The Content of Norwegian Primary Physical Education: Teachers’ Perspectives on Possibilities and Barriers

Introduction

Primary school physical education (PE) is crucial in promoting lifelong physical activity (Ministry of Education and Research [MER], 2015; Naylor & McKay, 2009). Providing children and adolescents with diverse experiences is crucial for fostering long-term engagement in physical activity (Engström, 2008). As individuals progress through different stages of life, their motivations and purposes for physical activity may evolve. Therefore, offering a range of exercise experiences is vital in accommodating these changes (Engström, 2008; Green, 2008). However, PE is criticized for its limited range of activities and its emphasis on sports and competition (Griggs, 2007; Hardman & Marshall, 2005; Morgan & Hansen, 2007, 2008). This phenomenon, referred to as the “sportification” of physical activity, has been consistently observed in prior research (Green, 2008; Naul, 2003). Despite explicitly mentioning activities such as dance, swimming, orienteering, and outdoor activities in the curriculum, there appears to be a gap between what is prescribed and what is implemented in practice (Hardman & Marshall, 2005). Ball activities, games, athletics, gymnastics, and fitness training prevail (Hardman & Marshall, 2005). Overemphasizing sports and health suffocate other types of learning within the subject, inhibiting PE practices (Petrie, 2016). Despite its numerous benefits, PE often receives less attention in schools than other subjects (Haydn-Davies et al., 2007; Ommundsen, 2008; Wright, 2002). Teachers face institutional and teacher-related barriers contributing to the need for more variation and engagement in students’ PE experiences (Morgan & Hansen, 2008). In primary schools, limited time and resources pose significant institutional barriers. Inadequate funding, restricted access to facilities and equipment, and other resource constraints contribute to a narrow focus on sports in PE classes and draw criticism toward the subject (Curtner-Smith & Meek, 2000; Faulkner et al., 2004; Hardman & Marshall, 2005; Mandigo et al., 2004; Smith & Parr, 2007).

Moreover, many generalist primary school teachers need more confidence and competence when teaching PE (Chedzoy, 2000; Hardman et al., 2008; Morgan & Hansen, 2008). Negative attitudes toward PE are also prevalent among some teachers (Harris et al., 2012; Tsangaridou, 2012). However, it is worth noting that other studies have found that many teachers do value the subject but need more confidence in delivering it (Morgan, 2008).

PE is compulsory for Norwegian primary students from six years old. Norway’s PE curriculum includes competence aims for students after the fourth and seventh years of primary school. The curriculum includes various physical activities, including traditional options like skiing, outdoor education, and swimming, as well as alternative options like skateboarding, BMX cycling, and slacklining. The curriculum outlines specific learning outcomes that teachers must implement. Schools can decide on content and teaching methods, reflecting a key principle of Norwegian education. The subject aims to encourage lifelong physical activity and enjoyment (MER, 2015). Yet, the urgency for effective PE interventions grows as evidence suggests physical activity levels begin to wane as early as age 6–7. This trend emphasizes the significance of PE’s role in instilling enduring physical activity habits from a young age (Deng et al., 2018).

According to Moen et al. (2018), as reported by teachers and students, PE lessons at the primary school level in Norway emphasize ball games, while in higher grades, there is an emphasis on strength training. Moen et al. (2018) demonstrate through teacher, and student reports that curriculum content is scarce, such as dance, skateboarding, yoga, parkour, climbing, and swimming. Moreover, teachers report how the physical environment (sports halls or gyms), equipment, and limited PE hours influence PE content.

In their study, Standal et al. (2020) conducted surveys among students and interviews with teachers in secondary schools, revealing that basic training and ball activities are more prevalent in PE lessons than dance and modern activities. Although teachers claim to cover a wide range of content, they most commonly mention sports and ball games to describe their lessons.

