Fostering Student Voice to Enhance Creativity

Introduction

In the time I have been teaching I have noticed that in education today we face many barriers to ensuring our pupils reach their full potential. Most professionals in education would agree that one common factor which is shared worldwide is the ability (or lack of) to engage the minds of young pupils, holding them accountable for their learning. This essay will seek to explore the extent at which encouraging student voice can impact creativity in KS4 Physical Education. Firstly, it is vital to define creativity which Amabile (2018) simplifies as the ability to turn an imaginative idea into real life. The use of the word ‘imaginative’ suggests this idea has been constructed in that person’s mind, offering their perspective to a concept which may (or may not) already exist.

De Bono (1995) has acknowledged such observations through emphasising on the argument that the element of creativity does not only pertain to the development of novel and hitherto untested ideas. According to Smith and Parr (2007), the primary barrier in terms of acknowledging the multiplicity of dimensions involving creativity is the prevalent misconception that only new ideas could be deemed to be associated with creativity and such superficial and shallow perceptions have been the impediments in development of creativity related research over the previous decades. Capel and Katene (2000) have suggested that such erroneous interpretation of creativity generally excludes the fact that individual thoughts and knowledge could often add to creative processes which could be in existence and thus, could not be categorised into the Novel ideation measures.

From an academic perspective, as has been opined by Lines (2007), such observations are not commensurate with the post-modernistic interpretation of creativity which could concentrate greater emphasis on the element of individual initiatives in terms of application of thoughts and knowledge so as to develop the creative processes further instead of initiating completely untested and thus, unusual sequence of functionalities. According to Harris (1997), it is necessary, to this effect, to properly discern the different features of student voice. Rudduck and Flutter (2004) have suggested that the concept of student voice highlights the process through which students could be inspired and empowered in terms of contributing positively to their educational curriculum through taking of initiatives which they would not have endeavoured in without the provisioning of such guidance and encouragement. Evans (2013) has made the observation that, from a broadened perspective, student voice could be understood to be the collective outcome of different aspects related to individual students such as values, beliefs and perspectives. From a figurative perspective, this concept could be alternatively paralleled with choices available and accorded to the students. However, Armstrong (2016) has emphasised on the necessity to practice caution and vigilance in terms of encouraging the students to become innovative in the Key Stage 4PE curriculum so as to dissuade them from obtaining any false notion that they could decide what they are required to learn.

Lamb and Aldous (2014) have opined that according the students greater autonomy in terms of decision formulation and innovative suggestion development could simultaneously be the rationale of development of challenges to their decision formulation perspectives on a constant basis. The reason could be underscored as this process could burden the students with greater responsibility for management of their physical literacy (Whitehead, 2010). Ha et al (2008) have delineated the responsibilities for the teachers, while providing encouragement of student involvement and innovation in the KS 4PE, in the

following manner:

To encourage the students to become greater inquisitive.

To motivate the students to pose multiplicity of questions so as to determine their development and inquisitive potential.

To guide the students in their endeavour to ensure that they could take risks related to their decisions, however, not without deliberate and calculated approaches.

To further encourage the students to add to their learning processes through innovative achievements concerning the educational disciplines which they could be undergoing.

According to Cremin, Mason and Busher (2011) , such interaction could be assessed regarding the primary thematic constructs of student responses so as to determine the experiences and associated responses generated by the students within the ambit of their physical educational curriculum. Cale, Harris and Hooper (2019) been of the opinion that such an interactive measure, from the teachers, could assist the students to address the existing barriers which they generally experience within the discourse of PE. Additionally, it is necessary to critically reflect on the practices of students, by their peers/teachers, while designing strategies to further strengthen the voices of students and their autonomy so as to obtain the objective of holistic development of students within the KS 4PE discourses.

To zoom in, I will be analysing one theory lesson I taught my GCSE year 10 class – comparing this to other lessons in which this may look different within the inner London Academy in which I am undergoing my ITT. I have chosen to focus on this group as the crossover to year 11 for GCSE PE requires the students to utilise their creativity for extended projects e.g. the 6-week Personal Exercise Programme. Additionally, this cohort comprises of multiple hard to engage individuals who Aubrey and Riley (2016) suggest teachers must adapt to in order to meet the needs of the pupils development – whilst still developing autonomous teenagers (Jeffrey & Craft, 2010).

