Physical education in Austria – A capable self in the centre of the curricula

Physical education in Austria – A capable self in the centre of the curricula

This blog is the second installment of the EERA-funded seminar series on ‘Physical Education Curriculum Learning across European Borders’ and focuses on the curricula of Austria and Spain.

At the end of December 2025, I had the opportunity to present at and participate in the seminar Physical Education Curriculum Learning Across European Borders: PE Curricula within Austria and Spain, led by the UKPE Cross-Border Learning and Innovation Collaborative. My presentation was based on the PE curriculum for general secondary schools in Austria (RIS, 2024) and sought to outline the document and critically examine the educational goals it sets out and how they are implemented.

An overview of the Austrian PE curriculum

Spanning a total of 316 pages, the curriculum for general secondary schools, which applies to students in grades 5–10, ages 10–16, took effect in September 2024 for fifth-graders and is being phased in gradually on an annual basis (RIS, 2024). The document is divided into an interdisciplinary section and subject-specific plans, with the PE curriculum (referred to as Movement and Sport) a relatively small proportion at just 5-6 pages. The PE curriculum is mainly focused on outlining learning outcomes in the form of competency expectations that students are expected to meet.

Students should acquire…

  • comprehensive movement and sports-related skills (technical, methodological, social, and personal skills)
  • an individual understanding of movement and sports
  • and a fundamental willingness to engage in physical activity as the basis for mindful, responsible, and self-determined athletic activity
    (RIS, 2024, p. 147).

The curriculum aims to emphasize the balance between physical skills, such as coordination and athletic performance, and reflective practices, such as questioning societal norms around sport and movement and one’s own actions. This dual focus highlights the importance of not only physical development but also critical thinking and personal growth in PE (RIS, 2024).

‘A capable self’

Notably, this Bildung-oriented dual approach (an emphasis on the interconnection between individual and societal aspects) is rooted in sport-pedagogical discussion in German-speaking countries over the past decades (Ruin & Stibbe, 2021; Wibowo et al., 2022). However, research on German PE curricula shows that education’s primary purpose in these documents is to produce individuals who are healthy, high-performing, and self-optimising—or in other words: to produce a capable self (Buchner, 2018; Ruin & Stibbe, 2021).  Similarly, an analysis of the Austrian curriculum reveals that while this breadth (Bildung-orientation) is clearly articulated at the level of objectives—albeit briefly—it is insufficiently reflected in the outlined competency expectations, which form the core of the document. Since teachers are likely to focus primarily on these learning outcomes when seeking guidance for their teaching, this can be seen as a significant narrowing of focus.

Nevertheless, an emphasis on multi-perspectivity (as a didactic principle; see Ruin, 2019) can be clearly identified within the Austrian curriculum. This concept encourages students, teachers, and researchers to approach movement and sport from various perspectives, including material, social, and cultural contexts. For example, students are encouraged to gain a wide range of experiences and then reflect on them personally, to engage with the social dynamics of physical activity and sports, and to consider the ethical implications of physical activity and sports (such as issues related to sustainability and environmental protection). This approach aligns with the broader educational goal of fostering well-rounded personal development combined with a critical engagement with the world (Biesta, 2021). As such, it clearly challenges the traditional view of PE in German-speaking countries as solely focused on physical fitness and performance (Stibbe, 2016).

Seminar reflections on Austria and Spain – same logic, different emphasis?

Reflecting on my presentation and the seminar discussions, I realize how much the current Austrian curriculum still reflects a traditional sport-oriented idea of PE, despite an apparent effort to offer broader perspectives. Indeed, while the document superficially seeks to balance the development of physical skills with critical thinking, personal reflection, and social engagement, in the end it reads as a sport-oriented curriculum, focusing on athletic performance with a touch of pedagogical embellishment.

The other contribution in the seminar session outlined the Spanish curriculum which, in my opinion, revealed a similar phenomenon. While the objectives of the Spanish curriculum place learners at the center of the pedagogical focus in a PE framework intentionally designed to be inclusive, the translation of these objectives into clearly operationalized learning outcomes (competencies) risks undermining this intention—a similar narrowing has been identified in earlier Austrian curricula (Meier et al., 2021). However, the Spanish curriculum is broader in scope, with a clear focus on enhancing physical activity rather than on sport alone.

