The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture

Topic Information

Dear Colleagues,

The scholar–practitioner has long been identified and discussed by academics working in disciplines that have strong practical and vocational crossovers. Disciplines with literature addressing the scholar–partitioner thus range widely and include conflict resolution (Kelman, 2000), counselling (Holloway, 1994) Social Work (Smith, 2006), nursing (Forsythe, 2017), complementary medicine (Birch, 2015), organizational studies (Coghlan, 2021), management (Tkachenko, 2016), leadership (Hampton 2010) education and special education (Linn and Hemmer, 2011), minority education (Covington, 2017), religious and spirituality studies (Gross, 2001; Wellman, 2006), international relations (Bertucci et al., 2014), human resources (Hughes, 2016), and yoga studies (Singleton and Larios, 2020). It is also worth noting that a plethora of generic articles and texts on the scholar–practitioner (see, for example, Hynes, 2021) inform the topic. However, with very few notable exceptions (in particular, Van Rheenen and DeOrnellas’ 2018 edited collection on scholars–practitioners in the US context), interrogations of the scholar–practitioner within sport and physical culture remain limited and underdeveloped in spite of a growing importance being placed on the increasingly close relationships between higher education institutions and these fields. As higher education becomes increasingly industry-facing, vocationally oriented, and focused on growing their civic missions, the scholar–practitioner becomes an important point of interface or suture between the knowledge and practice of these different worlds, having much to offer both. However, one of our concerns in this Special Edition is examining how we might move beyond the binaries of theory and practice. The practices and identities associated with scholars and practitioners are often lived, experienced, and represented as binaries. How can we evolve the scholar–practitioner relationship in constructive ways, and what might the implications of evolution be? Therefore, the purpose of the Special Edition is both to revisit and advance the concept of the scholar–practitioner by exploring a range of relationships and issues related to moving beyond the scholar–practitioner as a binary. Contributions can be in the form of a research article, a conceptual paper, or a review).  We are especially interested in the following subtopics as they connect to the issue of binary relationships, but submissions can address other topics as well:

• Revisiting the value of the ‘sociological imagination’ for everyday life in a lived sense;
• Reflexivity as a mode of living engagement;
• Closing the space between (or integrating) theory and practice (and vice versa);
• Positioning the scholar–practitioner as a ‘way of knowing’ (as one involved in enlightened critical practice);
• Dismantling traditional boundaries within academic and practical thought;
• Making theory live (through a critical consciousness of its use);
• The challenges of being a scholar–practitioner.

References

Bertucci, E. Borges-Herrero, E., & Fuentes-Julio, C. (2014) Toward “best practices” in scholar–practitioner relations: insights from the field of inter-American affairs. International Studies Perspectives, 15(1), 54–72.

Birch, S. (2015) Understanding Qi in Clinical Practice--Perspectives from an Acupuncture Scholar-Practitioner. Journal of Chinese Medicine, (107).

Coghlan, D. (2021) Schein, Edgar H.: The Scholar-Practitioner as Clinical Researcher. Springer Books, 1527–1539.

Covington, M., Chavis, T., & Perry, A. (2017) A scholar-practitioner perspective to promoting minority success in STEM. Journal for Multicultural Education,11 (2), 149–159.

Forsythe, L. (2017) Doctor of Nursing Projects Versus Research: Developing the Clinical Scholar Practitioner. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1): 14–14.

Gross, R. M. (2001) Passion and peril: transgressing boundaries as a feminist scholar-practitioner. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion, 13(2), 224–241.

Hampton, K. (2010) Transforming school and society: Examining the theoretical foundations of scholar-practitioner leadership. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly, 4(2), 185–193.

Holloway, E. L. (1994) A bridge of knowing: The scholar-practitioner of supervision. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 7(1), 3–15.

Hughes, C. (Ed.). (2016) Bridging the Scholar-Practitioner Gap in Human Resources Development. IGI Global.

Hynes, G. (2021) Coghlan, David: The World of the Scholar Practitioner and Practical Knowing. Springer Books, 407–426.

Linn, D., & Hemmer, L. (2011) English language learner disproportionality in special education: Implications for the scholar-practitioner. Journal of Educational Research & Practice, 1(1), 70–80.

Kelman, H. C. (2000) The role of the scholar-practitioner in international conflict resolution. International Studies Perspectives, 1(3), 273–287.

Smith, K. K. (2006) On Becoming a Scholar-Practitioner. In Cnaan, R. A., Dichter, M. E., & Draine, J. (Eds.). (2008) A Century of Social Work and Social Welfare at Penn. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Singleton, M., & Larios, B. (2020) The scholar-practitioner of yoga in the western academy. In Routledge Handbook of Yoga and Meditation Studies. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.

