Exploring Capacity and Professional Development Needs of Teachers: Moving Toward Inclusive and Engaging Physical Education for Girls

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to understand teachers’ knowledge, perspectives, and experiences on inclusive and engaging physical education (PE) for girls, for the development of teacher professional development (PD). Through grounded theory qualitative research, this study explored teachers’ capacity and PD needs for including and engaging girls in PE. Data were collected from 10 Ontario teachers (N = 10) through two semi-structured focus groups and five semi-structured individual interviews. Themes were generated from the data indicating that teachers’ capacity to engage and include girls in PE is multifaceted and is influenced by numerous intrapersonal and institutional factors. While teacher participants employed a variety of evidence-based practices, notable gaps remained—particularly in their PE knowledge, inclusive pedagogical approaches, and confidence in their teaching abilities in a PE environment. This research provides insight for future PD to support teachers in engaging girls in PE.

1. Introduction

Children’s engagement in physical activity (PA) plays a vital role in their health and well-being (Poitras et al., 2016); unfortunately, girls engage in less PA than boys. The percentage of boys aged 5–17 years old meeting physical activity guidelines is nearly double the percentage of girls, 46.8% versus 24.6%, respectively (Roberts et al., 2017). PE is an important opportunity in a child’s life to accrue physical activity, develop physical literacy, gain physical and mental health benefits, advance fundamental motor skills, and practise social skills (Cairney et al., 2019; García-Hermoso et al., 2020). Research has shown associations between childhood experiences in PE and attitudes toward PA and sedentary behaviour in adulthood (Dargavel et al., 2017). Girls often encounter barriers in PE classes that cause them to feel excluded and become disengaged in PE (Coen et al., 2018; Corr et al., 2019; Cowley et al., 2021; S. L. Gibbons & Humbert, 2008; Lamb et al., 2018; Marttinen et al., 2021; Mitchell et al., 2015).

Girls often report that PE is an uncomfortable social environment, that it perpetuates gender stereotypes, there are few opportunities to exercise choice or voice their interests, assessments emphasize insecurities in their movement competence, and they receive a lack of support from their peers and teachers (Corr et al., 2019). Despite these barriers, extensive research has identified effective teaching practices that can successfully engage and retain girls in PE (S. Gibbons et al., 2011; S. L. Gibbons & Humbert, 2008; Lamb et al., 2018; Sulz et al., 2020).

The widely used term ‘girl-friendly PE’ was originally coined by Felton et al. (2005) and is now used to describe PE that incorporates specific features of pedagogy that aim to include and engage girls in PE. The most common components of girl-friendly PE include (1) valuing student voice and choice, (2) creating a positive learning environment, (3) facilitating strong social connections and relationships, (4) challenging gender bias and societal expectations, (5) using authentic assessment methods, (6) facilitating the development of physical literacy, (7) focusing on fitness and health (PHE Canada, 2021).

Despite the evidence that these practices can successfully include and engage girls in PE, the literature shows that some teachers’ perspectives and practices continue to perpetuate gender bias and sometimes unintentionally exclude girls from PE. Evidence shows that some teachers hold views that girls are passive, overly social, and naturally disengaged in PE. Additionally, some teachers continue to use teaching practices that reinforce gender segregation and biased language, perpetuating unequal power dynamics between genders (Murphy et al., 2014; Howley & O’Sullivan, 2021; Valley & Graber, 2017).

Professional development (PD) can help teachers develop the skills and knowledge needed to implement pedagogy that supports girls, as the success of girl-friendly PE depends largely on the teacher’s capacity (Mitchell et al., 2015; Pollock et al., 2021; Sulz et al., 2020). This is particularly relevant as most teachers who teach elementary PE are not PE specialists (Truelove et al., 2021). Although both generalist and PE specialist teachers experience barriers when teaching PE, generalists require additional and specialized support in this area because they receive limited training and may experience low self-efficacy (Truelove et al., 2021).

Girls’ perspectives are well known and researched when it comes to their experiences in PE (Corr et al., 2019; Oliver & Kirk, 2016); however, this study shifts the focus to teacher perspectives, which are poorly understood in the current literature. The gender disparities that exist within PE environments have the potential to be changed and challenged by physical educators. Understanding the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours of teachers surrounding gender-inclusive PE is a necessary first step toward developing PD opportunities that truly meet their needs. By centring teacher voices, this study offers a novel contribution to the literature as it moves beyond student experiences to examine the role of educators in fostering inclusive PE spaces.

Grounded in a pragmatic lens, the following research questions guided the investigation: (1) What is the capacity of teachers to facilitate inclusive and engaging physical education for girls? (2) What are the professional development needs of teachers to improve their capacity to do so? The results provide clear insight into current teacher practices, highlight specific areas of need—particularly around gender-inclusive pedagogy and confidence—and point to actionable next steps for supporting educators through targeted PD.

