Lessons learned from Paralympic School Day: Reflections from the students

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to seek to understand and describe the experiences of sixth grade students, ages 11 and 12, taking part in the published Paralympic School Day (PSD) programme in relation to shaping attitudes and perceptions of disability and disability sport. This qualitative study utilized a phenomenological approach. Fifty-two students were purposively sampled, after taking part in a PSD event. Data from reflective writing responses were collected and analysed inductively using a three-step approach. The analysis revealed three interrelated themes: (a) ‘just like the rest of us’: participants’ new relatedness to those with disabilities; (b) ‘what it means to be normal’: challenging the idealized notion of normal; and (c) ‘PSD changed my view of disabled people’: a shift in paradigm. As the participants interacted with and learned from athletes with disabilities in a purposeful manner, they came to understand that disability was not synonymous with other-ness. This study provided new depth to our understanding of how participants experience PSD programmes, including profundities related to paradigm shifts, aha moments, and the meaning of normal.

Keywords

Physical education disability sport perceptions qualitative

Background

Attitudes are important in the lives of human beings, as they help guide behaviour towards goals, simplify information, and communicate values (Katz, 1960). Attitude research in adapted physical education (APE) provides a means to evaluate the thoughts, feelings, and beliefs of peers towards inclusive and integrative practices (Hutzler, 2003). The study of positive attitude change has long been divided between two lines of research: (a) investigating whether contact and exposure to an attitudinal referent has an effect on attitudes (Hutzler et al., 2007; Liu et al., 2010; McKay et al., 2015; Panagiotou et al., 2008; Reina et al., 2011; Xafopoulos et al., 2009), and (b) investigating whether information that will increase cognition has an effect on attitudes (Hutzler et al., 2007; Loovis and Loovis, 1997). One of the most important variables in successful inclusive practice is the attitude of the peer group (McKay et al., 2015; Sherrill, 1998; Sherrill et al., 1994; Tripp and Sherrill, 1991). Peer rejection can limit social learning opportunities and can negatively impact the academic achievement of students with disabilities (Block, 2016). Peer education, or preparing peers without disabilities for the inclusion of peers with disabilities, is considered an essential component of successful inclusion (Houston-Wilson et al., 1997; Loovis and Loovis, 1997), which lends itself to research investigating programmes and curricula that impact peer group attitude change.

Paralympic School Day programme

Disability awareness programmes offer an avenue for raising awareness and changing attitudes towards people with disabilities. Published disability awareness programmes focusing on disability sport are often designed for use in a single country and are not research-tested (e.g. Sport Ability: Australia; Ability vs. Ability: Britain; School Project: Belgium; Petro-Canada: Canada). One disability sport awareness programme, Paralympic School Day (PSD) (published by the International Paralympic Committee (IPC)), is designed for use internationally. Furthermore, to the knowledge of the authors, the PSD curriculum is the only published disability awareness programme on which field-based research has been conducted (Liu et al., 2010; McKay et al., 2015; Panagiotou et al., 2008; Xafopoulos et al., 2009). PSD is a multidimensional programme, created to raise awareness and provide a platform for attitude change through education about the Paralympics, individual differences, and acceptance (IPC, 2006).

The PSD curriculum is founded on the overall belief that youth not experiencing a disability will increase their awareness and understanding when they are informed about the lives and actions of persons with a disability, by experiencing a realistic and holistic portrayal of disability sport and athletes who participate in disability sport. In addition, participants are able to challenge and find meaning in their own beliefs and experiences (IPC, 2006). For more information about planning and executing the PSD curriculum, readers are encouraged to view the IPC website (http://www.paralympic.org/the-ipc/paralympic-school-day), as well as the McKay (2013) manuscript on planning and executing the PSD curriculum.

Published research on PSD, which investigates whether contact and exposure to an attitudinal referent has an effect on attitudes, is limited to a few quantitative studies which measure the attitudes of students without disabilities towards the inclusion of peers with disabilities in physical education. This research has focused on measuring attitude alone (McKay et al., 2015) or measuring attitude and gender combined (Liu et al., 2010; Panagiotou et al., 2008; Xafopoulos et al., 2009). Results of these studies are mixed, showing positive changes in attitude (Liu et al., 2010; McKay et al., 2015; Panagiotou et al., 2008; Xafopoulos et al., 2009) as a result of PSD, but not always at a significant level. The impact of gender on attitude change was also mixed, as Xafopoulos and colleagues (2009) found attitudes to be more positive in girls as a result of the PSD awareness intervention; however, other studies (Liu et al., 2010; Panagiotou et al., 2008) had conflicting findings.

