Celebrating the insecure practitioner. A critique of evidence-based practice in adapted physical activity

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 200-205

  Standal, Øyvind Førland ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN SCHOOL OF SPORT SCIENCES   (Norway)

Author keywords

Adapted physical activity; Evidence based practice; Phronesis; Professional practice

Indexed keywords

EID: 57749136479     PISSN: 17511321     EISSN: 1751133X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17511320802223527     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. ARISTOTLE. 1998. The Nicomechean Ethics, trans. David Ross, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. BERLINER, D.C. 2002. Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher 31 (8): 18-20.
3. BIESTA, G. 2007. Why ‘what works’ won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational theory 57 (1): 1-22.
4. BOURDIEU, P. 1990. The scholastic point of view. Cultural Anthropology 5: 380-91.
5. BREDAHL, A.-M. 2007. Participation of people with disabilities in adapted physical activity research. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Adapted Motor Activity 12 (1): 74-9.
6. BIESTA, G. 2001. Educational philosophy, theory and research: A psychiatric autobiography. Journal of Philosophy of Education 35 (3): 461-76.
7. BIESTA, G. 2003. Rival conceptions of practice in education and teaching. Journal of Philosophy of Education 37 (2): 253-66.
8. CARR, W. 2007. Educational research as a practical science. International Journal of Research and Method in Education 30 (3): 271-86.
9. CLEGG, S. 2005. Evidence-based practice in educational research: a critical realist critique of systematic review. British Journal of Sociology of Education 26 (3): 415-28.
10. COTT, C.A. 2004. Client-centred rehabilitation: client perspectives. Disability and Rehabilitation 26 (24): 1411-22.
11. DEPAUW, K.P. 1997. The (in)visibility of DisAbility: Cultural contexts and ‘sporting bodies’. Quest 49: 416-30.
12. DEPAUW, K.P. 2000. Social-cultural context of disability: implications for scientific inquiry and professional preparation. Quest 52: 358-68.
13. DUNNE, J. 1993. Back to the Rough Ground. Practical Judgement and the Lure of Technique. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
14. EMES, C., P. LONGMUIR and P. DOWNS. 2002. An ability-based approach to service delivery and professional preparation in adapted physical activity. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 19: 403-19.
15. FEUER, M.J., L. TOWNE and R.J. SHAVELSON. 2002. Scientific culture and educational research. Educational Researcher 31 (8): 4-14.
16. GALLAGHER, S. 1992. Hermeneutics and Education. New York: SUNY Press.
17. GRENIER, M. 2007. Inclusion in physical education: From the medical model to social constructionism. Quest 59: 298-310.
18. HAMMERSLEY, M. 2001. Some questions about evidence-based practice in education. Available online at http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001819.doc, accessed: Oct. 2007.
19. HORNER, R.H., E.G. CARR, J. HALLE, G. MCGEE, S.L. ODOM and M. WOLERY. 2005. The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children 71 (2): 165-79.
20. HUTZLER, Y. 2006. Evidence based practice and research in adapted physical activity: Theoretical and data-based considerations. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Adapted Motor Activity 11 (1): 13-24.
21. HUTZLER, Y. 2007. SWOT analysis of adapted physical activity: A rehabilitation perspective. Journal of the Brazilian Society of Adapted Motor Activity 12 (1): 48-57.
22. JONES, R. 2007. Coaching redefined: An everyday pedagogical endeavour. Sport, Education and Society 12 (2): 159-73.
23. LOEWY, E.H. 2005. In defense of paternalism. Theoretical Medicine & Bioethics 26: 445-68.
24. MORISBAK, I. 1988. Adapted physical activity: An overview of the field. Scandinavian Journal of Sport Sciences 10 (2-3): 73-8.
25. ODOM, S.L., E. BRANTLINGER, R. GERSTEN, R.H. HORNER, B. THOMPSON and K.R. HARRIS. 2005. Research in special education: Scientific methods and evidence-based practices. Exceptional Children 71 (2): 137-48.
26. OLSON, D.R. 2004. The triumph of hope over experience in the search for ‘what works’: A response to Slavin. Educational Researcher 33 (1): 24-6.
27. PORRETTA, D.L., J. NESBIT and S. LABANOWICH. 1993. Terminology usage: A case for conceptual clarity. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 10: 87-96.
28. REID, G. 2003. Defining adapted physical activity. In Adapted Physical Activity, edited by R.D. Steadward, G.D. Wheeler and E.J. Watkinson. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta Press: 11-25.
29. REID, G. and H. STANISH. 2003. Professional and disciplinary status of adapted physical activity. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 20: 213-29.
30. SACKETT, D.L., W.M.C. ROSENBERG, J.A.M. GRAY, R.B. HAYNES and W.S. RICHARDSON. 1996. Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal 312: 71-2.
31. SCHWANDT, T.A. 1999. On understanding understanding. Qualitative Inquiry 5 (4): 451-64.
32. SHDIR. 2004. Fysisk aktivitet for mennesker med funksjonsnedsettelser - Anbefalinger, [‘Physical activity for people with disabilities- recommendations’]. Oslo: Sosial- og helsedirektor-atet.
33. SHERRILL, C. 2004. Adapted Physical Activity, Recreation, and Sport. Crossdisciplinary and Lifespan. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
34. SHERRILL, C. and K.P. DEPAUW. 1997. Adapted physical activity and education. In The History of Exercise and Sport Science, edited by J.D. Massengale and R.A. Swanson. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics: 39-108.
35. SLAVIN, R.E. 2002. Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher 31 (7): 15-21.
36. SVENAEUS, F. 2000. The Hermeneutics of Medicine and the Phenomenology of Health. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
37. SLAVIN, R.E. 2003. Hermeneutics of medicine in the wake of Gadamer: The issue of phronesis. Theoretical Medicine & Bioethics 24: 407-31.