رفتار حرکتی

ویژگی‌های روان‌سنجی نسخة فارسی ابزار سواد بدنی ادراک شده در معلمان تربیت بدنی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار رفتار حرکتی، دانشکده روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، بخش تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه یزد، یزد، ایران

2 دانشیار گروه رفتار حرکتی و روان‌شناسی ورزشی، دانشکدۀ علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه اراک، اراک، ایران

3 استادیار گروه روانشناسی ورزشی، پژوهشگاه تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی تهران، تهران، ایران

چکیده
در سال‌های اخیر، سواد بدنی توجه بین‌المللی را به خود معطوف نموده و بدلیل مرتبط بودن به سیاست آموزشی و ورزشی، سرمایه‌گذاری فراوانی روی این مدل در کشورهای مختلف صورت گرفته است. علیرغم اهمیت موضوع سواد بدنی، از آن‌جا که این مفهوم هنوز در مراحل اولیه است، هنوز ابزار دقیقی برای ارزیابی آن در سنین و بین قشرهای مختلف وجود ندارد. هدف پژوهش حاضر، تعیین روایی و پایایی نسخة فارسی ابزار سواد بدنی ادراک شده در معلمان تربیت‌بدنی بود. بدین منظور 208 نفر از معلمان تربیت‌بدنی زن و مرد با دامنۀ سنی 20 تا 66 سال پرسشنامه سواد بدنی تکمیل نمودند. ابتدا با استفاده از روش باز ترجمه، صحت ترجمة نسخة فارسی پرسشنامه تأیید و در ادامه برای تعیین روایی سازة پرسشنامه از تحلیل عامل تأییدی مبتنی بر مدل‌یابی معادلات ساختاری و برای تعیین همسانی درونی از ضریب آلفای کرونباخ استفاده شد. همچنین برای پایایی زمانی سؤالات، از همبستگی درون طبقه‌ای با روش آزمون-آزمون مجدد استفاده شد. نتایج نشان داد که شاخص نیکویی برازش و شاخص برازش تطبیقی بالاتر از 90/0 می‌باشد. ضریب آلفای کرونباخ برای سواد بدنی ادراک شده و ابعاد آن بالای 7/0 (مقدار شاخص قابل‌قبول بودن) به‌دست آمد. بر اساس نتایج، نسخة فارسی ابزار سواد بدنی ادراک شده در معلمان تربیت‌بدنی از روایی سازه و پایایی درونی و زمانی مطلوب و قابل قبولی برخوردار است و می‌توان از آن به عنوان ابزاری روا و پایا برای ارزیابی سواد بدنی معلمان تربیت‌بدنی استفاده کرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Psychometric properties of Persian version of the Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument (PPLI)

نویسندگان English

  • hossein samadi 1
  • Jalil Moradi 2
  • alireza Aghababa 3
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Motor Behavior and Sport Psychology, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Arak University, Arak, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Sport Psychology, Sport Science Research Institute (SSRI), Tehran, Iran
چکیده English

In recent years, physical literacy has attracted international attention and due to its relevance to education and sports policy, much investment has been made in this model in different countries. Despite the importance of the issue of physical literacy, since this concept is in the early stages, there are still no precise instrument for evaluating it at different ages and between different groups. The aim of this study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument (PPLI) in physical education teachers. For this purpose, 208 male and female physical education teachers with an age range of 20 to 66 years completed questionnaire. First, the translation of the Persian version of the questionnaire was confirmed using the open translation method and then to determine the construct validity of the questionnaire, confirmatory factor analysis based on structural equation modeling and to determine internal consistency, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used. Also, for time reliability of the questions, intra-class correlation with test-retest method was used. The results showed that the good fit index and the comparative fit index are higher than 0/9. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for perceived physical literacy and its dimensions above 0.7 (acceptable index value) were obtained. Based on the results, the Persian version of the Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument (PPLI) in physical education teachers has a constructive validity and internal and temporal reliability and can be used as a valid and reliable tool to assess the physical literacy of physical education teachers.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

