PhD, Associate Professor O.I. Kuzmina¹
PhD, Professor A.A. Akhmatgatin¹
PhD, Associate Professor O.A. Shvachun²
PhD, Associate Professor A.G. Galimova^3
1Irkutsk National Research Technical University, Irkutsk
²Russian State University of Justice, Voronezh
³East-Siberian Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, Irkutsk

Corresponding author: www.ariana.ru@mail.ru

Abstract

Objective of the study was to analyze benefits and drawbacks of the academic distance learning formats for the students’ physical fitness in the pandemic period versus the pre-pandemic physical fitness test data.

Methods and structure of the study. The distance learning format was introduced by Irkutsk National Research Technical University (INRTU) in March through June 2020, with the Physical Education Department making a transition to the Moodle learning platform. The physical education and sport staff offered the distance physical education models customized to the students’ health, age, physical fitness and individual progress needs, with the recommended sets of exercises mobilizing every key muscle group mostly by own body weight application practices. We sampled for the study the 2-year students (n=221) qualified with the Health Group III and split them up into Reference Group (RG, n=103) trained in the pre-pandemic 2018-19 period and Experimental Group (EG, n=118) trained in the pandemic 2019-20 period. The RG and EG were virtually identical in the primary health conditions and diagnoses.

Practical self-reliant/ distant physical trainings were run twice a week and fixed by video-reports. Since the isolation requirements complicated the traditional speed and endurance trainings, the exercise sets were dominated by the strength, coordination and flexibility centered practices.

The physical education progress test technology offered a set of test exercises on the university website to profile the students’ physical development and physical fitness.

Results and conclusion. The study data and analyses showed that the distance learning format of the academic physical education service for the Health Group III may be recommended only in very limited and provisional training models complementary to the traditional physical education service curricula. It may be beneficial only for the students knowledgeable and skillful in the independent physical education practices plus well equipped with the training technologies and basic self-test systems. It should be mentioned at the same time that the modern university distance learning website with the advanced digital physical education technologies effectively encourages the INRTU students’ cognitive activity and independence. Such the distance learning facilities developed and advanced by many national universities may be beneficial for the self-reliant trainings of the responsible and determined senior students in many domains including modern physical education models for optimal customizable physical activity and healthy lifestyles.

Keywords: distance learning, physical fitness, students.

Background. Practical academic physical education service is commonly recognized pivotal for the students’ health protection and improvement programs [1] – in the context of the progress in high technologies, medicine and physical activity encouraging methods and models still failing to effectively reverse the youth health deterioration trends. The students’ health issues have been aggravated for the last few years by the growing priority to independent learning formats in the university education curricula – often since the very first academic years when students are still mostly irresponsible and uncommitted for studies and healthy lifestyle. The serious epidemiological situation for the last two years has forced the higher education system to make a fast transition to the distance learning formats – that come in conflict to a degree with the health protection and improvement policies and practices as they only contribute to the growing physical inactivity with the associating detriments for the physical development, physical fitness, functionality and morbidity statistics [2]. Practical experience has demonstrated that distance physical education models may be successful in the health protection aspects only when they facilitate progress in the self-reliant physical education and sports trainings. Regretfully, the ongoing pandemic complicates the independent trainings, and this is why we believe it could be beneficial to make an emphasis on the personality progress values of the physical education and sports culture in the life quality improvement context [3].

Objective of the study was to analyze benefits and drawbacks of the academic distance learning formats for the students’ physical fitness in the pandemic period versus the pre-pandemic physical fitness test data.

Methods and structure of the study. The distance learning format was introduced by Irkutsk National Research Technical University (INRTU) in March through June 2020, with the Physical Education Department making a transition to the Moodle learning platform. The physical education and sport staff offered the distance physical education models customized to the students’ health, age, physical fitness and individual progress needs, with the recommended sets of exercises mobilizing every key muscle group mostly by the own body weight application practices. We sampled for the study the 2-year students (n=221) qualified with the Health Group III and split them up into Reference Group (RG, n=103) trained in the pre-pandemic 2018-19 period and Experimental Group (EG, n=118) trained in the pandemic 2019-20 period. The RG and EG were virtually identical in the primary health conditions and diagnoses.

