The foundation of proposed goals and activities for individuals with disabilities is grounded in a basic understanding of human development and its applications to those with various needs. For the adapted physical education teacher, this implies familiarity with theories and practices related to human development. The emphasis within this standard focuses on knowledge and skills helpful in providing quality APE programs.
Kubler‑Ross, E. (1993). On death and dying. New York: Collier Books.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM‑lV. (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
Teaching individuals with disabilities requires some knowledge of how individuals develop. In the case of APE teachers, it means having knowledge of typical physical and motor development as well as understanding the influence of developmental delays on these processes. It also means understanding how individuals learn motor skills and apply principles of motor learning during the planning and teaching of physical education to students with disabilities.
Ayres, J. A. (1983). Sensory Integration and the child. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Schmidt, R. A. (199 1). Motor learning & performance: From principles to practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Magill, R. A. (1993). Motor learning: Concepts and applications. (4th ed.). Madison, WE Brown and Benchmark.
As an adapted physical educator, you must understand that modifications to the scientific principles of exercise and the application of these principles may be needed when teaching individuals with disabilities to ensure that all children with disabilities enjoy similar benefits of exercise. While there is a wealth of information in the foundational sciences, the focus of this standard will be on the principles that address the physiological and biomechanical applications encountered when working with diverse populations.
Adrian, M. J. & Cooper, J. M. (1989). The biomechanics of human movement. Madison, WI: Brown and Benchmark.
Finnic, N. R. (1976). Handling the young cerebral palsy child at home. New York: Dutton.
Rasch, P.J. (1989). Kinesiology and applied anatomy. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger.
This standard is one of the foundation standards underscoring the background an adapted physical educator should have in order to comply with the mandates of legislation and meet the needs of students. Understanding the measurement of motor performance, to a large extent, is based on a good grasp of motor development and the acquisition of motor skills covered in other standards.
Baumgartner, T.A., & Jackson, A.S. (1995). Measurement for evaluation in physical education and exercise science, (5th ed.) Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown.
Horvat, M., & Kalakian, K. (1996). Assessment in adapted physical education and therapeutic recreation. Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.
Safrit, M.J., & Wood, T. (1995). Introduction to measurement in physical education and exercise science, (3rd ed.). St. Louis: Mosby.
This standard traces facts regarding legal and philosophical factors involved in current day practices in adapted physical education. This information is important to understand the changing contribution that physical education can make in their lives. Major components of each law that related to education and physical activity are emphasized. The review of history and philosophy related to special and general education is also covered in this area.
Standard 6 refers to information based on the disability areas identified in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) found within school age population. Material is categorically organized in order to present the information in a systematic matter. This organization is not intended to advocate a categorical approach to teaching children with disabilities. All children should be treated as individuals and assessed to determine what needs they have.
American College of Sports Medicine (1997). Exercise management for persons with chronic diseases and disabilities. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Bleck, E. E., & Nagel, D. A. (1982). Physically handicapped children: A medical atlas for teachers (2nd edition). New York: Grune and Stratton.
Goldberg, B. (Ed.). (1996). Sports and exercise for children with chronic health conditions. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Miller, P.D. (1995). Fitness programming and physical disability. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
As you are planning to teach physical education to students with disabilities, you should recognize that certain Curriculum Theory and Development concepts, such as selecting goals based on relevant and appropriate assessments, must be understood by APE teachers. As you have no doubt discovered Curriculum Theory and Development is more then writing unit and lesson plans. Nowhere does this come into play more than when you are planning a program for a student with disability.
Melograno, V. (1985). Designing the physical education curriculum: A self‑directed approach. (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishers.
Davis, W. E., & Burton, A. W. (1992). Ecological task analysis: Translating movement behavior theory into practice. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 8(2), 154‑177.
This standard addresses the process of assessment, one that is commonly taught as part of the basic measurement and evaluation course in a physical education degree curriculum. Assessment goes beyond data gathering to include measurements for the purpose of making decisions about special services and program components for individuals with disabilities.
