Many adapted aquatic instructors and teachers have limited experience teaching students with disabilities (Conaster et al., 2002). Conaster et al. (2000) found that insufficient training (e.g., adapted aquatics workshops) was the reason for the failure of adapted aquatics programs. The National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (2001) indicates that people with disabilities experience lower rates of social activity and leisure-time physical activity than people without disabilities and show feelings of isolation or depression. Adapted Aquatics Field Experiences (AAFE) fulfill this need as they have as their primary goals to help people with disabilities to make incremental improvements in their levels of physical activity and to facilitate more opportunities to engage socially with their peers. Pre-service teachers need specific information and support in adapting and modifying equipment and techniques for conducting successful instruction to a class filled with students that have a wide range of abilities (Conaster et al., 2002). Physical Education programs are charged with preparing teachers who can implement socially just pedagogies (Sato & Hodge, 2012). Using cross cultural and community – based field experiences, both enhance pre-service teachers’ positive teaching experiences toward students with disabilities and impacts the lives of students with disabilities.
Method:
The purpose of this study was to examine pre-service physical educators’ academic experiences in AAFE. This study was grounded in the framework of Activity Theory (Grossman et al., 1999) that emphasizes the importance of field experiences in learning how to teach adapted aquatics through engagement in practice within a community (Shaler & Fusco, 2003). Field experiences provide both tacit and explicit knowledge of communication with cooperative teachers who mentor pre-service educators by sharing their experiences with the aid of useful journals, reflections, and voices in how to effectively engage in adapted aquatics instruction. The participants were ten students in adapted physical education (APE) courses at a Midwestern university in the U.S. Data were collected from face to face interviews, adapted aquatic reflection papers, weekly journal reflections entries, and follow – up interviews. Data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis (Merriam, 1998).
Analysis/Results:
The following themes emerged from the aforementioned data collection practice: (a) dilemmas of meeting therapeutic and educational expectations from cooperative teachers, (b) a ‘shocking’ experiences: feeling under-prepared in adapted aquatics, and (c) learning experiences from special education teachers during adapted aquatics.
Conclusions:
APE coursework must improve preparation of pre-service teachers working in adapted aquatics programs with greater cultural competence.