universiti putra malaysia effectiveness of responsibility model for ...

UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA

EFFECTIVENESS OF RESPONSIBILITY MODEL FOR PERSONAL AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

NORLENA SALAMUDDIN

FPP 2001 10

EFFEC TIVENES S OF RES PONS I B I L I T Y M O D EL FOR PERS O NAL AND SO CIAL DEVEL O P M ENT IN

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

By

NORLENA SALAM UD D I N

T h e s i s Subm i tted i n Fulfi l m e n t o f the Requirement fo r t h e D egree of D o ctor of P h i l o s o phy

in the Fa culty of Educ a t i o n a l S tud i e s U n iversit i Putra M a l ay sia

- JUIl� 200t

DEDICATION

To Faris Arifin and Farah Alyssa, my beloved children.

Thanks for your patience.

ii

Abstract of thesis presented to the Senate of Universiti Putra Malaysia in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy.

EFFECTIVENESS OF RESPONSIBILITY MODEL FOR PERSONAL AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN PHYSICAL

EDUCATION

By

NORLENA SALAMUDDIN

June 2001

Chairman: Professor Dr. Abdul Rahman Mohd. Aroff

Faculty: Educational Studies

An experiment to assess the effects of the responsibility model on

students' personal and social development was conducted in a

school in Shah Alam, Selangor. Instruction using the specific

teaching strategies served as the intervention programme, and a

pre test-post test control group research design was utilised. The

study involved 146 Form One students (75 males and 71 females)

in four classes. The teaching of personal and social development

in physical education classes used the responsibility model

developed by Hellison (1985) and adapted to Malaysian physical

education curriculum. It was hypothesised that the responsibility

model would improve students' personal and social development

and would assist students in responding to sports and non-sports

related dilemmas. It was further hypothesised that gender and

level or comiJt�tilion dTd -not nave any fnfIuence on the-students'

iii

ability to respond to dilemmas. The hypotheses of the study

received significant support. Students in the experimental group

improved significantly after exposure to the responsibility model.

Gender and number of years in competitive sports had no effect on

the ability to adapt to the responsibility model. The implication of

the study sho wed that the responsibility model did influence

students' personal and social development. Therefore, it is

recommended that specific teaching strategies be used in teaching

physical education so that the aim of producing students who are

able to cho ose right from wrong and good from bad be no longer

taken for granted.

iv

Abstrak tesis yang dikemukakan kepada Senat Universiti Putra Malaysia sebagai memenuhi keperluan ijazah Doktor Falsafah

KEBERKESANAN M ODEL TANGGUNGJA WAB BAGI PERKEMBANGAN SOSIO-KEND I RI DALAM

PENDI D I KAN JAS MANI

Oleh

NORLENA SALAMUDDIN

Jun 2001

Pengerus i: Pro fe s o r D r. Abdul Rahman Mohd A r o ff

Fakulti: Pengaj ian P e n d i d ikan

Satu kaj ian untuk meni I ai kesan model tanggungj awab ke atas

perkembangan sosio-kendiri pelajar telah dijalankan di sebuah

sekolah di Shah Alam, Selangor. Program intervensi bagi

kumpulan kajian adalah menggunakan strategi pengajaran yang

spesifik. Rekabentuk kaj ian adalah kaj ian kuasi menggunakan

uJlan pra dan pos. Seramai 146 orang pelajar Tingkatan Satu (75

lelaki dan 71 perempuan telah terIibat dalam kaj ian ini. Model

tanggungjawab yang dibentuk oleh Hellison (1985) telah

diadaptasikan dalam kurikulum pendidikan jasmani yang

digunakan di Malaysia. Dalam kajian ini, model ini digunakan

untuk mengajar kemahiran sosio-kendiri dikalangan pelajar

sekolah. Beberapa hipotesis kajian telah dibentuk, diantara lain

hipotesis kajian menyatakan bahawa model t-a-nggungjawab ini

dapat meningkatkan perkembangan sosio-kendiri serta membantu

v

pelajar dalam menangani dilema berkaitan sukan dan bukan sukan.

