The Classroom Ecology Paradigm

Introduction

Initial research in physical education was handicapped by lack of a theoretical base, and the lack of a research tradition for investigators to follow (Locke, 1977). Limitations included the absence of replicative studies, and no collections of studies from which to derive future topics for research. In fact, Locke (1977) claims that prior to 1970, only 10% of all physical education research (of which no more than 5% was published) could be defined as fitting the model developed by Dunkin and Biddle (1974) to conceptualize the study of teaching in classrooms, and could therefore qualify as research on teaching. Indeed, it was not until 1986 that Placek and Locke (1986: 27) were confident enough to announce that “physical education has been the beneficiary of the same dramatic advances in research on teaching that have revolutionized our understanding of instruction in the classroom”.

In subsequent reviews of research on teaching physical education. Silverman (1991) commented that still to that point, research had been mostly descriptive. Nonetheless, Silverman did identify a number of research streams that were beginning to take hold in the field, one of which was the classroom ecology stream. One of the research streams cited by Silverman (1991) was the classroom ecology model. Griffey (1991), in his reaction to the Silverman review, claimed had the potential for understanding the complex dynamics of instructional physical education. Griffey noted, however, that there was a paucity of research on this topic. While that may have been the case prior to 1990, in the decade since then there has been an abundance of research in physical education using the classroom ecology model, and a substantive database has been developed upon which to base this review. For the purposes of this chapter, this review will explain the fundamental concepts of the classroom ecology model, describe and account for the studies in physical education that have used the model as their theoretical base, and, following the guidelines for reviews proposed by Cooper (1989), will examine topics that have not yet been explored. Papers for this reviews were selected through an examination of four sources; the Dissertations Abstracts database, the journals of Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport and the Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, and through an ERIC search using the terms tasks, accountability, ecology and physical education as the main identifiers.

Brief Historical Perspective

The “classroom ecology paradigm” (Doyle, 1977:183) was developed from a concern with the process-product paradigm, a paradigm that attempts to link teacher classroom behaviors directly with student learning or growth. The first of these concerns was the lack of explanation of how teaching behaviors are or might be linked to students' learning. In other words, most of the studies reported correlational data without explaining why the variables discovered should be related to achievement. As Doyle (1977: 167) commented, “in the absence of formal explanatory propositions, it is difficult to interpret contradictory findings or select potentially fruitful avenues for investigation”.

Doyle's second concern was with an almost exclusive focus on the teacher in classrooms. This was manifest in two important ways. The first of these was in the neglect of pupil classroom processes. In this form of research, student data had been compiled mostly from classroom tests or other such product variables. Students' classroom behaviors (or process variables) had been neglected or at least de-emphasized. The second was in the assumption that the teacher is directly causing student outcomes. As Doyle reported, several studies have demonstrated the reverse, that is, that teacher behavior is often the result of (or coerced by) student classroom behaviors.

...