This article was downloaded by: [University of Cambridge]On: 06 November 2014, At: 12:32Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

QuestPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uqst20

Vision in an Age of AccountabilityRonald S. Feingold aa Department of Exercise Science, Health Studies , PhysicalEducation & Sport Management, Adelphi University , Garden City ,New YorkPublished online: 18 Oct 2013.

To cite this article: Ronald S. Feingold (2013) Vision in an Age of Accountability, Quest, 65:4,385-393, DOI: 10.1080/00336297.2013.834832

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2013.834832

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe 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 endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

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

Quest, 65:385–393, 2013Copyright © National Association for Kinesiology in Higher Education (NAKHE)ISSN: 0033-6297 print / 1543-2750 onlineDOI: 10.1080/00336297.2013.834832

The Twenty-Second Delphine HannaCommemorative Lecture 2013

Vision in an Age of Accountability

RONALD S. FEINGOLD

Department of Exercise Science, Health Studies, Physical Education & SportManagement, Adelphi University, Garden City, New York

A case is presented against a data collection system that is intended to provide increasedaccountability of teachers, professors and the profession. The utilization of some current data col-lection systems may in fact jeopardize the integrity of the profession’s mission and goals. The causeof concern is the use of the easiest form of data collection (e.g., fitness, skills, math, and sciencescores) rather than evidence viewing the student as a complex organism that would require a moreappropriate and complex assessment system (i.e., “life skills” activity participation and social skillsrather than a fitness test). I also note that a focus on increased accountability and simplified datacollection provides the impetus that research in higher education needs to consider a paradigm shiftto be more collaborative and holistic. In presenting these issues, I note that the vision of DelphineHanna was similar, specifically more collaborative, more holistic, and more humanistic in makingscholarly and professional decisions.

Keywords Accountability, higher education, social responsibility, state mandates, pedagogy,physical education teacher education, standardized testing, fitness testing

I wish to start by thanking the executive committee of the National Association forKinesiology in Higher Education (NAKHE) for inviting me to present the 22nd DelphineHanna Commemorative Lecture. The presentation comes at a time when I will be complet-ing more than 47 years in higher education and 40 years at Adelphi University (GardenCity, NY). It also comes at a time that I am perhaps more reflective than usual about whateducation is and what is important in life. It also is an honor to follow in the footsteps of pastHanna lecturers who clearly called for “change” (Boyce, 2008; DePauw, 2010; Kretchmar,2006; Metzler, 2007; Sage, 1993). I also want to thank Leah Fiorentino for her help withthe editing of this manuscript.

Our profession is in transition in an age of increased importance on accountabilityand data collection, resulting in directions that may not be positive routes for our children,profession, and society. Many years ago, Delphine Hanna (1854–1941) called for the pro-fession to exert greater wisdom and humanism in making decisions as she encouraged hercolleagues to embrace a more holistic view in research and scholarly endeavors (DePauw,

Address correspondence to Ronald S. Feingold, Department of Exercise Science, Health Studies,Physical Education & Sport Management, Adelphi University, Woodruff Hall, Room 168, GardenCity, NY 11530. E-mail: feingold@adelphi.edu

385

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

386 R. S. Feingold

2010; Kretchmar, 2006). Her vision continues to inspire kinesiology leaders across theworld and has influenced the main themes of this lecture. In addition to the ideas espousedby Hanna, a series of recent events should be considered as shaping the message includedhere, including the impact of Hurricane Sandy on the metropolitan New York area, the dis-aster at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and the long-term effects of the tragedy of the fallof the Twin Towers on the local Long Island community. In concert, these events form thebasis for important professional reflections on the critical aspects of “what is really impor-tant in life.” Those events beg the questions, “who is accountable?” and “what are theyaccountable for?”—and thus the title of this lecture and the focus of “vision in an age ofaccountability”

Examples of the Positive Actions That Are Missed in the Call forAccountability

The recent focus on accountability and the measurements of evidences that must be pro-duced for accreditations or certifications places an unbalanced emphasis on the collectionof data—clouding the real purpose of education and more specifically higher education.Too often colleagues get bogged down in minutia and lose perspective of what “we” areand what “we” can be to ourselves, to our profession, and to society. The series of eventsmentioned earlier, and one additional example, provide an interesting set of positive actionsthat often miss inclusion in the accountability reports. Professional attention to these sortsof actions should be considered in future higher education efforts as worthy of attentionrather than the narrower focus on countable data sets.

