Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:30:11 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
18 SES 15 A: Physical Literacy and Development in Childhood
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
18. Research in Sports Pedagogy
Paper Physical Literacy Between Knowing and Acting: Evidence from Standardised Assessment in Lithuanian Primary Education 1: Lithuanian sports university, Lithuania; 2: Kauno kolegija Presenting Author:Topic Theoretical Framework Although physical literacy is grounded in well-established philosophical traditions, the literature consistently points to tensions between its holistic conceptual foundations and the ways it is applied in educational research and practice. While the concept has become increasingly visible in international policy frameworks, including UNESCO’s Quality Physical Education guidelines (UNESCO, 2015), its practical enactment is often uneven. In many cases, greater emphasis is placed on measurable indicators, such as physical competence or activity behaviours, whereas experiential, emotional, and cognitive dimensions receive comparatively less attention (Jurbala, 2015; Durden-Myers et al., 2018). At the same time, systematic and conceptual reviews highlight considerable variation in how physical literacy is defined and operationalised across national and research contexts (Hurter et al., 2022). Empirical models frequently converge on multidimensional structures that include physical, emotional, cognitive, and behavioural components (Gunnell et al., 2018; Britton et al., 2022; and Shearer et al., 2021). While this separation helps make analysis clearer, it might also lead to a broken understanding of a concept that is meant to work together as a complete unit. Assessment Context These conceptual tensions become particularly visible in the context of assessment. Standardised instruments, such as the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy – Second Edition (CAPL-2), represent empirically robust efforts to capture physical literacy across multiple domains (Longmuir et al., 2018a; Gunnell et al., 2018). Nevertheless, existing evidence suggests that certain domains, most notably daily physical activity, behaviour and physical competence, tend to exert greater influence within empirical models. In contrast, cognitive and experiential aspects of physical literacy are more challenging to assess reliably, especially among younger children (Shearer et al., 2021). Consequently, the knowledge produced through assessments may not always fully align with the values emphasised in holistic educational frameworks. Aim of the Study The aim of this study is to examine the level and structure of physical literacy among primary school children using a standardised assessment framework and to explore how empirically generated knowledge can inform educational understanding and action without undermining the holistic foundations of the concept. Research Questions This study addresses the following research questions: 1. What is the overall level and structural composition of physical literacy among Lithuanian primary school pupils as known through a standardised assessment framework? 2. How do different domains of physical literacy, as captured by a standardised assessment, vary in relation to age, sex, and body mass index in primary education, and what do these patterns imply for translating assessment-based knowledge into educational action? European and International Relevance Across Europe, national-level empirical data on children’s physical literacy remain limited, particularly in Central and Eastern European education systems (Carl et al., 2023a). In this respect, Lithuania offers a relevant European example, as recent developments in physical education increasingly emphasise holistic learning, children's engagement, and progression rather than normative performance outcomes. By presenting empirical evidence from this context, the study contributes to broader international discussions on how standardised physical literacy assessments operate across diverse education systems and how the resulting knowledge can be used to support educational improvement and quality physical education in Europe.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study employed a quantitative cross-sectional research design to examine physical literacy among primary school children using a comprehensive standardised assessment approach. The methodological framework was based on a holistic understanding of physical literacy, in which physical competence, motivation and confidence, knowledge and understanding, and daily physical activity behaviour are conceptualised as interrelated components. The study design was informed by a conceptual model developed within the doctoral research, integrating holistic physical literacy principles with assumptions derived from self-determination theory and the social–ecological model. The study sample was formed using a cluster-based probability sampling strategy, with general education schools providing primary education serving as the sampling units. Data collection occurred in all 10 administrative regions of Lithuania to guarantee geographic representation and demographic diversity. In each region, one school was randomly selected from an urban, semi-urban, or rural setting. All pupils in grades 2 to 4 attending the selected schools were invited to participate, provided that written informed consent was obtained from parents or legal guardians. A total of 967 parental consent forms were received, and the final sample consisted of 846 pupils aged 8 to 11 years (49.8% boys and 50.2% girls). Data collection was carried out in two stages, separated by a one-week interval, resulting in minor variation in valid sample sizes across individual physical literacy components. Physical literacy was assessed using the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy – Second Edition (CAPL-2), a widely used instrument for children