A model fidelity check in cooperative learning research in physical education

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Fidelity is an essential component of research, theory and practice in pedagogical models in physical education [Hastie, P. A., and A. Casey. 2014. “Fidelity in Models-based Practice Research in Sport Pedagogy: A Guide for Future Investigations.” Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 33 (3): 422–431. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2013-0141]. Reporting fidelity data has been recognized as a way to know whether student learning outcomes can be attributed to the practical architectures of pedagogical models [Casey, A., and D. Kirk. 2020. Models-based in Physical Education. London: Routledge]. However, research that examines the effectiveness of pedagogical models rarely reports this valuable information about the authenticity of implementation [Casey, A., V. Goodyear, and B. Dyson. 2015. “Model Fidelity and Students’ Responses to an Authenticated Unit of Cooperative Learning.” Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 34 (4): 642–660. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2013-0227]. To date, no overall data have been published on how researchers reported fidelity data in cooperative learning literature in physical education. Therefore, it seems necessary to examine whether researchers have attended to fidelity to offer insights about the quality of the model delivery. Purpose To conduct a model fidelity check in cooperative learning research in physical education using checklists. Method First, a literature review was conducted to capture intervention studies focusing on cooperative learning in physical education. Second, a quality assessment was performed to obtain a global methodological score for the selected studies. Third, a model fidelity check was implemented to examine the quality of model delivery. Findings A total of 28 studies (11 qualitative, 13 quantitative, and 4 mixed methods) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were selected. Regarding checklist-1, only 10 studies (35.7%) reported the complete information of all items. Most presented a rich description of the curricular elements of the unit (71.4%) and a detailed description of the program context (68.7%). Information concerning teacher expertise (60.7%) and students’ previous experience (46.4%) was the lowest reported. Data from the validation of model implementation was reported at 50% (14 studies). Regarding checklist-2, no study reported the assessment of all five components of fidelity of implementation. More than 90% reported information about program adherence to intervention components (model features, lesson plans, learning tasks and teacher/students’ behaviors) and duration. Less than 50% of the studies reported information related to program differentiation (41.1%), delivery quality (35.2%) and participant responsiveness (11.7%). Conclusion Model fidelity remains a prominent theme in cooperative learning research in physical education. Findings, at least as captured in this study, indicated a notable lack of attention to and reporting of model fidelity in this research area. It is highly recommended to report information on model fidelity to enhance its validity with trustworthy guidelines. Therefore, documenting meaningful information about model fidelity is required to bridge the gap between planning and delivery. Additional research is needed to gain a better understanding of how the model is delivered.