The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview of the effectiveness of fundamental movement skill interventions in young children (2–5 years) and to identify elements that determine the effectiveness of these interventions. A systematic literature search was conducted in four electronic databases (PubMed, Academic Search Complete, Education Resources Information Centre and SPORTDiscus). First, intervention-related data (e.g., intervention length, volume, focus, and content) were extracted. Next, the methodological quality and risk of bias of the selected studies were evaluated using a 10-item checklist. Sixteen studies (13 randomised controlled trials and 3 controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria of which 9 had a high methodological quality. Fourteen studies reported statistically significant intervention effects, ranging from small negative to very strong positive effects. Four studies executed a retention test of which two showed positive effects. Elements that influence the effectiveness are: incorporating all fundamental movement skills in the intervention with a variety of activities; combining deliberate practice and deliberate play; the intervention length; the intervention volume and; providing a training programme with coaching during the intervention for the professional involved in delivering the intervention. However more studies containing retention tests are needed.
DOCUMENT
Many children aged 9–12 appear to have low levels of fundamental movement skills (FMS). Physical education (PE) is important because PE-teachers can teach children a variety of FMS and can influence PE-motivation. However, declined levels of PE-motivation are reported in the final grades of elementary school. Therefore, more insight in the relations between PE-motivation and FMS is needed.Purposes: In the first phase, instruments to measure the satisfaction of basic psychological needs (competence, autonomy, classmate relatedness and teacher relatedness) and PE-motivation (autonomous and controlled) in 9–12-year-old children were developed and validated. The purpose of the second phase was to examine the influence of basic psychological needs on PE-motivation, the influence of PE-motivation on locomotor skills, object control skills and balance skills, and the direct influence of basic psychological needs on FMS for boys and girls aged 9–12.Participants and data collection: In the first phase, 172 children (82 boys, 90 girls, M = 10.72 years ± 0.77) filled out questionnaires assessing the satisfaction of their basic psychological needs and motivation for PE. Forty-eight children completed the questionnaires again 4 weeks later. In the second phase, a total of 138 children (66 boys, 72 girls, 10.8 years ± .79) (three schools from phase 1 and one new school) participated. Children from the new school also completed the questionnaires and all children conducted the subtest for speed and agility, upper limb coordination and balance of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency 2.Data analysis: In phase 1, linear weighted Kappa's and the Mokken Scale Program for polychotomous items were used to test reliability and validity. In phase 2, Pearson's correlations and multiple linear regression analyses were performed to examine the relations.Findings: Regarding phase 1, all subscales were reliable and the validity was considered moderate to strong except for the autonomy subscale, which was not reliable and valid. With respect to phase 2, all basic psychological needs, except autonomy among girls, had moderate to strong correlations with autonomous PE-motivation. Teacher relatedness was the most important predictor for boys and girls, while the second predictor was classmate relatedness for boys and competence for girls. No positive significant relations between basic psychological needs and FMS and between PE-motivation and FMS were found. In contrary, moderate but negative relations between teacher relatedness and balance skills and between autonomous PE-motivation and balance skills were found for boys.Conclusions: The results confirmed the importance of the basic psychological needs in the prediction of autonomous PE-motivation in 9–12-year-old children. Although all needs should be supported by the PE-teacher, it is important to be aware of the different impact of the needs on autonomous PE-motivation for boys and girls. Despite the missing relations with FMS, PE-teachers seem to be able to autonomously motivate children for PE regardless of their FMS proficiency.
DOCUMENT
The main aim of this study was to determine the agreement in classification between the modified KörperKoordinations Test für Kinder (KTK3+) and the Athletic Skills Track (AST) for measuring fundamental movement skill levels (FMS) in 6- to 12-year old children. 3,107 Dutch children (of which 1,625 are girls) between 6 and 12 years of age (9.1 ± 1.8 years) were tested with the KTK3+ and the AST. The KTK3+ consists of three items from the KTK and the Faber hand-eye coordination test. Raw scores from each subtest were transformed into percentile scores based on all the data of each grade. The AST is an obstacle course consisting of 5 (grades 3 till 5, 6–9 years) or 7 (grades 6 till 8, 9–12 years) concatenated FMS that should be performed as quickly as possible. The outcome measure is the time needed to complete the track. A significant bivariate Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.51 was found between the percentile sum score of the KTK3+ and the time to complete the AST, indicating that both tests measure a similar construct to some extent. Based on their scores, children were classified into one of five categories: <5, 5–15, 16–85, 86–95 or >95%. Cross tabs revealed an agreement of 58.8% with a Kappa value of 0.15 between both tests. Less than 1% of the children were classified more than two categories higher or lower. The moderate correlation between the KTK3+ and the AST and the low classification agreement into five categories of FMS stress the importance to further investigate the test choice and the measurement properties (i.e., validity and reliability) of both tools. PE teachers needs to be aware of the context in which the test will be conducted, know which construct of motor competence they want to measure and know what the purpose of testing is (e.g., screening or monitoring). Based on these considerations, the most appropriate assessment tool can be chosen.
MULTIFILE
