Results across classes taught by both specialists and classroom teachers showed that ...... position to utilize what Kounin (1970) referred to as "withitness" skills.
JOURNAL OF TEACHING IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION. 1998.18,57-75 © 1998 HUMAN KINETICS PUBLISHERS. INC.
Students' Physical Activity Levels and Teachers' Active Supervision During Fitness Instruction Hans van der Mars Oregon State University
Bill Vogler Illinois State University
Paul Darst Arizona State University
Barbara Cusimano Oregon State University
Active supervision pattems of 18 elementary physical educators were studied in relation to physical activity levels of 3 students per teacher (n = 54) during allotted fitness time. Activity level was measured using the system for observing fitness instruction time (SOFIT) activity categories. Results showed that during fitness instruction teachers spent over 90% of the time in peripheral areas of the gym, actively moved about (7.9 sector changes per minute), and provided augmented feedback to students (3.7 total rpm). Students' most predominant activity levels were very active, standing, and walking, respectively. Students' moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) levels averaged 51.9%. Higher percentages of peripheral positioning and demonstrating by teachers correlated with lower amounts of standing still and higher amounts of very active and MVPA behavior. Higher rates of corrective feedback correlated with higher levels of students' walking and MVPA behavior. The benefits of regular moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) have been noted in research reports and position statements of various agencies and organizations (e.g., Fletcher et al., 1992; U.S. Centers for Disease Control, 1987; U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and American College of Sports Medicine, 1993; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1996; U.S. Public Health Service, 1991). These reports listed the increase of physical activity levels by this country's citizens as a central goal. The premise of this goal is based primarily on substantial empirical evidence that both physical activity and physical fitness are related inversely to several health risks including coronary heart disease and obesity (Blair, 1993; Blair, Kohl, Gordon, & Paffenbarger, 1992; Bouchard, Shephard, & Stephens, 1994). This evidence lends support to the argument that school-based physical education programs should be one of the primary vehicles for addressing such health-
H. van der Mars and B. Cusimano are with the Department of Exercise and Sport Science at Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97330. B. Vogler is with the Department of HPERD at Illinois State University, Normal, IL61790. P. Darst is with the Department of Exercise Science and Physical Education at Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287. 57
58
VAN DER MARS, VOGLER, DARST, AND CUSIMANO
related physical activity goals (e.g., Corbin, 1986; Sallis & McKenzie, 1991; Siedentop, 1980). It is argued that health-related physical activity rather than team sports should be emphasized in physical education programs. It is also suggested that rather than having children focus on reaching reasonable fitness standards (a product orientation), they should be encouraged to engage in regular physical activity (Corbin & Pangrazi, 1992). This stance is based on the assumption that regular engagement in moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) during school-age years will lead toward acceptable fitness levels that are associated with reduced risks of developing chronic diseases and carry over into physically active lifestyles during adulthood. Recent teaching research has included the use of direct observation in measuring students' physical activity levels (e.g., McKenzie, Sallis, & Nader, 1991). Results across classes taught by both specialists and classroom teachers showed that students' mean MVPA (in percent of class time) ranged between 41 and 51 %, and that standing is the most predominant student behavior (Faucette, McKenzie, & Sallis, 1992; McKenzie, Sallis, Faucette, Roby, & Kolody, 1993; McKenzie et al., 1991). These studies are part of a large-scale effort aimed at increasing physical activity levels of elementary-aged students by targeting the schools' curriculum. Results show that curriculum-based interventions, such as the CATCH and SPARK programs (coupled with in-service training for classroom teachers) can substantially increase students' physical activity levels (e.g., McKenzie et al., 1996; Sallis et al., 1997). If school-based physical education programs are to emphasize curriculum content aimed at socializing youth into regular physical activity (i.e., a process orientation), it seems logical that the success of such efforts will depend, in part, on the effectiveness of instructional strategies chosen by teachers. One important feature of such teaching efforts would be the manner in which students are held accountable for being physically active while in class—that is, the way in which teachers supervise students to stay actively involved in health-related fitness tasks. Research on teaching within the mediating process paradigm has provided substantial evidence supporting the role of teachers' active supervision strategies in maintaining students' (successful) task engagement (Doyle, 1978,1986; Evertson, Anderson, & Anderson, 1980; Evertson &Emmer, 1982; Fisher etal., 1981;Gage, 1978; Good & Grouws, 1979; Kounin, 1970; Rosenshine, 1979). Actively supervising (or monitoring) students is characterized by several behavioral pattems, including physical movement, positioning, visual scanning, as well as the nature of teachers' interactions with students. In classroom settings, teachers' pattems of active movement around the classroom, coupled with frequent feedback to as many students as possible were characteristic of classes with both higher task engagement and achievement levels (Brooks, 1985; Evertson, Emmer, & Brophy, 1980; Fisher et al., 1981; Woolfolk & Brooks, 1985). It was noted that actively supervising students affected both the amount and quality of students' engagement with the subject matter. Traditionally, professional literature on teaching physical education has recognized the importance of actively supervising students (Graham, 1992; Pangrazi & Dauer, 1992; Rink, 1993; Siedentop, 1991). Initial research efforts in physical education pedagogy on teachers' active supervision also have noted its role in holding students accountable for task completion (Hastie & Saunders, 1990; Jones, 1992; Lund, 1991; Tousignant & Siedentop, 1983; van der Mars, Vogler, Darst, & Cusimano, 1994). The emphasis of these studies has been on variables related to
ACTIVE SUPERVISION
59
leaming across various sport skills rather than fitness behaviors. Hence, the purposes of this study were to determine (a) students' physical activity level during class time allotted for physical fitness activities, (b) teachers' pattems of active supervision at that time, and (c) the relationship between such supervisory pattems and students' physical activity levels.
