MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138931892 · doi:10.1080/13573322.2015.1015978

Moving online physical education from oxymoron to efficacy

2015· article· en· W2138931892 on OpenAlexaff
Brian J. Kooiman, Dwayne P. Sheehan, Michael Wesolek, Eliseo Retegui

Bibliographic record

VenueSport Education and Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumKinesiologyPhysical educationOxymoronThe InternetPsychologyPedagogyMedical educationMedicineComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of the Internet within education has created an urgent need for research into online learning models, delivery methods and curriculum content modifications especially in online physical education (OLPE). Most secondary OLPE courses focus on the cognitive pieces of the curriculum, and to a lesser degree, fitness for life due to a lack of research. The omission of the physical, social and emotional components of the OLPE curriculum has created a rift in the understanding, growth and development of students who take these courses. For this reason, Kinesiology professionals need to take a lead in the development of OLPE curricula through efficacious research. Exergaming has shown positive results for each of these four components when played proximally; however, exergames have not been widely studied in remote Internet settings. An exploration of the present need for more research into the ramifications of OLPE and the role Kinesiology professionals can take in guiding this process along with the potential of exergames in OLPE to fill this curricular void is presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.406 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSport Education and SocietySame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207