"Easy Street"

1. Bulger, S. & Housner, L.D. (2009). Relocating
from “Easy Street”: A plan for reform in
physical education. Quest, 61, 442-469.
Kathleen Wack and Annie Machamer

2. Instant Activity /
Learning Activator / Hook
You have three minutes to build your dream
house using the materials that you are given.

3. Purpose of paper
• Type: Literature Review/position statement
• Purpose: “To consider what it will take to move
where physical education is better positioned to
make a difference in the lives of children and their
families”. (pg. 444)

4. Background
• Development of PE over
30 years
– NASPE Standards
– Large Scale
Programmatic and
Professional
development
– Pedagogical Strategies
• Sport Ed, TGFU, H-R PE,
Adventure/Outdoor PE,
etc.
• “Easy Street” Physical
Education
Characteristics:
– Introducing
• Short experiences of many
activities
• Hoping student will find niche
– Informing
• Brief explanations of why
physical activity/health are
important
• But no actual practice and self
experience
– Entertaining
• Busy, happy, good

5. Significance
• Proposal: “The problem
is a complex one and as
such requires a
multidimensional
approach making
substantive and
meaningful change in
school physical
education”. (pg. 442)
• Adds to the successful
development of
physical education
– Providing a breakdown
of moving from busy,
happy, good pe to
meaningful pe.
– What steps should be
followed/considered

6. Methods/Analysis
• Offer a number of possible solutions that
could make change
– Location
– Curb appeal
– Resale value
– Up-to-date features
– Square footage
– Price range

7. Findings

8. Location
• Adhere to new standards for
beginning and advanced teacher
preparation emphasizing community
involvement
• Provide leadership in county and
school wellness policy committees

9. Curb Appeal
• Increase expectations for preservice
physical educators to develop Sport, Physical
Activity, and Fitness Education Specialists
(SPAFES)
• Establish greater commitment from PETE
faculty regarding the scholarship of
engagement in communities and schools

10. Resale Value
• Collaborate with other professionals to
extend team and individual sport
opportunities for all community members
• Reconceptualize the PE curriculum to
incorporate “cool” alternatives that are more
personally meaningful to students

11. Up-to-date Features
• Develop standards-based curricula
• Conduct regular audits of school PE programs
• Provide regular and systematic PD for teachers
• Encourage greater involvement in professional
organizations and events

12. Square Footage
• Embrace CSPAP
• Focus limited resources on early childhood movement
education experiences
• Explore the use of web-based PA promotion and
associated technologies
• Implement more selective admissions processes in PETE
programs
• Free curricular space in PETE by using competency-based
assessment and integrated disciplinary studies

13. Price Range
• Minimize costs through collaboration,
use of existent organizational, structures
and public policy

14. Barriers

19. Conclusions
• “Why would below average and average
teachers want to work harder to make
this move a reality?” (pg.463)
• “Why would principals want to hold pe
accountable for a challenging learning
environment?” (pg. 463)

20. Conclusions
• State legislation enforcing policy
• Asked to move from “Easy Street” or risk
foreclosure.
• What if this doesn’t work?
– Outreach
– Community involvement
– CSPAP

21. Call to Action
– Professional development is possible even with
limited resources
• Use community, other teachers, PETE faculty
– Professional development
• challenging and developing their content
• If not participating, they are not fit to teach up to
date/meaningful pe

22. What We Learned
*Professional development holds a great
importance
*Use all your resources and support (CSPAP)

23. Questions?
• What is an example of “Easy Street” that you
have seen or used, and what was the
outcome?
• How does this relate to other articles we have
discussed?
• Comments/Concerns?