Physical Literacy In Physical Education

2218 Words 9 Pages
Physical education curriculum provides an indispensable opportunity in the establishment of physical literacy, however the aim of PL is to move beyond specific proficiency in specific activities to inclusiveness of all abilities and focuses on competencies in a variety of movements and environments. The internationally accepted definition of PL is “the motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge and understanding to value and take responsibility for engagement in physical activities for life” (Whitehead, 2013). Whitehead’s PL model has three key components: behavioral, psychological, and physical. Although interrelated, the behavioral component plays a role in the realization of potential by enabling individuals to invest the requisite …show more content…
For example, the Healthy Active Living and Obesity (HALO) research group established the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (CAPL), a comprehensive protocol that “accurately and reliably assesses a broad spectrum of skills and abilities that contribute to and characterize the physical literacy level in children” (Longmuir, 2013, p. 12). Since physical literacy moves beyond just fitness, motor skill or motivation, the CAPL is unique in that it assesses the multiple aspects of physical literacy: physical competency, daily physical activity behaviour, motivation and confidence (affective), and knowledge and understanding (cognitive) domains. There are currently two iterations of the CAPL: the focus is on the motivation and confidence and knowledge and understanding domains. The first version presented is the 2009 CAPL, which is comprised of 6 open-ended questions (see Appendix A). The survey is administered to children, or to an adult (e.g., teacher, parent, or coach) for children with learning …show more content…
Longmire at al. (2015) report that the chi-square statistic was 98.63 (degrees of freedom (df ) = 38, N = 489), with the ratio value of 2.60. Although Chi-square is not a very good fit index in practice under many situations because it is affected by the following factors sample size (larger samples produce larger chi-squares that are more likely to be significant (Type I error), efforts were made to show goodness of fit. The Goodness of Fit Index was 0.96, the Bentler Comparative Fit Index was 0.94, the Bentler-Bonett NFI was 0.91, and the Bentler-Bonett Non-normed Index was 0.91, all within acceptable ranges (Bentler, 1990). The PPLI used an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with item loadings ranging from 0.69 to 0.87, and Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.73 to 0.76. Nine items were eliminated. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed that the construct demonstrated good fit to the model for the 9-item, 3-factor scale for perceived PL in physical education teachers.


Previous research on the implementation of physical literacy in PE reveals that it is uncertain whether such interventions work. Inconsistencies in the concept of PL, PL models, and protocol to measure PL are largely to blame for this lack of evidence (Giblin, Collins, & Button, 2014; Lundvall, 2015;). Assessment of physical literacy in the Nebraska case study should align PL assessment

Related Documents