Antropomotoryka nr 55.indb - Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego w ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Robert Szeklicki Additionally, the averaging of scores in cross-sectional studies makes the population norm useless for tracking the dynamics of a child’s individual development. On the other hand, results of longitudinal studies can only pertain to the studied population [5]. By the way, another common mistake worth mentioning here is the use of well known WHO adult categories of overweight and obesity in the assessment of body build in children and adolescents. Apart from serious doubts about the usefulness of BMI for obesity assessment, we must remember that a child is not simply a miniature of an adult. As Cole et al. [12, 13] observe the BMI ranges in children differ substantially from the categories of underweight, overweight and obesity in adults. GOOD EXAMPLES or how to establish and apply norms of physical fitness in children and adolescents In the opinion of many authors [5, 9, 10, 14, 15] the assessment of development of functional traits must account for the purpose of norm setting and somatic development (in the case of motor fitness assessment). To precisely determine the purpose of establishing norms the concept of physical fitness and the role of fitness education must be first defined. Present-day physical education stresses the importance of those components of fitness education which constitute the notion of positive health and determine a low risk of health problems [16]. It is referred to as “health-related fitness” (H-RF), which does not defy but remains clearly distinct from the so-called “performance-related fitness” [17]. Such an understanding of physical fitness fully relates to the mission of physical education discussed earlier. The first and foremost aim of assessment tests (and corresponding assessment norms) within the concept of H-RF is health promotion and care for functional efficiency and wellbeing. Tests play an important educational role [18], and they should be integrated in school curricula and used as pedagogical tools [14]. Apart from its important (but not primary) diagnostic function a physical fitness test should be an aid in the propagation of knowledge about the significance of physical fitness and support the development of appropriate attitudes towards it. Thus, there should be premises to undertake specific actions in the future, especially aimed at promoting appropriate physical activity. The presentation and interpretation of test results should not be based on biological heredity only but on encouragement of an active lifestyle [10]. In this way, tasks traditionally associated only with performance of physical exercises become part of proper education. The diagnostic function of physical fitness norms must provide the answer to the important question “How much fitness needs good health”? [11]. The complexity of this issue has made any comprehensive, mathematical and theoretical establishment of criteria impossible [19]. The standards are usually set arbitrarily. The level of achievement corresponding to the state of complete health is estimated by means of “criterion values” [11], “criterion-referenced standards” [14] or “criterion health status” [16]. Similarly, years ago Wolański [20] considered a “target norm” (desired standard) in reference to biological development. An individual must realize whether he or she has achieved a desired standard (from the standpoint of health), not only how it contrasts with the rest of population [21]. A good example may be also the “healthy fitness zone” used in “FITNESSGRAM” developed by “The Cooper Institue” [22], that focuses on the range of desired physical fitness standard from the perspective of health needs. An exerciser must be made aware of his or her needs and encouraged to adopt desired attitudes [15]. The aims should be useful, attainable, and each next measurement and evaluation should verify their attainment [14, 21]. The present level of physical fitness is important, but it is much more important what it will be in 15 or 20 years [21]. Accounting for the level of somatic development in the assessment of such functional traits as physical fitness is a relatively easy task. It involves simultaneously the impact of genetic and environmental factors and the level of body’s maturity. There are many indices that can be used in such a comprehensive evaluation, however, their measurement and interpretation in physical education can be often difficult due to the unavailability of appropriate research methods and tools, lack of specialist medical knowledge or problems with processing and simple interpreting complex research results. Body height may appear to be a parameter that can be easily measured and yield sufficient data. It is certainly not the best index of genetic and environmental influences, as well as the level of somatic maturation, but nevertheless quite useful in physical education. This was noted, for example, by the authors of national norms of physical fitness for children and adolescents in Poland [23, 24], who proposed two categories of physical fitness – 94 –
