Improving Kindergarten and Grade One Indigenous Students' On-Task Behavior With the Use of Movement Integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of movement integration on the on-task behavior, a facet of self-regulation, of Indigenous kindergarten and grade one participants at an on-reserve school in Canada. Movement integration is defined as opportunities that allow for increased physical activity among children during classroom time. Methods: This study utilized participatory action research methodology. Nine <i>(n</i> = 9) kindergarten and grade one Indigenous students participated in this study. The repeated measures design used had a within subjects factor with four levels. For one-week participants' on-task behavior was measured without the use of movement integration during class time. For the subsequent two weeks on-task behavior was measured during class at two time points, before movement integration and after movement integration. Results: A two way [time (pre-lesson vs. post-lesson) x period (active lesson vs. non-active lesson)] repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant time x period interaction [F(1, 8) = 36.77, <i>p <</i>. 001, Partial η2 = 0.821], indicating that the movement integration intervention was effective in improving on-task behavior for the participants. Conclusion: Incorporating movement integration may be an effective way to improve the on-task behaviors of children in their first years of elementary school.
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".