Cristiana D'Anna, Daniele Albano, Benedetta Romano, Rodolfo Vastola


National and international documents (UNESCO, 2017; MIUR, 2012; 2020) promote the improvement of the quality of teaching-learning processes, underlining the need to design flexibility learning environments able to respond to multiple educational needs. Physical education, like other disciplines, is involved in the process of full inclusion process with the awareness that in order to face to the complexity of the system (group-class), which in turn consists of a network of interconnected complex adaptive systems (pupils) – which acting and interacting with each other - a systemic approach is needed, able to of implementation of open and flexible teaching practices (Sibilio, 2014).
This study aims to outline, in the light of recent neuroscientific researches (Mandolesi, 2012) and studies on complexity (Clark & Crossland, 1985; Davids & Araùjo, 2010), some basic principles to design inclusive learning environments in physical education.
The systemic perspective, starting from the awareness that there is no boundary between what is physical and what is cognitive and that the environment that surrounds us is able to modulate our brain circuits, opens up new scenarios on which to reflect in order to face the 'unpredictability, emergency and self-organization, which act in and on the teaching-learning process, determining its effectiveness.

Parole chiave

Complessità, Didattica inclusiva, Ambienti di apprendimento, Neuroscienze, Educazione fisica

Full Text


Riferimenti bibliografici

Altet, M. (2003). La ricerca sulle pratiche di insegnamento in Francia ( Brescia: La Scuola.

Bangsbo, J., Krustrup, P., Duda, J., et al. (2016). The Copenhagen Consensus Conference 2016: children, youth, and physical activity in schools and during leisure time. In British Journal of Sports Medicine, June 2016. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2016-096325

Beek, P.J. & Meijer. O.G. (1988). On the nature of the motor-action controversy. In: Meijer O.G., Roth, K. (Eds.). Complex movement behaviour: the motor-action controversy. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, pp.157-85.

Beer, R.D. (2003). The Dynamics of Active Categorical Perception in an Evolved Model Agent. Adaptive Behavior, 11(4), 209–243.

Berthoz, A. (2011). La semplessità. Torino: Codice.

Berthoz, A., & Petit, J.L. (2006). Phénoménologie et physiologie de l’action. Paris: Odile Jacob.

Booth, T. (2011). The name of the rose: Inclusive values into action in teacher education. Prospects, 41(3), 303-318.

Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (2008). L’Index per l’inclusione (tr. it.). Trento: Erickson.

Bortoli, L. & Robazza, C. (2016). L’apprendimento delle abilità motorie. Due approcci tra confronto e integrazione. In SdS/Scuola dello Sport, n.109, pp. 23-34.

Bortoli, L., Bertollo M., Robazza, C. (2005). Sostenere la motivazione nello sport giovanile. Il modello Target. In Giornale Italiano di Psicologia dello Sport, 3(3), pp. 69-72.

Capra, F. (1996). The Web of Life, ISBN 0385476760.

Chow, J. (2013). Nonlinear Learning Underpinning Pedagogy: Evidence, Challenges, and Implications. In Quest, 65, pp. 469– 484. doi:10.1080/00336297.2013.807746.

Chow, J. Y., & Atencio, M. (2012). Complex and nonlinear pedagogy and the implications for physical education. In Sport, Education and Society, pp. 1–21.

Chow, J., Davids, K., Button, C. & Renshaw, I. (2015). Nonlinear Pedagogy in Skill Acquisition: An Introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.

Chow, J., Davids, K., Hristovski, R., Araújo, D. & Passos, P. (2011). Nonlinear Pedagogy:Learning Design for Self-Organizing Neurobiological Systems. In New Ideas in Psychology, 29, pp. 189–200.

Chow, J.Y., Davids, K., Button, C., Shuttleworth, R., Renshaw, I. & Araújo, D. (2007). The Role of Nonlinear Pedagogy in Physical Education. In Review of Educational Research, 77, 3, pp. 251-278.

Clark, A. (1997). Being there: putting brain, body and world together again. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Clarke, D. & Crossland, J. (1985). Actions system: an introduction to the analysis of complex behaviour. London: Methuen.

Colella, D. (2018). Physical Literacy e stili d’insegnamento. Ri-orientare l’educazione fisica a scuola. Formazione & Insegnamento, XVI(1), pp. 33-42.

