spain Teoría e Historia del Deporte 9

MADRID, FACULTAD DE

EDUCACIÓN

UNIVERSIDADE DE COIMBRA, Portugal História da Educaçao I14 6

FACULDADE DE CIENCIAS DO História da Educaçao II 6

DESPORTO E EDUCAÇAO

FISICA


Fall 2006 391

Perhaps because of this viewpoint, J.A. Mangan has pointed out in some countries“the history of sport has yet to be fully accepted by all academic historians.”17 This trend iscertainly true in the case of Spain because of, in part, the lack of interest in HPES by theprofessionals in the field of physical education and sport. This lack of interest may beattributed to the weak preparation both in content and in inquiry methods that the latterreceive in their professional preparation. These professionals are attracted by a subjectmatter in which the possibilities for research are enormous, but they do not have enoughknowledge about physical education and sport, that, in turn, makes it difficult for them todevelop an effective, specialized analysis.18 At the same time, physical education and sportprofessionals do not have sufficient knowledge of history (nor do they know about thetechniques of historical research), which makes the progress of research and teaching ofHPES very difficult. All in all, both circumstances are barriers for an adequate develop-ment of HPES and highlight the need for more collaboration among the various humani-ties and social science subjects and physical education and sport.

It is necessary, however, to differentiate the perspectives of analysis in the field ofsocial sciences and to re-define the position that HPES occupies. In examining the prepa-ration of female physical education teachers in Copenhagen, Ann Lykke Poulsen describedthe interrelationship between history and sociology:

The barriers between social science and history should not be watertight—bothsciences can benefit by borrowing from each other. The sociologist can benefitfrom using a historical approach with the focus on the individual and the quali-tative, just as the historian can benefit from the structuring and quantificationof social science.19

In fact, Poulsen states that the understanding and collaboration among the differentfields of knowledge is possible and necessary, but she implies that, at present, history iscapable of offering a qualitative perspective of the society of each period. In our opinion,at least in the case of some European countries and particularly in the case of Spain, this isnot the present situation, and, qualitatively and interpretatively, there are serious shortfallsin HPES that must be overcome.

In short, the lack of adequate progress in the research and teaching of HPES creates asituation in which the position that should be occupied by this field or subject is occupiedby others that, although relevant to the training of physical education and sport profes-sionals, should not and cannot substitute for the historical perspective of the profession orthe educational aspect that history offers.

Advances occurring in other disciplines are because of a change of perspective in theirdevelopment as sciences have become more oriented toward cultural and social study. Thehistory of PE&S, on the other hand, is still very descriptive, lacks contextualization, anddoes not leave room for interpretation. These trends have been corroborated by studentinterviews.20 There has been little effort to change this way of using history, even if promi-nent historians, such as Earle Zeigler, recommended it more than two decades ago whenhe wrote: “Our teaching of sport history, for example, cannot be a mere chronologicalnarrative if we hope that such a course experience will be truly educational and effec-tive.”21 This is one of the aspects of teaching that we must modify and to which we shallrefer when talking about methodology.



What is Taught and Learned in History of PE&SThe analysis of programs of different subjects allows us to conclude that at present

there are important differences among the contents of HPES at European universities.Such differences even exist within the same country, as is the case in Spain.

Among other causes, the differences might be due to the fact that history has had toally itself with the social sciences in order to maintain its position in the university curricu-lum. When this occurs, the content of history is diluted, yielding to pressure from sociol-ogy or even anthropology. This situation already exists at the University of Exeter (UnitedKingdom). At that university, a course titled “Body, Self, and Culture” in which studentsapproach a history of the body through contents such as “The Lived Body from Plato toPostmodernism: A Cross Cultural and Historical Perspective.” In this vein, history is seenwithin a historical-social context as a force that contributes to the making of corporealidentities. Thus, among the written aims of this course one can read: “To enable partici-pants to understand the centrality of the lived body in the construction and maintenanceof different kinds of identities and selves and how this process is shaped by historical andcultural forces.” In that context, losing somewhat some of its own place in the curricularfield, history adopts a role as a tool to help “build” a sociology of the body.22

The orientation of the subject matter produces differences when trying to define thecontent of HPES. Some institutions have a very clear orientation in their programs towardphysical education in schools, while others, geared toward sport from a performance andcompetition perspective, contribute to important changes in history programs.

Even in those institutions with sport-oriented programs, there are other reasons forsignificant changes in history programs, namely the different theories about the origin ofsport and the time period or era that should be included in the history of sport andphysical education. Some programs analyze the development of all physical activity dur-ing the emergence and evolution of civilizations, while other programs consider the eigh-teenth century as the beginning of sport and teach the history of sport from that period tothe present day.

