• Fitness & Health
• Sport & Exercise Science
• Physical Education
• Strength & Conditioning
• Sports Medicine
• Sport Management
• Dance

Testing and assessment for Adapted PE

This is an excerpt from Adapted Physical Education and Sport 8th Edition by Joseph P. Winnick,David L. Porretta,Lauren J. Lieberman.

By Brock McMullen

There are many reasons for using testing and assessment in physical education, including increasing motivation, determining strengths and weaknesses, classifying students, determining degree of achievement, evaluating instruction and programs, predicting future success, and conducting research designed to answer questions and solve problems (Morrow et al., 2023). In adapted physical education, testing and assessment strategies are often employed to assist in the determination of unique need (eligibility for services and subsequent placement) and in providing a basis for instruction. The relation of testing and assessment to these functions is discussed in the following sections.

Determination of Unique Need

Students suspected of having unique physical and motor needs should be referred to appropriate personnel within the school for further testing. Increasingly, more school districts are using response-to-intervention (RTI) strategies before referrals are processed. Response to intervention consists of tiers of intervention strategies that can be employed in the general education classroom to determine whether struggling learners require specialized services (Pendharkar, 2023). Thus, the referral process does not mean automatic entry into special education. Referrals must document the reasons why the student should be considered for further testing. Testing and assessment at the referral level, usually called screening or informal assessment, document the need for an in-depth evaluation to determine whether the student has a unique need in physical education. Determining unique need is critical for two reasons. First, a student must have a unique need to be eligible for adapted physical education. This is true both for students considered to have disabilities under IDEA and for those without disabilities who have unique physical education needs. Second, once a unique need is determined, it serves as the basis for developing measurable IEP goals.

In dealing with the question of eligibility, a distinction must be made between an adapted physical education program and the instructional placement to which a student is assigned. A student might qualify for an adapted program but receive those services in a general placement. Thus, placement is established after the IEP goals have been determined. When a student is referred for possible adapted physical education services, the school district must first conduct more thorough, formalized assessments to determine whether the student is eligible for the adapted physical education program. In the absence of a medical referral, the criteria for entry into the adapted program (in most cases) should be based primarily on psychomotor performance. Usually, measurement and assessment for the purpose of determining program eligibility should focus on standardized testing (i.e., tests with strong psychometric properties and standards for evaluation). Most districts have established eligibility criteria, and teachers are expected to follow those district policies.

Some states and many school districts have developed criteria for adapted physical education services. For instance, in order for a student with a documented disability to be eligible for adapted physical education in the state of Minnesota, the student must either (1) fall one-and-a-half standard deviations below the mean on a standardized psychomotor evaluation or fitness test that is administered individually by an appropriately licensed teacher, (2) have documentation of inadequate development, or (3) exhibit limited achievement and independence in general physical education based on at least two of the following: motor and skill checklists; criterion-referenced measures; parent and staff interviews; informal tests; medical history or reports; systematic observations; social, emotional, and behavioral evaluations; and deficits in achievement related to the defined curriculum (Minnesota Department of Education, 2007).

In states without such criteria, it is recommended that school districts adopt specific criteria for eligibility in adapted physical education. It is also recommended that districts consider one or more of the following criteria for eligibility based on test results that measure aspects of physical education:

1. Delayed motor development. The student exhibits a motor delay of at least two years or performance one standard deviation below the mean in motor development.
2. Low motor skill performance. The student fails to meet age- or grade-level competencies or criterion-referenced standards or benchmarks in one or more physical education content areas.
3. Poor health-related physical fitness. The student does not meet specific or general standards of health-related physical fitness.

Because formal testing often takes place under artificial conditions, districts might consider additional salient criteria. For example, corroboration of standardized test results through observational techniques, authentic test results, or a temporary trial placement might also be required. Also, one may consider behavioral, communication, and assistive technology needs when making professional judgments regarding eligibility. These factors are reflected in criteria used to determine eligibility for adapted physical education in Minnesota. Thus, a variety of relevant professional judgments can supplement eligibility criteria and decision making. Other examples of these considerations include the following:

1. Need for a specially designed physical education program recommended by an individual education planning team
2. Need for safe participation
3. Medical condition or disability that affects participation in physical activity
4. Need for a specially designed program to meet unique needs (strengths) for intramural and interscholastic sport experiences

Once eligibility has been established based on a documented unique need, appropriate goals and objectives are written. Chapter 5 reviews aspects of writing measurable and observable annual goals and short-term objectives. Once goals and objectives are written to address the student’s unique needs, the most appropriate educational placement in the least restrictive environment is selected. When possible, teachers should attempt to modify activities and instructional methodologies so that the student’s goals can be met in the general class.

Although there is one primary criterion for admission into the program (i.e., performance), there are several considerations in the selection of the appropriate placement. Placement might partly depend on what is being taught in the general class. A student who uses a wheelchair, for instance, could probably meet appropriate goals for individual sports (e.g., swimming, weightlifting, track and field) in a general physical education class, but the same student might be assigned to a more restrictive setting for team sports (e.g., volleyball, soccer, football), although alternative activities also could be offered within the same placement. Another important consideration during placement is the input of students and parents. Whatever placement is selected, the student and parent should be comfortable with this important decision. In some cases, if students are unable to understand concepts or safety considerations being taught in the general class, or if there are behavioral or other affective concerns, they might need to be assigned to a more restrictive placement (see the continuum of instructional placements in chapter 2).