Females are the population represented in the literature informing this study and the focus of this research. However, it is important to acknowledge that while ‘girl-friendly’ PE highlights best practices designed to address the marginalization of biological females in PE, these practices may also benefit other marginalized groups.

2. Methodology and Theoretical Framework

This qualitative study aimed to explore gaps in teachers’ capacity to support girls in PE. Guided by a pragmatic interpretive framework, the research focused on identifying practical, real-world solutions—specifically, the development of targeted PD recommendations to help educators create more inclusive PE environments for girls (Creswell & Poth, 2018).

Guided by grounded theory (Corbin & Strauss, 1990), this study focused on developing comprehensive concepts that provided a thorough theoretical explanation of the social phenomena under study (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). A framework was developed using data collected from participants to explain the nature of teachers’ girl-friendly practices (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The framework was developed iteratively as researchers applied the constant comparison method to analyze the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The constant comparison method involved the researchers simultaneously collecting data, analyzing findings, and writing memos (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The themes generated are heavily ‘grounded’ in the data collected from participants (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). This methodology fit well with the goal of this study which was to uncover aspects and ideas that emerge from the views and experiences of participants rather than to prove or disprove existing knowledge about girl-friendly PE (Corbin & Strauss, 1990).

This research was guided by a theoretical framework that combined self-determination theory (SDT) with research-based recommendations for gender-equitable PE (PHE Canada, 2021). This framework described the values and existing knowledge of the researcher, explained concepts and assumptions that informed the research, and provided a clear picture of the lens the researchers used to view newly emerging knowledge (Collins & Stockton, 2018). A visual model of this theoretical framework can be seen in

Table 1. Theoretical framework: self-determination theory combined with best practices for inclusive and engaging PE for girls.

	Relatedness [R]	Competence [C]	Autonomy [A]
Safe and welcoming learning environment [R]	✓
Social connections and relationships [R]	✓
Diversity and advocacy [R, A]	✓		✓
Student voice, choice, and leadership [A]			✓
Authentic assessment [C, A]		✓	✓
Development of physical literacy [C, A]		✓	✓
Fitness focus and lifetime wellness [R, C, A]	✓	✓	✓

.

SDT, as explained by Deci and Ryan (2000), states that an individual’s behaviours need to be self-determined for them to be optimally and intrinsically motivated. SDT outlines three characteristics of environments (or activities) that support intrinsic motivation, which include promoting autonomy, facilitating competence, and creating a sense of emotional relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Specifically, research has found these components to contribute significantly to students’ motivation for participation in PE (Mitchell et al., 2015; Van den Berghe et al., 2014).

3. Participants

The inclusion criteria for the sample were full-time Grade 7 and 8 teachers who had taught Health and Physical Education in Ontario (Canada) public schools within the past three school years. These teachers work in the upper years of elementary or middle schools across various locations in Ontario. These criteria were chosen because they teach students between the ages of 12–14. This is an age when physical activity can drop for girls and is an important time to focus on girls’ engagement in PE to increase the likelihood that they will select PE electives in high school. Participant characteristics can be viewed in

Table 2. Participant characteristics.

Data Collection	Pseudonym		Type	Gender	Teaching Experience (Years)
Focus group	T1	Ms. Adler	PE specialist a	F	32
	T2	Ms. Baker	Generalist	F	4
	T3	Ms. Campbell	Generalist	F	13
Focus group	T4	Ms. Fleming	Generalist	F	3
	T5	Ms. Edwards	Generalist	F	8
Individual interview	T6	Ms. Dunn	Generalist	F	20
Individual interview	T7	Mr. Gibson	Generalist	M	12
Individual interview	T8	Ms. Hayes	PE specialist	F	14
Individual interview	T9	Ms. Irving	PE specialist	F	20
Individual interview	T10	Mr. Jones	PE specialist	M	17

^a High School PE specialist. This is due to the changes to inclusion criteria that occurred after Focus Group #1.

.

Theoretical sampling was utilized for recruitment to gather diverse perspectives and experiences that would provide sufficient information to reach data saturation (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Additionally, we utilized convenience sampling for recruitment, which included poster advertisements on social media, displayed by teacher associations, and sent to school administrations. The researchers had no previous relationship with the participants.

This study was conducted during the tail end of the COVID-19 pandemic, a period in which teachers were still navigating the transition between online and in-person instruction. School boards across Ontario were experiencing varying degrees of operational strain due to occupational burnout, staffing shortages, and ongoing disruptions to regular programming. While examining these systemic conditions was not an objective of the study, they form an important part of the broader context in which participants were working and reflect the educational realities that may have shaped their perspectives.

