Compatibility and Complementarity of Classroom Ecology and Didactique Research Perspectives in Physical Education
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
A large diversity of theoretical frameworks exists in the physical education literature. This article focuses on two of those frameworks to examine their compatibility and their complementarity. The classroom ecology paradigm concentrates on the balance between three task systems, two vectors, and programs of actions proposed by the physical education teacher and negotiated by students. The didactique research program studies the teaching and learning processes using the concepts of didactic contract and didactic milieu that focus on how the knowledge content emerges within teacher and students’ joint action. The article underlines the complementarity and the compatibility of the two frameworks when analyzing teaching and learning in physical education. It argues that the gray areas left by the classroom ecology paradigm could be filled with the insights of the didactique research program. A concise example of how the two frameworks have already been utilized 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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