Methods Participants and Settings Teachers. Eighteen certified elementary physical educators (K-6) participated in the study, which included 8 female and 10 male teachers whose experience ranged from 1 to 14 years (M = 4.3, SD = 3.30). Students. Three target students in one of each of the teachers' classes were randomly selected for observation of physical activity levels during the healthrelated fitness segment of class. The sample included students from African-, Anglo-, Asian-, Hispanic-, and Native-American heritage. Furthermore, the student sample was gender balanced. Program Content and Settings. Teachers used a multi-activity-based curriculum aimed at introducing elementary-aged students to a broad spectrum of physical education content (Pangrazi & Dauer, 1992). The philosophy underlying this curriculum is for children to become familiar with the process of physical activity across both the health-related fitness, fundamental gross motor skills, rhythmic movement, and sport skill domains. Each class included a 7-10 minute period devoted exclusively to healthrelated physical fitness activities. The curriculum calls for teachers to include fitness content balancing activities aimed at cardiovascular fitness with those targeting muscular strength, endurance, and flexibility. Furthermore, content was organized and sequenced so that all parts of the body were taxed and engagement could be sustained continuously throughout the allotted fitness time. Schools were located in middle-class suburban areas with class sizes ranging from 24 to 31 students. Teaching spaces were all similar in size (approx. 5,400 sq. ft). When equipment was needed, each student had his or her own so that waiting time could be minimized.
Procedures Behavior of teachers and students during fitness instruction was videotaped with taped markers on the gym fioor and large cones around the perimeter separating the activity area into nine (3 x 3) sectors allowing data collection of teachers' movement and location pattems. The elapsed class time was projected on each videotape with a character generator Teachers wore a wireless nnicrophone to capture verbal behavior which was dubbed onto the videotape record. Data collection commenced at the beginning of the transition episode leading toward the first fitness-related activity and ended at the completion of thefinalfitness-relatedactivity.
Data Collection Several methods have been used to estimate physical activity levels of youth, including self-reports, parent reports, teacher reports, motion sensors (e.g., Caltrac),
60
VAN DER MARS, VOGLER, DARST, AND CUSIMANO
and heart rate monitors. Given the limitations of self-report measures (e.g., SimonsMorton et al., 1990) as well as the efficiency and cost involved in using heart rate monitors (see Sallis & McKenzie, 1991), recent research efforts have incorporated the use of direct observation to measure children's physical activity levels (McKenzie et al., 1991). In this study, physical activity levels were measured using the system for observing fitness instruction time (SOFIT, McKenzie et al., 1991). Only the fitness instruction portion of the class period was analyzed as this is the portion of the class period devoted specifically to health-related fitness activities within the curriculum taught by the participating teachers. Therefore, only the student activity level and teacher behaviors within SOFIT were coded. Students' body positions were observed using a five-level activity code including lying down (Code 1), sitting (Code 2), standing (Code 3), walking (Code 4), and very active (Code 5). The latter category included any energy expenditure greater than that needed for walking. A combination of walking and very active constituted MVPA. The SOFIT activity categories have been validated for use in elementary physical education classes by correlating it with energy expenditure estimates, heart rates, and accelerometers (McKenzie, Sallis, & Armstrong, 1994; McKenzie et al., 1991; Rowe, Schuldheisz, & van der Mars, 1997). Observers used momentary time sampling (van der Mars, 1989) with a lO-s interval length for estimating students' activity levels. The teacher behavior categories within SOFIT included: promoting fitness, demonstrating fitness, instructing generally, managing, silently observing, and ojf-task. Teacher behavior was coded using partial interval recording (van der Mars, 1989) with a 10-s interval length. Data on active supervision variables related to teachers' location and movement were collected using the teacher movement analysis system (TMAS; van der Mars, Cusimano, & Ruppert, 1989) software. TMAS generated data on both frequency and duration of teachers' visits to any of nine sectors of the activity area. Location variables included frequency of visits made to each sector, time spent per visit, and total time spent in each individual sector. Using raw data, TMAS automatically generated percentages of time and movement rates. Teacher movement variables included rate of sector changes per minute as well as the mean time (in seconds) spent in each sector per visit. The less time that a teacher spends in any one sector per visit, the more movement occurs. Hence, the lower this value, the higher the rate of movement. Verbal feedback data were collected using standard event recording procedures. Feedback categories included: total feedback, skill feedback, behaviorfeedback, positive feedback, corrective feedback, general feedback, and specific feedback. Feedback category definitions developed by Dodds (1989) were used. Frequency totals were converted to rates per minute to account for varying lengths of fitness instruction across classes.