4. Study Design

Participant interviews were recorded virtually on Google Meet’s video conferencing platform due to COVID-19 public health regulations. The student researcher conducted two virtual focus groups/paired interviews. The first focus group had three participants, and the second paired interview had two participants. Focus groups were 1.25–1.5 h in duration. The student researcher also conducted five individual interviews, which were 40 min to an hour and 25 min each.

The focus groups and individual interviews were organized based primarily on participant availability, with no specific arrangement beyond ensuring a diverse range of perspectives. The focus groups were conducted first to capture collective views and experiences, providing an overview of common themes across participants (Then et al., 2014). Subsequently, individual interviews were conducted to delve deeper into specific topics and to explore emerging themes in more detail, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of individual perspectives (Corbin & Strauss, 2008).

The semi-structured interview script was designed with careful consideration of the research objectives. The student researcher, a graduate student, received formal training in qualitative research methods through degree requirements, coursework, and supervision from the principle investigator, which included designing and conducting interviews and focus groups. The questions inquired about the teachers’ beliefs, opinions, observations, and experiences regarding girls’ experiences in PE. They were also asked to discuss their current teaching practices and their PD needs.

Ethical approval was obtained on 26 November 2021 from the Ontario Tech University Ethics Board (REB#16573) prior to the commencement of this study. Each participant was informed of the nature of this study and signed an informed consent form. The participants in the focus group were also required to sign a confidentiality agreement to protect the privacy of other participants. The participants were given a gift card with a CAD 50 value for providing their time and knowledge to this research project.

5. Data Analysis

The interviews were transcribed verbatim into Microsoft Word documents by the student researcher. NVivo software (version 1.6.2) was used to store, search, and organize the data. All transcripts were de-identified before analysis. A constant comparative method of analysis was used, which involved the researcher beginning analysis as soon as the data were collected and comparing emerging categories as they were generated (Corbin & Strauss, 1990).

Consistent with grounded theory, the transcripts were analyzed using open, axial, and selective coding methods (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). NVivo software was first used to assess transcripts line by line and identify conceptually similar information. Once concepts were identified, the student researcher used NVivo to code them into broader groups guided by the theoretical framework. Finally, selective coding was employed to develop a ‘storyline’ that connected all the groupings by organizing them into themes and subsequent categories, using NVivo’s visual tools to support this synthesis. The theoretical framework was utilized to create a common language and categorize the data so that they could be interpreted in terminology that relates to the professional practice of teaching PE. In alignment with grounded theory methods, the generation of themes occurred throughout the data collection process and was heavily driven by the views and experiences of the participants (Corbin & Strauss, 1990).

The rigour of this research was appraised using criteria of Lincoln and Guba (1985) to establish trustworthiness. Credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability are the core components of trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Methods include conducting in-depth interviews, utilizing theoretical sampling, synthesized member checking, writing in thick description, managing the researcher’s subjectivity throughout the research process by engaging in memoing, debriefing with the supervisor, reflexive notetaking, and acknowledging preconceptions before the commencement of the study.

The triangulation of methods in this study allowed for data saturation with 10 participants, as the focus groups and individual interviews enabled probing and in-depth discussion. As the data analysis was guided by grounded theory, the researchers were able to constantly react to new information as it emerged. Theoretical sampling also allowed the researchers to select participants with the most relevant experience with the phenomenon. For example, the inclusion criteria were adjusted after the first focus group, when it became apparent that a high school teacher’s experience did not sufficiently address the research question. The broader focus groups were first utilized to guide researchers toward the general essence of the phenomenon, which allowed for a narrowing of focus in the subsequent individual interviews and informed the number of interviews required for saturation (Thomson, 2011). After interviewing the ninth participant, very little new information was contributing to the development of themes, and the tenth interview confirmed that the data had become redundant. Therefore, the student researcher and primary investigator deemed 10 participants sufficient to achieve data saturation.

6. Results

The data generated from this study led to three themes: (1) What are teachers seeing? (2) What are teachers’ current practices? (3) What is helping and hindering teachers? The data are also organized into categories within each theme, which are used to group together similar information, discussions, and experiences. A summary of themes and categories can be found in

Table 3. Results theme breakdown.

6.1 Theme 1: What are teachers seeing?	6.1.1 Category 1: Perceived barriers 6.1.2 Category 2: Perceived facilitators
6.2 Theme 2: What are teachers doing?	6.2.1 Category 1: Autonomy 6.2.2 Category 2: Relatedness 6.2.3 Category 3: Competence
6.3 Theme 3: What is helping and hindering teachers?	6.3.1 Category 1: Intrapersonal barriers and facilitators 6.3.2 Category 2: Institutional barriers and facilitators

.

6.1. Theme 1: What Are Teachers Seeing?

6.1.1. Category 1: Perceived Barriers

The first category within this theme highlights the barriers that teachers observe as limiting girls’ participation and engagement in PE. Participants in this study identified numerous perceived barriers, including exclusion by boys, boys’ aggressive behaviour, poor perceived physical competence, lack of skill, fear of getting hurt, fear of social judgement, being overly social, dislike of competition, low self-esteem, influential peer relationships, and puberty-related changes.

