Ennis 2006

1. Kathleen Wack
Readings In Coaching and Teaching
Review Critique Form
I. What review is this? Ennis, C. (2006). Curriculum: Forming and Reshaping the
Vision of Physical Education in a High Need, Low Demand World of Schools.
Quest, 58, 41-59.
II. How does the author justify the review? What purpose is it intended to serve?
The author highlights events and issues in the development of physical education
curriculum throughout history. The purpose is to discuss future considerations in
the current climate of 2006.
III. How is the selection of the studies handled? Is the review exhaustive, limited
to a given time period, or restricted to research that involves a particular
design, methodology, or population? The review is fairly exhaustive, beginning in
the mid-1800s when physical education began in schools in the United States. She
breaks the review into sections titled, “Historical Roots,” “The New Physical
Education,” “Education of the Total Child,” “Philosophical Basis of the New Physical
Education,” “Evolution of the New Physical Education 1930-1960,” “A Question of
Relative Value,” and “Theoretically Based Approaches to the Physical Education
Curriculum.” All of these studies lead up to the current time in which she discusses
the “vision of school-based physical education has been formed an shaped within
the high need, low demand world of schools” (p.41).
IV. How is the question of quality in the selected studies handled? What does the
author say about the credibility of what is reviewed? She does not comment
regarding how she chose the works to review in the paper.
V. How does the author sort or categorize the studies? What theoretical
framework is used to organize the studies reviewed? The studies are
categorized into time periods. “Historical Roots” is from mid-1800s to World War I.
“The New Physical Education” refers to the time period of early 1900s to 1930s.
“Evolution of the New Physical Education” is an analysis of 1930-1960. “Theoretical
Based Approaches to Physical Education Curriculum” starts with the 1960s and
moves to present day.
VI. Are the actual data reported (qualitative or quantitative) or is the review done
data free? Give an example to show type. The paper is data free. However, Ennis
cites
VII. Is there an attempt to identify
a. Need for additional research (give example)?

2. b. Problems with the kind of question(s) asked (give example)?
c. Persisting technical difficulty with study designs, methods, subjects, or
data analysis (give example)?
VIII. Where is the task of summary handled (after major sections, end of review,
not at all, etc.)?
IX. How are the tasks of summary and integration handled? How does the author
get from individual studies to general conclusions? Is some form of meta-
analysis used, or are the author’s assertions based on some type of vote
counting?
X. What are the main conclusions drawn from the review?
XI. What applications (if any) are suggested as a result of reviewing the studies?
How careful (explicit, clear, and thorough) do you think the author has been
basing his or her suggestions on the studies reviewed and the conclusion
derived?
XII. Write an abstract of what you might have said if you were asked to review this
review. Do not repeat method, content, or conclusions, but focus on such
issues as clarity, credibility, organization, topicality and utility.