Meaningful physical education: Towards an embodied pedagogy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International research on students’ meaningful experiences in physical education (PE) has led to the proposal of the Meaningful PE approach, aiming to guide pedagogical principles to support students’ meaningful experiences in PE. The approach currently includes democratic and reflective pedagogical principles. With this paper, we aim to contribute to the Meaningful PE approach by emphasizing the need to address a third pedagogical principle that attends to pre-reflective bodily dimensions of students’ meaningful experiences in PE. The democratic and reflective pedagogical principles are based on a reflective interpretation of the significance an experience holds. While this approach is highly valuable, the retrospective nature of these principles may unintentionally overlook significant pre-reflective bodily dimensions of experience. Drawing on a phenomenological concept of embodiment, we use key structures of our pre-reflective bodily engagement with the world to analyse features that young people describe as significantly contributing to their meaningful experiences in PE and youth sport: social interaction, challenge, motor competence, fun, and personally relevant learning. Our analysis reveals that pre-reflective bodily meaningful experiences emerge as something in-between the subject and the world. These experiences can be affected by others in body-to-body encounters and contain a dimension of negativity related to the pre-reflective, relational, and active–passive structure of our lived experience. Based on our analysis, we propose that teaching to support meaningful experiences in PE must address the dialectical interplay between reflective and pre-reflective dimensions. Therefore, we advocate for adding an embodied pedagogical principle to the Meaningful PE approach alongside the reflective and democratic principles.
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 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".