A PEP grant’s influence on change in a school district: One year post funding

Cate A. Egan, Catherine P. Abel-Berei and Grace Goc Karp

Evaluation and Program Planning, 2021, vol. 87, issue C

Abstract: This study examined teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of the institutionalization phase of the Carol M. White Physical Education for Progress (PEP) grant. A qualitative exploratory single case study (Yin, 2014) was utilized to examine the elements of the PEP grant that sustained or did not sustain after its conclusion, along with elements that were institutionalized and influences on this process. The findings were represented in the following three themes: (a) positive shifts, (b) backsliding, and (c) new directions, each with their own subthemes. Positive shifts includes sub-themes: (a) philosophy, (b) instruction, assessment and curriculum, (c) collaboration, and (d) respect. Backsliding includes sub-themes: (a) wellness team functioning, (b) the loss of PD and collaboration time, and (c) reduced data collection. New directions includes sub-themes: (a) mastery learning, (b) during school physical activity, (c) stress, and (d) administrative support. The factors that were institutionalized were quality physical education leadership roles, change in teachers’ philosophies that influenced their instruction and assessment, and garnered administrative support. These elements were embedded into the physical education program and the school so much so that principals now expect the same type of programming from any new hire.

Keywords: Physical education; Teaching; CSPAP; Sustainability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718921000379
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:epplan:v:87:y:2021:i:c:s0149718921000379

DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.101942

Access Statistics for this article

Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell

More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().