physical literacy Archives

Balancing act: can screens really get kids moving?

As digital technology becomes more ingrained in early childhood education, the debate over its effects on young children’s physical literacies intensifies. While there’s no denying the potential of technology to engage children in learning, it’s crucial to ask: How does it affect their physical literacies? This article explores the impact of digital technology on physical literacies and offers practical advice for parents and educators looking to strike a healthy balance. My research specifically investigates how teachers and parents perceive digital technology’s influence on young children’s physical literacies, addressing a critical gap in understanding its effects beyond motor skills.

The Growing Role of Digital Technology in Early Childhood

We live in an increasingly digital world, and young children are no exception. Tablets, smartboards, and educational apps are now staples in early childhood education. They offer children interactive learning experiences that can stimulate creativity, enhance cognitive skills, and foster social collaboration.

Research shows that when used effectively, technology can support literacy and numeracy development, catering to diverse learning needs (OECCED). But as screen time increases, concerns about its effect on physical literacies also rise. With children spending more time on devices, is there enough time left for physical activity, the kind of play that builds motor skills like running, jumping, and balancing?

What Is Physical Literacy?

The Australian Sports Commission states that physical literacy is about more than just mastering physical skills—it’s about confidence, motivation, and the ability to engage in physical activities for life. Early childhood is the perfect time to nurture this because active play lays the foundation for lifelong health. The Australian Physical Literacy Framework and The Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) stress the importance of physical activity in children’s overall development, highlighting that active play is essential for physical, social, and emotional growth.

Yet, with the rise of screen-based learning, educators and parents must ask: how do we ensure that technology enhances, rather than detracts from, children’s physical literacies? Despite its importance, current research lacks a comprehensive definition of how digital technology influences physical literacies in young children. My research seeks to address this gap by exploring how teachers and parents perceive and define physical literacies in today’s digital age.

How Does Digital Technology Affect Physical Literacies?

Research on the intersection of digital technology and physical literacies presents a complex picture. On one hand, increasing screen time is linked to lower levels of physical activity, which can hinder the development of essential motor skills such as balance, coordination, and agility. While studies show a correlation between increased screen time and reduced physical activity, little research has explored how parents and educators actively manage these challenges in early education settings.

On the other hand, there’s growing evidence that digital technology can support physical literacies when used creatively. Motion-based games, such as those using augmented reality (AR) or exergaming, encourage children to move while they engage with technology. Apps that promote activities like dance or yoga can integrate fun physical challenges with the engaging aspects of digital play, making them excellent tools for developing motor skills.

So, how can we ensure that technology is a tool that promotes, rather than stifles, physical development?

Striking the Right Balance: Practical Tips for Educators and Parents

The key is balance—striking the right balance between technology and physical activity in early childhood education is essential for fostering healthy development. Here are some tips to help educators and parents find the right balance when incorporating digital technologies into young children’s physical literacies:

Incorporate active digital play, where educators and parents can choose technology tools that encourage movement, such as interactive whiteboards for dance activities or apps designed for physical exploration. These tools help make learning more dynamic and engaging.
Limiting screen time according to the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines is important to prevent it from replacing physical activity. It is essential to prioritise free playtime, where children can move, explore, and engage physically, which is vital for their development.
Blending technology with outdoor play provides another valuable approach. By using nature exploration apps to guide outdoor activities or integrating storytelling apps with physical role-playing, educators and parents can ensure that technology supports active learning while fostering both cognitive and physical growth.
Engaging parents is equally important. Encouraging co-play or co-viewing during screen time transforms it into a shared experience that prompts movement and meaningful interactions. This not only strengthens parent-child relationships but also supports the development of physical literacies.
Prioritising unstructured outdoor play remains essential, as it offers children opportunities to develop motor skills and interact with their environment. Ensuring children spend time outdoors every day, free from screens, supports their physical and emotional well-being.

Doesn’t have to be a battle

The relationship between digital technology and physical literacies doesn’t have to be a battle. The truth is, when used thoughtfully, digital tools can complement physical play and support young children’s overall development. It’s about finding a balance—one where technology enriches learning without overshadowing the need for physical activity.

By integrating technology that encourages movement and setting clear boundaries around screen time, educators and parents can help children thrive in both the digital world and the physical one. By examining how digital technology intersects with physical literacies, my research aims to provide educators and parents with the knowledge they need to make informed decisions about integrating technology while fostering active play. Understanding these perspectives can help bridge the gap between concerns about screen time and the opportunities digital tools offer to support movement and engagement.

What’s your experience with balancing technology and physical activity in early childhood education? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

Trent Davis is an experienced early childhood educator and is passionate about advancing research in the early years’ domain. He is currently an adjunct academic and PhD candidate (post-confirmation) within the School of Education and Professional Studies at Griffith University. His study applies a case study and phenomenological approach to uncover these perspectives, offering practical insights that can shape future early childhood practices.