In short, depending on the accepted theory about the origin of sport, the content canvary considerably. In some programs, classical civilizations such as Greece, Rome, or Egyptare given a lot of coverage, while in others, those civilizations are completely ignored.

In spite of these deep differences, there seems to be an accepted common culturalbackground with three basic themes: the so-called “gymnastics schools” and the mostprominent people who contributed to their creation and development; the social phe-nomenon of the Olympic games; and the development of sport around Thomas Arnoldand its subsequent diffusion throughout the European continent, giving rise to regionaland national histories.

Within this context, the knowledge students possess23 about such prominent figuresas Per Henrik Ling (1776-1839), Francisco Amorós (1770-1848), Johann Guts-Muths(1759-1839), Friedrick Jahn (1778-1852), and Thomas Arnold (1795-1842) demonstratesthat these individuals are taught and studied. Nevertheless, students often have difficultyin associating particular individuals with their respective “gymnastics schools” or withtheir work. As a consequence, students do not put into context what they have learned, aproblem which we shall consider when discussing methodology.


Fall 2006 393

Undoubtedly, another one of those three basic themes in that shared cultural back-ground is the Olympic games and its history. Students show they know facts and dates,but unfortunately they do not know much about the historical meaning of this type ofcultural and social event or the consequences of its evolution and its impact on our societytoday.

This last cultural perspective of HPES, though not fully developed, is the emergenceand development of national identities. Apart from its contents, the evolution and ideol-ogy surrounding sport have been influenced by the social system in which it was created.Understanding cultural phenomena of sport and physical activity is only possible by knowingthe historical period in which they emerged and developed. For instance, it is difficult tounderstand the evolution of the German Turnen, without knowing the historical circum-stances of Prussia and the German states during the first half of the nineteenth centuryand the importance of gymnastics in giving rise to German national identity.24

Equally significant in France was the role of the Spaniard Francisco Amorós in creat-ing the so-called “Gymnastics French School.” To understand this movement, it is neces-sary to know the political circumstances that forced Amorós into exile and his motivationto continue in France the work he had begun in the Spanish army and at the InstitutoPestalozziano in Madrid in 1806.25 It is not possible to understand the principles of theAmorósian system, its evolution and relevance, without knowing the circumstances sur-rounding the development of educational ideas during the Spanish Enlightenment, thestruggle against the Ancien Régime, and the Church’s monopoly on education in theeighteenth and nineteenth centuries.26 In short, the social order and political pressurecontributed to different developments of physical education and sport.

Moreover, the lack of knowledge about the beginning of physical education in theschools contributes to the poor quality of teaching. In studying the current situation, wehave concluded that the knowledge about the beginning of physical education as a schoolsubject is very feeble. Once again, it is limited to dates and facts. For instance, the DaneFranz Nachtegall (1777-1847) is known as the pioneer teacher who, with the support ofthe Danish Royal House, introduced “Gymnastics” as a compulsory subject in the schoolsof Denmark in 1801,27 but the social and cultural circumstances in which this takes placeare unknown.28

The situation is similar in the field of sport. The HPES curriculum contains limitedknowledge about the events that took place at the Rugby Public School in the 1820s andabout the contributions of Headmaster Arnold (1795-1842). Students receive little infor-mation about the subsequent diffusion of sport, except for the names of those individualswho created new sports, such as James Naismith (1861-1939) in the case of basketball.

The reason why sport spread through other countries, the influence that big citieshave had on the rise of modern sport,29 and the role played by the aristocracy and thebourgeoisie in the creation of organizational structures, or even the influence of industri-alization in creating the possibility of access to sport for the working class are social andcultural aspects, which are hardly analyzed in the teaching of HPES at European universi-ties. In the teaching of HPES, there are few references to the struggle that sport, as aspecific cultural manifestation, has had with other types of physical activity to be includedin the school curriculum.30 The struggle for ideological and economic interests, the con-nection to national identity, and educational motives that are behind the changes, and the



opposition to those changes, are present in each phase or period of the history of physicaleducation and sport.31 Explaining and understanding all those principles and develop-ments should help students to become more aware of the trends and values attributed tothe human body and to physical activity at any given historical moment.