Many participants identified boys’ lack of inclusivity and negative attitudes toward girls’ abilities as key barriers to their participation in PE. One participant stated, “when the boys get another boy on their team, they’re like ‘oh yeah!’ and when they get a girl sometimes, they’re like ‘oh man’.” (T8, Ms. Hayes). Another participant also described how she saw this behaviour as a cycle, in that the girls acknowledge the way they are treated, in turn making them less likely to make an effort in PE, which then leads to boys not wanting to include them further.

Some participants discussed how girls can become too scared, fearful, or intimidated to take part in PE if the level of play or competition initiated by boys is too high. Participants discussed how girls may be hesitant to participate in PE because of their boy classmates’ strength, skill, or aggressiveness. One participant mentioned, “The biggest barrier I think are those strong athletic males that just dominate, they just kind of take over. So, the girls are like go ahead you can get the volleyball even though that’s in my space” (T9, Ms. Irving). One participant stated, “Girls are definitely more scared, and they will shy away from the ball, whereas a boy who isn’t an athlete, he will still attempt the ball, but girls will literally run away from it.” (T8, Ms. Hayes). Another participant mentioned, “… boys like competition, they crave that, and girls are generally more social, it’s more of a social-emotional thing.” (T10, Mr. Jones).

Many participants also described how girls’ low perceived physical competence played a hindering role in their engagement. A participant commented, “It always appears that the boys feel more confident even if they aren’t great at a sport they just come naturally with this confidence that girls tend to lack.” (T3, Ms. Campbell). Some participants discussed how girls tend to have lower actual physical competence, athletic skills, and talent than boys, which may contribute to their low confidence and disengagement in PE. One participant mentioned, “When they say you throw like a girl, they actually do. So, I think boys develop sports skills more naturally and there are some girls that get it naturally as well, but I think girls for some reason don’t naturally have sports skills.” (T9, Ms. Irving). In addition to this, participants also reported that girls need more encouragement from teachers to participate in PE than boys.

6.1.2. Category 2: Perceived Facilitators

The second category describes factors that teachers found to improve girls’ participation and engagement in PE. The participants in this study identified that influential peer relationships, athletic ability, and participation in sports outside of school are potential facilitators for girls’ engagement in PE.

Several participants highlighted the role of peer relationships in encouraging girls’ participation in PE. One participant stated, “I think peers can influence in a positive way. Where I’m really good friends with this person and they’re really into soccer, so I want to be into soccer.” (T2, Ms. Baker).

The participants described how they believe that having natural athletic ability or participating in extracurricular physical activities and sports was a facilitator to girls’ participation in PE. One participant mentioned, “I think there’s usually a gap in between young girls that are very interested in sports and they’re athletic and I’ve noticed that that usually starts to drop-off unless they continue like competitive sports in their own time.” (T2, Ms. Baker). Another participant stated, “If they really are athletic and they are on rep teams prior, those are the ones that still continue to be athletic in gym, and like gym.” (T3, Ms. Campbell).

6.2. Theme 2: What Are Teachers Doing?

6.2.1. Category 1: Autonomy

All participants shared strategies they use to foster autonomy among girls in PE. There were 30 mentions of teaching strategies throughout the focus groups and interviews that are used to develop a feeling of control, choice, and independence. Strategies included valuing student’s voice and providing choice (13 mentions), providing leadership opportunities (7 mentions), developing an understanding of the importance of lifelong PA (5 mentions), offering a variety of activities (4 mentions), and respecting students’ religious activities (1 mention).

The most popular strategy mentioned was valuing student voice and providing a choice of activities, which included getting to know their students and having them actively participate in decision-making. One participant mentioned, “I agree with allowing a little bit more choice sometimes… having them have a voice, if we’re going to do a vote between two different activities, they [girls] are just as represented as the boys in picking it.” (T5, Ms. Edwards).

Another highly mentioned strategy was providing leadership opportunities, which included having students lead warm-ups and activities or having students lead activities they have experience with outside of school. One participant mentioned, “I look at all the units I’m going to do, and they can sign up for the entire year and they do it in groups and they plan a warmup and then a core gym class, and then a cool down” (T3, Ms. Campbell).

6.2.2. Category 2: Competence

All participants described methods and strategies in their teaching practices that they used to build girls’ competence, which in a PE context means sufficient skills to be successful in various physical activities. There were 30 mentions of strategies that aim to encourage a sense of competence, which included using authentic methods of assessment (6 mentions), engaging students in non-competitive competence-building activities (5 mentions), facilitating skill progression (5 mentions), offering encouragement to students (5 mentions), teaching health and fitness concepts (4 mentions), offering multiple levels of competition (2 mentions), creating a supportive learning environment (2 mentions), and goal setting (1 mention).