aged 8–12 years. As the instrument had not previously been adapted for use in Lithuania, a double-translation procedure was applied to ensure semantic and conceptual equivalence, followed by expert review and pilot testing with primary school children. CAPL-2 assesses four domains of physical literacy: physical competence, daily behaviour, motivation and confidence, and knowledge and understanding. Physical competence was evaluated using the PACER shuttle run, plank test, and the Canadian Agility and Movement Skill Assessment (CAMSA). Daily physical activity was measured using wrist-worn accelerometers (ActiGraph wGT3X-BT) worn for seven consecutive days and supplemented by a self-report item. Motivation, confidence, and knowledge were assessed using self-report questionnaires. Good internal consistency was observed for the motivation scale (Cronbach’s α = 0.866). Additional data on individual, family, and school-level factors were collected through structured questionnaires completed by parents and primary school teachers. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS (version 28), including descriptive statistics and regression analyses to examine associations between physical literacy and contextual factors. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Based on a nationally diverse sample of Lithuanian primary school children (n = 846), the study provides empirical evidence on children’s physical literacy using a standardised assessment framework (CAPL-2). The results show that 37.1% of pupils reach an advanced level of physical literacy and 22.1% a sufficient level, while 34.0% are classified as progressing and 6.8% at the beginning level. Overall, only about half of primary school children achieve a sufficient or higher level of physical literacy. Statistically significant differences in overall physical literacy were identified by age (p < 0.001), sex (p < 0.05), and body mass index (p < 0.001). Younger pupils and children with higher body mass indexes were more frequently represented in lower physical literacy categories. Domain-specific analyses showed that physical competence differed significantly by age, sex, and body mass index (all p < 0.001), while knowledge and understanding increased with age (p < 0.001). Motivation and confidence were significantly associated with body mass index (p < 0.001), with good internal consistency of the motivation scale (Cronbach’s α = 0.866). Daily physical activity behavior did not show significant differences across these variables. From a broader perspective, these findings demonstrate how standardised assessment contributes to knowing by making visible developmental patterns and inequalities in children’s physical literacy. However, translating such knowledge into educational action requires pedagogical interpretation and context-sensitive decision-making. In this regard, physical literacy assessment serves as an essential connection between knowledge and action in primary physical education, providing policy-relevant insights for European education systems and highlighting the necessity for developmentally appropriate and inclusive educational methodologies. References Britton, U., Belton, S., Peers, C., Issartel, J., Goss, H., Roantree, M., & Behan, S. (2022). Physical literacy in children: Exploring the construct validity of a multidimensional physical literacy construct. European Physical Education Review, 29, 183 - 198. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336x22113127 Cairney, J., Dudley, D., Kwan, M., Bulten, R., & Kriellaars, D. (2019c). Physical literacy, physical activity and health: Toward an evidence-informed conceptual model. Sports Medicine, 49(3), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01063-3 Carl, J., Bryant, A. S., Edwards, L. C., Bartle, G., Birch, J. E., Christodoulides, E., … Elsborg, P. (2023a). Physical literacy in Europe: The current state of implementation in research, practice, and policy. Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness, 21, 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesf.2022.12.003 Durden-Myers, E. J., Whitehead, M. E., & Pot, N. (2018b). Physical literacy and human flourishing. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 37(3), 308–311. Edwards, L. C., Bryant, A. S., Keegan, R. J., Morgan, K., & Jones, A. M. (2017). Definitions, foundations and associations of physical literacy: a systematic review. Sports medicine, 47(1), 113-126. Gunnell, K., Longmuir, P., Barnes, J., Belanger, K., & Tremblay, M. (2018). Refining the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy based on theory and factor analyses. BMC Public Health, 18. 5899-2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09481-2 Hurter, L., Essiet, I., Duncan, M., Roberts, W. M., Lewis, K., Goss, H., Morris, J. L., Bingham, D. D., O’Brien, W., Barnett, L. M., Shearer, C., Daly-Smith, A., & Foweather, L. (2022). Physical literacy consensus for England: Evidence review. Liverpool John Moores University. https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/17272/ Longmuir, P. E., Gunnell, K. E., Barnes, J. D., Belanger, K., Leduc, G., Woodruff, S. J., & Tremblay, M. S. (2018a). Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy Second Edition: a streamlined assessment of the capacity for physical activity among children 8 to 12 years of age. Springer Science and Business Media LLC. https://10.1186/s12889-018-5902-y Shearer, C., Goss, H. R., Boddy, L. M., Knowles, Z. R., Durden-Myers, E. J., & Foweather, L. (2021). Assessments related to the physical, affective and cognitive domains of physical literacy amongst children aged 7–11.9 years: A systematic review. Sports Medicine – Open, 7, Article 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-021-00324-8 UNESCO. (2015). Quality physical education: Guidelines for policymakers. UNESCO Publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000231101 Ziegeldorf, A., Niermann, C., Speer, A., Streicher, H., Wagner, P., & Wulff, H. (2025). Changes of children's physical activity from 1st to 4th grade are related to parents' educational level and Family Health Climate: a longitudinal study with primary school-aged children. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 7, 1537854. 18. Research in Sports Pedagogy