Conclusion

Overall, the seminar was an eye-opening experience that deepened my understanding of the potential of international and interdisciplinary comparisons. The participants’ varied perspectives challenged me to think critically about how PE curricula are designed and how certain structural components of curricula development are shared across different countries. Not least, it revealed to me the omnipresence of neoliberal ideas centered on the creation of a capable self, one perpetually focused on the ongoing improvement of their own performance (Buchner, 2018; Ruin & Stibbe, 2021).

Even though Austria tends to narrow this focus to sport, while Spain broadens it to include physical activity and health, this underlying premise can be identified as central in both documents. Learner-centered approaches appear largely rhetorical, ultimately giving way to the overarching goal of producing a ‘capable self’ that is responsible for the own performance and health.

Key Messages

  • The Austrian PE-Curricula for general secondary education follow a ‘Bildung’-oriented approach and emphasize multi-perspectivity as a central teaching principle, which reflects the sport pedagogical discourse in German-speaking countries.
  • The focus on standardized learning outcomes in the form of competency expectations that students are expected to meet overshadows the broader educational goals.
  • It leads to a noticeable narrowing of the curriculum toward a sports-oriented approach that emphasizes athletic performance and is merely ‘spiced up’ with pedagogical elements.
  • As is similarly evident in the Spanish curriculum, the core objective of PE in Austria appears to be to empower students to establish themselves as capable, healthy, and well-performing individuals.
Professor Sebastian Ruin

Professor Sebastian Ruin

Department of Human Movement Sciences, Sport and Health, University of Graz, Graz, Austria

Dr Sebastian Ruin is a professor of Movement and Sport Pedagogy at the University of Graz (Austria). He gained his PhD in 2015 at the German Sport University Cologne (Germany) and habilitated in 2021 at the Bergische Universität Wuppertal (Germany). His main work fields are educational theory in movement and sport, curricula research, the role and understanding of the body in sport-pedagogical settings, as well as diversity and inclusion in sport.

University Homepage: https://online.uni-graz.at/kfu_online/wbForschungsportal.cbShowPortal?pPersonNr=127867&pMode=E

Researchgate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sebastian-Ruin

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/sebastian-ruin-1591093a0

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9881-8334

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

See also our blog post on language and educational concepts, which covers ‘Bildung’. translating-across-words-paradigms-and-traditions-of-education

Biesta G (2021) World-centered Education: A View for the Present. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003098331

Buchner, T. (2019). Die Subjekte der Integration. Schule, Biographie und Behinderung [The subjects of inclusion. School, biography and disability]. Klinkhardt. https://elibrary.utb.de/doi/book/10.35468/9783781556850

Meier, S., Raab, Andreas, Höger, Brigitta, & Diketmüller, R. (2021). ‘Same, same, but different?!’ Investigating diversity issues in the current Austrian National Curriculum for Physical Education. European Physical Education Review, 28(1), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X211027072

RIS [Rechtsinformationssystem des Bundes]. (2024). Lehrplan der allgemeinbildenden höheren Schule [Curriculum for general secondary Education]. Bundeskanzleramt der Republik Österreich. https://ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/1985/88/A1P1/NOR40264235

Ruin, S. (2019). Mehrperspektivität als sportpädagogischer Gemeinplatz? Eine konzeptionelle Standortbestimmung [Is multiperspectivity as part of sport-pedagogy commonplace? A conceptual assessment of the status quo]. German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12662-018-0564-6

Ruin, S., & Stibbe, G. (2021). Health‐oriented ‘Bildung’ or an obligation to a healthy lifestyle? A critical analysis of current PE curricula in Germany. The Curriculum Journal, 32(1), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.92

Stibbe, G. (Ed.). (2016). Lehrplanforschung: Analysen und Befunde [Curricula research. Analysis and findings]. Meyer & Meyer. https://www.dersportverlag.de/detailview?no=128934

Wibowo, J., Krieger, C., Gaum, C., & Dyson, B. (2022). Bildung : A German student-centered approach to health and physical education. European Physical Education Review, 29(2), 233-250. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X221133060

 

What PhD Dissertations Reveal About Early Childhood Education in Spain

What PhD Dissertations Reveal About Early Childhood Education in Spain

In educational research, peer-reviewed journal articles often take centre stage. Yet another rich source of knowledge is frequently overlooked: doctoral theses. These in-depth works capture new, exploratory directions and provide a unique window into how research evolves in specific national contexts.

