Logics in play: what ‘rules of the game’ regulate Swedish PE teachers’ decision-making processes?

ABSTRACT

Research suggests that physical education (PE) needs to adapt to meet societies’ changing needs and increased diversity amongst pupils. However, despite growing pressure from often competing sectoral interests, educational reforms, and new curricula directed at PE to bring about such changes, research has not seen a more profound impact. Many policy initiatives often impact PE teachers, which means they are responsible for implementing desired changes. Therefore, it is somewhat surprising how research has paid limited attention to PE teachers’ decision-making processes regarding the envisaged change. To address this shortfall of understanding, this study’s aim is to explore PE teachers’ decision-making processes and how they relate to external pressures, interests, and reforms. To meet this aim, this article draws on an institutional logics perspective and uses data collected from semi-structured interviews with 16 PE teachers. Findings show how four institutional logics guide PE teachers’ decision-making processes: (a) a democracy logic, (b) an investment logic, (c) a professional logic, and (d) a bureaucracy logic. The results also show that, beyond the fact that logics legitimise certain decisions, they delegitimise other decisions, which requires PE teachers to navigate between logics in their decision-making processes. This navigating process requires PE teachers to handle multiple and incompatible ideas about what good PE is and how to conduct it. This knowledge, if utilised, can increase alignment between policy content and implementers’ interpretations, which may mitigate resistance to policy reforms and stimulate intended implementation.

KEYWORDS:

• Organisational change
• institutional analysis
• policy reform
• PE teacher interpretation
• institutional logics
• physical education

Introduction

Research suggests that physical education (PE) needs to adapt to meet society’s changing needs and increased diversity amongst pupils (Kirk, 2010). However, despite growing pressure from often competing sectoral interests (Houlihan, 2000), educational reforms, and new curricula directed at PE to bring about such changes, more profound impact not been seen (Alfrey et al., 2017; Annerstedt & Larsson, 2010; Ekberg, 2016; Kirk, 2010; Redelius et al., 2009; Wilkinson et al., 2021). Many policy initiatives often impact PE teachers, which means they are responsible for implementing desired changes (Houlihan, 2000). Therefore, it is somewhat surprising how research has paid limited attention to PE teachers’ decision-making processes regarding the envisaged change. To address this shortfall of understanding, this study’s aim is to explore PE teachers’ decision-making processes and how they relate to external pressures, interests, and reforms.

In this article, external pressures, interests, and reforms are understood as forces emanating from an organisation’s institutional environment contributing to the organisation’s ideas about appropriate behaviour. Institutional logics is a concept describing how the interinstitutional system (i.e. interpretive schemas pertaining to professions, the community, state, and market) influences individuals and organisations in which they are located. The introduction of the perspective is often credited to Friedland and Alford (1991), who strived to place individuals in a societal context and argued that society is about not just material structures but also culture and the symbolic. Thornton et al. (2012) described institutional logics as a metatheoretical framework that can answer questions on ‘how individual and organisational actors are influenced by their situation in multiple social locations in an interinstitutional system’ (p. 2). The perspective has rapidly grown in the various disciplines in the education field (Thornton & Ocasio, 2008). Scholars has applied the perspective to examine, for example, how educational practices change over time (Russell, 2011), how artefacts serve as carriers of institutional logics (Woulfin, 2016), teachers’ interpretations of school reform (Bridwell-Mitchell, 2013), and the relationship between teaching cultures and student outcomes (Samuelsson & Lindblad, 2015). However, the study of PE has yet to use the perspective or the use of institutional perspectives more broadly. One rare exception is Linnér et al. (2022) who applied Scott’s (2013) three pillars to examine PE teachers’ actions in relation to social justice pedagogies. Linnér et al. (2022) showed how not only regulative, normative, and culture-cognitive elements inform PE teachers’ actions but also an institutional perspective can be useful in exploring how organisations’ institutional environments can constrain or enable change inside the organisations.

Outside the study of PE, the institutional logics perspective has proved to be rewarding when exploring change because individuals not only can reproduce behaviour consistent with existing institutional logics but also have the power to turn away, innovate, and transform logics (Pache & Santos, 2010; Thornton et al., 2012). Despite this potential and its extensive application in the study of sport outside the school context, the PE field has largely overlooked the perspective. Therefore, one contribution of this paper is to offer a new conceptual lens from which to understand processes of change in PE.

