1. The Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy: Development of a Model of Children’s Capacity for a Healthy, Active Lifestyle Through a Delphi Process
- Author
-
Roy J. Shephard, Lars Bo Andersen, Han C. G. Kemper, Weimo Zhu, Mark S. Tremblay, Tim Olds, Beth Hands, John Hay, Guy Faulkner, Thomas L. McKenzie, Avery D. Faigenbaum, Meghann Lloyd, Jennifer M. Sacheck, Duane Knudson, Peter T. Katzmarzyk, Elena A. Boiarskaia, Charles Boyer, John Cairney, Patricia E. Longmuir, Joel D. Barnes, Claire E. Francis, Ian Janssen, EMGO - Quality of care, Public and occupational health, Francis, Claire E, Longmuir, Patricia E, Boyer, Charles, Andersen, Lars Bo, Olds, Tim S, and Tremblay, Mark S
- Subjects
Male ,Program evaluation ,Canada ,Community-Based Participatory Research ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Consensus ,Delphi Technique ,Health Status ,Applied psychology ,Delphi method ,Health Promotion ,Health Promotion/methods ,Likert scale ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Community-based research ,Physical literacy ,medicine ,Humans ,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Evaluation ,Child ,Life Style ,Exercise ,Motor skill ,computer.programming_language ,Protocol (science) ,Schools ,Health Literacy/statistics & numerical data ,Physical activity assessment ,030229 sport sciences ,Health Literacy ,Socioeconomic Factors ,Motor Skills ,Physical therapy ,Health promotion ,Female ,Health determinants ,Psychology ,Inclusion (education) ,computer ,Delphi ,Program Evaluation - Abstract
Background:The Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (CAPL) was conceptualized as a tool to monitor children’s physical literacy. The original model (fitness, activity behavior, knowledge, motor skill) required revision and relative weights for calculating/interpreting scores were required.Methods:Nineteen childhood physical activity/fitness experts completed a 3-round Delphi process. Round 1 was open-ended questions. Subsequent rounds rated statements using a 5-point Likert scale. Recommendations were sought regarding protocol inclusion, relative importance within composite scores and score interpretation.Results:Delphi participant consensus was achieved for 64% (47/73) of statement topics, including a revised conceptual model, specific assessment protocols, the importance of longitudinal tracking, and the relative importance of individual protocols and composite scores. Divergent opinions remained regarding the inclusion of sleep time, assessment/scoring of the obstacle course assessment of motor skill, and the need for an overall physical literacy classification.Conclusions:The revised CAPL model (overlapping domains of physical competence, motivation, and knowledge, encompassed by daily behavior) is appropriate for monitoring the physical literacy of children aged 8 to 12 years. Objectively measured domains (daily behavior, physical competence) have higher relative importance. The interpretation of CAPL results should be reevaluated as more data become available.
- Published
- 2016