Perceptions and Experiences of Pre-service Teachers with Physical Education (PE) and Daily Physical Activity (DPA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To improve practice, we need to understand how pre-service teachers are prepared to implement school-based physical activity policies such as Ontario’s Daily Physical Activity Policy (DPA). This study explored the perspectives and experiences of Ontario pre-service teachers with DPA and physical education (PE). Data are presented for five participants who completed a semi-structured interview. Three super-ordinate themes were found for pre-service teachers: theory of DPA and PE, practical development of DPA and PE, individual factors. Varied experiences with DPA and PE were identified by pre-service teachers. Our findings raise questions about the consistency of early career preparation and how best to support pre-service teachers’ experiences not only with PE, but also DPA. Resume Il est important de comprendre comment les etudiants en formation a l’enseignement sont prepares pour implanter en milieu scolaire les politiques comme celle portant sur l’activite physique quotidienne, pour pouvoir ameliorer cette implantation. Cette etude explore les perspectives et les experiences d’etudiants en formation a l’enseignement en Ontario en lien avec l’education physique et l’activite physique quotidienne. Des donnees provenant d’entrevues semi-structurees avec cinq participants sont presentees. Ces donnees ont fait apparaitre trois themes: la theorie sur l’activite physique quotidienne et l’education physique, le developpement de l’activite physique quotidienne et de l’education physique et des facteurs individuels. Les experiences de ces etudiants en formation a l’enseignement sont variees. Nos resultats font emerger des questions sur la coherence de la formation en debut de carriere, et sur l’appui a offrir a ces etudiants en formation dans le domaine de l’education physique et aussi de l’activite physique quotidienne
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".