Currently, however, research exploring the efficacy of PSD has not utilized qualitative methods. This research paradigm permits researchers to conduct in-depth explorations of the nature and extent to which participants experience a phenomenon (Brantlinger et al., 2005; Haegele and Sutherland, 2015). Utilizing this paradigm, researchers can gain further insight into the perspectives of students towards PSD programmes by conducting in-depth explorations of the ways in which they interacted with the curriculum (Brantlinger et al., 2005). In this way, the researchers are permitted to examine meaning ascribed to experiences as well as salient features that contribute to these feelings (Haegele and Sutherland, 2015). While this research paradigm has not been used in accordance with the PSD curriculum, a large diversity of studies have utilized qualitative methods in inclusive physical education and disability sport research (Bush et al., 2013; Goodwin, 2008; Grenier et al., 2014; Haegele et al., 2017). Utilizing qualitative methods will address a limitation and direction for future research in the most recent quantitative PSD publication (McKay et al., 2015), where the impact was significant but had very small effect sizes and mean differences. In this research, the scores started at a relatively positive position and moved to an even more positive position, and the authors indicated that future research should consider the detail and insight that qualitative research could bring to the analysis of the impact PSD has on student attitudes and perceptions (McKay et al., 2015).

The power of meaningful contact

This study and the PSD curriculum are situated in Allport’s (1954) contact theory. Allport’s contact theory proposes that social contact will improve relationships between members of majority and minority groups. More specifically, Allport asserted that as people come into contact with others who are different from themselves, their prejudiced ideas diminish as they come to understand other people. Contact is a common theme in awareness research in physical education settings, which supports a combination of contact and knowledge acquisition through awareness activities (Hutzler et al., 2007; Liu et al., 2010; Loovis and Loovis, 1997; McKay et al., 2015; Panagiotou et al., 2008; Reina et al., 2011; Xafopoulos et al., 2009).

Allport (1954) specified six categories of variables (quantitative, status, role, social atmosphere, personality, and area of contact) to be considered in prejudice reduction that maximize the probability that shared values and beliefs will be demonstrated and perceived, and will therefore provide the basis for interpersonal interaction. Allport (1954) asserted that meaningful contact is necessary, as personal situations provide the chance for participants to acquire more information about one another and to get to know one another as individuals. Guided by interpretations of contact theory by Fishbein (1996) and Slininger et al. (2000), the current study focused on four specific categories: (a) equal status; (b) community/authority support; (c) pursuing common cooperative goals; and (d) intimate (meaningful) interactions.

The PSD awareness intervention specifically calls for pleasant and meaningful interaction with a Paralympic athlete based on equal-status contact (IPC, 2006). The curriculum recommends that the athlete and the participants have equal and interactive discussions, and provide and receive assistance from one another (IPC, 2006). In addition, PSD activities are purposely created to be cooperative in nature, as students work alongside Paralympic athletes to achieve group goals at the various activity stations. Personal interactions are supported through PSD, as it is designed to include a variety of supported opportunities for personal interactions: (a) to hear an athlete’s story about life experiences; (b) to learn from the athlete about sport as a human right; and (c) to ask questions and gain exposure to the successes and failures of the athlete (IPC, 2006). In addition, if the athlete is able to lead small group cooperative learning activities, increased personal interactions will occur. Finally, school leaders committed to planning and executing the PSD awareness intervention are indicating a level of support for meaningful and purposeful contact with Paralympic athletes. If the school already has a commitment to diversity through programming, values, and expected behaviours, the norm of acceptance is likely already strong. In addition, active participation during PSD by school leaders and teachers helps to establish the expectation of inclusivity and contact, and shows direct support from authority.

The purpose of this study was to seek to understand and describe the experiences of sixth grade students, ages 11 and 12, taking part in the published PSD programme in relation to shaping attitudes and perceptions of disability and disability sport. An assertion paramount to this research was the belief that the impact of the PSD intervention would be articulated at the student level through written reflections with depth and intensity, offering profundities that can only be expressed in the qualitative realm. These profundities will address a limitation and direction for future research in the most recent quantitative PSD publication (McKay et al., 2015).

Methods

Research design

To explore how the participants made sense of their experiences in PSD, this qualitative study utilized a phenomenological approach. Phenomenological studies seek to understand and describe the essence of experiences (Moustakas, 1994). Phenomenology enables underlying themes and commonalities in meanings to be understood by offering a descriptive, reflective, interpretive, and engaged mode of inquiry. The phenomenological approach is often hermeneutic because, in order to understand the experiences from the perspective of those being studied, the researchers must interpret the data to seek common understandings (Moustakas, 1994). This concept was further explained by Morphy and Goodwin (2012: 136) who explained that phenomenological studies aim to bring a ‘deeper understanding of the nature and meaning of a phenomenon by describing it as closely as possible to the way in which it was experienced within the context in which it took place. Bringing a deeper understanding and meaning to the impact PSD has on sixth grade students will provide valuable insight and data related to the research question.

Participants and setting

Sixth grade students, ages 11 and 12, from an independent school in a northeastern state in the United States of America were purposively sampled for this study. An independent school is independent in its finance and governance from the local, state, and national government. Fifty-two students across four English classes were invited to participate in the study. English classes were selected as a recruitment site because of recommendations by the head of school for data collection. Gender and other specific demographic information pertaining to the student participants are unavailable due to the nature of the data collection and policies of the independent school. The school enrolled 440 students in total, including 147 students in the sixth grade. Students who attended this school lived in a geographically diverse area, spanning 150 different ZIP codes in three states, and 17% of the student body received financial aid. Less than 1% of the student population is identified as having a physical disability, and none of the participants included in this study had a disability. The treatment of participants was in accordance with the ethical standards of the American Psychological Association. The primary researcher had an established relationship with the independent school, and reached out directly to the head of school to discuss implementing the programme. Permission to conduct the study was granted by the institutional review board at the primary researcher’s university. With the research being conducted at an independent school, the head of school (who is the school’s legally authorized representative) approved the study and labelled it a school diversity programme. Information was sent to parents about the study, including the option to opt their child out of the study. Children who were opted out of the study still participated in the PSD experience as part of the school’s daily educational tasks; however, reflective writing responses were not collected from them.

