View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

'Intervention' in Physical Education and Sport: Trends and Developments in a Decade of Francophone Research

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: 'Intervention' in Physical Education and Sport: Trends and Developments in a Decade of Francophone Research
Language: English
Authors: Musard, Mathilde, Poggi, Marie-Paule
Source: Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 2015 20(3):250-267.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 18
Publication Date: 2015
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Information Analyses
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Physical Education, Athletics, Educational Research, French, English, Comparative Analysis, Intervention, Literature Reviews, Conferences (Gatherings), Statistical Analysis, Computer Software, Qualitative Research, Heuristics, Interviews, Observation, Researchers, Social Influences, Content Analysis, Context Effect
Geographic Terms: France
DOI: 10.1080/17408989.2013.817008
ISSN: 1740-8989
Abstract: Introduction: The aims of this literature review were to characterize the communications presented during six Association for Research on "Intervention" in Sport (ARIS) French-speaking congresses from 2000 to 2010 and to compare the research trends between French and English research traditions. The definition of pedagogy is close to the notion of "intervention" and attempts to study, in an interacting or isolated way, three key components--the educator (professor, coach, teacher's educator), the participants (students, children, adults) and the curriculum/knowledge in specific contexts. The theoretical framework is centred on the social construction of the scientific knowledge. Method: All the communications of the six ARIS congresses (n = 836), reflecting the multiple facets of educational research were analysed. The quantitative treatment of the data, with the assistance of Sphinx software, consisted of univariate (frequencies, percentages) and bi-variate (chi-square statistic) analyses to identify possible significant relations between variables such as the congress, country and sex of author(s), institution, and so on. Findings: The results highlight the commonalties and differences between French and English research about "intervention"/pedagogy. We notice the continuing expansion of the field of "intervention"/pedagogy in the Francophone and the Anglophone worlds. But the low participation of the practitioners shows how intricate it is to move educational research closer to everyday practice. The results show that the contexts studied within ARIS are mainly school physical education and teacher's education, then coaching and other contexts. The majority of studies are centred on one component of pedagogy, but rarely on the interactions between the educators and the participants. The Francophone research is essentially descriptive and heuristic, using mostly qualitative methods (interviews and observations). This orientation of Francophone studies towards heuristic research seems to contrast with Anglophone research, even though qualitative research has recently come to dominate. Conclusion: The ARIS researchers have a common object of study ("intervention"/ pedagogy), share the same ideas and aims, learn how to do it better as they interact regularly and develop a shared repertoire of knowledge, theories and methods. We see here signs of an undeniable wealth of knowledge and the combination of different theories and methods leading to a better understanding of educational phenomena.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 36
Entry Date: 2015
Accession Number: EJ1055820
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFNUEO3hmLX98xmBSIzaeE6AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDFft4hkRwe29w4muAQIBEICBm6FJxDEaz0die6-pyEcAJsuHLvEj1woCqWObrhh6MAbt-ujkIgOMMp-5jjAJtJ82eTdmhw-en6vtZeiweK7d_D-iEwp1Ih6MD02UDzGhB8heH39nSYWgzrKQ2L6-JqU6t1rsO7CYh6-liq6Jf7keYc4L-vz028K_RW7ApBjUCe0DRvUQlSEs9rOdQX5-mlEnLHLXMQOlLJf6az32
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0101712144;z3x01may.15;2019Mar20.13:10;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0101712144-1">Intervention in physical education and sport: trends and developments in a decade of Francophone research. </title> <p>Introduction: The aims of this literature review were to characterize the communications presented during six Association for Research on Intervention in Sport (ARIS) French-speaking congresses from 2000 to 2010 and to compare the research trends between French and English research traditions. The definition of pedagogy is close to the notion of intervention and attempts to study, in an interacting or isolated way, three key components – the educator (professor, coach, teacher's educator), the participants (students, children, adults) and the curriculum/knowledge in specific contexts. The theoretical framework is centred on the social construction of the scientific knowledge. Method: All the communications of the six ARIS congresses (n = 836), reflecting the multiple facets of educational research were analysed. The quantitative treatment of the data, with the assistance of Sphinx software, consisted of univariate (frequencies, percentages) and bi-variate (chi-square statistic) analyses to identify possible significant relations between variables such as the congress, country and sex of author(s), institution, and so on. Findings: The results highlight the commonalties and differences between French and English research about intervention/pedagogy. We notice the continuing expansion of the field of intervention/pedagogy in the Francophone and the Anglophone worlds. But the low participation of the practitioners shows how intricate it is to move educational research closer to everyday practice. The results show that the contexts studied within ARIS are mainly school physical education and teacher's education, then coaching and other contexts. The majority of studies are centred on one component of pedagogy, but rarely on the interactions between the educators and the participants. The Francophone research is essentially descriptive and heuristic, using mostly qualitative methods (interviews and observations). This orientation of Francophone studies towards heuristic research seems to contrast with Anglophone research, even though qualitative research has recently come to dominate. Conclusion: The ARIS researchers have a common object of study (intervention/pedagogy), share the same ideas and aims, learn how to do it better as they interact regularly and develop a shared repertoire of knowledge, theories and methods. We see here signs of an undeniable wealth of knowledge and the combination of different theories and methods leading to a better understanding of educational phenomena.</p> <p>Keywords: intervention; pedagogy; publication trends; social construction</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-2">Introduction</hd> <p>During the 1990s, several congresses on <emph>intervention</emph> in physical education and sport were organized in the Francophone world. A community of researchers, teacher's educators, students and practitioners, all interested in educational practices in sport progressively developed, resulting in the creation in 1999 of the Association for Research on <emph>Intervention</emph> in Sport (ARIS[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>]). ARIS is constituted by French scholars and practitioners for the major part, but also includes French-speaking Canadians, Belgians, Swiss, Portuguese and Tunisians.</p> <p> <emph>Intervention</emph> gradually emerged as a key notion in the field of motor learning, sport and teacher's education in the 1990s. The notion of <emph>intervention</emph> then widened following theoretical reflection on the nature of the process of transmission of skills across various fields of physical activities and in relation to a range of communities.</p> <p>According to Durand ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref2">12</reflink>]), <emph>intervention</emph>:</p> <p>denotes all action and individual or collective situations involving one or more people engaged in a physical, sporting or artistic activity, aiming at the modification of that activity. These actions are of different natures according to the contexts in which they take place, persons whom they address, intentions of the participants and the nature of the envisaged modifications. If it is necessary to analyse separately these practices, it is also relevant to associate them, because the pursuit of one of these intentions is never exclusive of the others.</p> <p>The concept of <emph>intervention</emph> is thus envisaged here in its wide meaning and emphasizes the diversity of the professional practices and the variety of the transformations thanks to the physical and sports activities (David [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref3">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>The English community of researchers use the name of 'sport pedagogy', which includes the interacting and interdependent components of curriculum/ knowledge; learners and learning; teachers, teaching and teacher education, and their embedding and enactment in particular <emph>milieux</emph> (Kirk [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref4">18</reflink>])<emph>.