Fitness testing in secondary school physical education: a mixed methods approach to exploring teachers’ practices and students’ experiences

Promoting and educating the young about healthy active lifestyles is as much a priority now as it has ever been (WHO, 2018; Youth Sport Trust, 2024) and schools, and physical education (PE) specifically, are increasingly recognised as having a key role to play in this regard (Cale, 2023). Worldwide, fitness testing is one of the most commonly implemented practices to teach in, through and about health, in PE (Alfrey & Gard, 2014; Hooper 2018; Keating & Silverman, 2004b; O’Keeffe, MacDonncha et al., 2020). Despite its prevalence, the practice has and continues to be widely debated across the globe, with some scholars advocating it contributes to the promotion of healthy active lifestyles (Cohen et al., 2015; Fredrick III & Silverman, 2020; Silverman et al., 2008) and others purporting it to be the antithesis of this (Naughton et al., 2006; Rowland, 1995). Although there have been calls to explore PE teachers’ and students’ experiences of fitness testing (e.g., Fox cited in Cale et al., 2007; Alfrey & Gard, 2019), there is still a dearth of literature in this area, particularly in an English context. Thus, this research aimed to address this gap, by notably focusing on the pedagogical nature and educational worth of fitness testing as a health and physical activity promoting practice. In appreciating the complexities of conducting school-based research and the benefits of drawing on different research methods to gain novel insights, a mixed methods pragmatist approach, rooted in classical pragmatism, was the chosen framework for this research (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Morgan, 2020). In turn a mixed methods design was adopted, which involved three studies.

Study 1 involved an online survey, including closed and open questions, which was distributed to PE departments in secondary schools across the UK. The research questions underpinning the survey were: (i) is fitness testing still a common practice in secondary school PE?, and if so, (ii) why do PE departments include fitness testing in the PE curriculum?, and (iii) how do departments implement fitness testing? Responses from 260 schools showed that fitness testing remains a common health-related PE practice. Despite its prevalence, the majority of PE teachers expressed concerns and raised hesitancies over the potential negative psychological impact of fitness testing for some young people. Regarding teachers’ practices, these were found to be variable, sometimes questionable, and there was reportedly an absence of learning intentions underpinning testing. Further, there was a mismatch between teachers’ fitness testing practices and practical recommendations made by scholars and professional associations. This was perhaps to be expected given that less than half of PE teachers felt their initial teacher education had adequately prepared them to teach fitness testing, plus over two-thirds were uncertain or were unaware of fitness testing recommendations.

Study 2 explored secondary students’ experiences of fitness testing, particuarly aiming to identify students’ motivational profiles when engaging in fitness testing lessons and their cognitive, affective and behavioural responses associated with these profiles. Over 300 (n=342) students from seven secondary schools in England took part in a typical fitness testing lesson taught by their PE teacher. In this lesson, students completed measures of emotion pre, during and post the lesson, in addition to measures of perceived success after participating in a running test, and of their motivation towards fitness testing, at the end of the lesson. Running test scores were also recorded. Latent profile analysis (LPA) revealed three qualitatively distinct student motivational profiles that aligned with self-determination theory (SDT) (Ryan & Deci, 2017): ‘Low Quality Motivational Profile’ (LQMP), ‘High Quality Motivational Profile’ (HQMP) and ‘Mixed Quality Motivational Profile’ (MQMP). Further statistical analysis revealed that students in the HQMP reported significantly higher enjoyment responses compared to students in the LQMP. No other difference in emotional responses were found.

Study 3 (Chapter 6) aimed to build on the findings from Study 2, by using a Deweyan lens to explore students’ fitness testing experiences within PE. Twenty students from two secondary schools in England participated in this study. Students took part in focus groups underpinned by a participatory approach and completed two participatory creative tasks. These tasks related to students’ feelings and learning in fitness testing lessons. Drawing on Dewey’s notion of education-as-growth, and particularly his concepts of continuity and interaction (1916), reflexive thematic analysis was employed to make sense of the findings (Braun & Clarke, 2019). The findings indicated that many students’ experiences of fitness testing lacked meaning and involved little learning that extending beyond the lesson, thereby suggesting their educative growth through testing was limited.

Overall, when considering the findings across all three studies, it can be concluded that fitness testing remains a common practice in PE, but a number of issues with the practice remain. These link to teachers’ fitness testing practices and in turn, students’ experiences. In aiming to explain the paradox between the continued prevalence of fitness testing in secondary school PE, but persistent issues and concerns surrounding the practice, a model (the ‘fitness testing conundrum’) is put forward. In concluding this thesis, a number of recommendations are offered to “break” the cycle. This includes calling for the PE profession to critically reflect on whether and how fitness testing can be implemented in pedagogically sound ways to effectively educate and promote healthy active lifestyles among young people today.