Effect of Sport Education Model-Based Social-Emotional Learning Program on Emotional Intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the study, a 16-week SEM-SEL volleyball program was prepared using the Social-Emotional Learning Model (SEL) based on the Sport Education Model (SEM). The goal achievements of SEL are processed and awareness about the goal achievements is provided to the students in the SEM-SEL volleyball program each week. In the study, pattern with experimental pre-test final-test control group was used. Experiment and control groups were formed in all three-school types. The 16-week SEM-SEL program was applied to the students in the experimental groups and the current curriculum was applied to the students in the control groups. The Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale (SEI-S) was used as a data tool. Descriptive statistics and Two-way Covariance Analysis (ANCOVA) were used for data analysis. As a result of the descriptive statistics, it was determined that there were significant differences between the SEI-S total scores of the experiment and control groups; that there was an increase in the emotional intelligence levels of the students in the experiment group and a decrease in the students in the control group. According to ANCOVA, SEI-S final-test total scores were found to have a significant difference in favor of the experimental group and no significant difference in the school type. Consequently, the 16-week SEM-SEL volleyball program was effective in increasing the emotional intelligence levels of the students. Furthermore, it was determined that SEM and SEL were compatible with each other and that SEL had positive results in the field of physical education and sports.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".