“Silences throughout History”: History of PE&S and GenderIn our opinion, physical education and sport studies in Europe lack sufficient cover-

age of historical information about women, a trend not just specific to the field of sport.32

Undoubtedly, this shortcoming is one of the weak points of the history taught at universi-ties, but at the same time, it is a component of research on the rise because “sport is aparticularly good subject to teach from a gender perspective.”33

Nevertheless, it is not a question of a historical confrontation of genders nor is itabout building a history of women’s sport from a traditional male perspective of sporthistory. From the viewpoint of gender, the social reconstruction of men’s history on oneside and women’s history on the other does nothing for the development of this field ofstudy nor does it help to achieve a real perspective of the HPES as sport historian PatriciaVertinsky shows in the evolution of the discipline’s male-female dichotomy:

As women’s sport history became a sub-field of an emerging women’s history, itincreasingly questioned the strategy of viewing women and men historicallythrough a separate spheres perspective. A generic, male-oriented sport history,however, tended to align itself with those specializations emerging from thesocial history parent (hallowing the male sporting experience).34

Undoubtedly, a gender approach recognizes that gender has been under-examined insport history and deserves attention, but “teaching sport history from a gender perspectiverequires consideration of the gendered nature of men’s sport as well as women’s.”35

In any case, the consequence of the “silences” about women throughout history is thelack of a collective awareness about the role women have played in some periods of theHPES, as happened in the first half of the twentieth century for instance. Research aboutwhether women participated in sport and to what extent, Gertrud Pfister laments, was atheme that interested no one: “The lack of interest for the “second gender” appears notonly in the secondary literature but also in the original sources. We usually talk aboutpersons, players, people without mentioning whether these terms include women.”36

This lack of interest can be seen clearly in how little is known about this theme. Just tomention two examples, in Spain as well as in France, very few students can name orrecognize those women who have had an important role in the evolution of physicaleducation and sport. The best known women are the Scandinavians, Elizabeth Björksten(1870-1947) and Elin Falk (1872-1942), who played a fundamental role in the develop-ment of children’s physical education by making the Swedish gymnastics system moreflexible and introducing more playful movements. They belong to the first generation ofwomen with specialized training, who not only worked as teachers of physical education,but who, with their creative skills, also introduced changes that adapted Swedish physicaleducation to women during a historical period in which it was not easy for women to gainaccess to employment in this field.37

Women have played an important role in spreading gymnastics throughout the world.Female teachers at the Royal Central Institute in Stockholm helped to export “the Swedishsystem to the other Nordic countries, England and North America.”38


Fall 2006 395

The male-oriented nature of physical education and sport can be seen in the conflictsbetween men and women in the job market, but the field of history has not occupied itselfin showing this type of discrimination and its repercussions. Pfister leaves no doubts aboutthe biased atmosphere apparent in the late nineteenth century, although its consequenceshave not been explored in relation to the making of HPES. Nevertheless, Pfister writes,“[I]n 1871 the Berlin Association of Physical Education Teachers came to the conclusionthat male teachers should have priority over females even if both had the same abilities.”39

The presence of women in the field of PE&S has evolved gradually. Nowadays, the“number of women who practise sport during their free time, and the variety of sportsthey practise, is well above that seen at any other previous historical moment.”40 However,the arrival of women to the sports scene has been historically accompanied by a confronta-tion of ideas around male and female social roles and by the influence of sport in thedevelopment of gender roles. At this point, however, we cannot perceive significant ad-vances in the role women play in different aspects of PE&S, such as their token represen-tation on various committees or low-level administrative positions at institutions or orga-nizations related to the field of sport. This is all the more reason for avoiding the “silences”of those women who were pioneers in this field and who contributed to the developmentof PE&S.

The history of PE&S, therefore, must be more accurate when dealing with women’sparticipation. In addition, it is necessary to take into account the women who are con-ducting research in this discipline. This statement from the International Working Groupon Women and Sport (IWG) reinforces that point: “Those responsible for research andproviding information on sport should develop policies and programmes to increase knowl-edge and understanding about women and sport and ensure that research norms andstandards are based on research on women and men.”41

Within the European context, the opinions of the IWG coincide with those of sporthistorian Richard Holt who states that “the study of gender as a factor in the developmentof sport in France is still in its infancy. . . . The history of French women has not attractedthe same attention from French historians that women’s history has generated in the UnitedStates,”42 an opinion which might be applied to other countries, such as Spain.

Problems in Methodology: How History of PE&S Is TaughtThe problems we face when teaching history of physical education and sport depend

on our methodology. Joan Chandler, in calling for fortitude within the profession, writes:“[W]hile difficulties for sport history are not negligible, I suspect that most of them aredue simply to failure of nerve.”43 Such “failure of nerve” can be interpreted in two ways.One, as a lack of will and determination to help others (e.g., students, teachers, coaches)see the importance of HPES; and, two, the lack of courage by scholars in the field to adoptand implement alternative (non-dominant) methodologies to study, teach, and, ultimately,enhance the status of HPES.

As previously mentioned, one of the main problems is giving preference to descrip-tion at the expense of contextualizing when teaching HPES. Undoubtedly, this practicecontributes greatly to the lack of satisfaction among PE&S students with some knowledgeof history.



