KnE Social Sciences

Published date: Apr 18 2025

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: The 7th International Conference on Education and Social Science Research (ICESRE)

Pages: 163 - 174

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v10i9.18483

Nur Sita Utaminursitautami@student.uns.ac.idIlmu Keolahragaan, Universitas Sebelas Maret, 57126

Joko NurkamtoPendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Universitas Sebelas Maret, 57126

Mohammad Furqon HidayatullahPendidikan Kepelatihan dan Olahraga, Universitas Sebelas Maret, 57126

Hari YuliartoPendidikan Jasmani Sekolah Dasar, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, 55281

This study aimed to measure the content validity of physical literacy assessment instruments on manipulative motion games. A quantitative approach was used to describe the results of content validity from five experts. Data were analyzed using Aiken’s V index. The physical literacy instrument was developed based on the domains and elements of physical literacy from the Australian Physical Literacy Framework. The instrument used four domains—physical, psychological, social, and cognitive, with each domain focusing on one element. The physical domain focused on the manipulative movement element. The psychological domain focused on self-confidence. The social domain concentrated on the relationship element. The cognitive domain focused on understanding rules. According to the Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy, each element has three ability levels: pre-structural, unistructural, and multi-structural. The physical literacy assessment instrument assessed five manipulative movement games. Each game emphasizes one skill: throwing, catching, dribbling, kicking, and striking. Each manipulative motion game assessment consists of 12 items. Content validation using Aiken’s V method involved five raters. Evaluation of the relevance of each instrument item using a scale of one to four, corresponding to irrelevant and very relevant respectively. The results of content validation with the Aiken’s V index on the physical literacy assessment instrument are as follows: i. 12 valid items on throwing games, ii. 9 valid items and three invalid items on catching games, iii. 12 valid items on dribbling games, iv. 12 valid items on kicking games, and v. 12 valid items on striking games. The minimum value of Aiken’s V index that meets validity at the 5% significance level is ≥0.87. Invalid items need to be revised to differentiate ability levels.

Keywords: content validity, physical literacy, Aiken index

[1] Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi Republik Indonesia. Keputusan Kepala Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan Nomor 032/H/KR/2024tentangCapaianPembelajaran.2024:1–2042.

[2] International Physical Literacy Association. Definition of physical literacy [Internet]. Physical Literacy; 2017 [cited 2024 June 10]. Available from: https://www.physical literacy.org.uk/

[3] Gallahue DL, Ozmun JC, Goodway JD. Understanding motor development: infants, children, adolescents, adults. 8th ed. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2021.

[4] Australia S. Version 2. The Canberra: Australian Sport Physical Asutralia; Literacy 2019., Framework. Available from https://www.sportaus.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_fle/0019/710173/35455_Physical Literacy-Framework_access.pdf

[5] Dudley DA. A conceptual model of observed physical literacy. Phys Educator. 2015;72(5):237–41.

[6] Barnett LM, Dudley DA, Telford RD, Lubans DR, Bryant AS, Roberts WM, et al. Guidelines for the selection of physical literacy measures in physical education in Australia. J Teach Phys Educ. 2019;38(2):119–25.

[7] Hook P, Richards N. SOLO taxonomy in physical education: learning through movement contexts. Book2. Invercargill. Essential Resources Educational Publishers Limited; 2013.

[8] Barnett LM, Jerebine A, Keegan R, Watson-Mackie K, Arundell L, Ridgers ND, et al. Validity, reliability, and feasibility of physical literacy assessments designed for school children: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2023;53(10):1905–29.

[9] Aiken LR. Content validity and reliability of single items or questionnaires. Educ Psychol Meas. 1980;40(4):955–9.

[10] Aiken LR. Three coefficients for analyzing the reliability and validity of ratings. Educ Psychol Meas. 1985;45(1):131–42.

[11] Aiken L. Psychological testing and assessment. 6th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 1985.

[12] Whitehead M. The concept of physical literacy. European Journal of Physical Education. 2001;6(2):127–38.

[13] Penfield RD, Giacobbi PR Jr. Applying a score confidence interval to Aiken’s item content-relevance index. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci. 2004;8(4):213–25.

[14] Davis LL. Instrument review: getting the most from a panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res. 1992;5(4):194–7.