A Pedagogical Strategy Applied in Physical Education to Encourage Sustainable Physical Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is known that the practice of physical activity (PA) drops off drastically in late adolescence, during the transition to adulthood, leading to a deterioration in physical fitness among post-secondary students. Given the importance of the consequences of physical inactivity, interventions aimed at the sustained adoption of sufficient PA practice must be developed. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of a pedagogical strategy based on the question-behavior effect (QBE) implemented in the final post-secondary physical education and health (PEH) course and that capitalizes on the benefits derived from PA. An iterative, self-reflective exercise involving the personal benefits derived from PA practiced in PEH class was tested among 496 students (mean age: 19.10 [SD: 2.42]) from 15 post-secondary institutions and divided into three groups: self-reflection on benefits and on PA practiced (Group A; n = 152), self-reflection on PA practiced (Group B; n = 142), no self-reflection (Group C; n = 210). Two measurements of weekly PA practiced outside the school setting were taken: one week before the start of the final semester of PEH, and then six months after the end of that semester. In particular, the results indicate that PA practice outside of school increased among participants in Group A and that the proportion of students who were inactive at Time 1 who became active at Time 2 was higher in Group A. Thus, it appears that repeated awareness of the personal benefits of practicing PA in PEH class promotes engagement in PA done outside of class.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".