MONITORING OF MOTOR-EDUCATIONAL PATHWAYS: THE PREPARATION OF A CHECK-LIST

Gabriella Ferrara, Francesca Pedone, Giulio Francesco Polidoro

Abstract


The promotion of good practices represents an open challenge in all educational sectors because, also in the light of international recommendations, it requires monitoring and analysis processes of multiple variables: contextual, procedural and systemic. Any action, however, cannot ignore one element: the recipients of the educational action. In order to plan, to implement and to monitor any educational path, it is therefore necessary to identify the characteristics of each subject, promoting the initial assessment as a preliminary and essential step. The article describes an initial observation and evaluation tool, built and developed within an amateur sports association in Palermo. This tool was created for the motor-relational assessment  of the initial abilities of parathletes that is carried out before the swimming course. It is a checklist consisting of items that characterize the three areas investigated in the pre-operative phase: behavioral area, relational area, area of individual functioning divided into implicit objectives and explicit or technical objectives. The assessment, according to the indications promoted by the International Classification of Functioning, disability and health (ICF), highlights the functioning to be increased through the swimming path. In fact, this tool makes it possible to harmonize the observational procedures among the experts of the multidisciplinary team, in order to facilitate an assessment that focuses on the central areas of motor skills and relationships, thus improving the initial evaluation process and the structuring of subsequent practices. This work illustrates the path of reflection, supported by concordance and inter-coding data, that led to the construction of the  tool and the prospects for application.

 


Keywords


initial assessment; motor skills; check-list; interpersonal skills; inclusion

Full Text:

PDF

References


Baldacci, M. (2023). Evaluation and pedagogy. A semiological paradigm. PEDAGOGY TODAY, 21(1), 017-025.

Batini, F. (2020). Observing the child today. Actualizing the lesson of Maria Montessori. BILDUNG DIDACTICS OF FORMATIVE PROCESSES, 13, 75-82.

Bauer, M. W., Gaskell, G., & Allum, N. C. (2000). Quality, quantity and knowledge interests: Avoiding confusions. Qualitative researching with text, image and sound, 3-18.Berg, B.L. (2007). Qualitative research method for the social science. Boston: Mass, Allyn & Bacon.

Castoldi, M., & Martini, M. (2010). Towards skills: a compass for schools. A research path: A research path. FrancoAngeli.

Chiappetta Cajola L. (2008). Didactics for integration. Regulatory processes for raising the quality of education. Rome: Anicia.

Chiappetta Cajola L., Domenici, G. (2005). Didactic organization and evaluation. Rome: Monolith.

Cottini, L., & Morganti, A. (2015). Evidence-Based Education and Special Pedagogy (pp. 1-348). Carocci.

Damiano, E. (2006). The New Covenant. Themes, problems, perspectives of the New Didactic Research. Brescia: The School.

Del Gobbo, G., & Federighi, P. (2021). Education and training professions: guidelines, criteria and insights for a taxonomy. Education and training professions, 1-404.

Dell'Anna, S. (2021). Evaluation Models of an Inclusive School System: Perspectives of Dialogue between Implementation, Research and (Self-)Improvement (p. 148). FrancoAngeli.

Domenici, G. (2001). School Assessment Handbook. Bari - Rome: Laterza.

Domenici, G. (eds.). (2009). Evaluation as a resource. Naples: Tecnodid.

Gariboldi, A., & Pugnaghi, A. (2021). Evaluation as dialogue. IUL RESEARCH, 2(4), 308-321.

Gattullo, M., & Vannini, I. (2022). An evaluation that analyzes and reconstructs: rereading didactics and docimology today, in dialogue with Mario Gattullo.

Hattie, J. (2011). Visible learning for Teachers: Maximizing Impact on Learning. London-New York: Routledge.

Hughes M.A., Garret D.E. (1990). Intercoder reliability estimation approaches in marketing. A generalizability theory framework for quantitative data. Journal of marketing research, 27, 2, pp. 185-196.

Invernizzi, P. L., Eid, L., & Strano, S. (2012). SWIMMING PLAYING VOL. 1: Agility and Dexterity in the Water (Vol. 1). Caraba'srl.

Krippendorf K. (2004), Content analysis:An introduction to its methodology,Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kirk J., Miller M.L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Laneve, C. (2005). Analysis of educational practice. Research methodology and results. Brescia: The School.

Manno, R. (1984). Coordination skills. School of Sport, 1, 116-118.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G.B. (2014). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Pubblication.

Mortari, L. (Ed.). (2010). Say practice. The culture of schooling, Milan: Bruno Mondadori.

Neuendorf K.A. (2002), The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sibilio, M. (2012). The simple dimension of didactic action. Nonlinear trajectories in research. New interdisciplinary scenarios, 10-14.

Silverman, D., & Marvasti, A. (2008). Doing qualitative research: A comprehensive guide. Sage.

Tacconi, G. (2011). Didactics at work: analysis of educational practices in vocational education and training. Milan: FrancoAngeli.

Vertecchi, B. (2003). Evaluation Manual. Analysis of learning and contexts. Milan: FrancoAngeli.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.32043/gsd.v8i3.1166

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 ITALIAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH EDUCATION, SPORT AND INCLUSIVE DIDACTICS

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Italian Journal of Health Education, Sports and Inclusive Didactics 
ISSN printed: 2532-3296