Comprehensively Planning Physical Activity Programmes/Experiences

1. Comprehensively Planning Physical Activity Programmes/Experiences

2. Workshop Overview • Warm-up donut activity – sharing stories • Introduction to the specifications • Previous scholarship questions • What the examiners look for • Likely scenarios for 2009 • Using a debate to explore a scholarship question

3. Definitions • A physical activity programme or experience may include: • A personal fitness programme • An outdoor education experience • A triathlon • Leisure-based activities • Aerobics routine • Dance performance • Stage Challenge • Festivals that involve movement • Other appropriate programmes/experiences

4. Brainstorm of Experiences • What programme or experience did you plan?

5. Sharing Stories – Round 1 • What programme or experience did you plan for PE 3.1 and evaluate for PE 3.2? • What factor had the biggest positive impact on your wellbeing? How did it impact? Why? • What factor had the biggest negative impact on your wellbeing? How did it impact? Why?

6. Sharing Stories – Round 2 • What programme or experience did you plan for 3.1 and evaluate for 3.2? • What were the expected outcomes of the programme? • Were they achieved? Why / Why not?

7. Sharing Stories – Round 3 • What programme or experience did you plan for 3.1 and evaluate for 3.2? • What factors that affected the programme were out of the planner’s control? • How could the planning have been improved? • Why would it make a difference?

8. 2009 Specification Comprehensively planning physical activity programmes/experiences drawing upon knowledge underpinning achievement standards 90739 and 90740. 3.1 & 3.2

9. Previous Scholarship Questions

10. Previous Scholarship Questions

11. The assessment schedule and examiners report Information on the NZQA Website: http://nzqa.govt.nz/scholarship/subjects/resources.html • Check the assessment schedules from 2007 and 2008 • Content information • Markers schedule • Check the examiners report from 2008

12. Successful candidates in 2008 Question 2: OE context • ability to evaluate the process and outline potential outcomes of the process • good understanding of the nature and types of risk and risk management systems as a process • ability to discuss the benefits of Outdoor Education experiences • ability to portray the importance and provide detail of Safety Management Systems for Outdoor Education • ability to critically evaluate the scenarios given, demonstrating a high level of understanding of planning and implementing programmes • • ability to draw on their own learning experiences of planning and implementing programmes.

13. The examiners report 2008 For Question 1 on Outdoor Experiences, candidates who did NOT achieve scholarship... • inability to evaluate the process • superficial knowledge of the subject • a lack of discussion of the purposes of Outdoor Education or why the group might be going to the rock face • little or no knowledge of the use of RAMS or SAPS in planning and programming Outdoor Education experiences • In relation to risk and the relationship between risk and safety

14. Possible OE scenarios 2009 • A school trip using an outside provider eg OPC, adventure sport operators- rock climbing • School camp planning • Students planning outdoor experience activities

15. Successful candidates in 2008 Question 1B: PAP context Candidates who ACHIEVED scholarship... • Evaluated the planning process AND outlined potential outcomes of the programme • Critically evaluated the given scenario • Demonstrating a high level of understanding of planning and implementing programmes • Understood the limitations of the five-week programme for swimmers lacking in confidence • Gave evidence from their own learning experiences of planning and implementing programmes.

16. The examiners report 2008 Question 1B: PAP context Candidates who DIDNOT achieve scholarship... Did notidentify a lack of specificity of training by only training in a pool rather than the ocean • Did notlink knowledgespecifically to scenario to critique the programme – e.g. no specific ocean swimming in training, five-week programme to build up to a three kilometre swim • Failed to fully discuss a major issue of how a “one size programme fits all” would meet the requirements of the individual participants in the programme.

17. Possible focus for PAP scenarios 2009 • Effectiveness of a particular aspect of programming • e.g. periodisation, fitness testing, pre-testing, application of training principles • The effectiveness of a programme to achieve its outcomes • e.g. Peaking individuals for an event; unexpected outcomes: fatigue, overtraining; injury, illness, dehydration, heat exhaustion • The effectiveness of programmes in general • e.g. The value of having a programme plan or goal setting • The effectiveness of a programme for a particular: • Persone.g. Individual needs in a team sport or group situation • Purpose e.g. Specificity to a playing position; peaking for an event vs maintaining performance over a season; well-being vs sport

18. The debate & PMIS tools • For the debate, the whole group will split into • The OE group • The PAP group • Each debate will have three groups • The Plus group • The Minus group • The Judge & Jury group • The debate is aligned to the essay writing process using PMIS as shown in the next slide