Despite existing research on PE in Norway, there is a need for more studies explicitly focusing on PE in grades 1–4. Most research focuses on secondary school PE (Løndal et al., 2019). The prevalence of traditional ball sports in PE content is also evident in studies conducted in Sweden, which has a similar school context to the Norwegian (Larsson et al., 2016; Liljekvist, 2013; Londos, 2010; Lundvall & Meckbach, 2008; Redelius & Larsson, 2010). Annerstedt (2008) highlights the intention to offer a variety of activities in Swedish PE but identifies a gap between intention and practice. According to Lundvall and Meckbach (2008), more than 40% of teachers of students aged 15–16 experience time and group size as significant limiting factors.

Further, some teachers consider lack of equipment, facilities, and outdoor opportunities as limitations. Nevertheless, the perception of time constraints correlated minimally with ball game frequency. To our knowledge, apart from the Moen (2018) study, there is a lack of Norwegian research examining the influence of external factors such as time, group size, gymnasium size, and equipment on primary PE content. This study aims to gain both a broad and in-depth insight into, from the teachers’ perspective, how and why such external factors influence the content of PE lessons.

Theory of practice architectures

According to the theory of practice architecture (Kemmis, 2022; Kemmis et al., 2014), teaching practices consist of sayings, doings, and relations, all serving the purpose of the practice. These elements are enabled or limited by specific conditions, including cultural-discursive arrangements, material-economic arrangements, and social-political arrangements.

These conditions and interactions across various elements have a significant influence on the practices, and it is through these interactions that the unfolding of practices occurs within specific sites. In this article, we explore the material-economic arrangements described by Kemmis (2022) in the context of PE. We gain valuable insights into their influence on PE content in Norwegian schools through a focused examination of these arrangements. Understanding these material-economic aspects is essential for identifying areas of improvement and enhancing the overall PE experience. The material-economic arrangements interact with the doings (activities) of a practice and can be evident and apparent, but may also be framed by unacknowledged circumstances, and in contrast to the memories of participants, the material-economic arrangements of a site develop their own pattern over time. Changing the material-economic arrangements of practice may result in better or different outcomes. For example, the circumstances (such as time and equipment) in which teachers work may need to be changed (Kemmis, 2022). The purpose of this theoretical framework is to assist researchers, as well as participants in everyday practices, in demonstrating how practices with unforeseen consequences affect our lives. Such practices may be irrational or unreasonable, not productive or sustainable, or unjust or undemocratic. Although actors construct their own practices, actors are also shaped by the decisions and actions of many others. Therefore, they are not solely responsible for these practices. Practice architecture describes how people’s practices are partly enabled by the social world in which they live, which provides them with the tools and resources necessary to engage in their activities (Kemmis, 2022). Teacher practice is not the only barrier that influences student outcomes. The conditions in which a teacher acts, such as the equipment, facilities, and resources that he or she has at their disposal, also play a role. Changing individuals’ actions is not enough to transform a practice; it is also necessary to change the architectures that permit or inhibit it (Kemmis et al., 2014). In most cases, the material-economic arrangements at a site already indicate what kind of place it is and what kind of activities and work normally take place there. The equipment and facilities found in a gymnasium can be tailored to specific sports. In regard to material things and the activities they facilitate, Kemmis (2022) refers to the setting or landscape of this activity area as an “activity-scape.” Material objects found there may have been developed for specialized tasks that are performed there (e.g., a gymnasium is an activity-scape that provides physical equipment designed to facilitate specific activities) (Kemmis, 2022).

Research questions

Research on Norwegian primary PE’s content (types of activities in lessons) is limited. Furthermore, there is a need for more knowledge on how external factors influence primary teachers’ content selection in their PE lessons. This study examines teachers’ self-reported content in their PE lessons and the external factors they perceive as decisive for their content selection, seen through the lens of the material-economic dimensions of practice architectures theory. The research questions for the study are:

Method

We utilized a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative questionnaires and semi-structured qualitative interviews. Following the approach proposed by Schoonenboom and Johnson (2017), our design was qualitatively dominant (QUAL + quant) due to the greater emphasis on in-depth qualitative data. The questionnaires provided a large dataset, offering insights into content selection trends, while the interviews delved deeper into participants’ experiences, attitudes, and factors influencing content selection.

Results and findings

Survey results

Content of primary PE lessons

To determine what content is taught in Norwegian primary PE classes, we asked the teachers to rate the yearly frequency of 11 randomly ordered activities from the competence aims in the PE curriculum.