Pengaruh jantina serta tahap penglibatan pelajar dalam sukan

terhadap kebolehan untuk menangani dilema juga dikaji. Hipotesis

kajian ini mendapat sambutan yang memberangsangkan. Pelajar­

pelajar yang terlibat dalam kumpulan kaj ian telah menunjukkan

pre stasi signifikan dalam peningkatan dari segi tanggungjawab

sosio-kendiri selepas didedahkan kepada model tanggungjawab

tersebut. Jantina serta penglibatan dalam sukan tidak langsung

mempengaruhi kebolehan untuk menyesuaikan diri kepada model

tanggungjawab. Keputusan kaj ian dibincangkan dengan merujuk

kepada objektif kajian serta pengajaran pendidikan jasmani.

Saranan berkaitan dengan isi pengajaran serta kurikulum dan

saran an kajian lanjutan juga dibincangkan.

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In The N arne of God, The Most Beneficent, The Most Gracious

I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude and appreciation to

several individuals who have directly or indirectly been involved

in the development of this study.

My deepest and sincerest gratitude goes to my supervisors,

Professor Dr. Abdul Rahman Mohd. Aroff, Associate Professor Dr.

Zakaria Kasa and Dr. Abdul Majid Mohd. Isa, for their

professional guidance and valuable advice which have contributed

to the s!lccess of this study.

My sincere appreciation to the students at Sekolah Menengah

Projek, Shah Alam, Selangor who were involved in this study.

Without their cooperation this research could not have been

possible. My utmost appreciation goes to Professor Dr. Zalizan

Mohd. Jelas, Associate Professor Dr. Abdullah Mohd. Noor,

Associate Professor Dr. Abdul Rashid lohar, Professor Dr. A.

Bakar Nordin, Dr. Lilia Halim, Dr. Faridah Haq, Dr. Nor Aishah

Buang, Dr. Ruhizan Mohd Yassin, En. Mohd. Taib Harun and

other individuals for their moral and practical support.

My deepest appreciation also goes to my mother, Hjh Maimunah

Omar, my aunt, the late Hjh Aminah Mohd Said, my uncle, the

late Hj Mohd. Sheith Hj Ahmad, my sisters, Dr. Norhana and

Norhayati, and my cousins, Bahiyah, lamaliah, Dariah, Haniah,

Zawir and Hanan for their concern, encouragement and continuous

support during the darkest days of my life.

Last but not least, my gratitude and love to my children, Faris and

Farah for having the patience to wait for their mama to finish her

studies, and to my husband, Md. Saat Md. Yusof, I thank you for

everything.

vii

I certify that an Examination Committee met on 11th June 2001 to conduct the final examination of Norlena Salamuddin on her Doctor of Philosophy thesis entitled "Effectiveness of Responsibility Model for Personal-Social Development in Physical Education" in accordance with Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Higher Degree) Act 1980 and Universiti Pertanian Malaysia (Higher Degree) Regulations 1981. The Committee recommends that the candidate be awarded the relevant degree. Members of the Examination Committee are as follows:

Abdul Majid Konting, Ph.D. Associate Professor Faculty of Educational Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia (Chairman)

Abdul Rahman Md. Aroff, Ph.D. Professor Deputy Vice Chancellor Universiti Putra Malaysia (Member)

Zakaria Kasa, Ph.D. Associate Professor Faculty of Educational Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia (Member)

Abd. Majid Mohd. Isa, Ph.D. Associate Professor Dean, Faculty of Management and Economy Kolej Universiti Terengganu (Member)

Jabar Hj. Johari, Ph.D. Associate Professor Head of Department School of Cognitive and Human Development Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris (Independent Examiner)

viii

Professor Deputy Dean of Graduate School Universiti Putra Malaysia

Date 2 8 NOV 20m

This thesis submitted to the Senate of Universiti Putra Malaysia has been accepted as fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

ix

AINI IDERIS, Ph. D. Professor, Dean of Graduate School, Universiti Putra Malaysia

Date: 1 0 JAN 2002

I hereby declare that the thesis is based on my original work except for quotations and citations, which have been duly acknowledged. I also declare that it has not been previously or currently submitted for any other degree at UPM or other institutions.

x

T ABLE OF CONTENTS

P a g e

DE DICA TI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 A B S TRAC T . . . . . . . . ................. ........................... ....... .... 111