Some participants described how they found success with their female students in offering private, one-on-one, and observational methods of assessment and assessing students with an emphasis on growth and progression. One participant mentioned, “… it’s extremely important to start highlighting that you’re not in competition with anybody else, you’re in competition with who you were” (T7, Mr. Gibson).

Some participants described how they tried to engage their female students by facilitating non-competitive, confidence-building activities with a focus on fun and enjoyment. One participant explained, “… not focusing on that competition, excellence, perfection aspect… the biggest teaching strategy you could have is creating that atmosphere of we’re here to play, we’re not here to win.” (T10, Mr. Jones).

6.2.3. Category 3: Relatedness

All the participants described methods and strategies in their teaching practices that aimed to promote a sense of relatedness for their female students. Strategies for relatedness were discussed the most, with 43 mentions. These strategies included role modelling (11 mentions), promoting healthy peer relationships (9 mentions), using a variety of grouping strategies (7 mentions), fostering positive teacher–student relationships (7 mentions), using gender-neutral language (3 mentions), challenging gender bias in the classroom (2 mentions), and promoting diversity (1 mention).

Many teacher participants reported multiple ways they use role modelling to promote a sense of relatedness for their female students in PE. Examples of this included female teachers describing how participating in gym themselves, demonstrating skills, and sharing their strengths and weaknesses. One participant shared,

“I’m not the most athletic in all areas and I’m a human being and I show a lot of humility by you know… I’ll join in on their games and I’m not the best and they think ‘Oh my gosh Ms. Baker is playing!’ (laughing).”.

(T2, Ms. Baker)

Another common strategy, described by all but one participant, was promoting healthy peer relationships among female students by encouraging kindness and inclusivity. Similarly, participants reported that they use a variety of grouping strategies that promote social mixing and prevent cliques from negatively influencing the social environment.

Three participants mentioned how they are conscious about the language they use when teaching in PE, and the two males were the only participants to mention concrete ways they challenge gender bias. One participant said, “…any type of negative talk against gender, you gotta model appropriate behavior and you gotta call it out and shut it down when you hear it, you gotta be actively listening for it as a teacher.” (T10, Mr. Jones).

In the aim of promoting a sense of relatedness, two participants described how they divide their students into groups by gender. One participant mentioned, “I’ve separated by gender. That works well, I think.” (T4, Ms. Dunn). Another commented, “We had four classes of 7–8 and we combined two of the classes, he took all the males, I took all the females. We did more skills, and the boys played more games because boys just want to play games” (T9, Ms. Irving).

6.3. Theme 3: What Is Helping and Hindering Teachers?

6.3.1. Category 1: Intrapersonal Barriers and Facilitators

This category describes intrapersonal barriers and facilitators that were specific to the teachers’ background, experience, and beliefs. Participants discussed how their personal background with sports or PA and confidence in teaching have either hindered or improved their ability to teach PE inclusively.

The participants in this study had very diverse backgrounds, experiences, and attitudes regarding sport, PA, and PE, all of which acted as barriers or facilitators to teaching girls in PE. The PE specialists described how their favourable experiences with PA shaped their outlook on the importance of PE, contributed to their self-efficacy in teaching PE, and improved their ability to create inclusive lesson plans. One participant mentioned, “That knowledge I think is invaluable in finding a place for everyone to have an entry point. I can’t imagine someone not knowing about sports and physical activity, teaching phys ed inclusively, you couldn’t.” (T10, Mr. Jones).

In contrast, many of the female generalist teachers discussed how their lack of personal interest and experience in sports may have made their PE classes very different from teachers who have passion and experience with sports. They also described how their lack of personal experience or interest may negatively impact their self-efficacy and confidence in teaching PE, and their female students’ engagement. One participant mentioned, “…myself not being as confident, maybe isn’t trying to do all the different skills, or isn’t doing the different things that the teacher next door is doing because I don’t have the training or the confidence that teacher has.” (T3, Ms. Campbell).

However, there was a discussion that female generalist teachers with low confidence in PE might be able to connect with disengaged female students because they can directly relate to their experiences. One participant commented, “The group of girls that would have lower levels of enthusiasm and be more engaged in dance or yoga or even just going for walks, I’d have to say I do identify with that group.” (T2, Ms. Baker).

In order to address their intrapersonal barriers, all participants were either open to or expressed a clear desire for PD opportunities to engage girls in PE. One commented, “I think we’re doing a disservice by not having more phys ed PD.” (T2, Ms. Baker). Another participant stated “Yeah, getting girls engaged, that’s for sure important. I’m always open to learning different things.” (T9, Ms. Irving). Participants described how they are interested in learning practical strategies to engage girls in PE, build girls’ confidence, and improve teacher and female student relationships. Another participant said, “I do need to approach some girls differently and I think a lot of teachers would love to have that resource or PD or whatever it may be provided to them. I think it would be awesome.” (T6, Ms. Fleming).

