This article was downloaded by: [University of Bucharest ]On: 23 June 2015, At: 12:12Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Click for updates

Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & DancePublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujrd20

Using Photovoice to Determine Preservice Teachers'Preparedness to TeachJody L. Langdon a , Ashley Walker a , Gavin Colquitt a & Tony Pritchard aa Department of Health and Kinesiology , Georgia Southern University , Statesboro , GAPublished online: 26 Dec 2013.

To cite this article: Jody L. Langdon , Ashley Walker , Gavin Colquitt & Tony Pritchard (2014) Using Photovoice toDetermine Preservice Teachers' Preparedness to Teach, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 85:1, 22-27, DOI:10.1080/07303084.2014.855595

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2014.855595

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations orwarranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsedby Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectlyin connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

22 VOLUME 85 NUMBER 1 JANUARY 2014

Jody L. Langdon (jlangdon@georgiasouthern.edu), Ashley Walker, and Gavin Colquitt are assistant professors, and Tony Pritchard is an associate professor, in the Department of Health and Kinesiology at Georgia South-ern University in Statesboro, GA.

TO DETERMINE PRESERVICE TEACHERS PREPAREDNESS TO TEACHJODY L. LANGDONASHLEY WALKERGAVIN COLQUITTTONY PRITCHARD

The goal of physical education teacher education (PETE) faculty is to prepare preservice teachers to teach their physical education students the knowl-edge, skills, and competence to engage in physical activity for a lifetime (American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, in press). Many PETE programs share similarities, as faculty members strive to develop knowledge of content, teaching, and student learning, also known as pedagogical content knowledge (PCK; Shulman, 1986). Although competence in teaching is often measured by preservice teacher performance during student teaching, this is a major programmatic outcome rather than a process. Physical edu-cation teacher education faculty must engage in assessment and reflection that examines the effectiveness of their programs and the processes that contribute toward preservice teacher performance.

Program assessment has four related and interdependent pur-poses: (1) accountability, (2) improvement, (3) understanding, and (4) knowledge (Galluzzo & Craig, 1990). Models of comprehen-sive program assessment for PETE programs have been presented (Metzler & Tjeerdsma, 1998), implemented, and shown to be ef-fective (Metzler & Tjeerdsma, 2000). Program assessment is an ongoing process, made necessary by continuous changes in society

(Gurvitch, Lund, & Metzler, 2008). The increased reliance on tech-nology, evolving health behaviors, and shifts in educational policy have all led to changes in schools. The profession is aware of these changes and of the evolving skill set needed by new physical educa-tion teachers. The initial Teacher Standards (National Association for Sport and Physical Education, 2009) presented new competen-cies for physical education teachers that dictated changes in PETE programs. These changes have caused some to modify previous program-assessment models in order to help PETE programs to meet these new competencies (Colquitt, Pritchard, McCollum, & Langdon, 2011).

Initial efforts of comprehensive program assessment in PETE programs have focused on the dispositions, pedagogical knowl-edge, and content knowledge of preservice teachers (Metzler & Tjeerdsma, 2000). Measurement of physical education-related content knowledge is a commonality in all PETE programs, as typical data sources include course grades and certification exams

TO DETERMINE TO DETERMINE

Using PhotovoiceUsing PhotovoiceUsing PhotovoiceUsingUsingUsingUsing PhotovoicePhotovoicePhotovoicePhotovoiceUsing Photovoice

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

ity of

Buc

hares

t ] at

12:12

23 Ju

ne 20

15

JOPERD 23

(Tjeerdsma, Metzler, & Walker, 2000). Dis-positions in PETE programs have previously focused on students attitudes and beliefs about teaching, physical education, and learn-ers; and students perceptions or beliefs about their teaching skills or aspects of their educa-tion (Tjeerdsma, Metzler, Walker, & Mozen, 2000, p. 451). The pedagogical knowledge of preservice teachers has previously been studied by examining and assessing teaching behaviors (Metzler, Tjeerdsma, & Mozen, 2000). While information on dispositions and pedagogical knowledge can inform PETE faculty about what preservice teachers know and do, it does not address pedagogical con-tent knowledge (i.e., preparedness to teach in the real world). One way to address this is to assess the strengths and weaknesses of a program based on preservice teachers per-ceptions of preparedness.

