The presentation is concerned with the positioning of Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy (PESP) and the potential for engagement with other (sub)disciplines. Kirk and Haerens (2014) note a concern about the extent to which research in PESP appears to be less frequently cited, having less impact in the field of school physical education and, more broadly, sport. Acknowledging differences in contexts, the purpose of this presentation is to consider how PESP, while maintaining a collective identity, can most effectively develop a capacity to engage with academic and institutional changes in productive, proactive ways. This entails considering extending the groups or communities in which PESP is represented to increase the potential to access substructures with other academic communities. That is, ‘adjoining territories’ (Becher & Trowler, 2001) that afford us access to opportunities that we would be unlikely to secure as a freestanding international community. There would be an anticipation of making connections that allow collaboration with colleagues in other disciplines and related professions. This could result in a ‘give and take’ if you will; a reciprocated relationship that would increase the meaningfulness, visibility and credibility of PESP and, in turn, PESP doing the same for other disciplines.
We need to remain mindful of how credibility may be measured completely differently by a PESP researcher than it might by ‘the corporate University’. Credibility from a University perspective, linked to today’s audit-type culture, is often focused around accountability measures that pertain to research and grant money. While this is not a new phenomenon, it has certainly intensified over the past decades (Acker & Webber, 2016). Credibility from the PESP community perspective might be measured more around the impact a project has on the effectiveness of a physical education programme, or perhaps the enhancement of a teacher education programme. What we are arguing here is that for better or worse PESP researchers are to be credible in both worlds, and that a reciprocated relationship with other related professions may enhance credibility on both fronts. Such reciprocation could result in increased opportunities to secure external funding and, in turn, increase opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration and therefore overall impact. A consequence of this may be the extent to which PESP can maintain its (preferred) identity while at the same time traversing disciplines.