Identifying Criteria for a Physical Literacy Screening Task: An Expert Delphi Process

Objectives: REACH (Recreation, Education, Allied-health, Coaching, Healthcare) leaders support children’s physical literacy journey in diverse settings. This project sought physical literacy screening tool criteria that REACH leaders could use to assess children. Methods: A 3-round expert Delphi pr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Heather L. Rotz, Anastasia Alpous, Charles Boyer, Patricia E. Longmuir
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sapientia Publishing Group 2020-10-01
Series:Exercise Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.26644/em.2020.007
id doaj-d96132870c044492b2b411b3f7cefc04
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d96132870c044492b2b411b3f7cefc042020-11-25T04:09:41ZengSapientia Publishing GroupExercise Medicine2508-90562020-10-014710.26644/em.2020.007Identifying Criteria for a Physical Literacy Screening Task: An Expert Delphi ProcessHeather L. Rotz0https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3901-2220Anastasia Alpous1Charles Boyer2Patricia E. Longmuir3https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4827-0870Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, CanadaChildren’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, CanadaChildren’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, CanadaChildren’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, CanadaObjectives: REACH (Recreation, Education, Allied-health, Coaching, Healthcare) leaders support children’s physical literacy journey in diverse settings. This project sought physical literacy screening tool criteria that REACH leaders could use to assess children. Methods: A 3-round expert Delphi process sought consensus (75% of participants stating agree/strongly agree) regarding physical literacy screening. Group discussions (Round 1) identified screening issues. Qualitative analyses represented the issues as statements. Experts rated each statement (5-point Likert scale) in Rounds 2 and 3. Mean Round 2 rating for each statement was provided in Round 3. Results: 53 experts were invited to participate with 37 (63% female, mean career length = 16 years) providing consent. Each round comprised at least 7 experts with primary/secondary expertise for each sector. Round 1 identified 60 criteria and 27 potential screening tasks, which were represented in 90 statements. Consensus was achieved for 44/90 statements in Round 2 and 51/90 statements in Round 3. Conclusions: Expert consensus suggests that physical literacy screening should utilize both objectively measured tasks and questionnaires. Encompassing multiple facets of physical literacy, including motor competence, motivation, strength, endurance, and daily behavior, is important. Research is required to identify potential tasks that meet these criteria and are suitable for each REACH sector.https://doi.org/10.26644/em.2020.007assessmentdevelopmentphysical literacy
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Heather L. Rotz
Anastasia Alpous
Charles Boyer
Patricia E. Longmuir
spellingShingle Heather L. Rotz
Anastasia Alpous
Charles Boyer
Patricia E. Longmuir
Identifying Criteria for a Physical Literacy Screening Task: An Expert Delphi Process
Exercise Medicine
assessment
development
physical literacy
author_facet Heather L. Rotz
Anastasia Alpous
Charles Boyer
Patricia E. Longmuir
author_sort Heather L. Rotz
title Identifying Criteria for a Physical Literacy Screening Task: An Expert Delphi Process
title_short Identifying Criteria for a Physical Literacy Screening Task: An Expert Delphi Process
title_full Identifying Criteria for a Physical Literacy Screening Task: An Expert Delphi Process
title_fullStr Identifying Criteria for a Physical Literacy Screening Task: An Expert Delphi Process
title_full_unstemmed Identifying Criteria for a Physical Literacy Screening Task: An Expert Delphi Process
title_sort identifying criteria for a physical literacy screening task: an expert delphi process
publisher Sapientia Publishing Group
series Exercise Medicine
issn 2508-9056
publishDate 2020-10-01
description Objectives: REACH (Recreation, Education, Allied-health, Coaching, Healthcare) leaders support children’s physical literacy journey in diverse settings. This project sought physical literacy screening tool criteria that REACH leaders could use to assess children. Methods: A 3-round expert Delphi process sought consensus (75% of participants stating agree/strongly agree) regarding physical literacy screening. Group discussions (Round 1) identified screening issues. Qualitative analyses represented the issues as statements. Experts rated each statement (5-point Likert scale) in Rounds 2 and 3. Mean Round 2 rating for each statement was provided in Round 3. Results: 53 experts were invited to participate with 37 (63% female, mean career length = 16 years) providing consent. Each round comprised at least 7 experts with primary/secondary expertise for each sector. Round 1 identified 60 criteria and 27 potential screening tasks, which were represented in 90 statements. Consensus was achieved for 44/90 statements in Round 2 and 51/90 statements in Round 3. Conclusions: Expert consensus suggests that physical literacy screening should utilize both objectively measured tasks and questionnaires. Encompassing multiple facets of physical literacy, including motor competence, motivation, strength, endurance, and daily behavior, is important. Research is required to identify potential tasks that meet these criteria and are suitable for each REACH sector.
topic assessment
development
physical literacy
url https://doi.org/10.26644/em.2020.007
work_keys_str_mv AT heatherlrotz identifyingcriteriaforaphysicalliteracyscreeningtaskanexpertdelphiprocess
AT anastasiaalpous identifyingcriteriaforaphysicalliteracyscreeningtaskanexpertdelphiprocess
AT charlesboyer identifyingcriteriaforaphysicalliteracyscreeningtaskanexpertdelphiprocess
AT patriciaelongmuir identifyingcriteriaforaphysicalliteracyscreeningtaskanexpertdelphiprocess
_version_ 1724422217506226176