Nevertheless, in spite of student dissatisfaction with the way in which the HPES istaught, there are few references to it in the present literature.44 Furthermore, it does notseem to awaken the interest of researchers and teachers.45 Then, too, this problem is al-most totally ignored at congresses, such as the 2005 congress held in Köln (Germany)organized by the International Society for the History of Physical Education and Sport(ISHPES),46 or the even more recent congress organized by the European Committee forSport History (CESH) in November of 2005 at Seville (Spain).47 One possible explana-tion might be the already mentioned difference between the number of people involved inhistorical research compared with the very few who teach the subject, a consequence of thedeclining importance of history of physical education and sport in the curriculum.

The interviews of students48 have enabled us to determine the motives that havecontributed to their dissatisfaction. Basically, the problems stem from the impossibility ofstudents to relate the knowledge and the most relevant milestones in the history of PE&Swith the cultural and social events of the particular historical period in which they tookplace. In this sense, a poor education in learning general history (background education)and excessively descriptive teaching of history of PE&S contributed largely to the acquisi-tion of knowledge based on rote learning without meaning to the student. Students’ in-ability to relate historical knowledge to cultural and social events of a given time periodwas seen clearly in the anachronisms found in students’ writings on those events.

This descriptive style of teaching goes against history itself because it does not allowus to see the important role of historical studies in the humanistic education of students.This methodology also raises doubts about the importance of studying history and its“usefulness” if we are to understand the important social and cultural role that PE&S haveplayed in the development of societies and cultures.

Such deficiencies require deep changes in the way history of PE&S is viewed andtaught. Yet, it is important that we continue to advance in the path that we have ever sotimidly undertaken in order to make progress in identifying and interpreting social andcultural perspectives of history. In this sense methodology strategies can assist us in apply-ing knowledge related to HPES within the context in which it originated. The key here isto offer students a vision of the historical moment in which the milestones of the discipline’sevolution took place. This, no doubt, requires the ability to make connections amongdifferentiated moments, identify and analyze progress and key developments in otherdisciplines (e.g., philosophy, medicine, physical sciences, pedagogy), and explain and useother meanings, other values, and other contexts in the interpretation of history. We mustbe able to relate events in PE&S with global and local social changes. Different valuesattributed to the human body by different civilizations contribute to the understanding ofthe society that developed them, and vice-versa: Knowing the scale of fundamental valuesof society helps us to understand the why of a particular dominant conception of humanbody (and the PE&S) in a particular historical time period.

As we have discovered from our study of European university students and HPEScourses, the effort given to contextualizing the historical content of PE&S courses hasimproved the level of student satisfaction with this subject. The use of graphic documen-tary resources,49 “time lines,”50 a more participatory approach in class, and the promotionof independent learning are all strategies we have used with good results. Not only do


Fall 2006 397

these practices enhance students’ motivations to study history of PE&S, but they alsoenable students to broaden their knowledge.

Within this context, one methodology that allows for an increase in motivation aswell as in the value given to the subject itself is the reconstruction of the students’ “familysport history.” This technique allows for a “dialogue between generations” in which theyoung unexpectedly discover a sporting past of some family members while they learnabout the existence of different forms of physical activity in use throughout history andeven nowadays with a competitive and cathartic purpose. The dialogue between genera-tions facilitates the reconstruction of the meaning sport had for the people who practicedit in an earlier period, which had been conditioned by the specific characteristics of lifestylessome forty or fifty years ago (in the case of the grandparents). The existence, in some casesof graphic documentary sources, allows for the preparation of small exhibitions and isuseful for encouraging and stimulating individual and collective memories. This strategy,as Chandler pointed out, is useful if we want to include the use of oral sources to make thehistory of sport more dynamic.51

It also seems necessary to favor those strategies that help to promote independentlearning and develop inquiry skills, such as the careful analysis of evidence, comparison ofsources, and evaluation of historical interpretation. The teacher, through the presentationof situation-problems, and especially through the questions he or she asks to guide theactivity, plays the role of a mediator for the acquisition of knowledge, which he or sheconsiders more relevant for the education of the student and the development of cognitiveand analytical skills. With the intention of increasing the educational value of this re-source, we should be able to avoid the decontextualization of acquired knowledge, tryingto foster final reflections about student values in his or her education, or about the practi-cality of this type of knowledge when taught using these methodological strategies.

