Mosston, Ashworth and me.

I was first introduced to both Mosston and Ashworth in October 2001 at St. Luke’s. It was Will, the head of the course, who made those intial introductions, but they seemed to be friends of everyone involved in the training of teachers of Physical Education. I could see why some of my peers found it daunting and frustrating. Having to learn to teach in multiple ways, that there wasn’t some secret method that would work all of the time, every time, with everyone. I immediatley saw the variety it could bring to my teaching and how enjoyable that would be not to be restricted to teach in only one way. Yeah, it’s fair to say…. I liked Mosston and Ashworth from the start.

Through my teacher training and first placement I explored some of the range of teaching styles Mosston and Ashworth offered me. I was encouraged and supported to experiment and reflect on when my choices worked and when they didn’t. I was naturally drawn to Command and Practice. It was the predominant method I had been taught by at school and it came very easily to me. The classes were usually much more manageable as they were ordered and I could see notable improvements in the students performance during lessons. This I found was important to show those that were observing me and making decisions on whether I may teach or not in the future. I became more comfortable with Reciprocal and Self Check styles and experimenting with Inclusion, but looking back they were always in activities I had a depth of subject knowledge. My ventures into Guided, Convergent and Divergent were mixed at best. On some occasions I could see the potential power, in others they were complete disasters that undermined learning and behaviour, but I was encouraged to reflect and refine. Then in my second placement my exploration of the spectrum of styles that Mosston and Ashworth offered stopped. My mentor and the department saw no point in teaching any other way than Command and Practice. I put up a brief fight, but soon realised that if I wanted to pass, then I needed to do as they said. I finished off the summer with lesson after lesson of Command and Practice, but with the hope that my first job would offer me the freedom of working with Mosston and Ashworth again.

I started my first job brimming with the hope, enthusiasm and energy that all NQT’s seemed to have in abundance. I was fortunate to have two very experienced PE teachers within the department looking after me. The first was the Director of Sport, a giant of man, with an even bigger reputation. The second was the Head of PE, a slim, quiet and reflective practioner. I didn’t realise it at the time, but there was a fundamental difference in opinion between the two men, on all things related to PE and this split the department. Being young, naive and wanting to make a good impression I didn’t read the internal politics. I wanted both to take me seriously, but after a year a line was drawn. It was clear I needed to pick a side. I was drawn to the larger than life, charismatic Director of Sport. To fit in I put on a straight jacket of Command and Practice. The range and variety of Mosston and Ashworth was put away so I would be accepted by those I admired. Years went by and I became a disciple of the practice of isolated sports technique and a deficit model of feedback where I pointed out where my students were going wrong or what misconceptions they had.

My next step was abroad in an international school. I saw the full range of teaching style that Mosston and Asworth offered the PE Teacher. An all through school, my colleagues were well qualified, well experienced and very knowledgable in teaching PE. And I challenged them immediately from day one. Through socialisation and the acculturation of my first PE Dept. I had become the Gate Keeper of Command and Practice. My colleagues and the pupils who were used to a much wider range of teaching approaches and learning outcomes within PE distanced themselves from me. But I perceived this as them realising I was right and not being able to acknowledge it. I continued to tell anyone that listened why they were wrong. I soon found myself alone and talking to no one, so I returned to the UK in search of an environment that shared my ideas and philosophy.

I found that place and I have been there ever since. As a teacher I was afforded the space to teach the way I saw fit and I found I had kindred spirits within the department. For the first 3 years It was one of the most happiest times of my career. I was promoted till I became Director of Sport and I felt that I now had the opportunity to create an environment that my mentor in my first school had always talked about. However as I started to watch my department teach, as I started to see the numbers of students dwindle in school teams, as I started to listen to how adults spoke to children on the side of the sports field, I sensed there was something wrong. I witnessed incidents that made me question my approach and the culture I was creating within the department. I sought answers to the questions I had and I found them online, on Twitter, in blogs and from research.

Cooperative Learning, Sports Education, Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility, Game Sense and most recently a constraints led approach based on the principles of non-linear pedagogy. Models that use a cluster of teaching styles and had outcomes beyond just the physical. Typically when I realised that perhaps the approach that I had been developing for years may be wrong to achieve the main outcomes of physical education I did a full pendulum swing to the opposite end of the spectrum, without nuance and understanding. I wanted to distance myself as far as possible to my old ways of teaching. For the last 6 years of my career I have been working on improving and refining the delivery of these models, not just for myself but all members of my department.

However a phone call, with a wise man, reminded me of Mosston and Ashworth and all those memories came flooding back. I looked them up again and realised it isn’t the variety that really makes them appealing to the PE Teacher, it’s the empowerment. Teaching approaches are for the benefit of the children we teach. We need to know and understand them, both the children and the teaching style, to better select the most appropriate method for that context. It empowers us as PE teachers to make professional judgments on what is the most suitable, for that child, for that outcome and at that moment in time. Be that a more direct command and practice style or a more implicit method like a constraints led approach. 15 years later in my career and I’m reunited with Mosston and Ashworth. However I now see them through different eyes. It isn’t about developing a variety of teaching styles or becoming a master of one, but about improving my decision making that allows me to choose the best one for the context I find my students in.