Paralympic School Day experience

The PSD experience took place at the independent school during three consecutive class periods (periods one through three), and included five stations/activities. Each station was derived from the PSD curriculum (IPC, 2006). Stations included sitting volleyball (PSD activity card 4), wheelchair basketball (PSD activity card 5), class discussion about inclusion (PSD activity card 8), Paralympic games (PSD activity card 16), and athlete story (PSD activity card 18). Students gathered together as a large group for the first station, an athlete’s story, which took place in the school auditorium and featured two Paralympians. Next, students split into four groups of 18 students to rotate through stations two through five. Station one was 40 minutes long, and stations two through five were 18 minutes each. Stations two through five included a wheelchair basketball station led by two Paralympic athletes and members of a local wheelchair basketball team, a sitting volleyball station led by two Paralympic athletes, a Paralympic experience station led by a Paralympic athlete, and a reflection/discussion station led by two school staff members trained in facilitating conversations about diversity. The discussion station used a small group format to discuss inclusion, including discussing the notion of ‘normal’, bringing deeper meaning to the PSD experience. Stations were selected based on time, space, equipment, and the station’s ability to best support the components of contact theory. Station selection purposefully covered the four PSD values: respect for sporting achievement (activity cards 4 and 5), respect and acceptance of individual differences (activity card 8), sport as a human right (activity card 16), and empowerment and social support in sport (activity card 18). Paralympians were recruited to assume the role of lead instructors for all stations, with school faculty members taking part alongside the students or observing the activities. The selection of Paralympians was purposeful, as they were chosen based on their ability to lead and engage sixth grade students, their personal and professional background, and their sport specialty. A mix of male and female Paralympians was chosen, representing five different sport teams. Paralympians met with the lead researcher ahead of time to discuss the PSD activity stations and curriculum, modifications for lesson planning, student-centred developmentally appropriate instruction, and overall expectations.

Data collection

Data for this study were collected in the form of reflective writing responses. Writing is a tool that supports comprehension, where students evaluate understandings, confusions, and feelings about a topic (Bangert-Drowns et al., 2004). Writing responses, such as the reflective writing responses used in this study, help students clarify ideas and relationships between ideas, draw on relevant knowledge and experiences, and consolidate and review new experiences (Walshe, 1987). In short, utilizing reflective writing responses allowed students to make meaning of personal experiences (Bangert-Drowns et al., 2004). Reflective writing responses were collected from each participant during their English class period, one week after the entire sixth grade took part in the PSD programme at their school. One week was selected in order to provide participants with enough time to think about the meaning of their experiences at PSD, but not so much time as to burden them in remembering the characteristics of the event. Participants were asked to respond to the following prompt: ‘Reflect on your PSD experience, including what impacted you the most, what surprised you, and what was challenging for you’. Responses took approximately 20–30 minutes for students to complete and were approximately 150–200 words in length.

Data analysis

After data were collected, a three-step inductive thematic analysis was employed. First, the first author immersed herself into the original data by reading and re-reading the reflective writing responses to develop a deep understanding and familiarity with the content (Smith, 2017). While reading and re-reading, the author conducted a free textual analysis, where units of data of interest in relation to the purpose of the study were bracketed and descriptive and exploratory commentary were recorded on the documents (Boeije, 2010). For example, data units that communicated meaning to the experience (e.g. ‘because of this experience, I realized that disabled people are just like us’; Participant 1) were bracketed. Second, the author reduced each case into constructed themes that communicated the essence of each individual’s experiences. Being an interpretative endeavour, at this point in the analysis themes reflected both the participants’ words as well as the author’s interpretation of those words (Smith et al., 2009). For example, data units and commentary describing participants’ new-found relatedness to individuals with disabilities were reduced into a constructed theme titled ‘just like the rest of us’: participants’ new relatedness to those with disabilities. Lastly, after themes were constructed at the case level, the final step was to search for patterns and connections across participants through constant comparison (Boeije, 2010). Those themes that were identified across participants were presented as constructed themes to the research team, who reviewed the themes to ensure that they were in line with the purpose and framework of the study.

Trustworthiness is the extent to which phenomena represent experiences shared by the study participants (Brantlinger et al., 2005). To ensure trustworthiness, a number of techniques were utilized during data collection and analysis. Rigour (i.e. the completeness of the data collection) was supported by using reflective writing prompts that were inspired by the focus of the study and reviewed by the research team (Yardley, 2000). Particularizability, the extent to which findings can be applied to others in similar contexts or settings, was enhanced in this study by the researchers describing the school setting with thick detail so that readers can determine the degree of transferability to other situations (Brantlinger et al., 2005). Transparency, how clearly the stages of the research process are described, was achieved through explicitly describing the research processes (e.g. participant recruitment, analytic procedures) (Yardley, 2000). Critical friends (i.e. the process of critical dialogue between people) were used to encourage reflexivity in the data analysis process (Smith and McGannon, 2018). After themes were identified by the first author, the second and third authors discussed with the first author alternative explanations and interpretations of the themes based on the data (Smith and McGannon, 2018). Lastly, Yardley (2000) explains that the impact and importance of qualitative research lies in the ability of the authors to communicate the content as interesting and useful. In line with this assertion, the impact and importance of this work will ultimately be judged by those consuming this study.