As proposed by Greenwood et al. (2011), a key point of departure for institutional thinking is that the external environment always exposes organisations to pressure from the external environment and that they try to adapt according to these pressures to secure legitimacy. Therefore, to achieve this study’s purpose, I used a specific policy implementation process to examine the frames of reference that condition PE teachers’ decision-making processes in policy implementation. The specific policy is an example of a process in which external actors, in this case the Swedish government (2014/5377/S), launch a policy that practitioners expect to realise. Bridwell-Mitchell and Sherer (2017) argued institutional logics are most saliently revealed in processes of change and in issues that are most salient to organisational actors. Therefore, I make use of one specific policy implementation process, not to explore policy outcome but to prompt reflections that can stimulate PE teachers to motivate thoughts, ideas, and behaviours.

The policy implementation process utilised in this paper concerns a political decision reform that allocated an additional 100 h to the subject (now a total of 600 h) in the 9-year Swedish compulsory school (henceforth, referred to as the added hours). In the governmental argumentation, which formed the decision’s basis, scientific studies point to a strong connection between physical activity and increased learning ability (2014/5377/S). The government argued that the studies’ results show positive links between physical activity, motor training, and school performance. Against this background, the government allocated more teaching hours to PE (2014/5377/S), effective in July 2019. Following recommendations from the Swedish National Agency for Education [SNAE], the 100 additional hours were to be distributed by allocating 20 h in year 6 and 80 h in years 7–9 (Skolverket, 2018). SNAE was responsible for analysing the added hours’ distribution effects, but the agency did not include any regulations or changes in curricular documents (Skolverket, 2018). As the findings will reveal, each individual school had to decide on how to distribute and use these extra hours practically, but this responsibility was often passed to individual PE teachers, making their decision-making processes paramount for policy outcome.

Previous research

Research has highlighted the fact that PE has problems adapting to societal developments (Kirk, 2010). A rapidly changing society places new expectations and demands on PE, and scholars have tried to explore the causes behind this inertia. Researchers highlight, for example, the power of tradition permeating PE, with competitive sports’ strong influence (Redelius et al., 2009); an outdated teaching format (Kirk, 2010); unequal assessment and grading system (Annerstedt & Larsson, 2010); and a discrepancy between policy and practice (Ekberg, 2016). Moreover, politicians have acknowledged the need for change, and one way governments drive such change is the implementation of various educational and curricular policy reforms (Penney, 2017).

Such initiatives, in turn, have bolstered researchers’ interest in aspects that enable or prevent teachers from interpreting, (re)contextualising, and enacting processes of change. For example, Wilkinson et al. (2021) concluded that multiple contextual factors, such as culture, ethos, PE facilities, and the teacher’s individual educational philosophy, influence enactment and decision-making. Similarly, MacLean (2018) explored the social, cultural, and material structures that support teachers’ enactment of policy, using dance in Scottish PE as an example. She identified strong associations with social and cultural structures that enable teachers to include dance in the curricula. In addition, researchers have explored how previous experiences and beliefs about PE serve to condition teachers’ pedagogical practices (González-Calvo et al., 2020). González-Calvo et al. (2020) suggested that future Spanish-speaking PE teachers construct ideas and beliefs about PE, guided by a strong sporting identity, based on physical activity, sport, the body, and health. Therefore, when alternative approaches to PE are proposed, they cannot be too far from teachers’ historically rooted and previously unchallenged philosophies regarding PE and how they should teach it (Alfrey et al., 2017). Although policy constructs a specific context, some scholars (Alfrey et al., 2017) have argued, ‘It is the ideologies and histories that permeate teachers’ philosophies and their school context that will ultimately dictate the policy process’ (p. 119). On the other hand, researchers have pinpointed collaboration in various forms (e.g. teacher conversation, team teaching, and collaboration with policymakers) as a key facilitator for teachers to adopt curriculum changes (MacLean, 2018; Simmons & MacLean, 2018). Nevertheless, even in cases of coherence between policymakers and PE teachers, Linnér et al. (2022) showed that it is still challenging for PE teachers to enact specific thoughts due to broader societal structures, legitimising uneven educational systems.

Although previous research has explored how contextual factors enable or constrain PE teachers’ possibilities to conduct change, there is little knowledge about how PE teachers’ actions express broader societal discourses. In this paper, I take cues from Ball et al. (2011), who argued that educational researchers in their analyses of how teachers implement policy ‘will need to consider a set of objective conditions in relation to a set of subjective ‘interpretational’ dynamics’ (p. 21). Following Ball’s reasoning, I seek to bridge the gap between understandings based on notions of different aspects of context and those based on PE teachers’ decision-making processes. Such knowledge provides a fuller picture of factors affecting PE teachers’ actions. In addition, such knowledge may add a more generic contribution on which societal discourses permeate PE teachers’ thoughts about the subject, which can potentially guide future attempts to change PE.