To address teacher preparedness, a meth-odology commonly used in community-based participatory research (CBPR) could be ap-plied to PETE settings. Photovoice is typi-cally used to allow participants to visually document their experiences through the use of photography to promote social change. In the case of gathering the perceptions of pre-service teachers, Photovoice allows for the elicitation of a more in-depth response to the preparedness question, with the potential to more clearly show what preservice teach-ers feel are the strengths and weaknesses of a program. The purpose of this article is to introduce Photovoice as a technique for un-derstanding the perceptions of preservice teachers in PETE programs and to provide an example of how this methodology was imple-mented in a PETE program.

What Is Photovoice?Photovoice is a participatory action research technique introduced by Wang and Burris (1997). It has been used in several settings and among diverse populations to explore a variety of health and social problems. It has been used by groups such as Aboriginal health workers, rural Appalachian youth, Latino adolescents, mothers with learning disabilities, and children with autism (Booth & Booth, 2003; Carnahan, 2006; Clark & Zimmer, 2001; Downey & Any-aegbunam, 2010; Hergenrather, Rhodes, & Clarke, 2006; Streng et al., 2004; Wilkin & Liamputtong, 2010). The basic premise of the Photovoice methodology can be summarized by three overall goals: (1) allow participants to photograph everyday phenomena that relate to a given question; (2) allow for group discussions about the photographs, giving special attention to issues that are of greatest concern; and (3) connect the ideas and concerns shared in the discussions with decision makers (Wang & Pies, 2004). In most cases, the decision makers are local policy makers or community leaders. Within the scope of PETE programs, the decision makers are PETE faculty and program administrators. Unlike other field-based techniques, Photovoice allows for collaborative feedback to

both preservice teachers and PETE faculty, allowing for small-scale change in a relatively short amount of time.

Recommended ProceduresIt will be important to provide preservice teachers with a back-ground of Photovoice and its potential uses before beginning such a project. Photovoice methodology recommends that participants attend a training session (lasting 24 hours) to learn about Photo-voice. The session is also devoted to answering participant ques-tions, distributing cameras (if needed), reviewing methodology protocol, and brainstorming. Brainstorming is recommended to help facilitate discussion and to guide participants picture tak-ing before they begin the project. Sharing resources, such as www.photovoice.org and previous examples of Photovoice projects dur-ing the training session, provides insight to the purpose, goals, and uses of Photovoice. For the purpose of the project, preservice teachers would take pictures that illustrate the strengths and weak-nesses of the program in terms of how prepared they felt after their coursework was completed. This type of project is best suited for a seminar class during the student-teaching semester. If a program does not have a seminar class associated with student teaching, it can be completed through weekly meetings during the student-teaching semester.

To complete the project, PETE faculty must make sure that each preservice teacher has access to a camera. Cameras are an integral part of the methodology, so access to cameras can be a major limitation. While digital cameras are recommended, dispos-able cameras can be used as well. Additionally, most cell phones include digital camera capabilities. Digital photographs are easiest to upload to presentation programs such as PowerPoint, but print photos can be scanned as well. Regardless of the device used to take photographs, it is imperative that preservice teachers ensure that parental photo-release forms have been signed before taking photos of students.

It is recommended that the steps to the Photovoice technique developed by Wang and Burris (1997) be utilized to guide this proj-ect. Teachers should instruct students to record everyday realities through pictures, present and discuss photographs with other class-mates, and discuss a plan of action to make positive changes (Wang & Burris, 1997). It is also recommended that preservice teachers be given at least seven days to take photographs. Students will take pictures throughout the day to document their everyday realities. Instructors should adjust the time allowed to take photographs ac-cording to class schedules and the overall goals of the project. The students are then required to present and discuss their photographs with the class using the SHOWeD method. The SHOWeD method is the recommended five-question outline to help participants dis-cuss and describe their photographs. The five questions included in this process are (1) What do you See here? (2) What is really Happening? (3) How does this affect Our lives? (4) Why does this strength or weakness Exist? (5) What can we Do about it? (Wang, Burris, & Xiang, 1996).

