Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Fitness-performance of southern British Columbia Indian children Waldie, Jean V. M. 1968

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1968_A7_5 W34.pdf [ 5.34MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0302480.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0302480-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0302480-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0302480-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0302480-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0302480-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0302480-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0302480-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0302480.ris

Full Text

FITNESS-PERFORMANCE OF SOUTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA INDIAN CHILDREN by Jean V.M. Waldie B.P.E., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1959 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION i n the School o f P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 15, 1968 In p r e s e n t i n g . t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r a n a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l m a k e i t f r e e ] y , a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e a n d S t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may b e g r a n t e d b y t h e H e a d o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r b y h i ts r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t b e a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t o f Physical Education T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a D a t e August 15, 1968. ABSTRACT F i t n e s s performance of southern B r i t i s h Columbia Indian c h i l d r e n as measured by the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r H e a l t h P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n F i t n e s s -Performance T e s t was s t u d i e d t o determine the f o l l o w i n g . 1. Were there any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the f i t n e s s performance of the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d and the f i t n e s s performance of other Canadian c h i l d r e n ? 2. Were there any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the f i t n e s s performance of the Indian c h i l d r e n who attended p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s and those who attended Indian schools? 3. Were there any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the f i t n e s s performance of the Indian c h i l d r e n who l i v e d i n r e s i d e n c e and those who l i v e d a t home? The CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t was administered t o 651 In d i a n c h i l d r e n between the ages of e i g h t to seven-teen y e a r s . The s u b j e c t s were students o f s e l e c t e d Indian s c h o o l s or were l i v i n g i n Indian r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s study. The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found which showed the I n d i a n c h i l d r e n t o have b e t t e r performances were concen-t r a t e d i n three t e s t items: the f l e x e d arm hang, the s h u t t l e run, and the f i f t y yard run. The CAHPER mean scores which were found to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r were concentrated i n two t e s t items: the standing broad jump and the one minute speed s i t - u p t e s t s . In the comparison of the f i t n e s s performance of In-d i a n c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g p r o v i n c i a l s c hools w i t h the Indian s c h o o l students, a l l of the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found i n d i c a t e d a s u p e r i o r performance by p r o v i n c i a l school students. Only one s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found which favoured the Indian c h i l d r e n who l i v e d a t home. S i g n i f i -c a n t l y b e t t e r scores f o r Indian c h i l d r e n who l i v e i n r e s i -dence were found on a l l t e s t items. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 1 D e f i n i t i o n s 3 D e l i m i t a t i o n s 4 I I JUSTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM 6 I I I REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 10 S t u d i e s o f F i t n e s s Performance 10 S t u d i e s o f B r i t i s h Columbia Indians 11 IV METHOD AND PROCEDURE 14 A n a l y s i s o f Data 17 V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 21 Comparison o f F i t n e s s Performance o f Indian C h i l d r e n w i t h CAHPER Norms 21 Comparison o f F i t n e s s Performance of P r o v i n c i a l School Students and Ind i a n S c h o o l Students 29 Comparison o f F i t n e s s Performance o f Residence and Day Students 34 VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 41 Summary 41 Con c l u s i o n s 49 BIBLIOGRAPHY 52 APPENDIX 54 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE I. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Indian C h i l d r e n Tested by-Type of School Attended 15 I I . D i s t r i b u t i o n of Indian C h i l d r e n Tested by Type of Residence 16 I I I . S i g n i f i c a n c e of the D i f f e r e n c e Between I n d i a n Mean Scores and CAHPER Mean Scores.. 23 IV. CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t Mean Scores f o r P r o v i n c i a l and Indian School Students 30 V. S i g n i f i c a n c e o f the D i f f e r e n c e Between Mean Scores o f Students L i v i n g i n R e s i d e n t i a l Schools and Day School Students 36 VI. Summary o f D i f f e r e n c e s i n F i t n e s s Performance Between Indian C h i l d r e n Tested and CAHPER Sample 43 V I I . Summary of the D i f f e r e n c e s i n F i t n e s s Performance Between P r o v i n c i a l and Indian School Students 45 LIST OF TABLES (continued) TABLE PAGE V I I I . Summary of the D i f f e r e n c e s i n F i t n e s s Performance Between R e s i d e n t i a l and Day Students 48 CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM There has been a g r e a t e r concern f o r the problems of the Canadian Indian s i n c e the 1948 census r e v e a l e d t h a t the Indian p o p u l a t i o n was not d e c r e a s i n g as had been thought but was i n f a c t i n c r e a s i n g . Today, the I n d i a n p o p u l a t i o n i n Canada i s more than 200,000. The m a j o r i t y o f t h i s number s t i l l l i v e on the r e s e r v e where the stand-a r d of l i v i n g i s g e n e r a l l y w e l l below Canadian standards (1). They have remained a separate s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l and economic group w i t h o n l y a r e l a t i v e l y few Indians moving s u c c e s s f u l l y i n t o non-Indian s o c i e t y (2). Many government programmes are aimed a t h e l p i n g the I n d i a n t o adapt t o today's complex s o c i e t y (3). I n d i a n education, viewed as the key t o i n t e g r a t i o n of the I n d i a n i n t o Canadian l i f e , has undergone many changes i n r e c e n t y e a r s ( 4 ) . U s u a l l y , c h i l d r e n from a r e s e r v e b e g i n s c h o o l w i t h a much d i f f e r e n t background and d i f f e r -ent s k i l l s than non-Indian c h i l d r e n . P h y s i c a l l y I ndian c h i l d r e n have been thought t o be s u p e r i o r to non-Indian c h i l d r e n . T h i s concept was o f t e n the r e s u l t of observa-t i o n s of the Indian c h i l d w i t h h i s non-Indian classmates. 2 However, many Indian c h i l d r e n are r e t a r d e d two or more grades and are t h e r e f o r e o l d e r than t h e i r non-Indian classmates (5). The purpose of t h i s study was t o i n v e s t i g a t e the p h y s i c a l performance of I n d i a n c h i l d r e n of southern B r i t i s h Columbia. P h y s i c a l performance, as measured by the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Health, P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n (CAPHER) Fitness-Performance T e s t (APPENDIX A), of c h i l d r e n from the ages o f e i g h t t o seventeen years was examined a t each age l e v e l t o determine the f o l l o w i n g . 1. Were th e r e any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the f i t n e s s performance of the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d and the f i t n e s s performance of other Canadian c h i l d r e n o f the same age and sex? 2. Were t h e r e any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the f i t n e s s performance o f the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d between those who attended p r o v i i c i a l s c h o o l s and those who attended f e d e r a l l y operated I n d i a n s c h o o l s ? 3. Were th e r e any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the f i t n e s s performance of the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d between those c h i l d r e n who l i v e d i n r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s and those who l i v e d a t home? 3 D e f i n i t i o n s The term Indian i s used here t o mean those people who are r e g i s t e r e d as Indians and by the Indian A c t are c l a s s f i e d as In d i a n . T h i s i s a l e g a l d e f i n i t i o n and not an a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l one. The c h i l d r e n concerned i n t h i s study can be c l a s s i f i e d as In d i a n by the f a c t t h a t they attended an Indian day sch o o l or were l i v i n g i n an Indian r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l . Indian day sc h o o l s are l o c a t e d on or near the r e s e r v e . These s c h o o l s are operated by the f e d e r a l government and p r o v i d e grades one t o e i g h t f o r the c h i l d r e n on the r e s e r v e . I n d i a n r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s , a l s o operated by the f e d e r a l government, p r o v i d e food, c l o t h i n g , and medical care f o r c h i l d r e n o f broken homes or d e s t i t u t e f a m i l i e s , c h i l d r e n from i s o l a t e d v i l l a g e s which are too smal l f o r day s c h o o l s and f o r students o b t a i n i n g a secondary educa-t i o n a t nearby p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s . P r o v i n c i a l s c hools r e f e r s here t o p u b l i c s c h o o l s which come under the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the p r o v i n c i a l Depart-ment o f E d u c a t i o n . 4 D e l i m i t a t i o n s T h i s study was l i m i t e d t o Indian C h i l d r e n i n southern B r i t i s h Columbia and f u r t h e r t o those c h i l d r e n who were l i v i n g i n Indian r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s or were a t t e n d i n g I n d i a n day s c h o o l s . C h i l d r e n who were l i v i n g a t home and were a t t e n d i n g p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s were not i n c l u d e d i n the study s i n c e o n l y small numbers of these c h i l d r e n were r e g i s t e r e d i n any one of the p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s w i t h i n the southern p a r t o f B r i t i s h Columbia. These l i m i t a t i o n s were n e c e s s i t a t e d by the time and funds a v a i l a b l e f o r t r a v e l . REFERENCES Hawthorn, H.B., and C.S. Belshaw, and S.M. Jamieson. The Indians o f B r i t i s h Columbia. U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press and the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1960. Peterson, L.R. Indian E d u c a t i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Unpublished M.A. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1959. Department of C i t i z e n s h i p and Immigration, Indian A f f a i r s Branch. The Indian i n T r a n s i t i o n : The  Indian Today. Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r s , 1962. Parminter, A.V. The Development of I n t e r g r a t e d S c h o o l i n g f o r B r i t i s h Columbia Indian C h i l d r e n . Unpublished M.A. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1964. I b i d . , p.54. CHAPTER I I JUSTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM B r i t i s h Columbia has one of the l a r g e s t I ndian p o p u l a t i o n s i n Canada. Of the t o t a l o f 217,864 Indians i n Canada, 43,250 l i v e i n B r i t i s h Columbia (1). The p r o p o r t i o n of s c h o o l age I n d i a n c h i l d r e n i s much l a r g e r than t h a t o f the non-Indian p o p u l a t i o n (2). In 1964 the p r o p o r t i o n of the I n d i a n p o p u l a t i o n under twenty-one ye a r s of age was f i f t y - e i g h t p e r cent as compared t o f o r t y -two per cent f o r the p o p u l a t i o n o f Canada as a whole (3). In 1965-66 a t o t a l of 11,993 Indian c h i l d r e n were e n r o l l e d i n s c h o o l s throughout the p r o v i n c e (4). R e c e n t l y , concern f o r the p h y s i c a l f i t n e s s o f Canadian c h i l d r e n l e d t o the development of the CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t and the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of norms f o r the performance of Canadian c h i l d r e n from the ages of seven t o seventeen years (5). Indian c h i l d r e n , from a s o c i e t y t h a t remains d i s t i n c t from Canadian s o c i e t y c u l t u r -a l l y , s o c i a l l y and economically, may not conform t o the r e p o r t e d standards of performance f o r Canadian c h i l d r e n on the CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t . Other s t u d i e s have .7 found d i f f e r e n c e s i n p h y s i c a l performance between groups from d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l or economic backgrounds (6) (7). An assessment of the p h y s i c a l performance of Indian c h i l d r e n would p r o v i d e a sound b a s i s f o r determining the o b j e c t i v e s o f school p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n programmes and p h y s i c a l r e c r e a t i o n programmes f o r Indian c h i l d r e n . ' Approximately one h a l f o f the Indian s c h o o l c h i l d r e n i n B r i t i s h Columbia now att e n d p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s , the r e -mainder are r e c e i v i n g t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a t Indian day or r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s . Most c h i l d r e n are t r a n s f e r r e d from one sc h o o l t o another a t l e a s t once d u r i n g t h e i r s c h o o l l i f e , a l -though an i n c r e a s i n g number of students are being i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l system a t the grade one l e v e l . These t h r e e types o f s c h o o l s p r o v i d e very d i f f e r e n t e x p e r i -ences f o r the Indian c h i l d , r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s e n s u r i n g good standards o f h e a l t h and balanced d i e t s , day sc h o o l s e n a b l i n g the c h i l d t o a t t e n d school near h i s home w i t h other I n d i a n c h i l d r e n , and p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s p r o v i d i n g b e t t e r f a c i l i t i e s f o r i n s t r u c t i o n and more q u a l i f i e d s t a f f than the f e d e r a l I n d i a n s c h o o l s . An assessment of the p h y s i c a l performance o f c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g each type o f sc h o o l may p r o v i d e some i n f o r m a t i o n as t o the i n f l u e n c e o f the s c h o o l experience on the p h y s i c a l development of In d i a n c h i l d r e n . 8 With the r a p i d growth of the Indian p o p u l a t i o n and the i n c r e a s e d e f f o r t o f the f e d e r a l government t o a i d the Indian t o adapt t o our s o c i e t y , a knowledge of the p r e s e n t s t a t e o f p h y s i c a l h e a l t h of I n d i a n c h i l d r e n i s important. U n t i l r e c e n t l y , emphasis has been on the c o n t r o l o f d i s e a s e , p a r t i c u l a r l y t u b e r c u l o s i s , among the I n d i a n s . Modern drugs and g r e a t l y improved h e a l t h s e r v i c e s have achieved t h i s . That the emphasis i s now changing t o the improvement o f p h y s i c a l f i t n e s s o f Indians i s i n d i c a t e d by the f a c t t h a t p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n and r e c r e a t i o n s p e c i a l i s t s have been i n c l u d e d i n the s t a f f of the Indian A f f a i r s Branch (8). REFERENCES Annual Report of the Indian A f f a i r s Branch. Report o f the Department of C i t i z e n s h i p and Immigration  1965-66. Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1967, p.90. Hawthorn, H.B., and C.S. Belshaw, and S.M. Jamieson, The Indians o f B r i t i s h Columbia. U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto Press and the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1960, p.26. Canada, Bureau o f S t a t i s t i c s , The Canada Year Book 1966. Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1966, p.210. Annual Report o f the Indian A f f a i r s Branch, o p . c i t . , pp.98-99. The Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Health, P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n , The CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t  Manual. The Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Health, P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n , 1966. Ikeda, N., A Comparison of P h y s i c a l F i t n e s s o f C h i l d r e n i n Iowa, U.S.A. and Tokyo, Japan. Research  Q u a r t e r l y , vol.33, December 1962, pp.541-551. Ponthieux, N.A., and D.G. Barker, Socioeconomic Status and P h y s i c a l F i t n e s s . Research Q u a r t e r l y , vol.36, December, 1965, pp.464-467. Annual Report of the Indian A f f a i r s Branch. Department  Of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources Annual  Report F i s c a l Year 1965-66. Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1967, p.64. CHAPTER I I I REVIEW OP THE LITERATURE S t u d i e s o f F i t n e s s Performance There have been no s t u d i e s o f Canadian I n d i a n c h i l d r e n r e l a t e d t o t h e i r p h y s i c a l a b i l i t i e s or f i t n e s s performance (1). However, s t u d i e s u s i n g t e s t s s i m i l a r t o the CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t have found s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance o f groups of d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l , r a c i a l , and socioeconomic backgrounds. Only a few of these s t u d i e s were i n c l u d e d i n t h i s review s i n c e i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o compare other c u l t u r a l , r a c i a l and socioeconomic groups w i t h the I n d i a n p o p u l a t i o n of B r i t i s h Columbia. Thompson and Dove (2) compared the performance of Spanish-American boys and Anglo-American boys on s i x t e s t items: b a s e b a l l throw f o r d i s t a n c e , base running, s i x t y y a r d dash, jump and reach, shot put and c h i n n i n g . They found the Spanish American boys had s i g n i f i c a n t l y s u p e r i o r performances on a l l items except the shot put. Knuttgen (3), u s i n g the AAHPER Youth F i t n e s s Test, found Danish c h i l d r e n t o have s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r perform-ances than American c h i l d r e n . Ikeda (4), u s i n g the same 11 t e s t , found s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between performances of Japanese c h i l d r e n and American c h i l d r e n . Ponthieux and Barker (5) c o r r e l a t e d performance on the AAHPER Youth F i t n e s s T e s t w i t h socioeconomic s t a t u s as measured by the Index of S t a t u s C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . They found s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance o f lower s t a t u s and upper s t a t u s c h i l d r e n i n favour of both groups. In n o t i n g the d i f f e r e n c e s i n p h y s i c a l performance of m i n o r i t y groups i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , C r a t t y (6) suggested two f a c t o r s which may be i n v o l v e d : e a r l i e r m a t u r a t i o n of the c h i l d r e n or a l e s s r e s t r i c t i v e u p b r i n g -i n g w i t h t h e r e f o r e more e x t e n s i v e movement e x p e r i e n c e s . S t u d i e s o f B r i t i s h Columbia Indians Hawthorn, Belshaw and Jamieson's (7) study of the adjustment of B r i t i s h Columbia Indians t o the Canadian economy and s o c i e t y i n d i c a t e d t h a t s o c i a l and economic standards i n I n d i a n communities are g e n e r a l l y w e l l below Canadian standards. They d e s c r i b e d the l i f e o f the c h i l d r e n i n I n dian communities as being v e r y f r e e but l a c k i n g i n v a r i e t y of a c t i v i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o them. Community r e c r e a -t i o n programmes have been o r g a n i z e d i n some communities but g e n e r a l l y they have concentrated on other age groups ( 8 ) . 12 Federal goverment studies of Indian health have been concerned with the incidence and causes of disease and mortality rates and causes of death. The 1964 Report  on V i t a l S t a t i s t i c s of Registered Canadian Indians stated that "... contrary to previous impressions the health status of B r i t i s h Columbia i s the worst i n Canada" (9). This statement was based on the analysis of mortality rates which showed B r i t i s h Columbia Indians to have an extremely high infant mortality rate, the highest mortality rate between the ages of f i f t e e n and sixty-four years and the highest crude death rate (10). Parminter's study of integrated schooling f o r B r i t i s h Columbia Indian children reported that comparisons of academic achievement indicated that r e s i d e n t i a l school stud-ents had a higher rate of achievement than p r o v i n c i a l school students and that Indian Day School students showed the lowest rate of achievement. Parminter c i t e d the advantages of regulated diet, regular hours and the extra-curricular a c t i v i t i e s available to the r e s i d e n t i a l students as factors which may explain t h e i r higher academic achievement (11). 13 REFERENCES 1. L e t t e r from, P r o c t e r , H.A., D i r e c t o r General, M e d i c a l S e r v i c e s , Department N a t i o n a l H e a l t h and Welfare, Aug., 1967. 2. Thompson, M e r r i l E., and Claude C. Dove. "A Comparison of P h y s i c a l Achievement of Anglo and Spanish American Boys i n J u n i o r High S c h o o l . Research Q u a r t e r l y , vol.13, 1942, pp. 341-346. 3. Knuttgen, H.G. Comparison of F i t n e s s of Danish and American School C h i l d r e n . Research Q u a r t e r l y . vol.32, May, 1961, pp. 190-196. 4. Ikeda, N., A Comparison of P h y s i c a l F i t n e s s of C h i l d r e n i n Iowa, U.S.A. and Tokyo, Japan. Research Q u a r t e r l y , vol.33, D e c , 1962, pp. 541-551. 5. Ponthieux, N.A., and D.G. Barker, Socioeconomic S t a t u s and P h y s i c a l F i t n e s s . Research Q u a r t e r l y , vol.36, D e c , 1965, pp.464-467. 6. C r a t t y , Bryant J . , S o c i a l Dimensions of P h y s i c a l A c t i v i t y . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J., P r e n t i c e H a l l Inc., 1967. 7. Hawthorn, H.B., and C.S. Belshaw, and S.M. Jamieson. The Indians of B r i t i s h Columbia. U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press and the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1960. 8. I b i d . , p.287. 9. M e d i c a l S e r v i c e s , Department of N a t i o n a l H e a l t h and Welfare, Report on V i t a l S t a t i s t i c s o f R e g i s t e r e d  Canadian Indians 1964, p.6. 10. I b i d . , p.5. 11. Parminter, A.V., The Development of I n t e g r a t e d S c h o o l i n g f o r B r i t i s h Columbia Indian C h i l d r e n , unpublished M.A.Thesis, U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1964, P .99. CHAPTER IV METHOD AND PROCEDURE The CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t was administered-t o c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g I n d i a n day sc h o o l s and t o r e s i d e n t s and students o f Indian r e s i d e n t i a l s c h ools i n southern B r i t i s h Columbia. The f o l l o w i n g s c h o o l s were s e l e c t e d on the b a s i s o f student p o p u l a t i o n and a c c e s s i b i l i t y o f the s c h o o l . 