Conceptual framework: the institutional logics perspective

Ball (2021) noted that teachers often struggled to make sense of endless mismatched policies that constantly change. This struggle requires teachers to interpret, (re)contextualise, and enact the policy array heading their way. To understand this process better, I rely on the theoretical lens of institutional logics, arguing that it is imperative to understand how external pressures, interests, and reforms shapes individuals’ decision-making processes (Friedland & Alford, 1991; Thornton & Ocasio, 1999, 2008). During the last 30 years, the literature developing and employing an institutional logics perspective has moved quickly. As a result, research has produced many well-quoted reviews and theory papers (e.g. Greenwood et al., 2011; Pache & Santos, 2010; Thornton & Ocasio, 2008), as well as a comprehensive book on the topic (Thornton et al., 2012). My intention is not to repeat what researchers have already done, instead I provide a short overview.

When Friedland and Alford (1991) introduced the perspective, they aimed to incorporate institutions, individuals, and organisations in social systems. In this tradition, institutions are commonly understood as shared systems of meaning connected with associated prescribed behaviour patterns (e.g. Scott, 2013), and institutional logics are the organisational principles for institutions – principles that guide individuals in interpreting reality and regulating actions (Greenwood et al., 2011; Pache & Santos, 2010; Thornton & Ocasio, 2008). Thornton and Ocasio (1999) provided the most cited definition of institutional logics: ‘The socially constructed, historical pattern of material practices, assumptions, values, beliefs, and rules by which individuals produce and reproduce their material subsistence, organise time and space, and provide meaning to their social reality’ (p. 804).

Building from this definition, institutional logics are a collection of taken for granted practices, cognitive assumptions, attitudes, beliefs, and routine ways of doing things structured in and to a particular environment. Logics provide formal and informal rules for symbolic (i.e. ideation and meaning) and material (i.e. structure and practices) natures and create templates that provide meaning and constitute organising principles for the specific institution in which individuals are located (Thornton et al., 2012). As an example, Russell (2011), who focused on the symbolic dimension, explored how popular public discourses on what constitutes kindergarten education have changed over time. She found that a shift in the conceptualisation of the kindergarten, promoted by the media, state, and profession had consequences for what is appropriate instruction within that practice and the expectations on kindergarten education. Another example can be taken from Woulfin (2016) who, when focusing on the material dimension, investigated artefacts as carriers of particular logics. She identified three categories: (1) policy documents, (2) instructional material, and (3) research-based resources imbued with ideas and rules of two logics of reading instructions and, thereby, functioned as a source for understanding a reading reform.

Individuals are exposed to and learn multiple institutional logics through social interactions and socialisation (Thornton et al., 2012). However, Friedland and Alford (1991) argued that logics are more than just cognitive frames of reference; rather, they are action-oriented and form the basis for actors’ identities. Paying heed to Ball’s (2021) argument that educational researchers ‘bring too much rationality and intentionality to our objects of study’ (p. 388), employing an institutional logics perspective allows me to investigate potentially less rational and intentional aspects of PE teachers as objects of study. The institutional logics perspective builds on Berger and Luckmann’s (1966) argument that society exists as both a subjective and objective reality. Because reality is socially constructed, it requires analyses that reconcile the process in which this takes place. The institutional logics perspective enables me to explicate underlying expectations in observed interactions and to extract criterions of legitimacy (i.e. appropriate actions). Thus, institutional logics can contextualise individuals’ decision-making processes, behaviours, and courses of events that are often taken for granted as something we just do (Greenwood et al., 2011).

Research design

I guided the study’s overall design with the purpose of eliciting how external pressures, interests, and reforms are expressed and highlight how they regulate PE teachers’ decision-making processes. This twofold ambition required qualitative, individual-level data obtained from various schools. Regarding data collection, I chose to employ theoretically driven, qualitative, semistructured interviews with secondary school PE teachers randomly selected from the entire population of Swedish secondary schools (n = 1712) to meet these requirements.