The advantage of using Photovoice as a tool for program as-sessment comes from its unique benefits for qualitative research. In qualitative-based research (like Photovoice), reliability and valid-ity are achieved by increasing the methodologys credibility, au-thenticity, transferability, and consistency (Appleton, 1995; Fade, 2003). Triangulation of data-collection methods through the use of photographs, focus groups, and member checking increases the methods transferability. Photovoice achieves authenticity and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

ity of

Buc

hares

t ] at

12:12

23 Ju

ne 20

15

24 Volume 85 Number 1 JaNuary 2014

credibility because the methodology relies on the participation of the target population (i.e., preservice teachers) whose photographs represent their lived experiences, and consistency is achieved by following a stable protocol. For a more detailed description of Photovoice methodology, see Wang and Burris (1997).

As with any major assignment in a course, the Photovoice project should be evaluated on specific criteria related to the assignments goals and objectives. Areas of evaluation might include number of photographs, categories for photographs, written explanation of each photograph, presentation format, presentation design, and grammar/spelling. The purpose of the evaluation should be to ensure that students adhere to the parameters of the project so that the students presentations foster critical thinking. Evaluation should not emphasize the interpretation of the photographs since the purpose is to allow students to express their stories through

their own experiences. Therefore, the evaluation criteria can be modified by the instructor. In addition to stressing the confidential-ity of the process (i.e., no discussion about the project outside of class and information shared with stakeholders will not be identi-fied by individual students), the use of a moderator outside of the program to conduct the assessment would be helpful. An outside moderator allows students to share information freely without fear that it will influence their evaluation. The project should be process-oriented and focused on the SHOWeD method. Table 1 provides a sample rubric for a college-level assessment.

Photovoice Project Example and TimelineIn the Senior Seminar for Health and Physical Educators course at Georgia Southern University, Photovoice was used as a class

Table 1. Sample Rubric for College-Level Assessment

Unacceptable Acceptable TargetRating 1 2 3Photographs Fewer than 5 photos per

category78 photos per category 910 photos per category

Categorization of Photos

Not all photos are identified as a barrier or resource.

Most photos are identified as a barrier or resource.

All photos are correctly identified as a barrier or resource.

Written Explanation

Fewer than 2 sentences following each photo explaining what the image represents and the rationale for labeling it a Barrier or a Resource.

23 sentences following each photo explaining what the image represents and the rationale for labeling it a Barrier or a Resource.

4 or more sentences following each photo explaining what the image represents and the rationale for labeling it a Barrier or a Resource.

Cultural-Context Reflection

Does not provide a summary of how the context and culture affect health behavior, barriers, and resources.

Provides a brief summary of how the context and culture affect health behavior, barriers, and resources.

Provides a detailed, comprehensive summary of how the context and culture affect health behavior, barriers, and resources.

Format (Photos) Most photos are not resized (smaller than 1300 megapixels). Photos are not in JPEG or GIF file format and are inserted in PowerPoint. More than one photo per slide.

Most photos are resized (no larger than 1300 megapixels) in JPEG or GIF file format and inserted in PowerPoint. One photo per slide.

All photos are resized (no larger than 1300 megapixels) in JPEG or GIF file format and inserted in PowerPoint. One photo per slide.

Format (PowerPoint)

Does not have a title slide. Fewer than 10 photo slides. Few/ineffective corresponding summary/explanatory slides and conclusion. Fewer than 22 slides total.

Has a title slide, at least 10 photo slides with corresponding summary/explanatory slides (10), and a conclusion. 2226 slides total.

Effective, detailed title slide, 1415 photo slides with corresponding summary/explanatory slides (1415), and a conclusion. 2830 slides total.

Format (Total File Size)

Entire presentation is larger than 3 megabytes (MB).

N/A Entire presentation is less than 3 megabytes (MB).

Design Slides are difficult to read. Overall design lacks creativity and is not appealing.

Slides are easy to read and appealing.

All slides, transitions, and other effects are appealing and culminate with an effective presentation. The slides are easy to read and appealing.

