The exploration of TPSR practitioners’ implementation of culturally relevant pedagogies

UNCG Author/Contributor (non-UNCG co-authors, if there are any, appear on document)
Brittany B. Pinkerton (Creator)
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG )
Web Site:
Tom Martinek

Abstract: A large percentage of youth, 56%, engage in sport and physical activity (PA) programs after school therefore making sport and PA programs important to explore (National Survey of Children’s Health, 2018). After school hours or out of school time are critical to youths’ development, therefore it’s important to emphasize quality and equity of afterschool programs. One of the sports-based youth development (SBYD) models used in after-school programming is Hellison’s Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility (TPSR) Model. This model provides youth experiences of sport and PA while also fostering life skills that can be transferred to life (Hellison, 2011). An area that has not been addressed is how culturally relevant pedagogies (CRP) have been applied in TPSR programs. This seems important since the TPSR model values inclusivity of all youth. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore to what extent to TPSR practitioners incorporate CRP into their program. CRP is used in conjunction with the TPSR model (Hellison, 2011) to create and guide the SBYD practitioners’ experiences. Six TPSR practitioners were interviewed to explore their implementation of CRP. The Cultural Relevance Cycle (Flory & McGuaghtry, 2011) was used as a framework for the interview questions. The purpose of this study was to explore to what extent do TPSR practitioners implement CRP in their programs. Culture was informed by gender and ethnicity, and partitioners were asked about the challenges they encounter when being culturally relevant. A demographic questionnaire and archival data were also included in this study. Data indicated that TPSR practitioners were conscious of their culture, the youths’ culture, and the youths’ community and educational experiences. How each practitioner came to understand the youths’ community and educational process was slightly different. Cross-case commonalities consisted of (a) living in the same neighborhood as the youth they serve, (b) asking youth questions (c) general knowledge of barriers that the youth must overcome. Among community dynamics violence and underserved areas were two major focal points. As for educational experiences many practitioners reported low-quality education and school behavior informing their TPSR program and youth participation. The partitioners implemented strategies to be culturally relevant. These strategies aligned with the TPSR model: (a) relational time and (b) reflection. When discussing gender and ethnicity in relation to culture, practitioners reported challenges of (a) stereotyping (b) language and (c) friction between ethnic groups. Practitioners reported TPSR being inclusive by offering (a) safe environment and (b) empowering youth. Challenges to being culturally relevant included (a) language, (b) community immersion, (c) location and time, and (d) parents. Lastly, TPSR partitioners were questioned about their critical consciousness. The two largest concerns to the partitioners were (a) low-quality education and (b) urban and low-income life factors. The practitioners utilized this knowledge to inform their program content.

Additional Information

Language: English
Date: 2021
Youth, Afterschool programs, Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility (TPSR) Model, Culturally relevant pedagogies
Sports for children $x Social aspects
Culturally relevant pedagogy
Youth development

Email this document to