Exercise in French Physical Education Teaching Since 1945. A Civilising Intellectualisation as the Consequence of Sport and School Standardisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In France, since the Second World War, physical and sports education (PSE) methods have seen considerable renewal. However; the word “exercise” has remained in the professional vocabulary. This permanence inevitably raises questions about the conditions under which the term is used. The mutations undergone by this basic unit of the student's physical activity reflect the profound changes that have occurred in the discipline. Desiring to give greater coherence to their teaching and thus work towards greater school legitimacy, French PSE teachers have progressively developed a more and more complex argument. This argument has permitted them to rationally link the body movements that have to be performed with the aims that can thus be achieved, in a dynamic which bears the imprint of the “civilising process”. This study is a historical analysis of a particular element in the teacher-student relationship: exercise. Hexagonal physical education, through its incorporation of norms, makes it possible to fully understand the educational concepts of the moment and their evolution throughout the second half of the 20th century. Although often neglected in university research, the notion of exercise nonetheless represents a remarkable indicator of a society’s educational approach.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".