摘要
In the 2013 release of the U.S. National Physical Education Standards the term ＂physically literate＂ replaced ＂physically educated＂. Un- fortunately, most discourse within the profession about the term physically literate occurred primarily after its adoption. While we agree with the spirit and intent of the term, we feel it is essential to discuss not only what has been potentially gained but also lost. In our paper, we illustrate the similarity of the terms physically educated and physically literate and essentially, from a definitional perspective, find little difference--but are these terms interchangeable？ We provide a critical review of the standards and conclude that the change to physical literacy has produced a shift away from psychomotor outcomes to cognitive outcomes. Our concerns about this are many, but most importantly they are about the need to emphasize the ＂physical＂ in physical education （PE）. It is our belief that the key to elevating the profession and maintaining and increasing support for PE is in its ability to promote and provide physical activity. Without physical activity and physical fitness as main outcomes, PE increases its vulnerability to extinction as a standard part of the U.S. K-12 education curriculum.
在2013年发布的美国国家体育标准中,"体育素养"这一术语代替了"体育教育"。遗憾的是,在本专业领域内关于"体育素养"这一术语的论述基本上是在它被采用之后才出现。尽管我们赞同此术语的精神与目标,但讨论潜在的得失也极其重要。本文阐述了"体育教育"和"体育素养"这两个术语的相似性。从定义的角度来看两者几乎没有区别,但两者能否互换?我们对这些标准提出批判性论述,总结出从"体育教育"到"体育素养"这一术语的变化导致从注重运动技能结果到注重认知结果的转变。这方面我们有颇多顾虑,最重要的是在体育教育中需要强调"身体"的部分。我们认为提升体育教育行业以及维持并增加对其支持的关键,是促进和提供身体的活动能力。没有体力活动和体质健康作为主要成果,体育教育就更有可能失去其作为美国K-12教育课程中的常规部分。
