Putting the physical back into physical education
Just returned from a fascinating and rewarding weekend at the National Applied Functional Physical Education Conference in Farmington Hills, Michigan.
The conference, organized by Greg Thompson, career elementary physical educator, was a terrific success. We were treated to superb presentations by Vern Gambetta, the “Godfather of functional strength conditioning” and Steve Myrland, former strength and conditioning coach for the University of Wisconson. We were also joined by Mike Meeteer and John Ditter of Foundational Fitness.
There was too much content to describe here, but one theme emerged consistently: the distinction between “adapted” and “adaptable.” Those who train exclusively in a single sport, movement style or discipline simply dig their neurological ruts deeper and deeper; they become adapted to a specific challenge. But for true athleticism and holistic health, more is needed – the ability to move across challenges and disciplines, always adjusting and adaptable.
Passion was evident at every level of this event, but one consensus opinion was clear: All agreed that it’s time to transform the state of the modern human body, starting with kids. This conference marks a turning point in physical education philosophy and is sure to start a sea change in our teaching practices.
Many thanks to Greg and to all who gave their time and energy.
Previous post: Circle push ups by Rannoch Donald
Next post: Refined carbohydates: the new tobacco?
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Frank,
Thanks for joining us this weekend. You delivered a great talk and inspired many of us to lose the shoes! I have already received many nice congratulations with adulations for you in them. Thanks again for caring about kids and physical education.
Greg T.
Adaptability is absolutely one of the missing elements in most athletic and strength training programs. This is also something that Erwan Le Corre stresses at his MovNat seminars.
I think many coaches do NOT integrate adaptability into their programs because it is a much harder skill to coach. Those that DO understand and implement adaptability are providing a myriad of new challenges for the trainee that help to refine their performance skills and balance them as a holistic athlete.
I’m just responding to what John Sifferman says above: he said, “I think many coaches do NOT integrate adaptability into their programs because it is a much harder skill to coach.” Interesting: that it’s easier to direct people (kids) in only one method, than to teach/coach the ABILITY to adapt.
I agree…. that says that many ‘coaches’ are only doing what’s “easy”: “telling” (adapted) instead of real ‘coaching’? Coaching is a true skill; the ability to extract the best from the athlete, not give a cookie-cutter directive (adapted) approach.
You’ve got it, Lauren!
{ 1 trackback }