Sampling, recruitment, and data

I used a random sampling strategy, in which all schools had an equal chance of selection, to avoid seeking explanations in independent variables that a stratified sample might have stimulated. Furthermore, as I did not know the variation range at the study’s outset, I could not purposely sample information-rich informants. I employed random sampling even though it is not a common strategy in qualitative research (Cohen et al., 2013). Because institutional logics are expressed in streams of specific local and fleeting communicative events (Thornton et al., 2012), I based the random sampling on the idea that local variations shaped individuals (i.e. different schools), which arguably affect situated communicative events and manifested logics. As Swedish secondary schools implemented the majority of the added hours (described in the introduction), this became the first inclusion/exclusion criterion when I recruited participants. Therefore, from the entire population of Swedish compulsory schools (n = 4879) retrieved from the SNAE website (Skolverket, 2022), I excluded all schools not offering secondary school teaching and drew my sample from the remaining compulsory schools (n = 1712), using a random number generator. To ensure access to enough respondents, I selected 40 schools. Of those schools, 10 chose to participate, representing independent and municipally managed schools, as well as urban and rural demographics, and containing student populations ranging from 18 to 717. Furthermore, to ensure reflections on the introduction of the added hours, I invited all PE teachers who have passed a Swedish teacher exam responsible for years 7–9 and had working experience from before and after the policy reform to participate (after receiving consent from the school principal). The recruitment process resulted in 16 PE teachers (9 male and 7 female) across all 10 schools. The 30 schools that chose not to participate provided reasons, such as having no qualified PE teachers; provided no reply from principal or teachers; had no activity prior to before 2019; or declined participation due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In constructing the interview guide, I drew on the theoretical concepts presented above and formulated questions focussing on the added hours to prompt reflections on (a) organisational and individual decision making, (b) rationales for decision making, and (c) norms and values important to PE teachers. I asked the respondents questions that encouraged reflection: ‘Could you tell me about the changes you have made at your school in response to the additional 100 h?’ ‘Why do you think things have changed the way they have?’ and ‘What types of norms and values do you think are important to convey to your pupils?’ I provided all respondents written and oral information regarding the study’s purpose, conditions for participation, and code of ethics. The interviews lasted 23–56 min. I recorded and then transcribed them verbatim. I asked all questions in the interview guide in the same order, but they allowed for some flexibility and follow-up questions depending on the variety of changes that had taken place at the schools. All PE teachers’ names in this paper are pseudonyms.

Data analysis

I applied a bottom-up interpretivist analysis with the use of a pattern-inducing strategy (Reay & Jones, 2016), in which the first step implied a review of all interview transcripts. I performed the initial coding of data using software R and the addition of RQDA (R package for Qualitative Data Analysis; Chandra & Shang, 2019) and the ambition to identify units of texts that would show behaviour or beliefs, coding the data incident by incident (Charmaz, 2014). As the initial coding process evolved, I refined it so that I could consistently apply code names and definitions across interviews by constantly comparing the data (Charmaz, 2014). This process resulted in 31 initial thematic codes referring to the various prescribed positions PE teachers raised when reflecting on the reform. For example, I coded reflections, such as ‘Above all, what you should spend time on is to be able get through to those pupils with difficulties, give them more time’, as inclusive practice. Similarly, I coded reflections, such as ‘The purpose was to increase movement and that they thereby get better study results; that is how I have perceived it, that today’s pupils need more exercise and movement’, as investment values. Moreover, I coded reflections, such as ‘We four PE teachers talk a lot [with each other], and we all agree that this [the policy reform] is very good’, as collegial relations.

In the second analysis step, I reviewed the text content that generated each code to identify the types of issues on which PE teachers focused when reflecting on changes that occurred because of the added hours. This analysis involved an iterative process of reviewing texts, comparing and contrasting codes with one another, and identifying themes. Through inductive reasoning, I clustered initial themes to reveal existing underlying meanings and, thus identified patterns of behaviours and beliefs associated with particular logics (Reay & Jones, 2016) and simultaneously compared them with those in the extant literature (Bridwell-Mitchell, 2013; Bridwell-Mitchell & Sherer, 2017; Thornton et al., 2012). This second-stage analysis resulted in four main themes, which also constitute the external pressures, interests, and reforms (i.e. institutional logics) related to PE teachers’ decision-making processes. For example, I categorised the initial codes of adapted lessons and equal treatment, fostering ideal, inclusive practice, intrinsic value, in-depth learning, participation, pupils’ influence, and pupils’ needs as a democracy logic.

Findings

A bottom-up interpretivist analysis indicated that PE teachers’ decision-making processes related to four institutional logics, visualised by the subheadings. In this section, I show how these institutional logics relate to PE teachers’ decision-making processes, as well as the added hours.

