Acta Univ. Palacki. Olomuc., Gymn. 2011 41(1): 51-59 | DOI: 10.5507/ag.2011.006

A comparison of physical education (PE) development in the Czech Republic, Germany, and the USA - A historical perspective

Petr Vlček
Faculty of Education, Masaryk University, Brno

Background: After the year 1989, political, structural and economic reforms caused significant changes in education in the Czech Republic, also affecting physical education (PE). Within the context of unification and globalization there are similar changes in progress in other countries.

Objective: The complex situation, fast changes and various pedagogical traditions complicate the creation of a systematic view of the current PE reforms. The objective of this paper is to describe the most important events in the history of PE in the Czech Republic, Germany and the USA and to explain their effect on the PE curriculum changes in the selected countries. The purpose of this historical analysis is to present some fundamental information about the development of PE in selected countries which will make possible further comparisons of the current reforms of physical education.

Methods: Our methodology is based on historical comparison outlining and comparing the history of the PE concepts in selected countries.

Results: Our results and findings show the differences in the history of PE in the Czech Republic, Germany and the USA and the crosscultural influence of the countries on the development of PE concepts. Especially the Turners from Germany influenced the beginnings of Czech and American PE in the 19th century. Other gymnastic systems entered the USA later but the philosophy of pragmatism and the influence of the modern Olympic movement brought significant changes into the American PE concept at the beginning of the 20th century. As a consequence, the gymnastic systems have been replaced with the "sport recreational" concept. In the 20th century the emphasis on physical education changed repeatedly when conflicts between countries occurred. For example the German, Czech and American PE emphasis shifted from games and sport to physical conditioning after WWI and WWII and also after the Korean and Vietnam War in the USA. Further differences in PE concepts were caused by diverse political ideologies in the second half of the 20th century. Physical education in the former Czechoslovakia was influenced by the Soviet physical culture philosophy. Popularity of sport in the 1960's and the 1970's affected the PE curricula in Western Germany, but later, in the 1980's, sport decreased in importance. After the end of the "Cold War", PE focussed on "life long activities," and the influence of American culture was visible in the PE development in European countries. Recently, an active life style has been supported and the issue of health has become an important part of the PE curricula.

Conclusions: The results of this analysis confirm different approaches to physical education concepts among these countries in terminology, roles, and goals during different time periods. Our findings also show that the educational reforms in Germany and the USA were started 10 and 20 years earlier than in the Czech Republic. Therefore, it is important to carry out further comparisons of current educational reforms that might help to reform Czech physical education.

Keywords: History, conception of Physical Education, the Czech Republic, Germany, the USA