1. Adams Lake Indian Day School, Chase 2. A l b e r n i R e s i d e n t i a l School, A l b e r n i 3. C h e h a l i s I n d i a n Day School, H a r r i s o n M i l l s 4. Kamloops R e s i d e n t i a l School, Kamloops 5. M i s s i o n R e s i d e n t i a l School, M i s s i o n 6. S t . Paul•s Indian Day School, North Vancouver 7. T s a r t l i p I n dian Day School, Brentwood Bay A t o t a l o f 651 c h i l d r e n r a n g i n g i n age from e i g h t t o seventeen y e a r s were t e s t e d . TABLES I and I I show the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the c h i l d r e n t e s t e d by age, sex and type o f s c h o o l attended. The CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t was s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s study because i t p r o v i d e d a b a s i s o f comparison 15 TABLE I DISTRIBUTION OF INDIAN CHILDREN TESTED BY TYPE OF SCHOOL ATTENDED BOYS AGE PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS INDIAN SCHOOLS TOTAL 8 4 18 22 9 7 22 29 10 6 22 28 11 13 24 37 12 10 22 32 13 12 28 40 14 12 22 34 15 12 30 42 16 7 29 36 17 4 29 33 GIRLS 8 0 19 19 9 15 26 41 10 7 40 47 11 11 24 35 12 5 23 28 13 9 19 28 14 15 18 33 15 13 25 38 16 10 20 30 17 9 10 19 16 TABLE I I DISTRIBUTION OF INDIAN CHILDREN TESTED BY TYPE OF RESIDENCE STUDENTS LIVING STUDENTS LIVING AGE IN RESIDENCE AT HOME TOTAL BOYS 8 4 18 22 9 7 22 29 10 6 22 28 11 15 22 37 12 15 17 32 13 24 16 40 14 22 12 34 15 37 5 42 16 35 1 36 17 33 0 33 GIRLS 8 3 16 19 9 22 19 41 10 17 30 47 11 16 19 35 12 11 17 28 13 14 14 28 14 28 5 33 15 33 5 38 16 29 1 30 17 18 1 19 17 of the f i t n e s s performance of Indian children with the f i t n e s s performance of other Canadian children. In 1964-65 a random sample of school children throughout Canada was tested to es t a b l i s h norms for the CAHPER Fitness-Performance Test (1). Federal Indian schools were not included i n the l i s t of schools from which the CAHPER sample was selected. Mean scores of the CAHPER sample for each te s t item, reported by age and sex i n the CAHPER Fitness-Performance Test Manual (2), were used to determine whether Indian children d i f f e r e d from other Canadian children i n f i t n e s s performance. The s i x items of the CAHPER Fitness-Performance Test (see APPENDIX A) were administered to each subject by a group of trained testers as outlined i n the CAHPER Fitness-Performance Test Manual (3). Test r e s u l t s for each student were recorded on score cards. Analysis of Data The mean scores and standard deviations for the s i x te s t items were computed for each age and sex. Test scores for each age-sex group were then sorted into the following sub-groups. 18 A two t a i l e d t e s t o f s i g n i f i c a n c e of d i f f e r e n c e was used t o determine whether, a t any age l e v e l , d i f f e r -ences between the f o l l o w i n g groups were s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .10 l e v e l o f conf i d e n c e (4). 1. Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d and the CAHPER sample 2. Indian c h i l d r e n who attended p r o v i n c i a l s c hools and Indi a n c h i l d r e n who attended Indian day and r e s i d e n t -i a l s c h o o l s 3. I n d i a n c h i l d r e n who l i v e d i n r e s i d e n t i a l s c h ools and In d i a n c h i l d r e n who l i v e d a t home (Indian day s c h o o l students) A l l c a l c u l a t i o n s were done by the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Computing Centre. As Indian day sch o o l s have on l y the lower grades and I n d i a n r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s are p r i m a r i l y f o r o l d e r c h i l d r e n , i t was im p o s s i b l e t o ensure a s u f f i c i e n t number of s u b j e c t s a t each age l e v e l t o permit a l l t h r e e t e s t s of the d i f f e r e n c e b e i n g made f o r each age-sex group. The f o l l o w i n g groups, having l e s s than s i x s u b j e c t s , were a r b i t r a r i l y e l i m i n a t e d . 1. P r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l students Boys ages e i g h t and seventeen years G i r l s ages e i g h t and twelve y e a r s Students who l i v e d i n r e s i d e n c e Boys age e i g h t y ears G i r l s age e i g h t y ears Students who l i v e d a t home Boys ages f i f t e e n t o seventeen years G i r l s ages f o u r t e e n t o seventeen y e a r s 20 REFERENCES 1. The Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Health, P h y s i c a l Educa-t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n , The CAHPER F i t n e s s - P e r f o r m - ance T e s t Manual. The Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Health, P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n , 1966, p.7. 2. I b i d . , pp.24-45. 3. I b i d . , pp.8-19. 4. G a r r e t t , H.E., S t a t i s t i c s i n Psychology and E d u c a t i o n . New York, 5th E d i t i o n , D. McKay Co., 1961, pp.212-225. CHAPTER V RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The six items of the CAHPER Fitness-Performance Test were administered to 651 Indian children i n selected Indian schools i n southern B r i t i s h Columbia. The children tested ranged i n age from eight to seventeen years. From the r e s u l t s of these tests, mean scores for the Indian children of the same age and sex were computed for each t e s t item for the following groups. 1. A l l Indian children of the same age and sex. 2. Indian children registered i n P r o v i n c i a l schools. 3. Indian children registered i n Indian schools. 4. Indian children who l i v e d i n r e s i d e n t i a l schools. 5. Indian children who l i v e d at home. I. COMPARISON OF FITNESS-PERFORMANCE OF INDIAN CHILDREN WITH CAHPER NORMS Si g n i f i c a n t differences between Indian children and the CAHPER sample i n fitness-performance were found i n at l e a s t one of the six test items for every age-sex group except boys age eight years. The mean scores for the s i x t e s t items of the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d are shown i n TABLE I I I w i t h the CAHPER means and the t v a l u e s f o r the mean d i f f e r e n c e . The m a j o r i t y of the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found i n d i c a t e d a s u p e r i o r performance by the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d . On one t e s t item, the f l e x e d arm hang, the Indian c h i l d r e n had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r mean scores f o r a l l age-sex groups except boys ages e i g h t , ten and eleve n years o l d . Two t e s t items showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r perform-ances f o r the Indian c h i l d r e n i n one h a l f of the age-sex groups. I n d i a n boys had s i g n i f i c a n t l y f a s t e r s cores f o r the s h u t t l e run except boys ages e i g h t , nine and f o u r t e e n y e a r s . Indian g i r l s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r i n the s h u t t l e run a t the ages of e i g h t , nine and ten ye a r s . On the 50 y a r d run the Indian boys ages t h i r t e e n , f i f t e e n and s i x t e e n and the Indian g i r l s except ages nine, ten, and ele v e n had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r scores than the CAHPER sample. The three s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found f o r the one minute speed s i t - u p t e s t showed t h a t the scores of the CAHPER sample were b e t t e r than those of the Indian c h i l d r e n . 23 TABLE I I I "SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDIAN MEAN SCORES AND CAHPER MEAN SCORES NUMBER TEST INDIAN CAHPER TESTED NO. MEAN S.D. MEAN S.D. t BOYS AGE 8 22 1 21.0 7.7 23.5 8.9 1.30 2 46.2 5.1 48.0 7.4 1.11 3 13.21 0.62 13.50 1.27 1.07 4 31.7 19.9 28.4 20.3 -0.74 5 9.51 1.10 9.69 1.00 0.83 6 81.6 6.9 80.5 9.3 -0.57 9 29 1 23.3 12.2 26.4 9.4 1.70* 2 49.1 9.0 52.0 7.1 2.11* 3 12.63 1.01 12.97 1.23 1.44 4 39.6 19.6 31.4 18.9 -2.28* 5 9.25 0.77 9.23 0.84 -0.11 6 78.6 7.6 76.7 9.1 -1.08 10 28 1 26.2 7.9 27.3 9.5 0.59 2 53.4 6.5 54.0 7.2 0.46 3 12.38 0.66 12.78 1.18 1.77* 4 37.7 17.1 32.8 20.1 -1.27 5 8.84 0.56 8.88 0.80 0.27 6 73.5 5.9 73.8 8.7 0.16 11 37 1 27.9 8.5 30.2 9.6 1.42 2 56.0 5.9 58.0 7.9 1.53 3 12.12 0.78 12.47 1.25 1.69* 4 40.2 26.7 34.9 12.4 -1.48 5 8.67 0.88 8.57 0.80 -0.75 6 73.1 7.5 71.9 10.2 -0.72 12 32 1 30.9 7.6 29.7 10.1 -0.66 2 59.0 6.9 60.0 8.5 0.67 3 11.80 0.83 12.32 1.18 2.64* 4 46.5 18.9 37.5 20.8 -2.38* 24 AGE TABLE I I I (continued) NUMBER TEST INDIAN CAHPER TESTED NO. MEAN S.D. MEAN S.D. 5 8.32 0.68 8.45 0.85 6 69.2 6.6 69.2 7.6 13 40 1 32.9 7.7 2 63.0 6.6 3 11.52 0.79 4 53.7 19.2 5 7.79 0.63 6 64.6 5.3 32.5 10.3 64.0 9.7 11.99 1.18 41.0 21.4 8.11 0.79 66.0 7.2 14 34 1 33.7 9.5 2 67.3 10.7 3 11.31 0.99 4 66.9 29.2 5 7.48 0.73 6 61.4 7.2 32.9 9.9 70.0 10.2 11.55 1.09 47.1 21.8 7.67 0.79 62.5 6.8 15 42 1 36.3 8.5 2 72.0 9.2 3 10.52 1.12 4 63.5 21.3 5 7.09 0.50 6 58.5 - 5.9 33.4 10.9 74.0 9.7 11.26 1.03 49.6 20.4 7.32 0.72 60.0 6.0 16 36 1 37.5 7.6 2 76.0 11.4 3 10.42 0.36 4 64.4 17.5 5 6.75 0.43 6 56.3 6.5 34.9 9.7 79.0 10.0 10.94 0.93 53.2 19.9 7.09 0.61 57.8 4.9 17 33 1 36.7 6.7 2 80.8 8.6 3 10.31 0.50 4 72.4 24.5 5 6.75 0.43 6 54.5 3.3 34.1 10.2 82.0 9.0 10.76 0.93 52.6 18.8 6.99 0.93 56.2 4.1 t 0.83 0.01 0.27 0.62 2.48* 3.62* 2.49* 1.16 0.44 1.45 1.22 4.90* 1.32 0.89 1.64 1.24 1.81* 4.13* 2.01* 1.50 1.53 1.66* 3.33* 3.21* 3.20* 1.68* 1.40 0.73 2.75* 5.46* 1.44 2.30* 25 TABLE I I I (continued) NUMBER TEST INDIAN CAHPER TESTED NO. MEAN S.D. MEAN S.D. GIRLS AGE 8 19 1 15.8 7.5 18.8 9.5 2 43.7 5.8 46.0 7.9 3 12.95 2.87 14.12 1.26 4 27.4 22.9 17.8 15.6 5 9.19 2.15 10.01 0.89 6 83.1 10.4 81.7 8.2 9 41 1 20.7 9.7 20.2 9.6 - 2 46.9 5.2 49.0 8.2 3 13.31 0.93 13.81 1.34 4 27.5 19.9 19.3 16.1 5 9.78 0.85 9.68 0.98 6 83.0 8.2 79.1 8.3 10 47 1 19.4 9.9 22.4 10.2 2 50.1 6.9 52.0 7.3 3 12.81 0.72 13.28 1.23 4 34.4 19.6 21.5 19.0 5 9.28 0.75 9.22 0.95 6 78.1 7.0 76.4 9.60 1 23.2 9.1 24.8 10.2 2 52.8 7.0 55.0 8.1 3 12.85 0.91 13.04 1.32 4 28.9 22.9 21.1 17.8 5 8.73 0.70 8.90 1.00 6 75.3 7.7 74.1 8.9 1 22.5 7.7 23.1 10.4 2 54.6 6.9 56.0 8.5 3 12.77 1.09 13.01 1.27 4 29.4 15.0 18.7 14.9 5 8.42 0.76 8.75 0.93 6 77.9 25.1 72.5 7.2 t 1.37 1.24 3.74* 2.59* 3.70* 0.73 0.31 1.63 2.36* 3.11* 0.62 2.92* 1.91* 1.71* 2.57* 4.42* 0.44 1.17 0.90 1.56 0.84 2.45* 0.93-0.80 0.30 0.83 0.97 3.68* 1.85* 2.95* 26 TABLE I I I (continued) AGE 13 14 15 16 17 NUMBER TEST INDIAN CAHPER TESTED NO. MEAN S.D. MEAN S.D. t 28 1 20.3 8.5 22.7 9.4 1.31 2 56.2 5.6 58.0 8.8 1.03 3 12.60 0.67 12.77 1.19 0.74 4 27.0 23.4 17.6 14.6 -3.11* 5 8.32 0.57 8.66 0.93 1.87* 6 71.8 6.1 71.9 7.8 0.08 33 1 20.8 8.2 20.1 10.1 -0.41 2 55.4 5.5 59.0 10.4 1.95* 3 12.35 0.63 12.65 1.19 1.40 4 22.0 14.3 16.4 14.3 -2.16* 5 8.27 0.51 8.67 0.93 2.41* 6 71.6 6.7 73.1 7.9 1.03 -38 1 19.6 7.4 22.2 9.7 1.59 2 56.2 6.8 61.0 9.5 3.03* 3 12.26 0.61 12.57 1.16 1.60 4 25.5 17.0 16.5 13.7 -3.72* 5 8.16 0.65 8.49 0.90 2.18* 6 70.7 7.8 72.4 8.4 1.18 30 1 19.6 6.1 22.5 9.5 1.65* 2 55.1 5.4 62.0 8.2 4.52* 3 12.39 0.79 12.52 1.17 0.58 4 24.9 14.7 15.8 14.0 -3.35* 5 8.15 0.62 8.45 0.90 1.78* 6 70.3 6.0 72.0 6.6 1.32 19 1 21.0 7.4 19.9 .9.6 -0.48 2 56.6 7.0 60.0 7.6 1.87* 3 12.43 0.80 12.61 1.09 0.71 4 27.1 14.8 15.8 13.6 -3.38* 5 8.16 0.54 8.51 0.77 1.90* 6 71.7 6.3 72.9 6.7 0.72 S i g n i f i c a n t a t the .10 l e v e l of co n f i d e n c e . 