The Evolution of Spectrum Theory and Publishing Changes Spectrum theory was conceived by Muska Mosston in the early

1960s. In 1966 his book entitled Teaching Physical Education, in which Spectrum theory is fully described and explained, came out. Ever since another five editions of that book were published (i.e., 1981, 1986, 1994, 2002, 2008) with the latest one being an online edition. In the first two editions Muska Mosston was the sole author while in the remainder four Sara Ashworth served as a co-author. Although the 1981, 1986, and the 1994 editions are similar in their content, the 1966 and the 2002 editions are quite different from the three aforementioned editions. In particular, since 1966 there have been some theoretical and practical changes in the Spectrum the most crucial of which was the shift from the versus to the non-versus reality of teaching. In the 1966 edition the theoretical structure of the Spectrum was imbued with the versus notion according to which not only the reproduction cluster is examined in opposition to the production cluster but also teaching styles of one cluster are considered in opposition to teaching styles of the same cluster. This versus notion emerged from the educational theory of liberal education and individualization that was becoming popular in the 1960s. Mosston wanted to move the teacher from the Command style to promote individualized teaching and independent learner decision making. This resulted in his coming up with the cone shaped diagram in which there is a hierarchical and linear order of the styles based on their potential to promote independence in learners decision-making.

In all the subsequent editions the versus reality is not supported any longer. Instead the non-versus notion was proposed; that is all teaching styles can contribute to educational objectives and no one is more important, effective, or better than any other. Accordingly, the schematic representation of the Spectrum changed to a continuum with equal spaces and dotted lines representing the shift of decisions and the design variations between landmark styles.
A B C D E F G H I J K

Apart from the paradigm shift, another change that occurred gradually throughout the years and increased the scope of Spectrum theory was the addition of new teaching styles and the elimination of others. This resulted from the precise description of the decisions that define each landmark style and distinguish each style from the others. The following table shows which teaching styles appear in which edition.

1966 edition
Teaching by Command Teaching by Task Reciprocal teaching: the use of partner The use of small group The Individual program Guided Discovery Problem Solving The Next Step: Creativity

1981 edition
The Command style The Practice style The Reciprocal style The Self-Check style The Inclusion style The Guided Discovery style The Divergent style (Style G)

1986 edition
The Command style The Practice style The Reciprocal style The Self-Check style The Inclusion style The Guided Discovery style The Divergent style (Style G) The Individual Program: Learners Design (Style H)

1994, 2002, 2008 editions

The Command style The Practice style The Reciprocal style The Self-Check style The Inclusion style The Guided Discovery style The Convergent Discovery style The Divergent Production style (Style H) The Individual Program: Learners Design (Style I) Learners Initiated style (Style J) Self-Teaching style (Style K)

Learners Initiated style (Style H)

Learners Initiated style (Style I) Self-Teaching style (Style J)

The 2008 edition is the first online edition and is identical to the 2002 edition. This edition includes six new chapters about feedback, cognition, Spectrum research, designing subject matter and other issues common to all teaching styles. Also, the text is enriched with charts which help the teacher to design the sequence of events in each episode, new figures depicting examples of task sheets for each style, and new tables which complement the main text. Moreover, further information about the use of the Anatomy of Any Style is given. Spectrum Research (SR): Trends and Progress Spectrum research has been conducted since 1970. A current content analysis of 53 reviewed Spectrum studies yielded some interesting information about changes and directions of Spectrum research over a period of 38 years. Some of the results of that content analysis are presented below. The number of studies has gradually increased since then. For example, only six research projects were identified in the 1970s, whereas 21 papers were published in the 2000s which seems to be a prosperous period for Spectrum research. This growing trend in SR reveals that the influence and benefit of the Spectrum theory continues to contribute to the classroom learning process. Also, the majority of research was published in journals while little research could be found in proceedings. Tracing authorship from all over the world has revealed that a few countries have conducted SR (i.e., USA, Greece, UK, Jordan, Estonia, South Africa, Bahrain, and Malaysia). Although SR started in the USA, other countries have incorporated the Spectrum framework in their teaching and research. The premise that the Spectrum is a universal theory is reinforced by the fact that so many countries have adopted and investigated this framework. This worldwide adaptability is encouraging and promising for the future of the Spectrum theory.

Research investigating different aspects of the various Reproduction styles has been and continues to be the primary focus of most SR. Currently some researchers are beginning to cross the discovery threshold and investigate teaching styles from the Production cluster by asking questions related to the Production teaching styles. The overwhelming majority of SR focuses on the psychomotor domain (motor skill acquisition or fitness). Research focusing on multiple domains represents almost half of the 53 studies. SR has addressed diverse and varied questions concerning multiple human dimensions and domains of learner's development. Few SR studies have examined the social and moral domains. Critique of Spectrum Theory The Spectrum of Teaching Styles has been adopted and presented around the world. In particular, it has served as a framework for delivering instruction at schools and for designing physical education teacher education programmes. Additionally, it has provided authors with a framework to systematically study teaching and learning. Although scholarship has acknowledged the contributions of the Spectrum theory to physical education pedagogy Mosston`s work is open to criticism. Some scholars have attempted to expand or clarify Mosstons original theory while others have identified problems related to it. The following are some of the problems traced by a number of sport pedagogists. Overemphasis on teacher behavior. Mosstons model focuses solely on teachers behavior by describing in detail what the teacher is supposed to do when a certain teaching style is in use. This results in not attending to student process behavior which affects, to a great extent, achievement and instructional effectiveness. Lack of sequential descriptions of student and teacher behaviours. The Spectrum does not describe the sequence in which teacher and student behaviour are planned to occur within any teaching style. According to Hurwitz (1985), knowing the sequence in which such behaviours occur is important to planning. Difficulties in verifying the styles. The ecology of a class dictates that the teacher uses more than one teaching styles in varying degrees. This makes it difficult to describe the overall behaviour of the teacher according to the Spectrum Under the circumstances, verification of styles is problematic which does not help to demonstrate differences between styles to pre-service teachers Ignoring the context of learning. Learning styles are not taken into account by Spectrum theory. Learning is more effective when the teaching style used is consistent with the preferred learning style of the student. The problematic nature of the shift from the versus to the non-versus reality of Spectrum theory. The shift from the versus to the non-versus notion signifies an endorsement of technocratic orientations in teaching. This orientation is problematic because it reduces professional reflection to decisions about choosing from a universalized menu rather than why and how given teaching styles are relevant to a particular cultural context. It should be noted that no attempt has been made so far to address the above issues.