This study analysed 84 doctoral dissertations in Early Childhood Education (ECE) defended in Spain between 2020 and 2024, retrieved from the Spanish repositories TESEO and Tesis en Red. Using a descriptive–retrospective methodology supported by bibliometric analysis, it mapped emerging research priorities, identified the universities most active in ECE scholarship, and examined how this output aligns with current educational policies, including the LOE–LOMLOE reforms on competency-based learning, inclusivity, and cross-curricular values.

Why look at doctoral theses?

A desk with papers, some written, some printed documents with graphs and tables, crumpled up paper, a coffee cup, a pencil, and a notebook with pages marked.

PhD dissertations represent the culmination of years of academic inquiry and often capture new, exploratory directions that may not yet appear in mainstream literature. As Fuentes and Arguimbau (2010) note, a dissertation contributes original and specialized knowledge, offering valuable context to assess what matters most in a given field. This is especially true in Early Childhood Education, a stage recognized for its importance in long-term child development.

A research gap and a unique methodology

Despite their potential, doctoral theses have historically been classified as “grey literature,” meaning they are not always easily accessible. However, thanks to open repositories such as TESEO and Tesis en Red in Spain, it is now possible to conduct large-scale bibliometric and content analyses.

This study began by identifying 96 theses defended between 2020 and 2024. After applying inclusion criteria focused on Early Childhood Education—such as relevance of the topic, educational stage addressed, and methodological transparency—84 dissertations were selected for analysis.

Data extraction followed a structured protocol including:

  • Thesis title and year of defence
  • University and department
  • Author and supervisor gender
  • Main research theme (coded into thematic categories)
  • Methodological approach and sample characteristics

Thematic classification was conducted using both manual coding and keyword mapping, ensuring reliability through inter-coder agreement checks. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively to identify trends, while qualitative insights from abstracts and introductions provided context to interpret the statistical patterns.

We focused on variables such as thesis topics, authorship gender, supervising institutions, and frequency of certain methodological approaches.

The goal was not only to quantify scientific output, but also to understand how it aligns with current educational needs and policies, including the recent reforms in Spain such as LOE-LOMLOE — a legal framework updated in 2020 that emphasizes competency-based learning, inclusivity, and the integration of cross-curricular values like sustainability, gender equality, and digital literacy.

Key findings: What the data shows

The analysis revealed clear thematic patterns. Teacher training was the most prevalent focus, appearing in nearly 29% of the theses, followed closely by research on active methodologies at 22.6%. Inclusion and diversity were central in 21.4% of dissertations, highlighting the field’s attention to equity in early learning environments. Other areas such as socio-emotional development, digital competence, and neuropsychology were represented to a lesser extent but still contributed to a diverse research landscape.

Gender patterns were also striking. Women authored over 70% of the dissertations and supervised 68% of them, reflecting a strong female presence in ECE research. The data further suggested gendered differences in research focus: female authors more frequently explored inclusion, diversity, and emotional development, whereas male authors were somewhat more represented in technology-related studies.

Institutional analysis showed that doctoral production was concentrated in a few universities, which acted as hubs for innovation and scholarly collaboration. Departments specializing in Didactics and Scholar Organisation, and Developmental and Educational Psychology stood out for their volume of research, indicating the presence of focused academic communities with shared research priorities.

The findings point to a vibrant yet uneven research ecosystem in Spain’s Early Childhood Education doctoral output. While dominant themes like teacher training and inclusion align with both national and international priorities, there are emerging areas—such as digital competence in early years and socio-emotional skill development—that remain underrepresented despite their growing relevance in 21st-century classrooms.

The gender patterns observed are not only statistically significant but also sociologically meaningful. The strong female representation among both authors and supervisors may influence the thematic focus of the research, possibly reinforcing inclusive and affective dimensions in ECE scholarship.

