Teacher perspectives of online continuing professional development in physical education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuing professional development (CPD) is important to ensure teachers continuously maintain and update the best practice knowledge and skills needed for the profession. Limited research into CPD in physical education (PE-CPD) suggests that current provisions are largely ineffective, particularly regarding access, and the specific teaching of motor skills (e.g. throw, catch, run). Improved PE-CPD is clearly needed, and online programmes may provide a promising avenue for more accessible and effective delivery. Digital models of PE-CPD are in the early stages of use, and as yet we know very little about PE teachers’ experiences of online CPD. Thus, the present study aimed to (i) explore elementary school PE teachers’ perceptions of online PE-CPD; and (ii) provide recommendations on the development and provision of future online PE-CPD, with a particular focus on motor skill instruction and assessment. Twenty-two PE teachers participated in focus group discussions, which were analysed in NVivo 11 using an inductive thematic approach. Three major themes and several subthemes were developed from the data. First, there was significant teacher motivation and perceived need for online PE-CPD, mainly in relation to accessibility. Second, and despite this perceived need, teachers reported considerable caution around its use, especially regarding a perceived lack of a ‘community of practice’. Third, teachers provided multiple suggestions for future online PE-CPD design and delivery, including that it: (i) be evidence-based; (ii) provide pedagogical content knowledge and not just content knowledge; (iii) be informed by teachers and translatable to practice; (iv) facilitate communities of practice; (v) be interactive; (vi) be simple to navigate; and (vii) be highly visual. It is clear from teacher feedback that while online PE-CPD provides new opportunities, there are still significant limitations. This research provides novel insights and valuable recommendations that could optimise the success of future online PE-CPD offerings.
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 | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".