  • Perceived physical literacy
  • physical education teachers
  • construct validity
  • internal consistency
  1. Aghamolaei T, Zare F, Ghanbarnejad A, Haji-Alizadeh K. Relationship of exercise benefits/barriers and self efficacy with stages of change for physical activity in Abu Musa Island employees, Iran. Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2014;1(1):31-8.
  2. Gardner H. Physical literacy on the move: games for developing confidence and competence in physical activity. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2017.
  3. Yılmaz A, Kabak S. Perceived Physical Literacy Scale for Adolescents (PPLSA): validity and reliability study. international Journal of Education and Literacy Studies. 2021;9(1):159-71.
  4. Valadi S, Hamidi M. Studying the level of physical literacy of students aged 8 to 12 years. Research on Educational Sport. 2020;8(20):205-26.
  5. Cairney J, Clark H, Dudley D, Kriellaars D. Physical literacy in children and youth—a construct validation study. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 2019;38(2):84-90.
  6. Giblin S, Collins D, Button C. Physical literacy: importance, assessment and future directions. Sports Medicine. 2014;44(9):1177-84.
  7. Whitehead M. Physical literacy: philosophical considerations in relation to developing a sense of self, universality and propositional knowledge. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy. 2007;1(3):281-98.
  8. Corbin CB. Implications of physical literacy for research and practice: a commentary. Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 2016;87(1):14-27.
  9. Edwards LC, Bryant AS, Keegan RJ, Morgan K, Jones AM. Definitions, foundations and associations of physical literacy: a systematic review. Sports Medicine. 2017;47(1):113-26.
  10. Lundvall S. Physical literacy in the field of physical education–a challenge and a possibility. Journal of Sport and Health Science. 2015;4(2):113-8.
  11. Kurniawan F, Yuliawan D. Literacy dimension in physical education: analysis of construct validity instrument. Jurnal SPORTIF: Jurnal Penelitian Pembelajaran. 2021;7(2):303-16.
  12. Blanchard J, Van Wyk N, Ertel E, Alpous A, Longmuir PE. Canadian assessment of physical literacy in grades 7-9 (12-16 years): preliminary validity and descriptive results. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2020;38(2):177-86.
  13. Roetert EP, Ellenbecker TS, Kriellaars D. Physical literacy: why should we embrace this construct? : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Association of Sport and Exercise Medicine; 2018. p. 1291-2.
  14. Sum RKW, Ha ASC, Cheng CF, Chung PK, Yiu KTC, Kuo CC, et al. Construction and validation of a perceived physical literacy instrument for physical education teachers. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0155610.
  15. Scott JJ, Hill S, Barwood D, Penney D. Physical literacy and policy alignment in sport and education in Australia. European Physical Education Review. 2021;27(2):328-47.
  16. Penney D, Chandler T. Physical education: what future (s)? Sport, Education and Society. 2000;5(1):71-87.
  17. Choi S-M, Sum RK-W, Wallhead T, Ha AS-C, Sit CH-P, Shy D-Y, et al. Preservice physical education teachers’ perceived physical literacy and teaching efficacy. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 2020;40(1):146-56.
  18. Lodewyk KR. Early validation evidence of the Canadian Practitioner-Based Assessment of Physical Literacy in secondary physical education. Physical Educator. 2019;76(3):634-60.
  19. Sum RK, Cheng C-F, Wallhead T, Kuo C-C, Wang F-J, Choi S-M. Perceived physical literacy instrument for adolescents: a further validation of PPLI. Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness. 2018;16(1):26-31.
  20. Munusturlar S, & Yıldızer, G. Assessing factor structure of perceived physical literacy scale for physical education teachers for Turkish sample. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Advance. 2019:1-12.
  21. Mokaberian M, Kashani V, Sedighi Faroji F. Validation of the Persian version of Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale in Children. Motor Behavior. 2018;9(30):17-36.
  22. Kashani W, Farrokhi, Ahmad, Kazemnejad, Anoushirvan, Sheikh, Mahmoud. Validity and reliability of the Persian version of Sport Mental Toughness Questionnaire (SMTQ). 2015;7(20):49-72.
  23. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Publications; 2015.
  24. Whitehead M, Almond L. Creating learning experiences to foster physical literacy. Physical Education Matters. 2013;8(1):24-7.
  25. Tremblay M, Lloyd M. Physical literacy measurement: the missing piece. Physical and Health Education Journal. 2010;76(1):26-30.
  26. Roetert EP, Jefferies SC. Embracing physical literacy. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. 2014;85(8):38-40.
  27. Baumgarten S, Pagnano-Richardson K. Educational gymnastics: enhancing children's physical literacy. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 2010;81(4):18-25.
  28. Whitehead M. The concept of physical literacy. European Journal of Physical Education. 2001;6(2):127-38.
  29. Mandigo J, Francis N, Lodewyk K, Lopez R. Physical literacy for educators. Physical and Health Education Journal. 2009;75(3):27-30.
  30. Almond L. Physical literacy and fundamental movement skills: an introductory critique. ICSSPE Bull J Sport Sci Phys Educ. 2013;65:80-8.
  31. Dudley DA. A conceptual model of observed physical literacy. The Physical Educator. 2015;72(5).

Ma R-S, Sum RK, Hu Y-N, Gao T-Y. Assessing factor structure of the simplified Chinese version of Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument for undergraduates in Mainland China. Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness. 2020;18(2):68-73.

رفتار حرکتی
دوره 14، شماره 50
زمستان
بهمن 1401
صفحه 161-186

  • تاریخ دریافت 31 اردیبهشت 1401
  • تاریخ بازنگری 20 تیر 1401
  • تاریخ پذیرش 27 شهریور 1401

صفحه اصلی

داوران

ارسال مقاله

اصول اخلاقی

اخبار و اعلانات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

تماس با ما