Two examples of employing these methodologies can be found in the works of MªEugenia Martínez Gorroño,52 and Ann Stutts.53 In explaining how she uses this type ofstrategy, Stutts states:

Students are to analyze and interpret evidence from ancient Greek athletics.This evidence consists of sources from Greek art and documents. From thisfragmentary evidence, students are to draw tentative conclusions regarding theorganization and techniques of Greek athletics, and evaluate the worth of thedata. The students are presented with (1) an introductory statement includingobjectives and procedures, (2) a set of artifacts—mounted b. & w. photographsfrom vase paintings and sculpture (the sets may include 10 to 12 photos of thesame or different sports), (3) a set of documents (from Robinson’s source book),and (4) a set of questions to guide the evaluation of the artifacts and docu-ments.54

Our experience shows that these types of strategies facilitate a constructivist and com-prehensive approach to the teaching of history of PE&S and, at the same time, they makeit possible for the students to value positively the “usefulness” of studying this subject. Inthis sense, we agree with Zeigler who believes that “a comprehensive approach ensures thatthe course experience in sport and physical education history is a truly valuable aspect of auniversity curriculum.”55



Closing RemarksAs a final point, it would be advisable, collectively, to analyze the circumstances through

which the history of PE&S has become a “weak” subject in the university curriculum.One of the causes is the pressure that other curricular subjects exercise with the pur-

pose of gaining more space in teacher education. There are also external pressures inpostmodern society that consider HPES as a subject that does not produce immediateeconomic benefits and the knowledge it generates is not useful for the work of PE&Sprofessionals. Notwithstanding, critical self-reflection must take place about the charac-teristics of the HPES teaching and the perceptions of university students about this cur-ricular subject.

The results of the study undertaken with students of different European universitiesbetween 2002 and 2005 have allowed us to verify the majority of the opinions we havepresented in this paper.56 Moreover, in synthesis, it is possible to offer some conclusionsbased on the interviews with students. These conclusions reflect common characteristicsof teaching HPES, both methodologically and content-wise. At this point, it seems appro-priate to point out some of the weak points that emerged from the interviews.

First, we must highlight the predominance of a descriptive and non-contextualizedperspective of HPES. The descriptive aspect is characterized by the identification of his-torical facts void of the interpretation of their consequences or of their social value at thetime they occurred. The non-contextualized aspect refers to a lack of relation of HPESfacts with other facts and cultural events, on the one hand, and with the progress ofknowledge in other social areas, on the other. For instance, it is difficult for a student tounderstand the characteristics and evolution of the German Turnen without knowingsomething about the emergence of nationalism in nineteenth-century Europe. Likewise,it is difficult to try to comprehend why the Spanish scholar Amorós is considered thefounder of the French School of Gymnastics without knowing the motives that led to hispolitical exile in the Spain of the beginning of the nineteenth century.

Second, the strong “andro-centric” tendency of HPES “silences” the important role ofwomen in the evolution and development of PE&S. Students, thus, do not seem to becapable of identifying women in this regard. When male and female students are asked toidentify leaders within the field of HPES, they spontaneously name men; and when askedspecifically about women, only one of five is able identify some women, and just one ofseven is able to relate the name of a woman to her specific contributions to PE&S in thenineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Third, it is important to make reference to the difference in the teaching contents,even in universities within the same country (e.g., Spain, Italy). Despite these differences,there is a tendency to focus on the knowledge of people and gymnastics schools (especiallyin the nineteenth century) and of the Olympic games. Yet, in relation, for instance, to thegymnastics schools, the knowledge presented is quite superficial because problems exist inidentifying the value that the knowledge developed in these settings had for PE&S at thetime of their existence as well as for the present-day PE&S.

Fourth, it is necessary to address the dispersion of content in HPES among verydifferent curricular subjects. This situation, that seems to worsen as time goes by, leaves


Fall 2006 399

students with fragmented and partial knowledge (at times, even too local) of HPES at theexpense of a broad and integrated perspective of the more relevant milestones for PE&S.Under such circumstances, HPES continues to disappear from the curriculum as an au-tonomous subject matter.

In closing, these shortcomings, especially the ones regarding methodology, contrib-ute to a perception of HPES by students as a subject of little value for both their overallprofessional knowledge and for their work in PE&S. As we have shown in our study, suchperception can be modified with creative teaching of HPES, employing such innovativestrategies as “timelines,” “family trees,” and “stimulated recall” with graphic materials.

Those who teach HPES need to enhance students’ motivations and perceptions ofthe discipline with the intent of awakening their interest for HPES and helping them toappreciate the usefulness of historic knowledge not only in the educative process but alsoin their professional lives. This may even stimulate some students to pursue research andpost-graduate studies. Then, too, researchers and scholars in PE&S should become moreinvolved in research on the methodology of teaching history of physical education andsport.

At the same time, we need to propose alternative options for the better education andtraining of sport and physical activity professionals. It is a question of orienting theirpreparation toward bringing meaning to the social and historical construction of physicaleducation and sport to give these professionals the feeling that they are taking part in anhistorical process of improving the status of HPES.

