Are all domains created equal? An exploration of stakeholder views on the concept of physical literacy

Abstract

Background Developing physical literacy at population levels provides a transformative appeal for those working in sport, health, education, recreation and physical activity settings. Interdisciplinary approaches to development of policy in this area is recommended. The purpose of this study was to gather empirical data from key stakeholders working with young people in areas related to physical literacy across the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, to capture their current understanding and awareness of the physical literacy to help inform the development of the first all-island consensus statement for physical literacy. Methods A total of 1,241 participants (52% male), from a range of stakeholder groups (health, physical activity, sport, recreation and education) completed a researcher developed physical literacy questionnaire. A one-way MANOVA was carried out to investigate differences across stakeholder grouping in terms of perceived importance of three domains of physical literacy. Overlap of independent confidence intervals was analysed to determine importance of the physical literacy domains within stakeholder grouping. Results A majority (63%) of respondents indicated they were aware of an existing definition of physical literacy, but this varied by stakeholder group (e.g. 86% for higher education, versus 47% of coaches). Participants working in higher education (69%), or working as physical education specialists (67%), were more likely to rate themselves as experts or near experts in physical literacy, while coaches, education generalists, and decision makers were more likely rate themselves as having no expertise (9%, 12% and 12% respectively). Non-specialist teachers and physical education teachers rated the importance of all domains of physical literacy significantly higher than decision makers, and significantly higher than coaches in the cognitive and affective domains. All stakeholders significantly rated the importance of the physical/psychomotor domain of physical literacy higher than the affective or cognitive domains of physical literacy. Conclusions Differences observed across stakeholder groups underline the importance of developing a shared vision for physical literacy, and the need to clarify and gain consensus on a definition of the term and its domains. Engaging and understanding the voice of stakeholders is critical in ensuring the relevance, ownership of and commitment to physical literacy statement operationalisation.

Exploring physical literacy in children aged 8 to 12 years old: a cross-cultural comparison between China and Greece

“…At this point, it is important to highlight that despite their difference in PL scores, Chinese and Greek children did not distinctively differ from Canadian children who similarly demonstrate “progressing” PL level [ 15 ]. Generally, reports from different countries worldwide indicate that the PL level of children is not satisfactory [ 60 , 61 ]. More than any cultural difference, this phenomenon could be attributed to the world trending decrease in children’s PA levels, as it is known that more than half of 6–11-year-old children do not adhere to the recommended PA guidelines [ 5 ].…”

Development, explanation, and presentation of the Physical Literacy Interventions Reporting Template (PLIRT)

“…However, the PL concept is not always fully understood or accepted by providers [ 34 ]. Moreover, practitioners often prioritize the PL domains differently [ 90 ]. Against this background, the reporting should place particular attention on the involvement of information regarding treatment fidelity and modifications [ 88 ] as well as person compliance or adherence, respectively [ 91 ].…”

Assessing physical literacy with school-aged children in occupational therapy practice: An exploratory qualitative study

“…Whilst this conceptualisation is common, there are many definitions of physical literacy and frameworks of physical literacy in use around the world (Edwards et al, 2017; Martins et al, 2021; Shearer et al, 2018). Some have used consensus making endeavours to reach the resulting definition, such as recent processes in Ireland (Belton et al, 2022) and England (Hurter et al, 2022). The Australian Physical Literacy Framework (APLF) also arose from a consensus process and expanded the original Whitehead definition to also encompass social aspects, that is, ‘the integration of physical, psychological, social and cognitive capabilities, help us live active, healthy and fulfilling lifestyles’ (Australian Sports Commission, 2020).…”