Literature Review

This chapter will review relevant literature which relates to the subject and may support this research study by analysing and discussing significant themes. In addition, this chapter will critique the current knowledge surrounding the subject whilst providing further knowledge to this field.

According to Piotrowski and Capel (1996) , the education system within UK currently is oriented towards preparation of the involved students to acquire essential and necessary knowledge for their future development as educated citizens (Dfe, 2014). Such an observation has been supported by the concept of Physical Literacy which has been propagated by Whitehead (2010) in the form of combining multiple aspects associated with the learning experience of students of PE to impart the most favourable and coveted effect on their progress measures as learners. Such aspects have been identified by Doherty and Brennan (2014) as confidence enhancement, building of knowledge bases, formulation of physical competencies, infusion of motivation and endowment of the students with proper understanding of the measures through which responsibility has to be managed while they could be entrusted with their choices about their PE learning courses and teaching mechanisms. Ractliffe (2011) has contextualised such notions as enhancement of the value of engagement in physical activities for development which could continue throughout the lives of such students under consideration.

As has been observed by Craft, Jeffrey and Leibling (2001), such developmental approaches involving the students bring into focus multiplicity of questions which are required to be addressed prior to considerations about empower the student voice in KS4PE discourses. These questions, in a collective effect, could be identified as the necessity to determine the extent of creativity which could be required for the physical educational courses so that successful impartation of this essential knowledge could become a definite possibility for the teachers. To this effect, Roshan (2016) has offered the argument in favour focusing on the skill attributes of students. This could prove to be crucial in terms of enabling the students to become integrated citizens with characteristics such as tolerance, respecting others, social compliance, ethical conduct, effectively questioning authorities and public engagement. However, from the perspectives of Cropley (2001), it could be understood that a considerable problem remains as the factor that in majority of the schools/educational institutions within the UK, emphasis is concentrated on zero excuse policies and on silent working environments within the educational institutional premises. Thus, as per the observations of Craft (2010) , the primary impediment in implementation of practices which could hinder the progress of encouragement of student voice within schools is the diverging functionalities of such endeavours and the existing ethos of the schools with overt emphasis on control management on discourses associated with learning and educational curricula (such as KS 4PE).

Lytton (2012) has specified that both purpose and nature of physical education as well as the roles of PE teachers have significantly transformed throughout the duration of the previous decade. Such observations have brought to notice the requirement to question the current roles of physical education teachers. Craft (2003) added to such observations the essentiality of growth momentum maintenance across the wider spectrum of formal education and the finding of proper adaptations to existing practices so as to develop proper guidance based orientation of implementation of new practices. According to Csikszentmihalyi and Wolfe (2014), the ambiguity remains in terms of determination of whether a teacher could be teaching for achievement of greater creativity within the teaching process related functionalities or as a means of teaching with creative impulses so as to better motivate the students to become engaged in the study/training curriculum in an engrossing manner.

In this context, Lin (2011) has highlighted the National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCE) report of 1999 to define the process of creative teaching. The report has outlined that creative teaching is associated with utilisation of imaginative and innovative approaches so as to infuse greater interest within the students about learning effectively. On the other hand, Runco (2008) has emphasised on the same report to delineate the specifics of teaching to develop creativity within the students. This functionality is outlined as a specific form of teaching which is intended to provide encouragement and motivation to the students/young learners to develop their personal creative psychological and behavioural attributes. Both of these apparently diverging notions have been synthesised by Collard and Looney (2014) to suggest that if teachers could become creative in their teaching processes or formats then, in a corresponding and reciprocal manner, the students could also develop their innate creative skills and attributes to varying extents depending upon individual capabilities and characteristics. Burnard (2006) has further suggested that the previously mentioned report has been instrumental in terms of highlighting the role of any teacher to recognise the creative potential of any student and, simultaneously, to become creative himself/herself, to deliver the appropriate environment within which such identified potential of students could be realised.

This problem needs to be resolved in earnest since it is crucial for the teachers of PE to comprehend the manner in which one could deliver on both of the fronts of student capability enhancement through innovation and creativity. However, Day (2002) has opined that restricted pedagogical practices have been contributed to by the divergence between creatively teaching and teaching for creativity enhancement and the ambiguity of functionalities which are associated with the same. In this context, Ilozor et al (2006) have suggested that both of these terms are mostly similar and also complementary to each other involving pedagogical practices and assisting the intended outcomes to emerge.

