CC BY
95-17 YEAR-OLDS' PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT VERSUS PHYSICAL FITNESS PROGRESS TESTS AND ANALYSIS
UDC 796(075.8)
Associate Professor E.A. Koipysheva1 Dr. Med.,Professor V.Y. Lebedinskiy1,2
1National Research Irkutsk State Technical University, Irkutsk 2Irkutsk State University, Irkutsk
Corresponding author:
Annotation
For preschoolers, school and university students, the optimal level of motor activity is a physiological need and an important component of their healthy lifestyle. In this view, we conducted a comparative analysis of the levels of their physical development and physical fitness at the early stages of ontogenesis (n=10,618). The monitoring technologies made it possible to detect a certain correlation of changes in the respondents' rates.
When comparing the growth rates of physical development and physical fitness of the preschoolers, the maximum increase in terms of most indicators was observed at the age of 5-6 and this trend was typical of the children of both sexes. The schoolchildren were characterized by the alternating periods of growth of physical development and physical fitness rates. The physical development indicators in the girls increased rapidly at the age of 12-13; moreover, in their development they significantly outpace boys (13-15 years). Among boys, the maximum increase in the physical fitness rates (8-11 years) takes a longer period of time, especially after 14 years. In girls, the most intensive growth is observed at the age of 9-11.
The female students were not found to have any significant alternations in the growth of these parameters, since, basically, the process of their physical development, running in parallel with their physical fitness training, comes to an end, however, it depends on the peculiarities of organization of physical education classes for students.
Keywords:physical development, physicalfitness, physical education service, physical health, preschoolers, schoolchildren, university students, tests, healthy lifestyle.
Background. Physical education service in the national education system is designed to protect and improve the students' health,cultivate healthy lifestyles and lay a basis for the physical progress agendas for the whole lifetime. The individual progress facilitation and health improvement efforts,however,largely depend on the theoretical systemic provisions for the individual physical activity [1,3,5,6,8,1113], with the physical education service being reasonably customized to age,morphology and functionality - collectively referred as the individual progress heterochronism i.e. irregularity with the progress acceleration,deceleration and stabilization periods [2,4,9,10].
Objective of the study was to analyze the physical development versus physical fitness progress profiles of the 5-17 year-old residents of Irkutsk city in East Siberia.
Methods and structure of the study. We sampled for the study 10,618 Irkutsk residents (including 1,580 preschoolers , 3,211 schoolchildren and 5,827 female university students) and tested the sample as provided by the valid national test/ monitoring procedures and practical recommendations [1, 4 , 9 ,10]. The tests produced the anthropometric data (body length , body mass,
chest size), physiological test rates (vital capacity , carpal dynamometry , Martine-Kushelevsky test), physical health test rates and physical fitness test rates. The preschoolers' physical fitness was tested by sit and reach, 30m sprint , standing long jump , 30s sit-up tests; and the schoolchildren/ university students' physical fitness was tested by the shuttle sprint , bent-arms hang , pull-ups, sit and reach , 30s sit-ups , 1000m race , 20/30m sprint and standing long jump tests , plus bench press and pushups tests. The test data were processed by the variation statistics method to produce the absolute values plus the yearly progress rates for each of the physical health tests , with the 3% ,8% and 8%-plus yearly progresses rated as low , moderate and high.
Results and discussion. As far as the physical develop -ment rates of the 5-7 year-olds are concerned (Table 1), we should note the high age-unspecific yearly growth of body length,vital capacity,chest size and Martine-Kush-elevsky test rates; whilst the body mass yearly growth rates were found to reach their maximums by 6 years of age — in contrast to the other age groups tested with the slower body mass growth.
22
http://www.teoriya.ru/en/node/12231
№ 5 • 2020 May
Right/ left hand strength yearly growth rates were tested the highest in the 5 year old boys; and left hand strength growth rates the highest in the 7 year old girls; whilst the other age groups' yearly progresses in this test varied in a wide range on a gender-unspecific basis. The trunk muscle strength rating 30s sit-up test showed the highest yearly progress in the 6 year old girls,with the boys' progresses taking longer time. In the standing long jump test, the highest age-unspecific progress was found at 5 years of age and lowest at 7 years of age.
The speed rating 30m sprint test found the yearly peak achieved by 5 years of age in the boys' group (1.8s per
year) and 6 years of age in the girls' group (1.3s per year). The sit and reach test showed the moderate yearly progress achieved by 6-7 years of age in the boys' group (0.6cm per year) and highest by 6 years of age in the girls' group.
