Improving Physical Activity of Students with Low Fundamental

Movement Skills Using Sport Education Model

Agi Ginanjar

and Adang Suherman

Department of Physical Education, Health and Recreation, Sekolah Tinggi Keguran dan Ilmu Pendidikan Nahdlatul

Ulama Indramayu, Jl. Raya Kaplongan No. 28, Indramayu, Indonesia

Faculty of Sports and Health Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr. Setiabudhi No. 229, Bandung,

Indonesia

agiginanjar@stkipnu.ac.id

Keywords: Sport Education Model, Fundamental Movement Skill, Physical Activity.

Abstract: The purpose of this experimental study was to find out whether students with low fundamental movement

skill who learned through a sport education model had more physical activities than those who learned through

a traditional learning method. To this end, a randomized posttest-only control group design was employed.

The samples were 80 eight grade students at SMP Nahdlatul Ulama Darul Ma’arif Kaplongan Indramayu.

The instruments included Jakkola and Washington’s (2012) fundamental movement skill test to measure their

fundamental movement skill and a digital tool called iCardio to measure their physical activities. The data

were analyzed using one-way ANOVA. The results revealed that there was a probability that students with

low fundamental movement skill could improve their physical activities using a sport education model.

1 INTRODUCTION

Nowadays, physical activity has been a concern of

physical education in Indonesia. 48.2% of

Indonesia’s population aged above 10 are less

engaged in physical activity (Kemenkes RI, 2011, p.

16). Low physical activity can cause

noncommunicable diseases (NCD), such as

cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and

metabolic disorder-caused disease (Kemenkes RI,

2011, p. i). Childhood and adolescence are two very

critical periods to be engaged in physical activity in

anticipation of the adulthood (Friedman, et al., 2008;

Telama, et al., 2005; Trudeau, Laurencelle, &

Shephard, 2004; Jaakkola & Washington, 2012). At

secondary school level, physical activity begins to

decline (Telama & Yang, 2000; Nader, Bradley, &

Houts, 2008; Jaakkola & Washington, 2012).

Fundamental movement skills (FMS) are

contributing factors to the assessment of teenage

physical activity (McKenzie, 2007). Furthermore,

there is a long displacement effect between FMS and

physical activity (Barnett, et al., 2008). FMS include

locomotor skills, balance, and manipulation

(Gallahue & Cleland-Donnelly, 2007; Jaakkola &

Washington, 2012). FMS mastery affects sports skills

(O'Keeffe, Harrison, & Smyth, 2007). The higher a

student’s FMS, the faster he acquires movement skills

(Stodden, et al., 2008).

Sport Education Model (SEM) is an instructional

model to provide students with the most appropriate

sporting experience in terms of pedagogy and

physical education development (Siedentop, 1994).

SEM provides students with all the necessary aspects

to facilitate matches such as contract in a team, match

rules, scoring, referees, etc. Siedentop (1994, p. 4)

states, students who receives SEM instruction will

become literate, enthusiastic and competent

sportspeople. According to Siedentop (1994, p. 9),

SEM has the following characteristics: seasons,

affiliation, formal competition, culminating event,

keeping records, festivity. Perlman (2011) divides

SEM procedure in basketball into three phases:

skill/tactical development, inter/intra team games

with practices, and postseason.

Various literatures have revealed the success of

SEM in the process of physical education. Students

who receive SEM instruction have their self-

motivation developed and successful learning

achievements (Wallhead & Ntoumanis, 2004). Using

280

Ginanjar, A. and Suherman, A.

Improving Physical Activity of Students with Low Fundamental Movement Skills Using Spor t Education Model.

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education (ICSSHPE 2017) - Volume 1, pages 280-282

ISBN: 978-989-758-317-9

SEM, students are highly motivated and enjoy the

learning process (Perlman, 2011). The less motivated

students can increase their physical activity (Perlman,

2012).

Based on the above explanation, the low FMS can

be overcome by SEM. The literature also shows that

low motivation can be improved by SEM. Therefore,

it is necessary to study how SEM can increase

students’ physical activity without reducing the

instructional objectives of physical education

(Perlman, 2012). Furthermore, it has been questioned

if education programs do not involve much physical

activity to improving health (McKenzie, et al., 2000;

2006). Thus, the objective of this study is to answer if

students with low FMS who learn through SEM have

more physical activity than those who learn through

traditional instructional model.