Play and ball are the most frequently taught activities. These activities were taught more than ten times per year by 70% and 65% of teachers, respectively. As shown in Figure 1, 41% of the teachers taught swimming to their students more than ten times per year. However, 25% of the teachers answered that they never taught swimming. The results also show that many teachers did not teach cycling, alternative movements, or orienteering, with 49%, 36%, and 21% never teaching these activities.

External factors for the content of primary PE lessons

To determine how external factors influence the content of PE lessons, we asked the teachers to rate 8 external barriers on a scale as not decisive, slightly decisive, quite decisive, or very decisive for their selection of content.

The results show that several external factors influenced the content of PE lessons; the amount of time available, the size of the group, and the equipment available in the gym were the most decisive barrier for the teachers in this study.

Discussion

This study pursued two primary objectives: to examine teachers’ self-reported content in their PE lessons and the external factors they perceive as decisive for their content choices. The results of the survey revealed that most teachers’ primary choice of activities in PE lessons were ball-related activities and play (for example, dodgeball and playing tag). Furthermore, during the interviews, the teachers reported incorporating a range of ball-related activities in their PE lessons. Among these activities, dodgeball emerged as one of the most popular choices. Consistently, studies by Moen et al. (2015) among teachers in Grades 5–10 and Säfvenbom et al. (2015) among students in Grades 8–13 in Norway indicated that ball games, basic training, and play dominated the content of PE lessons. Thus, this study confirms that these activities also dominate PE classes for younger age groups. This is related to the critical discussion of PE in primary schools (Griggs, 2007; Morgan & Hansen, 2007). The subject has been criticized as being “sportified” (Green, 2008; Naul, 2003) and as traditionally consisting of sports activities and different ball activities (Hardman & Marshall, 2005; Ward & Quennerstedt, 2014). It is important to remember that certain activities will suffer if teachers concentrate only on a few (Petrie, 2016).

Relatedly, we found that alternative movements like skateboarding, parkour, yoga, and climbing, were rarely or never discussed, or offered as content in PE lessons. This is in accordance with Standal et al. (2020), who found that teachers primarily use sport and ball games as examples during lesson explanations. Since the Norwegian curriculum emphasizes not only traditional activities but also nontraditional physical activities such as skateboarding and parkour (Utdanningsdirektoratet, 2015), the content reported by the participants in our study does not correspond to its purpose. Linde (2012) points out that teachers often do not teach the content outlined in the official curriculum, which is consistent with this finding. The teachers in our study reported that some competence goals were provided only occasionally or never to their students, including swimming, dancing, cycling, orienteering, and alternative activities. Dance, skateboarding, yoga, parkour, and climbing are also underrepresented, according to Moen et al. (2018). The lack of focus on all aspects of PE has also been reported in research from other countries, including by Larsson and Meckbach (2007), Liljekvist (2013), and Morgan and Hansen (2008). This indicates that teachers in a variety of countries struggle to fulfill the requirements for what content they should offer students in PE. While the Norwegian curriculum emphasizes the importance of both understanding and valuing physical activity (MER, 2015), our findings reveal that the content in PE classes is restricted and does not align with the curriculum’s expectation for a diverse range of activities. Consequently, students are unable to acquire the knowledge and experiences that would be beneficial for their future development as outlined in the curriculum. Since PE at the primary level is an important part of promoting lifelong physical activity (Naylor & McKay, 2009), there is reason to be concerned about Norwegian primary PE. PE is critical in establishing a foundation for sustained participation in physical activity throughout one’s life (Naylor & McKay, 2009). A diverse range of physical activity experiences must be provided to children and adolescents to achieve this goal (Engström, 2008). Individuals evolve in their motivations and purposes for participating in physical activity as they progress through various life stages. Primary PE curriculum must include a variety of exercise experiences to meet these changing needs. By providing various activities, students can explore different forms of physical activity and discover what resonates with them, increasing their likelihood of continuing to engage in physical activity for a long time (Engström, 2008; Green, 2008).

