ABSTRACT

Background

This article focuses on the assessment of health education (HE) in physical education (PE). PE is one of the school disciplines that can contribute substantially to educational actions in HE (Kirk, D. 2018. “Physical Education-as-Health Promotion: Recent Developments and Futures Issues.” Education and Health 36 (3): 70–75). However, studies conducted on PE teachers’ practices indicate that assessment in HE is challenging, even though it is mandatory in Quebec schools (Bezeau, D., S. Turcotte, S. Beaudoin, and J. Grenier. 2020. “Health Education Assessment Practices Used by Physical Education and Health Teachers in a Collaborative Action Research.” Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 25 (4): 379–393). Few studies have focused on the assessment practices of PE teachers in HE, resulting in a limited amount of empirical data being currently available (Georgakis, S., and R. Wilson. 2012. “Australian Physical Education and School Sport: An Exploration Into Contemporary Assessment.” Asian Journal of Exercise & Sports Science 9 (1): 37–52). A well-planned assessment in which pupils are involved promotes their learning and makes them accountable for their own health (Leirhaug, P. E., and C. Annerstedt. 2016. “Assessing with new Eyes? Assessment for Learning in Norwegian Physical Education.” Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 21 (6): 616–631). It is necessary to investigate PE teachers’ assessment practices in HE to improve the current scientific knowledge on the subject and to better understand the main challenges they face.

Objectives

This article addresses three research objectives that aim to determine: 1) assessment practices as reported by PE teachers who assess in HE, 2) the reasons given by PE teachers who do not assess in HE for not doing so, and 3) the perceived contribution of PE teachers to the development of pupils’ autonomy in health and well-being.

Method

223 elementary school (pupils: 5–11 years old) PE teachers from Quebec (Canada) answered a questionnaire including five closed-ended and two open-ended questions specific to assessment practices in HE. A quantitative analysis of the data from the five open-ended questions was carried out using descriptive statistics in addition to a Kruskall-Wallis rank analysis (Howell, D. C. 2008. Méthodes statistiques en sciences humaines. De Boeck) with a Mann–Whitney post-hoc test (α < .05; Siegel, S., and N. J. Castellan Jr. 1988. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Mcgrawhill). These analyses were conducted using five independent variables: 1) gender, 2) teaching experience, 3) number of schools where they teach, 4) contract status, and 5) socioeconomic background of the school. Also, the Goodman-Kruskall's G coefficient was used to analyze statistical associations between items. A qualitative analysis of the data from the two open-ended questions was carried out following (L’Écuyer, R. 1990. Méthodologie de l’analyse développementale de contenu : méthode GPS et concept de soi. Presses de l’Université du Québec) steps of inductive content analysis.

Findings

A large majority of the participants claimed to assess in HE (84.9%). They also mentioned respecting the official programs (87.7%), building tools to assess in HE (87.4%), assessing pupils’ progress (84.4%) and having an impact on their pupils’ autonomy in matters of health (74.9%). Those participants who worked in multiple schools assessed more in the short term (U = 2426, p = .028). Finally, those who did not assess HE (15.1%) mentioned a lack of feasibility and a lack of resources.

Conclusion

This study contributes to the scientific literature by focusing on an area for which there are few empirical studies and which represents a challenge for practical settings. The results show that a large majority of PE teachers assess in HE, while some face challenges that lead them to not assess this competency at all, even though it is mandatory. Based on these findings, we believe it is important to work with PE teachers to lessen the impact of these challenges on their assessment practices to help pupils’ learning.

中文翻译：

---

体育教师健康教育评价实践

摘要

背景

本文重点讨论体育教育（PE）中健康教育（HE）的评估。体育是对高等教育做出重大贡献的学校学科之一（Kirk, D. 2018。“体育教育作为健康促进：近期发展和未来问题。”教育与健康 36 (3) : 70–75 ）。然而，对体育教师实践进行的研究表明，高等教育评估具有挑战性，尽管它在魁北克学校是强制性的（Bezeau, D., S. Turcotte, S. Beaudoin, and J. Grenier. 2020。“健康教育评估”体育和健康教师在协作行动研究中使用的实践。”体育和运动教育学25（4）：379-393）。很少有研究关注高等教育中体育教师的评估实践，导致目前可用的实证数据有限（Georgakis, S., and R. Wilson. 2012.“澳大利亚体育教育和学校体育：当代探索评估。”《亚洲运动与运动科学杂志》 9 (1): 37–52)。学生参与的精心策划的评估可以促进他们的学习，并使他们对自己的健康负责（Leirhaug、PE 和 C. Annerstedt。2016 年。“用新的眼光评估？挪威体育教育中的学习评估。”体育和体育教育学21（6）：616-631）。有必要调查高等教育中体育教师的评估实践，以提高当前有关该学科的科学知识，并更好地了解他们面临的主要挑战。

目标

本文讨论了三个研究目标，旨在确定：1）在高等教育中进行评估的体育教师报告的评估实践，2）未在高等教育中进行评估的体育教师给出的不这样做的原因，以及3）感知的贡献体育教师培养学生在健康和福祉方面的自主权。

方法

来自加拿大魁北克省的 223 名小学（学生：5-11 岁）体育教师回答了一份调查问卷，其中包括五个针对高等教育评估实践的封闭式问题和两个开放式问题。除了 Kruskall-Wallis 等级分析（Howell, DC 2008.Méthodes statistiques en sciences humanines . De Boeck）和 Mann-Whitney 后分析之外，还使用描述性统计数据对五个开放式问题的数据进行了定量分析。特殊检验（α < .05；Siegel, S. 和 NJ Castellan Jr. 1988。行为科学的非参数统计（第二版）。麦格劳希尔）。这些分析使用五个自变量进行：1) 性别，2) 教学经验，3) 任教的学校数量，4) 合同状况，以及 5) 学校的社会经济背景。此外，Goodman-Kruskall 的G系数还用于分析项目之间的统计关联。对两个开放式问题的数据进行了定性分析（L'Écuyer, R. 1990. Méthodologie de l'analysis développementale de contenu : méthode GPS et Concept de soi . Presses de l'Université du Québec）归纳内容分析的步骤。

发现

绝大多数参与者声称对 HE 进行评估（84.9%）。他们还提到尊重官方计划（87.7%）、构建高等教育评估工具（87.4%）、评估学生的进步（84.4%）以及影响学生在健康问题上的自主权（74.9%）。那些在多所学校工作的参与者在短期内评估更多（U = 2426，p  = .028）。最后，那些没有评估HE的人（15.1%）提到缺乏可行性和缺乏资源。

结论

这项研究通过关注一个很少有实证研究且对实际环境构成挑战的领域，为科学文献做出了贡献。结果表明，绝大多数体育教师在高等教育中进行评估，而有些教师面临的挑战导致他们根本不评估这种能力，尽管这是强制性的。基于这些发现，我们认为与体育教师合作以减轻这些挑战对其评估实践的影响以帮助学生的学习非常重要。