Antropomotoryka nr 57 [2012]. - Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Anthropological evaluation of the influence of socio-economic factors on the development and physical fitness...related mostly with the somatic characteristics of olderboys (aged 11–15 years).The socioeconomic situation of a family influencesthe manner of spending leisure time, including theamount of time spent on physical activity. Charzewski[22] observed that the differences in the levels ofphysical activity in children resulted from belongingto a given social class, but occurred irrespectively ofthe degree of urbanization of the place of residence.Children from families belonging to higher socialclasses participated in additional sport activities,including sport clubs at school and other organizedforms of sport activities, more frequently than thosefrom lower social classes. Also, research of Blanksbyet al. [23], Brodersen et al. [24], and McVeigh et al.[25] confirmed this aforementioned relationship, while,in contrast, it has not been observed by Białokoz-Kalinowska et al. [26].Furthermore, the studies of physical fitness in childrenand adolescents representing groups with high,moderate, and low SES documented variability in theresults. Gołąb [27] analyzed children and adolescentsbetween 8 and 18 years of age living in Nowa Hutaand observed that the best results of standing broadjump and envelope agility run were obtained by boyswith high SES and girls with moderate SES. In mostage categories, the best levels of relative strengthwere documented in boys and girls characterized bymoderate socioeconomic conditions. In a study byMynarski et al. [28], conducted in the Upper Silesiaregion, significant differences between girls andwomen qualified to groups with moderate and highsocioeconomic status were documented only in thecase of Flamingo balance test and maximal oxygenuptake. In boys and men, significant socioeconomicstatus-related differences pertained to the results ofhandgrip, strength endurance, shuttle run, and balancedwalk tests. Based on the results of their studyof adolescents from Cracow, Mleczko and Ozimek [10]revealed that the groups of participants from familieswith poorer economic status showed higher levels ofmotor capacity (with the exception of some coordinationskills) in most age categories. Also, our studydocumented a similar tendency in categories of those10–11 and 17–18 years of age. Participants from thegroup with lower SES had better results of most motortests. This phenomenon may result from the fact thatcurrently children from families with higher socioeconomicstatus spend higher amounts of time learning,more frequently participate in extra-school classesand, thus, have less time for physical activity. Bothin 1998 and in 2007, a higher level of motor capacitywas documented in boys originating from families withhigh SES. This may be the result of earlier maturationof boys from parents with higher education levels, assuggested by the results of Wilczewski’s study [29],which was examined a rural setting.Conclusions1. Similar tendencies with regards to the influenceof socioeconomic variables on the somatic developmentand motor abilities of boys from theLubelszczyzna region were observed in 1998 andin 2007.2. High socioeconomic status of families from rural areascorrelated with high values of somatic developmentparameters in examined boys.3. Low level of social stratification was most commonlyassociated with higher values of analyzed motorabilities and flexibility.LITERATURE • PIŚMIENNICTWO[1] Bielicki T, Szklarska A: Secular trends in stature in Polandnational and social class specific. Ann Hum Biol, 1999; 3:251–258.[2] Bodzsár É: Socio-economic factors and body composition.Int J Anthropol, 1999; 1–2: 171–180.[3] Eiben O, Mascie-Taylor C: Children’s growth and socioeconomicstatus in Hungary. Econ Hum Biol, 2004; 2:295–320.[4] Sławińska T: Environmental factors in the developmentof motor skills of rural children [in Polish]. Wrocław, AWF,2000.[5] Lindgren G: Height, weight and menarche in Swedishschoolchildren in relation to socioeconomic factors. AnnHum Biol, 1976; 6: 501–528.[6] Brundtland G, Liestol K, Walloe L: Height, weight andmenarcheal age of Oslo schoolchildren during the last60 years. Ann Hum Biol, 1980; 7: 307–322.[7] Ignasiak Z, Sławińska T, Domaradzki J: The influence ofsocial-economical factors on the morphofunctional growthof children considering the urbanisation factor aspect.Gymnica, 2002; 32(2): 29–34.[8] Kozieł S, Szklarska A, Bielicki T, Malina R: Changes in the– 111 –