A B S TRAK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v ACKNO WLE DGEMEN TS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Vll

APPROVAL SHEE TS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIlI

DEC LARA TION FORM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x L I S T O F TAB LE S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ................... XIV

L I S T O F F I GURE S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ............... ......... .... .... XVI

C HA P T ER

I IN TRO DU C TI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background of the Stud y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Personal and S o c ia l Development Theor ie s . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Ph ys ical Educat ion and P ersona l it y Deve lopment . . 10 Statement of the Prob l em . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4 Obj ect ive s of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 S ignif icance of Research ... . . . ... ..................... ...... 17 Research H ypothe s is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0 L im itat ion o f the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Def in it ion of Terms . . .. . . . . . ..... ........ ........ . . ..... ...... 2 2

Conclus ion . . . . . . . ....... ................ . . ...... ................. 2 7

I I REVIE W O F RELA TE D L I TERA TURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 9 Introduct ion . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .. . .. . .. . 29 Four Qua l it ie s of Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Phy s ica l Educat ion and Soc ial Deve lopment . . . . . . . . . 34 Educat ional Proce s s e s in Phy s ica l Educat io n . . . . . . . . 44 Phy s ica l Educat ion and B ehav iour Mod if icat ions . . 5 0 Sports and Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Supporters for Sports a s a B u ilder of Chara cter 58 Arguments aga ins t Sports as a B u ilder of Character . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

The Emp ir ica l Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7 Sport Part ic ipat ion and Persona l it y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Sport Part ic ipat ion and B ehav iour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 9 Moral it y and Mora l Educat io n . . . . . ...... . . ..... . ..... 78 Sport as Fa irne s s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2 Ph-ys ic al Edu-cation a n-d M-or al F-ormation ......... 88

xi

Physical E ducation ' s Contribut ion to Character Development . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Research Interventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 95 Ph ys i ca l Education Toda y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Ph ys i c a l E ducat ion Pedagog y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 04 S oc ia l L earning Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 09 S tructura l D eve lopment S tudie s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 1 P ersona l - S oc ia l D eve lopment S tud ie s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 6

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 9

I I I M E THODOLOG y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 22 I ntroduct ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 22 Research D e sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 23

E xperimental Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 25 Control Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 25

Framework o f the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 26 Research Subj ects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 28 Ins trumentat ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 1 G enera l Programme Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 34 Spec ifi c Teaching S trateg i e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 36 D ep endent Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 40 Method of Anal ys i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4 1 S coring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 44

I V RESUL TS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '" . . . . . . 1 46 Introduct ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 46 Organ i sat ion of the Chapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 48 D e scription of the Research Subj ect s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 48 D e s cr ipt ion of the D ata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 50 The Influence of I ndependent Variab l e s on Pre- tes t

S c ores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 53 The E ffect o f the Intervention P ro gramme on

Students ' P er sonal and Soc ia l Deve lopment . . . . . . . . . 1 59 Effects on the Gain S cores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 62 Effects on the P o st - tes t S c ores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 1 63

Adaptat ion to the Respons ib i l i t y Mode l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 67 Sk i l l , Fitne s s and Ph ys i ca l Abi li t y af te r E xp osure to the Respons ibi l it y Mode l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 72 The I nfluence of the Number of Years in

Competit ive Sports and Abi l i t y to make Respons ib l e Dec i s ions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 5 Conclus ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 7 7

xii

V SUMMARY, D I S CUS S ION AND S UGGESTION ... 179 Introduction . . .. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... . . . . .. ... . .. . .. . ... .. ... . 179 Summary of Results . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 D iscussions . . . . . .. . . ...... .... . ... ... .... . ....... ... ...... ...... .. 188 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240

Recommendations for Teaching and Curri culum Content. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 Recommendati ons for Future Research.. .. .. . .. . . . 246

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 25 1

B IB LIO GRAPHy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 5 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 A l Teaching Module for Control Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 A2 Teaching Module for Experimental Group . . . . . . . . . . .. 287 B 1 Stories for P re- and Post-test: B icycle . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 289 B 2 S tori es for Pre- and Post-test: Vol ley b a l l Game . . . . 290 B3 Stories for P re- and Post-test: Popul arity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 B4 S tories for Pre- and Post- test: Roun ders . . . . .. . . .. . . ... 292 C Codi n g S c ale for Level of Reasoni n g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 D P rocedure for S corin g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294 E Personal and Social Dilem m as i n Physical