Brickell B. et al (1994). Designing assessments: Applications for physical education. Willow Street, PA: Pennsylvania State AHPERD, P.E.‑L.I.F.E. Project.
Hensley, L.D., Morrow, J.R., & East, W.B. (1990). "Practical measurement to solve practical problems," Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 61(3): 42‑44.
Herman, J., Aschbacker, P., & Winters, L.(1992). A practical guide to alternative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Instructional design and planning must be developed before an APE teacher can provide services to meet legal mandates, educational goals and most importantly the unique needs of individuals with disabilities. Many of the principles addressed earlier in human development, motor behavior, exercise science and curriculum theory and development are applied to this standard in order to successfully design and plan programs of physical education.
A major part of any APE position is teaching. In this standard many of the principles addressed earlier in such standard areas as human development, motor behavior, and exercise science, are applied to this standard in order to effectively provide quality physical education to individuals with disabilities.
Cooper, J.O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (1987). Applied behavior analysis. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing.
French, R., & Henderson, H. (1993). Creative approaches to managing student behavior (2nd ed.). Park City, UT: Family Development Resources.
Lavay, B. W., French, R., & Henderson, H. (1997). Positive behavior management strategies for physical educators. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Mosston, M., &Ashworth, S. (1994). Teaching physical education (4th ed, NewYork: Macmillan.
Rink, J. E. (1993). Teaching physical education for learning (2nd ed.). St. Louis: Mosby.
Siedentop, D. (1991). Developing teaching skills in physical education (3rd ed. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.
As more students with disabilities are included in the general education program, teachers will provide more consultation and staff development activities for colleagues. This will require sensitivity and excellent communication skills. The dynamics of interdisciplinary cooperation in the consultation process requires knowledge of several consultative models. This standard identifies key competencies an adapted physical educator should know related to consultation and staff development.
Program evaluation is a process of which student assessment is only a part. It involves evaluation of the entire range of educational services. Few physical educators are formally trained for program evaluation, as national standards for programs have only recently become available. Therefore, any program evaluation that has been conducted is typically specific to the school or district, or limited to a small range of parameters such as number of students scoring at a certain level of a physical fitness test. Adapted physical education programs or outcomes for students with disabilities are almost never considered in this process.
Marzano, R., Pickering, D. & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
National Association for Sport and Physical Education. (1995). Moving into the future: National Standards for Physical Education. St. Louis: Mosby.
Stiggins, R., Conklin, N., & Bridgeford, M. (1986). "Classroom assessment: A key to effective education," Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 5(2): 5‑17.
The goal of this standard is to focus on APE teachers remaining current in their field. A variety of opportunities for professional development are available. Course work at a local college or university is just one avenue. APE teachers can take advantage of workshops, seminars and presentations at conferences, conventions or in service training. Distance learning opportunities are also becoming abundant.
A fundamental premise of the Adapted Physical Education National Standards Project is that those who seek and meet the standards to be certified as adapted physical educators will strive at all times to adhere to the highest of ethical standards in providing programs and services for children and youth with disabilities. This standard has been developed to ensure that its members not only understand the importance of sound ethical practices, but also adhere to and advance such practices.
In recent years, the role of the professional in APE has evolved from being a direct service provider to include communicating with families and other professionals in order to enhance program instruction for individuals with disabilities. This standard includes information regarding the APE teacher effectively communicating with families and other professionals using a team approach in order to enhance service delivery to individuals with disabilities.
Dunn, J. M., Moorehouse, J. W., & Fredericks, H. D. (1986). Physical education for the severely handicapped: A systematic approach to data‑based gymnasium. Austin, TX Pro Ed.
Fiornini, J., Stanton, K., & Reid, G. (1996). Understanding parents and families of children with disabilities: Considerations for adapted physical activity. Palaestra, 12(2), 16‑23
Rosenkoetter, S.E., Hains, A.H., & Fowler, S.A. (1994). Bridging early services for childrer with special needs and their families: A practical guide for transition planning. Baltimore MD: Brookes.
Do you want to know more? Check out APENS Study Guide
For further information, call toll free (888) APENS-Exam or (607) 753-4969