HEADER IMAGE: COURTESY OF AB PATERSON COLLEGE

What you should know about physical literacy

On Monday, we posted on the very real challenges facing those who teach PE on Zoom. Today we explore the meaning of physical literacy in the classroom.

The concept of physical literacy is not new but it has taken some time for key stakeholders here in Australia, such as Sport Australia, to start using the term to promote physical activity engagement

Sport Australia has published the Australian Physical Literacy Framework (APLF) (2020). This document provide readers with examples of practice across five stages of (human) development. At no stage do these documents refer to school or curriculum programs.

Instead another document the Physical Literacy Guide for Schools presents a holistic vision of the promotion of physical activity through the following macro-level areas: i. Culture, Organisation and Environment, ii. Curriculum Teaching and Learning, and iii. Partnerships. Even this latter document does little to explain how the concepts, domains or elements fit into health and physical education leaving Scott et al (2020) to write that the “…challenge is to find ways to appropriate integrate the APLF into HPE programmes.”

Physical literacy “…can be described as the motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge and understanding to value and engage in physical activity for life” (Whitehead, 2019, p. 8).

Our purpose for writing our article (see Brown & Whittle, 2021) was to explore this interest in the concept of physical literacy as it relates to the Victorian/Australian Curriculum: Health and Physical Education.

While others have highlighted how the term and concept has gained traction internationally in the development of policy and the teaching during school physical education, we considered how physical literacy was likely to be taken up by teachers, if at all, and considered how it could be presented in the Victorian Curriculum and subsequently the Australian Curriculum should it be seen as worthwhile and meaningful.

Our additional concern relates to how the concept of physical literacy from its intention to its enactment will occur with teachers. Research from educational policy sociology has suggested that teachers look towards implicit policy documents that are not formal in the curriculum sense (e.g. guidance materials produced by others not curriculum bodies, herein Sport Australia), placing teachers in “…uncharted territory, potentially feeling pressure to strengthen PL outcomes in their HPE programmes” (Scott et al. 2020, p. 6). We see that HPE teachers act as ‘policy actors’ and utilise materials to support their teaching but designed for a different purpose and in fact become ‘quasi-curriculum’.

Given the international and local contexts, we argue that there is perhaps a need to revisit how physical literacy is interpreted and enacted in the key learning area of HPE.

Currently within the Victorian Curriculum there is no explicit reference to the concept of physical literacy, even though there are likely practitioners that discuss and engage with the concept in their schools and during their HPE classes.

The contemporary pedagogical practices of primary and secondary health and physical education teachers are in line with the content descriptions and achievement standards of the curriculum. As an example, the teaching of movement skills, health-based physical activity/lifelong physical activity, movement concepts and teamwork and social capabilities are examples of content seen daily nationwide in health and physical education classes. All these content areas lead to the development of physical literacy. This then calls into question why physical literacy and why not physical education?

Some have suggested that the concepts of physical literacy are more closely aligned to the general capabilities in the Australian Curriculum. Unfortunately however, the general capabilities are not present within the Victorian Curriculum. Given these points that we have raised above, we considered whether the concept of physical literacy could be considered as the sixth proposition that informs the content of the curriculum. One argument for our justification relates to the abstract nature within the research and lay literature of physical literacy as a concept. Several reasons led us to this position that PL could act as the sixth proposition:

That PL is a contemporary and futures-focussed term that currently pervades to lexicon of teachers and academics within the physical education literature
That PL derives its content and disciplinary base from multiple different perspectives and these may be privileged or not in enactment
Aligns with a 21^st century curriculum
That there is an exponential explosion of research related to this term in the development, practice and assessment associated with HPE
Most importantly, that the concept is esoteric in nature, is difficult to define and there is little consensus about how it should be enacted in physical education.

Our contention is that it is best placed to exist as an overarching concept, or proposition within the curriculum. We argue that the concept of physical literacy should standalone as a proposition, as opposed to being embedded in the valuing movement proposition as proposed in the ACARA review of the HPE curriculum (ACARA, 2021). Additionally, and is not often stated, teachers are explicitly involved in physical literacy work during the teaching of health and physical education. Promoting its virtues as a proposition within the curriculum could be seen as an acceptable ‘middle ground’ in that it philosophically and conceptually approves that is should be part of the developing curriculum language, whilst simultaneously suggesting that teachers do physical literacy work.

Trent Brown is a senior lecturer at Deakin University and a former president of the Australian Council for Health Physical Education and Recreation. He has been an active researcher in the areas of physical education curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. In 2018 he co-authored Examination Physical Education – Policy, Pedagogies and Possibilities (Routledge) with Professor Dawn Penney.

Rachael Whittle has authored a number of health and physical education text books for both 7-10 HPE and VCE Physical Education and delivers teacher professional learning both nationally and internationally. Rachael’s doctoral studies research focussed on influences on academic performance in senior-secondary physical education.