Furthermore, Kaufman and Beghetto (2009) have suggested a structure to properly differentiate creativity within four different segments. These are as the following:

Mini-C: This involves creativity which is required for the purposes of learning inculcation and comprehension formulation regarding discerning the meaning of taught subjects.

Little-C: This segment involves creativity which could be attributed to the functionalities which involve mundane activities performed on daily basis.

Pro-C: This segment is comprised of creativity which involves professional functionalities.

Big-C: This is the highest measure of creativity which could be applied in terms of social and cultural transformative undertakings. Thus, Gibson (2005) has deemed such creativity to be revolutionary in nature.

Concerning such observations, the exploration of creativity could progress further so as to categorise the strategies necessary for creativity fostering within KS4 curriculum through encouraging of student voice. Slabbert (1994) has brought forth the suggestion that progression of Mini-c creativity within a contextual discourse which could be knowledge based could be achieved if Big-C creativity could be excluded which generally involve identification of the true purpose of endeavours of obtaining knowledge and learning. One particular factor, which, could be considered to be reflective of the veracity of such suggestions, has been outlined by Spendlove (2008) in the manner of studying the knowledge regarding fitness components without having much to research about the actual effects of such fitness components on the physical performance of students undergoing KS4PE courses.

It has been the focus of research performed by Craft (2008) to determine response of researchers to the offer of greater numbers of students who could demonstrate considerable creativity within the classroom environment. Curiously, in spite of the fact that creativity is a positive trait in students, the majority of the teachers are expected to be negative in their response regarding the previously mentioned offer. Karwowski (2010) has suggested that it is the quintessential preference of any school or teacher that students should be obedient completely. From a personal perspective, I feel that this observation could encourage the teachers to question the purpose of our teaching, not only the learning objectives but all of the outcomes and the teaching rationale of utilisation of such knowledge pertaining to creativity enhancement within the students of PE courses. The primary contention is between focusing on the students through providing greater encouragement to student voice and driving the teaching institutions forward. The challenge has been to develop proper methods through which both of these objectives could be pursued simultaneously albeit through often diverging approaches.

Glaveanu (2018) has emphasised on the suggestion that schools are required to follow any particular organisational model which could encourage creativity and not diminish the scope of application of the same which is the current standardised practice within most of the secondary schools within UK. The approach involving attempts to control non-conformist individuals, by the schools has been deemed to be a top down approach by Lahlou and Beaudouin (2016). In such a system, creativity could only be fostered by the leadership elements of the system.

Craft, Gardner and Claxton (2007) have brought into focus the examples of the Ormiston Shelfield Community Academy, the Great Marlow School and the Jack Hunt School concerning the encouragement of student voice within the PE curricula at school levels and the impact of such decisions on the overall creativity pertaining to the completion of such curricula. The research has been supported by Simmons and Thompson (2008) which has specified that the Director of Sports and PE, Pete Monaghan, under the CatalYST scheme at Ormiston Shelfield Community Academy, has selected the application of Youth Sports Award as an instrument to encourage the students through rewarding and recognition. This tool is utilised with the students who are selected from yearly groups under the purview of the academic ‘Sport Academy Programme’. The orientation is towards providing significant additional sports leadership based support under the competition calendar of School Games Organiser program. Furthermore, all of the students have been accorded proper qualification in KS4 so as to contribute to the accountability measures associated with the school by Pete Monaghan. This could secure additional time for PE related teaching courses. However, Pete has highlighted that it is specifically a challenge to properly combine teaching processes and gathering of evidence for such qualification procedures to be completed. Another challenge, in this context, pertains to the process of ensuring that maximised time duration could be spent by the students in performing physical activities. According to Wyse and Ferrari (2015), added purpose and motivation have been provided to the students through such institutionalised endeavours.

