Comparative Research on the Contents of Physical Education and Health Course in Foreign Middle Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper comparatively analyzes and researches the contents of physical education and health course in England,USA,New Zealand,Canada,and Japan. The results show that the common development trend of the contents of physical education and health course in foreign countries is to mark off the contents of P.E.according to the learning fields,attach importance to the contents of fitness and motor skills,show the flexibility and selectivity of the contents,fit with the individual differences,combine P.E.with health teaching,emphasize the lifelong P.E.,and strengthen its contact with life.The inspiration for Chinese curricular contents' reform is that the contents should meet the needs of society and scientific development,pay attention to students' needs,care for the individual differences,emphasize the functions of strengthening students' health,combine P.E.with health education,strengthen the education of P.E.and health knowledge,show diversification,flexibility and local characteristics,reflect the needs of lifelong P.E.,and pay attention to the unification of athletics,body building and entertainment.In the learning fields the samples of knowledge and skills should be provided to meet the demands of contents.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".