Better training of PE&S professionals will enable them to: a) facilitate the use of bothpast and present advances within the field of PE&S; b) recognize the existence of hege-monic and counter-hegemonic conceptions of the human body, physical education, andsport rooted in specific historical contexts; and c) identify and confront obstacles physicaleducation and sport that must be overcome in order to play a qualitative and quantitativerole in the lives and education of citizens.

Any professional in any related discipline should know and understand the back-ground of his/her profession as well as the specific knowledge that comprises the subjectmatter of their chosen field, academically and professionally. Furthermore, knowing the“history” of their field allows professionals to evaluate and use the contributions of thosewho preceded them in their profession. It also allows them to examine current knowledgefrom the viewpoint of history and to apply this knowledge as a link in the social andhistorical construction of the profession. History is the best resource to achieve a healthy,non-dogmatic attitude toward that knowledge which, as “children of our own society,” wetend to accept as unchangeable and immutable.57

All knowledge must be understood and interpreted within its historical context. Tomaster that context requires the understanding of the evolution of our own knowledgethat, in turn, allows us to view its meaning relatively. According to Pedro Laín, it is essen-tial to develop an interpretative way of history, as well as historical facts relating to thesocial and cultural context of each historical period. For Laín, the importance of thisacademic discipline lies in the fact that “[t]o know about History comprehensively, andnot only by rote, opens and frees the mind in regard to what is known.”58

We need not dwell any longer on the interrelationship of history and knowledge,even if it is of paramount importance. It is sufficient to recommend the reading of a



chapter in a timeless book, Ciencia y Vida (Science and Life) (1970), written by Pedro Laín. Toparaphrase him, dignity, clarity, liberty, and the choice of personal and original characteristicsmake up the outcome of the usefulness of the history of any subject matter or profession.

The establishment of the European Higher Education Area will stimulate changes in theuniversity curriculum, so now is the right time to analyze the position of HPES in the curricu-lum and to act in collaboration with others in order to enhance the status of this subject and toimprove teaching conditions. In this setting of reform, perhaps, it also might be a good time todiscuss and establish minimum common content for the HPES.

1Joan Chandler, “The End of Sport History? Or the Beginning of Oral History Archives,” SportingTraditions 1 (1999): 41.

2Our opinions are based on a study undertaken in the last three years (2002-2005). In this study,with the participation of Spanish, French, Portuguese, and Italian students, we have analyzed aspects ofthe teaching and learning of the history of physical education and sport in the university curriculum.

3We have analyzed the programs of the Université de Reims (France); Universitá Degli Studi diUrbino (Italy); Universitá di Bologne (Italy); University of Exeter (United Kingdom); Institut fürSportwissenschaft (Germany); Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain); Universidad de Granada (Spain);Universidad de León (Spain); Universidade de Coimbra (Portugal); and Jiväskilä University (Finland).

4The establishment of The European Higher Education Area has among its objectives: adoption ofa system of easily readable and comparable degrees; promotion of mobility by overcoming obstacles;promotion of European co-operation in quality assurance with a view to developing comparable criteriaand methodologies; and promotion of the necessary European dimensions in higher education, particu-larly with regard to curricular development.

5Some scholars have been worried about and critical of the situation of the history of sport. Forinstance: J.A. Mangan, “The End of History Perhaps—But the End of the Beginning for the History ofSport: An Anglo-Saxon Autobiographical Perspective,” Sporting Traditions 1 (1999): 61-72; Victor Andradede Melo, “¿Por qué debemos estudiar historia de la educacion fisica y del deporte durante la formacion?(Why Should We Study History of Sport and Physical Education in Our Education?),” Lecturas: EducaciónFísica y Deportes 2 (1997): 1-6; Mª Eugenia Martínez Gorroño, “El curriculum de la formación docenteen Educación Física a debate: el caso de la Historia de la Educación Física (The Debate on the PhysicalEducation Teacher Training Curriculum: The Case of the History of Physical Education),” Proceedings ofthe 19th Physical Education National Congress (Murcia, Spain: Universidad de Murcia, 2001), 842-857.

6Chandler, “End of Sport History,” 41.7Mangan, “End of History Perhaps,” 70.8Melvin L. Adelman, “Academicians and American Athletics: A Decade of Progress,” Journal of

Sport History 10 (1983): 80-106.9The scholarship program for young researchers started by the Olympic Studies Center in 1999 and

the historical research prizes created by the European Committee for Sport History (CESH) and theInternational Society of History of Physical Education and Sport (ISHPES) have been a tremendousboost to historical research.

10In Spain, the dissatisfaction with the History of PE&S among students and professionals alike hasbeen noticed in our study as well as on a survey carried out because of the development of a new syllabus.

