Pupil voice on being gifted and talented in physical education: ‘They think it's just, like, a weekend sort of thing’
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Pupils’ views have been elicited in physical education over a long period, but is a comparatively under-examined area within literature on gifted and talented (G&T) in physical education concerns pupil voice and their accounts of being placed on their schools’ G&T register. Purpose: This small-scale qualitative study consulted pupils in physical education about being on the G&T register, the demands of their academic work, academic support available to them, what could support them and their thoughts on post-16 and career aspirations. The findings emerged from a larger research project exploring key stakeholders’ views on provision for G&T pupils in physical education within an Excellence in Cities (EiC) cluster in rural eastern England. Participants, research design and data collection: Data for this study were collected within a 4-month period from four secondary schools, three of which formed part of an EiC cluster and included a Sports College. The fourth school, which was outside the EiC cluster, worked closely with the Sports College, linking its own G&T programme to the work already established at the Sports College. Thirty-one Year 10 and 11 pupils (17 male, 14 female) were selected by the schools from their G&T registers. Seven separate focus group interviews were held and pupils also completed a questionnaire. Findings: Common patterns were reported by pupils within and across the schools reflecting their positive perceptions of being on the G&T register for physical education. While pupils valued the schools’ nurturing of their abilities, the positive nurturing of talent was not always transferred to the nurturing of their academic potential. They felt they would benefit from more support for their academic needs, especially in managing their workloads. They expressed a tension between fulfilling their commitments to training and sport on the one hand and meeting the requirements of their academic work on the other. Support offered through individual mentoring was received positively. For most, however, mentoring was sparse and appeared to be an unstructured process. In addition, many pupils spoke of the toll their dedication to their sport took on their social lives. The majority of pupils expressed a desire to continue study beyond post-16 and several mentioned the aim of attending university. Conclusions: The need for personalised and tailored individual support to help pupils meet the demands of both academic and sporting commitments was articulated in this study. Implications from the findings also indicate that a Junior Athlete Education framework might be in place at some schools but it may not always be utilised effectively or meet the authentic needs of the pupils on the G&T register for physical education. As a consequence, unstructured and informal processes, as well as patchiness of support, have been seen to work against the effectiveness of G&T programmes. These findings reinforce previous research and add valuable insight in the form of pupils’ voices and experiences.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».