Analysis of gain scores, also called change scores or difference scores, was used to test for the effect of treatment; unpaired Student’s t-tests were used to compare the post- and pre-test difference in scores between the control and intervention groups (Allison, 1990; Ragosa, 1995; Oakes and Feldman, 2001). Since baseline differences between groups existed at pre-test, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was applied as an alternative to analyze the scores. We used the post-test gross motor and pre-literacy scores as the dependent variable, the control/intervention group as independent variable and the pre-test score as covariate. ANCOVA focuses on differences between the groups at post-test while holding constant pre-test differences. In all the analyses, the level of significance was set at p < 0.05. Statistics were performed by using STATA/MP 12.1.
From the baseline, CG and you will IG failed to tell you any high distinctions (p > 0.05) regarding sex, chronological many years, lbs, peak, Bmi and you may terrible motor character, since shown into the Desk 2.
After the experimental period, CG did not exhibit any significant difference in locomotor, object-control skills or QGMD scores. In contrast, the intervention group showed significant differences (p < 0.001) from baseline to post-test in gross motor skills. As shown in Figures 2, 3, locomotor, object-control skills and QGMD increased by 24.4%, 9.7%, and 10.4%, respectively, in IG. Moreover, the mean difference of QGMD between pre- and post-intervention in IG was significantly higher than that in CG (11.3 vs. 3.2, p = 0.0082). These results confirmed preliminary results previously reported (Battaglia et al., 2018). The same result occurred for the locomotor skills, showing a significant mean difference of 2.5 in IG compared to the 0.7 in CG (p = 0.0050). The analysis of covariance confirmed the positive effect of the intervention in the improvement of children's gross motor skills, starting even from different pre-test scores.
Figure 2. Score of gross motor development quotient in control and intervention group. ??? p < 0.01, compared with pre-test.
Figure 3. Score of locomotor and object control skills after 16 weeks of physical education program. ??? p < 0.01, compared with pre-test.
Desk step three screens that particular bits of locomotor and target manage experience did not upsurge in the fresh new manage group following the experimental months, whenever you are an extremely high increase is found in every item in IG responding so you can PEP.
The pre-literacy skills significantly increased from inside the IG adopting the input period, during CG only the level of problems towards the naming out of objects somewhat decreased (see Dining table 4). not, the latest analyses from get score and you can ANCOVA did not inform you one tall effect regarding input between CG and you can IG.
This study investigated the effects of a specific PEP on the outcomes of fundamental motor and pre-literacy skills concerning visual analysis and spatial orientation abilities in a sample of preschool children from Palermo. Gross motor development was expressed as a composite score of a set of fundamental motor skills across the two gross motor skill domains. We observed a positive effect of PEP on gross motor development in the studied population. In particular, IG showed a significant increase in both locomotor (p < 0. These findings are consistent with those of previous studies that investigated the effect of PE on preschoolers' gross motor skills (Derri et al. For instance, Derri et al. Analysis of the covariance and gain scores confirmed the positive effect of our intervention in the rise of children's gross motor skills, even starting from different pre-test scores.
The usage of obtain scores otherwise ANCOVA might have been mainly debated previously throughout the data off pre-test/post-try designs. As the ANCOVA is suitable just for randomized managed samples and you will normally bias causes non-similar teams or observational habits, the analysis of acquire scores provides for compatible, unbiased evaluation for some lookup patterns (Ragosa, 1995). About lack of randomization, whenever standard differences when considering organizations are present, change-score patterns yield less biased estimates (Allison, 1990). Considering QGMD ratings suggested because of the manual’s directions, we unearthed that IG increased brand new terrible engine show regarding average so you’re able to over mediocre in contrast to CG, and that did not show people related alter. Simultaneously, the firm of a single session in many sandwich-phase (social-warm up, main, cool-down-opinions phase) is actually a suitable answer to boost kid’s involvement.