</emph> This definition is thus close to the notion of <emph>intervention</emph>, which is interested in 'the diverse processes of transmission/appropriation of the knowledge, the attitudes and the sports techniques' in the different educational systems (David [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref5">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>The small number of French-speaking studies published in PESP (13 articles on 259 all in all from 1996 till 2012, that represents 5% of the articles) provides a partial view of trends developed within the French-speaking community. Moreover, this field of research is in expansion and it has become necessary to make an inventory of current and future research trends, so that the research progresses, gets organized and visible. The purpose of this article is to present a systematic analysis of the studies published by the French-speaking ARIS from 2000 to 2010. While we may not have exactly comparable data for the Anglophone literature (i.e. the analysis of the scientific programmes of congresses), we can nevertheless, with appropriate care, draw on analyses of trends in Anglophone publications (e.g. Silverman and Skonie [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref6">34</reflink>]; Silverman and Manson [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref7">33</reflink>]; Ward and Ko [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref8">36</reflink>]; Kulinna et al. [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref9">21</reflink>]; Kirk [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref10">18</reflink>]) to highlight the specificities of Francophone traditions in research on <emph>intervention</emph>/pedagogy.</p> <p>ARIS seeks to promote and spread research concerning the system of <emph>intervention</emph> in the field of the physical and sports activities. It also seeks to facilitate and develop relations between researchers and practitioners interested in educational research by creating opportunities to share information and by underlining the importance of drawing on the accumulated wealth of professional experience. Furthermore, the association ARIS seeks to make a contribution at the level of the definition of research programmes, and the distribution and the application of their results. Finally, it aims to develop relations with the other scholarly communities in physical education and sport, in order to promote educational research on <emph>intervention</emph>.</p> <p>Since 2000, ARIS has organized biennial events, with more than 800 communications presented at six congresses. These communications reflect the multiple facets of educational research and practice on <emph>intervention</emph> in sport. During this decade, researchers have developed diverse approaches to their programmes of work. It is for this reason, the diversity of research on <emph>intervention</emph>, that members of ARIS decided to create in 2007 the Observatory of Research on <emph>Intervention</emph> in Sport (ORIS) to capture the wealth of these diverse orientations. Francophone researchers have already completed several literature reviews in physical education (Marsenach and Amade-Escot [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref11">27</reflink>]; David et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref12">10</reflink>]; Amade-Escot et al. [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref13">2</reflink>]; Bouthier [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref14">5</reflink>]; Durand [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref15">12</reflink>]; Amade-Escot and Amans-Passaga [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref16">1</reflink>]). This study led by ORIS has a broader focus than previous analyses of publications, and has included a range of different fields of <emph>intervention</emph> and not only school physical education.</p> <p>The article addresses as well the researchers as the teacher educators, the educators (PE teachers, coaches, trainers, ...) or the students. On the one hand, this accessible inventory of <emph>intervention</emph> can help the researchers to better identify research trends, needs and directions for future studies and to develop exchanges with the French-speaking researchers. On the other hand, this process of scientific monitoring allows the practitioners to understand how the scientific field of research on <emph>intervention</emph> is growing and to become a 'reflective practitioner<emph>'</emph> (Schön [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref17">31</reflink>])<emph>.</emph> It opens new perspectives for teaching, teacher education and coaching, with the long-term ambition of facilitating a real and fruitful interaction between research and practice.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-3">The social construction of scientific activity</hd> <p>Before we outline the methods used in this study and present a discussion of our findings, we think it is important to acknowledge the social dimension of scientific activity. The philosopher Fleck (2005) pinpoints that science is a social and cultural phenomenon: scientific facts are built by groups of scientists who define many collectives of thought. Kuhn ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref18">20</reflink>]) is partially inspired by Fleck and explains the dynamics of sciences either from an only cognitive point of view, but by taking into account social factors. He argues that science does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge, but undergoes periodic revolutions, also called 'paradigm shifts' _ in which the nature of scientific inquiry within a particular field is abruptly transformed. These scientific revolutions are similar to a reversal of the researcher's representations. The scientific theories are not rejected as soon as they are refuted, but only when they can be replaced. This replacement is partly a social phenomenon and commits scientists' community in agreement on the explanation of certain phenomena.</p> <p>The sociologists Latour and Woolgar ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref19">23</reflink>]) observe how scientific work is conducted in laboratory life. They also show that the naive description of the scientific method according to which the success or the failure of a theory depend on the result of a single experience does not correspond to the real practice of laboratories. More widely, they consider the scientific activity as a system of faiths, oral traditions and specific cultural practices.</p> <p>By combining insights from philosophy and sociology, Berthelot ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref20">4</reflink>]) debates about the epistemological dimensions of 'truth' in human and social research and considers scientific activity to be a form of social activity, with three aspects. First, scientific activity is subjected to collective standards (intellectual, institutional or cultural). So, to be recognized as researcher of <emph>intervention</emph>, one must abide by the rules and conventions current at a given time in presenting one's work. Second, scientific activity is of necessity conducted through social interaction with others, direct or indirect, which engenders rules governing behaviour. Interactions between participants, from the informal exchanges within a research group through to more formal debates during conferences, influence the development of scientific activity. Third, scientific activity is presented to others for scrutiny and criticism before being published in scientific reviews and becoming the object of future debates.</p> <p>If these three aspects (institutional/interactional/intentional) of the social dimension of scientific activity refer to different theoretical frameworks, nonetheless we can admit that 'intentional agents weave them into situations where they find themselves, interactions with their own rules, while fitting into institutions and organizations providing a normative global framework' (Berthelot [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref21">4</reflink>], 11). Berthelot argues that scientific activity is not a social activity the same as other social activities; it presents a certain specificity by trying to produce more and more rational knowledge. At the same time, it remains pragmatic in the sense that scientific activity wishes to be simultaneously social, historical and contextual, but also rational.</p> <p>The curriculum historian Goodson ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref22">15</reflink>]) shows the importance of the social dimension of research. Fields of study are socially constructed rather than naturally occurring phenomena and each field has its own individual trajectory. Indeed, scientific activity is a social construction, but it is not a fragile and ephemeral intersubjective creation, 'where everything would replay itself at each moment, when everything would be reinvented in every interaction between actors and in singular contexts' (Lahire [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref23">22</reflink>], 104). Action is always the meeting place of individual experiences of the past which are incorporated into forms of representation, habits, and ways of seeing, saying and making in the present social situation. Following Berthelot, we can also consider the contextual and historical aspects of doing research. So, the field of the research on <emph>intervention</emph> in sport is historically and socially situated: it develops in very complex ways, under the cross-influences of present social interactions (e.g. during collective research projects or conferences) and of the history of the field (e.g. the archived outcomes of research).