Students' learning of concepts, such as the FITT principle, can enhance their adoption of physically active lifestyles (Corbin, 2002). Yet, scholars (Stewart & Mitchell, 2003) documented that students' understanding of the “intensity” concept central to current fitness recommendations is problematic. Ennis (2007) maintains scholars' use of new cognitive learning theories utilized in Science can inform examinations into students' science-based fitness conceptions. In Framework Theory of Conceptual Change (FTTC), Vosniadou (2002) hypothesizes students' context-based academic beliefs (ontological, epistemic) unconsciously influence the mental models they create to represent their knowledge. In Physical Education (PE), little is known about the academic beliefs students hold and how these influence students' developing mental models. The purpose of this study was to apply FTTC to a contextualized examination of sixth-grade students' mental models of "intensity" and academic beliefs.
Method
Nine students from two schools (N=18) completed multi-method interviews before and after their sports-based fitness units. Contextual data collection included document collection, field observations (n=24), and teacher interviews. Data were analyzed inductively and triangulated across data sources.
Analysis/Results
Variations in students' responses revealed they organized their knowledge into three mental models of intensity, designated as MM1, MM2, and MM3. Students categorized into MM1 assumed intensity comprised an unchanging form which they applied irrespective of “type”, but did perceive its relationship with "time". MM2 students described a transformative form of intensity corresponding to “type” thereby perceiving its integrated relationship with “type” and “time”. Finally, MM3 students perceived multiple forms of "intensity" entailing a relationship among all four FITT elements. Additionally, when designing fitness plans, they applied FITT flexibly taking several factors into consideration (e.g., experience, age). The models illustrate an increase in epistemic sophistication regarding the “structure of knowledge”, e.g., “The way I see it, FITT works altogether because they [frequency, intensity, time, and type] can't be separated” (MM3 student). Additionally, “justification of knowledge” epistemic beliefs emerged; all students believed "intensity" existed because it was detectable and “could be felt” (Emma) through their perceptions of increased body heat or heart rate. Students' ontological belief-themes reflected the properties they ascribed to "intensity" relative to its form (single or multiple) and controllable nature since “you can adjust it by speeding up your pace” (Sally).
Conclusions
This study demonstrated possible conceptual transitions students may experience as they learn fitness concepts. Instructional implications include the need for instruction to target both academic belief and knowledge change in ways sensitive to the manner students think.
See more of: Research Consortium