27 These differences were found for boys age nine years and g i r l s ages ten and sixteen. Seven of the CAHPER age-sex groups were s i g n i f i c a n t l y better on the standing broad jump te s t : boys ages nine and sixteen years and g i r l s ages ten and fourteen through to seventeen years. The 300 yard run was the only test item where s i g n i f i -cant differences were found i n favour of both the Indian children and the CAHPER sample. Indian boys ages sixteen and seventeen had s i g n i f i c a n t l y better scores on t h i s item while the CAHPER sample scores were s i g n i f i c a n t l y better for g i r l s ages nine and twelve years. Of the one hundred twenty tests of the significance of the difference made, sixty-nine showed no s i g n i f i c a n t difference and fi f t y - o n e tests showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t performances by the Indian children tested and the CAHPER sample. A t o t a l of thir t y - n i n e of the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r -ences found indicated a superior performance by the Indian children, nineteen of these were for boys age groups and twenty were for g i r l s age groups. Twelve of the s i g n i f i c a n t differences found showed the CAHPER sample to have s i g n i f i -cantly better performances, seven of these differences were 28 i n the g i r l s * scores and f i v e were i n the boy's scores. A l l but two of the s i g n i f i c a n t l y better performances for the Indian children were found i n three te s t items: the flexed arm hang, the shuttle run and the 50 yard run. The flexed arm hang had seventeen of the t o t a l number of s i g n i f i c a n t differences, ten of them for g i r l s ' age groups and seven for boys* age groups. The shuttle run showed the Indian children to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y better i n ten age groups, seven of the boys* and three of the g i r l s ' age groups. Ten s i g n i f i c a n t differences were also found i n the scores f o r the 50 yard run, seven of these were for g i r l s ' age groups and three were for the boys' age groups. Seven of the s i g n i f i c a n t l y better scores for the CAHPER sample were for the standing broad jump. Five of these differences were for g i r l s ' age groups and two were for boys' age groups. Three s i g n i f i c a n t differences for the one minute speed sit-up t e s t and two for the 300 yard run showed the CAHPER sample to be superior. 29 I I . COMPARISON OF FITNESS PERFORMANCE OF PROVINCIAL SCHOOL STUDENTS AND INDIAN SCHOOL STUDENTS Te s t s c o r e s f o r each age-sex group were separated by the type o f sc h o o l the student attended t o permit a comparison of Indian c h i l d r e n i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l system w i t h I n d i a n c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g segregated I n d i a n s c h o o l s . The number o f students i n each o f the age-sex groups d i d not permit t h i s comparison f o r a l l groups. E l i m i n a t i o n o f groups from t h i s p a r t o f the study was made f o r one of two reasons. 1. The t o t a l number of students i n e i t h e r type o f sc h o o l was l e s s than s i x . (Boys ages e i g h t and seventeen y e a r s and g i r l s ages e i g h t and twelve y e a r s ) . 2. The p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l student group was the same as the r e s i d e n t student group and t h e r e f o r e s t u d i e d o n l y i n the comparison of r e s i d e n t and day stu d e n t s . (Boys ages nine and ten y e a r s ) . The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found between the f i t n e s s performance of Indian c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g p r o v i n c i a l s c h ools and Indian s c h o o l students a l l i n d i c a t e d a s u p e r i o r perform-ance by the p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l students. TABLE IV shows the mean scores o b t a i n e d f o r the students of the two types of 30 TABLE IV CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST MEAN SCORES FOR PROVINCIAL AND INDIAN SCHOOL STUDENTS PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS INDIAN SCHOOLS TEST NO. NO. NO. TESTED MEAN S.D. TESTED MEAN S.D. t BOYS AGE 11 1 13 30.77 5.75 24 26.33 9.37 1.51 2 56.69 7.05 55.83 5.24 0.53 3 12.01 0.52 12.17 0.90 -0.60 4 48.15 33.63 3 5.87 21.68 1.31 5 8.99 1.13 8.50 0.67 1.61 6 73.54 8.15 72.92 7.31 . 0.23 12 1 10 32.60 3.75 22 30.14 8.81 0.82 2 62.60 6.53 57.32 6.51 2.06* 3 11.57 0.68 11.84 0.90 -0.84 4 56.70 14.81 41.86 19.07 2.11* 5 8.62 0.76 8.19 0.61 1.67 6 70.00 6.32 68.86 6.78 0.43 13 1 12 38.83 8.32 28 30.43 5.87 3.54* 2 67.33 7.43 61.18 5.38 2.86* 3 11.32 0.63 11.60 0.85 -0.98 4 63.25 19.98 49.64 17.69 2.09* 5 7.75 0.95 7.81 0.45 -0.25 6 63.08 6.80 65.32 4.48 -1.20 14 1 12 39.17 7.92 22 30.68 9.13 2.63* 2 72.50 7.79 64.50 11.10 2.15* 3 11.17 0.75 11.39 1.12 -0.60 4 88.08 20.72 55.36 26.87 3.56* 5 7.34 0.40 7.56 0.86 -0.80 6 59.08 5.16 62.68 7.94 -1.37 15 1 12 39.50 13.55 30 34.97 5.17 1.53 2 76.75 8.41 70.17 8.97 2.13* 31 TABLE IV (continued) AGE PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS INDIAN SCHOOLS TEST NO. NO. NO. TESTED MEAN S.D. TESTED MEAN S.D. t 3 11.14 0.85 10.88 1.22 0.67 4 71.25 17.19 60.37 22.29 1.48 5 7.11 0.43 7.08 0.53 0.14 6 60. 58 7.52 57.70 5.07 1.40 1 7 38.86 12.54 29 37.14 6.21 0.51 2 80.43 4.79 74.93 12.34 1.12 3 10.61 0.17 10.37 0.38 1.64 4 62.29 10.98 64.90 18.81 -0.34 5 6.67 0.31 6.77 0.46 -0.54 6 57.14 4.26 56.07 6.92 0.38 GIRLS AGE 1 15 26.33 12.07 26 17.42 6.18 3.04* 2 48.67 3.50 45.85 5.75 1.68* 3 12.82 0.67 13.59 0.96 -2.67* 4 31.47 16.77 25.27 21.45 0.94 5 9.79 1.05 9.77 0.73 0.05 6 84.60 9.00 82.11 7.68 0.91 1 7 23.71 15.72 40 18.67 8.56 1.21 2 51.57 3.41 49.85 7.34 0.60 3 12.19 0.24 12.92 0.73 -2.59* 4 43.71 19.53 32.75 19.37 1.35 5 8.69 0.59 9.39 0.73 -2.35* 6 77.86 5.58 78.12 7.27 -0.09 1 11 29.64 6.70 24 20.25 8.61 3.11* 2 56.27 6.21 51.21 6.88 2.02* 3 12.62 0.83 12..95 0.95 -0.98 4 34.54 14.43 • 26.33 25.77 0.96 5 8.34 0.46 8.91 0.72 -2.34* 6 75.18 5.19 75.42 8.72 -0.08 32 TABLE IV (continued) PROVINCIAL SCHOOLS TEST NO. NO. TESTED MEAN S.D. INDIAN SCHOOLS NO. TESTED MEAN S.D. AGE 1 9 24.11 9.64 19 18.47 7.49 1.63 2 57.11 5.18 55.84 5.86 0.53 3 12.42 0.54 12.68 0.73 -0.93 4 19.89 8.74 30.42 27.41 -1.08 5 8.23 0.63 8.37 0.55 -0.56 6 71.78 5.07 71.89 6.66 -0.00 1 15 21.07 8.30 18 20.67 8.42 0.13 2 57.67 5.35 53.56 4.94 2.22* 3 12.37 0.53 12.34 0.72 0.15 4 20.20 15.39 23.56 13.61 -0.64 5 8.23 0.42 8,31 0.58 -0.45 6 72.40 7.81 71.00 5.70 0.58 1 13 19.92 8.59 25 19.44 6.85 0.18 2 58.08 6.50 55.20 6.82 1.22 3 12.17 0.62 12.31 0.62 -0.66 4 27.54 19.78 24.40 15.63 0.52 5 8.09 0.67 8.20 0.65 -0.45 6 72.85 9.98 69.60 6.36 1.19 1 10 22.30 6.96 20 18.20 5.27 1.74* 2 58.00 4.97 53.60 5.09 2.17* 3 12.05 0.61 12.56 0.82 -1.70* 4 28.20 16.42 23.20 13.96 0.84 5 8.04 0.67 8.20 0.61 -0.65 6 68.70 3.47 71.15 6.91 -1.02 1 9 20.67 8.75 10 21.30 6.36 -0.17 2 57.00 8.00 56.20 6.32 0.23 3 12.47 0.90 12.39 0.75 0.19 4 29.00 13.64 25.30 16.30 0.50 5 8.00 0.49 8.31 0.56 -1.21 6 70.67 5.43 72.70 1.11, -0.65 S i g n i f i c a n t at the .10 l e v e l of confidence. 33 s c h o o l s and the t v a l u e s f o r the mean d i f f e r e n c e s . In e i g h t o f the f o u r t e e n age-sex groups i n c l u d e d i n t h i s comparison, the p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l students had s i g n i f i -c a n t l y b e t t e r s c o r e s on the st a n d i n g broad jump. These d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r boys ages twelve t o f i f t e e n y e a rs and f o r g i r l s ages nine, eleven, f o u r t e e n and s i x t e e n . The one-minute speed s i t - u p t e s t produced the second l a r g e s t number of s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s . Scores f o r boys ages t h i r t e e n and f o u r t e e n years and f o r g i r l s ages nine, e l e v e n and s i x t e e n were s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r f o r the p r o v i n -c i a l s c h o o l s t u d e n t s . No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found i n the boys' s c o r e s on th r e e of the t e s t items: the 50 y a r d run, the s h u t t l e run and the 300 yard run. There were s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances on the f l e x e d arm hang f o r p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l boys ages twelve, t h i r t e e n and f o u r t e e n . Only two t e s t items showed no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the performance of p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l g i r l s and Indian s c h o o l g i r l s : the f l e x e d arm hang and the 300 y a r d run. P r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l g i r l s ages nine, ten, and s i x t e e n years had s i g n i f i c a n t l y f a s t e r s c o r e s f o r the s h u t t l e run, and the 50 ya r d run showed p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l g i r l s ages t e n and 34 e l e v e n were s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than the Indian s c h o o l g i r l s . A l l p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l students t e s t e d were l i v i n g i n I n d i a n r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s . S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found i n the f i t n e s s performance o f Indian s c h o o l and p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l students may, i n p a r t , r e f l e c t the i n f l u -ence of the r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l on the p h y s i c a l development of these students r a t h e r than the i n f l u e n c e o f a d i f f e r e n t s c h o o l programme. However, d i f f e r e n c e s were found In age-sex groups where the m a j o r i t y o f the Indian s c h o o l students were a l s o l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e . The Indian s c h o o l group of s i x t e e n year o l d g i r l s , made up of ni n e t e e n r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l students and o n l y one day s c h o o l student, had s i g n i f i -c a n t l y poorer performances f o r the one minute speed s i t - u p , the s t a n d i n g broad giump, and the s h u t t l e run t e s t s . Other groups where the m a j o r i t y o f the Indian s c h o o l students were l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e a l s o had s i g n i f i c a n t l y poorer performances than the p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l students on some t e s t items. I I I . COMPARISON OF FITNESS PERFORMANCE OF RESIDENCE AND DAY STUDENTS , The t e s t f o r the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the d i f f e r e n c e of the mean sco r e s o f Indian c h i l d r e n l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e and the mean sco r e s o f Indian c h i l d r e n l i v i n g a t home showed r e s i d e n t students t o have s u p e r i o r performances i n a l l but one o f the twenty-seven s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found. TABLE V shows the mean scores and the t v a l u e s f o r the mean d i f f e r e n c e s f o r those age-sex groups which i n c l u d e d a t l e a s t s i x r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l students and s i x day stud e n t s . S e v e r a l age-sex groups i n c l u d e d too few r e s i d e n t or day students t o be i n c l u d e d i n t h i s comparison: boys ages e i g h t y e a r s and f i f t e e n t o seventeen years and g i r l s ages e i g h t y e a r s and f o u r t e e n t o seventeen y e a r s . R e s i d e n t students had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r perform-ances f o r the sta n d i n g broad jump i n e i g h t o f the eleve n age-sex groups i n c l u d e d i n t h i s comparison. The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r boys ages nine, ten, t h i r t e e n and f o u r t e e n years and g i r l s ages nine t o el e v e n and t h i r t e e n y e a r s . Boys l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances than the day students on the f l e x e d arm hang a t a l l ages except nine y e a r s . Only one s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r -ence was found i n the g i r l s * s c o r e s f o r t h i s t e s t item, g i r l s age t e n y e a r s . 3.6 TABLE V SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEAN SCORES OF STUDENTS LIVING IN RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS AND DAY SCHOOL STUDENTS STUDENTS LIVING STUDENTS LIVING IN RESIDENCE AT HOME TEST NO. NO. NO. TESTED MEAN S.D. TESTED MEAN S.D, BOYS AGE 9 1 7 28.57 14.69 22 21.64 11.14 1.28 2 56.14 6.20 46.86 8.61 2.55* 3 12.26 0.96 12.75 1.01 -1.11 4 34.86 13.61 41.14 21.20 -0.71 5 9.09 0.90 9.30 0.73 -0.61 6 76.86 6.41 79.09 8.03 -0.65 1 6 30.67 10.46 22 25.00 6.78 1.54 2 57.83 5.71 52.14 6.29 1.93* 3 12.05 0.37 12.47 0.70 -1.38 4 56.33 7.06 32.64 15.43 3.52* 5 8.77 0.76 8.86 0.52 -0.33 6 72.83 3.71 73.73 6.47 -0.31 1 15 30.73 5.35 22 25,95 9.70 1.69* 2 56.67 6.66 55.50 5.37 0.57 3 11.95 0.52 12.23 0.91 -1.06 4 51.27 32.73 32.64 18.98 2.13* 5 8.87 1.10 8.54 0.68 1.08 6 73.33 8.01 73.00 7.33 0.13 1 15 33.00 5.59 17 29.06 8.79 1.44 2 60.80 6.25 57.35 7.18 1.39 3 11.69 0.79 11.82 0.89 -0.44 4 57.20 14.99 37.06 17.22 3.40* 5 8.55 0.73 8.12 0.59 1.76* 6 69.93 5.85 68.59 7.25 0.55 37 TABLE V (continued) STUDENTS LIVING STUDENTS LIVING IN RESIDENCE AT HOME TEST NO. NO. NO. TESTED MEAN S.D. TESTED MEAN S.D. AGE 1 24 34.25 8.82 16 31.00 5.14 1.30 2 65.46 6.52 59.37 4.99 3.08* 3 11.23 0.57 11.95 0.90 -3.03* 4 61.96 18.84 41.37 12.03 3.78* 5 5.82 0.70 7.74 0.51 0.42 6 63.46 5.40 66.44 4.75 -1.75* 1 22 37.04 9.10 12 27.50 7.09 3.06* 2 70.73 7.59 61.08 12.87 2.67* 3 10.96 0.72 11.95 1.14 -2.99* 4 75.82 26.45 50.58 27.90 2.53* 5 7.32 0.45 . 