Tkachenko, O., Hahn, H. J., & Peterson, S. (2016) Theorizing the research-practice gap in the field of management: A review of key frameworks and models. In C. Hughes, (Ed.). Bridging the Scholar-Practitioner Gap in Human Resources Development, (101–119). IGI Global.

Van Rheenen, D., & DeOrnellas, J. M. (Eds.). (2018) Envisioning Scholar-practitioner Collaborations: Communities of Practice in Education and Sport. IAP.

Prof. Dr. David Brown
Prof. Dr. Robyn Jones
Topic Editors

Keywords

Participating Journals

Journal Name	Impact Factor	CiteScore	Launched Year	First Decision (median)	APC
Education Sciences education	2.5	4.8	2011	26.8 Days	CHF 1800
Societies societies	1.7	3.1	2011	32.4 Days	CHF 1400
Sports sports	2.2	4.1	2013	20.4 Days	CHF 1800
Sustainability sustainability	3.3	6.8	2009	20 Days	CHF 2400

MDPI Topics is cooperating with Preprints.org and has built a direct connection between MDPI journals and Preprints.org. Authors are encouraged to enjoy the benefits by posting a preprint at Preprints.org prior to publication:

1. Immediately share your ideas ahead of publication and establish your research priority;
2. Protect your idea from being stolen with this time-stamped preprint article;
3. Enhance the exposure and impact of your research;
4. Receive feedback from your peers in advance;
5. Have it indexed in Web of Science (Preprint Citation Index), Google Scholar, Crossref, SHARE, PrePubMed, Scilit and Europe PMC.

Published Papers (9 papers)

Order results

Content type Publication Date

Result details

Normal Extended Compact

Journals

All Education Sciences Societies Sports Sustainability

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Plain Text BibTeX BibTeX (without abstracts) Endnote Endnote (without abstracts) Tab-delimited RIS

Error

Oops... you haven't selected anything for export.

Ok

clear

19 pages, 305 KiB  

Open AccessArticle

Using Critical Social Theory as Professional Learning to Develop Scholar—Practitioners in Physical Education: The Example of Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice

by David H. K. Brown and Rhys G. Lloyd

Educ. Sci. 2024, 14(2), 160; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020160 - 3 Feb 2024

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1172

Abstract

In this conceptual article, we present the idea that the physical education (PE) teacher is, out of professional necessity, a scholar—practitioner. To substantiate and evolve this idea, we develop a Deweyian pragmatist view of the scholar—practitioner which also embraces criticality. This stance collapses [...] Read more.

In this conceptual article, we present the idea that the physical education (PE) teacher is, out of professional necessity, a scholar—practitioner. To substantiate and evolve this idea, we develop a Deweyian pragmatist view of the scholar—practitioner which also embraces criticality. This stance collapses the binary notion of theory and practice and instead embraces theory and practice as a duality. We add a critical dimension to this duality through recognising that scholar—practitioners (especially leaders) require criticality and cultural awareness to raise questions over knowledge conventions and the mitigations of contextual factors their learners may face. We then turn to the critical and practical sociology of Pierre Bourdieu to illustrate how the use of theory may help PE scholar—practitioners enhance their criticality and cultural awareness. More specifically, we draw on Bourdieu’s primary concepts of field, capital and habitus to show how the application of this theory can help PE scholar—practitioners position themselves in relation to their profession and how they might know their field; be aware of their, and their students’, capital worth in relation to that field; and know themselves (their personal—professional habitus). In conclusion, we suggest that for PE scholar—practitioners, theory-based learning and its applied use might be considered a form of professional learning and not be limited to Bourdieu’s theory but extended to include a range of other aspects of critical social theory. We finish by suggesting that this approach to the PE scholar—practitioner is even more pertinent due to the field of PE becoming increasingly a third space—something which requires additional research and analysis. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

16 pages, 255 KiB  

Open AccessConcept Paper

Notes from the Field of the Scholar–Practitioner: Inhabiting the Liminal Space between Research and Practice—A Reflective Account of Holding Dual Identities

by Kirsten Stevens-Wood and Kate Attfield

Societies 2024, 14(2), 13; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc14020013 - 23 Jan 2024

Viewed by 1662

Abstract

Kirsten and Kate are scholar–practitioners studying the people with whom they interact and operate. In this empirical paper, based on their auto/ethnographic reflections, they study some often-neglected circumstances and by-products of scholar–practitioner research. They review aspects of entering research situations with which they [...] Read more.

