儿童体育素养:多维体育素养构念的构念效度探讨

IF 2.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH European Physical Education Review Pub Date : 2022-10-19 DOI:10.1177/1356336X221131272
Úna Britton, S. Belton, Cameron Peers, J. Issartel, Hannah R. Goss, M. Roantree, Stephen Behan
{"title":"儿童体育素养:多维体育素养构念的构念效度探讨","authors":"Úna Britton, S. Belton, Cameron Peers, J. Issartel, Hannah R. Goss, M. Roantree, Stephen Behan","doi":"10.1177/1356336X221131272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Physical literacy (PL) is highlighted as a construct that can positively impact physical activity (PA). Measurement methods and definitions for PL exist, but vary between research groups. This variation affects the ability to compare research findings. The purpose of this study was to assess the construct validity of PL in children. PL was operationalised according to Whitehead’s (2001) definition, comprising confidence, motivation, physical competence, and knowledge and understanding. Participants (n = 1073; mean age 10.86 ± 1.20 years: 53% male) were measured on: (i) confidence (Physical Activity Self-Efficacy Scale; Bartholomew et al., 2006), (ii) motivation (Behavioural Regulation in Exercise-Adapted; Sebire et al., 2013), (iii) physical competence (health-related fitness: 20 m shuttle run, back-saver sit-and-reach, handgrip strength, plank); balance (Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency 2; Bruininks, 2005); object-control and locomotor skills (Test of Gross Motor Development-3rd edition (TGMD-3); Ulrich, 2016); and (iv) knowledge and understanding (PA and sedentary guidelines). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to analyse the factor structure of PL. The best-fitting model (χ2 = 209.8, df = 99, p < 0.001; comparative fit index = 0.95, normed fit index = 0.91, Tucker–Lewis index = 0.93, root mean square error of approximation = 0.032, 95% confidence interval: 0.026–0.038) was a three-component model containing the domains of motivation, confidence, and physical competence. The knowledge and understanding domain did not fit the model well. Factor loadings were highest for confidence and motivation. Findings support the adoption of a pragmatic approach to PL measurement. CFA results indicated a similar factor structure as has been identified in other studies which have used different tools to measure PL domains.","PeriodicalId":47681,"journal":{"name":"European Physical Education Review","volume":"29 1","pages":"183 - 198"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physical literacy in children: Exploring the construct validity of a multidimensional physical literacy construct\",\"authors\":\"Úna Britton, S. Belton, Cameron Peers, J. Issartel, Hannah R. Goss, M. Roantree, Stephen Behan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1356336X221131272\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Physical literacy (PL) is highlighted as a construct that can positively impact physical activity (PA). Measurement methods and definitions for PL exist, but vary between research groups. This variation affects the ability to compare research findings. The purpose of this study was to assess the construct validity of PL in children. PL was operationalised according to Whitehead’s (2001) definition, comprising confidence, motivation, physical competence, and knowledge and understanding. Participants (n = 1073; mean age 10.86 ± 1.20 years: 53% male) were measured on: (i) confidence (Physical Activity Self-Efficacy Scale; Bartholomew et al., 2006), (ii) motivation (Behavioural Regulation in Exercise-Adapted; Sebire et al., 2013), (iii) physical competence (health-related fitness: 20 m shuttle run, back-saver sit-and-reach, handgrip strength, plank); balance (Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency 2; Bruininks, 2005); object-control and locomotor skills (Test of Gross Motor Development-3rd edition (TGMD-3); Ulrich, 2016); and (iv) knowledge and understanding (PA and sedentary guidelines). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to analyse the factor structure of PL. The best-fitting model (χ2 = 209.8, df = 99, p < 0.001; comparative fit index = 0.95, normed fit index = 0.91, Tucker–Lewis index = 0.93, root mean square error of approximation = 0.032, 95% confidence interval: 0.026–0.038) was a three-component model containing the domains of motivation, confidence, and physical competence. The knowledge and understanding domain did not fit the model well. Factor loadings were highest for confidence and motivation. Findings support the adoption of a pragmatic approach to PL measurement. CFA results indicated a similar factor structure as has been identified in other studies which have used different tools to measure PL domains.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Physical Education Review\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"183 - 198\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Physical Education Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X221131272\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Physical Education Review","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X221131272","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