11In some cases, optional subjects, related to the History of PE&S, are included.12At some European universities, the contents of sport history are included in subjects with different

names such as “Sport, Physical Activity and Society,” which make it difficult to know the amount ofhistory taught. One can even see contents such as “The Lived Body from Plato to Postmodernism: ACross Cultural and Historical Perspective” in a subject named “Body, Self and Culture” (University ofExeter, United Kingdom), in which we can see a timid resurgence of a History of the Body.


Fall 2006 401

13Although there are slight variations, each credit means between seven and ten contact hours, apartfrom study hours—up to twenty-five—and essay writing set by teachers.

14In this case the History of PE&S is part of a General History of Education.15As Chandler states, “Legislators have become increasingly unwilling to allocate public money to

matters of the mind that seem to have little immediate economic benefit.” Chandler, “The End of SportHistory,” 41.

16Elias Norbert and Eric Dunning, Quest for Excitement. Sport and Leisure in the Civilizing Process(Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986), 15.

17Mangan, “The End of History Perhaps,” 69.18Let us examine an example. A hieroglyphic from ancient Egypt shows a person swimming. Any

specialist can see what is happening with a cursory analysis and conclude that swimming was developedin the Egyptian society. But someone who knows the historian’s techniques as well as today’s swimmingstyles, can reach the conclusion that not only swimming was an activity in those days but that there wasa technical style similar to our present day crawl, which is not the most natural way of swimming. This isimportant if we are to understand the level of development that this physical activity had reached.

19Anne Lykke Poulsen, “Female Physical Education Teachers in Copenhagen, 1900-1940: A Collec-tive Biography,” International Journal for the History of Sport 21(2004): 16-33.

20Juan Luis Hernández Álvarez and Mª Eugenia Martínez Gorroño, “The Teaching of the Historyof Physical Educación and Sport: A Survey in the European Context (2002-2005),”unpublished paper.Results and conclusions of the Spanish case have been published in: Juan Luis Hernández Álvarez and MªEugenia Martínez Gorroño, “Estudio sobre la Historia de la Educación Física y el Deporte que se enseñay que se aprende en el sistema universitario español,” Proceeding Xth International Congrees— EuropeanCommittee for Sport History, 2005, 1-8 (compact-disc format), in possession of authors.

21Earle F. Zeigler, “Excellent Teaching of Sport and Physical Education History Demands Interpre-tative Criteria,” Proceedings of the North American Society for Sport History, 1980, p. 44.

22See endnote 12.23Based on the study conducted with Spanish, French, Portuguese, and Italian students already

mentioned.24Some reflections on adopting a particular gymnastics system and national identity can be seen in

Gertrud Pfister, “Cultural Confrontations: German Turnen, Swedish Gymnastics and English Sport.European Diversity in Physical Activities from a Historical Perspective,” Culture, Sport & Society 6 (2000):61-91.

25Miguel Piernavieja del Pozo, “Francisco Amorós, el primer gimnasta español (Francisco Amorós,The First Spanish Gymnast),” Citius, Altius, Fortius 2 (1960): 277-313.

26For a clearer idea about the relationship between the Spanish historical context and the beginningof the Gymnastic School of Amoros, consult Mª Eugenia Martínez Gorroño and Juan Luis HernándezÁlvarez, “Los primeros exilios contemporáneos y el origen de la escuela hispano-francesa de gimnástica,”Migraciones & Exilios 7 (2006): 137-155.

27Alberto Langlade and Nely Rey de Langlade, Teoría General de la Gimnasia (Buenos Aires: Sta-dium, 1986), 25.

28Hernández Álvarez and Martínez Gorroño, “The Teaching of the History,” interviews with stu-dents at Université de Rouen (France), Université de Reims (France), Universitá degli Studi di Urbino(Italy), Universidade de Coimbra (Portugal), Universidad de Granada (Spain) and Universidad Autónomade Madrid (Spain), notes in possession of authors.

29See Adelman, “Academicians and American Athletics,” 88-89.30Juan Luis Hernández Álvarez, “La construcción histórica y social de la Educación Física: el currículo

de la LOGSE, ¿una nueva definición de la Educación Física escolar? (Social and Historical Constructionof Physical Education: The LOGSE Curriculum, a New Definition of School Physical Education?),”Revista de Educación 311 (1996): 51-76.



31See, for example, Jacques Gleyse, Sebastien Ruffie, Céline García, and Henri Baudet, “Les résistancesau sport dans l´éducation et dans l´éducation physique, en France, 1888-1978 (The Resistance to Sportin the Educational System and in Physical Education in France, 1888-1978),” in Sport and Education inHistory, eds. Gigliola Gori and Thierry Terret, Proceedings 8th Congress of the International Society for theHistory of Physical Education and Sport, Urbino, 2005, pp. 18-23.

32See, for example, Bonnie Smith, The Gender of History: Men, Women and Historical Practice (Cam-bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1998).