Colella, D. (2019). Insegnamento e apprendimento delle competenze motorie. Processi e Relazioni. Formazione & Insegnamento, XVII(3), pp. 73-88.

Correia, V., Carvalho, J., Araújo, D., Pereira, E. & Davids, K. (2019). Principles of nonlinear pedagogy in sport practice, In Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 24, 2, pp.117-132.

D’Anna, C. (2020). Life Skills Education of Inclusion. Le potenzialità dell’Educazione Fisica e dello Sport a scuola. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia.

Davids, K. & Araùjo, D. (2010). The concept of “organismic Asymmetric” in sport science. In Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 13(6), pp. 633-640.

Davids, K., Button, C., & Bennett, S. (2008). Dynamics of skill acquisition: A constraints-led approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Davis, B. & Sumara, D. (2012). Fitting teacher education in/to/for an increasingly complex world. Complicity. In International Journal of Complexity and Education, 9(1).

Di Gennaro D.C., Aiello, P., Zollo, I. & Sibilio, M. (2018). Agire didattico inclusivo: una questione di stile? In Pedagogia più didattica. Trento: Erickson.

Eggen, P. & Kauchak, D. (2001). Educational Psychology: Classroom Connections. 5th ed. New York: Macmillan.

Fogassi, L. (2019). Neuroscienze dei sistemi motori cognitivi e applicazioni riabilitative. Atti del convegno. Le proprietà cognitive del sistema motorio, i neuroni specchio e implicazioni per la riabilitazione, Monza, Aprile 2019.

Frauenfelder, E. (1994), Pedagogia e biologia. Una nuova alleanza, Napoli: Liguori.

Gallese, V. et al. (1996). Action, recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain, 119, pp. 593-609.

Gibson, J.J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a New Science, New York: Viking.

Gomez Paloma, F. (2017). Embodied Cognition. Theories and applications in education science. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

Kelso, J.A.S. (1984). Phase transitions and critical behavior in human bimanual coordination. American Journal of Physiology: Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative, 15: R1000 R1004.

Kelso, J.A.S. (1995). Dynamic Patterns: The Self Organization of Brain and Behavior. Cambrige: MIT Press.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy In The Flesh: the Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. Basic Books.

Mandolesi, L. (2012). Neuroscienze dell'attività motoria.Verso un sistema cognitivo motorio. Milano: Springer.

McLennan, N., & Thompson, J. (2015). Quality Physical Education (QPE): Guidelines for Policy Makers. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.

Morin, E. (1977). Il metodo, ordine, disordine, organizzazione. tr. it., Feltrinelli, Milano, 1988.

Morin, E. (1999). La testa ben fatta. Riforma dell’insegnamento e riforma del pensiero. Milano: Editore Cortina Raffaello.

Mosston, M. & Ashworth, S. (2008). Teaching physical education. First on line edition available at: .

Newell, K.M. (1986). Constraints on the development of coordination. In M.G Wade & H.T.A Whiting (Eds.) Motor development in children. Aspects of coordination ad control, pp.341-360. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.

Newell, K.M. (1986). Constraints on the development of coordination. In M.G. Wade & H.T.A. Whiting (Eds.) Motor Development in children: Aspects of coordination and control. pp. 341-360. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.

Pesce, C. (2002). Insegnamento prescrittivo o apprendimento euristico. SdS-Rivista di cultura, 55, pp.1-18

Pesce, C., Marchetti, R., Motta, A. Bellucci, M. (Eds.), (2015). Joy of moving. Movimenti e immaginazione. Torgiano-Perugia: Calzetti-Mariucci.

Port, R.F. & van Gelder, T. (1995). (Eds.). Mind as Motion, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Renshaw, I., Araujo, D., Button, C., Chow, J., Davids, K., & Moy, B. (2016). Why the Constraints-Led Approach is not Teaching Games for Understanding: a clarification. In Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, pp. 459-480.

Renshaw, I., Davids, K., & Savelsbergh, G.J.P. (Eds.). (2010). Motor Learning in Practice: A Constraints-Led Approach (1st ed.). Routledge.

Rivoltella, P.C. (2012). Neurodidattica. Insegnare al cervello che apprende, Milano: Raffaello Cortina.

Rizzolatti, G. & Sinigaglia, C. (2006). So quel che fai. Il cervello che agisce e i neuroni specchio. Milano: Raffaello Cortina.

