THE ECOLOGY OF MOTOR DEVELOPMENT IN COASTAL SCHOOL CHILDREN OF BRAZIL NORTHEAST

Autores

  • Francisco Salviano Sales Nobre Laboratório de Crescimento e Desenvolvimento Motor Humano - LACREDEM. Grupo de Estudos em Desenvolvimento Motor & Saúde da Criança e do Adolescente. Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia do Ceará – Campus Juazeiro do Norte, Ceará
  • Mônia Tainá Cambruzzi Coutinho Study Group on Motor Evaluation and Intervention School of Physical Education / Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul.
  • Nadia Cristina Valentini Study Group on Motor Evaluation and Intervention School of Physical Education / Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.88910

Palavras-chave:

child development, psychomotor performance, motor skills, motor delays, bioecological model.

Resumo

Background: The prevalence of motor delays (MD) in schoolchildren is an intercultural phenomenon which is particularly present among socio-economically disadvantaged children. Objective: to describe and explain the proximal processes for the development of fundamental motor skills (FMS) in schoolchildren from an elementary school (ES) in a coastal city in the Northeast of Brazil. the objective of this study was to describe and explain the proximal processes for the development of fundamental motor skills (FMS) in schoolchildren from an elementary school (ES) in a coastal city in the Northeast of Brazil. Methods: This was a quali-quantitative study. The quantitative aspect was characterized by the use of the Test of Gross Motor Development Edition 2 to evaluate the fundamental motor skills of 104 children from 7 to 10 years old, 56 boys (8.2±1.0 years) and 48 girls (8.3 ± 0.9 years). Regarding the qualitative aspect, the researcher ecologically placed himself in the context and used non-systematic and non-participant observations and interviews with 7 parents, representing the parents-board of the school, 7 Physical Education teachers and 11 classroom teachers from different schools. Data analysis: the qualitative data were organized using the content analysis synthesis. The quantitative data were treated using descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, distribution and frequencies) and inferential statistics (Student t-test). Results: The results revealed that 95.1% of children present MD in locomotor skills and 81.7% in object control skills; girls showed poorer performance compared to boys (p < 0.001). Considering the Bioecological model the MD can be explained by the absence of physical infrastructures and material resources, lack of opportunities and poor teacher training. However, the main explanation was the absence of a pedagogical program to foster MP in schools and youth sports programs. Yet, the Bioecological model allowed us to establish that the MP interferes the way that children interact with the context. Conclusions: It can be inferred that part of the solution to the problem lies in the coordination of exosystem actions (Municipal Department of Education) and in changes to the macrosystem (educational legislation) which guarantee the microsystems (schools and social sports projects) the means to promote MP in children.

Referências

Booth, ML. et. al. Mastery of fundamental motor skills among New South Wales School students: prevalence and sociodemographic distribution. Aust J Sci Med Sport. 1999; 2 (2): 93-105.

Brauner, LM.; Valentini, NC. Análise do desempenho motor de crianças participantes de um programa de atividades físicas. R. da Educação Física UEM. 2009; 20 (2): 205 – 216. http://dx.doi.org/10.4025/reveducfis v20 n2 p 205-216.

Spessato, BC.; Gabbard, C.; Valentini, NC.; Rudsill, M. Gender differences in Brazilian children’s fundamental movement skill performance. early child development and care. 2012; 7 (14): 1 – 8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/

2012.689761.

Goodway, JD.; Robinson, LE.; Crowe, H. Gender differences in fundamental motor skill development in disadvantaged preschoolers from two geographical regions. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2010; 81 (1): 7 – 24.

Bronfenbrenner, U.; Morris, PA. The bioecological model of human development. Handbook of child psychology. Department of Human Development, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA, 2007. 793 – 828. http://edfa 2402

resources.yolasite.com/resources/BronfenbrennerModelofDevelopment.pdf. (acesso em 12/07/2012).

Bronfenbrenner, U. Ecological systems theory. (In): Bronfenbrenner, U. Making human being human: bioecological perspectives on human development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2005. 106–73.

Flick, U. Introdução à pesquisa qualitativa. 3ª ed. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2009, p. 203 - 18.

Cecconello, AM.; Koller, SH. Inserção ecológica na comunidade: uma proposta metodológica para o estudo de famílias em situação de risco. Psicol. Reflex. e Crit. 2003; 16 (3): 515 – 524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722003000300010

Ulrich, DA. TGMD 2 – Test of gross motor development examiner’s manual . 2 ed. Austin, Texas: Pro-ed, 2000. 04–60.

Valentini, NC. Validity and reliability of the TGMD –2 for Brazilian children. J. Mot Behav. 2012; 44 (4): 275–80.

IPECE. Instituto de Pesquisa e Estratégia Econômica do Ceará. Perfil Básico Municipal. Disponível em http://www.ipece.ce.gov.br/publicacoes/perfil_basico/pbm-2011/. Acesso em 07 de Junho de 2012.

Lefevre, F.; Lefevre, AMC. O discurso do sujeito coletivo: um novo enfoque em pesquisa qualitativa (desdobramentos). 2ª ed. Caxias do Sul: Educs, 2005, p. 13-57.