The Democracy Logic

The democracy logic is expressed through a collection of ideas based on a concern for the collective and grounded in a belief of trust and reciprocity. It influences PE teachers’ thoughts about their professional mission and regulates decision-making in the implementation of the added hours by providing ideas on how to structure and conduct teaching. As an example, when I asked respondents what they thought was important to think about when conducting change in relation to the added hours, they highlighted that teaching always must be based on equality and equivalence. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to encourage all pupils to participate and to adapt teaching in such a way that all pupils will have equal opportunities to participate. In addition, respondents expressed that the added hours made it possible for them to spend more time with their classes, which provided PE teachers with better opportunities to influence pupils’ behaviour. For example, Diana described the possibilities that have emerged from the added hours at her school:

[It is important] to have time to talk to the pupils. The important thing is that they continue. Talk about the importance of them moving … . Talk about finding something they think is fun. What they can do in their spare time, it’s like an important tool we have. So that activity not only happening during school hours but that they continue when they get older.

This logic also provided respondents with ideas that PE fostered pupils for future adulthood in a democratic society, which the respondents expressed when explicitly reflecting on important values to convey. Their statements can relate to concepts such as building self-confidence, the equality of all people, equality between women and men, and solidarity. In that sense, legitimacy derives from thoughts that PE will increase pupils’ welfare and development. The essence of these thoughts is that participation in PE results in these values, which are largely based on democratic and fostering principles and processes. By participating in the (physical) activities, pupils learn to cherish the cooperative. However, to achieve this goal, pupils must do more than participate. During class, pupils must do their best to acquire these values. Hannah expressed this idea when she explained what she tries to convey to her pupils:

I would so much like to mediate that they are good as they are. The important thing is that you dare to do things based on your level … . No one should ever be mean if someone can or cannot [do something] or calling names or bullying for looks … . That is probably the most important thing. Yes, to be a good teammate! It also means that you do your best. It is perfectly okay not to be able to. I really think you should do your best. I want that.

The provided (physical) activities will equip pupils with knowledge of a democratic society’s unwritten rules. As legitimacy derives from ideas that PE will increase pupils’ welfare and development, it is important that pupils experience a positive, secure, and supportive learning environment. Therefore, if any pupil puts this learning environment at risk, PE teachers intervene. Rory illustrated this idea when he talked about important goals for learning:

[Pupils need to learn] fair play. Everyone is alike, girls and boys. If you get any comments from some tough boys against a girl, and I hear it, I immediately go in and break up and question what kind of comments it is. These are basic values. You should be kind to each other.

The Investment Logic

The investment logic is expressed through a collection of ideas in which PE can be seen as a product in and for the market with exchange value in relation to (a) a school’s goal fulfilment, reputation, and competitiveness and (b) its pupils’ achievements aimed at solving individual and societal problems. It influences PE teachers’ thoughts about proper output and regulates decision-making in the implementation of the added hours by providing ideas on productivity and efficiency. Common views amongst the interviewees were that pupils enjoy PE, that the subject has high goal fulfilment in relation to other subjects, and that the added hours can increase PE’s status. When reflecting on the purpose of the added hours, the respondents often highlighted both the individual and societal benefits that are argued to come from participating in PE. Overall, the respondents were reacting to the contemporary public debate concerning the increased overweight and sedentary behaviours among citizens. The respondents tackled the subject by reinforcing the well-known benefits of physical activity, and they made retrospective comparisons of children’s appearances, weights, and performances. Rose, for example, described how she wants to use the added hours:

More movement … it crawls down with age, [and] they become so lazy; they need a thorough workout of the body. So they need to move. A lot of pupils cannot cope with anything, and then you notice that they cannot sit [on] a bench, either. I think in terms of results, it would affect them a lot.

Some respondents proposed that the efficiency and quality of the added hours should be evaluated by measuring pupils’ achievements. Peter suggested, ‘It would have been fun to do some tests to see how much better the pupils have become because many have actually become much more fit actually’. This logic also provided respondents with the idea that sport as a product has outcomes that provide synergistic effects. That is, thoughts about the healthy individual are expected to encourage others to work better and more efficiently. The respondents expressed that they were greatly interested in sports and felt that by setting a good example, they could motivate pupils to participate in sports.