2 METHODS

This study used a randomized posttest-only control

group experimental design. The experimental class

received the SEM instruction, and the control class

received traditional instructional model. The study

was conducted in 15 meetings, consisting of three

phases: (1) skill/tactical development, (2) inter/intra

team games with practices, and (3) postseason

(Perlman, 2011). The samples were 80 eighth graders

at SMP Nahdlatul Ulama Darul Ma’arif, Kaplongan,

Indramayu. 40 were assigned to the experimental

class, and the other 40 to the control class. The FMS

was measured using Jaakkola and Washington’s

(2012) FMS test. The physical activity test was

measured using digital iCardio. The data were

analyzed using one-way ANOVA.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The physical education curriculum of junior high

school in Indonesia emphasizes students’ sports

motion skills, rather than physical activity

(Permendikbud, 2013). The school mandated sport-

based physical education programme adopted a skill-

drill-game approach (SDG) and exposed students to

an array of invasion games (e.g. soccer and basket-

ball) (Perlman, 2012). The curriculum should allocate

50% of learning process for physical activity. Key

aspects of a well-designed curriculum should (a) be

based on national or state curricula, syllabus or

standard(s) and (b) be designed to provide students

with 50% of class time spent in moderate-to-vigorous

physical activity (MVPA) (USDHHS, 2010;

Perlman, 2012).

The decline in physical activity and pubertal issue

are also not sufficiently paid attention to (Telama &

Yang, 2000; Nader, Bradley, & Houts, 2008;

Jaakkola & Washington, 2012). In addition, low FMS

also is yet to be more paid attention to despite the fact

that it requires good FMS to achieve great motion

skills because FMS are contributing factors to

increase of physical activity. Mastery of fundamental

movement skills (FMS) is a potentially significant

factor in the rate of adolescents' physical activity

participation (Mckenzie, 2007; Jaakkola &

Washington, 2012). So, it raises an issue that the

physical education program does not engage students

to increase physical activity. Some physical education

programmes are not engaging students in adequate

levels of health-enhancing physical activity

(McKenzie, et al., 2000, 2006).

The literature shows that it can be overcome using

SEM because physical activity is a contributing factor

to students’ FMS. The less motivated students can

increase their physical activity (Perlman, 2012).

Students prefer SEM to traditional model in their

physical activity (Andre & Hastie, 2017). SEM

provides students with 50% of classtime for moderate

to high physical activity (Stockly, 2008).

Hastie and Torst’s (2002) study suggests that

SEM did not improve physical activity level.

However, their study has sampling limitation. The

samples were relatively small and homogeneous.

Perlman (2012) conducted a study on SEM by

dividing it into three phases: (1) skill/tactical

development, (2) inter/intra team games with

practices, and (3) postseason. His samples were 32

people, consisting of 10 males and 22 females.

The result revealed the experimental class who

learned through SEM showed a difference in physical

activity duration and in the increase from moderate to

high physical activity from those who learned through

Skill-Drill-Game (SDG) method. The data were

analyzed using ANOVA.

The result of calculation of physical activity

duration at skill/tactical development phase showed a

value of 0.541>0.050, which means there is no

significant improvement. At inter/intra team games

with practices phase, the result also did not show any

improvement in physical activity duration since it was

obtained the value of 0.117>0.050. At postseason

phase, there was a significant improvement. The

result of data analysis obtained the value of

0.000<0.050.

Similarly, in terms of physical activity increase

from moderate to high at skill/tactical development

Improving Physical Activity of Students with Low Fundamental Movement Skills Using Sport Education Model

281

phase, the result did not show significant

improvement. The result of data analysis obtained the

value of 0.605>0.050. At inter/intra team games with

practices phase, the result also did not show

significance increase in physical activity from

moderate to high since it was obtained the value of

0.261>0.050. At postseason phase, there was a

significant increase in physical activity. The result of

data analysis obtained the value of 0.000<0.050.