Barnett, LM.; Van Beurden, E.; Morgan, PJ.; Brooks, LO.; Beard, JR. Childhood motor skill proficiency as a predictor of adolescent physical activity. J. Adolesc Health. 2009; 44 (3):252–59.

Gaspari, TC.; Souza Junior, O.; Maciel, V.; Impolcetto, F.; Venancio, L.; Rosário, LF. et. al. A realidade dos professores de educação física na escola: suas dificuldades e sugestões. R. Min. Educ. Fís. 2006; 14 (1):109–37. http:/

/www.revistamineiradeefi.ufv.br/artigos/arquivos/7828138ea2673071 ec9aa11cf361c7ed.pdf . (acesso 09/07/2012).

Tokuyochi, JH., Bigotti, S.; Antunes, FH.; Cerencio, M.; Dantas, LEPBT.; Leão Marcos, H.; Tani, G. Retrato dos professores de Educação Física das escolas estaduais do estado de São Paulo. Motriz. Rev. Educ. Fisc. 2009; 14(4):

-28.

Tudge, J.; Doucet, F.; Odero, D. Desenvolvimento infantil em contexto cultural: o impacto do engajamento de pré-escolares em atividades do cotidiano familiar. Interfaces Rev. de Psic. 2009; 2 (1): 23- 33.

Luz, GM. da; Raymundo, LS.; Kuhnen. Uso dos espaços urbanos pelas crianças: uma revisão. Psicol. teor. prat. 2010; 12 (3): 172 – 84. http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/pdf/ptp/v12n3/v12n3a14.pdf. (acesso em 06/07/2012).

Krebs, R. J.; Carniel, J. D.; Machado, Z. Contexto de desenvolvimento e a percepção espacial de crianças. Movimento. 2011; 17 (1):195–212. http://www.seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/Movimento/article/view/15483/12949. (acesso em 06/07/2012).

Souza, E. R. de.; Lima, M. L. C. de. Panorama da violência no Brasil e suas capitais. Ciênc. saúde coletiva. 2006; 11 (supl): 1211–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232006000500011.

Brasil. LDB – Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional: lei nº 9.394, de 20 de dezembro de 1996. 5ª ed. Brasília: Câmara dos Deputados, Coordenação Edições Câmara, 2010. P. 23. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9394.htm. (acesso em 9/07/2012).

Ceará. Conselho de Educação do Ceará. Resolução 412/2006. Disponível em http://www.cee.ce.gov.br/phocadownload/

resolucoes/RES-0412-2006.pdf. p.1 – 3 (acesso em 12/07/2012).

Freitas, L. B. L.; Shelton, T. L.; Tudge, J. R. H. Conceptions of US and Brazilian early childhood care and education: A historical and comparative analysis. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 2008; 33 (2): 161–170.

Silva, E. V. M.; Venâncio, L. Aspectos legais da Educação Física e integração à proposta pedagógica da escola. (In): Darido, S. C.; Rangel, I C. A. (Org.). Educação Física na Escola: implicações para a prática pedagógica. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan, 2008, p.50–63.

Palma, M. S.; Pereira, B.; Valentini, N. C. Jogo com orientação: uma proposta metodológica para a educação física pré-escolar. R da Educação Física/UEM. 2009; 20 (4): 529-541. http://dx.doi.org/10.4025/reveducfis v20 n4 p

-541.

Cordazzo, S. T. D.; Vieira, M. L.; Almeida, A. M. T. Brincadeiras de crianças brasileiras e portuguesas no contexto escolar. Journal of Human Growth and Development. 2012; 22 (1): 1–13. http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/pdf/rbcdh/v22n1/pt_09.pdf. (acesso em 16/03/2014).

Miyabayashi, L. A.; Pimentel, G. G. de A. Interações sociais e proficiência motora em escoares do ensino fundamental. Rev. Bras. Educ. Fís. Esporte. 2011; 25(4): 649–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1807-55092011000400009.

Magalhães, J. S.; Kobal, M. C.; Godoy, R. P. de. Educação Física na Educação Infantil: uma parceria necessária. Revista Mackenzie de Educação Física e Esportes. 2007; 6(3):43–52. http://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/remef/article/viewFile/1223/936. (acesso em 06/07/2012)

Molina Neto, V. Crenças do professorado de educação física das escolas públicas de Porto Alegre. Movimento. 2003; 9 (1):145–69. http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/handle/10183/86384/000382577.pdf?sequence=1. (acesso em 09/07/2012).

Downloads

Publicado

2014-12-16

Edição

v. 24 n. 3 (2014)

Seção

Pesquisa Original

Licença

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL  PUBLISHERS

 

Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:

 

Publishers should:

 

  • Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
  • Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
  • Protect intellectual property and copyright
  • Foster editorial independence

 

Publishers should work with journal editors to:

 

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:

–         Editorial  independence

–         Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

–         Authorship

–         Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

–         Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

–         Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
  • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
  • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record
  • Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
  • Publish content on a timely basis