The gendering of abilities in Senior PE

Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 271-285

  Hay, Peter J ^a   Macdonald, Doune ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Ability construction; Gender; Opportunity

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960624143     PISSN: 17408989     EISSN: 17425786     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17408980903150147     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Azzarito, L., and M.A. Solmon. 2006. A feminist poststructuralist view on student bodies in physical education: Sites of compliance, resistance, and transformation. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 25: 200-25.
2. Benjamin, S. 2003. What counts as 'success'? Hierarchical discourses in a girls' comprehensive school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 24: 105-18.
3. Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction. London: Routledge.
4. Bourdieu, P. 1989. Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory 7: 14-25.
5. Brown, D., and E. Rich. 2002. Gender positioning as pedagogical practice in teaching physical education. In Gender and physical education: Contemporary issues and future directions, ed. D. Penney, 80-100. London: Routledge.
6. Brown, S., and D. Macdonald. 2008. Masculinities in physical recreation: The (re)production of masculinist discourses in vocational education. Sport, Education and Society 13: 19-37.
7. Charmaz, K. 2000. Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In Handbook of qualitative research, ed. N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, 509-35. London: Sage.
8. Connell, R.W. 1983. Which way is up? London: Allen & Unwin.
9. Connell, R.W. 1995. Masculinities. London: Polity Press.
10. Evans, J. 2004. Making a difference? Education and 'ability' in physical education. European Physical Education Review 10: 95-108.
11. Evans, P., and D. Penney. 2008. Levels on the playing field: The social construction of physical 'ability' in the physical education curriculum. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 13: 31-47.
12. Flintoff, A., and S. Scraton. 2001. Stepping into active leisure? Young women's perceptions of active lifestyles and their experiences of school physical education. Sport, Education and Society 6: 5-22.
13. Gorely, T., R. Holroyd, and D. Kirk. 2003. Muscularity, the habitus and the social construction of gender: Towards a gender-relevant physical education. British Journal of Sociology of Education 24: 429-48.
14. Hart, S. 1998. A sorry tail: Ability, pedagogy and educational reform. British Journal of Educational Studies 46: 153-68.
15. Hay, P.J., and D. Macdonald. In press. Evidence for the social construction of ability in physical education. Sport, Education and Society.
16. Klomsten, A.T., H.W. Marsh, and E.M. Skaalvik. 2005. Adolescents' perceptions of masculine and feminine values in sport and physical education: A study of gender differences. Sex Roles 52: 625-36.
17. Li, W., A.M. Lee, and M.A. Solmon. 2006. Gender differences in beliefs about the influence of ability and effort in sport and physical activity. Sex Roles 54: 147-56.
18. Lightbody, P., G. Siann, R. Stocks, and D. Walsh. 1996. Motivation and attribution at secondary school: The role of gender. Educational Studies 22: 13-25.
19. Mac An Ghaill, M., and C. Haywood. 2007. Gender, culture and society: Contemporary femininities and masculinities. New York: Palgrave.
20. Macdonald, D., D. Kirk, M. Metzler, L.M. Nilges, P. Schempp, and J. Wright. 2002. It's all very well, in theory: Theoretical perspectives and their applications in contemporary pedagogical research. Quest 54: 133-56.
21. Markula, P., and R. Pringle. 2006. Foucault, sport and exercise: Power, knowledge and transforming the self. London: Routledge.
22. Mendick, H. 2005. A beautiful myth? The gendering of being/doing 'good at maths'. Gender and Education 17: 203-19.
23. Miah, A., and E. Rich. 2006. Genetic tests for ability? Talent identification and the value of an open future. Sport Education and Society 11: 259-73.
24. Nilges, L.M. 1998. I thought only fairy tales had supernatural power: A radical feminist analysis of title IX in physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 17: 172-94.
25. Oliver, K., and R. Lalik. 2004. Critical inquiry on the body in girls' PE classes: A critical post structuralist perspective. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 23: 162-95.
26. Queensland Studies Authority. 2004. Senior syllabus in physical education. Brisbane: Queensland Studies Authority.
27. Rink, J., and M. Mitchell. 2002. High stakes assessment: A journey into unknown territory. Quest 54: 205-23.
28. Sarantakos, S. 1998. Social research. South Yarra: Macmillan.
29. Scraton, S. 1992. Shaping up to womanhood: Gender and girls' physical education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
30. Skelton, A. 1993. On becoming a male physical education teacher: The informal culture of students and the construction of hegemonic masculinity. Gender and Education 5: 289-303.
31. Smyth, J., and G. Shacklock. 1998. Behind the 'cleansing' of socially critical research accounts. In Being reflexive in critical educational and social research, ed. G. Shacklock and J. Smyth, 1-12. London: Falmer Press.
32. Sternberg, R.J. 1998. Abilities are forms of developing expertise. Educational Researcher 27: 11-20.
33. Wright, J. 1997. The construction of gendered contexts in single sex and co-educational physical education lessons. Sport, Education and Society 2: 55-72.
34. Wright, J. 1999. Changing gendered practices in physical education: Working with teachers. European Physical Education Review 5: 181-97.
35. Wright, J. 2004. Post-structural methodologies: The body, schooling and health. In Body, knowledge and control: Studies in the sociology of physical education and health, ed. J. Evans, B. Davies, and J. Wright, 19-31. London: Routledge.
36. Wright, J., and L. Burrows. 2006. Re-conceiving ability in physical education: A social analysis. Sport, Education and Society 11: 275-92.