Academic education process self-management mechanisms in physical education service domain

Dr.Hab., Associate Professor G.A. Yamaletdinova1
PhD, Associate Professor N.B. Serova2
Dr.Hab., Professor V.S. Makeeva3
1University of Humanities, Yekaterinburg
2Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, Yekaterinburg
3Russian State University of Physical Education, Sports, Youth and Tourism (SCOLIPE), Moscow

Keywords: physical education, self-control, learning activity, stages, algorithm.

Background. It is quite traditional for the modern educational communities to intensify the academic educational process by giving a growing priority to the self-reliant learning formats – that require, among other things, special self-controls and self-analytical skills to effectively design and manage the self-reliant learning process. In the physical education domain, it implies the physical progress and health self-tests for success. Thus the modern academic physical education service shall facilitate the self-control and self-management capacities in students by the target education models geared to accumulate the relevant knowledgebase and practical experience and thereby contribute to success in the professional careers and other creative activities.

The self-learning formats in the national academic education system are implemented within the frame of the group-individual, order-chaos, knowledge-social practice, reality-expectations, outside control-self-control and other dual contexts that need to be studied in the ontological, epistemological and social domains. The notion of self-control implies that the individual has established him/herself within the interpersonal relationship system traditional for the society [3].

Objective of the study was to analyze the optimal staged self-controlled cognitive activity development model applied within the academic physical education service system.

Methods and design of the study. Sampled for the study were the Yekaterinburg Humanities University students (n=3000) split up into 3 Experimental Groups (EG1-3) and Reference Group (RG). The group progress in the self-control and self-learning skills building was tested in the academic physical education and sport and health service. The self-learning qualities and skills building model was facilitated by the individualized self-analysis and self-identification components of the physical education and sport service with special computer software tools, physical health certification system, practical solutions finding algorithms and the relevant supportive information technologies. The group progress rated by the theoretical and practical physical education and sport knowledge self-tests versus the relevant physical health standards was verified in the educational process by the following tests: physical/ professional/ technical fitness tests; adaptability test; biological age test; tolerance to heart diseases test; and the fatigue tolerance test [4].

We used the O.A. Kanopkin concept of discretional self-control mechanisms and their informational aspects to develop the basics of our self-control skills building model under the academic physical education and sport service. We assumed that the individual self-control building algorithm may be viewed as the self-control construction stages within the certain self-analyzing-and-building hierarchy, with every stage having its own goals, functions and deliverables [4]; and with the student’s progress rated by the individual capacity to find untraditional solutions and design options and follow the own ways out of problems – to grow in the self-control and self-learning domains from one process stage to the other.

The progress self-test and analysis stage of the training model was designed to lay a foundation for the health/ individual reserves/ mental/ physical fitness self-tests and analyses, with due diagnostics of own abilities, potentialities, advantages and drawbacks versus the relevant standards – governed by the idea that no progress in the self-control domain may be made unless the individual perfectly studies and knows his own self [1] .

The motivations and goals setting stage was intended to form the students’ self-identification frameworks within the physical education and sport service, with due primary knowledge, communication needs, priorities and skills so as to effectively solve the individual problems identified in the above progress self-test and analysis stage and shape up the own healthy lifestyle (HLS) to secure success of the professional service. It is based on the self-tests that the student shall decide how he/she is going to progress, with a special emphasis on the still deficient competences, personality traits, drawbacks and advantages critical for success.

The cognitive process design stage was intended to expand the physical education knowledgebase and the relevant competences in the self-analytical domain to find the most efficient health improvement ways and tools – based on the self-tested progress in the physical education and sport theory and practice, psychology, hygiene, knowledge of the own health issues and the ways to improve health via the own progress design and control skills supported by the growing practical self-learning experience [2]. Thus in the efforts to master own life and business design and control skills, the students are encouraged to: develop an individual healthy lifestyle using the relevant IT-driven algorithm. The individual healthy lifestyle shaping projects will be implemented in the relevant academic physical education and sport service formats with elements of the job-specific physical fitness, adaptability building, health and recreational trainings.

The practical experience building stage was viewed as integrative i.e. consolidating the prior achievements to facilitate the self-fulfillment and self-excelling agenda in the practical training processes. This is the key stage of the training model to secure transition to a complete self-control process with the student being able to effectively design his/her own healthy lifestyle in the elective physical education and sport course and self-reliant learning process, with active control of the training process intensity, scope, time and schedules as required for the own progress.

The progress rating stage was intended to rate the achieved self-control skills and, hence, efficiency of the relevant physical education service models and tools (the result assessment stage), and have the self-test rates verified by opinions of the physical education and sport faculty members, to fairly overview the work completed, its quality and the accomplishments and drawbacks in the self-learning capacity building process. It is important that the progress tests include the prior/ interim progress/ final tests and self-tests. The self-test, self-analyses, self-diagnoses and self-ratings of the own behavioral models, responses etc. will be used to assess the own physical/ healthy lifestyle shaping progress and self-learning skills in the academic physical education and sport.

The process correction stage implied a transition from the outside correction of the learning process to the self-correction format geared to mitigate and eliminate the somatic, physical, mental and social regresses/ disorders in the individual development process. It is very important that the relevant supportive IT toolkits are effectively applied to secure due training, with psychological effects on the individual motivations to cultivate the must-win mindsets and health sensitive agendas; and facilitate the academic progress. Methods and tools of the correction process will be selected as required by the cognitive process formats and the actual individual self-control capacities ratable in the problem identification, solution-finding and the self-research domains.

