Search

Problem Statement: Previous works have questioned the function of assessing and its influence on students' perception of the assessment. Depending on whether the assessment is summative or formative, the impact on learning and emotions may be different. However, few studies have been conducted in a physical education context where learning could be both cognitive and motor. Purpose: The purpose of this pilot study is to compare the effects of summative and formative assessments on students' state-anxiety, and shot-put performance in physical education. Method: Twenty-one high school students in a formative assessment class (Mage = 14.95; SDage = .50) and twenty-two in a summative assessment class (Mage = 15.14; SDage = .64) participated in the study. The students' characteristics between the two classes were not statistically different. Students filled out questionnaires measuring trait-anxiety and state-anxiety. State-anxiety was measured at the beginning of the lesson. Performance was evaluated through one shot-put attempt at the end of the lesson. Data collection was carried out in three phases: during the first lesson (i.e., beginning of the learning cycle), during the fifth lesson (i.e, end of the learning cycle), and during a deferred evaluation (i.e., four months later). Non- parametric tests were performed. Results: There was no difference in trait-anxiety between the two classes. At the beginning of the learning cycle, there was no difference in state-anxiety or performance. Results show that at the end of the learning cycle, both classes improved their performance. The formative assessment class felt less anxiety than the summative assessment class. Four months later, the summative assessment class's performance had improved, whereas the formative assessment class's performance had remained at the same level. Additionally, the summative assessment class's anxiety remained at the same level, whereas the formative assessment class's anxiety improved. Conclusion: These results can help physical education teachers to design more successful learning and emotional experiences during the learning cycle, focusing more on providing formative assessment. This paper also adds to the debate around formative good/summative bad, questioning the short- and medium-term benefits and drawbacks of formative and summative assessment. Keywords: pedagogy; evaluation; grade; emotion; motor learning [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: As major actors in sports activities, sports coaches can play a significant role in health education and contribute to the psychological well-being of young people. However, not all participants in sports activities experience sports positively, which reduces the potential benefits for health. The present study investigates if coaches' efforts to promote health increase young athletes' enjoyment, self-esteem and perceived health in daily life and decrease sport dropout.Design: To control for the variability between teams and between clubs, multilevel modeling was applied.Methods: A sample of 342 young football players completed questionnaires assessing their perceptions of coaches' Health Promotion (HP) activities, enjoyment of sports, dropout intentions, self-esteem and perceived health in daily life.Results: HP general score was positively related to enjoyment and perceived health as well as negatively dropout intentions. Players perceiving their coaches as promoting fair and play (Respect for oneself and others) scored higher on their perceptions of enjoyment in sport, self-esteem and self-reported health, and lower on dropout intentions. Moreover, players recognizing their coaches as encouraging their healthy lifestyle also reported higher perceptions of sport enjoyment, whereas player's perceived coaches' activities on substance use were associated with lower participants' enjoyment.Conclusions: These results support the importance of developing HP in sports clubs. Especially, promoting respect of oneself and others seems to be the more beneficial to sport participants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific evidence has shown that practicing exercise reduced the risk of overall and cancer-specific mortality for cancer patients. Numerous studies have shown limited support has been provided by cancer and general health professionals. This present study identifies determinants of suggesting of exercise from the oncology health professionals' perspective by using a socio-ecological approach. Health professionals from two oncology services in France were contacted, which resulted in 36 semi-structured interviews questioning elements of support for exercise, from individual to political determinants. intrapersonal-level findings revealed that exercise is considered complementary to treatment, not recommended at all times of the disease duration and not to all patients. For interpersonal determinants, health professionals discuss exercise based on their own sport practice and their exercise knowledge. Health professionals interchangeably use exercise, sport, or exercise. Examination of institutional determinants showed that the oncology services did not use tools to evaluate or follow up on exercise. Only one of the services had an exercise referral scheme. Examination of community determinants showed that health professionals identified a diversity of exercise providers, without the ability to differentiate exercise program quality. Public policy findings have shown that despite an exercise prescription law, health professionals do not prescribe exercise, do not know how to prescribe it, and consider that the exercise useless because of no refund system for patients. The results provide a systemic understanding of the determinants helping cancer patients and health professionals improve adherence to exercise. • Exercise is only considered as complementary to treatment by health professionals. • Health professionals interchangeably use exercise, sport and exercise when referring to exercise. • Health professionals do not prescribe exercise, but orientate their cancer patients to exercise providers. • Public policy impact is limited in supporting exercise of cancer patients from health professional point of view. • The most vulnerable patients are those who are less supported in exercise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]