Example 1: The Caroline Wambai Mungai School

In 2004, an Adelphi University faculty member lost her adult daughter to a serious ill-ness. In response to this tragic event the family chose to donate their house and propertyin Kenya to serve as an orphanage and elementary school for children living in the out-skirts of Nairobi—a true tribute to their daughter who was pursuing a graduate degree inpre-school education. In addition to the benefits to the children in Kenya, the CarolineWambai Mungai School served to re-focus the energies of the faculty, students, and staff atAdelphi University. The school became a living tribute and the faculty and students clearlyunderstood the need to work toward a more just and giving society. The school embod-ied the true core values embraced by Adelphi University and brought a common focusand commitment to something greater than oneself. There is a sense of positive energythat surrounds the volunteer efforts that the students and faculty share on a daily basis asthey plan for fund-raising and friend-raising events to continue support of this importantschool.

Example 2: Student Initiated Volunteer Efforts

In 2012, a large group of more than 300 students organized their own relief effort for thefamilies in need of assistance after Hurricane Sandy devastated the south shore of LongIsland, NY. They initially focused their efforts on the immediate need to dig out the sandfrom homes that had been buried in the wake of the storms—often finding more than 8 feetof sand in the basements of so many homes. While continuing their efforts at “digging out,”the students then turned to additional initiatives, such as collecting donations of food andclothing for the families who lost all of their belongings in the aftermath of the hurricane.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Vision in an Age of Accountability 387

Their efforts gathered national attention and in turn brought attention to Adelphi Universityas a national donation center for the collection/distribution of clothes and food for thefamilies in need. As the national focus on the impacted area waned, these students chose tomaintain their efforts and continued their fund-raising events by planning/executing a fairwith the proceeds directed to the children impacted by the loss of their homes.

Example 3: Teachers’ Response to Tragedies

Two recent events (Hurricane Sandy and Sandy Hook Elementary School) provided multi-ple examples of the strength of character of the teachers working in the local schools. Whenstate politicians visited the devastated south shore of Long Island they were amazed at theefforts of school teachers who were going door-to-door checking on their students. Therewas an immediate connection made to the new New York State teacher evaluation systemthat is based on the improvement of student test scores—where and how would these teach-ers be recognized for their caring and exceptional behaviors in that system? What rubric hasbeen developed to capture these traits? And, how would those behaviors be included in thedata collection system? Similarly, the teachers who protected their students from the armedintruder at Sandy Hook Elementary School made the ultimate sacrifice. Their decisions toprotect the children cannot be measured on the normal scale. How does one measure thistype of commitment and caring? These events serve to remind that what is important isthe value of life, the value of education, and the value of our educational system’s mostimportant resource—teachers.

Example 4: Recognition of the Master Teacher Award

In 2008, Adelphi University selected an outstanding teacher to be the recipient of the“Master Teacher Award” presented to an elementary school teacher who demonstrated mas-tery of pedagogical skills and commitment to students. As part of the selection process,Adelphi faculty visited the school site to meet her students, colleagues, and administrators.The faculty found a classroom where the children loved learning, were engaged in cre-ative projects, and were happy to come to school every day—they felt sure that the “best”teacher had been selected to receive the award. Much to the surprise of the Adelphi faculty,the principal was upset that this teacher had been selected for the award, because he felther class scores on standardized state test should be higher than reported. Adelphi made theobvious choice and presented the award to the teacher, as the Adelphi values supported thework of the teacher and not the standardized state test scores.

Data and Its Intended Uses

Diane Ravitch (2010) noted that sometimes schools and the governments do not care if thedata they collect and use is valid, reliable, or worthwhile as long as the schools send indata—data for data’s sake. In fact, she noted an over-reliance on data to support politicalagendas when she reported that 25 years ago, based on standard scores, the United Stateswas in the middle of the achievement rankings on math and science, just as we are today.Even so, graduates from U.S. universities are highly sought after and U.S. universities aremost often selected by foreign nationals as the site to send their top students. Perhaps U.S.universities and U.S. school systems are doing something right? In our efforts to justifyour political dollars, we have become overly immersed in the demanding collection of dataand related test scores, but of special interest to the testing conversation is the point that

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

388 R. S. Feingold

Finland and Singapore, who live at the top of the top of the achievement rankings, do notadminister standardized tests. Perhaps they spend more time on education related endeavorsrather than test construction?

