1 / 30

Is your University physical activity program on the “Chopping Block”?

Is your University physical activity program on the “Chopping Block”?. Don Rainey, MS, CSCS Stacia Miller, MEd., ABD Renee Rainey, MS, LAT. Rationale for Basic Instructional Programs. Basic Instruction Programs are being eliminated from Colleges and Universities at an alarming rate.

gaenor
Download Presentation

Is your University physical activity program on the “Chopping Block”?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Is your University physical activity program on the “Chopping Block”? Don Rainey, MS, CSCS Stacia Miller, MEd., ABD Renee Rainey, MS, LAT

  2. Rationale for Basic Instructional Programs • Basic Instruction Programs are being eliminated from Colleges and Universities at an alarming rate. • Obesity Crisis- • 16.3% of all children (ages 2-19) are considered obese, • 31.9% are classified as overweight (Ogden, Carroll, & Flegal, 2008). • 34% of adults in the US classified as obese (Ogden, Carroll, McDowell, & Flegal, 2007) • 66.3% classified as overweight or obese (Ogden et al., 2007).

  3. Rationale for Basic Instructional Programs • Physical Education is being taken out of public schools. • Need for quality Physical Education instructors at the public school level. • Crisis of Inactivity- • 51.2% of American adults were found to be either inactive and/or not meeting PA guidelines (ACSM guidelines). • 24.9% of American children aged 9-13, did not participate in 60 or more minutes of physical activity on any day. • Only 30.3% went to physical education class an average of 5 days per week (CDC, 2008).

  4. Rationale for Texas State University • Physical Education in Public Schools in Texas • 80% is team sports related • Athletics • New legislation • Hispanic Serving Institution • Diabetes, Obesity, PA levels • Our curriculum is diverse but all courses include a strong component of Health Related Fitness.

  5. Our Bottom Line……. • Provide students with possibly the last educational environment to learn about the benefits of living a healthy lifestyle. • Provide well constructed courses for both mainstream students and ESS majors. • Deal with societal influences: fast-food, technology, stress, peer-pressure. • Promote regular participation in structured, health-related physical activity. • Encourage healthy choices. • Promote skill development.

  6. Physical Fitness & Wellness (PFW) • We have approximately 28,000 students. • All students are required to take two 1-hour PFW credits. • PFW is 1 of 5 divisions in the HPER Department • Faculty (33 total) • 4 Full-time, 2 Part-time, 2 Adjunct, 13 Graduate assistants, 12 Non-salaried contract instructors • Program Cost: approximately $400,000 • Revenue Generated: approximately $1,798,000 (23% of totals funds generated) • 17% of money to pay faculty produced 27% of the Department’s total Student Credit Hours (SCH). VERY COST EFFECTIVE

  7. Diverse Course Offerings • Approximately 5,000 students per semester • 52 different curriculums ranging from beginning to advanced • 175 total activity classes • 70% On campus (3,500 students) • 30% Off campus (1,500 students) • Others • Substitutions • Accommodations • PFW Webpage • http://www.hper.txstate.edu/Divisions/PFW-PE-1100-Activity-Courses.html

  8. On-Campus

  9. Expert Instructors

  10. Off-Campus

  11. Learner Outcomes • The University has required all Departments to produce learner outcomes. • Our division was not required to comply. • We took the opportunity to change the perception. (Proactive/Advocacy) • We use learner outcomes to drive our curriculum. • Lesson planning • Program evaluation • Student assessment • Health-related components of fitness (Proactive/Advocacy)

  12. Administration

  13. PFW Program Director • Is the director qualified? • Duties: • Scheduling • Curriculum design and development • Recruiting, hiring, assigning, training, and observing instructors (Coaches?) • Gathering student feedback • Through instructor evaluations • Additional one-on-one time spent with students • Oversight of facilities and equipment • Mentor Graduate Assistants • Interpret and implement policy and procedure • Leads “Bootcamp” for all newly hired GAs • Director Changes and Transitions (Proactive)

  14. Texas State GIAs & GTAs

  15. Progressive Staff Training “BOOTCAMP” • Introduction to HPER assistantship • Mission Statement • Meet & Greet • Policy and procedure • Notebook • Facility • Staff

  16. Progressive Staff Training “BOOTCAMP” • Technology Training • Scheduling • Mentoring • Preparation

  17. Progressive Staff Training“BOOTCAMP” • Lesson plans: PFW/PE • Syllabi/Learner Outcomes • Textbooks • Gym and weight room training • Best practices • Personal Time • CPR Training

  18. Progressive Staff Training • Professional Mentoring /Development • Research, presentations, certifications, organizations. • Leadership • University opportunities • Community opportunities

  19. Appropriate Assessments • Assessment of the Curriculum • Learner outcomes • Self-efficacy • Skills tests • Fitness tests • Written tests • Observation

  20. Appropriate Assessments • Assessment of the Curriculum

  21. Appropriate Assessments • Assessment of Personnel • Graduate Assistants • Mentor • Student evaluations: quantitative/qualitative • Creating a new tool • Director’s ongoing assessment • Other Faculty’s eyes and ears • Other Faculty • FARS • Student evaluations • Off Campus Instructors • Comply with University PPS • Student evaluations

  22. Technology Integration • Heart Rate Monitors • THR zones • Calories • Distance • Speed • GPS • PDA • Rubrics • Fitness testing • PE Manager • Software

  23. Technology Integration

  24. Technology Integration

  25. Technology Integration

  26. Technology: constantly immerse into our curriculum Societal Needs: curriculum will be dictated by the societal needs New Activity Guidelines for Adults & Children New activities/exercises will emerge The changing learner (i.e. Millennial Student) Data Collection & Research: Validation Constant Accountability Promotion & Advertisement The Future: Change is Inevitable, Be Proactive!!!

  27. What we “Hang Our Hat On” • A proactive philosophy versus reactive philosophy • Having a director that has a primary charge of curriculum design and implementation. • Diversification of curriculum and facilities • High bar for accountability. • Active recruiting of Graduate Assistants • Well designed instructor training. • Evaluation and assessment as part of the system to insure quality instruction.

  28. PERCEPTION = EYES OF TRUTH WILL YOUR PROGRAM SURVIVE & THRIVE?

  29. Contact Information • Don Rainey dr17@txstate.edu, 512-245-2947 • Stacia Miller sm66@txstate.edu, 512-245-2246 • Renee Rainey tr18@txstate.edu, 512-245-3480

More Related