Education . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295 F Co-operative B ased Content to Develop P ersona l

a n d Soc ial V a lues i n Physi cal Education Classes . . 296

B I ODATA OF AUTHOR . . . . . ....... . ... . . .. ... ........ .. ..... .. ..... 300

xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Tab l e No. T itle

I Pre-test Mean Scores and Stan dard Deviat ion for Combined, Sport , Li fe ,

Phys i ca l , F i t nes s and Ski l l S c ores According to Gender and Leve l s of C ompetit ion

2 Adj u sted R S quare S tati s t i c s and One Way ANCOV A on Pre- tes t S cores

3 Analys i s of Variance on the Pre -test S core on C ombined S core , Sport S core and L ife S core with Respect to Gender and Leve l o f C ompetiti on

4 Ana lys i s of Variance on the Pre -test S c ore on Phys ica l S c ore , F i tn e s s S core and S k i l l S core with Respect to Gender and L eve l of Competit ion

5 Mean Post-test Score s and M e an Gain S cores of the E xperimental and Contro l Group

6 ANOV A of Gain S cores for E xper imental and C ontrol Group

7 Mean and S tandard Dev iation o f Post-test S cores for Combined, L ife - re lated and Sports -re lated Di lemmas for C ontro l and E xp er imental Groups

8 Mult ip l e Regres s ion Anal ys i s for Combined , Sports - re l ated and L ife -re lated Di l emmas

9 Mean Gain Scores According to Gender for C ontro l and E xperimental Group

10 Anal y s i s of Variance for the G ai n S cores for the Combined Di l emma, L i fe - re l ated d i l emma and Sports - re lated Di l emma in Respect to G ender

xiv

Page

1 5 4

1 5 6

1 5 8

1 5 8

1 6 1

1 6 3

1 64

1 6 5

1 67

1 6 8

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

Mean Post-test Scores and Standard Deviation in Respect to Gender and Group for Com b i ned, L i fe-related and S ports-related d i lemmas

Mu ltiple Regression Anal ysis of the Post­test S cores for the Three D i lemmas A c cording to Gender and Group

Mean Gain S cores and Standard D evi ati on for S k i l l , Fitness and P hysi c al A b i l ities of Control and Experimental Groups

Analysis of V ariance of S k i l l , Fitness and Physi cal Abi l ities for the Control and Experimenta l G roups

Mean Gain S cores and Standard Devi ation on three levels of Years i n Competitive S ports for Control and Experimental Groups

Analysis of V ariance for Years i n Competitive S ports between Control and Experimental Groups

xv

170

171

173

174

175

17 6

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Title Page

1 Conceptual Framework of the Research 128

2 Factors in Curriculum Planning 205

xvi

CHAPTER ONE

INT R O D U C TIO N

Bac kgrou n d of t h e S t u dy

Based on media report s , it seems that the behaviours o f the

younger generatio n today are deteriorat ing . Many factors c ontribute to

thi s deprec iat ion in behaviour . However , most peop le attr ibuted i t to

two prominent factors , i . e . the onset of modern techno log i e s and

working parents .

Through modern techno log i e s , ado l e scents are introduced to

te l ev i s ions and video arcades . Te lev i s ion has been proven to influence

ado l e scents in both po s it ive and negative ways ( White 1 990; Robson

1 99 7 ) . Through te lev i s ion and other media of c ommunicat ion outs ide

the scho o l , students today are more knowledgeable and sophis t icated

than students of the past . Dr . Mahathir Mohamed a l so denounced the

influence of te lev i s ion on l ocal ado l e scents who fol l o w the style of

their punk counterparts overseas (The Star , Jan 1 0, 1 99 7 ) .