The concentration of doctoral production in a handful of universities—particularly in Murcia, Valencia, Castilla-La Mancha, and Salamanca—indicates that these institutions have become influential research hubs, often developing ‘scientific schools’ focused on specific ECE themes. Interestingly, these are not Spain’s largest universities, yet they play a central role in shaping national ECE research agendas. While this concentration creates opportunities for strong collaborative networks, it also raises questions about whether the diversity of perspectives and equitable access to doctoral research opportunities are being fully ensured across the country.

Why this matters for policy and practice

Understanding the trends in doctoral research offers policymakers a unique, evidence-based perspective on where Early Childhood Education (ECE) is heading and what areas may require strategic support.

For example, the prominence of teacher training in nearly 30% of theses signals a continued need for professional development programs that equip educators with the skills to implement active and inclusive methodologies effectively. Similarly, the strong focus on diversity and inclusion suggests that policy measures should prioritize resources for supporting children with diverse learning needs, as well as monitoring the impact of these policies in the classroom.

Beyond guiding policy priorities, the findings also highlight gaps where intervention may be required. Certain research areas, such as digital literacy in early years or socio-emotional development, remain underexplored relative to their growing importance in 21st-century education.

Identifying these gaps allows education authorities to design targeted funding programs, encourage collaborative research initiatives, and foster innovative pedagogical practices. Additionally, recognizing which universities act as research hubs can inform decisions about where to concentrate partnerships, training initiatives, and dissemination of best practices, ultimately strengthening the national ECE system.

A call to recognize hidden knowledge

Doctoral theses contain rich insights that are often invisible to mainstream education stakeholders, yet they can significantly influence practice and policy. By treating these works as valuable sources of evidence, institutions and policymakers can expand their understanding of emerging trends and innovative methodologies in ECE. For instance, the clear gender patterns observed among authors and supervisors highlight not only the strengths of female representation in the field but also the need to examine how these dynamics may influence research focus and professional development.

Moreover, integrating knowledge from doctoral theses can enhance collaboration between research and practice. Educators can draw inspiration from experimental or pilot approaches documented in dissertations, while universities and research centres can use these findings to foster cross-institutional networks. Encouraging access to and discussion of grey literature promotes a more inclusive academic ecosystem, where evidence from diverse sources informs educational reform. Ultimately, acknowledging and leveraging the insights hidden in doctoral work is a step toward a more reflective, innovative, and effective Early Childhood Education system in Spain.

Overall, doctoral theses should be recognised as more than academic milestones; they are strategic sources of evidence for shaping educational policy, informing teacher training curricula, and identifying innovation opportunities in early years pedagogy.

Key Messages

— Doctoral theses offer deep insights into emerging research trends in Early Childhood Education (ECE) in Spain.

— Between 2020 and 2024, key themes included teacher training, active methodologies, and diversity/inclusion.

— Women represented the majority of thesis authors and supervisors, showing significant gender patterns.

— Academic production is concentrated in specific universities, pointing to strong institutional research hubs.

— The findings help identify current educational challenges and guide future improvements in ECE policy and practice.

Paula Martínez-Enríquez

Paula Martínez-Enríquez

International Doctoral School of UNED (Spain)

Paula Martínez-Enríquez is a PhD candidate in Education at the International Doctoral School of UNED (Spain). Her research focuses on quality assurance in education and emerging trends in Early Childhood Education, as well as Project-based methodology in Early Childhood Education and democratic pedagogies. She is currently funded by the Regional Government of Madrid through the 2023 predoctoral research training program.

Orchid: 0009-0001-7339-9425 

paula.martinez@edu.uned.es

Scholar Google Paula Martínez-Enríquez

LinkedIn Paula Martínez-Enríquez

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

Eliasson, S., Peterson, L. & Lantz-Andersson, A. A systematic literature review of empirical research on technology education in early childhood education. Int J Technol Des Educ 33, 793–818 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-022-09764-z

Yu, S., & Cho, E. (2022). Preservice teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion. Early Childhood Education Journal, 50(4).https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-021-01187-0

Fuentes, M., & Arguimbau, M. (2010). Tesis doctorales y conocimiento pedagógico. Editorial UOC.

Repiso, R., Torres-Salinas, D., & Delgado, E. (2011). Scientific grey literature and doctoral dissertations. ICONO 14, 11(2).

López-Gómez, E. (2016). Analysis of doctoral theses in educational tutoring. Revista General de Información y Documentación, 26(1).http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_RGID.2016.v26.n1.53047