| Author |
Message |
Cheryl Gorski (Gorski)
Junior Member
Username: Gorski
Post Number: 3
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 2:09 pm: |       |
Would someone explain to me why we can grade students on movement skills as per standard 1 but are not supposed to grade students on fitness tests. Not everyone can be an athlete with agility, balance, speed and reaction time but everyone can be in the healthy fitness zone. I struggle with this.
Thanks for any input.
Cheryl Gorski |
Joe Herzog (Bigfish344)
Advanced Member
Username: Bigfish344
Post Number: 56
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Monday, February 15, 2010 - 3:56 pm: | |
Cheryl: As I understand it all, a student can demonstrate movement knowledge by demonstrating the proper mechanics of something specific, that he/she has learned, such as throwing, striking an object, kicking, etc, or by describing the movement in written form. Even if the student is not proficient at performing the movement at full speed, they can demonstrate knowledge learned.
Fitness tests are an indication (and a very general one) of overall fitness/health. If a student came to me in the 7th grade and was overweight or obese it was unlikely that that individual would make all of the healthy fitness zones (we used Fitnessgram) and in the time that I had the individual might not be possible to get them there, although progress towards the goal would be measurable. I can control what I teach kids and measure what they are expected to learn and demonstrate in whatever fashion I (or they) choose, but I can't control the nutrition at or away from home, all of the activity or lack of same away from my class. Kids who are overweight/obese are unlikely to be in the healthy zone in C-V fitness, crunches, pushups and perhaps the trunk lift. I graded kids on what they learned, based on what I taught them and I based them on their daily effort in class. They were required to develop fitness plans for varying lengths of time and even to slot in activity during a described day: school/work/family, etc. Hope that helps.
Joe Herzog |
James Adams (Peteacher32)
Intermediate Member
Username: Peteacher32
Post Number: 36
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Thursday, June 10, 2010 - 8:44 am: | |
Grading on knowledge is well accepted. An occasional written test is probably a good thing, especially if it is big picture stuff like benefits of cardiovascular fitness, or even themes like moving without the ball, which is important in so many sports.
Grading on skills is okay but not the greatest priority for my program, but many people seem to be for it as it does encourage students to take what is being taught more seriously and learn better. Sometimes the problem with this is the time it takes and we have to be realistic about the amount of time we're giving them to master the skill.
Grading on fitness scores is generally discouraged but I struggle with this as well. Though I may be in the minority, I think it's fine to grade on improvement (not overall scores). But only grade on improvement if you give them adequate time to improve, have them write goals, and know why each area is important. Do not grade on improving body fat / weight - too sensitive of an area. Also, don't tell students about the plan until a pre-test has been performed. It's true we can't control what they do outside of class, but that is true with any subject. And at the end of the day, our students being healthy and reasonably fit is just as important as their knowledge of why health matters. |
|
