Validity and reliability of a physical literacy knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy and behaviors questionnaire for early childhood educators (PLKASB-ECE): An exploratory factor analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nurturing physical literacy in young children offers a unique opportunity to address global physical inactivity trend. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) environments, with their extensive reach into this age group, and early childhood educators, through their daily interactions with children, are strategically positioned to influence children's physical literacy development. However, enhancing educators' ability to foster physical literacy requires valid and reliable assessment tools to measure holistic physical literacy constructs (i.e., cognitive, affective, behavioral) to assess the impact of physical literacy educational interventions. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a holistic digital tool to measure physical literacy knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and behaviors of early childhood educators (PLKASB-ECE) for both their professional teaching context as well as the educator's own personal physical literacy behaviours. METHODS: This study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1 involved item generation and content validation. Phase 2 employed a cross-sectional validation study design to assess the psychometric properties of the PLKASB-ECE tool. RESULTS: Based on a literature review an initial 19-item instrument was developed that subsequently underwent three rounds of expert content validation. Six additional items were added, resulting in a final 25-item self-report measure with a readability score equivalent to an 8th grade reading level (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 8.7). This included 1 global rating item, 2 qualitative response items, 7 knowledge items, and 15 items addressing physical literacy attitudes, self-efficacy and behaviors using a 7-point Likert response scale. The PLKASB-ECE tool was administered to 470 educators in Alberta, Canada between 2019 to 2022. The 15 items were subjected to exploratory factor analysis and resulted in a five-factor scale with one item not loading. The five-factor scale held with the final 14 items with loadings ranging from 0.481 to 0.886, Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.70 to 0.82, with ordinal omega ranging from 0.72 to 0.82. Usability, as assessed by completion time, was 8.15 minutes. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate good indices of reliability and validity for the PLKASB-ECE tool. This tool will be valuable as a research outcome measure for assessing educational interventions aimed at enhancing educators' understanding, confidence, and strategies for fostering holistic concepts of physical literacy in young children within ECECs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".