Author
Listed:
- Zarah Ford
(Department of Kinesiology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA)
- Martin E. Block
(Department of Kinesiology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA)
Abstract
One of the greatest benefits of inclusion in general physical education (PE) is the opportunity for social interactions between students with and without disabilities. Unfortunately, interviews with students with disabilities who have participated in PE often find that social interactions with students without disabilities were limited. A model that promotes interaction between students with and without disabilities in PE is Special Olympics Unified Physical Education (UPE). In UPE, students with and without disabilities participate in activities together rather than the one-way focus on traditional peer tutoring. There have been anecdotal reports on the positive benefits of UPE for both students with and without disabilities. To date, there has been no published research on UPE. Additionally, some question how UPE has been implemented in schools, specifically questioning if UPE provided quality PE and whether students with disabilities were forced into UPE and denied opportunities to participate in general PE. The purpose of this qualitative study was to better understand how UPE was developed and implemented in select U.S. schools and the impact on social interactions between students with and without disabilities. Interviews with twelve teachers who were directly involved in their UPE programs revealed the following four major themes: (1) our students were not being served appropriately, (2) a mix of PE standards and Special Olympics programming, (3) UPE is a choice, and (4) our students improved in many ways. The discussion examined the results in relation to the criticisms of UPE and how UPE proved to be a positive alternative to limited social interactions in general PE.
Suggested Citation
Zarah Ford & Martin E. Block, 2025.
"Examining Unified Physical Education from the Teacher’s Perspective,"
Disabilities, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-19, August.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jdisab:v:5:y:2025:i:3:p:76-:d:1738813
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jdisab:v:5:y:2025:i:3:p:76-:d:1738813. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.