Dr. Hab., Associate Professor V.A. Kudinova¹
Dr. Hab., Professor V.Y. Karpov²
PhD, Associate Professor A.S. Boldov³
N.N. Marinina^2
1Volgograd State Academy of Physical Culture, Volgograd
²Russian State Social University, Moscow
³Moscow State University of Psychology and Education, Moscow

Corresponding author: kudinov9910@rambler.ru

Abstract

Objective of the study was to substantiate and analyze benefits of a new motor skills training model to improve the school physical education service quality.

Methods and structure of the study. The new motor skills training model includes the physical education teaching mastery, physical exercise difficulty and motor giftedness tests, with each aspect rated on a 10-point scale and verified by an expert team of university professors and experience school physical education teachers. The study was run at secondary schools of Volgograd and Moscow cities in 2014-2019 school years. We sampled for the study university physical education experts (n=12), school physical education teachers (n=47) and the 5-11-graders (n=705).

The physical education teaching mastery was rated with account of the physical education service record and formal physical education qualification by the physical education / sports teaching service quality tests supported by expert valuations; and the school students’ motor giftedness was rated by the physical fitness, motor activity and motor skills progress tests verified by the expert valuations. The motor skills difficulty levels were ranked by the primary error rates. The school motor activity was rated by enthusiasm/ determination in the physical education practices, and the motor giftedness was classified by the time costs of specific physical exercises, with every success in the physical exercises scored on a 10-point scale. Prior to and after every physical exercises, we rated the physical education teaching mastery, trainees’ motor gifts and motor skills difficulty levels, with the individual progresses in every physical exercises per session being indicative of the motor skills training abilities/ progress.  

Results and conclusion. The new motor skills training model was tested beneficial for the school physical education service. The motor skills progress testes in the school physical education course are recommended to be complemented by the physical education teaching mastery tests/ expert valuations, motor skills difficulty rankings and the trainees’ motor giftedness tests.

Keywords: assessment, efficiency, technique of motor actions, schoolchildren, physical education teacher, criteria.

Background. Presently the physical education curricula in the national secondary school education system are non-standardized and rather inconsistent [1, 6] that means that the training service is often inefficient, and many school physical education teachers are still in need of special theoretical knowledgebase [2-4] and competency in specific motor skills training and progress tests [5]; whilst effective motor skills training models for school applications are still underdeveloped.    

Objective of the study was to substantiate and analyze benefits of a new motor skills training model to improve the school physical education service quality.

Methods and structure of the study. The new motor skills training model includes the physical education teaching mastery, physical exercise difficulty and motor giftedness tests, with each aspect rated on a 10-point scale and verified by an expert team of university professors and experience school physical education teachers. The study was run at secondary schools of Volgograd and Moscow cities in 2014-2019 school years. We sampled for the study university physical education experts (n=12), school physical education teachers (n=47) and the 5-11-graders (n=705).

The physical education teaching mastery was rated with account of the physical education service record and formal physical education qualification by the physical education / sports teaching service quality tests supported by expert valuations; and the school students’ motor giftedness was rated by the physical fitness, motor activity and motor skills progress tests verified by the expert valuations. The motor skills difficulty levels were ranked by the primary error rates. The school motor activity was rated by enthusiasm/ determination in the physical education practices, and the motor giftedness was classified by the time costs of specific physical exercises, with every success in the physical exercises scored on a 10-point scale. Prior to and after every physical exercises, we rated the physical education teaching mastery, trainees’ motor gifts and motor skills difficulty levels, with the individual progresses in every physical exercises per session being indicative of the motor skills training abilities/ progress.   

Results and discussion. Average physical education teaching records rated on a grade-specific basis ranged from 5.65 to 6.04 points; with the physical education qualifications scored by 5.47 to 5.96 points; and the actual physical education service quality scored by 6.53 to 6.85 points versus the expert valuations ranging from 6.14 to 6.22 points. Therefore, the physical education teaching mastery of the sample was scored by 5.98 to 6.35 points. The trainees’ physical fitness was scored by 3.87 to 5.43 points, motor activity by 3.67 to 5.45 points, motor skills training ability by 4.78 to 5.23 points; and the motor gifts by 4.87 to 5.28 points.

The motor skills training was tested most successful in the three-attempts rope climbing tests (6.8 points) in grade 5; two-attempts climbing test in grade 6 (6.2 points); backward somersault to split test (girls) test (6.2 points) and 9-11-step-run-up long jump test (boys) test (5.8 points) in grade 7; acrobatic combination (6.7 points for boys and 6.5 points for girls) test in grade 8; volleyball pike test (5.6 points) for grade 9; serve reception test (5.6 points) in grade 10; and serve test (5.8 points) in grade 11.