Rossi, P.G. & Giaconi, C. (2016). Introduzione. In P.G. Rossi, C. Giaconi, Micro-progettazione: pratiche a confronto. Propit, EAS, Flipped Classroom. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

Rossi, P.G. (2011). Didattica enattiva. Complessità, teorie dell’azione, professionalità docente. Milano: Franco Angeli.

Sibilio, M. (2014). La didattica semplessa. Napoli: Liguori.

Sumara, D. & Davis, W. (2008). Enabling Constraints: Using Complexity Research to 5 Structure Collective Learning Activities. Communication to Teaching Games for 6 Understanding Conference, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, May 14th to 17th.

Syrmpas, I., Digelidis, N., Watt, A., Vicars, M. (2017). Physical education teachers’ experiences and beliefs of production and reproduction teaching approaches. In Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, pp. 184-194.

Tan, C.W.K., Chow, J. & Davids, K. (2012). How Does TGfU Work?: Examining the Relationship Between Learning Design in TGfU and a Nonlinear Pedagogy. In Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 17(4), pp. 331–348.

Thelen, E. & Smith, L.B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Thelen, E. et al. (2001). The dynamics of embodiment: a field theory of infant perseverative reaching, In Behavioral and brain sciences, 24, pp. 1-86.

UNESCO (2017). A guide for ensuring inclusion and equity in educationand equity in education. The Global Education 2030 Agenda. Paris: Unesco.

UNESCO (2019). Final report of the International forum on inclusion and equity in education –Every learner matters, Cali, Colombia, 11-13 September 2019.

UNESCO (2021). Making the case for inclusive quality physical education policy development: A policy brief. Paris, France.

Varela, F.J., Thompson, E. & Rosch, E. (1991). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge: MIT Press. ( 1992, La via di mezzo della conoscenza. Le scienze cognitive alla prova dell’esperienza. Milano: Feltrinelli).

WHO (2001). The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).

WHO (2007). The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF-CY).

WHO/Europe (2018). Global action plan on physical activity 2018-2030: More active people for a healthier world. Copenhagen.

Zambotti, F. (2015). BES a scuola. I 7 punti chiave per una didattica inclusiva. Trento: Erickson.

Normative references

MIUR (2009). Linee guida per l’integrazione scolastica degli alunni con disabilità.

MIUR (2012). Direttiva Ministeriale Strumenti d’intervento per alunni con bisogni educativi speciali e organizzazione territoriale per l’inclusione scolastica, Indicazioni operative, 27 dicembre 2012.

MIUR (2012). Indicazioni nazionali per il curricolo per la scuola dell’infanzia e del primo ciclo di istruzione.

MIUR (2018). Indicazioni Nazionali e Nuovi Scenari. Comitato Scientifico Nazionale per le Indicazioni 2012 della scuola dell’infanzia e del primo ciclo di istruzione, Roma.

UNESCO (1978). International Charter of Physical Education and Sport, approved at meeting in Paris 21 November 1978.

MIUR (2013). Circolare Ministeriale 06 marzo 2013, n. 8, prot. 561.

Legge 13 luglio 2015, n. 107. Riforma del sistema nazionale di istruzione e formazione e delega per il riordino delle disposizioni legislative vigenti.

D. Lgs 13 aprile 2017, n. 66, Norme per la promozione dell'inclusione scolastica degli studenti con disabilità, a norma dell'articolo 1, commi 180 e 181, lettera c), della legge 13 luglio 2015, n. 107, Gazzetta Ufficiale n.112 del 16-5-2017 - Suppl. Ordinario n. 23.

D. Lgs. 7 agosto 2019, n. 96. Disposizioni integrative e correttive al decreto legislativo 13 aprile 2017, n. 66, recante: «Norme per la promozione dell’inclusione scolastica degli studenti con disabilità, a norma dell’articolo 1, commi 180 e 181, lettera c), della legge 13 luglio 2015, n. 107».

MI, MEF, D.I., n.182 del 29/12/2020. Adozione del modello nazionale di piano educativo individualizzato e delle correlate linee guida, nonché modalità di assegnazione delle misure di sostegno agli alunni con disabilità, ai sensi dell’articolo 7, comma 2-ter del decreto legislativo 13 aprile 2017, n. 66.



  • Non ci sono refbacks, per ora.

Copyright (c) 2021 Giornale Italiano di Educazione alla Salute, Sport e Didattica Inclusiva

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.