Definitions, Foundations and Associations of Physical Literacy: A Systematic Review

Lowri Cerys Edwards · Anna S. Bryant · Richard James Keegan · Kevin Morgan

578 citations0/0 files storedSports Medicine

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Children's Physical and Motor Development Physical Education and Pedagogy Physical Education and Training Studies

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The concept of physical literacy has stimulated increased research attention in recent years-being deployed in physical education, sport participation, and the promotion of physical activity. Independent research groups currently operationalize the construct differently. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to conduct a systematic review of the physical literacy construct, as reflected in contemporary research literature. METHODS: Five databases were searched using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews. Inclusion criteria were English language, peer reviewed, published by March 2016, and seeking to conceptualize physical literacy. Articles that met these criteria were analyzed in relation to three core areas: properties/attributes, philosophical foundations and theoretical associations with other constructs. A total of 50 published articles met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed qualitatively using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The thematic analysis addressed the three core areas. Under definitions, core attributes that define physical literacy were identified, as well as areas of conflict between different approaches currently being adopted. One relatively clear philosophical approach was prominent in approximately half of the papers, based on a monist/holistic ontology and phenomenological epistemology. Finally, the analysis identified a number of theoretical associations, including health, physical activity and academic performance. CONCLUSIONS: Current literature contains different representations of the physical literacy construct. The costs and benefits of adopting an exclusive approach versus pluralism are considered. Recommendations for both researchers and practitioners focus on identifying and clearly articulating the definitions, philosophical assumptions and expected outcomes prior to evaluating the effectiveness of this emerging concept.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 578 citations exist upstream.

References

2006Using thematic analysis in psychology 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement 2009Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement 2009Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.2012Applied Thematic Analysis 1970Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes 2019The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis 2007Analyzing Qualitative Data

Cited by

2017‘Measuring’ Physical Literacy and Related Constructs: A Systematic Review of Empirical Findings 2020Understanding physical literacy in the context of health: a rapid scoping review 2018Canada’s Physical Literacy Consensus Statement: process and outcome 2017Critical Considerations for Physical Literacy Policy in Public Health, Recreation, Sport, and Education Agencies 2020Physical Literacy, Physical Activity, and Health Indicators in School-Age Children

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.