33Deborah L. Correa-González, “Teaching Sport History from a Gender Perspective,” Proceedings ofthe North American Society for Sport History, 1992, p. 26.

34Patricia Vertinsky, “Gender Relations, Physical Education and Sport History: Is it Time for aCollaborative Research Agenda?” in Gender & Sport from European Perspectives, eds. Else Trangbaek andArnd Krüger (Copenhagen: Institute of Exercise and Sport Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1999),13-27.

35Correa-González, “Teaching Sport History,” 26.36Gertrud Pfister, “Les femmes dans les jeux et les sport traditionnels (Women in Traditional Sports

and Games),” Revue Olympique 31 (2000): 38-45.37Gertrud Pfister, “Physical Education: From a Male Domain to a Female Profession, The Contro-

versy over Women as Physical Educators in Germany (1880-1914),” in Gender & Sport, eds. Trangbaekand Krüger, 72.

38Poulsen, “Female Physical Education Teachers,” 17.39Pfister, “Physical Education,” 75.40Jennifer Hargreaves, “Promesa y problemas en el ocio y los deportes femeninos (Promises and

Problems in Women’s Sport and Leisure),” in Materiales de Sociología del Deporte, ed. J.I. Barbero (Madrid:La Piqueta, 1993), 109.

41The Brighton Declaration on Women and Sport, 1994, <http://www.iwg-gti.org/e/> [19 March2005].

42Richard Holt, “Women, Men and Sport in France, c. 1840-1914: An Introductory Survey,” Jour-nal of Sport History 18 (1991): 121.

43Chandler, “The End of Sport History,” 41.44Some exceptions are the proposals put forward by different authors in the scientific meetings of

the North American Society for Sport History, in the seventies and eighties (see, for example, BettySpears, “The Use of Student Projects in Teaching Sport History,” Proceedings of the North AmericanSociety for Sport History, 1978, pp. 57-58; and David Matz, “Methods of Teaching Roman Chariot,”Proceedings of the North American Society for Sport History, 1979, p. 44).

45For example, an analysis of the work by Richard W. Cox, ed., “International Sport: A Bibliogra-phy, 2002,” International Journal for the History of Sport, supplement 21, (2004): 1-116, allows us to statethat articles referred to methods or to teaching are practically non-existant.

46We are referring to the 9th International Society for the History of Physical Education and Sport(ISHPES) Congress 2005. In the previous edition, Urbino-2003, there was only one reference to thissubject mentioned in the paper presented by Juan Luis Hernández Álvarez and Mª Eugenia MartínezGorroño, “The History of Physical Education and Sport in the Spanish University: Contents and Meth-ods in the ‘Curriculum’ at the End of the 20th Century,” in Sport and Education in History, eds. Gori andTerret, Proceedings 8th Congress, Urbino, pp. 46-51.

47Xth International Congress—European Committee for Sport History, Sevilla (Spain), 2-5 No-vember 2005.

48Hernández Álvarez and Martínez Gorroño, “The Teaching of the History.”49A peculiar case of motivation in the teaching of sport history using postage stamps is told by

Howard Stidwill, “Postage Stamps: A Teaching Device for the Sport Historian,” Proceedings of the NorthAmerican Society for Sport History, 1987, p. 60.


Fall 2006 403

50The experience consists of making a big poster in which different periods are shown chronologi-cally, referring to the most relevant historical facts and events which might have a link to PE&S. Thestudents have to make their small posters showing PE&S events and set them in their period and inrelation to other social and cultural events.

51Expression used by Chandler when she proposes the use of oral sources in the study of a JesseOwens biography. Chandler, “The End of Sport History,” 44.

52The author uses documentary resources on ancient civilizations (Crete; Mesopotamia) so thatstudents can analyze them and draw their own conclusions about the value given to the body and itsphysical qualities in those societies. See, for example, Mª Eugenia Martínez Gorroño and Mª José ÁlvarezBarrio, “La expresión corporal como fuente primaria en la investigación histórica de las civilizacionesantiguas,” Proceeding V Congreso Internacional de FEADEF, 2003, pp. 415-420.

53Ann Stutts, “Teaching Sport History: Reconstructing the Past,” Proceedings of the North AmericanSociety for Sport History, 1978, pp. 58-59.

54Ibid., p. 59.55Zeigler, “Excellent Teaching of Sport and Physical Education History,” 44.56Hernández Álvarez and Martínez Gorroño, “The Teaching of the History.”57Pedro Laín, Ciencia y vida (Science and Life) (Madrid: Seminarios y Ediciones, S.A., 1970).58Ibid., 94.

Documents

The Teaching of History of Physical Education and Sport …library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/JSH/JSH2006/JSH3303/jsh3303y.pdf · in the European Context: Status, Problems in Methodology,