A case study of disengaged adolescent girls’ experiences with teaching games for understanding in physical education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case study served to investigate six adolescent girls’, who were identified as disengaged in physical education (PE), feelings about their experiences in a Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) unit and how TGfU might support their engagement in PE. A two-week (6-lesson) TGfU territorial games unit was taught by a guest instructor. Data were collected from observational field notes, focus group interviews (pre-and post-unit), and individual interviews (post-unit). The whole child approach – understanding the physical, cognitive, and affective domains of learning and experience – was used to better understand the participants’ experiences. Students experienced heightened participation and effort, learning, affect, and motivation in the TGfU-games unit. TGfU was beneficial due to its student and game-centred nature; however, students also had some reservations (time and sport choices). Ultimately, TGfU can support girls’ engagement in PE, captivating them and encouraging them to elevate their participation in a holistic way.
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) | 0.001 | 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".