Results and discussion. The pre-experimental group test data and comparative analysis found insignificant intergroup differences, with the self-learning qualities and skills of the sample being tested fairly low: see Table 1 hereunder. The post-experimental tests found the EG1-3 making special progress versus the RG in the creative physical education and sport theory and practice; self-learning basics in the physical education and sport domain; and the job-specific self-reliant learning project design and management skills. Significant transitions to the self-learning formats in EG1, EG2 and EG3 were tested to grow from 13 to 43, 7 to 18 and 5 to 9 people, respectively – versus the RG that was tested with some albeit insignificant progress in the same test rates.

Table 1. Self-learning capacity test rates and their variations, points

 

Tests

Groups (М ± m)

EG1

EG2

EG3

RG

Self-control skills self-test

2,87±0,09

2,87±0,08

2,86±0,10

2,88±0,08

4,31± 0,06

3,59±0,09

3,30±0,07

2,92± 0,08*

Physical education and sport theory and practice knowledge test

1,67±0,07

1,67±0,08

1,68±0,08

1,69±0,08

4,94±0,03

4,74±0,06

4,16±0,07

3,10±0,07

Physical health test

2,76±0,07

2,90±0,07

2,97±0,08

3,03±0,09

4,72±0,02

4,13±0,04

3,91±0,05

2,67±0,08

Physical fitness test

1,86±0,09

1,87±0,11

1,91±0,11

1,88±0,11

3,44±0,08

3,09±0,09

3,06±0,10

2,21±0,07

Job-specific physical fitness test

2,67±0,09

2,37±0,08

2,67±0,10

2,70±0,09

4,50±0,03

4,09±0,05

3,85±0,06

2,64±0,08

Technical fitness test

3,83±0,11

3,85±0,10

3,86±0,11

3,87±0,11

4,87±0,02

4,71±0,05

4,54±0,07

3,84± 0,07*

Self-control skills test

2,65±0,19

2,69±0,20

2,73±0,19

2,74±0,22

4,56±0,17

4,07±0,18

3,81±0,17

2,82± 0,15*

Note: pre- and post-experimental test data are given in the upper and lower lines of each category, respectively; *insignificant difference of the pre- versus post-experimental test rates

Conclusion. The study data and analyses demonstrated benefits of the self-learning capacity building model for application in the academic physical education and sport / health service with the job-specific training priorities, as verified by the EG progress in the self-tested self-learning capacity, physical health, physical education and sport theory and practice knowledge and the physical/ professional/ technical fitness domains (with the tested progress from 15.4% to 195.8%); with the self-learning capacities found fairly integrated and synergized in the EG students.

The self-learning capacity building model was tested particularly beneficial in the modular/ project format with a special priority to the individualized education tools facilitated by the modern IT. The pre- versus post-experimental tests showed growths in the shares of creatively self-learning students in EG1, EG2 and EG3 from 19% to 64%, 13% to 33% and 10% to 18%, respectively.

References

  1. Golovin S.M. Fizkulturno-sportivnoe samoopredelenie studentov universiteta [Physical education and sports self-determination of university students]. Zdorovye cheloveka, teoriya i metodika fizicheskoy kultury i sporta. 2017, no. 3 (6), pp. 20-23.
  2. Grigoriev V.I., Davidenko D.N., Chistyakov V.A., Kil K.D. Kompetentnostny podkhod k proektirovaniyu individualnykh obrazovatelnykh traektoriy fizicheskogo razvitiya studentov [Competency-building approach to design of individual educational path of students' physical development]. Uchenye zapiski universiteta im. P.F. Lesgafta, 2011, no. 1 (71), pp. 36-40.
  3. Makeeva V.S., Polyakov P.O. Professionalnoe samosoznanie kak osnova uspeshnosti professionalnoy podgotovki bakalavra fizicheskoy kultury [Professional self-awareness as basis for success of professional training for bachelor of physical education]. Sovershenstvovanie fizicheskoy, ognevoy i taktiko-spetsialnoy podgotovki sotrudnikov pravookhranitelnykh organov [Improvement of physical, fire and tactical and special training of law enforcement officers]. Proc. nat. scie. conf.. Orel, 2015, pp. 87-91.
  4. Yamaletdinova G.A. Sistema samoupravleniya uchebno-poznavatelnoy deyatelnostyu studentov v sfere fizicheskoy kultury [Students' educational activity self-control system in physical education]. Yekaterinburg: HU publ., 2013, pp. 10-99.

Corresponding author: yamalga@mail.ru       

Abstract

The study analyzes the academic physical education process self-control mechanisms and stages, with an emphasis on the stage-specific control algorithms, goals, key operations, necessary skills and benefits of transition to the self-control format.

The progress self-test and analysis stage of the training model was designed to lay a foundation for the health/ reserves/ mental/ physical fitness self-tests and analyses, with due diagnostics of own abilities, potentialities, advantages and drawbacks versus the relevant standards. The motivations and goals setting stage was intended to form the students’ self-identification frameworks with due primary knowledge, communication needs, priorities and skills. The cognitive process design stage was intended to expand the physical education knowledgebase and the relevant competences in the self-analytical domain to find the most efficient health improvement ways and tools. The practical experience building stage was geared to facilitate the self-fulfillment and self-excelling agenda and practical training processes. This is the key stage of the training model to secure transition to a complete self-control process with the student designing his/her own healthy lifestyle in the elective course and self-reliant learning process. The progress rating stage was intended to rate the self-control skills and efficiency of the relevant physical education service models and tools. The process correction stage implied a transition from the outside correction of the learning process to the self-correction format geared to mitigate and eliminate the somatic, physical, mental and social regresses/ disorders in the individual development process. It is important that the relevant supportive information toolkits are effectively applied to secure due training, with psychological effects on the individual motivations to cultivate the must-win mindsets and health sensitive agendas; and facilitate the academic progress.