Paper Developing a Practice-Based Physical Literacy Assessment Model for Preschool Children 1: Riga Technical University Liepaja Academy, Latvia; 2: Riga Technical University Rezekne Academy Presenting Author:Physical literacy in early childhood is conceptualized as a holistic, developmental process that integrates physical, affective, cognitive, and social dimensions (Whitehead, 2019; Porter et al., 2022). There is a lack of empirical research on the assessment of physical literacy in early childhood and has also been concluded that existing research does not fully explore the concept of physical literacy (Carl et al, 2023). However, existing assessment approaches remain fragmented and predominantly emphasize discrete competencies or standardized indicators that inadequately capture children’s movement experiences in early years settings (Huang, 2024). Research shows that physical literacy emerges in preschool-age children across various formal and informal early chidhood educational context shaped by different pedagogical approaches (Westerbeek & Eime, 2021; Kretaine & Vecenane, 2025). This fragmentation stems from divergent pedagogical practices, assessment traditions, and professional discourses across contexts (Foulkes et al., 2020; Riley & Proctor, 2022). Teachers' experiences and attitudes are a very important factor in the development of a model for assessing physical literacy in preschool children. A qualified and experienced teacher of physical education may be unfamiliar with the concept of physical literacy; however, the content and methods applied are consistent with the idea of physical literacy (Wilkie et al., 2022; Carl et al., 2023) .Early childhood educators primarily assess physical literacy through daily observations and professional judgment. However, they often lack a coherent, pedagogically grounded framework to structure their assessment practices (Foulkes et al., 2020). Therefore, a practice-based physical literacy assessment model is needed to integrate contextual diversity and strengthen pedagogical coherence in early childhood education. Educational research increasingly emphasizes that effective and applicable models cannot be developed in a one-way process from theory to practice, but rather as a two-way process in which research knowledge and practical experience interact (Farley-Ripple et al., 2018). Teachers' professional practice involves not only the use of instrumental research results, but also conceptual interpretation, situational decision-making, and long-term observation, which together form what the authors describe as "practice-based knowledge." This approach is particularly important in early childhood, where developmental processes are dynamic, contextual, and difficult to standardize. The aim of this study is to develop a practice-based physical literacy assessment model for preschool children. The study examines how physical literacy is currently assessed, identifies common structural features among professional groups, and demonstrates how quantitative and qualitative data can be integrated to create an assessment model that is both context-sensitive and pedagogically grounded. Four research questions were proposed: RQ1.How do educators in different preschool settings assess physical literacy in preschool-aged children? Which domains, indicators, methods, and documentation practices do they use? RQ2.What common structural features and professional logics in physical literacy assessment can be identified by combining quantitative data from different professional groups? RQ3.How do general preschool educators and preschool sports teachers conceptualize physical literacy, and how do they explain their assessment approaches and professional judgment in everyday movement situations? (Initial qualitative findings.) RQ4. How can a practice-based, context-sensitive physical literacy assessment model be developed by integrating quantitative and qualitative data in a sequential mixed-methods design? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study employed a sequential mixed-methods research design to develop a practice-based physical literacy assessment model for preschool-aged children grounded in educators’ professional experience and everyday pedagogical practice. The quantitative and qualitative phases were implemented sequentially and integrated during the interpretation stage. Each phase served a distinct methodological function in the model development process. The quantitative phase provided the structural foundation for the preliminary assessment model. Data were collected via a nationwide online survey of educators from various early childhood education settings in Latvia, including general preschool teachers, preschool sports teachers, early-stage sports coaches, and dance teachers (n = 360; 90% confidence level). Participants were purposefully selected based on the assumption that physical literacy manifests differently in preschool-age children depending on their movement practices and educational settings. The survey instrument was developed based on physical literacy theory, early childhood research, and existing assessment approaches. The survey captured respondents' professional background, educational context, and assessment practices with a focus on domains, indicators, methods, and usability criteria relevant to physical literacy assessment. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was high (Cronbach’s α = .991), confirming the suitability of the data for analytical interpretation and model structuring. Statistical analyses were conducted to examine differences related to professional specialization, age group, and assessment approaches. The quantitative findings were used to identify key tendencies, shared practices, and core requirements informing the preliminary structure of the assessment model. The qualitative phase served as an interpretive expansion of the preliminary model. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 preschool educators and preschool sports teachers to explore how physical literacy is conceptualized, interpreted, and assessed in everyday pedagogical practice. The qualitative findings are preliminary at this stage, as data collection is ongoing and will expand to include educators and specialists from additional preschool education contexts. The interviews focused on educators’ explanations of children’s participation in movement activities, emotional engagement, learning processes, and the application of professional judgment in specific pedagogical situations. The interview data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2019), emphasizing identifying shared interpretive patterns. The qualitative findings were used to refine the assessment framework's meanings, pedagogical logic, and contextual sensitivity. Integration occurred during the interpretation stage, when quantitative results informed the model's structural components and qualitative insights supported refining the indicators, domains, and assessment principles. Through this sequential integration, the assessment model was developed as a pedagogically grounded, practice-based, and context-sensitive framework. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Quantitative findings suggest that although the assessment of physical literacy in preschool-aged children is widespread, it is uneven and significantly influenced by educators’ professional specialization, work experience, and institutional context. Educators most frequently assess motor skills, emotional engagement, participation in physical activities, and understanding related to movement use. However, the frequency, methods, and documentation practices of these assessments vary considerably across professional groups. Process-oriented approaches, particularly pedagogical observations embedded in play-based activities, are considered more suitable for evaluating emotional engagement and participation. Semi-structured interviews provided initial qualitative findings, and data collection will expand to additional preschool education contexts. Reflexive thematic analysis revealed interconnected themes that illustrate physical literacy through emotional safety, active engagement, respect for individual differences, meaningful movement learning, the role of fundamental movement skills within diverse experiences, the shaping influence of the learning environment, educators’ pedagogical actions, and the use of nonverbal indicators in assessment. An integrated analysis across phases revealed common structural features that transcend specific educational programs. Regardless of specialization, educators emphasized the functional use of movement, child participation, and emotional engagement as core indicators of physical literacy. The initial qualitative findings also suggest that preschool educators conceptualize physical literacy as a developmental process in which motor skills serve as entry points for understanding children's emotional, cognitive, and social development. Through a sequential mixed-methods design that integrates quantitative and initial qualitative findings, the study demonstrates the development of a practice-based, pedagogically grounded, and context-sensitive physical literacy assessment model. References Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806 Carl, J., Jaunig, J., Kurtzhals, M., Müllertz, A. L. O., Stage, A., Bentsen, P., & Elsborg, P. (2023). Synthesising physical literacy research for ‘blank spots’: A systematic review of reviews. Journal of Sports Sciences, 41(11), 1056-1072. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2023.2259209 Carl, J., Bryant, A., Edwards, L. C., Bartle, G., Birch, J. E., Christodoulides, E., Emeljanovas, A., Fröberg, A., Gandrieau, J., Gilić, B., Van Hilvoorde, I., Holler, P., Iconomescu, T. M., Jaunig, J., Laudańska–Krzemińska, I., Lundvall, S., De Martelaer, K., Martins, J., Miežienė, B., . . . Elsborg, P. (2023). Physical literacy in Europe: The current state of implementation in research, practice, and policy. Journal of Exercise Science and Fitness, 21(1), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesf.2022.12.003 Farley-Ripple, E., May, H., Karpyn, A., Tilley, K., & McDonough, K. (2018). Rethinking connections between research and practice in education: A conceptual framework. Educational Researcher, 47(4), 235–245. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18761042 Foulkes, J. D., Knowles, Z., Fairclough, S. J., Stratton, G., & Ridgers, N. D. (2020). Fundamental movement skills, physical literacy and physical activity: A systematic review. Journal of Sports Sciences, 38(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2019.1692525 Huang, Y. (2024). A critical narrative questioning the assessment of physical literacy: Current practices and future directions. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 6, 1353386. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1353386 Kretaine, A., & Vecenane, H. (2025). Characteristics of physical literacy in preschool children across educational contexts. Education Sciences, 15(7), 835. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15070835 Porter, J. E., Dabkowski, E., Prokopiv, V., Missen, K., Barbagallo, M., & James, M. (2022). An exploration into early childhood physical literacy programs: A systematic literature review. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 47(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/18369391221118698 Riley, K., & Proctor, L. (2022). The senses/sensing relationship in physical literacy: Generating a worldly re-enchantment for physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 27(9), 1043–1057. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2022.2071860 Westerbeek, H., & Eime, R. (2021). Physical activity and sport participation: A systematic review of frameworks and models. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 3, 608593. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.608593 Wilkie, B., Foulkes, J., Woods, C. T., Sweeting, A., Lewis, C., Davids, K., & Rudd, J. (2022). A games-based assessment in ecological dynamics for measuring physical literacy. Asian Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2(1), 50-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsep.2022.03.002 Whitehead, M. (2019). Physical literacy across the world. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429467033 18. Research in Sports Pedagogy