7.77 1.03 -1.71* 6 59.32 4.42 62.25 9.69 -2.37* GIRLS AGE 1 22 23.00 11.70 19 18.00 5.88 1.65 2 49.41 4.63 43.95 4.21 3.83* 3 13.03 0.74 13.63 1.05 -2.11* 4 29.45 14.71 25.32 24.82 0.64 5 9.85 0.95 9.69 0.72 0.57 6 83.14 8.48 82.89 8.01 0.09 1 17 22.18 11.36 30 17.87 7.64 1.42 2 54.88 5.58 47.40 6.11 4.07* 3 12.47 0.58 13.00 0.73 -2.51* 4 42.53 17.45 29.77 19.47 2.19* 5 8.98 0.82 9.45 0.66 -2.10* 6 77.00 6.68 78.70 7.21 -0.78 38 TABLE V (continued) TEST NO. STUDENTS LIVING IN RESIDENCE NO. TESTED MEAN S.D. STUDENTS LIVING AT HOME NO. TESTED MEAN S.D. AGE 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 16 27.25 55.50 12.79 34.75 8.48 74.12 7.08 5.76 0.87 16.82 0.45 5.00 19 19.79 50.53 12.90 24.00 8.94 76.37 9.28 7.28 0.97 26.46 0.80 9.43 2.54* 2.15* -0.35 1.36 -1.95* -0.83 12 1 11 23.27 8.82 17 22.00 7.13 0.40 2 57.36 6.33 52.88 6.80 1.69 3 12.63 0.95 12.86 1.19 -0.54 4 35.27 17.42 25.65 12.35 1.65 5 8.19 0.43 8.56 0.90 -1.24 6 70.64 4.50 82.59 31.54 -1.20 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 14 23.50 58.43 12.51 24.64 8.36 73.00 8.10 5.36 0.69 11.78 0.55 7.47 14 17.07 54.07 12.69 29.43 8.30 70.57 7.86 5.09 0.67 31.44 0.60 4.27 2.05* 2.13* •0.70 -0.51 0.28 1.02 * S i g n i f i c a n t a t the .10 l e v e l o f c o n f i d e n c e . 39 S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the mean scores f o r the s h u t t l e run showed r e s i d e n t boys ages t h i r t e e n and f o u r t e e n years and r e s i d e n t g i r l s ages nine and t e n years t o be s u p e r i o r . Twelve year o l d boys a t t e n d i n g Indian day sc h o o l s had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r mean score on the 50 ya r d run. Res i d e n t boys age f o u r t e e n and r e s i d e n t g i r l s ages ten and ele v e n scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r on t h i s t e s t item. The one minute speed s i t - u p t e s t showed r e s i d e n t boys ages e l e v e n and f o u r t e e n years and r e s i d e n t g i r l s ages e l e v e n and t h i r t e e n t o have s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r mean s c o r e s . No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found i n the g i r l s ' s c o res f o r the 300 yard run. Resident boys ages t h i r t e e n and f o u r t e e n years had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r scores on t h i s t e s t item. With the e x c e p t i o n o f twelve year o l d g i r l s , students l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances on a t l e a s t one t e s t item a t every age l e v e l . Fourteen year o l d boys l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r mean sc o r e s f o r a l l s i x t e s t items. The r e s u l t s o f the comparison of the f i t n e s s perform-ance of r e s i d e n t and day students i n d i c a t e s t h a t the care o f 40 the I n d i a n c h i l d r e n i n r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s may promote p h y s i c a l development b e t t e r than the care I n d i a n c h i l d r e n r e c e i v e i n t h e i r homes. P r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s appear t o a i d p h y s i c a l development b e t t e r than I n d i a n s c h o o l s . However, the s e p a r a t i o n o f the e f f e c t s o f sch o o l and home e n v i r o n -ment on the f i t n e s s performance o f the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d i n t h i s study was not p o s s i b l e . Many of the r e s i d e n t students attended p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s . Although the study i n c l u d e d c h i l d r e n who l i v e d i n r e s i d e n c e and attended I n d i a n s c h o o l s t h e i r numbers are small and no attempt was made to compare t h e i r performance w i t h r e s i d e n t students a t t e n d i n g p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s . Indian c h i l d r e n who l i v e d a t home and attended p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s were not i n c l u d e d i n the study. I n c l u s i o n o f these students might have a l t e r e d the r e s u l t s o f the comparison o f p r o v i n c i a l and Indian s c h o o l s t u d e n t s . CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t was ad m i n i s t e r e d t o 651 In d i a n c h i l d r e n from the ages of e i g h t t o seventeen y e a r s . The s u b j e c t s f o r t h i s study were students o f s e l e c t e d Indian s c h o o l s or were l i v i n g i n Indian r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s study. T e s t s c o r e s were used t o make the f o l l o w i n g compar-i s o n s of f i t n e s s performance of c h i l d r e n o f the same age and sex. 1. I n d i a n c h i l d r e n and other Canadian c h i l d r e n i n c l u d e d i n the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r H e a l t h P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n 1964 survey o f the f i t n e s s performance of Canadian c h i l d r e n (1). 2. Indian c h i l d r e n who attended p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s and Ind i a n c h i l d r e n who attended f e d e r a l l y operated Indian s c h o o l s . 3. I n d i a n c h i l d r e n who l i v e d i n r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s and Ind i a n c h i l d r e n who l i v e d a t home. Mean sc o r e s and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r each o f the groups i n v o l v e d i n the above comparisons were computed by the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Computing Centre. Mean d i f f e r e n c e s were t e s t e d f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e a t the .10 l e v e l of c o n f i d e n c e . Comparison of Indian C h i l d r e n and CAHPER Sample A l l s i x t e s t items of the CAHPER F i t n e s s - P e r f o r m -ance T e s t showed there were s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance between the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d and the CAHPER sample. As shown i n TABLE VI which summarizes the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found, the s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances of the Indian c h i l d r e n were co n c e n t r a t e d i n thr e e t e s t items and the CAHPER means which were s i g n i f i -c a n t l y b e t t e r were co n c e n t r a t e d i n two t e s t items. Only one t e s t item showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances by both groups. I n d i a n g i r l s a t a l l ages showed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performance on the f l e x e d arm hang and a l l but three of the Indian boys' groups were s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r on t h i s item. The s h u t t l e run showed seven of the In d i a n boys' groups and three of the Indian g i r l s ' groups t o have s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances. In the f i f t y y a r d run seven of the Indian g i r l s ' groups and three o f the Indian boys' groups had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances. 43 TABLE VI SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES IN FITNESS PERFORMANCE BETWEEN INDIAN CHILDREN TESTED AND CAHPER SAMPLE STANDING FLEXED 50 300 SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP SHUTTLE RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN BOYS AGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 CAHPER CAHPER CAHPER Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian GIRLS AGE 8 9 10 CAHPER CAHPER 11 12 13 14 15 16 CAHPER 17 CAHPER CAHPER CAHPER CAHPER Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian Indian CAHPER CAHPER Indian - Mean score of the Indian children tested s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than CAHPER sample CAHPER - Mean score for CAHPER sample s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than the Indian children tested 44 In the standing broad jump and the one minute speed s i t - u p t e s t s the CAHPER means were found t o be s i g n i f i c a n t l y -b e t t e r . S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the sta n d i n g broad jump were found i n f i v e of the g i r l s * age groups and two of the boys'. Only t h r e e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r the one minute speed s i t - u p t e s t : two f o r the g i r l s ' age groups and one f o r the boys'. The one t e s t item which showed s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f a v o u r i n g both the Indian c h i l d r e n and the CAHPER sample was the t hree hundred yard run. The two o l d e s t Indian boys' groups were s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r i n t h i s item; while two of the CAHPER means f o r the g i r l s ' age groups were s i g n i f i -c a n t l y b e t t e r . Comparison of P r o v i n c i a l and Indian School Students In the comparison of the performance on the CAHPER Fitne s s - p e r f o r m a n c e T e s t o f p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l students and Ind i a n s c h o o l students, a l l of the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found i n d i c a t e d a s u p e r i o r performance by p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l s t u d e n t s . TABLE V I I summarizes the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found. Only two t e s t items, the sta n d i n g broad jump and the one-minute speed s i t - u p t e s t , showed s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s 45 TABLE VII SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES IN FITNESS PERFORMANCE BETWEEN PROVINCIAL AND INDIAN SCHOOL STUDENTS STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 300 SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN BOYS AGE 11 12 Prov. Prov. 13 Prov. Prov. Prov. 14 Prov. Prov. Prov. 15 Prov. 16 GIRLS AGE 9 Prov. Prov. Prov. 10 Prov. Prov. 11 Prov. Prov. Prov. 13 14 Prov. 15 16 Prov. Prov. Prov. Prov. - Mean score of P r o v i n c i a l School Students s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than Indian School Students 46 i n the performance of both the boys and the g i r l s . Four of the p r o v i n c i a l school boys' age groups and four of the p r o v i n c i a l school g i r l s ' age groups had s i g n i f i c a n t l y better performances i n the standing broad jump. In the one-minute speed sit-up test, two of the p r o v i n c i a l school boys' age groups and three of the p r o v i n c i a l school g i r l s ' age groups had s i g n i f i c a n t l y better performances. The flexed arm hang was the only other test item i n which s i g n i f i c a n t differences i n the boys' performances were found. Three of the p r o v i n c i a l school boys' age groups had s i g n i f i c a n t l y better performances on t h i s item. No s i g n i f i c a n t differences werr found i n the g i r l s ' performance of the flexed arm hang. The p r o v i n c i a l school g i r l s had s i g n i f i c a n t l y better performances i n both the shuttle run and the f i f t y yard run. Three age groups were s i g n i f i c a n t l y better i n the shuttle run and two age groups had s i g n i f i c a n t l y better performances i n the f i f t y yard run. No s i g n i f i c a n t differences were found i n the perform-ance of the three hundred yard run. Comparison of Residence and Day Students S i g n i f i c a n t differences i n the performance of Indian 47 c h i l d r e n l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e and Indian c h i l d r e n l i v i n g a t home were found i n a l l items o f the CAHPER F i t n e s s - P e r f o r m -ance T e s t . Residence students had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances i n a l l but one of the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found. TABLE V I I I summarizes the r e s u l t s o f the comparison of r e s i d e n c e and day stud e n t s . On the sta n d i n g broad jump t e s t , o n l