Saavedra and Opfer (2012) reported on the results of a 2008 survey conducted byWagner (2008) who interviewed several hundred leaders in business, non-profits and edu-cation regarding what 21st skills were needed to be successful citizens and employees.The results pointed out the need for: (a) critical thinking and problem solving, (b) collab-oration and leadership, (c) agility and adaptability, (d) initiative and entrepreneurialism,(e) effective oral and written communication, (f) accessing and analyzing information, and(g) curiosity and imagination. The problem becomes quickly evident: when are these spe-cific skills taught and how are they assessed? If teachers spend time on implicit instructionin these necessary skills, they may not have the time to cover the mandated curriculumconnected to the state standardized tests. Saavedra and Opfer note that “students are notdeveloping these skills because they are not explicitly being taught and because they aremore difficult to assess than factual retention” (p. 13). So what should be taught in theschools? Where should time, effort, and energy be focused? Their conclusion is that schoolsare negligent in providing the important skills needed for the future, and instead havefocused more on those facts that can be more easily measured.

Influence of Mentors

Kretchmar (2006) noted that students of Hanna included T. D. Wood, Jesse FeiringWilliams, Luther Halsey Gulick, J. B. Nash, Gertrude Moulton, and Fred Leonard. Basedon the collective wealth of professional contributions, it would appear that Hanna had avery strong influence on them and, therefore through them, had a significant impact onthe profession. Her most important message was always directed toward a professionalorientation that was more holistic, more humanistic, and more value driven in nature.Of course things are very different now, but the point remains that professors and col-leagues can have an influence. And that influence can be the critical difference in the livesof children and society in general. Those influences have been of great value personallyand upon reflection created lasting connections and threads to NCPEAM, NAPEHE, andNAKHE.

Sheldon Fordham (professor and dean at the University of Illinois at Chicago, IL)taught an introductory course in physical education, and as a result was the first professorfor many of the undergraduate physical education students. How wonderful that the firstcourse the undergraduates had in the program was taught by the president of NCPEAM?Meanwhile at the University of Arizona (Tuscon, AZ), Donna Mae Miller and her col-leagues E. C. Davis and Eleanor Metheny, were frequent visitors to the undergraduate andgraduate student classes and of course had a great influence on the student majors in the pro-gram. Think of the wonderful interactions those students had with renowned philosophersand the first editor of Quest (at that time a joint publication of NCPEAM and NAPECW).Concurrently Fred Roby, an exercise physiologist at the University of Arizona, workedclosely with graduate students in lab settings while he was the president of NCPEAM. Whata great mentor for future leaders—researcher, teacher, and leader in the professional com-munity. At the University of New Mexico, Lawrence Locke (a leading scholar in pedagogyand a former editor of Quest) provided a strong influence for undergraduate and graduatestudents by the decisions he made on a daily basis as a professional. Influential profession-als still continue to weave in and out of the world of kinesiology as national leaders, suchas Don Hellison interacting with current professionals and students to share his philosophy

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Vision in an Age of Accountability 389

and programs with the next generation. It is important to note that each of these memo-rable mentors came from a different sub-discipline: Donna Mae Miller, philosophy; FredRoby, exercise physiology; Larry Locke, pedagogy; Sheldon Fordham, administration; andDon Hellison, sociology. In combination, they represented a holistic vision of professionalknowledge and served to support the importance of a multi-disciplinary perspective andcollaboration. Their influence clearly supports the need for a multi-disciplinary perspec-tive where collaboration is important in seeing the “big picture,” seeing the connectionsnecessary to be most effective when working with human beings.

As president of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education Recreation, andDance (AAHPERD) in 2000, my focus was on collaboration and breaking down turf bar-riers. Together, as a profession, we represent issues that span from birth to death, but ifwe are separated by disciplines we represent nothing of larger value. This collaborativeperspective was also evident when AAHPERD connected with the international commu-nity. The international perspective was interesting because in addition to bringing togethersub-disciplinary scholars, it also included discussion regarding the politics of the variouscountries. While I was president of the Association Internationale de Ecoles Superieuresd’Education Physique (AIESEP) (1998–2006), the majority of the efforts reminded all pro-fessionals that when it came to children we were all on the same page regardless of countryand educational system.

