Path Associations Between Preservice Physical Educators’ Beliefs About Epistemology and Their Value and Self-Efficacy for Sport Education and Teaching Games for Understanding
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Teachers’ beliefs about epistemology – that is, their personal broad mental representations about the nature of reality, knowledge, and how people know and learn – have been associated with the many educational outcomes both in the classroom and in physical education. Little is known about whether these beliefs predict physical educators’ value (i.e., interest, importance, like, and usefulness) and self-efficacy (i.e., confidence in performing) for using constructivist teaching models such as sport education and teaching games for understanding. As a result, this study examined path associations from beliefs about epistemology (epistemic worldviews and epistemological beliefs) to value and self-efficacy for sport education and TGfU in prospective physical educators. The sample consisted of 317 undergraduate students enrolled in a large (19,000 student) public university in south-central Canada. These participants completed a survey lasting approximately 10-12 minutes near the conclusion of one of their elective university classes in formal individual-dual games/sports (third year) or formal team games/sports (fourth year). Results revealed that students on average held more to a constructivist than a realist epistemic worldview, held relatively low unavailing epistemological beliefs for games (e.g., stable and simple knowledge that is learned quickly, and had high value and self-efficacy for sport education and teaching games for understanding. The path analyses revealed an excellent fit of the model to the data for these constructivist instructional models with each pathway significant for teaching games for understanding and three of the four for sport education. The results signal that prospective physical educators may be more susceptible to having less value and self-efficacy for using more constructivist instructional models if they believe games knowledge is relatively stable, objective, uncomplicated (simple), quickly learned facts derived more passively (rote learning) from mainly outer sources like expert teachers, coaches, and information resources. More efforts may be needed to uncover, explain, and account for underlying beliefs about epistemology prior to operationalizing constructivist instructional models such as sport education and teaching game for understanding.
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 | 0,001 | 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 ».