In the present study, we also aim to explore the external factors influencing teachers’ choices of content in PE. To do so, we utilize the material-economic dimension of the practice architecture (Kemmis et al., 2014) as a theoretical lens. Material-economic arrangements as described by Kemmis (2014) are the resources that cause actions in practice; these arrangements enable or constrain the doings of primary PE (e.g., when access to the equipment changes the actions in the gymnasium). Seen through Kemmis’ (2022) theory of practice architecture, it is unreasonable to blame the narrow content of primary PE solely on teachers. The results of this study show that the material-economic arrangements among the various sites were mostly similar, although there were some variations. We identified four barriers constraining practice: time, equipment, group size, and gymnasium size. These factors are similar to the external barriers/constraints for teachers that have been described by other researchers both in the Norwegian context (Moen et al., 2018) and in the international literature (Curtner-Smith & Meek, 2000; Morgan & Hansen, 2008; Smith & Parr, 2007).

To facilitate a comprehensive discussion on the material-economic dimension of practice architectures (Kemmis, 2022; Kemmis et al., 2014) and its implications for PE, we have organized our analysis of the interview data into three distinct themes: (1) Resources aren’t on your side, but it works, (2) Size matters, and (3) I don’t have time.

1) Resources aren’t on your side, but it works

The interview findings revealed that available equipment was one of the important material-economic arrangements for teachers. According to the theory of practice architecture, a practice’s equipment can be considered an aspect of its actions (Kemmis, 2022). PE teachers can therefore make choices based on the equipment they have at their disposal. In our interview findings when the teachers explaining their emphasis on activities involving balls, such as soccer, handball, and basketball, the teachers said that they often select ball-related activities because they have the equipment required for these activities. In our survey results biking was identified as an activity that was almost never included as content in primary PE, and Emma explained in the interview that students do not have the proper equipment for biking. In the same way, in the interviews the teachers also expressed skiing as limited by students’ lack of equipment. Emma suggested that this could be resolved by providing a pool of equipment in the school. During the interviews, the teachers used examples of equipment that was quite old and traditional. For instance, they talked about vaulting boxes being too expensive to replace if they broke. In addition to having access to only certain pieces of equipment, the teachers used this traditional equipment as an example when talking about handling equipment. In particular, the female teachers noted that the equipment was too heavy to lift. This posed a particular challenge for teaching in the primary years because the students were too young to assist with all the heavy lifting. The teachers solved this by arranging the equipment in their spare time before the class started. Alternatively, they chose other types of activities. According to the theory of practice architecture (Kemmis, 2022), the arrangement of materials at a site is not influenced by the memories of participants, but rather by a pattern embedded in the arrangement itself. Therefore, teachers are not solely making decisions based on their experience of what they think they can do or not do. The gymnasium can be seen as a specialized landscape, or “activity-scape,” in terms of the activities and work that take place there. Some of the items found there may have been tools developed for the specific type of work being done there (Kemmis, 2022), such as the equipment, layouts and set-ups in the gymnasium. In this way, the practice is guided by the architecture of the gymnasium and the materials available there. Considering the constraints faced, diversifying teaching methods beyond traditional gymnasium equipment is crucial. For example, equipment such as slacklines and skateboards, which is less expensive and more accessible than many traditional items, align with curriculum goals, yet are often overlooked in current practices.

2) Size matters

In the interviews, most of the teachers indicated that both group size and the size of the gymnasium pose challenges when selecting content. Additionally, several teachers expressed difficulty managing large groups of students because of the small gymnasium. Their classes usually consisted of approximately 25 students. In contrast, Lundvall and Meckbach (2008) reported that teachers distributed content similarly regardless of the facility’s limitations. Teachers in our study revealed that having student groups that were too large prevented them from providing feedback and guidance to students. Teachers also indicated that the content might not change if they had smaller groups but that they would have more time to assist those who were experiencing difficulties. They also expressed a desire to have more than one teacher to help manage large student groups. The ability to referee two soccer matches simultaneously was given as one of the reasons for wanting this arrangement. However, the teachers also stated that class sizes affected content, stating that they were only able to “just be together.” As one of the teachers explained, there was not enough space in the gymnasium to divide the group into two when the student group was large. It is evident that the combination of both architectures (Kemmis, 2022), small space and large group size, makes it even more challenging. Consequently, the teacher was not able to give different assignments and instructions to the students. As a result, they changed the content, choosing more collaborative games. This could explain why the teachers taught a narrow content that only focused on some parts of the curriculum.