Findings

The thematic analysis revealed three interrelated themes: (a) ‘just like the rest of us’: participants’ new relatedness to those with disabilities; (b) ‘what it means to be normal’: challenging the idealized notion of normal; and (c) ‘PSD changed my view of disabled people’: a shift in paradigm. Each participant was assigned a number to ensure anonymity. These numbers are referred to when presenting the student voices. Throughout the results section, person-first terminology was utilized within the voices of the authors. However, language within quotes of participants was left uncensored in order to respect each participant’s view towards disability.

‘Just like the rest of us’: participants’ new relatedness to those with disabilities

The first theme describes the meaning the participants ascribed to their involvement in PSD and its impact on their perceived relatedness to individuals with disabilities. As the participants interacted with and learned from athletes in a planned and purposeful manner, they came to understand that disability was not synonymous with difference or other-ness, and instead recalled experiencing first-hand the power of contact in learning about traits and characteristics that unite in a common manner. Feelings representing this theme were omnipresent among participant writing responses. For example:

PSD changed the way I thought about disabled people, so I no longer think disabled people are so different and now think they are just like us, with talents. (Participant 40)

Because of this experience, I realized that disabled people are just like us. (Participant 1)

People with disabilities are just as good at doing things as people without a disability. (Participant 3)

I learned that in the end, [individuals with disabilities] were not that different compared to us. (Participant 26)

Additional similar quotes included:

It surprised me how despite the athletes’ disabilities, they were able to do similar things as us, and even were willing to talk about their disabilities. (Participant 9)

It surprised me that some of them were born able-bodied, just like me. (Participant 25)

What surprised me most was that the athletes were so calm, just like the rest of us. (Participant 27)

Participants’ views on individuals with disabilities were not isolated to sport-based activities. The concept of being capable or doing things independently also emerged, indicating the manner in which the students were comparing their own capabilities and independence to that of the athletes with disabilities. For example, Participant 52 wrote: ‘I was very surprised at how capable they are without any help or assistance from anyone, just like us’, and finally, Participant 22 expressed that ‘people with disabilities can do just as much (or more) than people with abilities’.

Although most participants broadly discussed disability sport activities, several participants recalled their experiences with specific sports and activities. For these participants, these experiences allowed them to connect their realities to the realities of those with disabilities who engaged in similar sport skills. For example:

This experience impacted me hugely because all these people with disabilities could play sports like I do. (Participant 4)

I always thought that having a disability stopped you from doing sports, but with a few modifications they can play lots of sports just like us. (Participant 38)

What most surprised me was that one of the Paralympic swimmers actually competes on an able-bodied team. (Participant 35)

While the majority of the participants experienced a change in their conceptualization of their relatedness to individuals with disabilities as a result of participating in PSD, a few had conflicting understandings of their experience. For example, Participant 19 wrote: ‘What really had a great impact on me was seeing how people with such disadvantages were able to accomplish such impossible tasks’. Similarly, Participant 44 added, ‘I won’t take advantage of my life now, because I know that some people don’t have it so easy’.

The terms ‘disadvantages’ and ‘some people’ highlight these participants’ belief that there were innate differences between themselves and the athletes. Finally, Participant 22 was ‘surprised at how happy they were because if I were disabled like them, I wouldn’t be as happy’. The phrase ‘disabled like them’ inherently draws a line between individuals who are able-bodied and individuals who are disabled.

‘What it means to be normal’: challenging the idealized notion of normal

The second theme refers to the participants’ new understanding, as a result of participating in PSD, of the use and meaning of the word ‘normal’. In essence, the PSD experience demonstrated to the participants that their previous understanding, meaning, and use of the word ‘normal’ needed to give way to a new, more inclusive understanding and use of the word. For example:

Now, when I think of being normal, I think of someone laughing and smiling and having fun; not just people like me, but everyone. (Participant 1)

When I got to interact with people with disabilities, it showed that they were normal people, unlike what our parents teach us. (Participant 5)

Writing passages representing this theme were expansive. Passages ranged from highlighting a new understanding of the word ‘normal’ to defining the word ‘normal’ through a sporting lens. For example:

I understand the word normal in a different way. Just because you are disabled doesn’t mean you aren’t normal. (Participant 33)

Whether you are short, or you have disabilities, or you can’t play a sport, you are still normal. (Participant 29)

To me, normal means being able to walk and do everyday normal things. But after meeting the athletes, I think that they are normal. (Participant 7)

Normal means you are a person. You can be normal if you have a disability or even if you don’t. (Participant 35)

I now see that these people may not have arms and legs, or may not have perfect conditions, but they are still normal. (Participant 37)

I used to picture disabled people as fragile, but now it’s very different. Normal has been based on stereotypes, but if I saw a person in a wheelchair, I would have to think twice. (Participant 24)

The change in understanding of the term ‘normal’ as a result of engagement in PSD is evident among participants through the utilization of phrases like ‘but after meeting the athletes’, ‘I now see that’, and ‘but now it’s very different’.