6.3.2. Category 2: Institutional Barriers and Facilitators

This category describes institutional barriers and facilitators that existed within the educational system and school environment that impacted teacher participants’ abilities to teach girl-friendly PE and were beyond teachers’ direct control. Participants discussed how the amount and type of support they received from their school administrations, marginalization of PE, curriculum content, and PD opportunities have either helped or hindered their capacity to teach PE inclusively.

Participants reported that the prioritization of PE varied from school to school and was dependent on whether teaching staff or school administrators were passionate about PE. One participant mentioned, “Amongst the elementary schools in our boards the funding is different… I think it depends on who’s there and who has the passion, who is putting their foot down.” (T3, Ms. Campbell). The funding that teaching staff receive might have an impact on the variety of options and activities teachers can deliver to their students in PE, which, in turn, impacted their ability to learn about and deliver girl-friendly PE. One participant said, “the school I was at before had fairly limited resources, and there were very traditional kind of materials in the in the gym storage” (T4, Ms. Dunn). Other participants described how the financial support from their schools and administrative staff had allowed them to provide activities that their female students favour in PE. One participant mentioned, “one year I had a girl in my class who was really into boxing so I brought someone into class and he taught them some self-defence.” (T8, Ms. Hayes).

There was also some discussion about the marginalization of PE in some schools. Notably, generalist teachers described how prioritizing PE can be a struggle on its own, much less thinking about how they could make their PE classes more inclusive to girls. Lack of time seemed to be a constraint to successfully delivering PE as a generalist teacher. One participant mentioned, “often teachers will cut gym if they have to extend something like math for example.” (T2, Ms. Baker).

Participants also discussed how improving the quality of the PD available would be important. Current PD was described as short-term. Many participants in this study desired PD that is ongoing, practical, and of high quality. One participant commented, “…to have it over a duration of time that doesn’t just stop after that 3:30 mark, like okay your PD is done, hopefully, you wrote down every instruction that you need and you have amazing games for the next 100 days of school, good luck to you…” (T5, Ms. Edwards).

Furthermore, the elementary generalist teachers described how they felt unsupported in teaching girl-friendly PE (and teaching PE in general). They expressed that they were interested in learning strategies to manage the variety of student interests and abilities in their classes, improving student mental health, and gaining confidence in teaching. One participant mentioned, “I think general PD and resources for how to teach gym effectively for all learners would be awesome and then maybe girls as like a subgroup within that.” (T6, Ms. Fleming). Likewise, another participant stated, “I think now more than ever we need to be aiming for greater mental health, and obviously a huge piece of that is phys ed, getting outside and having the training to support that would be life-changing.” (T2, Ms. Baker).

7. Discussion

Our findings demonstrate that teacher attitudes, perspectives, implicit biases, personal and professional backgrounds, knowledge, training, and school characteristics can influence their capacity to teach girls inclusively in PE. These findings provide insight into the PD needs of some teachers for girl-friendly PE.

7.1. Discussion of Theme 1: What Are Teachers Seeing?

We explored the participants’ experiences to gain an understanding of what teachers are seeing with female students. Participants representing various demographics and professional backgrounds all identified and described multiple barriers impacting girls’ engagement in PE, including poor confidence and self-esteem, lack of skill, dislike of competition, and feelings of fear, intimidation, or exclusion. However, none of the participants in this study recognized gender stereotypes or societal expectations as a barrier. This may indicate that participants did not fully comprehend how these societal roles expectations could play a significant role in girls’ lives.

Oliver and Kirk (2016) discuss the potential positive impact on girls if teachers adopt an activist approach involving sustained listening and responding over time. Teachers could recognize and address the inequity and bias impacting girls in PE classes by engaging in open discussion about the girls’ experiences (Oliver & Kirk, 2016). Given that gender bias significantly affects girls’ participation in PE, teachers should actively listen to students and collaborate with them to address identified barriers (Corr et al., 2019; Cowley et al., 2021; Fisette, 2013). Our findings underscore the practical need for targeted PD that empowers teachers to recognize and address gender inequity, sex discrimination, bias, and stereotypes within physical activity and sports contexts. Systematic training on these topics should be integrated into both pre-service education and ongoing teacher PD programs to foster inclusive PE environments for girls.