Spelling and Grammar

More than 4 errors 24 errors Fewer than 2 errors

Total Points (out of 27)

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

ity of

Buc

hares

t ] at

12:12

23 Ju

ne 20

15

JoPerD 25

project to identify PETE program strengths and weaknesses. The overall purpose of the project was to actively engage preservice teachers in a discussion about program needs and their perceived preparedness to teach in real-life situations. With the course meet-ing only once a week, the project as a whole took approximately six weeks, as outlined in Table 2. At the beginning of the se-mester, the instructor introduced the Photovoice project with the assistance of a faculty member who had experience using Photovoice as a research method (Photovoice moderator). The preservice teachers learned about the goals of Photovoice and how it has been applied in community health (one class ses-sion, 60 minutes). The instructor used a second class session (60 minutes) to allow preservice teachers to ask questions about the Photovoice project and to provide final instructions before preservice teachers began to take photographs. The preservice teachers were instructed to take at least eight photographs (i.e., four to represent program strengths and four to repre-sent program weaknesses). During the second class session, the

instructor asked the Photovoice moderator to also facilitate a brainstorming session to help provide ideas for photographs that would meet the project requirements. The instructor left the room during this portion to allow students to speak freely about photograph ideas.

Preservice teachers were given 14 days to take photographs. After the 14 days, two class sessions were dedicated to the pre-sentation and discussion of their photographs, using slide-presen-tation software to display photos. To increase confidentiality, the instructor allowed the Photovoice moderator to conduct the two class sessions so the preservice teachers felt comfortable presenting their photographs. The instructor asked the preservice teachers to submit their pictures to an online class-management system so the projects could be evaluated based on presentation design as pre-sented in the sample rubric. The moderator was asked to evaluate the rubric components specific to the photograph descriptions and student participation. During each photograph presentation, the moderator took notes on the major concepts the students identified

Table 2.Timeline for Photovoice Project

Class Activity Person Responsible Corresponding Photovoice Methodology Step Time Allotted

Introduction of Photovoice methodology and class assignment

Instructor #3: Introduce Photovoice to participants

1 class session, approximately 60 minutes

Part I (30 minutes):In-class discussion of Photovoice questions.What are the program strengths? What do students feel prepared for?What are the program weaknesses? What do students feel unprepared for?Part II (30 minutes):Brainstorming session

Instructor #3: Introduce Photovoice to participants

#5: Brainstorm with participants

1 class session, approximately 60 minutes

Photograph portion of the Photovoice project

Preservice teachers #7: Provide time for participants to take pictures

14 days

Photovoice presentation and class discussion of photographs

Preservice teachers #8: Meet to discuss the photographs

2 class sessions, approximately 60 minutes each

Table 3.Program Strengths and Weaknesses

Program Strengths Program WeaknessesBest PracticesSubcategories = administration of fitness testing, writing and adapting lesson plans, classroom management at elementary level

Preparation for Real-World ScenariosSubcategories = behavior modification, teaching with limited equipment

Helping RelationshipsSubcategories = cohort-style education, faculty-member availability

Working with Vulnerable PopulationsSubcategories = students with disabilities, students with poor health outcomes

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

ity of

Buc

hares

t ] at

12:12

23 Ju

ne 20

15

26 Volume 85 Number 1 JaNuary 2014

as program strengths and weaknesses. Table 3 provides a summary of various strengths and weaknesses identified during the class discussions.

For example, best practices was identified as one of the pro-gram strengths during the in-class discussion among the preservice teachers. One such best practice discussed was lesson-plan prepa-ration. Students agreed that because each PETE class requires such detailed lesson planning, it is beneficial when they are in the class-room because they were better able to think on their feet. Figure 1 represents this ability because the student had to quickly revise a lesson based on student class attendance. One weakness that arose from the discussions was that preservice teachers felt they needed more real-world preparation. For example, preservice teachers were given a good selection of equipment to use in PETE course-work but were forced to quickly change previous plans when faced with teaching in the real world with minimal equipment. They felt that the program could do a better job of preparing preservice teachers to use limited amounts of equipment (see Figure 2).

The Photovoice moderator used the notes taken during the pre-service teachers presentations and the photographs submitted by each preservice teacher to discuss the outcomes of the Photovoice project with the Senior Seminar instructor and other PETE pro-gram faculty. At the end of the school year, PETE program faculty used the student Photovoice project to identify potential solutions for the weaknesses found within the program. The strengths within the program identified through the Photovoice project helped the PETE program faculty learn what the preservice teachers felt was most valuable in the program curriculum, course materials, and assignments.

