The affective domain of learning has been notoriously difficult to address in academic literature and to observe in Physical Education lessons. Unlike the cognitive domain, our understanding of the affective domain is a contested term. Defining it has depended upon one’s academic discipline, field of work, or research context. Therefore, attempting to find a universally agreed definition of the affective domain could be futile and endless. To that end, there can be comfort in a definitional heterogeneity among the contextual and disciplinary factors that explain it.
Despite the difficulty, there have been attempts to bridge gaps in our understanding of the affective domain; recent examples include Hanif Abdul Rahman’s (2022) chapter in CPD for Teaching and Learning in Physical Education, Global Lessons from Singapore through the development of social and emotional competencies. Eishin Teraoka and David Kirk (2020) have also contributed recently through a meta-analysis of academic literature and framing their data using Deci and Ryan’s (2000) Self-Determination Theory. However, despite these worthy contributions, I propose that there remain opportunities to explore the complexities of the affective domain further, both conceptually and in practice.
I propose that we consider embodied affectivity to understand the affective domain in action. This means we do not separate mind and body, social and emotional, but consider the whole person as one entity that interacts with and through its environment. Educational philosopher John Dewey was a prominent scholar in this area. Embodied affectivity emphasises the interplay between our physical bodies, through feedback and resonances, and emotional experiences with the environment. The environment could include the physical world (e.g. a sports hall or field, a ball or cone) or it could be other individuals such as peers and teachers. An individual’s body, through physical activity, may express emotional cues such as gestures (e.g. waving arms) and postures (e.g. slouching body). These biopsychosocial cues give the body feedback that may leave impressions on the individual which then begins the cycle. These feedback cycles and loops happen instantaneously, all the time, including in PE lessons. Factor in the number of students in your lessons and consider the implications for inter-affectivity. These expressions from students are observable; as practitioners, we can identify gaps in learning (e.g. hesitation, disagreement, questioning) and how they are bridged through encounters with others, with the environment, or through their own experiences and self-reflection.
At Dulwich College (Singapore) we deliver four value-based units over the academic year, each 8-9 weeks. Our four values at the College – Determined, Courageous, Skilful and Gracious –are the focal point of each unit. For example, we may discuss being Gracious in a modified game of Capture the Flag. The focus is not on physical or cognitive development but how and when students can act graciously. We begin every lesson discussing what the value (i.e. to be gracious) is conceptually, reflect on experiences from previous lessons, and visualise what it may look like in the current lesson. Student’s voice provides common understanding rather than abstract, teacher-driven understanding.
During the activity, I may observe a conflict between two students over whether someone was tagged or not, a gap in affective learning. There could be a myriad of reasons for this: interpretation of the rules, ethical dilemmas, perception of what fairness is. How a student attempts to bridge this gap is what I am looking for next. What they do in action, rather than what they say during a reflection highlights the process of affective learning rather than only the outcome. I am considering whether they refer to the environment (e.g. where the person was tagged), do they run to me as the teacher to resolve the debate. For low-level disagreements, I would encourage them to compromise or reconcile independently, this may require me to recommend tools (e.g. Kelso’s Choices) in the first part but eventually, the students will create their solutions to deal with future conflict. At the next break in play, this example, a key affective learning moment in the lesson, can be used to illustrate to the whole group how they could deal with conflict in a gracious way. Sharing what can be done in action with actual examples can make learning more meaningful. Students always come up with viable suggestions that enriches the discussion and gradually removes me as the focal point for learning.
The observation of gaps in affective learning, the responses of students through gestures, postures, and verbal interaction with their environment provide me, as the teacher, with an opportunity to monitor the affective domain in action. A values-based curriculum design provides a framework for students in their learning intentions, and subsequently focuses my attention on the process of affective learning in addition to the outcome.
Contributed by:
Will Patz is currently the Head of DUCKS (Early Years) Physical Education, Dulwich College (Singapore). He has 20 years of experience working with young people and adults in high-performance sport and school-based education. He has a passion for professional development and enjoys the opportunity to connect and discuss contemporary pedagogical approaches. Originally from the UK, Will has been living in Singapore for the last 10 years with his wife and two young children.
Feel free to contact Will at will.patz@dulwich.org.
What's next?
Back to content page - 2023 SPEA Newsletter Issue No.1 (June/July)
Click here for previous issues of the newsletter.
Keen to share any ideas or practices, comment on key issues or contribute to the news letter? Click here for more details.
Be part of the community. Join SPEA as a member. Enjoy members' benefits! We like to thank our partners for their generosity and continual support.