Occupational Energy Expenditure In Physical Education Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It had been suggested in the literature that teaching physical education is a very demanding occupation. However, no data exist that compared the energy expenditure in different teaching levels (primary school, high school and college). PURPOSE: The purpose of our project was to study energy expenditure of physical education teachers working in primary school, high school and college. METHODS: Twenty physical educators aged 35.5 ± 9.1 years (16 males and 4 females, VO2max=45.3 ± 7.0 ml.kg-1.min-1) had their oxygen consumption/heart rate (VO2/HR) relationship measured in the laboratory. On another day while working, PE teachers wore a monitor to record heart rate. Heart rate was later used to estimate energy expenditure using interpolation of the (VO2/HR) relationship. RESULTS: All together PE teachers had an average energy expenditure of 3.48 ± 1.90 kcal/min during the work day, which may seem rather low. However, at the college level, PE teachers worked 26% (or 87 min) of their working time at 45.48% VO2max, in high school at 21.25% (or 70 min) at 34.15% VO2max and in primary school the highest energy expenditure was 27.06% VO2max during 16.29% (54 min) of the total working time. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that there was a trend for college and high school physical educators to show a higher energy expenditures than primary school physical educators. However, despite a trend of higher energy expenditure in college and high school PE teachers, the high variability of our results indicates that energy expenditure is mostly associated with the type of activity taught. Furthermore, our results support previous observations that teaching PE may be a very demanding occupation during some periods of their working day. Supported by a IRSST Grant.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".