Abstract:An urban area is the region surrounding a city. Most inhabitants of urban areas have non- agricultural jobs. Urban areas are very developed, meaning there is a density of human structures such as houses, commercial buildings, roads, bridges, and railways. Rural areas are the opposite of urban areas. Rural areas, often called" the country," have low population density and large amounts of undeveloped land. Usually, the difference between arural area and an urban area is clear. But in developed countries with large populations, such as Japan, the difference is becoming less clear. In the United States, settlements with 2,500 inhabitants or more are defined as urban.
Purpose of The Study: 1. To find out whether any difference of physical fitness between rural physical education and urban physical education students at university level. 2. To analysis the status of skinfold measurement between rural physical education and urban physical education students at university level.
Materials and Methods: The total 40 male physical education students (20 students from rural and 20 from urban area.) were selected from University of Kalyani, West Bengal, India. There were range from 20 to 25 years who are actively involved in daily practice for their respective physical education course curriculum. Mean, SD and “tâ€-test for observing the differences of mean between the selected groups. The level of significance was at 0.05 level of confidence.
Result and Discussion: The calculated t-value for urban physical education students and rural physical education students were Biceps- 0.01, Triceps-1.41, Sub-scapula- 1.06, Supra-iliac- 0.51, Mid-thigh- 1.68, Medial calf- 0.54, Abdomen- 0.54.which are less than the tabulated t-value (t0.0538=2.02). Therefore, the difference in height between two groups was statistically not- significant. The calculated t-value for rural physical education and urban physical education students were Shuttlerun 0.07, Sit up 0.70, Pullup 0.72, 50 yard dash 1.06, VO² Max 0.95 and Standing broad jump (SBJ) 1.35, which are less than the tabulated t-value (t0.0538=2.02). Therefore, the difference in physical fitness measurements between two groups was statistically not- significant.
Conclusions: There were no significant difference found in any skinfold measures between rural physical education and urban physical education male students. There were no significant difference found in any physical fitness measures between rural and urban physical education male students.
Other Journals