Delphine Hanna, a Leader of the Most Interesting Sort

DePauw (2010) noted that Hanna was a visionary at a very early time in our history. It maybe viewed that her vision came at a time when we moved from that of scientific inquiry andmedical confirmation of Dudley Allen Sargent to a more humanistic and holistic view ofmovement similar to that of Jesse Ferring Williams.

This vision and Hanna’s relentless pursuit of a different approach pushed the profes-sion in the early 1900s toward the incorporation of physical education in the schools as partof education through the physical. This clear commitment should remain at the forefrontof our profession as the critical message that is presented to the public. Unfortunately itseems as if the focus on accountability and data collection for accountability’s sake takeson an eerie similarity to the events that surrounded Hanna in the early 1900s. Has the U.S.education system slipped backward with this move into an “age of accountability”? Thefinancial support that has been provided to school systems based on accountability and datacollection through standardized test scores (e.g., state and national mandates such as NoChild Left Behind and Race to the Top) casts a doubt on the core values to which we onceascribed. This greater focus on data collection is intended to verify our existence to the pub-lic and places a financial windfall for state education systems that comply with the depositof data into artificial collection systems. Higher education has followed suit as institutionsforce pre-ordained criteria on faculty in their professional roles (i.e., valuing quantitativeresearch more than qualitative research in the tenure/promotion process).

Both higher education institutions and schools have placed great emphasis on thecollection of numbers, control of variables, and the analysis of data captured through stan-dardized tests. Take for example the higher education tenure/promotion process, wherethe review committees placed artificial values on the number of publications, the types ofresearch completed, and the topic of the actual research conducted by the faculty member.Or the required adherence to accreditation agencies where the focus is on collecting dataon everything imaginable (i.e., how does one know that students are learning, candidates

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

390 R. S. Feingold

can teach, can assess, can reflect) which is within acceptable bounds, but now the addi-tional requirement of providing data about the candidate’s fitness and skill levels seemsa bit extreme. Is there really a correlation between the fitness level of the future physicaleducator and their effectiveness in the gymnasium?

The Beginning of the Changes

As our profession established a public identity at Adelphi University in 1885 under theleadership of William G. Anderson, the focus of physical education was on medicine andrehabilitation. The message Anderson delivered at Adelphi was to establish a U.S. systemof exercise. Obvious to those examining our historical documents, the original physicaleducators,were really exercise scientists and medical doctors with a focus on the medicalaspects of activity.

Paradigm Shift in Medicine

Barbara Ainsworth (2005) first noted the paradigm shift in medicine in our professionaljournals. She paid special attention to the notion that prior to 1990, physical activity wasthought to be a concern only for the young and was defined as structured sport and fitness.Beginning in the 1990s, the research focus shifted and data collected on adults showedthat activity was valuable for them as well (including senior citizens). Large-scale medicalresearch provided significant data sets that showed moderate activity was paramount indisease prevention and health initiatives; lifestyle changes have substantial healthy impactson adults; and cardiac patients needed to be treated holistically (i.e., psycho-social andcultural). What followed was a visible shift away from fitness and training toward physicalactivity and lifestyle changes. In other words, the medical profession came to the conclusionthat if their goal was to prevent heart disease through increased physical activity as an adult,one must look not to fitness levels but more so to behavioral change that requires analysisby multi-disciplinary teams.

Prior to this shift, there was an interesting project introduced at the University ofIllinois at Chicago that investigated the impact of an undergraduate fitness course designedaround a conceptual approach compared to a traditional exercise-only approach. Beck,Feingold, and Tieman (1968) developed the materials for the course. Traditional fitnesscourses were simultaneously taught to other undergraduates. At the end of the semester,the students in the conceptual approach class had higher gains of their fitness measuresthan the classes that did daily calisthenics for the entire class period. The students in theconceptual approach class were not graded on their fitness scores, but noted that they choseto exercise at home in addition to their class activity time because they understood howimportant activity was to their overall health and well-being. The students in the traditionalclasses noted that they never felt better and were never in better shape in their life, but nowthat the class was over, they never wished to go to a gymnasium again! So those that under-stood the fitness concepts really valued physical activity and were more likely to continuethis lifestyle. Early projects such as this eventually led to more popular programs in the late1990s when conceptually based fitness programs, such as AAHPERD’s Physical Best weredeveloped and introduced to the school systems. Pangrazi (2010) made the case againstusing a fitness test as an accountability measure, and recognized that attitudes toward phys-ical activity would be better if these tests were not part of the data packages. It was foundby Feingold, et al. (1992) through a grant supported by Mars, Inc., that Physical Best, aprogram of AAHPERD on teaching fitness concepts (k-12) that attitudinal changes were

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Vision in an Age of Accountability 391

more important than fitness score changes, and that the importance of the program, besidesteaching fitness concepts, was on changing attitudes about physical activity.