Prepublished online: September 8, 2011; Published: January 1, 2011  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Vlček, P. (2011). A comparison of physical education (PE) development in the Czech Republic, Germany, and the USA - A historical perspective. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis. Gymnica, 41(1), 51-59. doi: 10.5507/ag.2011.006
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Balz, E., & Neumann, P. (2005). Physical education in Germany. In U. Pühse & M. Gerber (Eds.), International Comparison of Physical Education: Concepts, problems, prospects (pp. 292-309). Oxford: Meyer & Meyer.
    2. Bennett, B. L. (1970). A historian looks at comparative physical education. Gymnasion, 7, 10-13.
    3. Brettschneider, W. D., Brandl-Bredenbeck, H. P., & Rees C. R. (1997). Sportkultur und jugendliches Selbstkonzept: Eine interkulturell vergleichende Studie über Deutschland und die USA [Juventa]. Retrieved from http://books.google.cz/books?id=FSbH_TPgmTIC&pg=PA52&lpg=PA52&dq=etic,+emic,+universalismus&source=web&ots=2fCnX_OiTW&sig=HriI_xK8JlgiwAsZW3qLmcIok8I&hl=cs&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA5,M1
    4. Brettschneider, W. D. (Ed.). (2003). Die SPRINT Studie: Eine Untersuchung zur Situation des Schulsports in Deutschland. Retrieved from http://bildungsklick.de/datei-archiv/40033/gesamtbericht_dsb_sprint_studie.pdf
    5. Cazers, G., & Miller, G. (2000). The German contribution to American physical education: A historical perspective. JOPERD, 71(1), 44-48. Go to original source...
    6. CDC. (2003). Prevalence of physical activity including lifestyle activities among adults: United States 2000-2001. Morbidity an Mortality Weekly Report, 52(32), 764-769.
    7. Clifford, P. (2001). Muscular christianity: Manhood and sports in protestant America, 1880-1920. Mass: Harvard U Press.
    8. Dobrý, L., & Hendl, J. (2006). Národní standardy tělesné výchovy v USA. Těl. Vých. a Sport Mládeže, 72(6), 2-14.
    9. Dollman, J., Norton, K., & Norton, L. (2005). Evidence for secular trends in childrenʼs physical activity behaviour. British Journal of Sport Medicine, 39, 892-897. Go to original source...
    10. Editorial. (2004). Editorial. International Journal of Physical Education, 4, 143. Go to original source...
    11. Feingold, R., S., & Fiorentino, L. (2005). United States of America. In U. Pühse & M. Gerber (Eds.), International Comparison of Physical Education (pp. 699-713). New York: Mayer & Mayer.
    12. Frömel, K. (2001). Tělesná výchova a sport v systému vzdělávání a výchovy v počátku tisíciletí. Česká kinantropologie, 5(1), 39-48.
    13. Frömel, K., & Bauman, A. (2006). Intenzita a objem pohybové aktivity 15-69leté populace České republiky. Česká kinantropologie, 10(1), 13-27.
    14. Gavora, P. (2000). Úvod do pedagogického výzkumu. Brno: Paido.
    15. Guttmann, A. (1992). The Olympics: A history of the modern games. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
    16. Haag, H. (1986). Research methodology in sport science: Implications for the comparative research approach - 1982. In J. C. Pooley & C. A. Pooley (Eds.), Proceedings from the Second lnternational Seminar on Comparative Physical Education and Sport (pp. 89-110).
    17. Haag, H. (1989). Sportpädagogik. In H. Haag, B. Strauss, & S. Heinze (Eds.), Theorie und Themenfelder der Sportwissenschaft: Orinetierungshilfen zur Konzipierung sport wissenschaftlicher Untersuchungen (pp. 48-69). Schorndorf: Hofman.
    18. Hardman, K. (2000). Comparative physical education and sport. ICSSPE Directory of Sport Science, 28, 59-77.
    19. Hardman, K. (2003). Worldwide survey on the state and status of physical education in schools: Foundations for deconstruction and reconstruction of physical education. In K. Hardman (Ed.), Physical Education: Deconstruction and reconstruction - Issues and directions (pp. 15-34). Schorndorf: Hofmann.
    20. Hardman, K., & Marshall, J. (2000). The state and status of physical education in schools in international context. European Physical Education Review, 6(3), 203-229. Go to original source...
    21. Hendl, J. (2008). Kvalitativní výzkum: základní metody a aplikace. Praha: Portál.
    22. Hendl, J., & Vindušková, J. (2004). Standardy pro tělesnou výchovu na amerických školách. Česká kinantropologie, 8(2), 33-48.
    23. Hrčka, J., & Drdácká, B. (1992). Rekreační tělesná výchova a sport. Bratislava: SPN.
    24. Jelínková, V. (1993). Deset let marných snah o reformu amerického základního a středního školství. Praha: ÚIV.
    25. Kelly, L., & Melograno, V. (2004). Developing the physical education curriculum: An achievement based approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
    26. Kössl, J., & Hubička, V. (1983). Vývoj mezinárodního olympijského hnutí a jeho současné problémy. Olympia: Praha.
    27. Kössl, J., Krátký, F., & Marek, J. (1986). Dějiny tělesné výchovy od roku 1948 do současnosti. Olympia: Praha.