The above 8-17 year-olds' physical development and physical fitness yearly progress rates show a few age-specific peaks. Thus the girls' physical development peaks at 12-13 years of age, and physical fitness at 9-11 and 14-plus years of age; whilst the boys' physical fitness and physi cal development growth rates are the fastest at 14-plus and 13-15 years of age,respectively. The senior (university student) girls' anthropometri c characteristi cs
Table 1. 5-7 year-olds' physical development and physical fitness yearly progress rates
Gender, age Test rate Girls Boys
5 6 7 5 6 7
Body length,cm
Body mass,kg
Chest size,cm
Vital capacityml
Martine — Kushelevsky test,s
Right hand strength,kg
Left hand strength,kg
30s sit — ups,count
Standing long jump,cm
30m sprint,s
Sit and reach,cm
Note: white, grey and black boxes indicate the low, moderate and high yearly progress rates, respectively Table 2. 8-17 year-olds' physical development and physical fitness yearly progress rates
Test rate Age, years
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
tg Body length,cm
Body mass,kg
Chest size,cm
Vital capacity,ml
Right hand strength,kg
Left hand strength,kg
Martine — Kushelevsky test,s
Bent — arms hang,s
30s sit—ups,count
Standing long jump,cm
30m sprint,s
Shuttle sprint,s
Sit and reach,cm
1000m race,s
boys Body length,cm
Body mass,kg
Chest size,cm
Vital capacity,ml
Right hand strength,kg
Left hand strength,kg
Martine — Kushelevsky test,s
Pull — ups,count
30s sit—ups,count
Long jump (cm)
Standing long jump,cm
30m sprint,s
Shuttle sprint,s
Sitting front lean,cm
Note: white, grey and black boxes indicate the low, moderate and high yearly progress rates, respectively
№ 5 • 2020 May
http://www.teoriya.ru/en/node/12231
23
(body length,chest size) stay virtually the same being genetically predetermined,whilst the body length still grows by 2.2cm by 19 years of age i.e. the body growth continues.
The senior girls' physi cal development and physical fitness rates typically still grow in the 17-18 year period and fall in the 19-21 year period that may be due to the time limitation of the academic Physical Education classes (2 times a week for the 17-18 year-olds and once a week for the 19-21 year olds) and, hence, the relatively lower physi cal activity of the senior students in the aca -demi c hours.
The study found a few physi cal development versus physical fitness correlations in the age groups (preschoolers, schoolchildren and university students) at the early stages of ontogenesis. Thus the preschool group (see Table 1) showed virtually no differences in the physical development progress rates, whilst the physical fitness progress rates were tested the highest at 6 and 5 years of age in the boys' and girls' groups,respectively. The physical fitness / physical development progress rates were found the highest for the school period (Table 2),with the girls and boys tested with the highest physical development progresses at 12-13 and 14-15 years of age, respectively (that means a one-two year delay for the boys). The physical fitness progress rates in the girls' group were the highest at 9-11 and 14-plus,and in the boys' group at 8-11 and 14-plus year periods.
It should be noted that the boys' physi cal fitness progress takes a longer time, particularly in 14-plus year period, and the 12-year point may be considered a critical time when the physical development / physical fitness progress stalls and recovers at a slow pace by 13 years of age in the both gender groups. The physical development progress slows down (and never reaches maximums) after 15 and 17 years of age in the girls' and boys' groups,respectively.
The university girls group showed no fastvariations in the physical development / physical fitness progress rates,and their anthropometri c characteristics may still slowly grow (with the physical development process basically coming to an end) with some progress in the physical qualities. The physi cal fitness rates normally grow in the 17-18 year-olds trained twice a week in the regular Physical Education classes and fall in the 18-20 year olds due to the physi cal education service being limited by one class a week. The study data demonstrate the need in the young people's yearly physi cal development / physical fitness
progress rates being tested and analyzed for the physical education service being reasonably customized and individualized as required by the physical progress data.
Conclusion. The 5-17 year-olds physical development / physi cal fitness progress rating tests and analyses make it possible to assess their physi cal health standards and physical development and fitness regularities and potential disorders to improve and customize the physical education and sports services as required by the students' morphologies and functionalities on an age- and gender-specific basis.
References
1. Vinogradov P.A., Parshikova N.V., Mochenov V.P., Izaak S.I. [publ.] Activity of State Sports Committee of Russia to monitor physical health of the population, physical development of children, adolescents, youth. Experience in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in physical health monitoring among children, adolescents, youth: Col. scientific works. M., 2002. pp. 411.
2. Gerasimova I.N., Larina M.V., Sidorova I.Yu. et al. Physical development and physical fitness of Irkutsk child population. Irkutsk: Irkutsk State Technical Uni -versity, 2012. v. 1. Doshkolniki. 142 p.
3. Izaak S.I. Physical development and physical fitness monitoring: theory and practice. M.: Sovetsky Sport publ., 2005.196 p.
4. Koypysheva E.A., Rybina L.D., Lebedinsky V. Yu. Phys -ical development and physical fitness of preschool girls, schoolgirls and students of Irkutsk. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury. 2016. no. 4. pp. 4143.
5. Landa B.Kh. Methodology for comprehensive assessment of physical development and physical fitness. Study guide. Kazan, 2000. 76 p.
6. Lubysheva L.I., Zagrevskaya A.I., Peredelsky A.A. et al. Sportization in physical education system: from scientific idea to innovative practice. M.: Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury i sporta publ., 2017. 200 p.
7. Martynyuk O.V., Vilensky V.N. Assessment of health level of students by indicators of adaptive potential, biological age and by body bioenergy reserves. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury. 2015. no.3. pp. 2028.
8. Pashchenko L.G.,Krasnikova O.S. Influence of motor mode on physical health of university students. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2017, no. 6, pp. 24-26.
□
u
£ r. CL
14—
0
01 u
CL ■o c
ra &
O
u
JZ
H
http://www.teoriya.ru/en/node/12231 № 5 • 2020 May