What followed these shifts were visible changes in how people behaved and howpeople thought about their health. The medical profession emphasized a shift away fromexercise for the young/athlete toward more physical activity for the adult as a means ofmaking lifestyle changes. The medical community also began to focus on the more holisticanalysis and treatment of conditions—away from the physical nature of disease. Thepublic began to talk more about activity levels and less about fitness levels, more aboutmoderation and less about high workloads, and more about physically active lifestyles andless about painful physical exertion. In the media there were shifts from negative “no pain,no gain” feelings to a positive experience with moderate lifetime physical activity. Allof these shifts required a more holistic, collaborative, multi-disciplinary approach in thedevelopment of lifetime fitness and lifestyle changes rather than scores on a fitness test.Unfortunately, with the recent emphasis on childhood obesity, the shift is moving backtoward fitness testing. But the fitness test scores do not necessarily point to who mightbe more likely to be active, and regrettably foster the notion that those that are less fitmight truly be more inactive. What may be the most distressing factor in this inactivityscenario is that the reason for the inactivity by some children may not be the struggle tobecome fit but instead the negative experiences of fitness testing in the physical educationclass. Might comparisons with other students, embarrassment of not meeting the standardsor not being in the top quarter of the class, the potential loss of self-esteem resultingfrom the scores on the test have caused the inactivity of the child? We have not only thenegativity of fitness testing for children, but now we have a fitness testing standard forcollege students who are becoming teachers of physical education. In other words the newNCATE/NASPE standards included fitness and skill testing. The main concern here is noton “data collection” or even getting feedback on fitness and skills, but whether the focusof the data collection actually is measuring the goals of being a teacher.

Paradigm Shift in Our Disciplinary Thinking

Dunn (2001) challenged us to think more broadly and to not allow ourselves to think in nar-row sub-disciplines, and noted that there was pressure to maintain the status quo. He calledattention to the professional pressure to maintain the importance of the sub-disciplines andto encourage focus on the more narrow perspective. He noted that professional pressurecontinued to call for sub-disciplines to continue narrow data-based research as a means tomaintain quality of control. The scenario in higher education and the professional seemsworse today, as this narrow perspective of research is supported by tenure/promotioncommittees as the only acceptable standard:

While it is essential that we value our specialized fields of study, we mustremember that it is the impact of the “whole” that will give our field substanceand meaning in addressing the challenges of the next century. (p. 505)

Besides Dunn, previous calls for integration and collaboration from the past were numer-ous in our field (e.g., Feingold, 1994; Hellison, 1992; Lawson, 1993; Sage, 1993). Mostrecently, Corbin (2012) argued for a paradigm shift in the direction of research, as reportedin Cardinal and Lee (2013):

Many focused researchers are beginning to realize the need for collaboration(a team approach) to better deal with current issues and increase prospects for

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

392 R. S. Feingold

grant support. If we are to become the renaissance field of the 21st century,those in our field will have to make continued concerned efforts to do morecollaboration.

The impact of the lack of an adjusted paradigm shift on societal issues requires a broaderperspective, a multi-discipline perspective, and a focus on application and impact as Boyer(1990) reported:

Surely, scholarship means engaging in original research. But the work ofthe scholar also means stepping back from one’s investigation, looking forconnections, building bridges between theory and practice. (p. 16)

Although Boyer supports disciplined inquiry, he recommends that scholars should “thinkabout the usefulness of knowledge, reflect on the social consequences of their work and,in so doing, gain understanding of how their own study relates to the world beyondthe campus” (p. 69). Perhaps there is a need to remind the profession of Boyer’s workespecially how he expanded the concept of scholarship from the traditional data basedmanipulation research published in a national peer reviewed journal, to a more flexible,more applied and definitely more effort to connect to societal or school based issues andproblems.