体育素养(PL)被强调为一种可以积极影响体育活动(PA)的结构。PL的测量方法和定义是存在的,但在不同的研究小组之间有所不同。这种差异影响了比较研究结果的能力。本研究的目的是评估儿童PL的构念效度。根据Whitehead(2001)的定义,PL是可操作的,包括信心、动机、身体能力、知识和理解。参与者(n = 1073;平均年龄(10.86±1.20)岁,男性占53%),测量指标为:(1)自信(体育活动自我效能量表;Bartholomew et al., 2006), (ii)动机(运动适应性行为调节;Sebire et al., 2013), (iii)身体能力(与健康相关的体能:20米穿梭跑、仰卧式坐前伸、握力、平板支撑);平衡(Bruininks-Oseretsky运动能力测验2);Bruininks, 2005);物体控制和运动技能(大肌肉运动发展测试-第三版(TGMD-3);乌尔里希,2016);(iv)知识和理解(PA和久坐指南)。采用验证性因子分析(Confirmatory factor analysis, CFA)分析其因子结构,最佳拟合模型(χ2 = 209.8, df = 99, p < 0.001;比较拟合指数= 0.95,归一化拟合指数= 0.91,Tucker-Lewis指数= 0.93,近似均方根误差= 0.032,95%置信区间为0.026 ~ 0.038)是一个包含动机、信心和身体能力域的三成分模型。知识和理解领域不能很好地拟合模型。信心和动机的因素负荷最高。研究结果支持采用实用的方法来测量PL。CFA结果表明,在其他使用不同工具测量PL结构域的研究中发现了类似的因子结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Physical literacy in children: Exploring the construct validity of a multidimensional physical literacy construct
Physical literacy (PL) is highlighted as a construct that can positively impact physical activity (PA). Measurement methods and definitions for PL exist, but vary between research groups. This variation affects the ability to compare research findings. The purpose of this study was to assess the construct validity of PL in children. PL was operationalised according to Whitehead’s (2001) definition, comprising confidence, motivation, physical competence, and knowledge and understanding. Participants (n = 1073; mean age 10.86 ± 1.20 years: 53% male) were measured on: (i) confidence (Physical Activity Self-Efficacy Scale; Bartholomew et al., 2006), (ii) motivation (Behavioural Regulation in Exercise-Adapted; Sebire et al., 2013), (iii) physical competence (health-related fitness: 20 m shuttle run, back-saver sit-and-reach, handgrip strength, plank); balance (Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency 2; Bruininks, 2005); object-control and locomotor skills (Test of Gross Motor Development-3rd edition (TGMD-3); Ulrich, 2016); and (iv) knowledge and understanding (PA and sedentary guidelines). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to analyse the factor structure of PL. The best-fitting model (χ2 = 209.8, df = 99, p < 0.001; comparative fit index = 0.95, normed fit index = 0.91, Tucker–Lewis index = 0.93, root mean square error of approximation = 0.032, 95% confidence interval: 0.026–0.038) was a three-component model containing the domains of motivation, confidence, and physical competence. The knowledge and understanding domain did not fit the model well. Factor loadings were highest for confidence and motivation. Findings support the adoption of a pragmatic approach to PL measurement. CFA results indicated a similar factor structure as has been identified in other studies which have used different tools to measure PL domains.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Physical Education Review
European Physical Education Review EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
5.90%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: - Multidisciplinary Approaches: European Physical Education Review brings together contributions from a wide range of disciplines across the natural and social sciences and humanities. It includes theoretical and research-based articles and occasionally devotes Special Issues to major topics and themes within the field. - International Coverage: European Physical Education Review publishes contributions from Europe and all regions of the world, promoting international communication among scholars and professionals.
期刊最新文献
Meaningful physical education: Towards an embodied pedagogy Pre-service teachers’ experiences of an activist approach in a health and physical education teacher education context What is the meaning of PE? Exploring the influence of an educational curriculum approach on students’ participation and non-participation in physical education How is observed (de)motivating teaching associated with student motivation and device-based physical activity during physical education? Understandings and enactments of social justice pedagogies in Swedish physical education and health practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1