NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ818171
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2006-Jun
Pages: 22
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: 63
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-1740-8989
The Assessment of Athletics "Knowledge" with Written and Video Tests
van Vuuren-Cassar, Gemma; Lamprianou, Iasonas
Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, v11 n2 p119-140 Jun 2006
Background: Athletics programmes for secondary schools include a variety of skills, knowledge and cognitive abilities, which are currently assessed through written, practical, oral and/or video-based tests. Skills are traditionally taught in practice-based sessions, while the knowledge aspect is often reinforced in class-based sessions with video/computer-assisted instruction. Currently, it is still not clear whether these teaching environments have an effect on written and video modes of assessment. This research attempted to investigate this lack of clarity for the content knowledge of techniques, planning tactics and rules in athletics. Purpose: To investigate the impact of written and video-based assessments on three teaching environments. The aim of this research was to assess: (i) which of the three teaching environments contributed most to learning; (ii) whether the written and video-based assessments communicate the same assessment information in relation to the teaching environment; and (iii) whether content knowledge, such as techniques, planning tactics and rules, taught in a practical performance teaching situation adequately prepares students for written and video-based assessments. Setting: A written paper and a video-based paper were used to measure the learning gains of the participants of three teaching environments: practice; practice and handouts; and video-based class sessions in the context of athletics. The practice-based sessions were similar to traditional performance-based physical education (PE) lessons. During the practice and handouts class, information sheets were used to consolidate the content. The class-based sessions included discussions, video clips, information sheets and written class work. Participants: There were 49 participants, (16 females and 33 males). Intact classes from different schools were randomly assigned to the experimental teaching environments; practice 12; practice and handouts 25; and class sessions 12. The participants of the study were aged 16 years, in their first term of post-secondary schooling in Malta. Intervention: Content knowledge of rules, planning tactics and techniques of sprints, relays and the shot put in athletics was taught in three experimental teaching units of six hours each. Two assessment instruments--a written paper (35 test items) and a video-based written paper (same test items with video clips)--were administered to each participant before and after the experimental teaching. Research design: The study was a "quasi" experimental design. Two experimental assessment instruments: a written assessment; and a video-based assessment were administered to each participant before and after the experimental teaching treatment of six hours. The three experimental teaching units represented three teaching environments: Athletics Practice; Athletics Practice and handouts; and Athletics class sessions. Data collection and analysis: Raw and logit scores for the three content domains were computed for the written assessment and the video-based assessment. A partial Credit Rasch Model analysis was used to measure the uni-dimensionality, reliability and the fit of the test items. ANOVA (analysis of variance), MANOVA (multiple analysis of variance repeated measures) and Scheffe Multiple Range test procedures were employed to investigate the effectiveness and any main effects and significant differences of the experimental teaching environments on the assessment of content domains. Findings: The subjects of the class-based teaching environment achieved statistically significant (p = 0.05) better scores on rules (M = 24.21; SD = 3.58; Range = 0 - 30), planning tactics (M = 19.00; SD = 6.37; Range = 0 - 30), and techniques (M = 20.67; SD = 16.18; Range = 0 - 40), when video-based assessments were used. Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that a written assessment and a video-based assessment test different competencies on the same test items. The findings of the study indicate that students familiar with video analysis will cope satisfactorily with video-based assessments. Practice-based teaching environments without video-based analysis are sufficient for written assessments, yet not for video-based assessments in athletics. (Contains 1 figure, 7 tables and 1 note.)
Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Research
Education Level: Secondary Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Location: Malta