Kirsten and Kate are scholar–practitioners studying the people with whom they interact and operate. In this empirical paper, based on their auto/ethnographic reflections, they study some often-neglected circumstances and by-products of scholar–practitioner research. They review aspects of entering research situations with which they are connected, participating in them, leaving them behind, and revisiting them. Kirsten is an ethnographer, both working with and studying intentional communities. Kate is a qualitative researcher who operates auto/ethnographically in studying Triple X unintentional communities. This article arises from discussions of Kirsten’s and Kate’s field notes, which have led them to compare and relate their convergent experiences with one another. Kirsten and Kate focus on the physical culture of the environments in which they study. Some traditional boundaries like the isolation of researchers and communities are eroding. Kirsten and Kate care about those they study and continue to hold some responsibility for the lives of people they have entered. They attempt to narrow the space between theory and practice in recognising their interconnected nature. Civic mission is gaining increased currency for researchers and may form a signpost towards the future of research. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

14 pages, 267 KiB  

Open AccessArticle

The Shared Sociological Imagination: A Reflexive Tale from the Boxe Popolare Field

by Lorenzo Pedrini

Societies 2023, 13(11), 233; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13110233 - 31 Oct 2023

Viewed by 1420

Abstract

This paper considers the personal commitment to ‘boxe popolare’ (people’s boxing), focusing on my scholar-practitioner status as a tool to contribute to the boxe popolare agenda by means of what I term ‘shared sociological imagination’. Through a reflexive tale on becoming a boxe [...] Read more.

This paper considers the personal commitment to ‘boxe popolare’ (people’s boxing), focusing on my scholar-practitioner status as a tool to contribute to the boxe popolare agenda by means of what I term ‘shared sociological imagination’. Through a reflexive tale on becoming a boxe popolare member, the article sheds light on the importance of overcoming the theory/practice divide. The first section of the paper draws on ‘habitus as topic and tool’—namely, the methodology I have adopted in a four-year ethnography of boxe popolare—and illustrates sociological imagination as a capacity that can be cultivated even in extremely carnal worlds by social agents who do not belong to academia. The second section broadens the reasoning, arguing that one characterising trait of being a scholar-practitioner in sport and physical culture may consist in working out agency both on an individual and a collective level. Echoing Burawoy’s perspective of ‘public sociology’, such an attempt can be seen as a potentially emancipatory strategy: it allows people with whom we research and practice to live with and through theory, embodying shared understandings in novel mundane activities. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

11 pages, 280 KiB  

Open AccessArticle

Critical Reflexivity and Positionality on the Scholar–Practitioner Continuum: Researching Women’s Embodied Subjectivities in Sport

by Fabiana Cristina Turelli, Alexandre Fernandez Vaz and David Kirk

Sports 2023, 11(10), 206; https://doi.org/10.3390/sports11100206 - 19 Oct 2023

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1848

Abstract

The sports world has many prejudices that have been converted into common sense. Some relate to the idea of athletes being strong or pretty but endowed with little intelligence. There is another view, perhaps a little more accurate, around the reification of consciousness [...] Read more.

The sports world has many prejudices that have been converted into common sense. Some relate to the idea of athletes being strong or pretty but endowed with little intelligence. There is another view, perhaps a little more accurate, around the reification of consciousness in the name of the automation and maximum outcome of the body. Both views are informed by Cartesian thinking, perpetuating the mind–body dichotomy. Such a dichotomy is spread in several other areas in our society, expressed as binaries. We meet a binary when conducting research as well, disembodying the researcher as someone who is neutral, objective, and highly rational, and someone who, in synthesis, performs good mental work, but who must not let feelings intrude. On the contrary, we argue that we are embodied beings who are often not able to (and maybe should not) become detached from previous experiences and knowledge when conducting research. Even though this can present itself as a challenge, we consider that a fluid non-binary positioning encompasses actions holistically and leads to tasks being performed on a continuum. The purpose of this paper is to explore the reflexive process embedded in carrying out a PhD project committed to studying the production of the embodied subjectivities of a group of women high-level athletes in karate. The researcher inserted in the researched environment was not a high-level athlete; however, she had several experiences competing at the amateur level in different countries and faced experiences that were, to some extent, similar to those of the elite athletes. She used her previous experiences as a karateka, researcher, and woman to inform her research-doing since the intersectional social issues faced by her and lived queer feelings motivated her research questions. She plunged into a process of self-reflection and counted on the guidance of the other authors to organise her learning in order to use it in her scholarship. That was, primarily, an experience of “practice” of subjectivity through examining others’ production of subjectivity, besides strengthening a positionality that lacked self-confidence. Thus, we explore issues around the researcher–practitioner theoretical–practical continuum of research-doing, presenting a journey that became empowering. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

