Anlu Yang

Health-related fitness (HRF) evaluations should be an important component of teaching and learning in physical education (PE). Assessment, however, has been severely neglected by researchers and practitioners in the field of PE. This chapter focuses current studies on (a) students’ HRF assessment methods and (b) the evolution of physical education teachers’ and pre-service physical education teachers’ attitudes toward HRF testing. Based on the findings, instructional strategies are suggested, and benefits and challenges are discussed.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the result assessment approaches used in the widely implemented health-related fitness batteries in school-based physical education programs. Method: Fitness test batteries implemented in the European Union (Assessing Levels of Physical Activity and Fitness), China (China’s National Physical Fitness Testing), the United States (Fitnessgram), and Russia (Ready for Labor and Defense [Gotov k Trudu i Oborone [GTO]]) were included in the study. The document analysis method was used to identify commonalities and differences of results assessment methods in the above test batteries. Results: It was found that the norm-referenced method has been used in Assessing Levels of Physical Activity and Fitness, China’s National Physical Fitness Testing, and GTO, and only Fitnessgram used the criterion-referenced method. Among the three norm-referenced evaluation methods, there were two variations: (a) total numerical points used in CNPFT, and (b) categories employed in Assessing Levels of Physical Activity and Fitness and GTO. Conclusions: Both norm-referenced and criterion-referenced evaluations were used in the current youth health-related fitness test batteries, suggesting that the current understanding of the purpose of school-based-fitness testing in schools has not reached a consensus.