A Pragmatic Feasibility Trial Examining the Effect of Job Embedded Professional Development on Teachers’ Capacity to Provide Physical Literacy Enriched Physical Education in Elementary Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A gap in physical literacy (PL) oriented professional development (PD) for generalist teachers exists and thus their capacity to develop PL and maximize student health is potentially limited. We explored the feasibility of a novel job-embedded professional development (JEPD) program (10 weeks) and its impact on teachers’ capacity to deliver PL-enriched physical education (PE) and student PL. A pragmatic feasibility trial with mixed methods included quantitative measurements of teacher PL, knowledge and confidence (pre), and knowledge, confidence, satisfaction and intention (post), as well as self-reported change, to evaluate the impact on teacher capacity and practices. A pre–post comparison of student PL outcomes (motor skills using PLAYbasic, Sport for Life, Victoria, BC, Canada) during the JEPD and teacher implementation phase explored the impact on student PL. In total, 15/44 teachers participated in surveys and 11/44 completed interviews (87% female, mean age bracket = 25–44 years). Confidence to deliver PL enhancing PE increased significantly after JEPD (p < 0.0001). Teachers were highly satisfied with the JEPD (X = 4.67/5) and intended to change their practices (X = 4.09/5). At three months, teachers reported changes including enhanced lesson planning, increased activity variety (often from the JEPD), intentional skill development, student-focused discussions, introductory, transition, and closing activities, and more equipment adaptations. During JEPD, with the exception of throwing (p < 0.0001), children’s (47% female, mean age = 7.9 (1.7)) change in running, jumping, kicking and balance walking backwards did not differ from usual practice (UP). During teacher implementation, motor skill competence regressed; confounding factors could not be ruled out. JEPD appears feasible and effective for changing teacher capacity to deliver PL and enhancing PE; however, post-JEPD teacher implementation and outcomes need further exploration.
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 | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".