While many participants explained a new understanding of the meaning of ‘normal’, several participants indicated that they believed that ‘there is no normal’. This new conceptualization offers a different challenge to the idealized notion of normal that societal norms often project. For example, participants explained that:

Normal is a word that is described in 100 meanings, yet mostly there is no normal. (Participant 11)

It [PSD] really made you think about the fact that there is no normal. (Participant 17)

Further, several participants noted that ‘there is no normal’, while also focusing on individual uniqueness. For example, Participant 42 wrote that ‘It [experiencing PSD] really changes your perspective. To me, normal doesn’t exist. Everybody is unique in their own special way’.

Additional equivalent quotes included:

I think there really isn’t a normal because everyone is unique in their own way. Because of this, there also is no weird because there is no normal. (Participant 41)

I also learned that there is no normal, everyone is different in their own ways. (Participant 39)

There really is no specific definition of normal, everyone is just different in their own unique way. Your physical features don’t define if you are normal or not. (Participant 15)

‘PSD changed my view of disabled people’: a shift in paradigm

The PSD curriculum was created to provide a platform for attitude change through education and awareness, and to provide participants with an avenue to challenge and find meaning in their own beliefs and experiences. The third constructed theme of this study encompassed the depth at which the PSD experience changed the participants’ attitudes and perceptions towards individuals with disabilities. In essence, these results support the notion that experiencing PSD encouraged a major paradigm shift in regard to their views. This shift was evidenced through numerous quotes from the participants. For example, Participant 34 wrote, ‘This entire day completely changed my view of disabled people’, and similarly, Participant 40 said, ‘Paralympic School Day changed my view of disabled people’. Further emphasizing a shift in perspective, participants noted:

It made me change my perspective towards disabled people for the better. (Participant 52)

This experience made me think of disabled people in a whole different way. (Participant 27)

Participants indicated a shift in paradigm through ‘aha moments’ (i.e. a moment of sudden realization, inspiration, insight, recognition, or comprehension). For many participants, their aha moments were centralized around being surprised at the magnitude of disability sport opportunities that are available. For example, Participant 46 said, ‘What surprised me the most was that there are so many sports for disabled people’, and Participant 50 added, ‘I was surprised about how many sports they have for Paralympic athletes’.

Participants also wrote about aha moments related to ability, as noted by Participant 2: ‘Before I saw the Paralympians, I never thought that they would be able to partake in any of these sports’. Similarly, participants recalled that:

I learned that people who are disabled are much more capable than I first thought. (Participant 13)

I was surprised to see how people with disabilities can work so hard and be so good at something that people without disabilities can’t. (Participant 23)

This change of viewpoint was described by many of the participants, and some were very specific in terms of the aha moment that influenced their perspective. For example, Participant 22 recalled, ‘When Scott (pseudonym) got out of his wheelchair to show us how he wrestled, at first I felt really bad, but then I thought about how he is accomplishing so much with no legs’. Likewise, Participant 18 remembered that ‘It was challenging for me to talk about Paralympians, because I was afraid I might say something wrong. Now I realize that disabled people are just as active, fit, and the same as us’.

Among participants, several experienced unique and meaningful paradigm shifts that were more individualized. PSD is founded on the belief that youth without disability will increase their understanding by experiencing a realistic and holistic portrayal of disability sport and athletes who participate in disability sport (IPC, 2006). Participant 48 shared a story about a best friend from an old school he attended who had cerebral palsy. PSD allowed him to experience shooting a basketball from a seated position, and in turn understand why his old friend could not pass a ball very far or make baskets. He wrote:

What was challenging for me was making a basket from a seated position. I kept on trying to use plenty of force, but I couldn’t do it. Now I know why one of my best friends from my old school couldn’t pass the ball very far or make a basket. She has cerebral palsy, and it affects her in her legs.

For Participant 48, experiencing PSD allowed him to have a better understanding of an old friend with a disability, and shifted his perspective towards better understanding the perceived limitations of youth with disabilities. Shifts in paradigm evidenced across participants focused on their views of individuals with disabilities as well as athletes with disabilities, highlighting the interrelated nature of the three constructed themes in this study.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to seek to understand and describe the experiences of sixth grade students taking part in the published PSD programme in relation to shaping attitudes and perceptions of disability and disability sport. To the knowledge of the authors, this is the first study to employ a qualitative methodology to explore the meaning of the PSD experience by examining profundities through the voices of the participants. The profound impact of the day and a significant level of enjoyment were evident in all student passages about the PSD experience, thereby reinforcing the notion of PSD as a valuable and fun learning and engagement experience.

