Opinions of the Physical Education Teachers about the Effect of Peer Education and Physical Activity Cards’ Usage on the Student Skills
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to determine the opinions of the physical education teachers about the effect of peer education and physical activity cards’ usage on the student skills. Physical education teachers used a questionnaire to follow the students through observation. One-hundred-twenty secondary school students in 2015-2016 semester in Elazığ participated to the study. The students in the sample group were divided into two 30-person groups and control group and experimental group were constituted. The formed groups were taught lessons by means of Physicak Activity Cards for 4 weeks. At the end of the four-week course period, opinions about peer education were obtained through individual and focus group interviews with the experimental and control group students. In addition, “Skill Learning Observation Forms” prepared by researchers and experts were also applied. In the analysis of the data, for qualitative dimension, descriptive analysis, for quantitative data, percentage, frequency, for repetitive measurements, t test and one-way variance analysis were used. The SPSS 22 package program was used for the analysis of the quantitative data. The quantitative data were explained through tabulation. Again, the data obtained from observation forms were presented in the form of tables with their frequency and percentage values. Themes were obtained by coding the qualitative data. When the influence of the physical activity cards on the students’ attitudes toward the class is considered, a significant difference was attained in the common effect of the experimental group. According to this result, the education received by the students in the experimental and control groups led to a significant difference in favor of the last-test at the pre- and post-program attitude levels. However, it was determined that being in different groups did not lead to a significant difference in students’ attitude scores. When we examined the student opinions about the cards, the most of the students expressed the opinions that teaching lessons through cards created difference in the classes and increased their participation in the class. It was also enhanced their exercise skills and self-confidence. They did not have difficulty while applying the cards, they led them to act in coordination, and they rendered the class more enjoyable.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».