Fitness Testing in Physical Education, Teacher Education (PETE) Programs Timothy Baghurst Health and Human Performance Oklahoma State University.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reaching Consensus.
Advertisements

W HAT IS M UTUAL AGREEMENT AND P ARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE ? Dr. Eric Oifer Randy Lawson August 26, 2010.
A presentation by: The University Student Evaluation of Teaching Task Force August, 2014.
Why We Are Here: Context for Curricular Design and Clinical Education Copyright 2008 by The Health Alliance of MidAmerica LLC.
PEER REVIEW OF TEACHING WORKSHOP SUSAN S. WILLIAMS VICE DEAN ALAN KALISH DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING ASC CHAIRS — JAN. 30,
Operation H.O.P.E.F.U.L. Sean McIntosh, AS Program Coordinator Faculty, Florida/Caribbean AIDS Education and Training Center.
Guidelines for Instructional Physical Activity Programs in Higher Education A Position Statement of the National Association for Sport and Physical Education.
CRICOS Provider No 00025B Strategies for enhancing teaching and learning: Reflections from Australia Merrilyn Goos Director Teaching and Educational Development.
Writing Program Assessment Report Fall 2002 through Spring 2004 Laurence Musgrove Writing Program Director Department of English and Foreign Languages.
The Academic Assessment Process
A Study of Teacher Competencies and Involvement in Transition Services for Middle and High School Students with Disabilities Conducted by: John Mattos.
Staar Trek The Next Generation STAAR Trek: The Next Generation Performance Standards.
Introduction to teaching and assessing so students will learn more using learner-centered teaching Phyllis Blumberg Warm-up activity How can instructor’s.
DR. JOE SCARCELLA, PROGRAM COORDINATOR/ADVISER OR MASTERS OF ARTS CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION.
School Uniforms: An Investigation Status Report Harford County Public Schools December 17, 2007.
HOW TO SUCCEED ONLINE BY REALLY TRYING: COMPETENCIES AND SKILLS FOR ONLINE TEACHING SUCCESS Lawrence C. Ragan Penn State World Campus 1.
+ Measuring Teaching Quality in the Online Classroom Ann H. Taylor Director, Dutton e-Education Institute College of Earth and Mineral Sciences.
Who’s the Boss? Faculty Advisor or Principal Investigator Supervision versus Student Investigator or Study Coordinator Responsibilities Gwenn Snow, MS,
Assessment Day 2012 Focus: Educator as Member of Communities Data: Alumni Survey Initial Programs Employer Survey Initial Programs Alumni Survey Advanced.
Joanna O. Masingila Dana Olanoff Dennis Kwaka.  Grew out of 2010 AMTE symposium session about preparing instructors to teach mathematics content courses.
METHODS Setting Kansas Study population Kansas Physician Assistants Study design Cross-sectional Measurements / Data points collected A survey consisting.
BY Karen Liu, Ph. D. Indiana State University August 18,
Engaging the Arts and Sciences at the University of Kentucky Working Together to Prepare Quality Educators.
An Evaluation of SLIS Student Satisfaction and its Global Impacts Christina Hoffman, MLS Dr. Samantha Hastings, Interim Dean The University of North Texas.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © The Homework Effect: Does Homework Help or Harm Students? Katherine Field EdD Candidate, Department.
Students’ Perceptions of the Physiques of Self and Physical Educators
Evaluating the Vermont Mathematics Initiative (VMI) in a Value Added Context H. ‘Bud’ Meyers, Ph.D. College of Education and Social Services University.
University of Arkansas Faculty Senate Task Force on Grades Preliminary Report April 19, 2005.
Streamlined NCATE Visits Donna M. Gollnick Senior Vice President, NCATE 2008 AACTE Annual Meeting.
The European standards and guidelines for quality assurance Séamus Puirséil, Vice – President, ENQA.
Maximizing Learning Using Online Assessment 2011 SLATE Conference October 14, /12/ P. Boyles, Assistant Professor, Chicago State University,
Deconstructing Standard 2c Dr. Mike Mahan Gordon College 1.
The Impact of the MMP on Student Achievement Cindy M. Walker, PhD Jacqueline Gosz, MS University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee.