The second factor contributing to behavioural problems i n

adolescents i s working parents (Smith and Sharp 1 994) . Since parents

were at work most of the day, adolescents spend most of their t ime

on their own or under the care of a helper . As a consequence, these

adolescents frequently became the perpetrators and victims of

undesirabl e behaviours . Adolescents need to be taught, control led and

corrected by adults . Good b ehaviours and instructions need to b e given

to children of all ages for them to fol low as ideal example s (Barnett,

Matthews and Howard 1 979; Crittenden 1 99 1 ; B ernstein, 1 996) . If

children need to possess se lf-control and se lf-direction, then they have

to be provided with opportuniti e s and responsibi l i ti e s to control and

direct their own actions according to the acceptab le and commendable

rules and norms of society (Bredemeier 1986 ; Eisenberg and Mussen

1 989) .

Scho o l s are now under a tremendous pre s sure smce p arents are

more worried about how their chi ldren perform in schoo l , in other

words , their chi ldren ' s grades in school (Broadfoot 1 99 8 ) . Schoo l s

are g iv ing more and more attention to academic achievement o f

student s . This increase in attention may be due t o parental cho ice and

c ompetit i on among scho o l s to be exce l lent in academic achievement .

In such a c l imate, the future for other aspects of education i s l ike ly to

b e b l eak . Time and enthusiasm spend on l e s s measurab le educat ional

2

values are great ly reduced because schoo l s and indivi dual teachers

are forced to focus their energies on "getting the scores up"

(Broadfoot 1 998 ) . P ersonal and soc ial deve lopment i s one o f the

s everal aspects of l earning that are currently under pre s sure . A lthough

po l i t ic ians and po l i cy-makers a l ike know about the need for s choo l s to

take more respons ib i l ity for moral , civic and sp iritual deve lopment of

soc ie ty ' s next generat ion , " what you test i s what you get" atti tude s t i l l

prevai l s .

What i s happening to school ing for the past s everal decades

d ic tat es the need of s o c i al sk i l l s training for schoo l chi ldren .

Teaching IS a more d ifficul t j ob today than it was i n the past .

V irtual ly everyone who i s e i ther direct ly or indirect ly involved in

educat ion be l i eves that students are more d i sruptive today than they

were in the past (Si edentop, Mand, and Taggart 1 98 6 ) . D i sc ip l ine has

been the s ing le most important i s sue in the minds of both p arents and

teachers over the past decade (Baer , Goodall and Brown 1 983;

Chomsky 1 995 ) .

Teachers , administrators and parents believe that students are

more disruptive , more difficult to manage , and more in need of

3

disciplinary training (Dauer and Pangrazi 1986). Regardless of what

previous generations of students were l ike , it seems c lear that the current

generation needs to learn to behave better in school as wel l as outside

the school compound (He l l i son 1 978 ) . Along with the widespread

concern about disruptive behaviours , there i s a related bel ief that schoo l s

should do more to teach students appropriate social and ethical

behaviour ( Inman, Buck and Burke 1 99 8 ) . The deep and continuing

concern about the social development of students makes thi s study

particularly relevant to the current scene .

There i s a lso a long-standing bel ief that adolescents can l earn

valuable l essons pertaining to rule s , authority, perseverance , courage ,

and responsibil ity through sports and games (Haft and S lade 1 98 9;

Rayner 1 992) . When physical education was introduced as a school

subj ect in early 1 8 th century in the United States of America and in the

United Kingdom, character deve lopment occupied a s ignificant role

alongside physical fitnes s (Zeigler 1 964; McPherson 1 97 8). This proves

that s ince it was first introduced, physical education was taught for

fitnes s development and at the same t ime for the development of the se lf

as a person.

4

Over the year s , as e ducational j argons change, i t becomes

more common to de scribe this obj ect ive as s o c ia l/emot ional

deve lopment rather than character deve lopment , but the two

e s sent ia l ly meant the same thing . The progre s s ive educatio n movement

serve s to emphasi s e even more the importance of soc ial deve lopment

funct ion of schoo l s , and many important phys ica l educat ion teachers

p lace great importance on socia l deve lopment outcomes in phys i c al

educat ion .