15 pages, 272 KiB  

Open AccessArticle

Bridging the Gap: Integrating Theory and Practice for Early Childhood Physical Education Teacher Education in Korea

by Sunghae Park and Hyunwoo Jung

Sustainability 2023, 15(19), 14397; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151914397 - 30 Sep 2023

Viewed by 1175

Abstract

Early childhood physical education (ECPE) plays a crucial role in giving young children their first impressions of physical activity and promoting lifelong participation. In the Korean context, however, the provision of physical education to young children is challenging owing to a lack of [...] Read more.

Early childhood physical education (ECPE) plays a crucial role in giving young children their first impressions of physical activity and promoting lifelong participation. In the Korean context, however, the provision of physical education to young children is challenging owing to a lack of expertise among teachers. This study aims to explore effective teacher training strategies to normalize physical education for young children in Korea. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to derive teacher education strategies that minimize the gap between theory and practice in ECPE. These integration strategies are presented in two categories: pre-service teacher training strategies and in-service teacher training strategies. Five sub-categories were identified within each category, goal, content, method, evaluation, and environment, and the educational implications in terms of minimizing the gap between theory and practice in ECPE teacher education were discussed based on the results. The teacher education strategies derived based on this study are significant in that they prioritize the integration of theory and practice based on the shared opinions of ECPE scholars and practitioners and offer concrete and practical approaches that can actively contribute to the promotion of ECPE. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

24 pages, 538 KiB  

Open AccessArticle

A Typology of Martial Arts Scholar–Practitioners: Types, Transitions, and Tensions in Capoeira

by David S. Contreras Islas and George Jennings

Societies 2023, 13(10), 214; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13100214 - 25 Sep 2023

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2448

Abstract

Martial arts are concerned with continuous technical practice and refinement over a lifetime, while scholarship is ordinarily undertaken by active learners and experienced (occasionally veteran) practitioners. These martial arts scholar–practitioners tend to be positioned according to specific types, from a more distant (and [...] Read more.

Martial arts are concerned with continuous technical practice and refinement over a lifetime, while scholarship is ordinarily undertaken by active learners and experienced (occasionally veteran) practitioners. These martial arts scholar–practitioners tend to be positioned according to specific types, from a more distant (and sometimes critical) scholar with less combat acumen to an instructor keen to read and engage in collaborative research. This article introduces a typology of ten martial arts scholar–practitioner types: (1) Supportive Scholar; (2) Former Practitioner; (3) Practitioner on Stand-by; (4) Immersed Apprentice; (5) Budding Scholar–Practitioner; (6) Established Scholar–Practitioner; (7) Temporary Practitioner–Researcher; (8) Experimental Leader; (9) Inquisitive Teacher; and (10) Curious Practitioner. The types are examined using Capoeira, one of the most academically studied martial arts. Drawing on the Spannungsfeld—the “field of tension” between science and practice—we reveal the specific strengths and limitations of each type while illustrating the common transition between positions across a career or research project. Finally, we consider some practical solutions to mitigate the relative weaknesses and oversights of the specific types, including the ability to form teams of scholar–practitioners from different positions in academia and martial arts. We close with suggestions for empirical research to test and refine our methodological model. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

8 pages, 216 KiB  

Open AccessArticle

Questions of Identity in Sport Psychology Scholar–Practitioners

by Karen Howells

Sports 2023, 11(9), 182; https://doi.org/10.3390/sports11090182 - 13 Sep 2023

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1900

Abstract

As with other academic disciplines, sport psychology academics working in higher education (HE) in the United Kingdom (UK) in lecturer and senior lecturer positions are typically required to hold a PhD in sport psychology or a related discipline. To work in applied practice [...] Read more.

As with other academic disciplines, sport psychology academics working in higher education (HE) in the United Kingdom (UK) in lecturer and senior lecturer positions are typically required to hold a PhD in sport psychology or a related discipline. To work in applied practice with athletes, coaches, National Governing Bodies (NGBs), and sporting organisations, practitioners are required to acquire a qualification that affords registration with the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) through either the British Psychology Society (BPS) or the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES). Accordingly, scholar–practitioners, who have “a foot in both worlds” (Tenkasi and Hay, 2008), are required to have two related but distinct qualifications, each of which requires considerable resources (i.e., time, finances, and commitment) to achieve. This paper addresses some of the dilemmas and conflicts that these individuals may encounter in their primary workplace, which typically does not provide for applied practice (either in time or financial incentives). Specifically, issues around the knowledge-transfer gap will be addressed. Real-world examples will be in the form of reflections from the author’s own experiences. I am a senior lecturer in sport and exercise psychology at Cardiff Metropolitan University and the programme director of the MSc Sport Psychology. The role requires me to be HCPC registered, as well as have a PhD in sport psychology. I am also an HCPC Practitioner Psychologist, registered following completion of the BPS Qualification in Sport and Exercise Psychology (QSEP). My practice is limited to minimal private work and the supervision of trainee sport psychologists (BPS). At the end of the paper, I leave the reader with three questions to prompt reflection on what being a sport psychologist means and what contributions scholar–practitioners may offer to academic institutions and the clients we work with. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

