Developing and validating a school-based screening tool of Fundamental Movement Skills (FUNMOVES) using Rasch analysis.

BACKGROUND: A large proportion of children are not able to perform age-appropriate fundamental movement skills (FMS). Thus, it is important to assess FMS so that children needing additional support can be identified in a timely fashion. There is great potential for universal screening of FMS in schools, but research has established that current assessment tools are not fit for purpose. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate the psychometric properties of a FMS assessment tool designed specifically to meet the demands of universal screening in schools. METHODS: A working group consisting of academics from developmental psychology, public health and behavioural epidemiology developed an assessment tool (FUNMOVES) based on theory and prior evidence. Over three studies, 814 children aged 4 to 11 years were assessed in school using FUNMOVES. Rasch analysis was used to evaluate structural validity and modifications were then made to FUNMOVES activities after each study based on Rasch results and implementation fidelity. RESULTS: The initial Rasch analysis found numerous psychometric problems including multidimensionality, disordered thresholds, local dependency, and misfitting items. Study 2 showed a unidimensional measure, with acceptable internal consistency and no local dependency, but that did not fit the Rasch model. Performance on a jumping task was misfitting, and there were issues with disordered thresholds (for jumping, hopping and balance tasks). Study 3 revealed a unidimensional assessment tool with good fit to the Rasch model, and no further issues, once jumping and hopping scoring were modified. IMPLICATIONS: The finalised version of FUNMOVES (after three iterations) meets standards for accurate measurement, is free and able to assess a whole class in under an hour using resources available in schools. Thus FUNMOVES has the potential to allow schools to efficiently screen FMS to ensure that targeted support can be provided and disability barriers removed.

The validity and reliability of observational assessment tools available to measure fundamental movement skills in school-age children: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Fundamental Movement Skills (FMS) play a critical role in ontogenesis. Many children have insufficient FMS, highlighting the need for universal screening in schools. There are many observational FMS assessment tools, but their psychometric properties are not readily accessible. A systematic review was therefore undertaken to compile evidence of the validity and reliability of observational FMS assessments, to evaluate their suitability for screening. METHODS: A pre-search of 'fundamental movement skills' OR 'fundamental motor skills' in seven online databases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, EBSCO SPORTDiscus, Ovid PsycINFO and Web of Science) identified 24 assessment tools for school-aged children that: (i) assess FMS; (ii) measure actual motor competence and (iii) evaluate performance on a standard battery of tasks. Studies were subsequently identified that: (a) used these tools; (b) quantified validity or reliability and (c) sampled school-aged children. Study quality was assessed using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklists. RESULTS: Ninety studies were included following the screening of 1863 articles. Twenty-one assessment tools had limited or no evidence to support their psychometric properties. The Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD, n = 34) and the Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC, n = 37) were the most researched tools. Studies consistently reported good evidence for validity, reliability for the TGMD, whilst only 64% of studies reported similarly promising results for the MABC. Twelve studies found good evidence for the reliability and validity of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency but poor study quality appeared to inflate results. Considering all assessment tools, those with promising psychometric properties often measured limited aspects of validity/reliability, and/or had limited feasibility for large scale deployment in a school-setting. CONCLUSION: There is insufficient evidence to justify the use of any observational FMS assessment tools for universal screening in schools, in their current form.