What is the education in physical education?

There has long been debate about the educational value of physical education, for example whether it can be justified on the grounds of its unique contribution to the curriculum or whether the subject is best seen as supporting wider educational goals. This is an important issue for physical education teachers, challenged, as they often are, to justify their subject within the school. This chapter critically considers the place of physical education in education. From the basis of defining what is to be understood as ‘education’, the focus moves to the work of Arnold (1979). In his landmark treatise, which is frequently referred to and forms the basis of many arguments regarding the value of physical education (Department for Education and Skills (DfES)/Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), 2004; Talbot, 2008) he claims that movement experiences in physical education can offer a threefold contribution to the compulsory curriculum. He asserts that physical education has the potential to educate about movement, to educate through movement and to educate in movement. Arnold’s arguments will be set out briefly and will then be subject to analysis. This analysis reveals some contestable issues as well as identifying dangers for physical education. Using the foundation of a holistic approach to the nature of the human condition Arnold’s three claims are reexamined. This leads to an assertion that movement or physical education is valu able and educative in its own right. In respect of reference to wider educational goals it is argued that the subject has the potential to make a valuable contribution on account of our holistic nature, but that this will only be realised through informed, sensitive and effective teaching of movement work. The conclusion outlines the benefits of this approach. Readers are encouraged to form their own opinion as to how far the profession can benefit or otherwise from Arnold’s treatise. The full text referred to in this chapter (Arnold, 1979) and his other work are worthy of study.