Many teachers and programs have adopted the use of FITNESSGRAM as the assessment tool of choice. Although the reliability and validity of the program has been well-established, what hasn't been systematically determined are the practices employed by in-service teachers, once the assessments have been made. Specifically, the purpose of this project was to determine, through a survey of physical education teachers (N= 65), the common practices employed using the FITNESSGRAM 8.0 battery, compare the knowledge and practice of physical education teachers by years of teaching, formal training, and experience, and examine the strategies employed by teachers to prepare students (physically and motivationally) for FITNESSGRAM.
Method
Following IRB approval, a survey was developed, piloted, revised, and disseminated via direct contact, district P.E. supervisor recruitment, and the state professional association newsletter, to teachers. An incentive for completion was provided.
Analysis/Results
Although the results are subject to self-report bias, it was established that age and years of service were not significant predictors of use. Although the data is descriptive, implications for future training are evidenced by these results: While 97% of the teachers had a computer in their office, 28% of the respondents had never received formal training in FITNESSGRAM; less than half (47%) reported using Physical Best Activities more than 2 times annually; 82% don't give homework related to fitness; 82% use goal setting strategies based upon fitness scores; and 70% reported that fitness scores are not incorporated into their grading schema. The barriers to implementation were: teacher time for testing (46%) and entering scores (41%), and computer accessibility for students (59%). This was further exemplified by 52% of teachers reporting they did not allow students to use computers for entering scores or printing reports, yet 63% reportedly would do so if they had the web based program for student access, and 41% stated that students like using the computers. With respect to usage, over 90% of respondents used test protocols for curl-ups, push-ups, flexibility and the PACER tests, but 89% failed to assess BMI, skinfolds, or other indices of body composition.
Conclusions
Most teachers didn't use Activity Gram or Activity Log programs – which implies the programs are used for assessment but not for monitoring physical activity. From these data, advanced training is warranted for experienced teachers for full implementation of the tools available from FITNESSGRAM, specifically with respect to ancillary use for monitoring physical activity, promoting self-responsibility and self-assessment, and for monitoring body composition.