Dr.Hab., Professor N.I. Sinyavsky¹
PhD, Professor V.A. Grigoryev²
PhD, Associate Professor A.V. Fursov¹
PhD, Associate Professor V.Yu. Losev^2
1Surgut State Pedagogical University, Surgut
²Surgut State University, Surgut

Keywords: questionnaire survey, physical education instructor, preschool education institutions, assessment of physical education indicators

Background. The physical development and educational service offered by the preschool education system is designed to attain the following interrelated goals: protect and improve children’s health and cultivate healthy lifestyles and conscientious physical perfection agenda for their whole lifetime [1, 3]. The children’s development and nurturing system on the whole and the physical education service in particular is intended to facilitate the physical development process in the preschool educational system [2]. For the purposes of the study, we completed a questionnaire survey of preschool physical education instructors who are expected to spearhead reforms in the national preschool physical development and educational system. The questionnaire survey data provide, among other things, an insight into the current situation of the national preschool physical development and educational service.

Objective of the study was to survey the physical education instructors’ attitudes to preschool physical education models.

Methods and structure of the study. Sampled for the questionnaire survey were the preschool physical education instructors (n=73) from the municipal preschool education establishments in Surgut. We used an electronic questionnaire survey form converted to the Google format to offer a convenient online survey toolkit. The outcome questionnaire survey data were complemented by the data of the public opinion poll completed by the Ministry of Sports of the Russian Federation with concern to the physical education and sports services offered by the national educational system (educators’ survey form) [4, 5].

The questionnaire survey under the study was timed to the advanced education courses of the preschool physical education instructors in Surgut, with the instructors offered to join the questionnaire survey online at https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeYtOY09z4O3RFQZSQrBnfIvJzRJwl9TugB-Yybpy-IYFvwA/viewform .

Study findings and discussion. The question ‘Have you seen any changes in the physical education and sports (PES) service provided at your establishment for the last few years, and if so, what are they?’ was responded as follows: 79.5% of the sample reported changes to the better; 15.1% reported no changes; 2.7% found changes to the worse; and 2.7% were uncertain.

The question of whether they have seen changes in the demand for the PES service in their establishments was responded as follows: 87.7% of the sample reported growth of the demand; 9.6% found no changes; and 1.4% was uncertain.

The question ‘What is the supply and demand situation in the PES/ health service in your establishment?’ was responded as follows: 28.8% reported the demand in excess of supply; 16.4% said the supply is higher than the demand; 49.3% believed they are roughly balanced; and 5.5% were uncertain on the point.

Furthermore, the instructors were to rate the PES situation in their educational establishments in different aspects. Thus the available sport assets and facilities were rated as follows: 15.1% of the sample rated them excellent; 24.7% good; 41.1% satisfactory; 16.4% poor; and 2.7% were uncertain on the point. It may be noted that the survey data generally correspond to the asset management reporting data of the municipal preschool educational establishments in Surgut.

The available sport equipment and assets were rated as follows: 20.5% of the sample rated them excellent; 32.9% good; 32.9% satisfactory; and 13.7% poor.

The competitive process design and management standards were rated excellent, good, satisfactory and poor by 16.4%, 61.6%, 20.5% and 1.4% of the sample, respectively.

The physical education program quality was rated excellent, good and satisfactory by 38.4%, 60.3% and 1.4% of the sample, respectively.

The existing sanitary and hygienic conditions for the physical education service were rated excellent, good, satisfactory and poor by 30.1%, 54.8%, 13.7% and 1.4% of the respondents, respectively.

The health service provided to the trainees were rated excellent, good, satisfactory and poor by 19.2%, 61.6%, 16.4% and 1.4% of the sample; and 1.4% was uncertain.

The off-class PES and training service was rated excellent, good, satisfactory and poor by 23.3%, 61.6%, 9.6% and 2.7% of the sample; plus 2.8% were uncertain.

The question ‘Do you think the PES service provided at your establishment meets the actual needs of the trainees?’ was responded as follows: 42.5% of the sample said yes, on the whole; 53.4% rather yes than no; 1.4% rather not; and 2.7% were uncertain on the point.

The question ‘Does your management make analyses of the PES service quality on the whole?’ was responded as follows: 97.2% said yes; 1.4% no; and 1.0% uncertain.

In the next question (see Figure 1 hereunder) the respondents were to rank by importance the PES service quality rating criteria applicable by their establishments, and they gave the following responses: 87.7% (n=64) prioritized the physical fitness test rates; 35.8% (n=26) health (medical examination/ test) rates; 26% (n=19) numbers of qualifiers for the GTO Complex tests; 24.7% (n=18) opted for the PES progress rates reported by the educational establishment; 21.9% (n=16) numbers of athletes having formal sport qualifications; 16.4% (n=12) total sick days; and 11% (n=8) gave preference to the trainees’ health grouping rates.