Observer Reliability Trained observers served as primary data collectors for this study. Training in the use of the TMAS and SOFIT instruments as well as collecting teacher feedback data occurred prior to actual data collection. Inter-observer agreement (10A) of 90% was used as a criterion to indicate observers were sufficiently trained to collect actual data.
ACTIVE SUPERVISION
61
In addition, IOA was checked on five (28%) randomly selected classes to guard against observer drift. Observers were unaware as to which classes were used for the purpose of estimating observer reliability. IOA percentages for teacher location, movement, and feedback data ranged from 86.7 to 100%. IOA percentages for students' physical activity levels and SOFIT teacher behaviors were calculated using the scored-interval agreement procedures (Hawkins & Dotson, 1975; van der Mars, 1989). 10As for physical activity level categories averaged 96% within a range of 94—98%. Percentages for the SOFIT teacher behavior categories averaged 96.2% with a range of 92.3-98.5%, suggesting the observers were sufficiently reliable.
Data Analysis Means and standard deviations were calculated for all variables. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures on sectors was used to determine whether teachers favored certain sectors of the activity area in terms of time spent or time spent per visit. In cases where statistically significant differences were found, the Tukey post-hoc measure was used to determine which specific sectors were favored. Pearson r correlation coefficients were calculated to determine relationships between teachers' active supervision variables, SOFIT's teacher behavior categories, and the class means of the students' physical activity levels.
Results Students' Physical Activity Levels Physical activity levels were averaged based on samples from three randomly selected students per class. Students' mean percentages of intervals laying down, sitting, standing, walking, very active, as well as their MVPA levels are shown in Figure 1. As the graph shows, the most predominant activity level was very active (M = 38.0%, SD = 14.8) followed by standing (M = 36.4%, SD = 14.2), and walking (M = 13.8%, SD = 10.1). MVPA levels (i.e., combination of walking and very active categories) averaged 51.8% (SD = 15.3).
Teaching Behavior Patterns Location Patterns. Teachers' location pattems provide an indication of how they position themselves across the activity area and are refiected in the distribution of time spent across sectors. Figure 2 provides data on the time teachers spent across various activity area sectors. Teachers spent an average oil.1% (SD = 7.72) of their time in the center (Sector 5) of the activity area with the remaining 92.3% (SD = 1.12) in peripheral sectors. While in peripheral sectors, teachers spent 63.7% (SD = 15.5) of the time along the sides of the activity area, and 36.2% (SD = 15.5) of the time in comer sectors. Differences in teachers' time spent across individual sectors (using ANOVA with repeated measures) were not statistically significant (F[8,136] = 1.38, p = .178), indicating an even distribution of time spent across individual sectors. Movement Patterns. Teachers' movement about the activity area should allow them to observe or interact with as many students as possible during periods of activity. Movement was quantified as both rate of sector changes per minute and
62
VAN DER MARS, VOGLER, DARST, AND CUSIMANO
a
3
m
CN
in
06
acti
"o3
c u TD
p
— «
—.
s S
j
T3 C
CN
o o
ON
CN
d
cn
ON O
ON
—'
S! 00
CN
—
—•
Tt
o
o
CN
-H
o
ON CN_ ON CN
CN
NO
O ••3
5
cd 3
I i
cd 3
cd 3
cd 3
cd 3
-I I
I £2
E 8 ^a s
Tt
u S
CJ
c o U
e
cd 3
!2 : a ^ : a - a .•Hu..'a .— — .— c3 — S E .^ S i i '^
E o cj
•o
S2
o
I ^
O VO
T3 3
67
ACTIVE SUPERVISION
cd D --^
> ^ 2 < B'>
00
ON
00
ON
od
od
in
in
vd
m in
CN,
o —;
cn -^
o p
« rn
1-^
CN
d
-^
—
m m
m m
cn
d CN
m
E
o o
ON
vd
cs ON
Q
>
I
c/l
1
NO CS
(U
ON CS
Pro :ness
a
O
o 'g U g
vd
vo Tt
od
cn rn