The first theme describes the meaning the participants ascribed to their involvement in PSD and its impact on their perceived relatedness to individuals with disabilities. Hunt and Hunt (2000) suggest that in contemporary society, there is a belief that individuals with disabilities are less than or inferior to individuals without disabilities. This is likely a result of social norms, which approach disability from a medical standpoint focusing on treatment of a condition, or the individual deficits of individuals with disabilities (Shakespeare, 2013). From this standpoint, disability is conceptualized as being a negative attribute, and individuals with disabilities are thought of as faulted (Haegele and Hodge, 2016). The student reflections indicated a new understanding of common factors that unite, as well as a diminished focus on differences. Similar findings were reported by Evans et al. (2015), where after students took part in a disability sport intervention, their perceptions shifted from other-ness (including physical limitations and inferiority) to similarities between the athletes and themselves. The authors noted that after experiencing a disability sport intervention, students began to question their own assumptions about the capabilities of athletes with disabilities; however, the students still housed these perceptions through a lens of ability (Evans et al., 2015). This lens of ability is representative of ableism, which refers to unfavourable postulations about the essence of living with a disability, and cursory beliefs about the superiority of being able-bodied (Hehir, 2002). Amsterdam et al. (2015) described ableism as a theoretical concept that refers to the attitudes and perceptions of able-bodied individuals towards individuals with disabilities, often based on hidden norms and implicit assumptions that society should conform to able-bodied dominance. Some may argue that the first theme, Just Like the Rest of Us, is situated in ableist thought. Because ableist assumptions are prevalent in sport and physical education (Barton, 2009), expanding conceptions related to ability is necessary. Using PSD to expand perceptions, and advance a culture where individuals of all abilities are celebrated, supports much needed respect for human differences and diversity efforts in the school setting (Davis, 2011; Grenier and Kearns, 2012; Grenier et al., 2014). According to Allport (1954), when people have meaningful contact with others who are different from themselves, prejudices allay as they come to understand other people. Consistent with assertions by Allport, through structured, meaningful contact, the students were able to relate to the athletes, connect on a human level, and find common uniting traits that dispelled myths and supported a picture of disability that starts from a place of inclusion. As reported in Carter et al. (2014), participating in disability sport can blur the lines between able-bodied and disabled, and, with programming that is strategic, can provide a safe and equitable space to learn about the limits that stem from ableist and disableist attitudes.

Individuals with disabilities are often considered different because they fail to fit the description of normalcy that is often construed by beauty, attractiveness, and able-bodiedness (Seo and Chen, 2009). The second theme, What it Means to be Normal, describes the participants’ new understanding, as a result of participating in PSD, of the use and meaning of the word ‘normal’. Through their reflections, participants indicated that structured, collaborative contact with the athletes provided the foundation for examining what ‘normal’ means, in terms of differences and perceived deficits. The power of sixth grade participants challenging the idealized and exclusive notion of ‘normal’, and indicating that they were able to derive new meaning from a word commonly used in a preferential and privileged manner, is notable. Disability sport education and awareness, including meaningful and purposeful contact with athletes with disabilities, plays an important role in shaping perceptions of ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’, as society places a strong emphasis on physical activity and athleticism (Amsterdam et al., 2015). This concept of acceptable, or normal, appearance was brought forth by Depauw (1997) two decades ago: ‘In a society where individuals are judged by their appearance and valued for their youth, virility, activity, and physical beauty, individuals with disabilities are often shunned by society and treated as inferiors’ (423). Twenty years later, this idealized notion of ‘normal’ is rooted in ableist norms and supports the necessity for disability awareness and education programmes that promote sociocultural attitude change.

Within the reflections of the participants, phrases such as ‘there is no normal’ and ‘normal doesn’t exist’, which support an ‘everyone is different, everyone is normal’ discourse (Amsterdam et al., 2015: 159), were constant. This positioning advances opportunities to muddle the influence of ableism and lessen the impact of marginalization across various sociocultural categories (Amsterdam et al., 2015; Shakespeare and Watson, 2001). Reflections related to ‘normal’ clearly depicted the PSD intervention, including the experience of intergroup contact, as having a positive impact on newly formed perceptions. In a meta-analysis on intergroup contact, Pettigrew and Tropp (2006) found that contact effects generalize beyond the contact intervention, and have far-reaching positive effects towards the entire population being identified as ‘other’ or ‘abnormal’ (the outgroup). Similar results were found in this study, as student reflections specified the entire outgroup, and generalized past the actual athletes in attendance. Reflections placed the outgroup members in other situations, and even referenced those not involved in the contact. This result supports the components of contact theory and utilizing intergroup contact as a realistic and tested approach in which attitudes and perceptions, as well as intergroup relations, can be improved. It should be noted, however, that attitude retention has not been tested empirically and may be ephemeral or subject to change over time and place.

It was clear that as a result of engaging in the PSD programme, participants experienced a paradigm shift in their attitudes towards individuals with disabilities. This attitude shift was often the result of an aha moment. Similar to research by Grenier et al. (2014), the opportunity for students to learn about and practise disability sport skills connected them to the experience of the sport. The aha moments occurred when the students were able to counter the ableistic traditional stereotypes of disability, and form new, enlightened thoughts related to ability and athleticism. Essential to contact theory is the component of equal status relationships. As such, one of the goals of PSD is that students view individuals with disabilities as equal in status to themselves, not superior or inferior in status. Some may challenge the declaration that elite Paralympic athletes can be viewed as equal in status to sixth grade students, as elite athletes would naturally be viewed as superior since they are representing their country at competitions around the world. This challenge disregards common and accepted societal norms, as well as previous research examining attitudes towards individuals with disabilities (Amsterdam et al., 2015; Depauw, 1997; Evans et al., 2015; Grenier et al., 2014; Shakespeare, 2013). For example, the prefix ‘dis’ is a reminder of society’s conceptualization of the inferior nature of disability in comparison to ability (Grenier et al., 2014).

