Self-identified and observed teaching styles: a case study of senior physical education teachers in Queensland schools

The research undertaken has reviewed teaching styles used in Senior Physical Education within Queensland schools. Teaching styles, or its equivalent terms such as methods, models or strategies, are valued for what they claim they can achieve. While numerous definitions exist for teaching styles during this chapter they will be defined as 'decision patterns that define the teacher's and learners' actions so that a prescribed set of objectives can be accomplished' (Mosston & Ashworth. 2002, p.1). In undertaking research in the area of teaching styles the researchers not only set out with specific research questions to explore but also some beliefs about what to expect of teachers. The findings of the study challenged the assumptions of the study questions and the 'truth' about teaching styles actually used by teachers. In recent times curriculum documents by governments in places such as Scotland, England and Queensland (Australia) have called for a range of teaching styles or approaches to meet the variety of learner differences and allow students to make more independent decision making in physical education (Hardy and Mawer, 1999). Prior to 2005, no research had been conducted on the teaching styles that teachers of physical education use in Queensland. Cothran, Kulinna, Banville, Choi, Amade-Escot, MacPhail, Macdonald, Richard, Sarmento, and Kirk (2005) completed a study titled A Cross-Cultural Investigation of the Use of Teaching Styles, which presented a questionnaire to teachers (including in Queensland) with scenarios of teaching styles based on the 11 styles identified by Mosston and Ashworth (2002). The study outlined here was designed to identify which teaching styles (based on the work of Mosston & Ashworth, 2002) that 110 teachers of Queensland Senior Physical Education believed they used and then sought to confirm the use of these teaching styles by observation of the lessons of nine volunteer participants across three of their lessons of Senior Physical Education in a unit of work. The research investigated whether the level of congruence between what teaching styles teachers believe that they use to teach physical education and what they actually do is accurate or a misrepresentation of actual practice. According to Jaakkola and Watt (2011), 'until now, there have been no studies where self-reported and observed teaching styles have been compared' (p. 261). When nine volunteer participants were observed teaching three times over a nine week unit of work, the claims about the type and number of teaching styles used were challenged. Results indicated considerable discrepancies between perception and reality. These discrepancies indicate that myths exist about the range of teaching styles being used within senior physical education and as observed in this study. Similarly myths may also exist with regards to the implementation and understanding of syllabus documents. While the study did not seek to examine in detail why this incongruence occurred, the findings have implications for syllabus writers and educators who perhaps presume that the range of teaching styles suggested are both understood and used effectively to meet subject requirements. Considering these results, and with particular regard to the Queensland Senior Physical Education Syllabus (2004), it would seem that this syllabus document was not being implemented as desired as the specific teaching styles it suggested to be used were not observed. Equally, it would appear from this research, in spite of teachers claiming that there is a wide range of teaching styles being used, it is in fact a myth that a wide range is being used