y two o f the r e s i d e n c e student boys' age groups and one of the r e s i d e n c e student g i r l s ' age groups d i d not have s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances than the day stud e n t s . A l l but one of the r e s i d e n c e student boys' age groups had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances than the day students on the f l e x e d arm hang wh i l e o n l y one of the r e s i d e n c e student g i r l s ' age groups had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performance on t h i s item. Two t e s t items, the one-minute speed s i t - u p and the s h u t t l e run, showed two of the boys' and two o f the g i r l s ' r e s i d e n c e student age groups t o have s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances. One Day student boys' age group had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performance than the r e s i d e n c e students on the f i f t y y a r d run. Residence students had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances on t h i s item i n one o f the boys' and two of the 4 8 TABLE V I I I SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES IN FITNESS PERFORMANCE BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND DAY STUDENTS STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 300 SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN BOYS AGE 9 Res. 10 Res. 11 Res. 12 13 Res. 14 Res. Res. Res. Res. Res. Res. Res. Res. Res. Day Res. Res. Res. GIRLS AGE 9 Res. Res. 10 Res. Res. Res. Res. 11 Res. Res. Res, 12 13 Res. Res. Res. - Students l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e had mean sco r e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than students l i v i n g a t home. Day - Students l i v i n g a t home had mean s c o r e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than r e s i d e n t students 49 g i r l s ' age groups. .No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found i n the g i r l s ' performances of the three hundred y a r d run. Two r e s i d e n c e student boys' age groups had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r perform-ances on t h i s item. CONCLUSIONS 1. There are s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance of the CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t between the Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d and other Canadian c h i l d r e n . The Indian c h i l d r e n t e s t e d had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances i n f o u r t e s t items. The t e s t items and the number of age-sex groups i n which t h e i r performance was s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r were: the f l e x e d arm hang (17), the s h u t t l e run (10), the f i f t y y a r d run (10), and the three hundred y a r d run (2). The t e s t items and the number of age-sex groups i n which the CAHPER sample had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r s c o r e s were: the standing broad jump (7), the one minute speed s i t - u p (3), and the three hundred y a r d run (2). 2. The Indian c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g p r o v i n c i a l s c hools and the Ind i a n c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g Indian schools d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i -c a n t l y i n t h e i r performance of the CAHPER F i t n e s s - P e r f o r m -ance t e s t . A l l s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s found favoured the 50 p r o v i n c i a l s c h o o l students. The boys had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances on the standing broad jump, the one minute speed s i t - u p , and the f l e x e d arm hang. The g i r l s had s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances on the standing broad jump, the one minute speed s i t - u p , the s h u t t l e run and the f i f t y y a r d run. 3. The performance on the CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t of the Indian c h i l d r e n who were l i v i n g i n r e s i d e n c e d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from the performance of the Indian c h i l d r e n who were l i v i n g a t home. Only one of the s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r -ences found favoured the Indian c h i l d r e n who were l i v i n g a t home. The s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performances by the r e s i d e n c e students were found i n a l l t e s t items. IMPLICATIONS Although i t was beyond the scope o f t h i s study to determine the reasons f o r the d i f f e r e n c e s found i n f i t n e s s performance of Indian c h i l d r e n and other Canadian c h i l d r e n , t here are s e v e r a l p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n s of the r e s u l t s which may warrent f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h . 1. The p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t i e s of c h i l d r e n i n Indian communities may d i f f e r from the a c t i v i t i e s o f c h i l d r e n i n non-Indian communities. 51 2. The p h y s i c a l growth and development of In d i a n c h i l d r e n may d i f f e r from other Canadian c h i l d r e n as a r e s u l t o f l i v i n g c o n d i t i o n s i n I n d i a n communities, because of an i n h e r i t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f the Indian people, or because I n d i a n c h i l d r e n are encouraged t o a c q u i r e p h y s i c a l s k i l l s which d i f f e r from the s k i l l s emphasized i n non-Indian communities. 3. There may be d i f f e r e n c e s i n the k i n d and amount of p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t y these c h i l d r e n g e t i n the Indian s c h o o l programme. BIBLIOGRAPHY 52 BIBLIOGRAPHY Annual Report of the I n d i a n A f f a i r s Branch. Department  of Northern A f f a i r s and N a t i o n a l Resources Annual  Report F i s c a l Year 1965-66. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1967. Annual Report of the Indian A f f a i r s Branch. Report of  the Department o f C i t i z e n s h i p and Immigration  1965-66. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1967. Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Health, P h y s i c a l Education, and R e c r e a t i o n . The CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t  Manual. Toronto: Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Health, P h y s i c a l E d u c a t i o n and R e c r e a t i o n , 1966. C r a t t y , Bryant J . Psychology and P h y s i c a l A c t i v i t y . Englewood C l i f f s , New J e r s e y : P r e n t i c e H a l l , Inc., 1968. C r a t t y , Bryant J . S o c i a l Dimensions of P h y s i c a l A c t i v i t y . Englewood C l i f f s , New J e r s e y : P r e n t i c e H a l l Inc., 1967. Department of C i t i z e n s h i p and Immigration, Indian A f f a i r s Branch. The Indian i n T r a n s i t i o n : I n d i a n E d u c a t i o n . Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1962. Department of C i t i z e n s h i p and Immigration, Indian A f f a i r s Branch. The Indian i n T r a n s i t i o n : The Indian Today. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1962. Department of N a t i o n a l H e a l t h and Welfare. Annual Report  M e d i c a l S e r v i c e s 1965. Ottawa: Department of N a t i o n a l H e a l t h and Welfare, September 1966. G a r r e t t , H.E. S t a t i s t i c s i n Psychology and E d u c a t i o n . F i f t h e d i t i o n . New York: D. McKay Company, 1961. 53 Hawthorn, H.B., C.S. Belshaw and S.M. Jamieson. The Indians o f B r i t i s h Columbia. U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto Press and the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1960. Jordan, C. " E v a l u a t i o n o f the CAHPER Fitness-Performance T e s t . " Unpublished M.P.E. T h e s i s . U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1966. Ikeda, N. "A Comparison o f P h y s i c a l F i t n e s s o f C h i l d r e n i n Iowa, U.S.A. and Tokyo, Japan." Research  Q u a r t e r l e y , vol.33, December 1962 t pp. 541-551. Knuttgen, H.G. "Comparison o f F i t n e s s o f Danish and American School C h i l d r e n . " Research Q u a r t e r l y , vol.32, May, 1961, pp. 190-196. M e d i c a l S e r v i c e s , Department o f N a t i o n a l H e a l t h and Welfare. Report on V i t a l S t a t i s t i c s o f R e g i s t e r e d  Canadian Indians 1964. Parminter, A.V. "The Development o f I n t e g r a t e d S c h o o l i n g f o r B r i t i s h Columbia Indian C h i l d r e n . " Unpublished M.A. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1964. Peterson, L.R. "Indian E d u c a t i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia." Unpublished M.A. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1959. Ponthieux, N.A. and D.B. Barker. "Socioeconomic S t a t u s and P h y s i c a l F i t n e s s . " Research Q u a r t e r l e y . vol.36, December 1965, pp. 464-467. Thompson, M e r r i l E. and Claude C. Dove. "A Comparison of P h y s i c a l Achievement o f Anglo and Spanish American Boys i n J u n i o r High S c h o o l . " Research  Q u a r t e r l e y . vol.13, 1942, pp. 341-346. APPENDICES 54 APPENDIX A DESCRIPTION OF THE CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST The One Minute Speed S i t - U p s Equipment: Gym mat and stop-watch or timer. S t a r t : The s u b j e c t assumes a b a c k - l y i n g p o s i t i o n on the mat, f i n g e r s i n t e r l a c e d behind h i s head. The knees are bent and the f e e t are h e l d f l a t on the f l o o r by a p a r t n e r . Performance: The s u b j e c t s i t s up and touches both elbows t o h i s knees. Then he r e t u r n s t o the s t a r t i n g p o s i t i o n . S c o r i n g : The movement s i t - u p and r e t u r n i s counted as one e x e c u t i o n . The t o t a l score i s the number of complete executions performed i n 60 seconds. Count when the elbows touch the knees. Allow one t r i a l . C o n t r o l s : The p a r t n e r k n e e l s s t r a d d l i n g the performer's f e e t . He p l a c e s h i s hands on the c a l v e s of the s u b j e c t ' s l e g s j u s t below the back of the knee t o p r e v e n t the s u b j e c t from s l i d i n g and t o m a i n t a i n the s t a r t i n g p o s i t i o n of the l e g s throughout the t e s t . Only the shoulders have to touch the f l o o r . The s i t - u p s do not need t o be performed c o n t i n u -o u s l y . The Standing Broad Jump Equipment: A 10 f o o t tumbling mat i s recommended and a c l o t h tape measure. S t a r t : The s u b j e c t assumes a p o s i t i o n w i t h the f e e t s l i g h t l y a p a r t and the toes behind the t a k e - o f f l i n e . 55 Performance: The h i p s , knees and ankles should be bent enough so t h a t the s u b j e c t can v i g o r o u s l y push w i t h h i s l e g s , and swing h i s arms t o jump as f a r forward as p o s s i b l e . S c o r i n g : Measurement i s i n terms of inches t o the n e a r e s t i n c h from the t a k e - o f f l i n e t o the h e e l o f the f o o t n e a r e s t the t a k e - o f f l i n e . C o n t r o l s : The suggested t a k e - o f f angle should be between 30 and 45 degrees. Two v a l i d t r i a l s are allowed, the b e t t e r t r i a l r e c o r d e d . I f any p a r t of the body touches behind the h e e l s , the jump w i l l be c o n s i d e r e d i n v a l i d . Two or t h r e e p r a c t i c e t r i a l s w i l l be allowed. The S h u t t l e Run Equipment: Two wooden b l o c k s (2" x 3" x 3") and a stop-watch c a l i b r a t e d t o one-tenth of a second. S t a r t : The s u b j e c t l i e s f a c e down, hands a t the s i d e of the c h e s t and the forehead oh the s t a r t i n g l i n e . Performance: On the s i g n a l , the s u b j e c t jumps to h i s f e e t and runs 30 f e e t t o the l i n e . He p i c k s up one b l o c k of wood, r e t u r n s t o the s t a r t i n g l i n e , and p l a c e s the b l o c k behind t h i s l i n e . He r e t u r n s t o the i n i t i a l l i n e , p i c k s up the second b l o c k of wood, and runs back a c r o s s the f i n i s h l i n e . S c o r i n g : Measurement i s i n terms of seconds t o the near-e s t t e n t h of a second from the s t a r t i n g s i g n a l u n t i l the s u b j e c t ' s c h e s t c r o s s e s the f i n i s h l i n e . C o n t r o l s : The t e s t should be taken i n gym shoes or bare-f o o t . A 'ready' warning s i g n a l i s g i v e n p r i o r t o the s t a r t i n g s i g n a l . Two t r i a l s w i t h s u f f i c i e n t r e s t between are allowed and the b e t t e r t r i a l i s r e c o r d e d . 