Body and Sartorial Paradox in Physical Education: A New Look at the Gender Interaction and Co-Educational System in Physical Education Class
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the Tunisian Revolution of 2010, two views (modernism and conservatism) conduct two opposite social projects for the Tunisian population, which affect, in first order, the school from primary to secondary level. The Tunisian educational system is based on co-education, contradicting the country’s conservatism culture. The religious dress (veil/hijab) is accepted and tolerated in schools. Physical education, as an educational discipline, had to adapt to these changes, especially to the religion dress and gender interaction. The aim of this paper is to study, through the representations of physical education’s (PE) teachers, the paradoxes observed between physical practice and religious dress (veil/Hijab) and the management of the co-educational system in PE classes. This is based on the opinion which indicates that this matter requires the student’s body and physical ability to be independent from their gender, dress or motor skills. The results show a difference in opinion between females and male teachers regarding gender interaction and religious dress.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".