The motor skills training ability were ranked by the following levels: poor 2.7 points; low 4.0 points; acceptable 5.4 points; good 6.8 points; and excellent 8.5 points. On the whole in the 5-11-grade sample the motor skills training ability was initially low, with some motor skills training progress found in the physical education service due to the physical exercises being repeated in the standard school physical education curriculum. Generally, the progress in the motor skills training practices was higher in the standard gymnastic exercises and much lower in the situational team sports practices. We believe that the school physical education service should be complemented by the situation-specific motor skills trainings to improve the secondary school physical education service quality.

The new motor skills training and progress test model makes it possible to rank the physical exercises by the difficulty levels and manage the physical education service so as to effectively master every physical exercises. Our study found the physical exercises success rates varying from 27.0% in expert valuations of the physical education teaching mastery to 58.2% in the trainee’s physical fitness tests.

Furthermore, the trainees’ physical fitness was tested to fall with age from 5.34 to 3.92 points. The 5-7-graders were tested with the highest motor skills training ability scored by 5.06±0.29 points; with the boys tested with the higher motor activity, whilst the motor skills training abilities were found virtually gender-unspecific (no significant differences). The physical exercises tests on the physical education teaching mastery and trainee’s motor skills success scales made it possible to design individual progress trajectories in the secondary school physical education service. Our test data analyses found the following priorities in the motor giftedness elements: motor skills training ability for grades 5-7 (20.7%); motor activity for grades 8-9 (21.3%); and physical fitness (20.3% for boys); and motor skills training ability (21.4% for girls) in grades 10-11.

The grade 5-7 boys were tested with the motor skills training ability correlated with the motor skills learning efficiency (r = 0.433) and individual physical fitness; and the motor activity was found correlated with the physical education / sports teaching mastery (r = 0.437). The grade 5-7 girls were tested with correlations of the motor skills training abilities with the motor skills teaching efficiency (r = 0.524); the physical education / sports teaching mastery (r = 0.411); and expert-valuated physical fitness rates (r = 0.405).

The grade 8-9 boys were tested with the motor skills training ability being correlated with the motor skills learning efficiency (r=0.537); and the physical fitness correlated with the motor skills learning efficiency in expert valuations (r=0,474) and the motor skills training ability(r=0,472). The grade 8-9 girls were tested with correlations of the motor skills training abilities with the motor skills learning efficiency (r=0.496), motor activity r=0,464) and motor gifts (r=0.432), and correlations of the motor skills learning ability with the motor gifts (r = 0.430).

The grade 10-11 boys were tested with significant correlations between the motor skills training ability and motor activity (r=0.527); and the physical fitness and motor skills learning efficiency in expert valuations (r=0.503). And the grade 10-11 girls were tested with correlations of the motor skills training abilities with the motor skills learning efficiency (r=0.512), and motor activity with motor gifts (r = 0.430).

Conclusion. The new motor skills training model was tested beneficial for the school physical education service. The motor skills progress testes in the school physical education course are recommended to be complemented by the physical education teaching mastery tests/ expert valuations, motor skills difficulty rankings and the trainees’ motor giftedness tests.

References

1. Kudinova V.A. Effectiveness of teaching motor actions at physical education lessons. Fizicheskaya kultura v shkole. 2015. No. 3. pp. 21-25.
2. Kudinova V.A., Karpov V.Y., Kudinov A.A., Kozyakov R.V. Physical education personnel's performance in entities of the Russian Federation. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2016, no. 11, pp. 14-16.
3. Pogudin S.M. Priorities and criteria for effectiveness of school physical education. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury. 2010. No. 5. pp. 7-9.
4. Pravdov M.A., Pravdov D.M., Karpov V.Y. et al. Physical education teachers' competency to form regulatory universal educational actions in students. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury. 2020. No.8. pp. 55-57.
5. Chernyshenko Y.K., Balandin V.A., Shestakov M.M. Criteria for rating of methodological effectiveness of teaching methods. Fizicheskaya kultura, sport – nauka i praktika. 2012. No. 4. P. 70.
6. Аbramishvili G.A., Karpov V.Y., Eremin M.V. The Technology of Differentiated Physical Education of Primary. Age Pupils. Asian Social Science. 2015. V. 11. No. 19. pp. 329-334.