Exploring the Use of a Learning-Based Exergame to Enhance Physical Literacy, Soft Skills, and Academic Learning in School-Age Children: Pilot Interventional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is ample evidence that most children do not perform enough physical activity (PA). To address this major public health problem, the French government implemented 30 minutes of daily PA (DPA) at schools but did not provide any supplemental resources or concrete guidance. Considering both children's interest in video games and the need for teachers to complete their curriculum, the use of a learning-based exergame that combines PA and learning appears particularly relevant. OBJECTIVE: The first objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of implementing 30 minutes of DPA through exergaming among school-age children. The second objective was to examine the effects of an exergaming program on physical literacy, academic learning, and soft skills (motivation, self-efficacy, and concentration). METHODS: This interventional study had a pre-post design and used the Play LÜ exergame platform. The study included 79 children with a mean age of 8.9 (SD 1.2) years from grade 2 (7 years old) to grade 5 (11 years old). Play LÜ requires players to throw balls against a wall to reach a target or to activate an object and provides an interactive game area for educational activities linked to specific learning themes. After a 4-session familiarization phase during which the teachers chose to prioritize mathematics learning in 30-minute DPA sessions, students took part in DPA sessions over a period of 3 weeks with Play LÜ and a motor skills circuit behind the LÜ setup to keep them continuously active. All sessions were carried out by PA specialists. Each session started with a warm-up using the Grööve application, continued with main activities promoting mathematics learning adapted to each grade level, and ended with a 3-minute meditation for returning to a calm and serene state using the Gaïa application. Before (T0) and after (T1) the program, students completed a self-evaluation booklet to assess their levels of physical literacy, academic performance, and soft skills. RESULTS: =-0.44, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.16). In addition, it is important to note that some measures progressed differently across learning levels and age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The study results indicate positive impacts of learning-based exergaming on physical literacy and motivation in mathematics among school-age children.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".