Next, Craft (2006) has captured the performance of Joe Clarke, the chief PE course instructor at the Great Marlow School. The research has brought forth the data that Clarke is utilising the YST My Personal Best approach as part of the NPQSL course. The objective is to develop life skills throughout the student populace and to ultimately improve the moral, cultural and social values of such pupils. Joe is off the opinion that schools have to be something greater than only examination factories and students have to be provided the opportunity to reach their complete potential at both the academic and character formulation levels through utilisation of effective creative thinking on part of the teachers. In this process, according greater autonomy to opinions and perceptions of the students, in the form of encouraging student voices, has been considered by Joe as one of the fundamental tenets of his approach. I consider such an approach to be a definitive step towards the establishment of the fact that encouraging student voice could lead to greater creativity demonstration the functional levels of the KS4 time duration based PE curricula.

According to Treffinger, Schoonover and Selby (2012), the approach utilised by Joe Clarke involve the promotion of a series of fundamental life skills and values across the entire teaching spectrum associated with the school. The staff members have consistently encouraged the students to demonstrate the characteristic traits which could assist them in realisation of their hidden and innate potential to achieve greater measure of success within and outside of the school curriculum. Hodges (2005) has outlined the efficacy of focus on promotion of resilience and responsibility by the Great Marlow School staff members during autumn term, covering the tutor time, student assemblies, overt focus concentration on student learning and lesson delivery and, finally, on the rewarding mechanism of outstandingly creative students. Jeffrey and Craft (2004) have determined that Joe had empowered the students to develop leadership qualities amongst themselves which could be considered to be a daunting prospect for the average 15 year olds studying in that school. The objective had been to demonstrate the responsibility management capabilities and resilience of the students in terms of engaging with the staff to gain their support in performing specific PE activities during the outlined time period. Furthermore, the school under consideration has been further involved in the specific Girls Active Programme which is oriented towards broadening the opportunities of participation in particular PE courses and within other sports disciplines for girls only. In a similar manner, the school faculty has been also providing encouragement to student voice through Living For Sport project under which sports and PE have been made compulsory for sixth graders.

Finally, the research of Chávez-Eakle (2010) has emphasised on the initiatives of Vickie Bracken, the PE teacher at Jack Hunt School (JHS). Vickie Bracken is also the Duke of Edinburgh coordinator and has been responsible for embedding the YST My Personal Best Approach within the organisational PE curriculum as a lead PE CatalYST. The explicit rationale has been to ensure relevant and meaningful creativity implementation in providing equitable opportunities of physical literacy to all of the involved students. Again, from a personal perspective, I think that the vision which JHS operates upon could be categorically deemed to be oriented towards supporting and facilitating the development of aspirational and confident youth leadership through infusion of value based lifelong physical activity. Thus, making a contribution to the greater interest of society within UK could become a possibility by such youngsters through undergoing such processes.

Practical reflections

The research of Tamdogon (2006) has outlined that throughout the previous four decades, the consistent expansion in the provisioning of Physical Education (PE) and associated qualifications, at both the academic and vocational levels, within the secondary schools of the UK, have brought forth unique situational dimensions which have engendered the necessity to foster the element of creativity at the earliest of levels. Such expansion in the scope of PE has been termed by Craft and Jeffrey (2008) to be an explosion. However, according to Maley and Kiss (2018), the context of development and instantaneous as well as extensive growth in the PE curriculum have also brought forth multiplicity of issues which now influence both the students and teachers of PE courses. According to Sarsani (2005), these issues primarily pertain to the broader social discourses which have contributed to the development of core PE curriculum and to the impact of such development on the subjective discourses as well as on teaching process related to PE.

In this context, Pickering (2017) has observed that corresponding expansion of opportunities of accreditation, which, previously, had been available to only constricted numbers of students, has taken place. It is my perception that this has brought greater numbers of Secondary Schools within the fold of main course 14-19 PE. This process has been further illustrated by Kohe and Collison (2019). so as to identify the catalysts which have influenced such expansions in scope of PE over the previous decades. The research of Makopoulou, Neville and McLaughlin (2020), to this effect, has acknowledged that such catalysts are mostly related to National and Local contexts. The effects of such catalysts pertain to both the intended and the unintended outcomes in the process of development of PE. In this context, the encouragement of student voices within the discourses associated with KS4PE has been identified by Barnes (2018) to be of dual folds. The initial one could be ascertained as concentration of views of PE teachers on the benefits which could enhance the performance of students. The next one pertains to the benefits of PE teachers themselves. Such benefits could positively alter the work demands currently experienced by the PE teachers although, Konstantinidou (2018) has suggested that some unintended and unforeseen consequences could not be planned for in advance.

