南昌市高校学生体质健康水平现状调查及差异分析
|
摘要
目的为了了解南昌市高校学生体质健康水平现状及各年级学生之间的差异。方法根据2014年7月18日教育部印发《国家学生体质健康标准》的测试要求对随机抽取的1 040名大学生进行体质健康测试,并对测试所得的数据进行数理统计与分析。结果与结论 1)南昌市女大学生体质健康水平整体高于男大学生;2)大一学生耐力素质最好,下肢力量最差;3)大二学生身体机能、速度素质、力量素质最好;4)大三学生柔韧素质最差;5)大四学生柔韧素质、下肢力量素质最好,身体机能、速度素质、耐力素质、下肢力量素质最差。
Objective To understand the status quo of college students' physique health level in Nanchang and the differences between students of all grades. Methods According to the test requirements of the National Student Health Standards issued by the Ministry of Education, 1 040 college students were randomly selected for physical fitness tests, and the data obtained from the tests were statistically analyzed. Results and Conclusion The physical health level of female college students in Nanchang was higher than that of male college students. Freshmen had the best endurance quality and the worst lower limb strength. Sophomores have the best physical function, speed quality and strength quality. The flexibility quality of junior students was the worst. The flexibility quality and lower limb strength quality of the senior students were the best, while the physical function, speed quality, endurance quality and lower limb strength quality were the worst.
Objective To understand the status quo of college students' physique health level in Nanchang and the differences between students of all grades. Methods According to the test requirements of the National Student Health Standards issued by the Ministry of Education, 1 040 college students were randomly selected for physical fitness tests, and the data obtained from the tests were statistically analyzed. Results and Conclusion The physical health level of female college students in Nanchang was higher than that of male college students. Freshmen had the best endurance quality and the worst lower limb strength. Sophomores have the best physical function, speed quality and strength quality. The flexibility quality of junior students was the worst. The flexibility quality and lower limb strength quality of the senior students were the best, while the physical function, speed quality, endurance quality and lower limb strength quality were the worst.
引文
[1]国家体育总局.《2014年国民体质监测报告》[R].2015.
[2]国务院.关于印发全民健身计划(2016—2020年)的通知[J].中华人民共和国国务院公报,2016(19):9-15.
[3]教体艺[2014]5号.《国家学生体质健康标准》[S].中华人名共和国教育部,2014.
[4]刘丹松.青少年体质调查与能量消耗模型研究[M].中国地质大学出版社,2015.
[5]马德浩,季浏.我国中小学生体质健康中存在的问题、致因及其对策[J].西安体育学院学报,2017,34(2):182-188+236.
[6]刘才金.体力活动对大学男生力量素质的影响——以井冈山大学为例[J].湖北体育科技,2018,37(2):149-151+168.
[7]赵晓光,顾耀东,于佳彬,等.基于身体活力和老化速度的40~65岁男性体质年龄模型的构建[J].中国体育科技,2018,54(6):68-75.
[8]陆国田,段意梅,独龙,等.云南“极少数民族”大学生体质调查[J].山东体育学院学报,2017,33(5):67-72.
[9]教育部.国家体育总局关于实施《国家学生体质健康标准》的通知[J].中国学校体育,2007(04):4-5.
[10]赵琦,陆锦华.对不同时期我国田径优势项目训练理念和实践的审视与反思[J].北京体育大学学报,2018,41(03):118-124.
[11]田麦久,刘大庆.运动训练学[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2012:122-155.
[12]范洪彬,孙有平,季浏.体质测评中仰卧起坐测试规格的国际比较[J].北京体育大学学报,2016,39(04):60-65+71.
[13]赵亚楠.大学生体质健康测试低于50分者不能毕业[N].人民日报,2014-07-09(008).
[14]聂涛,李秋良.高校新生体质健康现状调查分析与发展对策[J].广州体育学院学报,2016,36(5):5-9+17.
[2]国务院.关于印发全民健身计划(2016—2020年)的通知[J].中华人民共和国国务院公报,2016(19):9-15.
[3]教体艺[2014]5号.《国家学生体质健康标准》[S].中华人名共和国教育部,2014.
[4]刘丹松.青少年体质调查与能量消耗模型研究[M].中国地质大学出版社,2015.
[5]马德浩,季浏.我国中小学生体质健康中存在的问题、致因及其对策[J].西安体育学院学报,2017,34(2):182-188+236.
[6]刘才金.体力活动对大学男生力量素质的影响——以井冈山大学为例[J].湖北体育科技,2018,37(2):149-151+168.
[7]赵晓光,顾耀东,于佳彬,等.基于身体活力和老化速度的40~65岁男性体质年龄模型的构建[J].中国体育科技,2018,54(6):68-75.
[8]陆国田,段意梅,独龙,等.云南“极少数民族”大学生体质调查[J].山东体育学院学报,2017,33(5):67-72.
[9]教育部.国家体育总局关于实施《国家学生体质健康标准》的通知[J].中国学校体育,2007(04):4-5.
[10]赵琦,陆锦华.对不同时期我国田径优势项目训练理念和实践的审视与反思[J].北京体育大学学报,2018,41(03):118-124.
[11]田麦久,刘大庆.运动训练学[M].北京:人民体育出版社,2012:122-155.
[12]范洪彬,孙有平,季浏.体质测评中仰卧起坐测试规格的国际比较[J].北京体育大学学报,2016,39(04):60-65+71.
[13]赵亚楠.大学生体质健康测试低于50分者不能毕业[N].人民日报,2014-07-09(008).
[14]聂涛,李秋良.高校新生体质健康现状调查分析与发展对策[J].广州体育学院学报,2016,36(5):5-9+17.