Students’ Perceptions on Physical Education Teachers’ Compliance with the Professional Code of Ethics and Conduct in Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nature of Physical Education (PE) is grounded in movements, games and sports; this lends itself to a high rate of interaction between PE teachers and students. As such, PE teachers need to be aware and comply with their professional code of ethics and conduct (PCEC) in their relationship with students during theory and practical lessons as well as during interschool competititons and outside school contexts. The idea of PE teachers' compliance with PCEC in Tanzania has not been widely investigated, so this study is rare and important to the field. The purpose of the study was to determine the perception of students on PE teachers' compliance with PCEC in Tanzania. The study utilized descriptive survey design and was conducted in secondary schools and teachers’ colleges that had PE and sport programs. Purposive sampling was adopted to select PE students and data were collected through a questionnaire. Participants were 720 students who were either studying PE or participating in school sports. It was concluded that PE students perceive their teachers as having a high level of compliance with the PCEC and their perception is influenced by their level of education. It was recommended that there is a need to improve and sustain PE programmes in schools and colleges, emphasize training in the codes for teachers, and moral education for students. There is also a need to improve teacher-student-relationship and school-community partnerships through sports. Further study should be conducted to determine unethical behavior in teacher-student relationships in the context of school sport.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".