Many participants in our study described girls as social, hesitant, fearful, and unskilled in PE. This aligns with the teachers’ views in the case study by Murphy et al. (2014), as the teachers described how girls’ disengagement is expected. This is consistent with past research findings on teachers’ perspectives in PE, in that teachers might not be aware of their own biases about gender and PE and how they impact their teaching (Murphy et al., 2014; Valley & Graber, 2017). Similar biases held by teachers in the Pollock et al. (2021) mixed methods study were improved by the facilitation of a training program that aimed to increase teachers’ awareness about gender bias in schools and provide strategies to challenge it. Based on our findings and past research, teaching practices may be improved if teachers are trained to recognize, reflect on, and challenge their implicit and explicit biases about girls’ role in PE.

7.2. Discussion of Theme 2: What Are Teachers Doing?

We gathered participants’ experiences to develop an understanding of the teaching practices that impact girls’ inclusion and engagement in PE classes. The educators in this study, regardless of demographics, training, or professional background, all described many strategies they were employing in PE to improve the inclusion and engagement of girls in their PE classes.

When discussing student autonomy, teachers described how they value students’ voices and provide choices, offer a variety of activities, and provide leadership opportunities. All these strategies align with best practices and have been successful methods of engaging girls in previously discussed literature (Cowley et al., 2021; S. L. Gibbons & Humbert, 2008; Lamb et al., 2018; Mitchell et al., 2015). For example, many of the teacher participants in our study reported valuing girls’ interests and preferences, which was a successful strategy in the girl-centred PE intervention in a study by Mitchell and colleagues (2015).

Strategies to promote a sense of competence were also discussed by teachers in our study, which included using authentic methods of assessment, engaging students in non-competitive confidence-building activities, facilitating skill progression, offering encouragement to students, offering multiple levels of competition, creating a supportive learning environment, and goal setting. All these strategies are considered best practices and have been successful in promoting confidence, skill development and engagement in girls (Corr et al., 2019; Cowley et al., 2021; S. L. Gibbons & Humbert, 2008; Mitchell et al., 2015; Sulz et al., 2020). Many teachers in our study reported how they utilize authentic methods of assessment that are based on learning outcomes such as effort, attitude, and progression, which avoid uncomfortable evaluation situations that were reported by girls in the qualitative inquiries by Corr et al. (2019) and Cowley et al. (2021).

Teachers described some strategies they use to promote a sense of relatedness, including role modelling, promoting healthy peer relationships, using a variety of grouping strategies, fostering positive teacher–student relationships, and using gender-neutral language. All these strategies have been identified in the literature as best practices (Cameron & Humbert, 2020; Coen et al., 2018; Corr et al., 2019; Cowley et al., 2021; Fisette, 2013; S. L. Gibbons & Humbert, 2008). Teachers’ role modelling skills, humility, and inclusive behaviour were highly mentioned strategies that have been reported by girls as motivating factors for their participation (Corr et al., 2019; Cowley et al., 2021; Lamb et al., 2018; Mitchell et al., 2015).

Although the teachers in this study mentioned multiple strategies, there were pillar best practices that were rarely mentioned. For example, there were only a few strategies identified to challenge gender bias, promote diversity, explore advocacy, and discuss gender stereotypes. Nearly all the strategies mentioned, such as discussing gender inequity with their students, were implemented in other school subjects outside of PE and a PA or sports context by teachers in this study. Societal expectations and gender norms have been identified as a barrier to girls’ participation in PE, as they are related to issues such as body image, health-related behaviours, and upholding views of femineity in a sport or PA context (Corr et al., 2019; Cowley et al., 2021). Cameron and Humbert (2020) discuss the importance of a teacher’s role in critically examining gender in their classroom and facilitating discussions with students about the sources of gender inequities. None of the strategies mentioned by teachers in this study included discussions, reflections, or lessons on gender inequity in sports or PA. Teachers should be aware of how and why gender bias manifests in PE and be given strategies to address it in the PE space (Cameron & Humbert, 2020).

Some strategies mentioned by participants do not align with recommended best practices for teachers. Some of the teachers in this study described how they segregate girls and boys when organising activities and making teams, with the intention of making girls more comfortable. While offering optional girls-only activities aligns with best practices, mandatory gender segregation may discourage some girls and create discomfort for gender-diverse students (Cowley et al., 2021; Devís-Devís et al., 2018; Fisette, 2013). This is similar to the findings of Valley and Graber (2017), where the teachers unintentionally created unequal power dynamics between genders in their classes by segregating girls from boys in PE. Although some teachers in our study could identify why this strategy may perpetuate the notion that girls are more suited for a less competitive and more fun PE class, some did not. To meaningfully shift practice, it is essential that future PD equips teachers not only with instructional strategies, but also with tools to critically examine their own practices and assumptions. This would allow educators to integrate discussions of gender bias, diversity, and advocacy directly into their PE teaching practice rather than delegating such conversations to other subject areas.