Furthermore, from a sociological perspective, as I could gather through review of previously mentioned literature, KS4PE could be understood to have developed the principle components within the context of complicated developmental procedures which could be further illustrated as networks of interdependencies. Such networks are characterised by ratios of balances of power and the outcomes have been multidimensional from administrative perspectives. In this context, Wainwright et al (2018) have outlined the core components of KS4 as the specific constituents which formulate the overall framework of Edexcel GCSE Physical Education related specifications. These are as the following:

Physiology and applied anatomy, physical training and methods of movement analysis.

Components of health and fitness maintenance procedures, socio cultural influences on the PE curriculum and sports psychology.

The assessment of performance of students consists of three different physical activities which could be determined from a general list.

One of these activities would be required to be a team activity (such an activity could not provide the students, as per my reflective understanding, particular scope of functional creativity since this would be primarily a regimented activities).

Another activity consists of individual performance. From the perspective of my reflective understanding, this specific activity could be considered as an ideal point to permit greater student voice to be included within the discourse of such activities. The objective, as I have managed to understand in terms of relating this activity to conditions at my school, would be to engage student voice to provide the students with the opportunity to enhance their ownership of delivery of physical activity. The rationale is that this process could ensure that activities could be innovatively and appropriately tailored to the individual necessities of such students and could, thus, support their participation with greater efficacy.

The final activity is an autonomous choice for the students. This could be considered to be the most suitable backdrop to engage with student voice. The offering of variety of choices is central to such an approach. Green et al (2018) have emphasised on the positive benefits of offering variety of opportunities of physical activities to students/young learners to participate in involving increment of participation rates in physical activity scenarios. I further have gathered that the focus in KS4 physical educational curriculum is on games and traditional competitive sporting activities so as to encourage innovative engagement within, particularly, the inactive students.

According to Cale and Harris (2018), the final assessment of students would involve utilisation of previously determined assessment criteria which is detailed in the Pearson Edexcel Level1/Level 2 GCSE (9–1) based criteria of assessment of practical performances. Each of the activities could have a maximised duration of 12 hours and these are to be assessed by the teacher/trainer and moderation would be undertaken as per Pearson guidelines. According to Wainwright et al (2016), the ultimate objective of the KS4 has been to cover multiple practical activities within the PE courses so that the formulation of a Personal Exercise Programme could become a possibility. As per the opinion of Shearer et al (2018), the new frameworks of teaching pertaining to the Primary National Strategy of educational excellence, particularly for PE literacy, the inclusion and accordance of significance of student voice in the overall KS4 curriculum has been reinforced as definitive approaches by the schools in terms of planning of such curriculum. Konstantinidou (2018) has emphasised on such processes as reflective of the significance which is required to be attached to representation of sensible cross-curricular themes within the entire teaching/training discourse.

From the perspective of my reflective understanding, the encouragement provided to student voice could impact creativity in KS4 PE primarily in the manner of infusing greater flexibility in the utilisation of time and other resources which could contribute to detailed exploration of different training courses so as to provide effective continuity of learning to the students. In this context, Wainwright et al (2018) have researched about the current condition of physical education as a curriculum based subject within the secondary schools of UK.

Through the previous research literature review, it is my comprehensive understanding that a gradual decline has set in the PE educational process within the school education architecture of UK. Green, et al (2018) have opined that the concurrent social dimensions have outlined that young people are consistently experiencing unprecedented complications such as high rates of obesity, declining emotional strength and wellbeing and extensive tendencies of depression in terms of dissolution of social interaction based interpersonal skills, only PE stands, as a subject, to be unparalleled in having the potential to address all of such challenges which the young generation has been encountering. However, I have come to understand that while primary schools could benefit from the double investment in Sport Premium and PE, the secondary schools are experiencing difficulties in terms of maintaining their PE departments since the curriculum is getting narrowed down and this challenge has been exacerbated through constriction of core PE time in KS4.

