ABSTRACT
If teaching physical education is a moral activity, it follows that there is a moral component to the preparation of teachers of physical education and thus a moral component to the preparation of teacher educators. In this article, I examine the major policies, agendas, and practices that influence doctoral preparation in physical education teacher education. I argue from both a utilitarian and realist perspective that we can best serve children and youth in schools by being knowledgeable of the contexts and effects of these policies, agendas, and practices in educating future professors of physical education teacher education.
Acknowledgments
My thanks to Drs. Panayiotis Doutis and Hans van der Mars for their critique of this article; however, the positions expressed in this article are entirely my own. I also wish to thank Ann Boyce, who kindly allowed me access to her data set on characteristics of doctoral education, and the feedback of two anonymous reviewers.
Notes
1. There are other influences to be sure, and these are perhaps even more impactful on teaching, such as the occupational socialization of teachers (Richards, Templin, & Graber, Citation2014); the professional growth throughout a teacher’s career (Patton, Parker, & Pratt, Citation2013); and the beliefs, work ethic, and professionalism of a teacher (Armour, Citation2010; McCaughtry, Citation2004).
2. Boyce and colleagues (Citation2015) reported their data from three data collection periods: 2005–2006, 2008–2009, and 2011–2012. Their analyses reflect the only trend data on this topic.
3. I first presented this analysis at the 2015 SHAPE America conference in the symposium Last PETE Program Standing.
4. The doctorate either as the Ph.D. or the Ed.D. involves preparation beyond that of teacher education such as mentoring, research, collegiality, and service. My focus has been on the education of teacher educators.