MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2178868649 · doi:10.5430/wje.v5n6p37

Exploring Principals’ Physical Education Perceptions and Views from Elementary and Middle Schools of Shanghai

2015· article· en· W2178868649 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Howard Z. Zeng, Xiaozan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShanghai Municipal Education Commission
KeywordsMultivariate analysis of variancePsychologyLikert scalePerceptionCurriculumPhysical educationMathematics educationScale (ratio)PedagogyDevelopmental psychologyMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the status of principals’ physical education (PE) perceptions, the differences between genderand school-levels of these principals’ PE perceptions; and what they have to say about the opportunities, challengesand solutions on their school PE. Participants were 92 principals (37 Males, 55 Females) from 12 different schooldistricts of Shanghai. The Adapt Principal Perception on PE Questionnaire Chinese Version (APPPEQC.V.) was employedfor data collection; this questionnaire consists of sixteen items with a 5-points Likert like scale. Key data analysestechnich  technique was a 2 x 2 (Gender x School-levels) multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Findingsincluded: The principals’ PE perceptions appear to be very positive evident by scored high on the APPPEQC.V. E.g.Item 5, “Without PE in our school curricula, our students will not be fully developed”; Item 11, “Once PE and dailyPA are valued and supported, children will gradually form their active and healthy lifestyle”. The MANOVAdiscovered that: no significant difference in the ‘Gender’ factor; however, significant differences were found in the‘School-levels’ factor: Elementary-school principals scored higher than middle-school principals in 5 items; e.g. Item3, “PE is an academic discipline and just as important as English, Math and Sciences to our students”. Whileprincipals at middle-school scored higher than those of the elementary-school in other 5 items; e.g. Items 14, “Safeenvironment, necessary facilities and equipment is the key for kids to . . .” The challenges, opportunities andsolutions in their school PE do existed and were analyzed and discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.395
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.099 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207