Paper Body–Spatial Perception in School Physical Education: A Qualitative Study with Primary Education Teachers Aimed at the Design of an Assessment Instrument University of Alicante, Spain Presenting Author:Body–spatial perception is a fundamental ability for effective and safe interaction with the environment, as it integrates proprioceptive, visual, and vestibular information to generate a functional representation of the body in space (Proske & Gandevia, 2012; Serino, 2019). This ability is closely related to motor control, spatial organization of action, and the adaptation of movement to environmental demands, particularly in educational and sport contexts (González-Grandón et al., 2021; Shumway-Cook & Woollacott, 2022). During school age, body–spatial perception plays a key role in motor learning, participation in physical activities, and the prevention of errors and risky situations (Gallahue & Ozmun, 2006; Adolph & Hoch, 2019). Despite its relevance, the assessment of body–spatial perception in educational contexts continues to present significant methodological limitations. In school practice, the evaluation of these abilities relies mainly on informal observation of students during motor tasks, games, or circuits, without the support of specific standardized instruments that allow for systematic, objective, and change-sensitive assessment (Shumway-Cook & Woollacott, 2022; Szabó et al., 2023). This situation hinders both early detection of difficulties and monitoring of progress following educational intervention. The aim of the present study was to analyse, from a qualitative perspective, how body–spatial perception is conceptualized, assessed, and addressed in the context of Physical Education in Primary Education, to identify key dimensions that may serve as a basis for the design of a future assessment instrument. The study is part of a doctoral dissertation funded by the Ministry and belongs to a broader research project that collected information from different professionals in the sport sector. However, this contribution focuses specifically on the analysis of data provided by 10 Primary Education teachers specialized in Physical Education, as this educational stage is particularly relevant for the development of perceptual–motor abilities. Semi-structured interviews were conducted using an ad hoc interview guide organized into four thematic blocks: (A) concept and relevance of body–spatial perception, (B) assessment and observation, (C) intervention and resources, and (D) barriers and proposals. This type of interview is especially suitable for exploring complex and context-dependent constructs, as it allows access to professional experience and the meanings attributed by participants (Braun & Clarke, 2006; McLaughlin & Bailey, 2022). The results show a high degree of conceptual coherence among teachers, who describe body–spatial perception as students’ ability to orient themselves, position their bodies, and adjust their movements in relation to space, objects, and others during motor action. Participants consistently highlight its importance for learning basic motor skills, safe participation in games and sports activities, and students’ motor autonomy, in line with current perspectives on motor development and situated learning (Adolph & Hoch, 2019; Wang & Wang, 2024). Regarding assessment, teachers report that body–spatial perception is mainly evaluated through direct observation during motor tasks, without the use of specific assessment tools. Although these strategies allow for a functional and contextualized appraisal, they present limitations in terms of objectivity, systematization, and monitoring of progress. Concerning intervention, teachers describe approaches based on motor games, spatial exploration tasks, and progressive activities, along with a general perception of insufficient specific resources and specialized training. Overall, the findings highlight the need to develop an assessment instrument for body–spatial perception adapted to Primary Physical Education and grounded in the practical reality of the school setting. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used A qualitative exploratory study was conducted using semi-structured interviews, with the aim of analysing body–spatial perception from the perspective of professionals in the educational–sport field. Qualitative methodology is particularly appropriate for examining complex phenomena that are insufficiently operationalized in applied contexts, such as body–spatial perception in Physical Education (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The study is part of a doctoral dissertation funded by the Ministry. Although the overall project included different professional profiles from the sport sector, the present study focuses specifically on a subgroup of Physical Education teachers in Primary Education, given the relevance of this stage for perceptual–motor development (Gallahue & Ozmun, 2006). PARTICIPANTS The sample consisted of 10 Primary Education teachers specialized in Physical Education, selected through purposive sampling. All participants were actively working as teachers and had direct experience teaching motor and