The Effect of Using Video on Developing Physical Fitness of Physical Education Students at the Hashemite University
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of video on developing physical fitness to physical education students at the Hashemite University. The study sample consisted of (20) Physical education students They were divided into two groups, the control group (10) students went through traditional physical practice method, and the experimental group (10) students went through physical practice using video, Pre and post-tests were carried out to measure student’s development in physical fitness (Vertical jump from stability, Throwing and receiving the ball, Trunk bending forward from standing, Zigzag running, Throwing a ball to the farthest distance and 25m running). Statistical analysis included t-Test for mean at pre and post test for the two groups, and t-Test for mean at post test in the two groups. The results showed significant differences (p < 0.05) in post test between the two groups in favor of the experimental group, it is concluded that using video improved physical fitness level more than the traditional method. The researchers recommended using video to developing physical fitness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it