</p> <p>We will seek to highlight the socially constructed dimensions of scientific activity as we explore the emerging body of Francophone research on <emph>intervention</emph> in sport. Indeed, we think that researchers focus on certain contexts of <emph>intervention</emph> and research themes; they mobilize particular theoretical and methodological approaches in relation to specific traditions to capture the complexity of <emph>intervention</emph>.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-4">Method</hd> <p>The data-set for this study was all the communications (<emph>n</emph> = 836) which have been peer-reviewed and accepted by the scientific committees to be presented during six ARIS congresses:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Congress of Grenoble (Fr), '<emph>Intervention</emph> in the field of the physical and sports activities: competence(s) in transition?', December 14th–16th, 2000: 144 abstracts;</item> <p></p> <item> Congress of Rennes (Fr), <emph>'</emph>Sports and artistic cultures – Formalization of the professional knowledge–Practice, Training, Research', December 12th–14th, 2002: 139 abstracts;</item> <p></p> <item> Congress of Louvain – La – Neuve (Bel), <emph>'</emph> To intervene in the physical, sports and artistic activities – Practice – Research – Trainings', January 20th–22nd 2005: 138 abstracts;</item> <p></p> <item> Congress of Besançon (Fr), <emph>'</emph>Co-construction the knowledge: the work of intervention in physical, sports and artistic activities', May 9th–12th, 2006: 157 abstracts;</item> <p></p> <item> Congress of Rodez (Fr), <emph>'</emph>Intervention in sport and its institutional contexts: cultures and singularity of action', May 14th–16th, 2008: 149 abstracts;</item> <p></p> <item> Congress of Sherbrooke (Ca), <emph>'Live active and in health at any age and in all the circles of life</emph>', May 27th–30th, 2010: 106 abstracts.</item> </ulist> <p>The content analysis enabled to sift through large volumes of data with relative ease in a systematic fashion and to describe the research trends. According to the literature (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref24">8</reflink>]), we identified minimal but sufficient categories to decline several subcategories related to the research questions in four analysis grids. The standard rules of categorization (exhaustiveness, independence, objectivity, simplicity and productivity) were respected (Bardin [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref25">3</reflink>]). After several readings of the texts, initial categories were developed a posteriori and pre-tested. Categories were modified or added if necessary (Silverman and Manson [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref26">33</reflink>]). For example, we observed that researchers sometimes pursue two research aims (to understand and to transform the practices). These papers were coded in another category to respect the rule of independence between categories.</p> <p>The first analysis grid concerned the identification of the communication (year, main author gender, profession, institution, country).</p> <p>The second grid allowed to characterize the type of communication:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> research,</item> <p></p> <item> innovation report (construction and assessment of a project to improve the <emph>intervention</emph>),</item> <p></p> <item> literature review,</item> <p></p> <item> personal opinion (on a theme which creates debate, i.e. health education in PE),</item> <p></p> <item> epistemological reflection (about the nature and scope of scientific knowledge),</item> <p></p> <item> laboratory introduction (presentation of research topics and theoretical orientations).</item> </ulist> <p>Then, two other grids focused on the stratum of research to identify the research topics and aims. We defined research topics (see Table 1) for the three main contexts studied (PE, teacher education, coaching) in relation with the definition of pedagogy (Kirk, Macdonald, and O'Sullivan [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref27">19</reflink>]). Categories were centred on one component of pedagogy (e.g. instruction and form management, student's perceptions, curriculum) or on the interactions between two or three components (interactions between the teacher and the students).</p> <p>Table 1. Research focus in PE, teacher education and coaching.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Analysis categories</td><td>Analysis subcategories</td><td>Examples</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Research focus in PE</td><td>Instruction/classroom management</td><td>Teaching strategies, conflicts between teacher and students, teacher's communication</td></tr><tr><td>Curriculum</td><td>Knowledge, health education, pedagogical reasoning, learning settings</td></tr><tr><td>Students' perceptions</td><td>Students' perceptions of teacher, physical and sports activities, success and inequities</td></tr><tr><td>Learning strategies</td><td>reflexive practice, peer interactions, debate of ideas</td></tr><tr><td>Teacher's knowledge</td><td>Teacher's conceptions of sport/physical and sport activities/learning process, relationship to knowledge</td></tr><tr><td>Teacher–students interactions</td><td>Didactic contract, knowledge co-construction, shared space, effects of negotiations</td></tr><tr><td>Teaching planning</td><td>The process of curricula construction, the role of the PE teacher's team, the implementation of programmes</td></tr><tr><td>Assessment</td><td>Tool assessment, evaluative arrangements</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>Parents' representations, school inspectors' reports</td></tr><tr><td>Research focus in teacher education</td><td>Professional development</td><td>Impact of teacher education, construction of knowledge-in-action, professional identity, experience analysis</td></tr><tr><td>Students' activity</td><td>Students' perceptions of PE, teacher education, learning strategies</td></tr><tr><td>Curriculum</td><td>Reflective practice, collaborations novice teachers–teacher educators, teacher education by research</td></tr><tr><td>Teacher educator's activity</td><td>Professional competencies, teacher educator's representations</td></tr><tr><td>Teacher educator–students interactions</td><td>Professional didactic obstacles, communities of practice, impact of teacher education interactions</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>Comparison of the teacher education for coaches in various countries</td></tr><tr><td>Research focus in coaching</td><td>Athletes' activity</td><td>Athletes' experience, perceptions and intentions, learning strategies, the decision-making of the coach</td></tr><tr><td>Coach's <italic>intervention</italic></td><td>Coach's intentions, competencies, communication analysis,</td></tr><tr><td>Game  play analysis</td><td>Game play analysis models, prototypic configurations of play, tools of game analysis</td></tr><tr><td>Coaching tools</td><td>Assistance in finding new methods/tools, the syndrome of burnout</td></tr><tr><td>Coach–athletes interactions</td><td>Knowledge co-construction, conflicts between the coach and the athletes</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>Relations with parents, referee activity role of doctors</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The fourth grid concerned research aims (Table 2), which bring to light various relationships between research and practice (researches <emph>on/in/for intervention</emph>, Bouthier [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref28">5</reflink>]; Bru [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref29">6</reflink>]) and opens up possibilities for complementary knowledge:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> to assess the effectiveness of practices (researches <emph>for intervention</emph>):</item> <p></p> <item> The researchers assess the practices to help teachers to be more effective, for example the processes-products research which study the relations between the measure of the teachers' behaviour and the students' learning. This experimental research wish to emphasize causal relations and regularities. In that case, the conditions of application for the other contexts must be specified.</item> <p></p> <item> to innovate and transform practices (studies <emph>in intervention</emph>):</item> <p></p> <item> The researchers are interested in a local problem and they try to resolve it in association with the practitioners, by proposing open tools (determination of the possible, constitution of the corpus on the basis of checked innovations). In that case, it is a question of defining clearly the roles of the researcher and the practitioners.