56 The F l e x e d Arm Hang Equipment: A doorway gym bar or h o r i z o n t a l bar p l a c e d 6 f e e t from the f l o o r ; a bench and a timer or stop-watch. S t a r t : The s u b j e c t takes a r e v e r s e grasp on the bar (palms towards f a c e ) . He i s a s s i s t e d t o the p o s i t i o n on the bar so t h a t h i s eyes are a t the l e v e l of the bar. The arms are f u l l y bent. Performance: The s u b j e c t h o l d s h i m s e l f i n t h i s hanging p o s i t i o n as l o n g as he i s a b l e . S c o r i n g : The t o t a l p e r i o d of time t h a t the s u b j e c t can m a i n t a i n the exact p o s i t i o n i s determined t o the n e a r e s t second. C o n t r o l s : The s u b j e c t must keep the eyes a t the l e v e l of the bar. When the s u b j e c t ' s head drops below the bar, the t e s t i s terminated. One t r i a l i s a l l o w -ed. The t e s t e r counts the seconds out l o u d . The 50 Yard Run Equipment: A 50 y a r d straightaway w i t h markers or stakes p l a c e d a t the s t a r t and the f i n i s h l i n e ; a s t o p -watch c a l i b r a t e d t o one-tenth o f a second and a s t a r t i n g f l a g . S t a r t : A r a c i n g crouch s t a r t or a s t a n d i n g p o s i t i o n may be assumed. Performance: On the s t a r t i n g s i g n a l 'ready', 'go*, the s t a r t e r drops the f l a g and the runner s p r i n t s the 50 y a r d d i s t a n c e as f a s t as he can. S c o r i n g : The e l a p s e d time from the s t a r t i n g s i g n a l t o the passage o f the runner's chest a c r o s s the f i n i s h l i n e i s scored t o the n e a r e s t t e n t h of a second. S7 C o n t r o l s : The t e s t i s taken i n gym shoes. Only one runner i s t e s t e d a t a time on a course, but one t e s t e r may time two runners on a d j a c e n t courses w i t h a s p l i t timer or two stop-watches. The 300 Yard Run Equipment: A 50 y a r d straightaway with markers or stakes p l a c e d at- the s t a r t and the f i n i s h l i n e , a stop-watch and a s t a r t i n g f l a g . S t a r t : A r a c i n g crouch s t a r t or a s t a n d i n g p o s i t i o n may be assumed. Performance: On the s t a r t i n g s i g n a l the s u b j e c t runs s t r a i g h t up and around the stake marker and back over the 50 y a r d straightaway. The c i r c u i t i s run 3 times t o make up the 300 y a r d s . S c o r i n g : The e l a p s e d time from the s t a r t i n g s i g n a l t o the passage o f the runner's c h e s t a c r o s s the f i n i s h l i n e i s s c o r e d t o the n e a r e s t second. C o n t r o l s : The t e s t i s taken i n gym shoes. Only one runner i s t e s t e d a t a time on a course, but one t e s t e r may time two runners on a d j a c e n t courses w i t h a s p l i t t imer or two stop watches. 58 APPENDIX B LETTER FROM DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE 1967 The S e c r e t a r i a t o f the Indian A f f a i r s Branch have r e f e r r e d your l e t t e r , dated J u l y , 12th, 1967 t o me f o r r e p l y . Although we have c o n s i d e r a b l e data on the p h y s i c a l h e a l t h o f Indians we do not have data on the p h y s i c a l f i t n e s s o f I n d i a n c h i l d r e n i n the sense you mean. S t u d i e s made by t h i s department have, so f a r , been d i r e c t e d t o -wards e l i c i t i n g the degree of i l l - h e a l t h and i t s causes r a t h e r than l e v e l s o f p h y s i c a l f i t n e s s or f i t n e s s - p e r f o r m -ance. I am not aware of any s p e c i a l s t u d i e s t h a t may have been made of p h y s i c a l f i t n e s s among Indian c h i l d r e n per se but In d i a n c h i l d r e n have been i n c l u d e d i n s t u d i e s made o f s c h o o l c h i l d r e n . What I can t e l l you i s t h a t m o r b i d i t y and m o r t a l i t y among In d i a n s c h o o l c h i l d r e n i s from t h r e e t o f i v e times t h a t o f the p o p u l a t i o n o f s c h o o l c h i l d r e n as a whole and t h a t g i r l s are r e l a t i v e l y more a f f e c t e d than boys a t a l l ages. Although I f e a r they do not q u i t e meet the purpose you have i n mind, I enc l o s e c o p i e s o f my l a t e s t annual r e p o r t and r e p o r t on In d i a n V i t a l S t a t i s t i c s . APPENDIX C SCORE CARD FOR CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST 1 Name 2 Grade 3 School 4 Province 5 Sex ( C i r c l e ) M F 6 Weighting 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 AGE (yrs.) HEIGHT (i n s . ) WEIGHT (l b s . ) 1 MINUTE SPEED SIT-UPS (no.) STANDING BROAD JUMP (i n s . ) SHUTTLE RUN (tenths) FLEXED ARM HANG (sec.) 50 300 YARD YARD RUN RUN (tenths) (sec.) 10 I 60 APPENDIX C CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE 8 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 21 47 12.7 2. 28 49 12.8 3. 22 55 12.0 4. 10 48 13.0 5. 11 45 13.5 6. 23 47 13.8 7. 20 40 13.6 8. 29 50 12.7 9. 31 39 14.2 10. 10 40 13.0 11. 21 41 14.0 12. 18 42 13.0 13. 21 40 14.2 14. 33 40 14.4 15. 26 47 12.8 16. 5 47 13.2 17. 15 46 13.5 18. 17 54 13.5 19. 21 44 12.4 20. 25 54 12.4 21. 21 49 13.0 22. 34 53 12.9 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 22 11.5 89 28 10.1 80 23 8.4 74 10 11.8 92 29 11.5 95 14 10.0 87 14 10.5 82 54 9.5 80 15 9.4 78 24 8.6 76 19 10.0 76 43 8.6 73 71 8.8 72 26 9.8 81 37 8.6 92 6 8.4 87 12 10.3 87 43 8,9 86 27 9.2 83 76 8.9 77 40 8.4 76 64 8.0 76 61 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE. 9 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 48 63 11.5 2. 12 49 12.5 3. 25 52 12.5 4. 50 64 11.0 5. 26 60 11.8 6. 20 50 14.0 7. 19 55 12.5 8. 37 69 11.0 9. 21 55 12.5 10. 26 49 12.3 11. 24 52 12.4 12. 8 48 11.7 13. 8 58 12.8 14. 35 55 12.0 15. 5 36 15.2 16. 10 48 15.0 17. 25 36 13.5 18. 6 38 12.8 19. 24 45 12.5 20. 14 42 13.0 21. 22 40 13.8 22. 15 43 12.2 23. 10 39 13.7 24. 15 44 13.1 25. 39 51 12.0 26. 36 48 12.1 27. 32 39 13.0 28. 34 37 11.9 29. 30 58 12.1 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 33 7.9 69 42 9.6 80 29 10.5 70 41 9.0 81 56 8.4 74 12 8.5 87 31 9.7 77 55 8.5 67 27 9.7 74 45 9.6 74 47 9.6 75 49 9.3 75 38 8.9 75 37 9.6 81 3 11.0 92 20 9.6 92 22 9.5 82 31 8.7 76 45 8.5 71 17 10.0 84 36 10.0 84 59 9.5 76 14 10.5 98 33 9.1 87 31 8.8 82 79 8.9 78 60 9.2 78 71 8.1 72 86 8.0 67 62 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE 10 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 31 56 11.7 2. 24 59 12.2 3. 27 58 12.5 4. 50 68 11.5 5. 32 55 12.2 6. 20 51 12.2 7. 23 52 11.9 8. 17 42 13.5 9. 25 52 12.6 10. 19 61 11.9 11. 33 57 11.9 12. 26 52 12.0 13. 22 53 12.0 14. 31 67 11.5 15. 36 47 13.5 16. 22 52 13.1 17. 11 53 12.8 18. 20 47 12.4 19. 35 45 13.2 20. 30 58 13.1 21. 27 42 13.8 22. 22 42 13.3 23. 28 53 12.0 24. 15 56 12.0 25. 32 57 12.4 26. 17 56 12.0 27. 30 50 11.5 28. 29 52 12.0 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 61 8.4 70 64 8.4 73 62 8.5 74 53 8.1 68 52 9.0 72 46 10.2 76 51 9.2 90 3 9.5 84 49 9.5 75 23 9.2 73 29 8.6 71 58 8.8 70 31 9.6 69 69 7.9 64 36 9.5 79 24 8.5 75 50 9.8 72 36 8.4 71 34 8.5 71 29 8.5 70 34 9.4 71 18 9.0 86 16 8.3 80 21 8.5 75 38 8.5 72 31 8.4 69 19 8.6 69 18 8.7 66 63 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE 11 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 29 60 11.2 2. 32 53 11.9 3. 32 63 12.0 4. 32 55 12.0 5. 30 50 12.6 6. 37 69 11.5 7. 27 54 13.0 8. 28 48 12.7 9. 39 65 11.4 10. 40 63 11.5 11. 32 53 12.1 12. 30 52 12.0 13. 20 50 12.1 14. 30 64 11.3 15. 23 51 11.9 16. 26 58 11.5 17. 32 54 12.0 18. 14 53 14.2 19. 29 61 11.9 20. 5 62 12.0 21. 22 53 12.4 22. 29 66 10.9 23. 25 63 11.9 24. 19 58 11.8 25. 21 43 14.0 26. 27 60 12.3 27. 15 56 13.5 28. 45 59 11.5 29. 43 49 12.1 30. 21 54 13.5 31. 32 53 12.0 32. 24 47 13.2 33. 38 51 12.0 34. 15 56 12.4 35. 25 56 11.2 36. 38 56 11.0 37. 26 53 11.8 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 87 7.7 65 56 8.4 79 123 8.4 64 18 8.5 72 19 9.1 74 75 7.6 61 72 9.8 84 8 11.9 91 72 8.8 69 54 8.0 72 14 8.5 74 19 8.9 72 30 9.3 78 65 8.0 66 57 10.1 79 64 8.5 69 21 8.4 93 3 10.0 83 32 9.1 82 10 9.2 81 16 10.0 76 34 8.4 75 69 8.2 75 25 8.5 75 15 9.2 74 40 8.5 70 40 8.6 70 36 8.0 63 47 8.5 69 23 8.9 77 63 8.5 73 60 8.8 71 27 8.1 68 13 7.5 67 9 7.4 63 35 7.7 62 36 7.9 70 64 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE 12 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 33 62 11.5 2. 49 53 11.8 3. 30 55 12.6 :4. 27 61 10.5 5. 30 55 13.2 6. 36 67 11.5 ,7. 35 48 13.2 8. 24 64 11.1 9. 33 67 11.5 10. 34 55 11.3 11. 33 64 11.0 12. 35 69 10.7 13. 36 66 11.1 14. 31 66 12.0 15. 29 60 11.8 16. 25 51 13.5 17. 17 59 12.0 18. 34 61 11.6 19. 21 70 12.8 20. 45 68 11.4 21. 28 59 11.4 22. 42 59 10.9 23. 26 58 11.8 24. 32 53 11.3 25. 33 49 12.0 26. 13 40 13.8 27. 23 56 11.2 28. 18 50 12.5 29. 33 61 12.0 30. 34 61 10.8 31. 34 61 10.8 32. 36 59 11.2 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 58 9.2 79 67 8.8 70 33 8.6 68 79 8.0 67 54 7.4 65 85 7.6 66 68 9.5 83 51 9.7 74 56 - 9.0 71 63 9.1 69 41 8.1 68 50 8.5 58 67 8.0 68 33 7.7 72 53 8.0 71 1 8.9 73 34 8.4 72 50 8.0 63 43 8.4 69 60 7.9 63 35 7.9 62 32 7.5 61 34 8.0 70 40 8.2 68 70 8.1 66 26 9.0 88 62 8.3 66 i l 9.5 81 26 7.5 73 36 7.5 66 32 7.5 63 38 7.5 62 .65 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE 13 STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 300 SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 1. 30 60 11.5 76 8.3 73 2. 26 61 11.5 51 8.0 64 3. 32 64 10.5 74 7.4 65 4. 37 66 11.2 69 8.0 65 5. 33 65 11.1 46 8.3 65 6. 31 66 10.8 47 7.9 64 7. 18 64 11.8 83 8.2 64 8. 40 69 11.4 67 8.3 64 9. 21 60 10.9 40 7.5 61 10. 32 70 10.0 96 7.8 58 11. 22 51 11.6 48 7.6 60 12. 40 67 11.3 38 7.5 61 13. 36 69 10.6 95 7.5 60 14. 49 73 11.1 75 6.6 60 15. 48 71 11.5 63 8.1 62 16. 43 60 11.7 81 7.5 61 17. 23 69 10.6 57 7.7 63 18. 31 63 11.7 47 8.1 68 19. 49 48 12.8 16 10.4 83 20. 46 74 10.9 69 7.4 58 21. 34 68 11.8 52 7.5 63 22. 40 75 10.8 78 7.0 61 23. 33 69 11.0 60 8.1 59 24. 34 69 11.4 66 7.1 59 25. 37 62 12.0 56 7.8 70 26. 31 65 11.6 49 8.1 65 27. 28 62 12.0 65 8.1 65 28. 32 66 11.0 40 7.4 63 29. 32 64 10.7 35 7.3 62 30. 34 65 11.2 38 7.4 61 31. 33 60 14.1 47 7.6 65 32. 24 49 13.0 20 9.1 74 33. 24 55 12.3 48 7.3 78 34. 30 50 12.6 40 8.3 71 35. 33 56 13.0 55 8.2 69 36. 33 58 12.2 34 7.8 65 37. 31 61 11.5 25 7.4 66 38. 19 59 11.6 44 7.5 64 39. 37 59 11.1 26 7.1 63 40. 38 59 11.3 40 7.4 62 66 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE 14 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 15 62 10.9 2. 33 69 10.7 3. 31 65 11.7 4. 52 83 10.0 5. 27 64 11.3 6. 31 77 10.1 7. 45 73 10.0 8. 33 60 11.6 9. 41 67 10.5 10. 37 66 10.4 11. 42 81 9.9 12. 42 80 10.6 13. 46 70 11.5 14. 51 80 10.5 15. 34 77 11.0 16. 42 78 10.6 17. 28 55 11.9 18. 48 66 11.5 19. 44 74 12.2 20. 35 69 10.9 21. 28 65 12.4 22. 30 75 11.0 23. 32 77 10.0 24. 30 72 11.3 25. 34 76 11.4 26. 24 71 10.7 27. 35 65 11.4 28. j 23 44 13.0 29. 14 45 13.1 30. 20 55 13.7 31. 34 69 11.2 32. 36 65 12.0 33. 21 52 12.4 34. 27 42 13.2 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 68 7.6 67 70 7.6 61 30 7.7 61 68 7.2 60 68 8.0 60 108 7.1 59 30 6.7 54 84 7.9 61 57 6.6 58 28 6.6 55 72 6. 5 54 117 7.0 55 103 7.5 59 105 7.0 54 100 7.5 57 85 7.5 59 70 8.1 72 54 7.2 59 91 7.2 59 93 7.5 57 110 7.6 66 57 7.5 58 33 6.6 58 68 6.4 59 79 7.1 59 63 7.4 61 55 8.2 63 21 8.6 74 6 9.7 82 5 9.4 85 61 7.5 59 91 7.5 59 62 7.8 66 63 7.1 58 67 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE INDIAN BOYS AGE 15 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 34 68 11.0 2. 30 67 10.6 3. 28 68 11.2 4. 30 68 10.4 5. 30 80 10.2 6. 39 84 9.9 ,7. 42 71 10.1 8. 41 86 10.0 9. 44 77 9.7 10. 46 78 9.9 11. 35 72 9.5 12. 36 62 11.5 13. 25 59 11.8 14. 37 71 10.5 15. 40 62 10.5 16. 32 68 10.7 17. 39 69 10.8 18. 26 72 11.0 19. 36 75 10.7 20. 41 69 10.7 21. 34 75 10.2 22. 32 71 10.2 23. 36 75 9.9 24. 35 62 10.8 25. 39 76 10.5 26. 32 81 10.6 27. 17 66 12.9 28. 43 74 11.5 29. 38 80 10.5 30. 32 72 12.5 31. 31 64 11.2 32. 75 91 11.5 33. 41 69 10.9 34. 43 88 10.6 35. 42 74 10.8 36. 36 83 10.6 37. 44 79 10.7 38. 33 53 15.0 39. 