Articles In Press / Online First
Back to the articles list |
Back to browse issues page
Dian Budiana *1 
, Cep Ubad Abdullah2 , Wayne Cotton3 , Mulyana Mulyana4 , Gifran Rihla Gifarka Latief5
, Cep Ubad Abdullah2 , Wayne Cotton3 , Mulyana Mulyana4 , Gifran Rihla Gifarka Latief5
1- Faculty of Sport and Health Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia. , dianbudiana@upi.edu
2- Faculty of Social Sciences Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia. & Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Univeristy of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
3- Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Univeristy of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
4- Faculty of Sport and Health Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia.
5- Faculty of Sport and Health Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia. & School of Pharmacy, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia.
2- Faculty of Social Sciences Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia. & Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Univeristy of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
3- Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Univeristy of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
4- Faculty of Sport and Health Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia.
5- Faculty of Sport and Health Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia. & School of Pharmacy, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia.
Abstract: (13 Views)
Background. In Indonesia, physical education (PE) teachers are trained in a single-subject model emphasizing deep specialisation in PE. While this model fosters subject-specific expertise and supports the preservation of cultural practices, it may limit teacher flexibility in interdisciplinary teaching contexts. In contrast, Australia adopts a dual-subject model that requires PE teachers to qualify in an additional subject, such as English or Mathematics. This approach enhances employability and adaptability, particularly in rural or underserved schools, but may dilute professional identity and reduce the depth of PE-specific training.
Objectives. This comparative study investigates how national policies in Indonesia and Australia shape the teaching responsibilities of PE educators, focusing on curriculum design, teacher preparation, and alignment with labour market demands.
Methods. Data were collected through focus group discussions (FGDs) with curriculum developers, PE teachers, program alumni, and employer representatives in both countries.
Results. Using thematic analysis of FGDs involving 20 stakeholders (10 from Indonesia, 10 from Australia), findings suggest that integrating specialisation with interdisciplinary competencies could improve adaptability while retaining PE expertise.
Conclusion. This study contributes to comparative education research by providing insights into how teaching responsibilities impact curriculum implementation, professional identity, and workforce responsiveness in PE teacher training programs across different national contexts.
Objectives. This comparative study investigates how national policies in Indonesia and Australia shape the teaching responsibilities of PE educators, focusing on curriculum design, teacher preparation, and alignment with labour market demands.
Methods. Data were collected through focus group discussions (FGDs) with curriculum developers, PE teachers, program alumni, and employer representatives in both countries.
Results. Using thematic analysis of FGDs involving 20 stakeholders (10 from Indonesia, 10 from Australia), findings suggest that integrating specialisation with interdisciplinary competencies could improve adaptability while retaining PE expertise.
Conclusion. This study contributes to comparative education research by providing insights into how teaching responsibilities impact curriculum implementation, professional identity, and workforce responsiveness in PE teacher training programs across different national contexts.
Full-Text [PDF 394 kb]
(3 Downloads)
APPLICABLE REMARKS
APPLICABLE REMARKS
- This study pointed out that teacher education institutions should consider hybrid curriculum models (70% PE specialisation, 30% interdisciplinary skills) to balance professional identity with workforce adaptability.
- Policymakers may integrate interdisciplinary modules (e.g., health education, ICT, collaborative teaching) into PE programs to improve graduate employability without sacrificing disciplinary expertise.
- Employers and schools should recognise the strengths and limitations of single-subject versus dual-subject trained teachers when designing recruitment and staffing strategies.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Physical Education Learning
Received: 2025/07/1 | Accepted: 2025/08/21
Received: 2025/07/1 | Accepted: 2025/08/21
References
1. 1. Alharbi AM. Implementation of Education 5.0 in Developed and Developing Countries: A Comparative Study. Creat Educ. 2023;14(05):914-42. [DOI:10.4236/ce.2023.145059]
2. Bickmore K, Hayhoe R, Manion C, Mundy K, Read R. Comparative and International Education: Issues for Teachers, Second Edition - Google Books. Canadian Scholars' Press; 2017. 8-10.
3. Sagie N. Book review: Comparative and international education: An introduction to theory, method and practice, 2nd edn. Vol. 14. 2015. 76-77. [DOI:10.1177/1475240915569971]
4. Gray S, Sandford R, Stirrup J, Aldous D, Hardley S, Carse NR, et al. A comparative analysis of discourses shaping physical education provision within and across the UK. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2022;28(3):575-93. [DOI:10.1177/1356336X211059440]
5. Bailey R, Armour K, Kirk D, Jess M, Pickup I, Sandford R. The educational benefits claimed for physical education and school sport: An academic review. Res Pap Educ. 2009;24(1):1-27. [DOI:10.1080/02671520701809817]