bodily content in the school context. Prior to data collection, participants were informed about the aims of the study and provided informed consent. INSTRUMENT An ad hoc semi-structured interview was designed specifically for this study and organized into four thematic blocks: (A) concept and relevance of body–spatial perception; (B) assessment and observation; (C) intervention and resources; (D) barriers and proposals. Open-ended questions were used to allow in-depth exploration through probing questions and to encourage the emergence of concrete examples related to teaching practice in Physical Education, in line with recommendations for qualitative research in education (McLaughlin & Bailey, 2022). PROCEDURE Individual interviews were conducted between December 2025 and January 2026, either face-to-face or online depending on participants’ availability. Interview duration ranged from 20 minutes to 1 hour. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim for subsequent analysis. DATA ANALYSIS An inductive thematic analysis was conducted following the phases proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006). First, transcripts were read repeatedly to achieve familiarization with the data. Subsequently, relevant meaning units were identified, coded, and grouped into thematic categories. The coding process was reviewed iteratively to ensure internal coherence and fidelity to participants’ accounts. Final categories were aligned with the interview blocks and allowed identification of dimensions relevant to the design of a body–spatial perception assessment instrument. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The analysis of interviews with Primary Education Physical Education teachers highlights the central importance attributed to body–spatial perception as a core component of motor development and safe participation in school-based physical activities. Teachers share a functional understanding of the construct, closely linked to orientation, spatial organization, and movement coordination in relation to the environment, which consistently emerges from their pedagogical experience. Assessment of body–spatial perception in teaching practice is characterized by a strong reliance on direct observation during motor tasks, circuits, and games, without the support of specific standardized instruments. While these strategies allow for contextualized and practice-based evaluation, they present limitations in terms of objectivity, systematization, and the possibility of longitudinal monitoring of students’ progress. Participants repeatedly express the need for an assessment tool that is brief, easy to administer, sensitive to individual changes, and aligned with authentic motor situations typical of school Physical Education. This demand is accompanied by a perceived lack of specific resources and training opportunities aimed at improving systematic assessment of body–spatial perception. In addition, a clear interest emerges in exploring the potential of emerging technologies to support assessment and intervention, provided that their application is guided by well-defined pedagogical and functional criteria. Overall, the findings provide a solid empirical basis for the development of a body–spatial perception assessment test specifically oriented to Primary Physical Education, with the aim of promoting more systematic, contextualized, and practically useful evaluation practices. References Adolph, K. E., & Hoch, J. E. (2019). Motor development: Embodied, embedded, enculturated, and enabling. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 141–164. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Gallahue, D. L., & Ozmun, J. C. (2006). Understanding motor development (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill. González-Grandón, X., Falcón-Cortés, A., & Ramos-Fernández, G. (2021). Proprioception in action: A matter of ecological and social interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. McLaughlin, J., & Bailey, J. (2022). Students need more practice with spatial thinking in education: A systematic review. Studies in Science Education, 59, 147–204. Proske, U., & Gandevia, S. C. (2012). The proprioceptive senses: Their roles in signaling body shape, body position and movement, and muscle force. Physiological Reviews, 92(4), 1651–1697. Serino, A. (2019). Peripersonal space as a multisensory interface between the individual and the environment, defining the space of the self. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 99, 138–159. Shumway-Cook, A., & Woollacott, M. H. (2022). Motor control: Translating research into clinical practice (6th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Szabó, T., Babály, B., Pataiová, H., & Kárpáti, A. (2023). Development of spatial abilities of preadolescents: What works? Education Sciences. Wang, L., & Wang, L. (2024). Relationships between motor skills and academic achievement in school-aged children and adolescents: A systematic review. Children, 11(3), 336. 18. Research in Sports Pedagogy
Paper From Sedentary to Active Use of Digital Technologies: Physically Active Play and Digital Transformation in Early Childhood– A Systematic Review Anadolu University, Turkey (Türkiye) Presenting Author:In early childhood, movement transcends a mere expression of physical energy; it serves as a fundamental epistemic medium through which developmental learning is embodied and enacted. During this critical developmental period, children acquire foundational movement skills and establish health-related behaviors that have enduring implications across the lifespan. (Gallahue et al., 2012; Pate et al., 2011). For children in early childhood, a minimum 180 minutes of physical activity per day is recommended, of which at least 60 minutes should involve moderate-to-vigorous intensity activities (WHO, 2019). Despite these recommendations, many children are not sufficiently active due to environmental factors, increased sedentary screen