The details of the established literature of the Youth Sport Trust (YST) have been available to me pertaining to the previous two years of functionality based information of the PE CatalYST movement which has been pioneered by the YST. According to Flemons, Diffey and Cunliffe (2018), such endeavours are suggestive of the efforts to re-shape PE as an educational course and to put it at the appropriate positions within the school curriculum. From the available literature, I have understood that the pioneering movement has emphasised on adopting of My Personal Best Approach of YST for the purpose of developing personal and social skills through physical education. Through the study of such literature, I have come to appreciate the pressure which all of the teaching faculty within my school are currently experiencing to secure progressive measures of examination based performances of students. It is my perception that occasionally, it is required to employ considerable courage so as to protect the balanced and expanded curriculum under the current scrutiny related to accountability measures. To this effect, I feel that only bold and visionary leadership at the school level would be appropriate to ensure that loss of extra-curricular sport within my school could be avoided and this process would have to be cognisant about retaining the core PE courses from disappearing involving the KS4 timetable.

I have also realised that within the context of my school, the senior leadership would be required to formulate the decisions since the school, as has been mentioned earlier, generally implements a policy of no excuses. Thus, the factor of creativity fostering within the school environment and especially through student voice encouragement would require specific functional formats to be implemented. Glaveanu (2018) has observed that such functions are identifiable as self-quizzing, peer marking, presentations, own examples and project handling. Again, through reviewing the previous literature, especially the examples highlighted in the format of three distinct academic institutions where special administrative approaches have been designed and implemented in the forms of YSTs to encourage student voices in the PE curricula within the KS4 time limit, it has been clear to me that the measure of creativity in teaching could not be jeopardised within such approaches which emphasise on encouraging student voices. I also could perceive from the wider context of this previous literature review that direct impacts of providing students the opportunities to become creatively engaged within the PE curricula under the Key Stage 4 regulations could entail improvements in confidence levels of students (since they could witness that their voices are getting the required measure of attention through differentiated functionalities by their peers/teachers), improvement of comprehension about the life skills which are required for future success and increment in engagement levels within the sport and physical education courses at institutional levels.

Conclusion

At the conclusive phase, the research question regarding the measure of impact which could be generated by encouraging student voice on creativity based PE training, could be considered to have been addressed through different perspectives. As far as impacting the creativity measure in KS4 duration based PE courses, the literature review and reflective study of the same could indicate that multiplicity of factors influence this process when it comes to inspiring student voices for the purpose of fostering greater engagement in ever declining and time shortage affected discourses related to PE. These factors are as the following:

The capacity of promotion of student voices and leading the encouragement process by staff members who could be sufficiently capable in terms of management of the excess pressure which could emerge as students gain greater autonomy in voicing their opinions and in engaging with the designs of their PE curricula.

The availability of adequate measure of financial and supporting resources so that managing the additional pressure on the teachers, caused by encouragement of student voices, could be effectively performed.

Effective and synergistic collaboration between the PE teachers and their students concerning the integration of physical activities into wider school curricula since this could be vital to manage the limited measure of time available under KS4 directives and fostering of creative solution development could become effective in terms of making such collaboration successful.

Identification of differing preferences and necessities of students. This process could effectively be guided through encouraging student voices while the designing of such school curriculum could be underway. Such differing necessities, as I have managed to understand, involve the determination of appropriate measures of training in PE courses concerning different ages and stages of physical development of students.

Finally, the most significant finding through this entire preceding research has been that the core curriculum of PE, on the KS4 timetable, completely depends upon the differing engagement levels of students in their primary lessons and in their extra-curricular activities. The encouragement of student voices could be considered to be the enrichment factor which could bring forth favourable consequences for students who could become active in development of their PE based skills. Thus, creativity could only be reinforced in this context, as far as PE teaching is concerned. The reason could be identified as that it is always necessary to plan lesson activity, including the PE courses, in the form of blocks and contents and the basis of such planning remains the lesson objectives as well as intended outcomes of assessments of learning experiences of students. Student voices empower the students to actively participate and contribute to this process. Thus, the element of teaching creativity and associated learning experiences could only experience progress in this context.

As far as the influencing of my practices is concerned, the preceding project has enabled me to develop a comprehensive understanding of the building blocks of any creativity based teaching format, on the basis of interactive collaboration with the students, while managing the external and administrative exigencies such as KS4 timelines. I prefer to consider these building blocks as five ‘MEs’. Regarding the environment of my school, these could be demonstrated as the following diagram:

I consider each of such blocks to be underscored by physical elements involving students. I think that teaching staff at schools could only be associated with a practical PE based activity. On the other hand, students are better suited to be empowered to adapt to such activities, particularly involving the Key Stage 4. This observation could be better suited in terms of development of student group motivations. Thus, it has been an effect of this research that I consider that curricula design at the school levels would require student voice to be encouraged as a consequence of undertaking programs such as formulation of YST PE Change Teams so that students could actively share the PE offers through presenting situations which could be then resolved through creative means.