6. Green N. Changing the Focus of Physical Education . Int J Phys Educ Heal Sport Sci. 2020;9(1):44-50.
7. Opstoel K, Chapelle L, Prins FJ, De Meester A, Haerens L, van Tartwijk J, et al. Personal and social development in physical education and sports: A review study. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2020;26(4):797-813. [DOI:10.1177/1356336X19882054]
8. Li C, Zhang C. Exploring the Current Landscape of Primary School Physical Education Within the Framework of the New Curriculum Reform: A Quality Evaluation Model Perspective. J Knowl Econ. 2024;15(4):20677-98. [DOI:10.1007/s13132-024-01873-5]
9. Baena-Morales S, González-Víllora S. Physical education for sustainable development goals: reflections and comments for contribution in the educational framework. Sport Educ Soc. 2023;28(6):697-713. [DOI:10.1080/13573322.2022.2045483]
10. Pérez-Ordás R, Nuviala A, Grao-Cruces A, Fernández-Martínez A. Implementing service-learning programs in physical education; teacher education as teaching and learning models for all the agents involved: A systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(2):1-27. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph18020669] [PMID] []
11. Gugusheff J, Foley BC, Owen KB, Drayton B, Ding D, Stamatakis E, et al. Trends in walking, moderate, and vigorous physical activity participation across the socioeconomic gradient in New South Wales, Australia from 2002 to 2015. J Phys Act Heal. 2020;17(11):1125-33. [DOI:10.1123/jpah.2020-0070] [PMID]
12. Martins J, Marques A, Peralta M, Henriques-Neto D, Costa J, Onofre M, et al. A comparative study of participation in physical education classes among 170,347 adolescents from 54 low-, middle-, and high-income countries. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(15):1-12. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph17155579] [PMID] []
13. Praekanata IW, Virnayanthi NP, Juliangkary E, Ratnaya IG. Menelusuri Arah Pendidikan: Dinamika dan Inovasi Kurikulum di Indonesia. PT. Sonpedia Publishing Indonesia; 2024 Dec 17.
14. Sears JA, Wilson R. Issues in staffing and outsourcing in schools. Who's teaching health and physical education?. Australian journal of education. 2024;68(3):176-98. [DOI:10.1177/00049441241267924]
15. Whipp PR, Hutton H, Grove JR, Jackson B. Outsourcing physical education in primary schools: Evaluating the impact of externally provided programmes on generalist teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education. 2011;2(2):67-77. [DOI:10.1080/18377122.2011.9730352]
16. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology. 2006;3(2):77-101. [DOI:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
17. Hartanto D, Kusmaedi N, Ma'mun A, Abduljabar B. Integrating social skills in traditional games with physical education interventions. Int J Hum Mov Sport Sci. 2021;9(5):921-8. [DOI:10.13189/saj.2021.090513]
18. Dyson M, Plunkett M, McCluskey K. Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Success Prof Exp. 2018;229-34. [DOI:10.1017/9781108550703.014]
19. Penney D, Brooker R, Hay P, Gillespie L. Curriculum, pedagogy and assessment: Three message systems of schooling and dimensions of quality physical education. Sport Educ Soc. 2009;14(4):421-42. [DOI:10.1080/13573320903217125]
20. Richards KAR, Gaudreault KL, Starck JR, Mays Woods A. Physical education teachers' perceptions of perceived mattering and marginalization. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog. 2018;23(4):445-59. [DOI:10.1080/17408989.2018.1455820]
21. Welch R, Alfrey L, Harris A. Creativity in Australian health and physical education curriculum and pedagogy. Sport Educ Soc. 2021;26(5):471-85. [DOI:10.1080/13573322.2020.1763943]
22. Kirk D. Physical Education Futures. Physical Education Futures. Routledge; 2009. 1-184. [DOI:10.4324/9780203874622]
23. Tinning R. Pedagogy and human movement: Theory, practice, research. Pedagogy and Human Movement: Theory, Practice, Research. Routledge; 2009. 1-247. [DOI:10.4324/9780203885499]
24. Casey A, Goodyear VA, Armour KM. Digital technologies and learning in physical education. Abingdon: Routledge. 2017. [DOI:10.4324/9781315670164]
25. Salvo D, Garcia L, Reis RS, Stankov I, Goel R, Schipperijn J, Hallal PC, Ding D, Pratt M. Physical activity promotion and the United Nations sustainable development goals: building synergies to maximize impact. Journal of physical activity and health. 2021;18(10):1163-80. [DOI:10.1123/jpah.2021-0413] [PMID]
26. Kirk D. Physical education futures. Routledge; 2009 Sep 10. [DOI:10.4324/9780203874622]
27. Baena-Morales S, González-Víllora S. Physical education for sustainable development goals: Reflections and comments for contribution in the educational framework. Sport, Education and Society. 2023;28(6):697-713. [DOI:10.1080/13573322.2022.2045483]
28. Philpot R, Smith W, Gerdin G, Larsson L, Schenker K, Linnér S, Moen KM, Westlie K. Exploring social justice pedagogies in health and physical education through Critical Incident Technique methodology. European Physical Education Review. 2021;27(1):57-75. [DOI:10.1177/1356336X20921541]
29. Welch R, Alfrey L, Harris A. Creativity in Australian health and physical education curriculum and pedagogy. Sport, Education and Society. 2021;26(5):471-85. [DOI:10.1080/13573322.2020.1763943]
30. Amade-Escot C, O'sullivan M. Research on content in physical education: theoretical perspectives and current debates. Taylor & Francis. 2007. [DOI:10.1080/17408980701610144]
31. AITSL. Australian Professional Standards for Teacher. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. https://www.aitsl.edu.au. 2024.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