</item> <p></p> <item> to describe, explain and understand practices (studies <emph>on intervention</emph>):</item> <p></p> <item> The researchers aim at understanding better the authentic practices to develop the scientific knowledge <emph>on intervention</emph>. This research, qualified as heuristic, is firmly anchored in the particularity of the activities under investigation.</item> </ulist> <p>Table 2. Research aims.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><td>Categories</td><td>Examples</td></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td><italic>Research aims</italic></td></tr><tr><td> To describe, explain and understand:</td><td>The educator's activity (teacher, coach, teacher educator), the participant's activity (pupils, adults, ...), the transmission/appropriation of the knowledge interactions between the components of pedagogy</td></tr><tr><td> To innovate and to transform:</td><td>Pedagogical reasoning of physical and sports activities, teacher education <italic>intervention</italic> tools (learning settings, game analysis)</td></tr><tr><td> To assess:</td><td>Effectiveness of teaching methods, effects of a programme of physical and sports activity, effects of innovating teacher education, tools' reliability</td></tr><tr><td> To describe, explain, understand and to assess:</td><td>The educator activity to propose pedagogical reasoning of physical and sports activities, the students activity to propose <italic>intervention</italic> tools</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The data treatment was conducted with the assistance of Sphinx software. This software offers a user-friendly environment that allows the management of quantitative studies, data collection and results communication projects. It is particularly suited when the corpus is large-sized. Besides, it offers a space of methodological freedom: researchers define themselves the categories and the subcategories of analysis. All in all, 22 items in the form of closed questions were generated from the four analysis grids.</p> <p>The quantitative treatment of the data consisted of univariate (frequencies, percentages) and bi-variate (chi-square statistic) analyses to identify possible significant relations between variables such as the congress, country and sex of author(s), institution, and so on.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-5">Findings</hd> <p>In this section, we present methodological and substantive findings.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-6">Methodological findings</hd> <p>Figure 1 shows that two techniques are widely used: interviews (56% of studies) and observations (54%). Questionnaires, texts (documents, programmes, articles) and tests are much less used (respectively 23%, 15% and 7%). These data remain stable from 2000 till 2010, showing that over a third of the studies combine observations with interviews. We think these data suggest that researchers have been trying to get closer to the complexity of practices, aware that observation by itself is no longer sufficient to understand the activities of teachers and learners.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Methods of data collection.</p> <p>If we focus on the studies which mobilized the technique of the interview (<emph>n</emph> = 362), we note the variety of interviews. The researchers do not thus hesitate to adapt various techniques according to their topics and their theoretical frameworks. Two techniques are mainly used in a significant way: the self-confrontation interview (32% of interviews) and the semi-structured interview (25%).</p> <p>On the other hand, three types of observation were identified from the inductive analysis of summaries. The observation in naturalistic context (36% of the observations) is the most widespread technique, in particular in the studies <emph>on intervention</emph>: the observer does not interact to a great degree with those he or she is observing and observes events as they occur in authentic settings. The observation in negotiated settings (15%) is also used in the <emph>studies in/for intervention</emph>: the researcher negotiates with the practitioner a specific setting and estimates the produced effects. At last, the participant observation, which leads the investigator to accept a role within the social situation he or she studies, is rarely used (3%).</p> <p>The Francophone research is more qualitative than quantitative: at least a quarter of the research is dedicated to case studies and another quarter is interested in small samples, with fewer than 30 individuals.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-7">Substantive findings</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0101712144-8">A rapidly expanding international research community</hd> <p>If scholars from France are the largest national group represented, we notice the important increasing participation of other nationalities, in particular Canadians and Belgians. All in all, 18 nationalities and more than 100 research groups were represented across the six congresses. International collaborations allow the mutual exchange of theoretical and methodological tools. But groups specializing in the field of <emph>intervention</emph> in sport remain a minority within the education and sport research worlds. Kirk, Macdonald, and O'Sullivan ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref30">19</reflink>]) argue that even though the field has shown progress in its development, evidenced by the existence of several international associations and journals, nevertheless researchers must continue to fight in universities around the world to defend this still marginalized field.</p> <p>Figure 2 highlights that students (predominantly PhD students) represent a third of first authors. This proportion of young researchers is very promising for the development of research. In fact, young researchers seem particularly active both in the Francophone and the Anglophone research communities. The number of research journals, of publications, and of postgraduate students continues to grow (Macdonald et al. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref31">26</reflink>]; Kulinna et al. [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref32">21</reflink>]). On the other hand, around 40% of first authors are researchers (23% of assistant professors and 17% of professors). The emergence of a critical mass of researchers with many educational research associations as ARIS (AIESEP, BERA, ...) provides an illustration of the continuing consolidation and expansion of the field in the Francophone and the Anglophone worlds (Kirk, Macdonald, and O' Sullivan [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref33">19</reflink>]).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Status of first author (congresses of Rodez, 2008 and Sherbrooke, 2010). Remark: an author can exercise simultaneously two functions, for example trainer at university and PhD student.</p> <p>Finally, teacher educators (15%) and practitioners (teachers: 4% and coaches: 1%) are the under-represented groups. The facilitation of collaborations between researchers, teacher educators and practitioners is an urgent priority (Durand [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref34">12</reflink>]). Most of the teacher educators develop simultaneously a double activity of teaching and researching in universities, particularly in the European context of teacher education by and for research at Master's Degree level. They contribute to the diffusion of scientific knowledge and help practitioners to analyse their practices using scientific tools and knowledge. But moving closer research to practices constitutes a real challenge (Haag [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref35">17</reflink>]; Dugal [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref36">11</reflink>]; Cloes, Lenzen, and Trudel [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref37">7</reflink>]; Grossthéphan and Brau-Antony [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref38">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>Figure 3 presents the percentage of men and women publishing as first author from 2000 to 2010. On average, only a third of first authors are female. But it is interesting to note the encouraging increase in the percentage of women as first author, up from 22% in 2002 to 46% in 2010. The comparison of these data with those of Ward and Ko ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref39">36</reflink>]) in the USA reveals some similarities. These authors studied the percentages of men and women publishing as first author in the American <emph>Journal of Teaching in Physical Education</emph> (JTPE) and observe also that while the distribution between men and women is becoming more and more balanced, women continue to publish less than their male colleagues. Women typically enter the academy much later than men. Men spend a higher percentage of time engaged in research activities, whereas women spend more time teaching and providing service activities (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES] [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref40">29</reflink>]). Moreover, females combine their professional activity with existing domestic responsibilities (Stinson [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref41">35</reflink>]). We conclude that despite evidence of some progress, the inequity relative to women's opportunity to publish persists in both research communities, as in numerous other disciplines.