Looking closer at paradigm shifts involves examining how attitudes and subsequent changes in attitude come to fruition. An attitude can be looked at as an enduring set of emotionally charged beliefs that predispose a person to certain kinds of behaviours (Sherrill, 1998). Triandis (1971: 2) states that: ‘An attitude is an idea charged with emotions which predisposes a class of actions to a particular class of social situations’. In this definition, the idea is the cognitive component, the emotion is the affective component, and the actions are the behavioural component. The attitudinal components of cognition, affect, and behaviour are typically identified with attitudes towards disability (Tripp and Sherrill, 1991). As related to disability, the cognitive component involves statements related to knowledge about individuals with disabilities, the affective component involves statements about feelings towards individuals with disabilities, and the behavioural component involves statements about actual or intended behaviour towards individuals with disabilities. Participants indicated paradigm shifts through cognition, feelings, and intended behaviours, representing a multidimensional attitude change.

The impact the PSD awareness programme has on attitude change has been measured in four published studies, three conducted in Europe (Liu et al., 2010; Panagiotou et al., 2008; Xafopoulos et al., 2009), and one conducted in the United States (McKay et al., 2015). A commonality in PSD research is that analysis tended to indicate very small mean difference and effect sizes, as scores started at a relatively positive position and moved to an even more positive position. Quantitative analyses on PSD, even those indicating significant results, have yet to capture the intensity of the impact of the PSD intervention. This study provided new depth to our understanding of how participants experience PSD programmes, including profundities related to paradigm shifts, aha moments, the meaning of normal, and the similarities and commonalities that they experienced.

Limitations

There were several limitations to this study. The participants in this study may not be a representative sample of the sixth grade population, as participants are enrolled at an independent school. The rich detail provided about the independent school setting utilized in this study should be used for readers to determine the degree of transferability these findings can have to other, traditional school settings (Brantlinger et al., 2005). Results of this study could be biased based on the participants’ lack of exposure to inclusion in the school setting or the physical education setting, as the percentage of students with physical disabilities in the setting is very low. It should also be noted that because the PSD programme relates to elite athletes with disabilities who are capable of significant cognitive and/or physical feats, it cannot be assumed that findings will transfer to attitudes towards all individuals with disabilities. Furthermore, it is feasible to suggest that using elite Paralympic athletes as instructors can shape unrealistic expectations that disempower non-athletic individuals with disabilities.

Conclusion

The results of this study provide in-depth qualitative data indicating the experiences of sixth grade students taking part in the published PSD programme in relation to shaping attitudes and perceptions of disability and disability sport. Results of this study have implications for future practice, as findings indicate that the PSD curriculum, when planned and executed using Allport’s (1954) contact theory, can have a profound impact on the perceptions of students without disabilities towards inclusion of peers with physical disabilities in physical education. This study offers results that could potentially guide future awareness programming initiatives that are specific to exploring attitudes of the peer group, as well as future research on the PSD programme in the qualitative realm. Qualitative research could include culling the lived experiences of the athlete facilitators, interpreting the experiences and reflections of a different age group of students participating in PSD through focus group interviews, and analysing the social action intentions of students participating in PSD through reflective essays.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Allport

(1954) The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Amsterdam

Knoppers

Jongmans

(2015) ‘It’s actually very normal that I’m different’: How physically disabled youth discursively construct and position their body/self. Sport, Education and Society 20(2): 152–170.

Bangert-Drowns

Hurley

Wilkinson

(2004) The effect of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 74(1): 29–58.

Barton

(2009) Disability, physical education and sport: Some critical observations and questions. In: Fitzgerald

(ed) Disability and Youth Sport. London: Routledge, pp.39–50.

Block

(2016) A Teacher’s Guide to Including Students with Disabilities in General Physical Education. 4th ed. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Boeije

(2010) Qualitative Data Analysis: Thinking and Doing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Brantlinger

Jimenez

Klingner

. (2005) Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children 71(2): 195–207.

Bush

Silk

Porter

. (2013) Disability [sport] and discourse: Stories within the Paralympic legacy. Reflective Practice 14(5): 632–647.

Carter

Grey

McWilliams

. (2014) ‘Just kids playing sport (in a chair)’: Experiences of children, families and stakeholders attending a wheelchair sports club. Disability & Society 29(6): 938–952.

10.

Davis

(2011) Teaching Disability Sport: A Guide for Physical Educators. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

11.

DePauw

(1997) The (in)visibility of disability: Cultural contexts and sporting bodies. Quest 49(4): 416–430.

12.

Evans

Bright

Brown

(2015) Non-disabled secondary school children’s lived experiences of a wheelchair basketball programme delivered in the East of England. Sport, Education and Society 20(6): 741–761.

13.