EGS Research & Consulting BASELINE SURVEYS OF MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT CHAIR PERSONS, MATHEMATICS FACULTY AND EDUCATION DEPARTMENT FACULTY.
The ISLLC Standards for School Leaders: A Comparison of Traditionally Certified Administrators and Administrators Certified Via Examination in California.
GUIDANCE AND SCHOOL COUNSELING UNIT. It Is the Law ACT 908 of 1991 Revised 1997, 1999, 2003, 2005, 2007 “Public School Student Services ACT” Ark. Code.
INTRODUCTION METHODS Amanda Mortensen Dr. Karen Mumford Amanda Mortensen Dr. Karen Mumford Campus Wide Healthy Eating Initiative RESULTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.
ABSTRACT The current study identified the factors related to exercisers’ self-talk and exercise adherence. Hardy (2006) defined self-talk as “(a) verbalizations.
Academic Program Review Chair’s Workshop John E. Sawyer, Ph.D. Associate Provost Institutional Research and Effectiveness.
Teacher Behaviors The teacher should allow the students to figure out the main idea of a lesson on their own. (SD, D, A, SA) –SD=4, D=3, A=2, SA=1 The.
AASCB The Assurance of Learning AASCB Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business Marta Colón de Toro, SPHR Assessment Coordinator College of.
Standard Two: Understanding the Assessment System and its Relationship to the Conceptual Framework and the Other Standards Robert Lawrence, Ph.D., Director.
Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Application, 9 th edition. Gay, Mills, & Airasian © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
What do Graduate Learners Say About Instructor and Learner Discourse in Online Courses? By Dr. Peter Kiriakidis, PhD Abstract This study was grounded on.
Reviewer Training 5/18/2012. Welcome & Introductions Co-Chairs: NHDOE Representative:Bob McLaughlin.
Instructors’ General Perceptions on Students’ Self-Awareness Frances Feng-Mei Choi HUNGKUANG UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH.
Assessing Student Learning Workshop for Department Chairs & Program Directors Workshop for Department Chairs & Program Directors January 9, 2007.
1 Learning Outcomes Assessment: An Overview of the Process at Texas State Beth Wuest Director, Academic Development and Assessment Lisa Garza Director,
Researching Technology in South Dakota Classrooms Dr. Debra Schwietert TIE Presentation April 2010 Research Findings.
Induction and Mentoring: Evidence From the Teacher Graduate Assessment Project Charles Rohn, Dean, Eastern Illinois University Andrew F. Wall, Project.
6 Standards: Governance, Curriculum, Diversity, Assessment, Faculty, and Clinical  Spring Self Study Completed  June Submit Report  Fall.
The ISLLC Standards for School Leaders: A Comparison of Traditionally Certified Administrators and Administrators Certified Via Examination in California.
QCC General Education Assessment Task Force March 21 and 22, 2016 Faculty Forum on General Education Outcomes.
Advanced Level Programs and NCATE Unit Review Antoinette Mitchell Vice President, Unit Accreditation.
Deconstructing Standard 2c Laura Frizzell Coastal Plains RESA 1.
Quality Online Preparation: Qualities of Faculty, Courses, and Preparation Programs By Dr. Erin O’Brien Valencia College League of Innovation Conference,
West Bowers Matt Ragas Jeff Neely University of Florida May 22, 2009.
Performance-Based Accreditation
Online Quality Course Design vs. Quality Teaching:
Advisor: Dr. Richard Fanjoy
EVALUATING EPP-CREATED ASSESSMENTS
Why We Are Here: The Purpose of the Clinical Faculty Academy and the Importance of Curricular Design in Nursing Education.
Explaining and Communicating Faculty Purview over Curriculum to Board Members and External Stakeholders Larry Galizio, Community College League of California.
Jenn Shinaberger Corey Lee Lee Shinaberger Coastal Carolina University
Advanced Level Programs and NCATE Unit Review
Evidence for gender bias in interpreting online professor ratings
Research amongst Physical Therapists in the State of Kuwait: Participation, Perception, Attitude and Barriers Presented by Sameera Aljadi, PT, PhD Assistant.
Program Assessment Processes for Developing and Strengthening
Assigning Courses to Disciplines: Curriculum Opportunities
SUMMARY OF Teacher Preparation In US
Presentation transcript:

Fitness Testing in Physical Education, Teacher Education (PETE) Programs Timothy Baghurst Health and Human Performance Oklahoma State University

Introduction  Staffo and Stier (2000) reported that PETE chairpersons valued physical fitness, yet many did not specifically test student fitness levels.  Baghurst and Bryant (2012) questioned the efficacy of currently used fitness tests citing their controversy.  There remains little consensus on why, when, and how PETE fitness testing should be conducted.

Theoretical Standpoints  Fitness testing reinforces the logical rationale that PETE programs should want their students to not only teach healthy and fit lifestyle habits to their students, but model them also.  Modeling health and fitness is an expected standard (NASPE, 2014).  Conversely, others suggest that a student’s fitness is a societal not programmatic problem (Ross, Jones, & Deerness, 2007), and may have liability issues (Baghurst & Bryant, 2012).

The Problem  “[The] diverse form of testing may in part help explain why this issue is so controversial, for it raises many debatable questions. What is the definition of fitness? How fit is fit? What should be the passing grade? What if someone looks fit, but they are not fit? What if someone looks unfit but they are fit? Does a higher education institution have the right to enforce this kind of testing?” (Baghurst & Bryant, 2012, p.12)

Study Purpose  To investigate the differing measures used or not used to assess fitness levels of PETE students in United States four year colleges.

Method – Participants  169 PETE decision makers in 4 year institutions where the program led to licensure.  A master list comprised of 592 universities; 195 participants began the survey (32.94% response rate).  106 indicated that their program conducted fitness testing whereas 63 participants indicated that they did not fitness test.

Methods – Instruments  Online survey that contained both closed (Likert- type questions) and open-ended questions.  All participants were asked demographic information about PETE (e.g., NCATE accredited) and six questions concerning opinions of the importance of physical educator fitness and fitness testing.

Methods – Procedure  IRB approval, contact found from university lists and university websites.  s were sent to participants with a 7 day follow-up reminder.

Results – Who is Tested and When  Wide variations  Only 35% required other majors to complete fitness tests.  Testing periods were Course Driven/Convenient (38.55%), To Address Concerns (28.82%), Compliance with Accreditation (20%), and Other (12.63%).

Results – Administrator and Test Details  45% used multiple faculty, 37% a PETE faculty member, 4% PETE coordinator, 7% other students.  82% used a standardized test FITNESSGRAM being most common (65%).

Results – Passing, Failing, & Avoiding  Wide variations even when using FITNESSGRAM  If failed, retake with remediation (49.56%), no option for remediation but retest (35.78%) and Other (14.66%) which included those that did not require any passing requirements.

Results - Why Fitness Test  Accreditation (42.86%)  Dispositions (23.47%)  Educational (21.43%)  Other (12.24%)

Results - Why Not Fitness Test?  Philosophical and Ethical Issues (61.2%)  Measurement and Testing Issues/Constraints (20.7%)  Other (18.1%)

Results – Combined Opinions Regarding Fitness Testing  Participants were very supportive of physical education professionals being fit. They were also, but to a lesser degree, supportive of the suggestions that PETE students should be required to pass a fitness test and that practicing physical educators should be required to pass a fitness test on a regular basis.

Results – Combined Opinions Regarding Fitness Testing  Participants were asked their opinions on the following statements:  Physical fitness is an important attribute of a physical educator.  PETE students should be required to pass a fitness test or tests to graduate.  Elementary and middle school physical educators should be physically fit.  Secondary high school educators should be physically fit.  University physical education instructors should be physically fit.  Physical education teachers working in schools should be required to pass a fitness test (e.g. FitnessGram) on a regular basis just like other professions such as the military and firefighters.

Results – Combined Opinions Regarding Fitness Testing  Those programs that did fitness test were significantly more supportive of requiring PETE students to pass a fitness test or not [F(1, 160) = 14.52, p <.01].  Fitness testing of physical education teachers received significantly more support from fitness testing programs than their non-fitness testing counterparts [(F(1, 160) = 4.78, p <.05].  Participants’ opinions on the other four statements were not statistically different based whether the program fitness tested and opinions on all six statements did not significantly differ by whether the program was NCATE accredited (p >.05).

Discussion About Testing  Testing needs to cross disciplines.  When testing takes place appears to be driven by how and when it can fit within a specific course.  There are testing issues when using multiple faculty and students.  There is little consensus on passing requirements even when using FITNESSGRAM.  Remediation assistance was lacking in many programs.

Discussion About Testing  2/3 of respondents that did not fitness test were NCATE accredited. What are they doing to meet standards?  It is encouraging that the majority of PETE decision makers value fitness amongst physical educators at all levels and believe that they should be fit.  Baghurst and Bryant (2012) suggested that many physical educators at all levels practice unhealthy behaviors and would not be perceived as fit by their students.

Discussion About Opinions  While most participants strongly supported fitness values, testing was more controversial.  It would be also be interesting to ascertain how enthusiastic PETE decision makers would be about testing themselves. Vice versa, physical education teachers may have different opinions about fitness testing both themselves and collegiate physical education faculty.

Discussion  The ambiguity of NASPE standard three appears to have led many programs to make their own interpretation.  Our study found differences among programs for almost every aspect of fitness testing resulting in an unstandardized, almost haphazard measure of fitness.  A recommendation based on our data would be for accreditation bodies to clearly stipulate the expected requirements for meeting and achieving standards associated with the demonstration of health and fitness among students.