The Impact of Sport Education on Physical Education Majors’ Basketball Content Knowledge and Performance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose : To examine the consistency of findings between two studies examining the impact of sport education on Chinese physical education preservice teachers’ content knowledge and performance of volleyball and basketball. Methods : One hundred and six preservice teachers’ from a university in central China participated in six semester-long courses of basketball taught using either a Multi-Activity or Sport Education model of instruction. Pre- and postcourse measures of game performance were recorded for common content knowledge and specialized content knowledge. Results : After controlling for preintervention scores, statistically significant differences favoring Sport Education were found for common content knowledge as well as specialized content knowledge. Students in Sport Education had 62 times higher odds of reaching the specialized content knowledge benchmark depth for acceptable content development. Conclusion : These findings provide support for the idea that the accountability mechanisms specific to Sport Education, together with the tasks related to designing team training plans, serve to promote students’ ability to design and sequence tasks based on their team’s needs.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it