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 3. Sex of first author from 2000 to 2010.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-9">Evolution of the communication types</hd> <p>We observe that the studies are more and more dominant (56% of the communications in 2000; 92% in 2010) whereas the other forms of scholarly communications (literature review, epistemological reflection, personal points of view, innovation reports, laboratory introduction) decrease (see Figure 4). Without dispute, the research field on sport pedagogy is characterized by a rapid expansion during this decade. Research students, researchers and teacher educators chose to present their work by following the academic model in order to have their work recognized as contributions to scientific knowledge. By comparison, the need to publish formal research papers would appear to be less important in JTPE where, according to Ward and Ko ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref42">36</reflink>]), 68% report research, 20% are conceptual papers, 5% are reviews of literature, and 7% are categorized as 'other' (e.g. introduction to monographs). This wide range of scholarly communications is necessary, because they reflect complementary analyses of pedagogy.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 4. Nature of presented communications from 2000 to 2010.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-10">Contexts studied in research on intervention in sport</hd> <p>Three main contexts of <emph>intervention</emph> in sport are studied (Figure 5): school physical education (more than half of the research; Figure 6), teacher education (25%; Figure 7) and coaching (19%; Figure 8). Cloes, Lenzen, and Trudel ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref43">7</reflink>]) confirm that coaching is poorly studied: the annual frequency of publication of the French-speaking papers is 10 times less important than the English-speaking literature from 1988 to 2007, in large part because of the limited number of available journals.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 5. Contexts studied in researches.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 6. Research themes in PE.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 7. Research themes in teacher education.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-11">Research themes in school physical education</hd> <p>Figure 6 shows a wide range of topics investigated, connected mostly to one or two components of pedagogy:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> the component 'teacher and teaching' is more widely studied with 41.5% of research, in particular during the interactive phase of teaching («instruction and classroom management»: 17.9%) and then during the other phases («teaching planning»: 6.8% and «assessment»: 6.2%) or about the «teachers knowledge» (10.6%); researchers, involved in PETE, are still very interested in a traditional aspect of physical education.</item> <p></p> <item> the component 'students and learning' represents the second dimension under study (25% of research), with the 'students perceptions' (13.8%) and the 'students strategies' (11.2%);</item> <p></p> <item> the component «curriculum/knowledge» is also well developed with 20% of the studies;</item> <p></p> <item> the interactions between the components «teacher» and «students» are still not enough studied (10.3% of the studies).</item> </ulist> <p>The researchers studied these pedagogical topics, but separately. We can consider we have also failed to use the evidence that is readily available to us to understand how one might affect the other (Kirk [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref44">18</reflink>]).</p> <p>The topics studied are very diverse and the same topics can be analysed by different and complementary approaches. Kirk ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref45">18</reflink>]) observes in four English-language journals a similar range of theoretical and methodological approaches and topics to research on teaching and learning in the same decade. We see here a sign of an undeniable wealth of knowledge and the combination of different theories and methods leading to a better understanding of educational phenomena.</p> <p>Concerning the English-speaking research, several authors (Ward and Ko [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref46">36</reflink>]; Kulinna et al. [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref47">21</reflink>]) observe an evolution towards student's attitude. Kirk ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref48">18</reflink>]) notes that a predominant concern for teachers and teaching at the beginning of the decade has been overtaken to some extent by an interest in learners and learning (e.g. learner cognition, constructivist and situated perspectives on learning, pupil conceptions and motivation). The English-speaking researchers see progressively the importance of moving past a unidimensional focus on motor skill. Research in how students develop perceptions is clearly needed (Lee [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref49">25</reflink>]). Indeed, additional research on student attitude, cognition and decision making will enhance what we know about students' thoughts and feelings in PE and will provide greater insight (Silverman and Manson [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref50">33</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-12">Research themes in teacher education</hd> <p>The researchers on teacher education are also interested in the three components of pedagogy (see Figure 7):</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 58% of the studies are centred on 'participants', i.e. student teachers, in particular the 'professional development' (37%) and the 'student teachers activity' (e.g. strategies and perceptions, 21%);</item> <p></p> <item> 17% of the researchers study the 'curriculum': what the student teachers do learn and how to improve the teacher education by experimenting original tools with the paradigm of the reflective practitioner (Schön [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref51">31</reflink>]);</item> <p></p> <item> 14% of the studies focus on the 'teacher educator activity' (representations, competencies, collaborations with the student teachers);</item> <p></p> <item> 8% of the studies are relational studies ('teacher educator–students interactions').</item> </ulist> <p>We observe a very important centration on the student teachers' activity. As researchers are at the same time teacher educators in PETE, they need to understand how the student teachers learn from their teaching experiences and how they can incite professional development.</p> <p>On the other hand, we can add that researchers mainly analyse the pre-service training of physical education teachers. In-service training continues to remain little studied (7.5% of studies). Nevertheless, the need for professional development of physical education teachers in particular has been highlighted in a number of recent reports (e.g. O'Sullivan [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref52">30</reflink>]), which noted there is better value to be gained by investing in professional development than in lengthening pre-service preparation.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-13">Research themes in coaching</hd> <p>Figure 8 shows that researchers are interested in a balanced way in the three key elements of pedagogy in the field of coaching, and that the interactions between the coach and athletes remain little studied:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 34% of the studies analyse the activity of the participants (i.e. the athletes) with questions such as 'what are the significant structures of the activity of the athletes?', 'What do they think of their coaches?', 'Which kind of knowledge do they mobilize?';</item> <p></p> <item> 28% of the studies are centred on the curriculum, namely the 'game-play analysis' (16.3%) and the 'coaching tools' (11.4%)';</item> <p></p> <item> 26% of research studies the activity of the educator, more precisely the choices, the strategies and the adaptations of the coach during the interactive phase;</item> <p></p> <item> 7% of the studies are centred on the interactions between the coach and athletes.</item> </ulist> <p>Graph: Figure 8. Research themes in coaching.</p> <p>As for the context of the teacher education, the activity of the participants is more studied than the activity of the educator because of the determining of improvement stakes. This trend can be explained by the importance of performance in competitive sports, which assumes scientific knowledge concerning the perceptions and the strategies of athletes should contribute to improve sports performance. On the other hand, coaching research is newer and does not have the same history as teaching research: researchers on coaching have realized quite early that the perspective of the participants is very important to understand the process of knowledge construction.