The purpose of this study is to describe the results of a try-out of Gréhaigne, Godbout, and Bouthier’s (1997) team sport performance assessment procedure in elementary and junior high school physical education classes and to expose issues related to its potential implementation. Six elementary and junior high school teachers were asked to use this assessment procedure with their Grade 5 to 8 class-groups for a 6-week period in order to gather data for the establishment of performance norms. As it was developed for peer assessment purposes, the teachers instructed their students in observing and coding. Teachers and their students then proceeded to collect team sport performance data. Following this process, interviews were conducted in order to gather the teachers’ perceptions and opinions regarding the potential integration of this assessment procedure. From the collected data, topics focusing on the possible applications in a team sport teaching-learning context are presented and discussed.
Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for
- Author: Jean-Paul Richard x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
The Try-Out of a Team Sport Performance Assessment Procedure in Elementary and Junior High School Physical Education Classes
Jean-François Richard, Paul Godbout, Marielle Tousignant, and Jean-Francis Gréhaigne
How to Support Athlete Autonomy in University Sports: Coaches’ Experience of the reROOT Program
Emilie Lemelin, Hali Kil, Élodie Petit, Joëlle Carpentier, Jacques Forest, Sophie Gadoury, Jean-Paul Richard, Mireille Joussemet, and Geneviève A. Mageau
The purpose of this study was to evaluate coaches’ experience of the reROOT program, a program aiming to increase coaches’ autonomy-supportive skills, structure, and involvement. We delivered the program to 32 university sports coaches, and of these coaches, 13 participated in three semistructured focus groups 2 weeks postprogram and discussed their experience of the program. Guiding questions aimed at assessing participants’ responsiveness to the program and its perceived usefulness. Classical content analyses were performed and organized based on the guiding questions when applicable. Results suggest that coaches appreciated the program, believed that they could implement its skills in their day-to-day coaching, and observed positive impacts on themselves and their athletes despite the COVID-19 pandemic. It thus appears that coaches are responsive to the reROOT program and that it could be a useful part of their training.
The reROOT Coaching Program: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Its Impact on Coaching Style and Athlete Sports Development
Emilie Lemelin, Joëlle Carpentier, Sophie Gadoury, Élodie Petit, Jacques Forest, Jean-Paul Richard, Mireille Joussemet, and Geneviève A. Mageau
The reROOT program teaches coaches 40 behaviors belonging to a need-supportive coaching style (including structure, involvement, and autonomy support), as defined by self-determination theory. This pilot randomized controlled trial, conducted during the COVID-19-related lockdown, evaluated the impact of this 18-hr program on coaching style (e.g., Problems in Sports Questionnaire) and on athlete motivation (Motivation Underlying Achievement Goals Questionnaire), performance (tactical, technical, physical, and psychological skills), and well-being (Satisfaction with Life Scale; Positive and Negative Affect Schedule). Twenty-three sports teams from two universities were randomized in the experimental or the wait-list control condition. Coaches in the experimental condition evaluated autonomy-supportive coaching styles more favorably than those in the control condition at the 1-year follow-up, but not 2 months after the end of the program. Athletes whose coaches participated in the program did not rate them as having a higher need-supportive coaching style, but experienced greater autonomous motivation and (potentially) performance, and under certain circumstances greater well-being and less controlled motivation 2 months after the end of the program compared with the wait-list condition. These findings suggest that the reROOT program could potentially improve readiness to rely on more autonomy-supportive skills and promote some aspects of sports development in athletes.