Paradigm Shift: Our Profession Reconsidered

As previously noted, our profession may be headed in a direction that would concern ourpast leaders in the guise of improving accountability measures and increasing standardsas the best approach to establishing our professional identity. State tests have fosteredmeasurements of the product in the K–12 setting (the score on the test), while in highereducation settings the focus on the number of faculty publications, the types of publica-tions (quantitative or qualitative; narrow single sub-discipline or multi-disciplinary) havebeen arbitrarily applied to the tenure/promotion process. In each case the tendency is onthe product rather than the process. Would it not be wonderful if our schools could focuson instilling a love for a physically active lifestyle rather than focusing on fitness and skilltest scores? We need to be vigilant in our efforts to focus on the right goal.

As we look ahead at the value we continue to place on accountability measures andthe efforts we place on the “counting” of products, it might be a good time to look backat the goals that our profession endorsed years ago: should the goal be a fitness level scoreor embracing a physically active lifestyle; should it be the number of publications or theimpact of those publications on the target audience? If we carefully think about the past, wewould find that Boyer’s (1990) broader view of scholarship, Dunn’s (2001) more collabora-tive model of professional efforts, and Hanna’s more holistic view of the person (DePauw,2010) more appropriately defines our profession.

Conclusion

As we consider how to deal with the increased demand for data for accountability purposes(evidence of productivity and evidence of learning) we may want to carefully reflect uponhow we view the person that is impacted by our work. Have we lost sight of the person,lost sight of the goals of general education, lost sight of the goals of higher education,or lost sight of the goals of research and scholarship? Since the birth of NAKHE (first

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

Vision in an Age of Accountability 393

NAPEHE, then NAKPEHE) we have publically supported the multi-disciplinary collab-orative approach to our profession through the intentional selection of keynote speakers,distinguished award programs, and high quality publication opportunities. Hanna clearlysaw this vision and reacted to the constraints encountered in the “age of science” era thatshe worked in and used her position to guide the profession toward a more holistic andhumanistic approach to our work. Perhaps it is that time again to reflect upon our collec-tive goals and mission as we carefully navigate through this age of accountability. Havelost sight of the person as we continue to input evidences into data collection systems thatmight be undermining our goals? Our professional community needs to revisit Hanna’smessage and consider her vision, including her focus on the whole person, on a collabo-rative model of research, and on the importance of the impact of our scholarly work onsociety.

References

Ainsworth, B. (2005). Movement, mobility and public health. Quest, 57, 12–23Beck, R., Feingold, R., & Tieman, R. (1968) Outlines in fitness. Champaign, IL: Stipes.Boyce, B. (2008). The next generation: Our legacy, their future. Quest, 60, 186–189.Boyer, E. (1990) Scholarship reconsidered. San Francisco, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the

Advancement of Teaching, Josey-Bass.Cardinal, B., & Lee, H. (2013). Leading contributors to the Research Consortium’s annual pro-

gram, 1992– 2011: High-visibility institutions, researchers, and topics, Measurement in PhysicalEducation and Exercise Science, 17, 74–87

Corbin, C. (2012). C. H. McCloy Lecture: Fifty years of advancements in fitness and activity research.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 83, 1–11.

DePauw, K. (2010). A journey of many dimensions: Reflections on change and possibility. Quest,62, 335–347.

Dunn, J. (2001), Honoring the past—Embracing the future. Quest 53, 495–506.Feingold, R. (1994). Making connections: An agenda for the future. Quest 46, 357–367.Feingold, R., Rees, C. R., & Fiorentino, L. (1992). Physical Best Impact, (Grant supported by

AAHPERD and Mars, Inc).Hellison, D. (1992). If Sargent could see us now: Values and program survival in higher education,

Quest, 44, 398–411.Kretchmar, S. (2006). Life on Easy Street: The persistent need for embodied hopes and down to earth

games. Quest, 58, 345–354.Lawson, H. (1993). After the regulated life. Quest, 45, 546–556.Metzler, M. (2007). Looking for (and finding) modern day pioneers in kinesiology and physical

education in higher education. Quest, 59, 288–297.Pangrazi, R. (2010). Chasing unachievable outcomes. Quest, 62, 323–333.Ravitch, D. (2010, April). Celebration on Teaching Conference, New York, NY.Saavedra, A., & Opfer, V. (2012, October). Learning 21st century skills requires 21st century

teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 8–13.Sage, G. (1993). Sport and physical education and the New World Order: Dare we be agents of social

change? Quest, 45, 151–164.Wagner, T. (2008). Global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new survival

skills our children need and what we can do about it. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

ambr

idge

] at

12:

32 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014