Based on the results of the survey, we found that teachers rarely presented orienteering to the students. In the interviews, Max explained how orienteering outdoors with nearly 30 students would not be safe. To cope with the large student group, he chooses team collaboration activities such as dodgeball, which is justified as a practice because it encompasses many students. Since he cannot alter the conditions by reducing the number of students in the group, he changes the content. Seen through Kemmis’ (2022) theory of practice architecture, it is unreasonable to blame the narrow content of primary PE solely on teachers. If they do not have access to adequate facilities, they may struggle to provide a content in line with the curriculum.

3) I don’t have time

Like previous research (e.g., Mandigo et al., 2004; Moen et al., 2018), our interview findings, revealed that time was a significant constraint in delivering PE. According to interview findings, the allocated time for PE lessons is often insufficient to ensure high-quality instruction. In some cases, it may take longer to initiate specific activities. For instance, teachers need more time to organize skiing lessons due to the travel time required to reach suitable skiing locations.

In line with Moen et al.’s (2018) study in Norway, our interview findings reveal that PE classes primarily take place in sports halls or gyms and are constrained by limited hours. Consequently, students are unable to participate in a comprehensive array of physical activities, including outdoor ones. This limitation necessitates attention and intervention to ensure a broader range of physical experiences for students. The issue at hand is concerning because existing literature, such as Engström’s study (2008), highlights the importance of offering diverse experiences in PE to foster student motivation and long-term participation. It’s worth noting that modifying the actions of individuals involved and adjusting the practice architectures that permit or restrict those actions can transform practices (Kemmis et al., 2014). Due to time constraints, teachers have implemented new practice architectures by dedicating entire days to specific activities, such as ski days, activity days, and PE days. This allows for a change in conditions, including allocating more time for particular activities and providing the opportunity to explore different locations. Embracing interdisciplinary teaching offers another avenue. By linking PE with subjects like geography or science, activities such as orienteering or nature exploration can be integrated into regular lessons, without the need for full-day events. This not only provides diverse content but also offers ways to use environments outside the traditional gymnasium, reducing dependency on typical equipment and spaces. While dedicated physical activity days have demonstrated efficacy in select scenarios, their integration can be challenging within densely structured school timetables. This is often the case when educators contend with extensive commitments. Nonetheless, it is imperative to acknowledge the potential benefits of such interventions. The reconfiguration of practice architectures, as proposed by Kemmis et al. (2014), can substantially augment the PE experiences of students, whether through comprehensive day-long events or the adoption of interdisciplinary methodologies. By introducing a variety of teaching locations and diversified activities, this enhancement is further enhanced.

Conclusions

Understanding primary PE content from educators’ perspectives is essential for fulfilling the curriculums objectives and fostering a lifelong joy of physical activity. This study focused on teacher perceptions and external factors shaping the content in PE. By employing Kemmis’ theory of practice architecture’s material-economic dimension (2022), we gained a deep insight into the interplay between resources and pedagogical decisions.

We have identified several key constraints that affect the variety and creativity of PE classes’ content. These include limitations on resources and equipment, such as an overreliance on ball-related equipment and a lack of access to diverse facilities. Logistical challenges, such as limited gymnasium space and large student groups, also steer teachers towards certain activities, like dodgeball. In addition, time constraints limit PE instruction quality and diversity, especially outdoor activities.

Our results highlight that lack of variety in primary PE content in Norway is not solely based on teachers’ choices. Material-economic conditions significantly influence the content. These findings underscore the need to address these challenges in a diversified PE curriculum. The present study’s results provide a deeper understanding of the complexities faced by primary PE educators, emphasizing the pressing need to address material-economic challenges. While material-economic factors play a significant role, cultural and political contexts is also expected to influence PE content. Future studies could further investigate these aspects and their impact on PE practices.