    28. Kössl, J., Štumbauer, J., & Waic, M. (2004). Vybrané kapitoly z dějin tělesné kultury. Praha: Karolinum.
    29. Kudláček, M. (2006). American adapted physical education in the first half of the 20th century. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis. Gymnica, 36(1), 23-28.
    30. Kudlorz, P. (1989). Comparative physical education: An international scientific approach. International Review of Education, 35(1), 65-72. Go to original source...
    31. Kurz, D. (1993). Leibes erziehung und Schulsport in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Epochen einer Fachdidaktik. Bielefeld: Universität Bielefeld.
    32. Lumpkin, A. (2004). Introduction to physical education, exercise science, and sport studies. McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages.
    33. Massengale, J., & Swanson, R. (Eds.). (1997). The history of exercise and sport science. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
    34. Ministerium für Schule, Wissenschaft und Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen. (2001). Richtlinien und Lehrpläne für die Sekundarstufe I - Gymnasium in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Retrieved 20. 8. 2009 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ritterbach.de/lp_online/3426.pdf
    35. Muzik, V. (1999). Gesundheitlich vorbeugende Körpererziehung: Eine neue Richtung in der Tschechischen Schule. In J. C. Bussard & F. Roth (Ed.), Which physical education for which school? (pp. 91-96). Berne: SVSS.
    36. Naul, R. (2003). Koncepce školní tělesné výchovy v Evrope. Česká kinantropologie, 7(1), 39-53.
    37. Naul, R., & Brettschneider, W. D. (2005). Young peoplesʼ lifestyles and sendetariness in Europe. Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Kinantropologica, 41(2), 25-34.
    38. Naul, R., & Hardmann, K. (2002). Sport and physical education in Germany. Retrieved 19. 12. 2008 from the World Wide Web: http://books.google.cz/books?id=uOL9-_5ajZ8C&pg=PA16&lpg=PA16&dq=german+physical+education+history&source=bl&ots=6vVlFsQP_o&sig=jSeTAZgX3fcfhnXsyWRz5nx2WMo&hl=cs&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=8&ct=result#PPP1,M1
    39. NASPE - National Association for Sport and Physical Education. (2004). Moving into the future: National standards for physical education (2nd ed.). Reston, VA: Author.
    40. Nováček, V., Mužík, V., & Kopřivová, J. (2001). Vybrané kapitoly z teorie a didaktiky tělesné výchovy. Brno: Pedagogická fakulta MU.
    41. Novotný, F. (2006). Stručný přehled dějin tělesné výchovy. Univerzita J. E. Purkyně: Ústí nad Labem.
    42. Pühse, U., & Gerber, M. (Eds.). (2005). International comparation of physical education. New York: Mayer & Mayer.
    43. Richter, Ch. (2007). Concepts of physical education in Europe: Movement, sport and health. International Journal of Physical Education, 44, 101-105.
    44. Rychtecký, A., & Fialová, L. (1993). Didaktika školní tělesné výchovy. Praha: Karolinum.
    45. Seaman, J. A., & DePauw, K. D. (1982). The new adapted physical education. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.
    46. Sherrill, C. (1993). Adapted physical activity, recreation and sport: Crossdisciplinary and lifespan. Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.
    47. Siedentop, D. (2006). Introduction to physical education, fitness, and sport. McGraw Hill.
    48. Singule, F. (1991). Americká pragmatická pedagogika: John Dewey a jeho američtí následovníci. Praha: SPN.
    49. Stillwell, J. L., & Willgoose, C. E. (2006). The physical education curriculum. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
    50. Švaříček, R., & Šeďová, K., et al. (2007). Kvalitativní výzkum v pedagogických vědách. Praha: Portál.
    51. Trávníček, M. (2006). Různost pojetí výuky tělesné výchovy na 1. stupni ZŠ. In School and health 21. (pp. 561-575). Brno: Paido.
    52. Vlček, P. (2009a). Vývoj koncepce americké školní tělesné výchovy. In Sborník referátů II. doktorandské konference KRCR FIM UHK (pp. 15-22). GAUDE- AMUS: Hradec Králové.
    53. Vlček, P. (2009b). Komparativní kinantropologie. Česká kinantropologie, 13(1), 82-95.
    54. Vlček, P. (2009c). Vliv školských reforem na tvorbu kurikula tělesné výchovy v České republice, Spolkové republice Německo a Spojených státech amerických. Disertační práce, Univerzita Palackého, Fakulta tělesné kultury, Olomouc.
    55. Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze. (2007). Rámcový vzdělávací program pro základní vzdělávání - RVP ZV. Retrieved 8. 7. 2009 from the World Wide Web: http://www.vuppraha.cz/soubory/RVPZV_2007-07.pdf
    56. Wolf, A. M., Manson, J. E., & Coldiz, G. A. (2003) The economic impact of owerweight, obesity, and weight loss. In R. H. Eckel (Ed.), Obesity: Mechanisms and clinical management (p. 6). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams & Williams.
    57. Zeigler, E. (2005). History and status of American physical education and educational sport. Victoria, BC: Trafford.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content