Assessment of the Motor Competencies Regarding Adapted Physical Activities
-
Published:2022-07-01
Issue:
Volume:
Page:1-11
-
ISSN:2347-5528
-
Container-title:Innovare Journal of Education
-
language:
-
Short-container-title:Innovare J Edu
Author:
Popović MilošORCID, Válková Hana, Đorđević Ivana, Popovic Ruzena
Abstract
In the introduction, part authors give some of the histories of assessment in Adapted Physical Education (APE). There are currently 13 legally recognized disabilities. Inclusion has many meanings, but typically it is linked to the quality of life in the least restrictive environment and social competence, which is in line with the attitudes of individuals with and without disabilities. The fundamental principle of valuing diversity guides inclusion. Belonging, acceptance, and a sense of being supported are essentials of an inclusive environment. The most prevalent barriers to including students with disabilities are teacher preparation and teacher attitudes and perceived barriers to instruction consisting of equipment, programming, and time. Inclusion may impact internal and external factors, controlled and uncontrolled, and active and passive. People of all ages, types of disabilities, and experiences demonstrate individual differences in responding when facing similar situations in movement settings. An inclusive environment offers all individuals equally interesting, equally important, and similarly engaging tasks. An inclusive environment comprises the physical space and equipment, the social-emotional atmosphere, and the teaching strategies that are in use. The physical space should be barrier-free and include various equipment related to the lesson/activity. The social-emotional atmosphere should be free of stress, underlining cooperation rather than the existence of the fittest, fastest, or strongest. Teaching strategies should incorporate techniques that promote collaboration between instructor and learners, respond to different learning styles, encourage self-responsibility, provide opportunities for independent learning, and use various informal assessment tools to guide instruction.
Publisher
Innovare Academic Sciences Pvt Ltd
Reference57 articles.
1. Adam, C., Klissouras, V., Ravazollo, M., Renson, R., & Tuxworth, W. (1998). EUROFIT: European test of physical fitness - handbook. Council of Europe, Committee for the Development of Sport. 2. Andersen, L. B., Harro, M., Sardinha, L. B., Froberg, K., Ekelund, U., Brage, S., & Anderssen, S. A. (2006). Physical activity and clustered cardiovascular risk in children: A cross-sectional study (The European Youth Heart Study). Lancet, 368(9532), 299–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69075-2 3. Backman, E. (1988). Methods for measurement of muscle function: Methodological aspects, reference values for children, and clinical applications. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, Supplement, 20, 9-95. 4. Bille, B., Kumlin, L., Lidholt, M., Lind, B., & Nordquist, M. (1992). FBH-provet: Erfarenheter fran Folke Bernadottehemmet [The FBH test: Experiences from Folke Bernadottehemmet]. Motorika. 5. Blair, S. N., Cheng, Y., & Holder, J. S. (2001). Is physical activity or physical fitness more important in defining health benefits? Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33(6) 379–99. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005768-200106001-00007
|
|