Practical self-reliant/ distant physical trainings were run twice a week and fixed by video-reports. Since the isolation requirements complicated the traditional speed and endurance trainings, the exercise sets were dominated by the strength, coordination and flexibility centered practices.

The physical education progress test technology offered a set of test exercises on the university website to profile the students’ physical development and physical fitness. It is traditional for the IRNITU to test the physical development / physical fitness by the pre- versus post-academic-year tests; and so we analyzed the EG versus RG test data (2019-20 versus 2018-19) to rate the distance learning service efficiency for the elective physical education disciplines: see Table 1. The students were required to run and report the post-year functionality tests independently using the Stange/ Gench Breath-Holding Probe. Note that the student numbers in the tests varied due to some of them barred from the tests in cases of contraindications. The test data were statistically processed and analyzed using the Student's t-test.

Results and discussion.

Table 1. EG physical fitness test data: pre-distance-learning and distance learning periods in 2019-20

As could be expected, the breathing tests showed regress, as well as the pull-ups test – apparently due to many students having no horizontal bar at home. Despite the generally good external respiration test rates, the regress may be interpreted as indicative of the decreased circulatory and oxygen-supplying system functionality and, hence, lower hypoxic tolerance and worse general fitness. However, the EG was tested with significant progress in the 30s sit-ups and push-ups tests and insignificant progress in the flexibility tests.

The physical education benefits and drawbacks of the distance learning format were rated by the RG versus EG physical fitness test data for the two years: see Table 2. The study showed benefits of the traditional physical education service in the RG, with significant (p <0.05; 0.01) group progress in every pre- versus post-year-2 test. Having compared the RG and EG test data, we found clear advantages of the RG in every test save for the push-ups.

Table 2. EG versus RG physical fitness test data of 2019-20

Having analyzed the above test data, we found the following:

• The traditional pre-pandemic format of the academic elective physical education service is better in every physical fitness / physical development aspect;

• The distance learning format of the academic physical education is effective enough for the strength and speed-strength training goals but not for the flexibility ones. Progress in the distance learning format was found limited by the shortages of training equipment and space;

• Shortages or limitations of the training equipment and space in the distance learning format limit the students’ and teachers’ progress in the physical education service;

• In cases of health issues or training regress due to the physical stress in the distance learning format, the teacher may be unable to help the student on a timely and efficient basis;

• Since the teacher cannot control the training process on an uninterrupted basis, he/ she is mostly unable to effectively manage and individualize the training service; and

• Progress in the isolated trainings and tests may be hampered by the lack of competitive motivations typical for the traditional academic physical education classes.

Conclusion. The study data and analyses showed that the distance learning format of the academic physical education service for the Health Group III may be recommended only in very limited and provisional training models complementary to the traditional physical education service curricula. It may be beneficial only for the students knowledgeable and skillful in the independent physical education practices plus well equipped with the training technologies and basic self-test systems. It should be mentioned at the same time that the modern university distance learning website with the advanced digital physical education technologies effectively encourages the INRTU students’ cognitive activity and independence. Such the distance learning facilities developed and advanced by many national universities may be beneficial for the self-reliant trainings of the responsible and determined senior students in many domains including modern physical education models for optimal customizable physical activity and healthy lifestyles.

References

1. Golubyatnikova M.V., Yakovleva V.N., Makarova L.N. et al. Effect of physical exercises on of health coefficient indices, physical fitness, physical condition and working capacity of students in physical education process. Sportivnaya meditsina: nauka i praktika. 2017. No. 7(3). pp.14-21.
2. Kuzmina O.I., Lebedinskiy V.Y., Kudryavtsev M.D. et al. Monitoring of female functional group III students' health III as control tool and basis for design of educational environment (physical education) in non-core university. Chelovek. Sport. Meditsina. 2019. V. 19. no4. pp. 78-91.
3. Lubysheva L.I. Philosophical studies for kinesthesia interpretation. Teoriya i praktika fiz. Kultury. 2020. No. 1. P. 95.
4. Lubysheva L.I. Philosophical studies for modern understanding of physical education and sports. Philosophical studies to modern understanding of physical education and sports]. XVI national research and practical conference, 27 March 27, 2020. St. Petersburg: SPbGUP publ., 2020. pp. 15-17.