Measurement in the Affective Domain

Students with or without unique needs in the psychomotor domain might be placed in more restrictive physical education settings if they have unique needs in the affective domain. The affective (or social–emotional) domain is broad and encompasses elements such as attitudes, interests, values, beliefs, and personality, but social behavior is the element of the affective domain that often gets the greatest attention in schools. The ability (and willingness) to follow directions, take turns, respect others, play fair, and demonstrate sporting behavior, for instance, is important in physical education and community-based physical activity settings.

Although physical educators can certainly make observations about a student’s behavior in physical activity settings, it is unlikely that they will administer any standardized tests to help determine a unique need in the affective domain. Such an assessment would most likely be conducted by a school psychologist and might include administration of tests such as the Vineland Social Maturity Scale or the Behavior Assessment System for Children. Physical educators would more likely assess behavior and the affective domain in an authentic context and, as such, would develop their own rubrics, checklists, task analyses, or rating scales to measure these areas. Criteria or learning indicators for these two areas are based on SHAPE America (2025) standard 3 (develops social skills through movement) and standard 4 (develops personal skills, identifies personal benefits of movement, and chooses to engage in physical activity). Refer to figure 4.3 for criteria or learning indicators that can be used in physical education for grades preK-2.

Physical educators might also be involved with functional behavioral assessment (FBA), which is designed to gradually reduce unwanted behaviors while also increasing more desirable behaviors (PACER Center, 2015). In FBA, data such as frequency of behaviors, response rates, intervals, time sampling, durations, and latency periods are commonly gathered. The collection of behavioral data through the use of rubrics and FBA processes can lead to individualized behavioral intervention plans deemed necessary for the child to achieve educational success. Behavioral intervention plans based on FBA are covered in chapter 6.

Providing a Basis for Instruction

The student’s progress on annual goals should be monitored throughout the year. As suggested earlier, alternative tests can be used for this purpose. For instance, students can work (individually, in pairs, or with the teacher) from task sheets or cards that include rubrics or task analyses for a particular activity. Teachers can help students devise practice regimens that promote learning, as evidenced by scoring at a higher level on the rubric or by demonstrating previously missing techniques on the task analysis. Skills learned in practice situations also need to be transferred to natural environments, such as daily activities, games, and sports.

At the conclusion of the instructional program or unit, the teacher should conduct final testing to determine the student’s exit abilities. In some cases, grades are awarded based on this final assessment. Whether the program is graded or not, progress should be evaluated in terms of the written goals and objectives. For nongraded situations, Melograno (2006) suggests a checklist on which teachers can mark “achieved,” “needs improvement,” or “working to achieve” for each of the student’s goals. Summary sheets from portfolios can also be used for evaluating exit abilities. Teachers might choose to give awards to students on the basis of their final test performances.

It should be noted that it can be challenging to collect sufficient individual data when students with disabilities are educated in a fully inclusive or integrated setting. In these large classes, adapted physical education teaches will often have to collaborate in a multidisciplinary team via a co-taught environment to collect data through observation, performance checklists, or adapted assessments tailored to individual student needs (Friend and Cook, 2017). Paraprofessionals and co-teachers can play a crucial role by providing one-on-one support, facilitating small-group activities, and assisting with data collection. Additionally, technology like apps or video recordings can help track progress efficiently. Collaboration among staff ensures that assessment data is collected from multiple sources and all students can receive the necessary accommodations and modifications to participate fully and succeed in physical education (Benedict et al., 2022).

Meeting District and State Testing Requirements

IDEA requires that students with disabilities be included in state- or districtwide assessment programs (Center for Parent Information and Resources, 2020). These assessment programs include tests that are periodically given to all students in order to measure achievement in academic areas, including physical education. Because IDEA states that students with disabilities should have as much involvement in the general curriculum as possible, a child who is receiving instruction in the general curriculum could take the same standardized test given to children without disabilities. Accordingly, the IEP must indicate how the child is participating in state- or districtwide assessments. Participation in a state- or districtwide test can fall under one of the following three options (Center for Parent Information and Resources, 2020):

1. No accommodations are needed. The same test and testing methods that are given to peers without disabilities are given to the student with a disability. For example, beginning at the ninth grade, all students, including those who receive special education services, perform the 20-meter PACER test to measure aerobic capacity.
2. Appropriate accommodations are provided. In order to enable children with disabilities to participate in such general assessments, appropriate accommodations may be necessary. The IEP team specifies what accommodations a given child will need in order to participate. For instance, instead of the 20-meter PACER test, a student with a disability might be allowed to perform the 15-meter version with the assistance of a peer tutor. This particular test would allow for appropriate evaluation according to disability-specific standards.
3. An alternative test is given. The IEP team may determine that the student cannot participate in a particular state- or districtwide test, even with modifications. If this is the case, the team must include a statement in the IEP explaining why the test is not appropriate for the student and what assessment will be used instead. The child is then tested using an alternative method that measures the same content area. In the case of measuring aerobic capacity (the purpose of the PACER test), bike or arm ergometry, swim tests, or the Target Aerobic Movement Test (as described in the BPFT) may be used instead.

More Excerpts From Adapted Physical Education and Sport 8th Edition

---