30 82 10.2 40. 34 81 12.4 41. 34 54 14.1 42. 31 50 12.3 TEST SCORES FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 37 7.1 67 52 7.1 63 82 6.8 59 29 7.6 58 37 7.0 56 49 6.5 54 21 7.0 54 82 6.5 53 97 6.5 53 60 6.5 51 50 6.3 47 42 8.5 69 49 8.0 65 85 7.5 62 90 7.1 59 40 7.4 59 77 7.5 58 74 7.2 57 49 6.9 56 90 6.9 56 112 6.9 56 78 7.0 56 64 6.5 55 38 6.6 53 65 6.7 53 66 6.5 58 63 7.7 80 76 6,9 57 58 6.6 53 85 6.9 64 46 7.8 67 82 6.7 55 62 7.4 65 48 7.0 55 74 7.5 56 96 7.0 57 99 7.3 60 56 8.3 66 52 7.0 65 52 7.4 59 35 7.1 56 67 7.1 56 68 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE 16 STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 30 SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD : 1. 46 84 10.2 84 6.2 88 2. 27 70 11.2 82 7.6 61 3. 30 79 10.5 56 6.0 58 4. 44 77 10.6 73 7.3 58 5. 37 80 10.5 58 6.5 54 6. 43 79 10.0 107 6.7 52 7. 40 84 10.1 78 • 6.5 53 8. 37 78 10.3 87 ' 6.6 53 9. 30 68 10.4 43 6.8 53 10. 49 96 10.0 50 6.1 52 11. 32 87 9.5 62 6.8 51 12. 44 90 10.5 62 6.3 50 13. 42 80 10.9 56 6.6 50 14. 45 80 9.8 70 6.0 48 15. 41 34 10.6 93 7.4 58 16. 24 76 10.8 73 7.3 60 17. 36 80 10.2 40 7.4 59 18. 34 80 10.3 55 7.4 58 19. 25 65 10.8 44 7.5 58 20. 39 81 9.9 68 6.8 57 21. 36 69 10.6 69 6.9 57 22. 40 77 10.1 66 6.8 56 23. 32 68 10.6 58 7.2 56 24. 36 84 9.8 76 6.5 55 25. 41 71 10.3 41 6.5 54 26. 37 69 10.7 97 6.6 54 27. 35 44 10.3 67 6.9 54 28. 38 68 10.7 31 6.6 53 29. 34 87 10.7 47 6.4 53 30. 41 78 10.5 73 7.0 58 31. 37 80 10.6 56 7.0 56 32. 65 86 10.4 78 6.5 56 33. 31 73 10.7 57 6.5 56 34. 38 80 10.5 57 6.3 54 35. 26 78 10.0 68 7.0 57 36. 37 75 10.5 36 6.6 56 69 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN BOYS AGE 17 STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 30 SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD : 1. 30 68 10.8 46 7.4 60 2. 33 83 9.9 50 7.1 57 3. 33 96 10.2 37 6.2 56 4. 40 85 10.5 69 6.8 53 5. 40 91 9.8 44 6.4 54 6. 19 80 9.8 56 6.7 53 7. 35 75 10.3 51 .7.0 53 8. 41 86 9.9 82 6.4 52 9. 49 88 10.1 71 6.7 52 10. 43 108 10.0 55 5.9 51 11. 47 82 10.9 75 6.5 51 12. 31 94 10.0 99 6.0 50 13. 38 68 11.6 64 6.2 50 14. 35 88 10.1 56 6.6 50 15. 38 88 10.2 99 6.7 50 16. 37 77 10.7 69 7.4 62 17. 25 70 10.5 67 7.3 60 18. 26 71 11.2 85 7.1 60 19. 34 74 10.7 101 7.3 58 20. 31 79 9.8 91 6.6 56 21. 42 81 9.9 127 7.0 56 22. 30 77 9.7 58 6.4 55 23. 36 83 9.8 69 6.5 55 24. 38 78 9.5 58 6.9 55 25. 38 76 9.8 54 6.5 54 26. 36 68 10.9 51 7.4 54 27. 37 79 10.8 50 6.3 53 28. 37 78 10.6 132 7.1 53 29. 44 77 10.1 84 6.3 52 30. 45 79 10.6 121 7.4 60 31. 32 83 11.0 98. 7.0 57 32. 44 77 10.2 66 7.0 54 33. 46 79 10.2 55 6.7 52 70 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 8 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 13 50 13.4 2. 11 55 14.4 3. 18 50 13.6 4. 21 46 13.0 5. 28 45 13.8 6. 15 49 12.8 7. 3 39 14.7 8. 12 37 15.2 9. 21 43 14.4 10. 20 38 13.3 11. 25 36 13.5 12. 0 39 13.5 13. 17 48 12.4 14. 21 36 1.6 15. 5 39 14.9 16. 25 46 13.5 17. 15 52 12.4 18. 16 40 13.0 19. 14 43 12.7 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 110 10.0 86 9 10.1 82 90 9.5 76 26 9.5 83 9 10.0 83 26 9.4 79 47 10.3 78 33 10.1 89 27 10.5 78 74 10.6 77 20 9.5 73 35 9.5 81 20 9.1 77 2 11.5 115 5 10.0 103 39 8.4 87 10 8.4 82 12 8.9 79 25 8.3 71 71 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 9 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1 1. 10 56 12.9 2. 9 52 13.5 3. 25 55 12.8 4. 12 43 14.9 5. 11 47 13.6 6. 18 44 13.5 7. 26 60 13.1 8. 19 48 13.5 9. 41 55 11.9 10. 21 50 11.4 11. 37 53 12.5 12. 15 50 13.2 13. 46 53 12.9 14. 28 43 13.4 15. 6 46 13.9 16. 40 43 13.2 17. 27 49 12.7 18. 40 47 12.0 19. 12 51 13.0 20. 25 46 13.3 21. 21 47 12.4 22. 17 49 13.0 23. 14 36 15.0 24. 9 45 14.0 25. 17 46 12.9 26. 18 46 13.2 27. 25 44 12.5 28. 25 52 12.8 29. 21 42 14.5 30. 27 48 14.7 31. 25 40 16.5 32. 21 45 13.5 33. 20 49 13.2 34. 8 35 14.9 35. 16 45 13.5 36. 16 41 13.1 37. 20 47 12.6 38. 22 44 13.0 39. 19 46 13.0 40. 10 41 13.4 41. 9 42 12.7 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 17 11.2 90 23 10.2 86 41 9.1 85 21 10.6 76 30 9.7 75 26 10.0 75 18 9.1 73 25 9.5 79 57 9.0 79 54 9.4 84 41 12.0 86 20 10.0 87 35 9.0 79 19 12.0 104 8 10.6 92 17 9.9 102 39 8.9 72 34 8.9 76 58 9.8 79 29 9.4 85 3 8.5 86 33 9.9 79 38 11.1 95 15 9.8 86 20 10.0 83 16 10.9 82 30 8.6 73 6 9.0 71 22 9.8 89 34 9.5 87 27 10.6 82 29 8.2 69 112 9.5 71 30 9.9 82 3 10.5 99 3 9.5 89 13 9.4 86 2 9.5 86 4 9.4 84 48 9.5 83 29 9.5 76 72 GAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 10 STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 30( SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD I 1. 22 52 12.7 30 10.5 84 2. 23 67 12.4 35 8.6 79 3. 27 57 12.7 75 9.0 76 •4. 25 52 13.8 39 9.1 74 5. 16 56 13.1 28 10.0 74 6. 30 59 11.9 59 8.8 72 7. 21 56 12.8 47 8.4 67 8. 2 48 13.4 15 10.8 87 9. 26 62 11.5 48 8.2 65 i o . 19 63 12.4 41 8.5 86 11. 10 46 12.3 17 8.5 78 12. 42 53 12.0 40 8.0 71 13. 32 50 12.4 64 8.3 72 14. 1 51 12.2 36 9.5 78 15. 41 55 11.8 70 * 8.4 76 16. 25 56 12.1 53 8.6 85 17. 15 50 12.5 26 9.5 85 18. 16 58 12.6 18 8.9 83 19. 14 45 13.9 17 10.0 82 20. 14 45 13.0 15 9.4 80 21. 28 51 13.7 49 9.7 79 22. 20 45 12.8 25 9.9 79 23. 26 48 11.7 52 9.5 78 24. 22 54 13.2 31 10.0 78 25. 17 50 13.2 31 9.5 77 26. 24 38 12.8 23 9.5 72 27. 18 50 13.6 39 9.2 82 7.3 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 10 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 28. 20 53 13.3 29. 11 46 14.0 30. 7 36 14.4 31. 23 51 13.2 32. 17 45 12.6 33. 24 52 12.1 34. 16 51 12.5 35. 3 45 12.5 36. 1 34 15.2 37. 5 43 13.1 38. 6 41 13.0 39. 4 48 12.4 40. 23 44 12.4 41. 33 40 12.6 42. 33 45 13.0 43. 16 52 12.5 44. 16 47 13.0 45. 23 50 13.0 46. 28 62 13.0 47. 28 51 11.8 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 25 9.5 73 36 9.5 68 31 10.0 81 25 9.4 78 21 9.1 76 91 8.3 72 24 9.3 72 46 9.9 71 7 11.0 102 9 10.5 92 14 10.2 89 14 9.6 85 22 9.8 85 9 9.1 79 38 9.5 79 44 9.1 78 14 9.5 77 23 9.5 76 19 8.6 70 81 7.6 68 74 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 11 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 20 58 12.5 : 2. 26 55 13.4 3-. 24 53 13.6 4. 26 57 12.0 5. 14 46 14.3 6. 29 55 12.6 7. 25 62 12.2 8. 39 52 11.9 9. 30 63 12.1 10. 22 64 12.0 11. 22 60 13.0 12. 40 60 13.2 13. 35 56 12.0 14. 21 50 12.6 15. 30 44 14.8 16. 33 53 12.2 17. 25 39 12.3 18. 5 50 13.0 19. 13 49 14.2 20. 21 46 13.1 21. 3 54 13.0 22. 15 54 12.8 23. 22 52 14.8 24. 25 56 12.3 25. 28 55 12.8 26. 28 61 11.7 27. 16 60 12.8 28. 34 49 12.8 29. 24 44 13.9 30. 30 54 12.1 31. 24 49 11.9 32. 29 58 11.8 33. 2 33 15.0 34. 12 53 11.8 35. 20 42 13.0 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 48 9.0 68 56 8.7 68 14 8.4 71 52 8.9 75 6 9.0 77 36 8.5 78 61 7.6 74 21 8.4 67 43 8.0 67 52 8.0 70 38 8.8 81 23 8.2 80 13 7.8 80 24 9.0 79 43 8.9 77 24 8.5 74 28 8.5 85 6 10.0 82 9 8.9 80 19 9.5 76 13 9.5 76 7 8.6 75 17 8.5 71 26 8.6 71 38 8.3 70 46 8.4 70 7 8.5 69 30 9.5 69 5 9.0 68 32 8.3 65 30 8.3 71 120 7.4 74 6 10.5 103 74 9.0 91 3 10.5 85 75 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 12 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 23 71 11.4 2. 15 55 12.2 3. 19 52 12.0 4. 8 50 13.4 5. 18 57 13.3 6. 27 63 11.5 7. 33 55 14.2 8. 23 49 12.4 9. 23 59 12.2 10. 26 59 14.0 11. 41 61 12.3 12. 30 63 12.6 13. 27 64 12.0 14. 30 55 15.5 15. 22 56 12.5 16. 25 50 12.4 17. 20 59 12.4 18. 14 43 13.7 19. 27 62 13.5 20. 15 46 13.8 21. 21 49 14.0 22. 21 45 14.2 23. 26 55 10.5 24. 37 59 11.8 25. 21 46 13.4 26. 11 51 12.5 27. 14 50 11.2 28. 13 46 13.5 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 36 7.5 65 66 8.0 67 51 8.5 69 27 8.5 69 36 8.3 75 61 8.2 65 21 9.0 72 10 7.7 76 29 7.8 67 30 8.5 76 21 8.1 76 20 8.9 65 38 7.7 67 22 8.0 68 32 7.7 69 47 8.9 73 9 9.0 75 10 8.6 76 49 8.0 72 26 7.6 70 21 8.5 68 20 9.8 83 42 7.4 78 26 7.6 75 17 10.2 80 24 8.4 91 24 9.1 93 9 10.2 201 76 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 13 STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 300 SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 1. 22 61 11.9 43 8.4 67 2. 24 57 12.7 30 8.7 68 3. 15 66 12.7 49 8.3 72 4. 29 66 11.8 25 8.5 75 5. 22 54 14.2 19 9.0 94 6. 30 65 12.2 28 8.0 67 7. 28 66 11.9 20 7.8 72 8. 10 51 13.4 13 9.3 79 9. 32 55 11.6 30 7.7 67 10. 33 52 12.3 23 8.8 76 11. 7 57 12.7 2 8.0 73 12. 27 57 12.7 15 9.0 77 13. 20 56 12.8 22 8.0 71 14. 30 55 12.2 26 7.5 64 15. 20 55 11.8 19 8.1 67 16. 25 53 11.8 13 8.1 67 17. 22 55 12.5 27 8.9 68 18. 26 56 12.5 21 7.7 69 19. 11 49 14.0 5 9.5 74 20. 18 55 12.4 47 8.1 66 21. 24 56 13.4 47 7.6 66 22. 17 59 12.9 20 8.2 69 23. 5 58 12.1 17 8.2 70 24. 11 62 13.2 24 8.2 70 25. 9 45 12.5 19 8.6 72 26. 4 49 13.7 7 9.4 79 27. 28 59 12.6 16 7.9 72 28. 19 46 12.3 13 7.6 79 77 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 14 STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 30( SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD I i . 20 52 13.2 24 9.1 79 2. 26 59 13.1 37 8.4 74 3. 10 45 12.5 11 8.0 71 4. 26 59 12.4 20 8.4 70 5. 10 53 12.5 57 8.1 69 6. 19 55 11.4 47 8.0 68 7. 16 50 11.5 27 8.3 68 8. 30 51 11.0 29 8.5 68 9. 24 52 11.2 26 8.0 64 10. 29 46 12.5 6 7.9 70 11. 29 50 12.2 21 7.9 69 12. 24 55 12.3 11 7.7 67 13. 21 57 12.4 32 7.9 64 14. 18 52 13.0 14 8.0 72 15. 32 60 12.1 44 8.0 72 16. 24 55 12.0 4 8.4 70 17. 19 59 12.6 9 8.4 73 18. 21 58 12.6 12 8.4 70 19. 15 54 13.0 21 8.6 67 20. 20 63 12.0 50 7.6 66 21. 17. 62 12.4 34 8.0 64 22. 29 55 12.2 17 7.8 68 23. 25 59 11.9 17 8.4 67 24. 36 70 11.5 45 7.6 66 25. 23 55 11.9 11 8.6 93 26. 20 62 12.0 13 7.9 82 27. 17 52 13.1 6 9.0 74 28. 0 49 13.3 6 8.7 82 29. 0 53 13.6 9 9.1 86 30. 15 48 12.4 7 10.0 78 31. 15 57 13.0 17 8.0 74 32. 32 64 13.0 21 8.5 74 33. 26 58 11.9 22 7.8 65 78 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 15 STANDING SHUTTLE SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN 1. 5 38 13.5 2. 18 49 12.0 3. 24 56 12.5 4. 20 63 12.3 5. 21 54 12.0 6. 17 48 12.8 7. 36 60 11.8 8. 27 62 11.8 9. 10 48 13.5 10. 21 53 12.2 11. 18 61 12.4 12. 10 60 12.1 13. 26 49 11.3 14. 21 68 12.0 15. 9 54 10.9 16. 18 61 12.1 17. 24 59 12.4 18. 28 60 11.8 19. 27 49 12.2 20. 12 53 12.2 21. 6 56 12.5 22. 25 49 12.3 23. 20 60 11.8 24. 23 66 11.4 25. 5 50 13.0 26. 24 54 13.4 27. 19 50 12.0 28. 20 58 12.0 29. 18 59 12.3 30. 36 59 12.3 31. 11 58 12.0 32. 26 66 12.2 33. 26 70 11.0 34. 20 54 12.6 35. 17 63 12.4 36. 18 53 13.4 37. 19 46 13.0 38. 20 59 12.6 FLEXED 50 300 ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD RUN 2 9.3 88 7 9.0 80 34 8.5 78 31 8.1 75 26 8.3 74 16 8.6 74 53 8.0 72 51 8.2 72 6 9.4 70 36 8.0 69 50 8.1 66 32 7.5 65 23 7.5 64 12 7.5 63 20 7.5 63 19 7.8 67 50 7.7 65 9 7.9 64 35 7.4 64 18 7.8 63 16 9.1 76 28 7.7 71 44 8.4 70 45 7,8 64 3 8.2 95 5 9.5 86 8 8.0 69 18 8.0 84 58 8.4 71 25 7.5 70 12 8.0 68 62 7.7 62 34 6.9 61 10 8.8 76 7 8.4 68 15 8.2 66 12 7.6 64 36 9.8 70 79 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 16 STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 30( SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD I 1. 22 60 13.4 16 9.5 86 2. 34 50 12.5 7 8.0 79 3. 22 55 11.7 10 7.8 76 4. 17 56 11.9 47 8.4 74 5. 16 48 12.0 40 9.0 74 6. 14 49 12.0 19 9.2 74 7. 8 57 13.0 41 7.8 72 8. 21 50 12.0 28 8.0 72 9. 20 55 12.8 11 8.3 72 10. 18 52 11.5 21 8.3 71 11. 20 50 13.6 10 8.2 70 12. 28 58 12.0 25 7.6 68 13. 17 59 12.2 4 8.0 67 14. 27 62 11.5 52 7.1 62 15. 23 56 12.6 35 7.5 61 16. 17 47 14.6 20 8.4 75 17. 15 44 13.5 8 9.0 75 18. 22 61 12.2 24 7.8 72 19. 8 54 13.3 30 8.5 53 20. 20 52 11.9 20 8.2 70 21. 23 64 11.4 40 7.8 65 22. 23 62 11.8 23 7.7 72 23. 27 58 11.4 42 7.5 64 24. 6 56 12.1 15 9.7 71 25. 24 60 12.0 33 7.6 69 26. 16 52 13.0 15 7.8 72 27. 28 51 12.5 16 8.5 72 28. 29 62 13.0 14 7.5 63 29. 27 63 11.4 64 8.1 69 30. 15 49 13.0 16 7.7 70 80 CAHPER FITNESS-PERFORMANCE TEST SCORES INDIAN GIRLS AGE 17 STANDING SHUTTLE FLEXED 50 30( SIT-UPS BROAD JUMP RUN ARM HANG YARD RUN YARD I 1. 17 52 13.9 28 8.8 85 2. 10 60 12.3 8 9.4 85 3. 21 45 13.0 22 8.8 75 4. 30 60 12.3 21 8.4 74 5. 25 53 11.6 60 8.2 71 6. 30 56 11.6 10 7.9 69 7. 15 53 13.0 37 8.2 68 8. 24 61 11.6 32 7.5 65 9. 19 54 12.8 30 8.0 67 10. 31 65 11.5 25 7.0 66 11. 24 59 12.4 27 8.0 71 12. 17 56 13.0 9 8.2 71 13. 32 65 11.9 41 7.8 64 14. 4 44 13.8 26 8.7 80 15. 14 51 12.7 13 8.1 76 16. 17 47 13.7 26 8.5 75 17. 24 64 11.4 46 7.7 67 18. 23 62 11.8 48 8.0 66 19. 22 68 12.8 5 7.9 68 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0302480/manifest

Comment

Related Items