Physical fitness norms in children and adolescents: the physical education approach assessment: calendar age and body height age. In the case of the latter, if a child’s body height differs significantly from that of its peers, the so-called “calendar age correction” should be calculated and the child’s level of physical fitness should be evaluated according to the norms of a younger or older age category. The subject of this paper is not new. Arguments for and newly proposed approaches towards the establishment and application of physical fitness norms in physical education have been around for a long time. Why then outdated and harmful stereotypes can be still encountered in physical education? Perhaps, it is because PE teachers at school are more often training instructors than physical educators in the full sense of the word? The education of PE teachers still leaves much to be desired. There is too much stress on knowledge and skills rather than on what a human being the student becomes. Development of the student’s axiological competences is still wishful thinking. In education of PE teachers biological aspects of physical education are often considered in separation from pedagogical aspects, without pointing to any mutual interactions. The knowledge of physical education is treated too analytically. We concentrate on sophisticated research investigations, hoping students will somehow figure them out as a whole. Not everyone will be willing and ready to adopt such a synthetic approach. The norms of physical fitness of children and adolescents required such an approach. This should be done in a systematic way, and prospective PE teachers should be constantly reminded of this approach as the danger of stereotypical proceedings and misinterpretation is still high. What is interesting, arguments for the educational approach postulated in this paper can be found long time ago in the views of Jędrzej Śniadecki, a famous Polish physician with great pedagogical aspirations, who wrote more than 200 years ago that: “Man is never cast into the same, uniform mold, but his existence features unbound variability (…) there is no one uniform but multiple patterns of perfection…” This was Śniadecki’s biological argument. And if someone still insists on uniformization in physical education in the name of apparent equality and fairness, let them remind of Śniadecki’s pedagogical argument: “Physical education, designed to make man happy, should be made accessible to all (…). After all, even the crippled and the infirm have their health and their happiness.” Can there be anything more important than that? LITERATURE • PIŚMIENNICTWO [1] Crum BJ: Conventional thought and practice in physical education: problems of teaching and implications for change. Quest, 1993; 45(3): 339–356. [2] Demel M: Ciało i zdrowie jako przedmiot wychowania. Nowa Szkoła, 1979; 9: 14–16. [3] Grabowski H: Co koniecznie trzeba wiedzieć o wychowaniu fizycznym. Kraków, Oficyna Wydawnicza „Impuls”, 2000. [4] Malina RM, Bouchard C, Bar-Or O: Growth, maturation, and physical activity. Second edition. Champaign, Human Kinetics, 2004. [5] Szopa J: Czy tzw. „normy rozwojowe” mogą być biologicznymi układami odniesienia? <strong>Antropomotoryka</strong>, 1996; 15: 105–111. [6] Osiński W: O wykorzystaniu testu sprawności fizycznej: czyli o nauczycielu wf jako światłym doradcy dzieci i rodziców. Lider, 2009; 7–8: 13–16. [7] Stupnicki R, Milde K, Przewęda R: Constructing growth reference curves. Papers on Anthropology, 2001; 10: 268–279. [8] Safrit MJ: The validity and reliability of fitness tests for children: a review. Ped Exerc Sci, 1990; 2(1): 9–28. [9] Fox K, Biddle S: Health related fitness testing in schools: introduction and problems of interpretation. Bulletin of Physical Education Autumn, 1986; 22(3): 54–64. [10] Corbin CB, Whitehead JR, Lovejoy PY: Youth Physical Fitness Awards. Quest, 1988; 40(3): 200–218. [11] Oja P, Tuxworth B (eds): Eurofi t for adults. Assessment of health-related fi tness. Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 1995. [12] Cole TJ, Bellizi MC, Flegal KM, Dietz WH: Establishing a standard defi nition for child overweight and obesity worldwide: international survey. Br Med J, 2000; 320: 1240–1243. [13] Cole TJ, Flegal KM, Nicholls D, Jackson AA: Body mass index cut offs to defi ne thinness in children and adolescents: international survey. Br Med J, 2007; 335: 194–201. [14] Docherty D: Field tests and test batteries; in: Docherty D (ed.): Measurement in Pediatric Exercise Science. Champaign, Human Kinetics Publishers, 1996, 285–334. [15] Fox KR, Biddle SJ: The use of fi tness tests. Educational and psychological considerations. JOPERD, 1988; 59(2): 47–53. [16] Howley ET, Franks BD: Health fi tness instructors. Handbook. Champaign, Human Kinetics, 1997. [17] Bouchard C, Shephard RJ: Physical activity, fi tness and health: The model and key concepts; in: Bouchard C, Shephard RJ, Stephens T (eds): Physical activity, fi tness and health. Champaign, Human Kinetics Publishers, 1994, 77–88. [18] Kemper HCG, Van Mechelen W: Physical fi tness testing of children: a European perspective. Ped Exerc Sci, 1996; 8(3): 201–214. – 95 –
Page 1 and 2:
ISSN 1731-0652 COMMITTEE FOR REHABI
Page 3 and 4:
ANTROPOMOTORYKA ISSN 1731-0652 COMM
Page 5 and 6:
NR 55 AN TRO PO MO TO RY KA 2011 CO
Page 7 and 8:
NR 55 AN TRO PO MO TO RY KA 2011 FR
Page 9:
From Editors years). The attempts w
Page 12 and 13:
Information for the Authors Example
Page 14 and 15:
Informacje dla Autorów scripts sub
Page 17 and 18:
NR 55 2011 AN TRO PO MO TO RY KA PR
Page 19 and 20:
Probabilistic prognosis in sport ki
Page 21 and 22:
Probabilistic prognosis in sport ki
Page 23 and 24:
NR 55 2011 AN TRO PO MO TO RY KA EF
Page 25 and 26:
Effect of strength training with vi
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
NR 55 2011 AN TRO PO MO TO RY KA TH
Page 33 and 34:
The sport dance athlete: aerobic-an
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37:
Page 40 and 41:
Václav Bunc, Marie Skalská Materi
Page 42 and 43:
Václav Bunc, Marie Skalská tion o
Page 44 and 45: Václav Bunc, Marie Skalská The su
Page 46 and 47: Václav Bunc, Marie Skalská [13] F
Page 48 and 49: Kamila Czajka, Teresa Sławińska W
Page 50 and 51: Kamila Czajka, Teresa Sławińska T
Page 52 and 53: Kamila Czajka, Teresa Sławińska t
Page 54 and 55: Kamila Czajka, Teresa Sławińska 1
Page 56 and 57: E. Cieśla, E. Mleczko, M. Markowsk
Page 65 and 66: NR 55 2011 AN TRO PO MO TO RY KA DE
Page 67 and 68: Development of spatial and temporal
Page 73 and 74: NR 55 2011 AN TRO PO MO TO RY KA TH
Page 75 and 76: The effectiveness of cooperation in
Page 81 and 82: 3+ 3+ 7+ 4+ The effectiveness of co
Page 87: The effectiveness of cooperation in
Page 91 and 92: NR 55 2011 AN TRO PO MO TO RY KA PH
Page 93: Physical fitness norms in children
show all

Antropomotoryka nr 55.indb - Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego w ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?