Toni hilland t a hilland@2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 19

Toni Hilland [email protected] 0151 2315493 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 65 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Project PE-PAYS: Physically Educated & Physically Active Youth 1) Physical Education Predisposition Scale (PEPS) 2) The Physical Education and School Sport Environment Inventory (PESSEI). Toni Hilland [email protected] 0151 2315493. Project PE-PAYS.

Download Presentation

Toni Hilland [email protected] 0151 2315493

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Toni hilland t a hilland@2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

Project PE-PAYS:Physically Educated & Physically Active Youth

1) Physical Education Predisposition Scale (PEPS)

2) The Physical Education and School Sport Environment Inventory (PESSEI)

Toni Hilland

[email protected]

0151 2315493


Project pe pays

Project PE-PAYS

Aspects of secondary school physical education and school sport (PESS) that have the strongest influence on developing physically educated and physically active young people

Multi-method approach involving PE teachers and pupils

Identification of factors that positively influence the development of the ‘PE product’

Development of a practise model, that may inform future pedagogical interventions and continued professional development.


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

  • Physical Education Predisposition Scale:

    Preliminary Development & Application.


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

PEPS

  • Physical activity and health

  • Physical activity guidelines and recommendations (60 minutes MVPA every day)

  • Lack of physical activity and sedentary lifestyles

  • Youth physical activity promotion; School Physical Education

  • Correlates of youth PA.


Welk s 1999 youth physical activity promotion model ypapm

Welk’s (1999) Youth Physical Activity Promotion Model (YPAPM)


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

  • YPAPM in PE

  • Predisposing factors;

    Am I Able? (perceived competence & self-efficacy)

    Is it Worth it? (enjoyment & attitudes)

  • Gender differences (Carroll & Loumidis, 2001; Cardon et al., 2005; Chung & Phillips, 2002; Stelzer et al., 2004; Trost et al., 1997)

  • Age differences (Butcher & Hall, 1983; Portman, 1995; Subramaniam & Silverman, 2007)

  • AIMS;

    1) Develop and psychometrically test PEPS

    2) Explore age and gender differences in PE Worth and Ability.


Method

Method

PARTICIPANTS & SETTINGS

  • 400 year 8 and 9 students (aged 12-14 years)

  • 4 state schools in NW of England

    INSTRUMENT-PEPS

  • 4 domains of Predisposing factors in relation to PE

  • Item identification

  • 22 item questionnaire

  • 5-point Likert scale

  • Example items;

    The things I learn in PE are useful to me

    I think I am pretty good at PE.


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

PROCEDURES

  • Written and verbal information

  • PEPS administered before PE class

  • Envelopes to ensure confidentiality and to reduce social desirable responses

    DATA ANALYSIS

  • Responses checked and collated

  • STUDY AIM 1 – Principal components analysis

  • STUDY AIM 2 – 2X2 ANOVA.


Results

Results

STUDY AIM 1

  • Response rate = 78.75% but on 80 of the questionnaires the students’ gender was not indicated

  • Suitability of the data for factor analysis

  • 5 items eliminated

  • PCA of the 17 remaining items

  • 2 components (Eigenvalues exceeding 1)

  • Direct oblimin rotation revealed 2 factor structure;

    Factor 1 – PERCEIVED PE WORTH

    Factor 2 – PERCEIVED PE ABILITY

  • Final solution an 11 item PEPS

  • Acceptable level of internal consistency (PE Worth: α = .91; PE Ability: α = .89).


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

STUDY AIM 2

  • Boys reported significantly higher values on both aspects of the PEPS (PE Worth, F(1, 231) = 17.9, p =.000: PE Ability, F(1, 231) = 5.8, p = .02)

  • Year 8 students scored significantly higher than Year 9 counterparts on PE Worth (F(1, 231) = 8.2, p = .005) and PE Ability (F(1, 231) = 12.3, p = .001)

  • There were no significant interactions between gender and age.


Discussion

Discussion

  • Factorial validity and internal consistency reliabilities of the PEPS

  • Age and gender differences concurs with past research in the area

  • Explanations for age and gender differences

  • Implications and conclusions

  • PEPS as a short and simple tool for school based research.


2 the physical education and school sport environment inventory preliminary validation reliability

2) The Physical Education and School Sport Environment Inventory: Preliminary Validation & Reliability


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

PESSEI

  • Environmental correlates as “enabling” factors (Welk, 1999)

  • The physical environment of the school as influential for physical activity (PE, extra-curricular & recess)

  • Previous measurement of school environment

    AIMS:

  • To develop a valid and reliable measure of the school physical environment (PESSEI).


Method1

Method

PARTICIPANTS

  • 8 Secondary Schools in Northern England

    INSTRUMENT - PESSEI

  • Previous measures were studied to inform the development of the PESSEI (Cradock et al., 2007; Fein et al., 2005; Sallis et al., 2001)

  • 4 Sections:

    1) Demographic and context-specific data

    2) Indoor, outdoor and off-site spaces

    3) Permanent physical resources and PE budget

    4) PE and School Sport time


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

PROCEDURES

  • Initial piloting with a group of experts – content related validity

  • One named PE teacher per school received instructions, the PESSEI and an aerial photograph of their school’s site obtained from Google™ Earth Pro (GEP).


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

PROCEDURES (CONT.)

  • Spatial area was calculated using GEP polygons

  • Next stage involved visiting the schools to objectively observe and record details of PE and School Sport spaces and facilities – criterion validity

  • At the same time the teachers were given a second PESSEI to complete and return – test-retest reliability

    DATA ANALYSIS

  • PESSEI data was collated

  • Criterion validity analyzed using paired t-tests and Pearson correlation coefficients

  • Test-retest reliability was assessed by paired t-tests and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).


Results1

Results

PESSEI Validity

  • Paired t-tests revealed no significant differences in teacher reported and researcher observed variables

  • Pearson correlation coefficients ranged from

    r = .80 through .97 indicating strong agreement.


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

Table 4

PESSEI RELIABILITY

Test-retest Differences and Correlations between Teacher Responses


Toni hilland t a hilland 2007 ljmu ac uk 0151 2315493

PESSEI RELIABILITY (cont.)

  • No significant differences were observed between each pair of variables

  • ICCs supported the paired t-tests by revealing very high levels of agreement between measurement occasions (ICC = .93 through 1.0)

    Discussion

  • Criterion validity was established

  • Fourteen day test-retest illustrated responses were very stable

  • Preliminary evidence suggests the PESSEI possess high levels of criterion validity and test-retest reliability

  • Intended application of the PESSEI.


  • Login