I also show pupils that I’m out: It’s a small village, [and] I’m out jogging, running, skiing a lot, out hunting, and talking to the students. They hear how active I am, so thereby, I hope they understand how enriching it can be. So I use myself maybe a little, and then we also talk a lot about exercise, diet, and health. (Rory)

Because legitimacy is constructed from the idea that PE is a contractor of sports, it does not just enable PE teachers to turn pupils into consumers of the product of sports. It also allows them to produce future athletes. With the pretext that more time in PE can increase the probability that each pupil will find their sport, PE teachers introduce (non)athletes to nonprofit sport organisations through various types of collaborations in exchange for resources (e.g. free practice, access to a gym, materials), with sports being both a production and a reproduction practice. Isaac provided an example of a variant of such a collaboration:

The school has a collaboration with a gym and a martial arts club that is quite close to the school. … We have been able to go there and, for example, taught training theory. We were able to go there for free. … It has been quite good because there are many [pupils] who have simply become interested in it [the sport].

The Professional Logic

The professional logic is expressed through a collection of ideas in which teachers’ widespread autonomy enables them to use their important abilities and skills for efficiency and productivity. Professional logic influences PE teachers’ thoughts about their professional significance and responsibility and regulates decision-making in the implementation of the added hours by providing ideas that activity outcomes are a result of the teachers’ professional autonomy, knowledge, and skills. For example, participation in organisational decision-making is considered important. Many respondents expressed that they were given full responsibility, offering them control over what to do with the added hours. ‘We got to do exactly what we wanted with the time. It was not like we got any pressure from above’ (Kristofer). In addition, Liam mentioned, ‘You can say that it is me [who] manages the subject’.

Teachers’ work is governed by collegiality, which the respondents highlighted as important. Among others, Isaac said, ‘We have meetings every week so we can discuss and plan lessons together [and] make sure we teach and assess pretty much in the same way. I think that is important’. Based on profession-specific knowledge, professional ethics, and the prevailing culture, the PE teachers were keen to highlight that PE professionals are best equipped to decide on issues related to the subject. For example, Michelle argued, ‘It is up to the profession, that is, us PE teachers, to discuss how to set up this extra time, where to place it, and what the content should be and so on’. The respondents determined the appropriateness of various PE practices at their own schools as did the PE teachers at other schools. Diana had heard about PE teachers at other schools who had chosen to use the time differently:

There are many who use it for theory, and that was not the point at all—that you should have more focus on the theoretical part. … I am a little bit old-fashioned and conservative in my way of thinking. I probably still think that our subject is practical.

Legitimacy can be used to influence collective actions because it is constructed from thoughts that teachers as professionals are accountable for making the right judgements based on their expert knowledge. This means that PE teachers can use the added hours as an argument for placing normative pressure on each other to promote a specific practice. In other words, these prescribed behaviour patterns also tell PE teachers what they cannot do. As in all organisations, illegitimate behaviour is followed by a sanction, an undesirable situation that often leads to adaptation. Hannah’s reflection shows how prescribed behaviour patterns and sanctions can be expressed:

I was probably a little bit influenced by [others] that it should be movement. Because I also notice that when you sit down and discuss with others [PE teachers] on Facebook or something like that, if you say that you spend a lot of time on theory, then you will be more or less beheaded. Then it’s like just “you cannot think like that!”

The Bureaucracy Logic

The bureaucracy logic is expressed through a collection of ideas involving bureaucratic structures from which PE teachers’ work is controlled. It influences PE teachers’ thoughts about rules, routines, and standardisation and regulates decision-making in the implementation of the added hours by providing ideas about the division of power, regulations, and tasks at the school. When the respondents reflected on the added hours, they touched on matters such as bureaucratic regulations as a foundation for subject content and assessment. The respondents emphasised the hierarchical organisational structure guiding their profession. For example, when Nathalie reflected on what she needed to consider when implementing the added hours, she declared, ‘I think [that I need to relate to] SNAE. So there is a syllabus, and what comes from SNAE, and my school management … that is where my work is controlled’. This quote illustrates the bureaucratic logic’s emphasis on top-down control in the public sector.

PE teachers requested this top-down management and argued that the added hours were instituted without a clear purpose or a specific required change. In addition, the introduction of the added hours lacked managerial direction and collaboration with policymakers regarding implementation. PE teachers seek to achieve goals within bureaucratic structures, but when the goals are unclear, uncertainties arise. As a result, the lack of direction for implementation of the added hours raised questions concerning desirable content and how teachers were practically going to solve emerging challenges while lacking resources (e.g. facilities and sufficient equipment). Furthermore, scheduling issues, school management, and school structures affect teachers’ alternatives for how the extra hours can be distributed when gym capacity is limited in many cases and when it is difficult to add another lesson to an already crowded school day.