ConclusionThe information gathered using this unique project resulted in an action plan for program changes and improvements. In this PETE program, assessment is ongoing and has previously included sur-veys. The use of Photovoice has the potential to provide a more in-depth look at the potential strengths and weaknesses of pro-grams and to provide a starting point for conversations between preservice teachers and PETE faculty. Along with traditional as-sessments of PCK and dispositions, using unique methodologies such as Photovoice allows PETE faculty to see how effective their instruction has been. The information gathered using this method can influence programmatic changes and satisfies preservice teach-ers need to voice their perceptions about their PETE program.

ReferencesAmerican Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance.

(in press). National standards & grade-level outcomes for K12 physical education (3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Appleton, J. (1995). Analyzing qualitative interview data: Addressing issues of validity and reliability. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22, 993997.

Booth, T., & Booth, W. (2003). In the frame: Photovoice and mothers with learning difficulties. Disability and Society, 18, 431442

Carnahan, C. (2006). Photovoice: Engaging children with autism and their teachers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(2), 4450.

Clark, L., & Zimmer, L. (2001). What we learned from a photographic component in a study of Latino childrens health. Field Methods, 13, 303328.

Colquitt, G., Pritchard, T., McCollum, S., & Langdon, J. (2011, April). Meeting the NASPE Initial Teacher Standards through comprehensive

Figure 1. Example of a program strength:

Adapting a lesson plan

Figure 2. Example of a program weakness:

Inadequate equipment outside of the program

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

ity of

Buc

hares

t ] at

12:12

23 Ju

ne 20

15

JoPerD 27

program assessment. Paper presented at the annual Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance Convention, San Diego, CA.

Downey, L., & Anyaegbunam, C. (2010). Your lives through your eyes: Rural Appalachian youth identify community needs and assets through the use of Photovoice. Journal of Appalachian Studies, 16(12), 4260.

Fade, S. A. (2003). Communicating and judging the quality of qualitative research: The need for a new language. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 16, 139149.

Galluzzo, G. R., & Craig, J. R. (1990). Evaluation of preservice teacher education programs. In W. Robert Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 599616). New York, NY: Macmillan.

Gurvitch, R., Lund, J. L., & Metzler, M. W. (2008). Researching the adop-tion of models-based instruction Context and chapter summaries. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 27, 449456.

Hergenrather, K., Rhodes, S., & Clarke, G. (2006). Windows to work: Exploring employment-seeking behaviors of persons with HIV/AIDS through Photovoice. AIDS Education and Prevention, 18, 243258.

Metzler, M. W., & Tjeerdsma, B. L. (1998). PETE program assessment within a development, research, and improvement framework. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 17, 468492.

Metzler, M., & Tjeerdsma, B. (2000). The Physical Education Teacher Edu-cation Assessment Project. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 19, 395401.

National Association for Sport and Physical Education. (2009). National standards and guidelines for physical education teacher education (3rd ed.). Reston, VA: Author.

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teach-ing. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 414.

Streng, J., Rhodes, S., Ayala, G., Eng, E., Arceo, R., & Phipps, S. (2004). Realidad latina: Latino adolescents, their school, and a university use Photovoice to examine and address the influences of immigration. Jour-nal of Interprofessional Studies, 18, 403415.

Tjeerdsma, B. L., Metzler, M. W., & Mozen, D. (2000). Assessing pedagogi-cal knowledge. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 19, 487507.

Tjeerdsma, B. L., Metzler, M. W., & Walker, T. M. (2000). Assessing knowl-edge. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 19, 476486.

Tjeerdsma, B. L., Metzler, M. W., Walker, T. M., & Mozen, D. (2000). Assessing dispositions. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 19, 451457.

Wang, C. C., & Burris, M. (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education and Behavior, 24, 369387.

Wang, C., Burris, M., & Xiang, Y. (1996). Chinese village women as visual anthropologists: A participatory approach to reaching policy makers. Social Science Medicine, 42, 13911400.

Wang, C., & Pies, C. (2004). Family, maternal, and child health through Photovoice. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 8(2), 95102.

Wilkin, A., & Liamputtong, P. (2010). The Photovoice method: Research-ing the experiences of Aboriginal health workers through photographs. Australian Journal of Primary Health, 16, 231239. J

To learn more about this topic, refer to this AAHPERD resource at www.aahperd.org/shop: National Standards & Guidelines for Physical Education Teacher Education, 3rd Edition.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [U

nivers

ity of

Buc

hares

t ] at

12:12

23 Ju

ne 20

15