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-14">Research aims</hd> <p>Figure 9 shows that about 80% of research is heuristic in its intent. These data do not change from 2000 to 2010, neither by congress nor by context (school physical education, coaching, teacher education). Indeed, the Francophone researchers defend the idea, that practices are autonomous. Practices develop within organized social systems and singular actors, and receive also the influence of present social interactions (Durand [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref53">12</reflink>]). Faced by complex, uncertain and opaque practices, researchers cannot prescribe strategies for practitioners, because the generalization of results obtained in a singular context remains very problematic. The impossibility of controlling the numerous variables interacting in unpredictable environments explains why the studies which assess the effectiveness of practices (studies <emph>for intervention</emph>) are thus less common. The researchers progressively give up the prescriptive model and turn to descriptive, explanatory and qualitative studies, anchored in authentic contexts. They wish to grasp the complexity of human practices and to describe very finely, by case studies, the activity of individuals in naturalistic settings. Nevertheless, we notice that the dialogue between the studies <emph>on/in/for intervention</emph> is limited to open possibilities of complementary knowledge. The pursuit of various aims of research will provide additional understanding of the teaching-learning process. A dialogue between these complementary approaches should allow to progress in a scientific project which gives a perspective to strengthen the bases of the theoretical models of sport pedagogy.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 9. Research aims.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-15">Discussion</hd> <p>We observe peculiarities in the Francophone research, with a focus on comprehensive and qualitative studies which require specific methods of data collection. This orientation of Francophone studies towards heuristic research seems to contrast with Anglophone research, even though qualitative research has recently come to dominate (Silverman and Manson [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref54">33</reflink>]; Ward and Ko [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref55">36</reflink>]; Kirk [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref56">18</reflink>]). Indeed, analysing more than 500 theses in physical education from 1985 till 1999, Silverman and Manson ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref57">33</reflink>]) underline the ascendancy of research centred on the efficiency of the teacher (93%), among which 43% of research centred on the comparison of various teaching methods and 23% on descriptive research, while 4% of the research was concerned the cognition of the teacher and 4% with the development of tools for pedagogy. A previous study by Silverman and Skonie ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref58">34</reflink>]) analysing 179 research articles in physical education published between 1980 and 1994 reported similar trends. This tradition of effective teaching research (Silverman and Skronie [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref59">34</reflink>]) is perplexing, because of the difficulty of doing these studies (issues related to sample size, unit of analysis, strength of the treatment). Silverman and Manson ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref60">33</reflink>]) explain this trend with two factors. First, students are committed to doing research that addresses practical issues. Second, professors may believe that experimental forms of research are better than the others. It is apparent that quantitative methods may be appropriate for answering many questions related to effectiveness and student mediation of instruction (Shulman [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref61">32</reflink>]). Most researchers employed quantitative methods, but the recent increase of qualitative methods reflects a maturing of research in sport pedagogy: many questions are now of interest that were not in the past and cannot be answered through quantitative methods (Silverman and Manson [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref62">33</reflink>]).</p> <p>In our view, the time period studies by these researchers cannot explain completely the important variations in the aims of Francophone and Anglophone research. On the basis of this comparison, we can propose the hypothesis that research practices are historically and culturally situated. Every field of research has its own trajectory (Kirk, Macdonald, and O' Sullivan [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref63">19</reflink>]) and develops certain paradigms and theoretical frameworks according to the political, cultural, historical and social contexts of community, region or country.</p> <p>The stability in themes and methods also shows that the researchers need a long time to develop programmes of research. Indeed, more and more often, theoretical frameworks cross different scientific fields and methodologies generate data from observation in classes and interview data in order to better study <emph>intervention</emph> in naturalistic contexts. Researchers thus draw on their past experiences, the previous studies incorporated into new forms of representations, habits and ways of seeing, saying and making. Furthermore, researchers are influenced by peer interactions. They play a decisive role, because they guide the numerous PhD students towards the themes developed in their laboratories and they stimulate new research. It is thus necessary to take into account the historical and the social dimension to understand the construction of a scientific field (Goodson [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref64">15</reflink>]; Lahire [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref65">22</reflink>]).</p> <p>The ARIS researchers chose to group together as a 'community of practice' (Lave and Wenger [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref66">24</reflink>]) into the multidisciplinary scientific association ARIS in 1998 while two other French-speaking research associations on sport sciences had already developed (the AFRAPS in 1980 and the ACAPS in 1984). Indeed, they study the same proper object of <emph>intervention</emph> and share the same interest: to study the effective practices with the ambition to make them better known and more effective. They considered that the classical model of applied science was not sufficient any more a) to report practices exhaustively and adequately, b) to shape a basis of operational knowledge for the educators and c) to supply the basic contents of the teacher/coach education (Durand [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref67">12</reflink>]). As the practices are autonomous and opaque, it thus became necessary to analyse the authentic practices and to construct original theoretical and methodological tools to describe, understand and transform these practices.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-16">Conclusion</hd> <p>This article proposes a systematic inventory of the communications presented during the first ARIS congresses from 2000 till 2010. The aims of this literature review were to characterize the communications published in this field of French-speaking research on <emph>intervention</emph> in sport and to compare the research trends between French and English traditions in sport pedagogy. This indirect comparison was conducted through the ARIS abstracts analysis and in relation to previous reviews of research trends (Silverman and Skonie [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref68">34</reflink>]; Silverman and Manson [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref69">33</reflink>]; Ward and Ko [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref70">36</reflink>]; Kulinna et al. [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref71">21</reflink>]; Kirk [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref72">18</reflink>]).</p> <p>The results highlight the commonalties and differences between French and English research about <emph>intervention</emph>/pedagogy. First, we note the continuing consolidation and expansion of the field in the Francophone and the Anglophone worlds, as Kirk, Macdonald, and O' Sullivan ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref73">19</reflink>]), with a growing and promising number of publications and of postgraduate students (Macdonald et al. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref74">26</reflink>]; Kulinna et al. [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref75">21</reflink>]). But the low participation of the practitioners shows how difficult it is to move educational research closer to the practices and the teacher education (Haag [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref76">17</reflink>]; Dugal [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref77">11</reflink>]; Cloes, Lenzen, and Trudel [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref78">7</reflink>]; Grossthéphan and Brau-Antony [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref79">16</reflink>]). According to Kirk ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref80">18</reflink>]), we have failed as a research community to see the importance of using our research to understand this interdependent relationship between forms of PETE and forms of school physical education. The French-speaking and English-speaking researchers must thus be encouraged to continue today a challenge: the innovation in teacher education in relation with the model of the reflective practitioner (Schön [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref81">31</reflink>]) to allow a real interaction between research, teacher education and practice.