The fact that this policy was implemented without clarifying guidelines contributed to the lack of standardisation: ‘Since there is no central regulatory framework or there is no central call for it to look a certain way, it will, for natural reasons, look different’ (Isaac). On one hand, the respondents expressed that if some form of enforced compliance were to occur – for example, official rules regulating how PE teachers should use the added hours – PE teachers would comply. Isaac continued by stating,

If there was a central request that stated that you should spend more time on the theoretical sections of the subject, for example talk about doping or stuff like that, then of course, all schools would add an extra theory lesson.

On the other hand, even if the curriculum is perceived to be theoretically driven, it provides plenty of room for interpretation, which meant that the respondents did not need to reduce physical activity in favour of the theoretical aspects of PE. Sophie stated,

They wanted PE to be a subject of knowledge, and there is a lot in the curriculum that is also theoretical knowledge. But for me, the more I work, the more important I think the movement part is, that I really have to keep them moving.

Because legitimacy is constructed from ideas about curricula compliance, such quotes indicate a decoupling process. This decoupling process was also visualised in cases where the PE teachers chose to introduce a pure fitness lesson, which was not included in grading. Peter, for example, stated,

We have invested in a 40-min cardio session where the pupils will raise their heart rate quite well. … You could get a gold star if you are a person who really does your best. Then it does not matter how good you are. I want them to work as hard as possible. But to answer your question, if you assess them, then it is no.

In other words, even when the respondents referred to the curriculum as the main guiding document for their work and were confident that they achieved the stipulated goals, they highlighted physical activity as more important, and they indicated the curriculum contains such a large space for interpretation that they can implement their own ideas.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to explore PE teachers’ decision-making processes and how they relate to external pressures, interests, and reforms. In pursuit of this aim, I conceptualised these external pressures, interests, and reforms into four overarching logics that guide PE teachers in interpreting reality and making strategic decisions. Although many aspects of my findings present interesting points for discussion, I want to highlight more specifically the following: (a) what significant impacts multiple institutional logics might have on PE teachers’ decision-making processes, (b) why the existence of multiple institutional logics can be problematic in policy implementation processes, and (c) how implementation strategies can result in unintended consequences. Following the study’s theoretical underpinning, I argue that the legitimacy embedded in all four logics indicates what PE teachers might imagine doing when implementing the added hours and when acting on new policies in the future. Drawing on such a notion, the findings from this study can help policymakers, school leaders, and PE teachers make informed decisions about how PE can be developed to meet their societies’ changing needs.

First, by highlighting the varying institutional logics at play, the findings illustrate what are considered legitimate policy outcomes. Per this study, by using the added hours to provide physical activity, PE teachers can obtain legitimacy in: (a) the democracy logic because participating in PE per se brings about values that will increase pupils’ welfare and development, (b) the investment logic because sport more broadly is commonly seen as a panacea for various societal problems and therefore as able to strengthen pupils’ health, (c) the professional logic because PE teachers are responsible for activating pupils (especially those not participating in sports in their spare time), and (d) the bureaucracy logic because the curriculum can be interpreted as an arena for promoting physical activity. As a result, physical activity is seen as legitimate across all four logics, which also makes it possible to reproduce the habitual behaviour patterns for activating pupils. Moreover, the government wanted more physical activity. The whole idea behind the added hours was that more physical activity could increase pupils’ learning abilities (Regeringsbeslut U2014/5377/S, 2014).

These results can answer questions not only on why schools have trouble adapting the subject to societies’ changing needs (Kirk, 2010) but also on why physical activity becomes so prominent even though many PE teachers argue that the subject is something other than competitive sports (Larsson & Karlefors, 2015). The ideas behind these various logics can be difficult to resist because an organisation must live up to certain external expectations and must act in accordance with them to obtain societal legitimacy (Scott, 2013). Because physical activity is legitimate in all four logics, its prominent place is therefore not so surprising. The alternative – unlegitimate behaviour – will, according to Scott (2013), be followed by sanctions, an undesirable situation that often leads to adaptation. Therefore, if radical reform is the answer (Kirk, 2010), much work needs to be done to replace physical activity with other legitimacy-based behaviours. Until then, physical activity will most likely continue to form future policy outcomes.