Figure 1. Ranking by importance the PES service quality rating criteria applicable at the establishments

The question of whether or not the educational establishment provides an inclusive PES service to the trainees with disabilities or health disorders was responded as follows: 64.6% of the sample said yes, for the establishment gives a priority to such services; 16.0% said yes, but to a limited degree (not for everybody in need); 15.1% said no; and 4.3% were uncertain.

The question ‘How often do you feel the trainees should train in addition to the regular PES service for real progress?’ was responded as follows: 16.4% said at least twice a week; 69.9% at least 3 times a week; 5.5% at least 4 times a week; 5.5% at least 5 times a week; and 2.7% were uncertain.

Furthermore, the respondents were requested to rank by importance the PES service improvement options, with the following results: 78.1% (n= 57) ranked first the PES assets and technologies improvement projects; 64.4% (n= 47) sport equipment and training systems improvements; 53.4% (n=39) better financial support; 32.9% (n=24) better theoretical and practical provisions for the PES service; 21.9% (n=16) improvements in the mass sport process scheduling and management; 21.9% (n=16) improvements in the PES promotion projects; and 17.8% (n=13) improvements in the legal and regulatory provisions for the PES service.

The study data and analyses make it possible to highlight the most promising ways for reforms as they are reported by the sample of the physical education instructors: PES assets and technologies improvement projects; better financial support; improvements in the sport equipment and training systems; better theoretical and practical provisions for the PES service; improvements in the mass sport process scheduling and management; and improvements in the PES promotion projects.

Conclusion. Based on the study data and analyses, the following physical education and sport service quality rating criteria applicable at the preschool education establishments were offered: (1) physical fitness test rates; (2) numbers of qualifiers for the GTO Complex tests; (3) тumbers of qualified athletes; (4) health (medical examination/ test) rates; (5) total sick days; and (6) PES service progress rates reported by the educational establishment.

References

1. Varfolomeeva Z.S. Formirovanie fizicheskoy kultury lichnosti starshikh doshkolnikov v usloviyakh realizatsii innovatsionnykh modeley fizicheskogo vospitaniya: teoriya i praktika [Formation of personal physical culture of senior preschoolers within implementation of innovative physical education models: theory and practice]. Moscow, 2012, pp. 41-42.
2. Sinyavskiy N.I., Fursov A.V., Kamartdinova A.A., Verbitskiy K.G. Ispolzovanie onlayn tekhnologiy kak osnova formirovaniya innovatsionnoy deyatelnosti po fizicheskomu vospitaniyu i razvitiyu detey doshkolnogo vozrasta [Online technologies as a basis for formation of innovative activities in physical education and development of preschoolers]. Mater. XIII Vseros. s mezhdunar. uchastiem nauch.-prakt. konf. 'Sovershenstvovanie sistemy fizicheskogo vospitaniya, sportivnoy trenirovki, turizma i ozdorovleniya razlichnykh kategoriy naseleniya' [Proc. XIII nat. with intern. participation res.-practical conf. 'Actions to improve of the system of physical education, sports training, tourism and health improvement of various categories of population']. 2014, pp. 38-42.
3. Snigur M.E., Peshkova N.V., Losev V.Yu., Kizaev O.N. Formirovanie rezhima dvigatelnoy aktivnosti detey starshego doshkolnogo vozrasta v usloviyakh realizatsii FGOS [Formation of motor mode of senior preschool children within implementation of federal state educational standard]. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2015, no. 3, pp. 86-89.
4. Sinyavskiy N.I., Rodionov V.A., Losev V.Yu., Fursov A.V. Otnoshenie uchiteley fizicheskoy kultury k organizatsii fizicheskogo vospitaniya v obrazovatelnykh uchrezhdeniyakh [Survey of Physical Education teachers' attitudes to physical education process in national education system]. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2017, no. 9, pp. 86-88.
5. Razvitie fizicheskoy kultury i sporta i vnedrenie kompleksa GTO v sisteme obrazovaniya (opros dlya pedagogov SurGPU) [Development of physical education and sports and introduction of GTO complex in educational system (Surgut teachers' survey)]. Google Forms Platform. [Electronic resource]. 2016. Available at: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeYtOY09z4O3RFQZSQrBnfIvJzRJwl9... free access. Date of access: 06.11.2017.

Corresponding author: logsi@list.ru

Abstract

The study offers the data of a questionnaire survey of the physical education instructors’ attitudes to the preschool physical education models, their design and content; and analyzes their opinions on the pros and cons of the valid preschool physical education programs. The survey data helped put together a set of criteria to rate the preschool physical education service quality and efficiency.