</p> <p>On the other hand, this study brings to light differences between French and English research traditions. Francophone research is essentially descriptive and heuristic, using predominantly qualitative methods (interviews and observations). The ARIS researchers finally grouped together in a community of practice: they have a common object of study (the three elements of <emph>intervention</emph>/pedagogy), share the same ideas and aims, learn how to do it better as they interact regularly and develop a shared repertoire of knowledge, theories and methods.</p> <p>These differences between both communities become gradually blurred. The Anglophone studies evolve towards a comprehensive model with more focus on learners and learning and on increasing amounts of qualitative research (Kirk [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref82">18</reflink>]).</p> <p>This first inventory of research on <emph>intervention</emph> in sport was completed by a presentation on the main theoretical frameworks used in the studies <emph>on/for/in intervention</emph>. Musard, Loquet, and Carlier ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref83">28</reflink>]) gathered in the book <emph>Sciences of intervention in physical education and in sport: the results of research and theoretical foundations</emph> 29 ARIS researchers who provide a persuasive account of the rich and diverse theoretical and methodological frameworks that currently inform research on <emph>intervention</emph> in sport. The presentation of these diverse theoretical approaches, developed quite particularly by French-speaking researchers to study <emph>intervention</emph>, should give rise to numerous very interesting exchanges with the Anglophone researchers. The use of a variety of research is good for the advancement of the field (Silverman and Manson [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref84">33</reflink>]). Research topics, theoretical perspectives and methods are more diverse and it allows to share a very strong corpus of knowledge. We consider with Eid and Diener ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref85">13</reflink>]) that the existence of multiple paradigms to investigate research questions is very promising since they provide complementary perspectives and data.</p> <hd id="AN0101712144-17">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>We would like to thank David Kirk for the precious advice, Jean-François Robin and Sophie Richard for their assistance in the data collection.</p> <ref id="AN0101712144-18"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> <ulink href="http://www.aris-intervention-sport.org/">http://www.aris-intervention-sport.org/</ulink> </bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0101712144-19"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Amade-Escot, C., and C. Amans-Passaga 2006. Quality Physical Education: A Review from Situated Research (1995–2005). Part One: Curriculum and Content Issues. International Journal of Physical Education, (A Review Publication) 43 (4): 162–172</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref13" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Amade-Escot, C., J. P. Barrué, J. C. Bos, F. Dufor, M. Dugrand, and A. Terrisse 2000. Recherches en Éducation Physique et Sportive: Bilan et perspectives. Actes du colloque Actualité de la Recherche sur l'Intervention en EPS et en Sport, Paris: revue EPS.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref25" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bardin, L 2001. L'analyse de contenu, Paris: PUF.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref20" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Berthelot, J. M. 2008. L'emprise du vrai, connaissance scientifique et modernité, Paris: PUF.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref14" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bouthier, D. 2001. "L'intervention en EPS, panorama des axes et des types de recherches conduites ces dernières années." In L'intervention dans le domaine des activités physiques et sportives: compétence(s) en mutation? [CD-ROM], edited by J. Aubert, M. Durand, and R. Refuggi. Grenoble: IUFM</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref29" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bru, M 2002. Pratiques enseignantes: des recherches à conforter et à développer. Revue française de pédagogie, 138 (138): 63–71. doi: 10.3406/rfp.2002.2864</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref37" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Cloes, M., B. Lenzen, and P. Trudel 2009. Analyse de la littérature francophone portant sur l'intervention de l'entraîneur sportif, publiée entre 1988 et 2007. STAPS, 83 (30): 7–23. doi: 10.3917/sta.083.0007</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref24" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Cohen, L., L. Manion, and K. Morrison 2007. Research Methods in Education, London: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref3" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> David, B. 2001. "L'intervention en sciences et techniques des activités physiques et sportives: recherche et formation." In L'intervention dans le domaine des activités physiques et sportives: compétence(s) en mutation? [CD-ROM], edited by J. Aubert, M. Durand, and R. Refuggi. Grenoble: IUFM</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> David, B., D. Bouthier, J. Marsenach, and A. Durey 1999. French Research into Didactics and Technology of Physical Activities and Sports. An Expanding New Field. Instructional Sciences, 27 (1–2): 148–162. doi: 10.1007/BF00890688</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dugal, J. P. 2008. Le conseil en formation initiale des enseignants. Intérêt et fonction des savoirs didactiques pour le tutorat des professeurs stagiaires en EPS. eJRIEPS, 14 (14): 7–21.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Durand, M. 2001. "Intervention et recherche en sport." In L'intervention dans le domaine des activités physiques et sportives: compétence(s) en mutation? [CD-ROM], edited by J. Aubert, M. Durand, and R. Refuggi. Grenoble: IUFM</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eid, M., and E. Diener 2006. Handbook of Multimethod Measurement in Psychology, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fleck, L 2005. Genèse et développement d'un fait scientifique, Paris: Les Belles Lettres.(édition originale allemande, 1935, Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissentschafftlichen Tatsache)</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goodson, I. F. 1988. The Making of Curriculum: Collected Essays, Lewes: Falmer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grossthéphan, V., and S. Brau-Antony 2009. Le processus d'incorporation par des enseignants d'EPS de savoirs issus de la recherche. Exemple d'un dispositif de formation continue de type collaboratif associant un chercheur et des enseignants. eJRIEPS, 16 (16): 22–37.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Haag, H 1994. State-of-the-art Review of Sport Pedagogy: Research Directions for the 1990's. International Journal of Physical Education, 29 (3): 26–29.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kirk, D 2010. Porquê de investigar: estado atual e tendências futuras nas pesquisas em Educação Física. (Why Research Matters: Current Status and Future Trends in Physical Education Pedagogy). Movimeto, 16 (2): 11–43.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kirk, D., D. Macdonald, and M. O'Sullivan 2006. The Handbook of Physical Education, London: Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kuhn, T. S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kulinna, P., K. Scrabis-Fletcher, S. Kodish, S. Phillips, and S. Silverman 2009. A Decade of Research Literature in Physical Education Pedagogy. JTPE, 28 (2): 119–140.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lahire, B 2005. L'esprit sociologique, Paris: La découverte.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Latour, B., and S. Woolgar 1979. Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts, Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lave, J., and E. Wenger 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, A. M. 1997. "Contributions of Research on Student Thinking in Physical Education." Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 16 (3): 262–277</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Macdonald, D., D. Kirk, M. Metzler, L. M. Nilges, P. Schempp, and J. Wright 2002. It's all Very Well, in Theory: Theoretical Perspectives and their Applications in Contemporary Pedagogical Research. Quest, 54 (2): 133–154. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2002.10491771</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsenach, J., and C. Amade-Escot 1993. Les orientations de la recherche en didactique de l'éducation physique et sportive. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 103 (103): 33–42. doi: 10.3406/rfp.1993.1295</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Musard, M., M. Loquet, and G. Carlier Eds. 2010. Sciences de l'intervention en EPS et en sport: résultats de recherche et fondements théoriques, Paris: EPS.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics 2000. Salary, Promotion and Tenure Status of Minority and Women Faculty in US Colleges and Universities, Washington, DC: US Department of Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> O'Sullivan, M 2008. Creating and Sustaining Communities of Practice among Physical Education Professionals. eJRIEPS, 15 (15): 21–31.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schön, D 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, London: Temple Smith.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shulman, L. S. 1986. Paradigms and Research Programs in the Study of Teaching. In Handbook of Research on Teaching, edited by M. C. Wittrock, 3–22. New York: MacMillan.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Silverman, S., and S. Manson 2003. Research on Teaching in Physical Education Doctoral Dissertations: A Detailed Investigation of Focus, Method, and Analysis. JTPE, 22 (3): 280–297.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Silverman, S., and R. Skonie 1997. Research on Teaching in Physical Education: An Analysis of Published Research. JTPE, 16 (3): 300–311.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stinson, S 2003. Participation of Women in Human Biology, 1975–2001. American Journal of Human Biology, 15 (3): 440–445. doi: 10.1002/ajhb.10160</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ward, P., and B. Ko 2006. Publication Trends in the Journal of Teaching in Physical Education from 1981 to 2005. JTPE, 25 (3): 266–280.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Mathilde Musard and Marie-Paule Poggi</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref85"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1055820
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: 'Intervention' in Physical Education and Sport: Trends and Developments in a Decade of Francophone Research
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Musard%2C+Mathilde%22">Musard, Mathilde</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Poggi%2C+Marie-Paule%22">Poggi, Marie-Paule</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Physical+Education+and+Sport+Pedagogy%22"><i>Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy</i></searchLink>. 2015 20(3):250-267.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 18
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2015
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research<br />Information Analyses
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Physical+Education%22">Physical Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Athletics%22">Athletics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Research%22">Educational Research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22French%22">French</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English%22">English</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+Analysis%22">Comparative Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intervention%22">Intervention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Literature+Reviews%22">Literature Reviews</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Conferences+%28Gatherings%29%22">Conferences (Gatherings)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Statistical+Analysis%22">Statistical Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Software%22">Computer Software</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Qualitative+Research%22">Qualitative Research</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Heuristics%22">Heuristics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interviews%22">Interviews</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Observation%22">Observation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Researchers%22">Researchers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Influences%22">Social Influences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Content+Analysis%22">Content Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Context+Effect%22">Context Effect</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22France%22">France</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/17408989.2013.817008
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1740-8989
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Introduction: The aims of this literature review were to characterize the communications presented during six Association for Research on "Intervention" in Sport (ARIS) French-speaking congresses from 2000 to 2010 and to compare the research trends between French and English research traditions. The definition of pedagogy is close to the notion of "intervention" and attempts to study, in an interacting or isolated way, three key components--the educator (professor, coach, teacher's educator), the participants (students, children, adults) and the curriculum/knowledge in specific contexts. The theoretical framework is centred on the social construction of the scientific knowledge. Method: All the communications of the six ARIS congresses (n = 836), reflecting the multiple facets of educational research were analysed. The quantitative treatment of the data, with the assistance of Sphinx software, consisted of univariate (frequencies, percentages) and bi-variate (chi-square statistic) analyses to identify possible significant relations between variables such as the congress, country and sex of author(s), institution, and so on. Findings: The results highlight the commonalties and differences between French and English research about "intervention"/pedagogy. We notice the continuing expansion of the field of "intervention"/pedagogy in the Francophone and the Anglophone worlds. But the low participation of the practitioners shows how intricate it is to move educational research closer to everyday practice. The results show that the contexts studied within ARIS are mainly school physical education and teacher's education, then coaching and other contexts. The majority of studies are centred on one component of pedagogy, but rarely on the interactions between the educators and the participants. The Francophone research is essentially descriptive and heuristic, using mostly qualitative methods (interviews and observations). This orientation of Francophone studies towards heuristic research seems to contrast with Anglophone research, even though qualitative research has recently come to dominate. Conclusion: The ARIS researchers have a common object of study ("intervention"/ pedagogy), share the same ideas and aims, learn how to do it better as they interact regularly and develop a shared repertoire of knowledge, theories and methods. We see here signs of an undeniable wealth of knowledge and the combination of different theories and methods leading to a better understanding of educational phenomena.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 36
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2015
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1055820
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1055820
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/17408989.2013.817008
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 18
        StartPage: 250
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Physical Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Athletics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: French
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: English
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comparative Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intervention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Literature Reviews
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Conferences (Gatherings)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Statistical Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Software
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Qualitative Research
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Heuristics
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interviews
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Observation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Researchers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Influences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Content Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Context Effect
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: France
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: 'Intervention' in Physical Education and Sport: Trends and Developments in a Decade of Francophone Research
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Musard, Mathilde
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Poggi, Marie-Paule
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2015
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1740-8989
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 20
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy
              Type: main
ResultId 1