Fishbein

(1996) Peer Prejudice and Discrimination: Evolutionary, Cultural, and Developmental Dynamics. Boulder, CO: Westview.

14.

Goodwin

(2008) Self-regulated dependency: Ethical reflections on interdependence and help in adapted physical activity. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 2(2): 182–184.

15.

Grenier

Kearns

(2012) The benefits of implementing disability sports in physical education: A model for success. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 83(4): 49–66.

16.

Grenier

Collins

Wright

. (2014) Perceptions of a disability sport unit in general physical education. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 31(1): 49–66.

17.

Haegele

Hodge

(2016) Disability discourse: Overview and critiques of the medical and social models. Quest 68(2): 193–206.

18.

Haegele

Sutherland

(2015) Perspectives of students with disabilities toward physical education: A qualitative inquiry review. Quest 67(3): 255–273.

19.

Haegele

Zhu

Davis

(2017) The meaning of physical education and sport among elite athletes with visual impairments. European Physical Education Review 23(4): 375–391.

20.

Hehir

(2002) Eliminating ableism in education. Harvard Educational Review 72(1): 1–32.

21.

Houston-Wilson

Dunn

van der Mars

. (1997) The effect of peer tutors on motor performance in integrated physical education classes. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 14(4): 298–313.

22.

Hunt

(2000) Attitudes toward people with disabilities: A comparison of undergraduate rehabilitation and business majors. Rehabilitation Education 14(3): 269–283.

23.

Hutzler

(2003) Attitudes toward the participation of individuals with disabilities in physical activity: A review. Quest 55(4): 347–373.

24.

Hutzler

Fliess-Douer

Avraham

. (2007) Effects of short-term awareness interventions on children’s attitudes toward peers with a disability. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 30(2): 159–161.

25.

International Paralympic Committee (IPC) (2006) Paralympic School Day Manual. Available at: http://www.paralympic.org/the-ipc/paralympic-school-day (accessed 14 August 2012).

26.

Katz

(1960) The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly 24(2): 163–204.

27.

Liu

Kudlacek

Jesina

(2010) The influence of Paralympic School Day on children’s attitudes towards people with disabilities. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis. Gymnica 40(2): 63–69.

28.

Loovis

(1997) A disability awareness unit in physical education and attitudes of elementary school students. Perceptual & Motor Skills 84(3): 768–770.

29.

McKay

(2013) Paralympic School Day: A disability awareness and education program. Palaestra 27(4): 14–19.

30.

McKay

Block

Park

(2015) The effect of Paralympic School Day on attitudes toward inclusion in physical education. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 32(4): 331–348.

31.

Morphy

Goodwin

(2012) The experience of choice in physical activity contexts for adults with mobility impairments. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 29(2): 132–150.

32.

Moustakas

(1994) Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

33.

Panagiotou

Evaggelinou

Doulkeridou

. (2008) Attitudes of 5th and 6th grade Greek students toward the inclusion of children with disabilities in physical education classes after a Paralympic education program. European Journal of Adapted Physical Activity 1(2): 31–43.

34.

Pettigrew

Tropp

(2006) A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90(5): 751–783.

35.

Reina

Lopez

Jimenez

. (2011) Effects of awareness interventions on children’s attitudes toward peers with a visual impairment. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 34(3): 243–248.

36.

Seo

Chen

(2009) Attitudes of college students toward people with disabilities. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling 40(4): 3–8.

37.

Shakespeare

(2013) The social model of disability. In Davis

(ed) The Disability Studies Reader. 4th ed. New York: Routledge, pp.214–221.

38.

Shakespeare

Watson

(2001) The social model of disability: An outdated ideology? In: Barnett

Altman

(eds) Exploring Theories and Expanding Methodologies: Where We Are and Where We Need to Go. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.9–28.

39.

Sherrill

(1998) Adapted Physical Activity, Recreation, and Sport: Crossdisciplinary and Lifespan. 5th ed. Boston, MA: WCB/McGraw-Hill.

40.

Sherrill

Heikinaro-Johansson

Slininger

(1994) Equal-status relationships in the gym. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 65(1): 27–31.

41.

Slininger

Sherrill

Jankowski

(2000) Children’s attitudes toward peers with severe disabilities: Revisiting contact theory. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 17(2): 435–455.

42.

Smith

McGannon

(2018) Developing rigor in qualitative research: Problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 11(1): 101–121.

43.

Smith

(2017) Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In: Smith

Sparkes

(eds) Routledge Handbook of Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise. London: Routledge, pp. 103–123.

44.

Smith

Flowers

Larkin

(2009) Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method, and Research. London: SAGE.

45.

Triandis

(1971) Attitude and Attitude Change. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

46.

Tripp

Sherrill

(1991) Attitude theories of relevance to adapted physical education. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 8(1): 12–27.

47.

Walshe

(1987) The learning power of writing. The English Journal 76(6): 22–27.

48.

Xafopoulos

Kudlacek

Evaggelinou

(2009) Effect of the intervention program “Paralympic School Day” on attitudes of children attending international school towards inclusion of students with disabilities. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis Gymnica 39(4): 63–71.

49.

Yardley

(2000) Dilemmas in qualitative health research. Psychology & Health 15(2): 215–228.