Anthony John Maher

Physical education (PE) is recognized as an avenue for nurturing lifelong physical activity knowledge and behaviours among children and youth, including those with disabilities, and when well desig...

While intersectional research has begun to examine the experiences of trans*, inter* and non-binary pupils within physical education (for example, Haase & Kastrup, 2025), little is known about how ...

Policymakers, practitioners, and scholars typically consider educational inclusion as access, opportunity, participation, and representation. While these areas of focus are important, they are often anchored to adult-centered perspectives of inclusion and thus neglect how the decisions made by (mostly) nondisabled adults in the name of inclusion are experienced and felt by disabled students. As such, we argue in this chapter that such perspectives about inclusion are narrow, parochial, and reductive because the experiences of disabled students are not centered. Their voices are not amplified by scholars in research about inclusion, government, and school leaders when it comes to policy about inclusion and practitioners when they make curriculum and pedagogical decisions. This chapter advocates for considering inclusion as intersubjective experiences and feelings of belonging, acceptance, and value that can happen in any educational space and can change over time. We end the chapter by considering some of the implications, benefits, and challenges of thinking about, and practicing, inclusion in this way.

There is currently no literature that considers the practicalities of delivering physical education (PE) in alternative provision schools, nor the challenges that this might entail. As such, this paper offers a unique contribution to knowledge by highlighting the key factors that influence the delivery of PE within alternative provision schools in England from the perspectives of practitioners (i.e. those tasked with delivering it). Following a Freedom of Information request, an online survey was distributed to all alternative provision schools in England ( n  = 335, 48 responses). A purposive sample of practitioners ( n  = 14) was then invited to take part in online semi-structured interviews. Qualitative responses from the survey (extracted into an Excel spreadsheet), along with the transcripts from the interviews, were analysed using inductive and deductive procedures. The data were subsequently mapped to the socio-ecological model ( McLeroy et al., 1988 ) to identify what influenced delivery at multiple levels. This included factors at the intrapersonal level (e.g. staff confidence and competence, their pedagogical and content knowledge and feelings of isolation), interpersonal level (e.g. pupil needs/abilities, their behaviour and trauma, confidence, negative experiences of mainstream PE and lack of motivation), institutional level (e.g. spatial constraints, the facilities and equipment available and class sizes), community level (e.g. stigma and a lack of engagement with National Governing Bodies), and public policy level (e.g. recruitment of staff, financial constraints and attainment pressures). This paper presents a range of intersecting factors that influence what happens and how in PE in the context of alternative provision schooling.

Curriculum is at the heart of education. It has been said that a broad and balanced physical education curriculum can contribute to young people developing socially, cognitively, affectively, and physically. As such, in this article, we draw on Antonio Gramsci's ideas of culture, power, and ideology to explore the physical education curriculum in alternative provision schools in England. We did this by generating qualitative data using semi‐structured interviews with 13 physical education practitioners working in 13 different alternative provision schools. Interviews were audio recorded, and audio recordings were transcribed verbatim, before being subjected to reflexive thematic analysis. The themes generated through these analytical processes were (1) Physical education curriculum should be tailored to the needs and preferences of pupils; (2) The National Curriculum, national qualifications, assessment arrangements and Ofsted inspection expectations influence curriculum decisions; and (3) Group sizes influence the physical education curriculum. We end this article by encouraging physical education and/or curriculum scholars to learn more about alternative provision settings because, at present, there is a dearth of research‐informed knowledge about them despite them becoming a much more prominent feature of the education landscape in England.

This book presents research on disabled children and young people in sport, physical activity and physical education settings using empirical data gathered either with or from disabled children and young people, centring their experiences and amplifying their voices, while decentralising non-disabled voices in research about them. Much of the albeit limited research relating to disabled children and young people in sport, physical activity and physical education settings is from the perspective of teachers, school leaders, coaches, support assistants and special educational needs coordinators. While this research has undoubtedly contributed to developing a rich tapestry of knowledge about disability and sport, physical activity and physical education, the views and experiences of disabled children and young people are conspicuous by their absence. Thus, in this book, contributors showcase research that centres on the experiences and amplifies the voices of disabled children and young people. When reading these articles, readers are encouraged to reflexively consider the ways and extent to which their own research and practice endeavours to include, empower, and emancipate disabled children and young people. Contributors hope that this book will encourage sport, physical activity and physical education scholars, especially those who ‘do not research disability’, to consider the significance of including disabled people as active participants in more general research studies. This book will be an essential reading for those who want to learn more about involving disabled children and young people in research, centring their experiences, and amplifying their voices in sport, physical activity and physical education as part of the multi-stakeholder approach advocated by Vickerman and Maher (2018). It was originally published as a special issue of Sport, Education and Society.

Much of the albeit limited research relating to disabled children and young people in sport, physical activity and physical education settings is from the perspective of teachers, school leaders, coaches, support assistants and special educational needs coordinators. While this research has undoubtedly contributed to developing a rich tapestry of knowledge about disability and sport, physical activity and physical education, the views and experiences of disabled children and young people are conspicuous by their absence. Thus, in this special issue, we showcase research that centres on the experiences and amplifies the voices of disabled children and young people. When reading these articles, we encourage you to reflexively consider the ways and extent to which your own research and practice endeavours to include, empower, and emancipate disabled children and young people. If nothing else, we hope that this special issue will encourage sport, physical activity and physical education scholars, especially those who ‘do not research disability’, to consider the significance of including disabled people as active participants in more general research studies.