The impact of an early childhood educator e-Learning course on young children’s fundamental movement skills: A cluster randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early childhood educators (ECEs) are ideally positioned to support the development of children’s fundamental movement skills (FMS). However, ECEs have little specialised training to support the development of FMS in young children. This study aimed to assess the impact of an e-Learning course on the FMS of preschool-aged children. 145 Preschool-aged children and 42 ECEs from 12 childcare centres participated in the study. ECEs in the experimental group were asked to complete the e-Learning course. A subsample of children (n = 48) was objectively assessed using the Test of Gross Motor Development 3rd Edition (TGMD-3). Additionally, parents of all participating children reported perceptions of their child’s FMS to understand if they knew how well their child was progressing. Findings showed a significant increase in TGMD-3 assessed locomotor skills from baseline to follow-up in the intervention group compared to the control group and total FMS but not objective control skills. Parent-reported FMS increased in the intervention group for all locomotor, object control skills, and total FMS. However, the intervention effect for all three measurements was not significant. The results from this study highlight the potential utility of online professional development for ECEs as an approach to improving young children’s FMS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".