Helena Popławska, Krystyna Buchta, Agnieszka DmitriukBMI of Polish conscripts between 1965 and 2001: secularand socio-occupational variation. Int J Obes, 2006; 30(6):1382–1388.[9] Łaska-Mierzejewska T, Olszewska E: Changes in thebiological status of Polish girls from a rural region,associated with economic and political processes inthe period 1967–2001. J Biosoc Sci, 2006; 38 (Part 2):187–202.[10] Mleczko E, Ozimek M: Somatic and motor developmentof adolescents aged 15–19 years in Cracow in the lightof environmental factors [in Polish]. Studia i Monografie,Kraków, AWF, 2000; 14.[11] Mynarski W, Garbacik W, Stokłosa H, Grządziel G: Healthorientedfitness (H-RF) of the Upper Silesia population [inPolish]. Katowice, AWF, 2007.[12] Trzcińska D, Olszewska E: Physical status of children enteringschool. Phys Educ Sport, 2007; 51(4): 281–285.[13] Saczuk J, Wasiluk A: Secular trend in the physical fitnessof rural girls from eastern regions of Poland in respect ofgeneration gaps of their urban peers; in Popławska H(ed.): Somatic development, physical fitness and healthstatus of rural children and adolescents. Biała Podlaska,Josef Pilsudski University of Physical Education, Facultyof Physical Education, 2000: 277–288.[14] Skład M, Zieniewicz A, Popławska H, Saczuk J: Thelevel of physical development of boys and girls from ruralfamilies with a very large number of children [in Polish].Rocznik Naukowy, Biała Podlaska, Zamiejscowy WydziałWychowania Fizycznego, 2002; IX: 221–229.[15] Martin R, Saller K: Lehrbuch der Anthropologie in systematicherDarstellung mit besonderer Berücksichtigung deranthropologischen Methoden. Stuttgart, Verlag, 1957.[16] Eurofit. European Test of Physical Fitness. Council ofEurope. Rome, Committee for the Development of Sport,1988.[17] Grabowski H., Szopa J. “Eurofit”. European Test of PhysicalFitness [in Polish]. Kraków, AWF, 1989.[18] Niećko E, Białach M, Osik M: We live in Lublin Province[in Polish]. Ziemia Lubelska 2001; 2: 4–10.[19] Popławska H: Biological development of girls and boysfrom the rural areas of Southern Podlasie in the light ofthe indicators of fatness [in Polish]. Studia i Monografie,Warszawa, AWF, 2006; 107.[20] Bański J, Dobrowolski J, Flaga M, Janicki W, WesołowskaM: Influence of the state border on the directions of socioeconomicdevelopment of the eastern part of Lublin Province[in Polish]. Studia Obszarów Wiejskich, Warszawa2010; XXI.[21] Strzelczyk R. Determinants of motor development in ruralchildren. Attempting a hierarchical recognition of determiningfactors [in Polish]. Monografie, Poznań, AWF, 1995;324.[22] Charzewski J: Physical activity of children representingtwo extreme social classes [in Polish]. Wych Fiz Sport2003; 47: 5–16.[23] Blanksby B, Anderson M, Douglas G: Recreactionalpatterns, body composition and socioeconomic status ofWestern Australian secondary school students. Ann HumBiol 1996; 23, 2: 101–112.[24] Brodersen N, Steptoe A, Boniface D, Wardle J: Trends inphysical activity and sedentary behaviour in adolescence:ethnic and socioeconomic differences. Br J Sports Med2007; 41, 3: 140–144.[25] McVeigh JA, Norris S, de Wet T: The relationship betweensocio-economic status and physical activity patternsin South African children. Acta Pædiatr 2004; 93:982–988.[26] Białokoz-Kalinowska I, Rogowski K, Abramowicz P, KonstantynowiczJ, Piotrowska Jastrzębska J: Assessmentof physical activity of young people from the region ofPodlasie [in Polish]. Medicina Sportiva 2006; 10(Suppl.4): S443–S447.[27] Gołąb S: Using the relative assessment of motor skills indetermining inter-environmental differences [in Polish].Wych Fiz Sport 1997; 1–2: 103–111.[28] Mynarski W, Garbacik W, Stokłosa H, Grządziel G: Healthorientedphysical fitness (H-RF) of the Upper Silesiapopulation [in Polish]. Katowice, AWF, 2007.[29] Wilczewski A. Environmental and social determinants ofchanges in the biological development of children andyouth from rural areas in the years 1980–2000 [in Polish].Studia i Monografie, Warszawa, AWF, 2005; 104.– 112 –
Page 2:
ISSN 1731-0652COMMITTEE FOR REHABIL
Page 5 and 6:
ANTROPOMOTORYKAISSN 1731-0652KOMITE
Page 7 and 8:
NR 57 ANTROPOMOTORYKA20
Page 9 and 10:
From Editorsching stimulus had a po
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16:
ORIGINAL PAPERSPRACE ORYGINALNE
Page 19 and 20:
Kazimierz Mikołajec, Adam Maszczyk
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 28 and 29:
NR 57 2012ANTROPOMOTORY
Page 30 and 31:
The impact of rapid weight loss on
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Body response of hurdle runners to
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44:
Page 47 and 48:
Ewa Dybińska, Marcin Kaca, Magdale
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Assessment of the effectiveness of
Page 62 and 63: Assessment of the effectiveness of
Page 64 and 65: NR 57 2012ANTROPOMOTORY
Page 66 and 67: Walking as a tool of physical fitne
Page 76 and 77: Functional and dynamic asymmetry in
Page 82: Functional and dynamic asymmetry in
Page 85 and 86: Beata Wojtyczek, Małgorzata Pasła
Page 91 and 92: Jerzy Januszewski, Edward MleczkoCe
Page 93 and 94: Jerzy Januszewski, Edward MleczkoD.
Page 95 and 96: Jerzy Januszewski, Edward MleczkoTa
Page 101 and 102: Jerzy Januszewski, Edward Mleczkoof
Page 106 and 107: Anthropological evaluation of the i
Page 114: REVIEW PAPERSPRACE PRZEGLĄDOWE
Page 117 and 118: Emilia Mikołajewska, Dariusz Miko
show all

Antropomotoryka nr 57 [2012]. - Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?