Continue your exploration of Fostering Learner Development with our related content.

Reference List

AMABILE, Teresa (2018). Creativity In Context: Update To The Social Psychology Of Creativity. Harvard University.

ARMSTRONG, Thomas (2016). The Power of the Adolescent Brain: Strategies for Teaching Middle and High School Students. Alexandria, ASCD.

AUBREY, Karl and RILEY, Alison (2016). Understanding and Using Educational Theories. London, Sage

Barnes, J., 2018. Applying cross-curricular approaches creatively. Routledge.

Burnard, P., 2006. Reflecting on the creativity agenda in education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(3), pp.313-318.

Cale, L. and Harris, J., 2018. The role of knowledge and understanding in fostering physical literacy. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 37(3), pp.280-287.

Cale, L., Harris, J. and Hooper, O., 2019. Debating health knowledge and health pedagogies in physical education. In Debates in Physical Education (pp. 256-277). Routledge.

Capel, S. and Katene, W., 2000. Secondary PGCE PE Studentsí Perceptions of Their Subject Knowledge. European Physical Education Review, 6(1), pp.46-70.

Chávez-Eakle, R.A., 2010. The relevance of creativity in education. New Horizons for Learning, 8(1).

Collard, P. and Looney, J., 2014. Nurturing creativity in education. European Journal of Education, 49(3), pp.348-364.

Craft, A. and Jeffrey, B., 2008. Creativity and performativity in teaching and learning: tensions, dilemmas, constraints, accommodations and synthesis. British Educational Research Journal, 34(5), pp.577-584.

Craft, A., 2003. The limits to creativity in education: Dilemmas for the educator. British journal of educational studies, 51(2), pp.113-127.

Craft, A., 2006. Fostering creativity with wisdom. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(3), pp.337-350.

Craft, A., 2008. Tensions in creativity and education. Creativity, wisdom, and trusteeship: Exploring the role of education, pp.16-34.

Craft, A., 2010. Creativity and Education Futures: Learning in a Digital Age. Trentham Books Ltd. Westview House 734 London Road, Oakhill, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST4 5NP, UK.

Craft, A., Gardner, H. and Claxton, G. eds., 2007. Creativity, wisdom, and trusteeship: Exploring the role of education. Corwin Press.

Craft, A., Jeffrey, B. and Leibling, M. eds., 2001. Creativity in education. A&C Black.

Cremin, H., Mason, C. and Busher, H., 2011. Problematising pupil voice using visual methods: Findings from a study of engaged and disaffected pupils in an urban secondary school. British Educational Research Journal, 37(4), pp.585-603.

Cropley, A.J., 2001. Creativity in education & learning: A guide for teachers and educators. Psychology Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Wolfe, R., 2014. New conceptions and research approaches to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In The systems model of creativity (pp. 161-184). Springer, Dordrecht.

DAY, Chris (2002). Developing Teachers: The Challenges of Lifelong Learning. London, Routledge

DE BONO, Edward (1995). Serious creativity, The Journal for Quality and Participation, 18(5), 12

Department for Education (2014). National Curriculum in England: complete framework for key stages 1 to 4. Available at:

Doherty, J. and Brennan, P., 2014. Physical Education 5-11: A guide for teachers. Routledge.

Evans, G., 2013. THE INFLUENCE SECONDARY SCHOOL PUPILS HAVE ON PE AND SCHOOL.

Wainwright, N., Goodway, J., Whitehed, M., Williams, A. and Kirk, D., 2016.

The Foundation Phase in Wales–a play-based curriculum that supports the development of physical literacy. Education 3-13, 44(5), pp.513-524.

WHITEHEAD, Margaret (2010). Physical Literacy: Throughout the Lifecourse. Oxon, Routledge.

Wyse, D. and Ferrari, A., 2015. Creativity and education: Comparing the national curricula of the states of the European Union and the United Kingdom. British Educational Research Journal, 41(1), pp.30-47.