Therefore, it is perceived that low FMS in

physical activity can be overcome by SEM since FMS

are parts of physical activity increase. In addition,

various literatures also have revealed the success of

SEM in the process of physical education. Thus, there

is a possibility to increase physical activity of

students with low FMS using SEM.

4 CONCLUSION

Fundamental Movement Skills contribute to the

increase of students’ physical activity. Sport

Education Model, as supported by various literatures,

can increase students’ physical activity. It can be

concluded that there is a chance for SEM to increase

physical activity of students with low Fundamental

Movement Skills.

REFERENCES

Andre, M. H., Hastie, P., 2017. Sport education in a higher

education physical activity course. European Journal of

Physical Education and Sport Science.

Barnett, L.M., Van Beurden, E., Morgan, P.J., Beard, J.R,

2008. Perceived sports competence mediates the

relationship between childhood motor proﬁciency and

adolescent physical activity and ﬁtness. A longitudinal

assessment. International Journal of Behavioral

Nutrition and Physical Activity.

Friedman, H.S., Martin, L.R., Tucker, J.S., Criqui, M.H.,

Kern, M.L., Reynolds, C.A., 2008. Stability of physical

activity across the lifespan. Journal of Health

Psychology.

Gallahue, D.L., Cleland-Donnelly, F., 2007.

Developmental physical education for all children.

Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Hastie, P.A., Trost, S. G., 2002. Student physical activity

levels during a season of sport education. Pediatric

Exercise Science.

Jaakkola, T., Washington, T., 2012. The relationship

between fundamental movement skills and self-

reported physical activity during Finnish junior high

school. Journal Physical Education and Sport

Pedagogy.

Kemenkes RI, 2011. Strategi Nasional Penerapan Pola

Konsumsi Makanan dan Aktivitas Fisik Untuk

Mencegah Penyakit Tidak Menular, Kemenkes RI.

Jakarta.

McKenzie, T.L., Marshall, S.J., Sallis, J.F., Conway, T.L.,

2000. Student activity levels, lesson context, an teacher

behavior during middle school physical education.

Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport.

McKenzie, T.L., Catellier, D.J., Conway T., et al., 2006.

Girls’ activity levels and lesson contexts in middle

school PE: TAAG baseline. Medicine and Science in

Sports and Exercises.

McKenzie, T. L., 2007. The preparation of physical

educators: A public health perspective. National

Association for Kinesiology and Physical Education in

Higher Education.

O’Keeffe, S.L., Harrison, A.J., Smyth, P.J., 2007. Transfer

or speciﬁcity? An applied investigation into the

relationship between fundamental overarm throwing

and related sport skills. Physical Education and Sport

Pedagogy.

Perlman, D., 2011. Examination of Self-Determination

Within the Sport Education Model. Asia-Pacific

Journal of Health, Sport, Physical Education.

Perlman, D., 2012. The influence of the Sport Education

Model on amotivated students’ in-class physical

activity. Journal European Physical Education Review.

Siedentop, D., 1994. Sport education: quality PE through

positive sport experiences. Champaign: Human

Kinetics.

Stockly, J.S, 2008. Thesis. Sport education and the

traditional until approach a comparasion of student

activity levels. Sonoma: M S Program Kinesiology

Sonoma State University.

Stodden, D.F., Goodway, J.D., Langendofer, S.J.,

Roberton, M.A., Rudisill, M.E., Garcia, C., Garcia,

L.E., 2008. A developmental perspective on the role of

motor skill competence in physical activity: An

emergent relationship. National Association for

Kinesiology and Physical Education in Higher

Education.

Telama, R., Yang, X., Viikari, J., Valimaki, I., Wanne, O.,

and Raitakari, O., 2005. Physical activity from

childhood to adulthood: A 21-year tracking study.

American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

Trudeau, F., Laurencelle, L., and Shephard, R.J., 2004.

Tracking of physical activity from childhood to

adulthood. Medicine and Science in Sports and

Exercise.

USDHHS, 2010. Strategies to Improve the Quality of

Physical Education. Washington, DC: US Department

of Health and Human Services.

Wallhead, T.L., Ntoumanis, N., 2004. Effects of a sport

education intervention on students' motivational

responses in physical education. Journal of Teaching in

Physical Education.

ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education

282