To Credit or Not to Credit

It is probably no secret to anyone reading this that I have an obsession with the martial arts. Whether it involves practicing in the gym with my weapons or gloves, chuckling while reading clearly embellished histories and supernatural experiences, or watching the technique (or lack thereof) showcased by athletes in a sporting match; I love it all. I especially owe the martial arts a debt of gratitude for my personal health and fitness, as it was through attending classes in the private sector (NOT school physical education classes) where I found my method of keeping myself physically fit. I went from overweight to over-hyped when I found out that I could just keep hitting a heavy bag as get my moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) goal achieved.

But notice an important part of that story: school physical education classes did not help me. I actually hated them. Forcing me to be around a ton of other sweaty kids, most of whom also don't want to be there, and telling us what do to, how to move, and when we're "allowed" to stop? Add to that a sense of inadequacy many of us felt about physical activity, the always-dated music being played over the gymnasium loudspeakers, and how if you sweat you either had to deal with the embarrassment of the school showers or just deal with being smelly all day. Put it together and what you've got is a heaping pile of NO THANK YOU. So if these types of classes are so hit-or-miss, and there are private-sector alternatives that could be more engaging and provide unique opportunities for students to find activities that appeal to them, why is there still such a strong push for physical activity classes? Even if these classes may have unique benefits for K-12 students, wouldn't mandatory attendance in a physical activity class go against the development of student autonomy that is integral to the college experience?

Good question.

A recent opinion piece in The Dartmouth echoed these concerns. The author rightly notes that physical education college credits are almost exclusively the jurisdiction of physical activity classes. Your college is essentially saying that in order to graduate, you must attend THESE specific classes at THESE hours of the day for THIS MANY days of the semester. The author points out that a student's personal interest in their own health and wellness, such as a body-builder who spends hours of their free time in the gym or a group of friends who regularly meet for a game of pick-up basketball to unwind from the school day, are not considered worthy of these college credits. The author of the article makes a salient point by saying:

"That our student body is actively exploring healthier lifestyles should supersede any preconceived notions as to how that lifestyle is attained. Club sports should count, but so, too, should the likes of individual exercise and intramural sports." - Paragraph 4, Lines 1-2

It seems odd that students who are already exhibiting the traits of life-long physical activity, one of the primary goals of physical education, are not rewarded for their efforts. Wouldn't it make sense to recognize this autonomous behavior as equal to if not superior than compulsory attendance to a traditional college physical activity course? Perhaps in a similar way that some colleges recognize work experience as transferable credits, couldn't we credit the students who have put in the "work" to become self-regulated before they even stepped foot on campus?

This is a strong argument IF these credit requirements are supposed to instill lifelong physical activity behaviors in students AND there is no other significant benefit to the organized classes. So are all these college P.E. credit requirements only about personal physical fitness?

Physical fitness is important, and maintaining fitness across the lifespan in personally enjoyable activities is a primary goal of every physical educator for their students. However, it would be short-sighted to consider physical fitness to be the only goal of a physical education class. The Society of Health and Physical Educators (S.H.A.P.E.), the primary representative body of health and physical education best practices in the United States, offers no less than five goals for a physical education class. Students in these classes should be:

1. Gaining competence in a variety of skills and movements

2. Obtaining the knowledge and skills necessary for lifelong physical fitness

3. Applying knowledge of the concepts, principles, strategies, and tactics involved in proper movement and performance

4. Learning proper social behavior and personal responsibility

5. Showing that they value physical activity and its many benefits

(Paraphrased from the list of 5 national P.E. standards and adjusted for the acronym)

If a class is well-developed and representative of the S.H.A.P.E. national standards, students are not just exercising. Students are learning and practicing new skills, being exposed to novel activities in a controlled environment, engaging in positive social behavior, and offered an opportunity to develop a multi-faceted set of values about physical activity.

These standards create a distinction between physical activity and physical education. Depending on the type of activity, nearly all students should achieve at least numbers 1 and 2, and may even make some progress in 4. But only students who already have some proficiency in goals 3 and 5 will have the ability to improve those skills, and all of these GOALS assume that the students are taking great personal care to develop themselves holistically as a human being through their physical activity. While I wish this were the case, it does not seem wise to simply assume that all of these GOALS, much less the same quality of their development, are being fulfilled by independently motivated activity. One thinks of how many avid weight lifters use obviously improper form during their regular workouts, or how the whole point of a casual game of pick-up is meant to focus on fun and not necessarily require sustained intensity to meet an MVPA target.

But what if students do achieve all of these GOALS in their independent practice? If a student is already physically literate, shouldn't that student be able to "transfer" those "credits" and fulfill their degree requirements? We do this with other subjects, so if P.E. really wants to be treated as an academic subject equally important to the maths, sciences, and social studies of the world then it would make sense to honor previous achievement in the same way as those subjects. That said, other subjects have things like comprehensive AP test-out procedures that can encompass all aspects of their curriculum using a fair but rigorous set standard of performance and honor a passing score as earned college credit. Physical education assessment is usually more complex and relative to students' individual abilities, and thus the idea of an "AP Physical Education" class may be beyond the current capacity of physical education assessment, but it is an option worth considering as physical education continues to fight for proper representation as a subject.

Either way, serious physical education faculty and administrators should review their policies on this and have a good answer for why they do or do not "transfer" PE credits for a demonstrably physically literate student.

At the end of the day, this debate comes down to a question of values. If a college credit system is designed only to make sure students are maintaining their physical health during their time on campus, then including gym-goers and pick-up ballers as fulfilling this requirement seems justified. However, if these credits are meant as an extension of physical education best practices into higher education, then simply honoring personal exercise is not enough. Gaining a credit in that system should require education, experience, and satisfactory performance of all five standards.

Whether or not a credit system using traditional classes is still the best method for these GOALS is...another good question.