Second, highlighting the variations in institutional logic can provide answers to why policy implementation processes can be problematic and why policy outcomes sometimes do not turn out as policymakers intended. Because institutional logics prescribe rules for individual behaviour, they influence what are considered not only prominent goals to achieve but also appropriate means for achieving those goals (Thornton & Ocasio, 2008). As the findings show, there are four institutional logics shaping and constraining PE teachers’ actions. This implicates that each logic (separately) provides PE teachers with ‘means-ends designations, as well as organising principles’ (Pache & Santos, 2010, p. 457). As a result, there are multiple, and sometimes incompatible, ideas about what main goal PE teachers should try to achieve, which has the potential to create conflicts between the different logics. The possibility of conflict was not investigated in this study, but Samuelsson and Lindblad (2015) touched on the matter and highlighted the risk for goal displacement. In their study, the authors compared teaching cultures and argued that Sweden embraces a market logic, whereas Finland embraces a professional logic. Even though market principles have been rhetorically emphasised as being solutions to educational excellence and large-scale international assessments are regarded as ways to measure such excellence, Finland performs better in international comparisons of school results.

According to Pache and Santos (2013), multiple institutional logics impose conflicting demands on individuals. This affects PE teachers’ decision-making processes by providing them with multiple ideas and rhetorical principles that then permeate their actions. This means that PE teachers and schools face conflicting pressures from their environments (Linnér et al., 2022; Wilkinson et al., 2021) and that organisational members need to find ways to deal with these pressures (Pache & Santos, 2013). One way PE teachers handle these conflicting pressures is by making symbolic changes. This is done by referring to bureaucratic regulations as the basis for the subject’s content and assessment. However, when motivation changes are made, professional expertise is featured as superior. Through the decoupling of practices from logics, legitimacy can still be achieved. This phenomenon is not at all uncommon, though. On the contrary, Boxenbaum and Jonsson (2008) showed that practices are often decoupled from formal structures, and this is often a critical strategy for organisational success. This knowledge, if utilised, can increase alignment between a policy’s content and the implementers’ interpretations, which, in turn, may mitigate resistance to policy reforms and stimulate intended implementation.

Third, the basic tenet of the concept of institutional logics is that the norms, values, and belief systems constitute identities, specify the appropriateness of actions, and provide meaning systems that guide individuals’ interpretations (Thornton & Ocasio, 1999). However, the symbolic nature of institutional logics also entails material consequences (Scott, 2013; Thornton et al., 2012). This is evident in the findings of this study concerning how the lack of resources the respondents often mentioned – for example, limited gym capacity – affects both the teaching and the content being implemented. The respondents raised questions concerning how they were practically going to solve emerging challenges while lacking resources. This lack of resources also, in terms of both facilities and sufficient equipment, limits what types of teaching PE teachers have opportunities to conduct.

A strategy that the respondents apply, not only to mitigate the lack of facilities but also to enact ideas on productivity and efficiency, is to initiate collaboration with local sport clubs. As an unintended consequence, this provides external actors with the authority to control both the content and teaching. Putting these results in the light of previous Swedish studies shows it is possible that implementation strategies as such can contribute to additional unintended consequences. Redelius et al. (2009) argued that PE is part of two separate fields: one attached to the educational system and the other attached to competitive sports. However, PE teachers ‘are in the field of the sports movement rather than in the field of schools’ (Redelius et al., 2009, p. 258). What will happen to both PE as a subject and the PE teacher profession if the field of the sports movement is given additional room to grow? Perhaps both researchers and practitioners need to discuss what effects an expanded collaboration may have on knowledge and learning and what it can do with the legitimacy of the PE teacher profession. Could it lead to questions about who is best suited to conduct teaching?

Many unanswered questions remain concerning the variations of institutional logic and the navigating processes they entail. For a better understanding of policy outcomes, it is important for future research to explore how PE teachers navigate and respond to different logics perhaps to answer questions on how teachers experience conflicting institutional demands, organisational changes, and policy enactment.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this paper highlights how external pressures, interests, and reforms matter for PE teachers’ decision-making processes. It does so by identifying the context-specific institutional logics guiding PE teachers’ decision-making processes. Thereby, this paper makes two important contributions: (a) Because logics legitimise certain decisions, they also delegitimise other decisions, which, in turn, require PE teachers to navigate between logics in their decision-making processes. This navigating process requires PE teachers to handle multiple and incompatible ideas about what good PE is and how to conduct it. This knowledge, if utilised, can act as a basis for more adapted policies, which can minimise resistance to policy reforms and stimulate the intended implementation. (b) Adding an institutional perspective to the emerging scholarly debate offers a new conceptual lens that can help describe how broader societal discourses are expressed in actions, which is useful when one is discussing teacher behaviour, policy enactment, external pressures, and future directions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).