time, and inactive indoor routines (Carson et al., 2017; Hu et al., 2021; Torres et al., 2021). With the increasing integration of digital technologies into educational environments, the ways in which physical activity is experienced are being reshaped. Play, as a fundamental cultural and social practice, both influences and is influenced by changing world. (Callois, 2001). Every play has a predetermined spatial boundary. Today, the relationship between physical space and digital space shows that children's play exists in digital spaces and demonstrates the transformation of play (Torres, 2021). Digital games, movement-based dance videos, interactive screens, or sensor-based applications can also influence physically active play in this context. In early childhood education, the digital transformation significantly reshapes developmental trajectories by blending physical and digital experiences. While the proliferation of digital tools and gamified applications has expanded pedagogical discourse, a comprehensive integration of technology within game-based learning frameworks remains a global challenge (Flint and Adams, 2024). Despite their own pervasive engagement with digital technologies, adults frequently perceive these tools as inherently detrimental to children. This paradox necessitates a critical examination of digital play, investigating the ontological roots of these concerns beyond mere surface-level anxieties. Existing research has predominantly focused on quantifiable risks such as screen exposure, sedentary behaviors, and content safety, often reflecting parental apprehensions and policy-driven constraints. However, to bridge the gap between 'knowing' and 'acting,' scholarly inquiry must shift toward the qualitative dimensions of the digital experience. This involves examining how children get lost in the joy of digital play, how they use these virtual spaces to create and work together, and how the interaction between their physical activity and digital space influences their experiences (Sakr, 2020). The questions that should be asked about digital games should be about how children are affected by digital game flow, how they demonstrate skills in the digital game environment, and how the game is affected by the physically active play and digital play. In this context, the multiliteracies approach emphasizes that children construct learning not only cognitively but also through physical, spatial, and digital interactions (Kumpulainen and Sefton-Green, 2019). Integrating digital tools into early childhood learning contexts that emphasize play, movement, and physical participation supports the development of children’s multiliteracies and embodiment. Although physical literacy and digital literacy are often conceptualized as distinct domains, they increasingly intersect within early childhood learning environments. Contemporary understandings of digital literacy in early childhood extend beyond passive and sedentary screen-based activities, encompassing embodied, interactive, and movement-oriented digital experiences. (Marsh et al., 2020; Juliantine, 2022). Therefore, this systematic review aims to synthesize existing research that examines how digital technologies are integrated into physically active play in early childhood education. In line with this aim, the review is guided by the following research questions: 1-How physically active play is integrated with digital technologies in early childhood? 2-What are the effects of digitally supported physically active play applications on children? 3-How do children navigate and experience the integration of physically active play and digital technologies within early childhood settings? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study aims to examine the effects of physically active play and digital technologies on children's development. In response to ongoing debates about children's sedentary behaviors and the role of digital technologies in early childhood, this systematic review aims to examine studies that conceptualize digital technologies not merely as sources of passive screen time, but as pedagogical tools embedded within play- and movement-based learning contexts. This review was conducted to synthesize research examining the relationship between physically active play and digital technologies in early childhood education. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines governed the methodological framework and reporting standards of this study (Page et al., 2021). The literature search was conducted using various databases, including Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, ERIC, and Elsevier. Studies were included in the review if they met the following criteria: • Published between 2015 and 2026; • Published in peer-reviewed academic journals; • Conducted with children aged between 3 and 8 years; • Focused on the integration of digital technologies within physically active play contexts; • Published in English or Turkish. The keywords used in the search of the studies conducted were: “Early Childhood”, “Physical Literacy”, “Physical Play”, “Movement-Based Play”, “Digital Technologies”, “Digital Space”, “Digital Literacy”, and “Exergame.” A total of 94 studies were identified through the database search, after which studies were screened and excluded in accordance with the predetermined eligibility criteria. The titles, abstracts, and full texts were independently checked for reliability by the first and second authors in terms of eligibility. In this context, the titles and abstracts of the studies found in the literature search were examined in the first stage, and a preliminary screening was conducted in line with the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the second stage, the full texts of studies deemed eligible following the preliminary screening were assessed in detail. At this stage, duplicate publications and studies found to be inconsistent with the objectives and criteria of the research were excluded from the systematic review. As a result of all these evaluations, 10 studies on the digital transformation of physically active play in early childhood were included in the review. The included quantitative studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) Scale, which is widely used for intervention-based research (Maher et al., 2003). Qualitative studies were assessed using the CASP Qualitative Studies Checklist. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The review aims to bridge the gap between 'knowing' (concerns about digitalization) and 'acting' (pedagogical practices about digitalization) by synthesizing how digital transformation affects physically active play. The results of the studies indicate that digital floors, exergame applications, VR sports tools, and digitally equipped spaces are new arrangements used for children's physically active play during the early childhood. It should be noted that, within technology-supported movement-based teaching processes, digital technologies are conceptualized as functional, supportive, and facilitative tools rather than as indispensable or inherently purposeful elements of instruction. In early childhood education classrooms, YouTube videos are frequently used for movement because they are easily accessible, but they carry the risk of not being aligned with educational goals, purposeful learning, and developmentally appropriate practices. Furthermore, structured and semi-structured active games are recognized as offering developmental benefits comparable to those of goal-oriented physical education in supporting the development of fundamental movement skills during early childhood. Preliminary findings suggest that both digital and active games, such as exergames, are inherently compatible with the requirements of the technological age and the fundamental physical activity needs of children. However, resources should be selected in line with pedagogical goals. Digital games that recreate and redesign spaces, materials, and identities will also encourage children to play active games. Children should learn not only to use technology but also to establish appropriate relationships with technology. Digital technologies should be conceptualized as complementary to movement rather than as its adversary, with emphasis placed on screen-based content that promotes physical activity instead of prolonged sedentary screen use. The findings delineate the specific conditions, constraints, and pedagogical frameworks required for digital technologies to effectively facilitate physically active play. Consequently, this study will establish a robust foundation for formulating evidence-based, context-sensitive recommendations tailored for educators, policymakers, and the broader research community. References Arnott, L. (2020). An ecological exploration of young children’s digital play: framing children’s social experiences with technologies in early childhood. In Digital Play and Technologies in the Early Years (pp. 49-66). Routledge. Caillois, R. (2001). Man, Play and Games. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Cairney, J., Dudley, D., Kwan, M., Bulten, R., & Kriellaars, D. (2019). Physical Literacy, Physical Activity and Health: Toward an Evidence-Informed Conceptual Model. Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 49(3), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-019-01063-3 Carson, V., Lee, E. Y., Hewitt, L., Jennings, C., Hunter, S., Kuzik, N., Stearns, J. A., Unrau, S. P., Poitras, V. J., Gray, C., Adamo, K. B., Janssen, I., Okely, A. D., Spence, J. C., Timmons, B. W., Sampson, M., & Tremblay, M. S. (2017). Systematic review of the relationships between physical activity and health indicators in the early years (0-4 years). BMC public health, 17(5), 854. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4860-0 Edwards, S. (2013). Digital play in the early years: A contextual response to the problem of integrating technologies and play-based pedagogies in the early childhood curriculum. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal. 21(2), pp. 199 - 212. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2013.789190 Flint, T., K. & Adams, M., S. (2024). Of Landles and Laptops: Exploring Preschool Children’s Digital Play. Early Childhood Education Journal, 52(6). Pp. 1-10 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-023-01485-9 Gallahue, D. L., Ozmun, J. C., & Goodway, J. D. (2012). Understanding motor development: Infants, children, adolescents, adults (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. Hu, D., Zhou, S., Crowley-McHattan, Z. J., & Liu, Z. (2021). Factors That Influence Participation in Physical Activity in School-Aged Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review from the Social Ecological Model Perspective. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(6), 3147. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063147 Kumpulainen, K., & Sefton-Green, J. (Eds.). (2019). Multiliteracies and Early Years Innovation: Perspectives from Finland and Beyond (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429432668 Marsh, J. (Ed.). (2005). Popular culture, new media and digital literacy in early childhood. Psychology Press. Pate, R. R., O’Neill, J. R., & McIver, K. L. (2011). Physical Activity and Health: Does Physical Education Matter? Quest, 63(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2011.10483660 Sakr, M. (2020). Digital play in early childhood: What's the problem? Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526481399 Torres, P.E., Ulrich, P.I.N., Cucuiat, V., Cukurova, M., Fercovic De la Presa, M., Luckin, R., Carr, A., Dylan, T., Durrant, A.C., Lawson, S. & Vines, J. (2021), 'A systematic review of physical–digital play technology and developmentally relevant child behaviour', International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 30, 100323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100323 | ||