11 pages, 271 KiB  

Open AccessArticle

Bordering, Connecting, and Dispelling within Sports Coaching: Erasing the Practitioner–Scholar Divide

by Robyn L. Jones, Charles L. T. Corsby and Gethin L. Thomas

Societies 2023, 13(9), 201; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13090201 - 27 Aug 2023

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1760

Abstract

The current picture of sports coaching suggests one where practitioners and scholars operate not so much at a particular interface, but rather on parallel lines of development; in essence, of talking past as opposed to each other. Through a critical re-reading of the [...] Read more.

The current picture of sports coaching suggests one where practitioners and scholars operate not so much at a particular interface, but rather on parallel lines of development; in essence, of talking past as opposed to each other. Through a critical re-reading of the practitioner–scholar divide, this paper takes issue with the existence of the separate identities featured, in addition to the argument that we merely need a better, rather straightforward, connection between theory and practice to ‘fix the problem’. Alternatively, the case made highlights how the problematic ‘othering’ nature of a theory–practice division has severely hampered the development of the field. In terms of structure, we initially challenge existing ‘anti-intellectual’ claims within coaching, essentially by advocating for better appreciating the everyday, socio-pedagogic nature of the activity. In this respect, the relegation of experience, of the inherent ‘code of coaching’ (so dear to coaches themselves), is protected against. Secondly, we promote the idea of encouraging coaches, coaching scholars, and coach educators to consider the indivisibility of theory and practice through the use of such notions as sensitizing concepts, internalisation, and authenticity to improve the ‘doing’ of the job. Of particular importance here is the development and utilisation of a critical consciousness of coaching; not only of thoroughly understanding the activity, but also in actively fashioning it through engagement with new ideas. This latter notion gives required credence, however loosely, to some guiding frame of reference; otherwise we become enmeshed in, and blinded by, the immediate. In dismantling the wall that has divided practitioners and scholars by not giving authority or indeed acceptance to such fixed positions, we alternatively advocate for the creation of a more authentic coaching life through living the theory that actively sustains it. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

15 pages, 269 KiB  

Open AccessArticle

“Scholar–Practitioners”, Reflexivity and the Illusio of the Field: Ethnography, Yoga Studies and the Social Scientific Study of Religion

by Matteo Di Placido

Societies 2023, 13(8), 195; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13080195 - 19 Aug 2023

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1154

Abstract

This article dialogues with “yoga studies” and the social scientific study of religion (e.g., the sociology of religion and religious studies), arguing that both substantially neglect a thorough discussion of scholars’ engagement in the field despite being largely composed by “scholar–practitioners”. This is [...] Read more.

This article dialogues with “yoga studies” and the social scientific study of religion (e.g., the sociology of religion and religious studies), arguing that both substantially neglect a thorough discussion of scholars’ engagement in the field despite being largely composed by “scholar–practitioners”. This is problematic from a methodological point of view as well as from an ethical perspective. Moving in the interstices between biographical reflections, critical social theory and methodological notes on embodied ethnographic research, I self-reflexively discuss my “shifting positionality” from devoted yoga practitioner to critical scholar, mapping the most significant turning points that I encountered during my research on the pedagogies of modern forms of yoga (2017–current). In so doing, I also discuss my overall positioning, participation and ethical reflections in relation to the main object of inquiry of my research. From this, I posit that the positions of scholar and practitioner are, at least in some cases, incommensurable, while the scholar–practitioner may also foster a unique way of knowing based on reflexivity as a living engagement and on the linkages between theory and practice from which there is much to gain. Full article

(This article belongs to the Topic The Scholar Practitioner in Sport, Education, and Physical Culture)

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Plain Text BibTeX BibTeX (without abstracts) Endnote Endnote (without abstracts) Tab-delimited RIS

 

Error

Oops... you haven't selected anything for export.

Ok

clear

Displaying articles 1-9