I was really surprised to hear that riskier playgrounds are more beneficial for children than keeping them indoors. I remember hearing in the news that parents were increasingly concerned about their children’s safety outside and while I suspected that there was something wrong with that line of thinking, I had no recourse to argue against it. The worry over sending children out on their own plays into a fear of the unknown. For a prospective teacher, this anxiety is heightened by the fact that we will be placed in a position of responsibility. Knowing that some element of risk is actually beneficial for child development goes a long way toward quelling that concern.

It’s also refreshing to hear that children are more active outdoors. I remember being young and going out adventuring with my friends. It therefore makes sense to encourage children to play outdoors. The solution can be as simple as taking whatever activities you had intended to do indoors and do them outside. It would also be nice to find activities to do that require being outside like hiking or perhaps visiting a petting zoo.

My own thoughts resonate with Zoe Filliter’s Movement Journal entry. I appreciate the way that Physical Education has changed over its recent history into something that is more accessible to everyone. Simply by diversifying the kinds of activities that are made available to the students, PE can be much inclusive of its students. To be sure, there is plenty of justification for teaching conventional sports and activities. But it is also important to teach children that they have to keep active and to accomplish this by finding what is most enjoyable to them.

Upon further reflection, I began to wonder what role playground games such as skipping rope, hopscotch and four square might have in the gymnasium. I know that some of these games have the stigma of being for girls only or for boys only, but there’s no reason for bringing such stigmas into the class room. Besides, I’m sure that there are a lot more kinds of games that I don’t know about simply because no one ever taught them to me.

This week’s class included an intro to physical literacy and to teaching net/wall games. The group that presented this week set the bar high. Their high energy, thoughtful transitions, and lesson plan structure proved they’re group management pro’s. I enjoyed the scaffolding of skills that developed through stations, which were well-timed and didn’t lag on.

Our intro to physical literacy uncovered some inspirational theories and mission statements to develop the following abilities:
• Consistently develop the motivation and ability to understand, communicate, apply, and analyze different forms of movement.
• Demonstrate a variety of movements confidently, competently, creatively and strategically across a wide range of health-related physical activities.
• Make healthy, active choices throughout their life span that are both beneficial to, and respectful of their whole self, others, and their environment.

Although I consider myself physically literate, I had only recognized that as the fundamental movement skills used during sports and exercise. After last class, I’ve realized it can involve feelings and emotions as well. This is an area of my physical literacy I would like to engage in more. Overall, I found the lecture and theory to be a bit abstract, it seems there isn’t yet a resource guide or means for evaluation. I wholeheartedly believe that physical literacy needs to be promoted in the classroom to build healthy, active adults. Working with Elementary learners, I’ll have to research PHE Canada and Canadian Sport for Life to find best practices for application.

What is physical literacy? Who can be physically literate? To be honest, when I try to picture what the stereotypical physically literate person would look like in my head, I picture someone in their 20s-30s, probably male, who is fairly muscular and is skilled in almost every sport they attempt. However, after viewing the class readings and discussions, I’ve tried to think critically about what different types of physically literate people might look like. For example, I would view an eighty-year old male who goes on very long walks everyday and likes to do exercises to keep his mental skills sharp to be quite physically literate even if he is not as physically strong as someone in their twenties.

Although I really appreciate the emphasis on mental and physical health mentioned by Whitehead (2010) and PHE Canada, I wonder if the definitions are a bit narrow or intimidating. For example, PHE Canada says a physically literate individual is one that moves with confidence or competence in a wide variety of areas (2010) but depending on how you define “competence”, there may be very few individuals that fit into this category. For older adults or children with special needs or physical disabilities, having competence in a “wide variety of areas” may be particularly challenging for them. I think we need to have a broader definition of physically literacy that places emphasis on an intrinsic love for physical activity and is more inclusive of people of different abilities and age groups.