Over the past decade , many have argued that there IS l it t l e

ev idence that schoo l physical educat ion has made any d i s t inct

contribution to character deve lopment in students (Ogi lvi e and Tutko

1 97 1 ; Leonard 1 972; He l l i son 1 97 8; Or l ick 1 9 7 8 , 1 990; Kohn 1 98 6;

S age 1 9 8 8 ) . One reason for thi s l ack of evidence may b e that the

deve lopment of c haracter has very se ldom been approached a s the

maj or goal of a physical education programme. If character and

soc ial deve lopment i s j ust one goal among many, i t i s not l ike ly to be

ach i eved to a degree that i t becomes not iceab l e . Us ing the mode l

deve loped by He l l i son ( 1 9 9 1 ) , there are good reasons to b e l i ev e that

phys ical education teachers can achieve personal and s o cia l goa l s such

as perseverance , s e l f-re spons ib i l ity, more appropriate behaviour ,

5

shar ing , and co -operat ion among troub led students and the general

student populat i on .

I t would be h igh ly pre sumptuous to s tate that physi cal e ducatio n

w i l l automatical l y produce good personal and soc ia l behaviour .

Phys i cal educat ion can be benefi c ia l , neutral or detr imental to

personal and soc ial deve lopment , depending o n the nature o f soc i a l

i nteractions that actual ly takes p lace i n a phys i cal educat ion c l a s s .

Henkel and Earl s ( 1 98 5 ) po int s out that phys ical educat ion teachers

were o n average l e s s deve lop i n their moral reasoning capac i t i e s , thus

making i t d iffi cult for them to implement moral deve lopment

strat eg i e s in phy s ica l e ducat ion c l as s e s . Neverthe l e s s , there are many

ded icated and competent physical educat ion teachers who have quite

effect ive ly used var ious personal - soc ial deve lopment mode l s in their

phys ica l education c l a s s e s .

P e rsonal a n d Soc ial D ev e lop m e n t T h eories

Social problems among school chi ldren have caught the attentio n

of many people . Although teachers often state that social development i s

6

one of the general outcomes of education and physical education, it

appears to be merely statements . A conscious effort need to be done In

terms of planning for personal and social development so that students

are aware of their behaviour. One way of planning for this o utcome is

using the ideas from personal and social development theorists .

Personal and social development theorists (Orlick 1 97 8; He l l i son

1 98 5; Gruber 1 986; Romance, Weiss and Bockoven 1 98 6; Winnick 1 990)

be l ieve that personal and social attribute s can be taught. Personal and

social development refers to a wide range of affective domain attributes

such as se lf-esteem, courage , co-operation, motivation, sportsmanship

and fair play. In a review of the pub l ications of past phys ical education

leaders , Mi l ler and Jarman ( 1 9 8 8 ) provide cons iderabl e evidence not

only of the central role of "moral and ethical character development" in

the urgings of past physical education leaders but of their awareness that

physical education teachers must consciously teach toward these

outcomes if they are to occur.

Currently , there are four teaching mode l s that u s e the personal

and soc i al deve lopment theory as a maj or goal in phys i cal e ducat ion

l e s sons . These mode l s are :

7

1 . se l f- e steem model ,

2. moral educat ion mode l ,

3 . outdoor pursuit and adventure education mode l, and

4. respons ibi l ity mode l .

T h e first model i s the se l f- e steem mode l . Se lf- e steem i s o ften

v i ewed as a primary ind icator of a person ' s emotional adj ustment and

mental health (Campbe l l 1984 ) . Therefore , i t often appears as a

curr iculum obj ect ive i n school programmes ( Gruber 1 98 6 ) . Proponents

o f the s e l f-e steem model i n teachin g personal - soc ial deve lopment

promote s trateg ie s such as po s i t ive re inforcements , redefin ing s uc c e s s

s o that i mprovement and effort count, remedia l support for thos e who

perce ive themse lves to be unski l l ed or unfi t , and attent ion to the

in s ide s e l f in the form of l i stening , conference s , and cho i c e s .

However, because s e l f-e steem i s perceptual and subj ect ive, i t i s

d i fficu l t t o p lan for .

Another l i ne o f research (We i s s and Bredemeier 1 98 6 ) suggested

a different model of personal - socia l development whi ch i s ca l led the

moral education mode l . The goals of moral educat ion are to promote

moral reasoning , put moral reasoning into act ion , and deepen affect ive

8