A Progress-Oriented Assessment Model for Physical Literacy in Secondary School Physical Education: A Grounded Theory Study

Abstract

Conventional assessment in school physical education frequently privileges short-term physical performance and fixed motor benchmarks. Such practices may underrepresent the cognitive, affective, and developmental dimensions that are central to physical literacy. This study aimed to develop a context-sensitive, progress-oriented assessment model for secondary school physical education based on the paradigm of physical literacy. A qualitative grounded theory design was used. Sixteen experts in curriculum studies and physical education were selected through purposive and snowball sampling. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analyzed through open, axial, and selective coding in MAXQDA. Trustworthiness was addressed through member checking, peer debriefing, audit-trail documentation, and constant comparison. The analysis generated 58 initial codes, 9 subcategories, and 3 overarching categories. The core phenomenon was the establishment of holistic, formative, and progress-oriented assessment. The model comprised causal conditions, including the need to broaden the goals of physical education; contextual conditions, including quantitative grading structures and unequal school infrastructure; intervening conditions, including the absence of formal protocols and the dominance of entrance-exam culture; strategies, including standardized rubrics, ipsative assessment, portfolios, self-assessment, peer assessment, and descriptive feedback; and expected consequences, including fairer grading, stronger teacher accountability, holistic student development, and increased physical self-efficacy. The proposed model reframes assessment from a mechanism for ranking students to a pedagogical process that supports learning, inclusion, and lifelong active living. A preliminary 60-20-20 weighting structure is proposed, with 60% allocated to psychomotor performance, 20% to cognitive knowledge, and 20% to affective-social competence. The weighting requires empirical validation, and implementation requires formal assessment protocols, teacher professional development, and infrastructure-sensitive interpretation of student progress.