Physical education (PE) is at a critical juncture, requiring innovative strategies to address the heterogenous and evolving needs of students. Central to this transformation is the integration of formative assessment (FA) into teaching and learning due to its vital role in promoting learning success (Black & Wiliam, 1998). However, FA in PE often remains underutilized or incorrectly applied, with traditional assessment methods still prevailing (AIESEP, 2020). Yet, the rise of digitalization presents new possibilities for learning in PE (Meier et al., 2023), the opportunities it offers for FA remain a desideratum. Therefore, this systematic literature review addresses this gap by examining how digital tools can enhance FA in motor learning, thereby fostering a more inclusive and effective educational practice.

Formative Assessment in Physical Education

FA is a dynamic process involving continuous identification of students' learning needs and the provision of timely feedback to guide their learning progress (Black & Wiliam, 1998). In PE, the traditional emphasis on summative assessments, such as fitness tests and isolated skill demonstrations, often overlooks the formative potential of assessment to foster deeper learning (López-Pastor et al., 2012). These traditional methods limit opportunities for students to actively engage in their learning journey (AIESEP, 2020). Current pedagogical shifts advocate for the integration of FA into PE, emphasizing goal-setting, self-assessment, and reflection of learning, as outlined by cognitive-constructivist learning theories (Blundell, 2021). Such practices are particularly crucial in motor learning, where nuanced feedback on movement patterns and skill development significantly enhance engagement and motor skill acquisition (Herrero-González et al., 2023). Despite these benefits, the application of FA in PE remains inconsistent, hindered by factors such as lacking teacher competences, large class sizes, and varying student abilities.

The Potential of Digital Tools in Formative Assessment

The advent of digital technologies offers promising avenues to revolutionize FA in PE. Different tools such as video analysis software, wearable devices, and mobile applications have demonstrated effectiveness in enhancing motor skills and accelerating motor learning (Modra et al., 2021). These technologies enable detailed performance data capture, which can be used to offer specific feedback and track student progress over time (Herrero-González et al., 2023). They also offer visual feedback channels, such as slow-motion replay and posture angles, which are crucial for correcting errors and refining skills (Mödinger et al., 2021). However, despite these advancements, the application of digital tools for the implementation of FA remains underexplored, presenting a significant research opportunity.

Objective and research questions

Despite these parenthetical insights into the benefits of digital tools for motor learning, to date, there is no systematic review that addresses PE teachers’ digital FA practices. Therefore, this review aims to address this research gap by conducting a systematic review of the international literature. The formulated research questions are:

RQ1) How do digital FA tools improve students’ motor learning outcomes in PE?

RQ2) How do digital teacher training modules improve PE teachers’ FA competences?

RQ3) What are PE teachers’ perceptions of and recommendations for using digital FA tools in PE?

This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Moher et al., 2015). The review conducted a comprehensive search across multiple databases, including Web of Science, SCOPUS and EBSCOHost (= a meta-database) using refined search strings related to assessment, motor skills, and digital tools in PE. The initial search yielded 166 articles: 23 from Web of Science, 39 from SCOPUS, and 104 from EBSCOHost. An additional three studies were identified using the snowball method (Moher et al., 2015). Duplicates and non-English/German studies were removed. All remaining articles were screened for compliance with eligibility criteria, including peer-reviewed publications (from year 2000 onwards) in PE-settings that utilized digital FA tools. Titles and abstracts were initially screened. If the content was still considered suitable, the studies were then subjected to a full-text screening. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were independently assessed for eligibility by the first author and another researcher to ensure the reliability of the extracted studies. Consistency in the final selection of studies was 100%. The process resulted in 15 studies being included in the final review. Risk of bias was assessed by the first author and another researcher, achieving 100% consistency. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), a 10-item scale to measure the methodological quality of the included studies (Maher et al., 2003), was used for quantitative studies. Medium quality was observed, primarily due to the absence of group blinding and retention testing. This is partly attributed to the authentic school setting, which provides ecological validity but limits the control over variables that is typically achievable in laboratory conditions. Qualitative studies were evaluated using the quality assessment tool by Garside (2014). Three studies were rated as “good” and one as “medium-good”.

(RQ1) The findings from the review demonstrate that digital FA tools significantly impact motor learning in PE. Tools like video analysis, featuring slow-motion replay and posture angles, allow for immediate error correction and improved motor skill execution, particularly in gymnastics and complex movements. There is a positive correlation between student autonomy and skill improvement. Additionally, self-assessment and reflection are enhanced through video tutorials, confirming the effectiveness of digital FA in fostering self-regulated learning. (RQ2) Digital teacher training modules significantly enhance teachers' assessment accuracy in motor skills, benefiting both in-service and pre-service teachers. The structured approach of these digital modules, featuring tutorials and feedback loops, proves effective for developing FA practices. Studies find strong correlations between the number of guided attempts and improved accuracy. (RQ3) Additionally, PE teachers’ perceptions of digital FA tools highlight the significance of process-oriented movement scoring, video integration, and feedback support, which contribute to increased confidence in delivering FA of motor skills. However, they emphasize the necessity of enhancing usability and providing training in digital competence. Overall, digital tools have the potential to revolutionize FA in PE by enhancing accuracy, personalization, and inclusivity. Innovative PE should embrace these tools to foster individualized learning, improve engagement, and bridge the gap between current performance and desired motor learning outcomes. However, the need for teacher training, resistance to technology and challenges such as limited infrastructure could hinder their effectiveness, potentially exacerbating disparities due to unequal access to advanced digital resources across different educational contexts.

AIESEP (2020) AIESEP Position Statement on PE Assessment. Available at: https://aiesep.org/scientific-meetings/position-statements/ (accessed 10 August 2024). Black P and Wiliam D (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 5(1): 7–74. Blundell CN (2021) Teacher use of digital technologies for school-based assessment: A scoping review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 28(3): 279–300. Garside R (2014) Should we appraise the quality of qualitative research reports for systematic reviews, and if so, how? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 27(1): 67–79. Herrero-González D, López-Pastor VM, Manrique-Arribas JC, et al. (2023) Formative and shared assessment: Literature review on the main contributions in physical education and physical education teacher education. European Physical Education Review 30(3): 493–510. López-Pastor VM, Kirk D, Lorente-Catalán E, et al. (2012) Alternative assessment in physical education: A review of international literature. Sport, Education and Society 18(1): 57–76. Maher CG, Sherrington C, Herbert RD, et al. (2003) Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Physical Therapy 83(8): 713–721. Meier S, Rode D and Ruin S (2023) Digitalization challenging physical culture and education – Current issues in sport pedagogical research. Current Issues in Sport Science 8(3). Mödinger M (2021) Video-based visual feedback to enhance motor learning in physical education — A systematic review. German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research (52): 447–460. Modra C, Domokos M and Petracovschi S (2021) The use of digital technologies in the physical education lesson: A systematic analysis of scientific literature. Timisoara Physical Education and Rehabilitation Journal 14(26): 33–46. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews 4(1).