Status and Trends of Physical Activity Surveillance, Policy, and Research in 164 Countries: Findings From the Global Observatory for Physical Activity—GoPA! 2015 and 2020 Surveys
Andrea Ramírez Varela, Pedro C. Hallal, Juliana Mejía Grueso, Željko Pedišić, Deborah Salvo, Anita Nguyen, Bojana Klepac, Adrian Bauman, Katja Siefken, Erica Hinckson, Adewale L. Oyeyemi, Justin Richards, Elena Daniela Salih Khidir, Shigeru Inoue, Shiho Amagasa, Alejandra Jauregui, Marcelo Cozzensa da Silva, I-Min Lee, Melody Ding, Harold W. Kohl III, Ulf Ekelund, Gregory W. Heath, Kenneth E. Powell, Charlie Foster, Aamir Raoof Memon, Abdoulaye Doumbia, Abdul Roof Rather, Abdur Razzaque, Adama Diouf, Adriano Akira Hino, Albertino Damasceno, Alem Deksisa Abebe, Alex Antonio Florindo, Alice Mannocci, Altyn Aringazina, Andrea Backović Juričan, Andrea Poffet, Andrew Decelis, Angela Carlin, Angelica Enescu, Angélica María Ochoa Avilés, Anna Kontsevaya, Annamaria Somhegyi, Anne Vuillemin, Asmaa El Hamdouchi, Asse Amangoua Théodore, Bojan Masanovic, Brigid M. Lynch, Catalina Medina, Cecilia del Campo, Chalchisa Abdeta, Changa Moreways, Chathuranga Ranasinghe, Christina Howitt, Christine Cameron, Danijel Jurakić, David Martinez-Gomez, Dawn Tladi, Debrework Tesfaye Diro, Deepti Adlakha, Dušan Mitić, Duško Bjelica, Elżbieta Biernat, Enock M. Chisati, Estelle Victoria Lambert, Ester Cerin, Eun-Young Lee, Eva-Maria Riso, Felicia Cañete Villalba, Felix Assah, Franjo Lovrić, Gerardo A. Araya-Vargas, Giuseppe La Torre, Gloria Isabel Niño Cruz, Gul Baltaci, Haleama Al Sabbah, Hanna Nalecz, Hilde Liisa Nashandi, Hyuntae Park, Inés Revuelta-Sánchez, Jackline Jema Nusurupia, Jaime Leppe Zamora, Jaroslava Kopcakova, Javier Brazo-Sayavera, Jean-Michel Oppert, Jinlei Nie, John C. Spence, John Stewart Bradley, Jorge Mota, Josef Mitáš, Junshi Chen, Kamilah S Hylton, Karel Fromel, Karen Milton, Katja Borodulin, Keita Amadou Moustapha, Kevin Martinez-Folgar, Lara Nasreddine, Lars Breum Christiansen, Laurent Malisoux, Leapetswe Malete, Lorelie C. Grepo-Jalao, Luciana Zaranza Monteiro, Lyutha K. Al Subhi, Maja Dakskobler, Majed Alnaji, Margarita Claramunt Garro, Maria Hagströmer, Marie H. Murphy, Matthew Mclaughlin, Mercedes Rivera-Morales, Mickey Scheinowitz, Mimoza Shkodra, Monika Piątkowska, Moushumi Chaudhury, Naif Ziyad Alrashdi, Nanette Mutrie, Niamh Murphy, Norhayati Haji Ahmad, Nour A. Obeidat, Nubia Yaneth Ruiz Gómez, Nucharapon Liangruenrom, Oscar Díaz Arnesto, Oscar Flores-Flores, Oscar Incarbone, Oyun Chimeddamba, Pascal Bovet, Pedro Magalhães, Pekka Jousilahti, Piyawat Katewongsa, Rafael Alexander Leandro Gómez, Rawan Awni Shihab, Reginald Ocansey, Réka Veress, Richard Marine, Rolando Carrizales-Ramos, Saad Younis Saeed, Said El-Ashker, Samuel Green, Sandra Kasoma, Santiago Beretervide, Se-Sergio Baldew, Selby Nichols, Selina Khoo, Seyed Ali Hosseini, Shifalika Goenka, Shima Gholamalishahi, Soewarta Kosen, Sofie Compernolle, Stefan Paul Enescu, Stevo Popovic, Susan Paudel, Susana Andrade, Sylvia Titze, Tamu Davidson, Theogene Dusingizimana, Thomas E. Dorner, Tracy L. Kolbe-Alexander, Tran Thanh Huong, Vanphanom Sychareun, Vera Jarevska-Simovska, Viliami Kulikefu Puloka, Vincent Onywera, Wanda Wendel-Vos, Yannis Dionyssiotis, and Michael Pratt
Background: Physical activity (PA) surveillance, policy, and research efforts need to be periodically appraised to gain insight into national and global capacities for PA promotion. The aim of this paper was to assess the status and trends in PA surveillance, policy, and research in 164 countries. Methods: We used data from the Global Observatory for Physical Activity (GoPA!) 2015 and 2020 surveys. Comprehensive searches were performed for each country to determine the level of development of their PA surveillance, policy, and research, and the findings were verified by the GoPA! Country Contacts. Trends were analyzed based on the data available for both survey years. Results: The global 5-year progress in all 3 indicators was modest, with most countries either improving or staying at the same level. PA surveillance, policy, and research improved or remained at a high level in 48.1%, 40.6%, and 42.1% of the countries, respectively. PA surveillance, policy, and research scores decreased or remained at a low level in 8.3%, 15.8%, and 28.6% of the countries, respectively. The highest capacity for PA promotion was found in Europe, the lowest in Africa and low- and lower-middle-income countries. Although a large percentage of the world’s population benefit from at least some PA policy, surveillance, and research efforts in their countries, 49.6 million people are without PA surveillance, 629.4 million people are without PA policy, and 108.7 million live in countries without any PA research output. A total of 6.3 billion people or 88.2% of the world’s population live in countries where PA promotion capacity should be significantly improved. Conclusion: Despite PA is essential for health, there are large inequalities between countries and world regions in their capacity to promote PA. Coordinated efforts are needed to reduce the inequalities and improve the global capacity for PA promotion.