7.3. Discussion of Theme 3: What Is Helping and Hindering Teachers?

During the interviews, participants expressed positive attitudes toward including and engaging girls in PE and were motivated to improve their teaching practices. Unlike the teachers in the study by Howley and O’Sullivan (2021), who were hesitant to change their practices, the participants were open to changing their practices to support girls and have even recognized instances where they needed support. The participants expressed a desire to have a more diverse toolkit or reservoir of teaching strategies in PE.

The finding that teachers’ personal experiences and backgrounds play a significant role in teaching PE is not novel in educational research. Several previous studies have made connections between teachers’ attitudes, confidence, and approaches in PE to their past experiences and perceived abilities with PE, PA, and sports (Barber et al., 2022; Robertson-Wilson et al., 2018). A qualitative study by Robertson-Wilson et al. (2018) conducted semi-structured interviews with five pre-service teachers from Ontario to explore their perspectives and experiences with PE and daily physical activity (DPA). Aligned with our findings, the pre-service teachers’ confidence in PE and DPA was tied to biographical experiences and perceived abilities related to PA (Robertson-Wilson et al., 2018).

Similarly, a study examining pre-service teachers’ biographies and personal experiences and how these shaped their approach to PE discussed how an inclusive and non-competitive pre-service teacher course in PE promotes self-confidence in teaching PE (Barber et al., 2022). Barber et al. (2022) suggested that this course should provide opportunities to reflect on, discuss, and deconstruct past experiences so that physical educators can develop successful teaching methods and confidence. Applying reflection of personal experience and perceived ability to a PD opportunity might challenge the lack of confidence and experience that some generalists report.

There were some notable differences between generalist and PE specialist participants. The PE specialists and the male generalist reported that their experience with sports and PA positively influenced their teaching confidence in PE and shaped their outlook on PE. In contrast, many female generalist teachers reported the opposite, in that their lack of positive experiences with sports or PA contributed to a lack of confidence in teaching PE. This is consistent with recent research by Truelove et al. (2021), who conducted a study of Canadian elementary school generalists and PE specialists. Similarly to our findings, Truelove et al. (2021) found that generalist teachers report a lack of time, confidence, knowledge, experience, and training as barriers to instructing PE. Meanwhile, PE specialists reported that their personal interest and experience were key facilitators.

These insights highlight the need for sustained, structured training for generalist teachers in inclusive PE practices. PD initiatives should include opportunities to reflect on personal experiences, build pedagogical knowledge, and gain confidence through practice-based learning that explicitly addresses gender inclusion. Unlike our study, other findings from Truelove et al. (2021) indicated that teaching philosophies and goals also differ between specialists and generalists. Specialist teachers’ philosophies focused on developing their students’ physical literacy and lifelong capacity to participate in PA; meanwhile, the generalists’ goals were focused on accruing daily PA (Truelove et al., 2021). Based on our findings and past research that generalists and specialists have different needs, we suggest that future PD be tailored to the unique needs of teachers’ diverse professional and personal backgrounds.

8. Limitations

There are limitations to this research. Owing to the nature of qualitative inquiry and the small sample size, the findings cannot be generalized to all teachers in Ontario or beyond. While some methodological literature suggests that up to 30 interviews may be ideal for grounded theory studies, our use of rigorous, iterative, and theory-driven sampling and analysis allowed us to reach data saturation with 10 participants (Then et al., 2014). This was supported by the consistency of emerging themes and the redundancy of data observed after the ninth interview.

Another limitation to consider is selection bias. This occurs when there is a group of the population that is less likely to be recruited. It is important to consider that the group of teachers who voluntarily participated in this study may not represent the entire teacher population accurately in terms of views and attitudes toward girls in PE.

This research was focused on girl-friendly PE and teacher PD; the interviews were designed to inquire about biological females, as opposed to those who identify as female. It was beyond the scope of this work to inquire into PE for students who identify as a different gender from their sex and the teacher PD needs for this. However, this is an important and emerging area that will require teacher PD and additional approaches to gender-inclusive PE.

9. Conclusions

In conclusion, our findings highlight that engaging girls in PE remains a challenge for teachers, despite progress in PE research. While teachers are implementing various strategies to foster inclusion, there is a clear need for additional support and tailored PD. Although many educators hold positive views and employ effective practices, gaps in their knowledge and teaching methods persist. Addressing these gaps, along with the intrapersonal barriers teachers face, could enhance their confidence and ultimately improve the PE experience for girls.

Providing PD opportunities and support for teachers is key to addressing girls’ disengagement and exclusion in PE. Building on Oliver and Kirk’s (2016) work, this research emphasizes the need to shift from merely documenting ‘what is’ to envisioning and describing ‘what can be’. This research provides insights and recommendations for developing future PD programs tailored to the needs of Ontario teachers. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine teachers’ perspectives and experiences with a pragmatic focus on PD. The findings offer valuable guidance on structuring PD opportunities that equip teachers with the necessary tools to move toward more inclusive and engaging PE for girls.