Teachers’ Perceived Effects of Classroom Physical Activity Breaks on Students’ Self-Regulation: A Mixed-Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This mixed-methods study focused on teachers’ perceptions about the effects of a classroom physical activity breaks (CPAB) program on students’ self-regulation. Participants were six teachers and 47 elementary students (6 to 10 years old). Teachers identified two groups: 23 students with behavioral difficulties and 22 students in the control group. A simultaneous mixed design was used to measure teachers’ perceptions of students’ self-regulation with the Self-Regulation Questionnaire teacher version and interviews. According to teachers, a CPAB program seems interesting to support students’ cognitive, behavioral, and emotional self-regulation through different processes, such as task involvement, energy modulation, emotional expressivity, emotional modulation, and self-consciousness. Quantitative and qualitative results converged, suggesting that CPAB could be helpful for students with behavioral difficulties considering the positive effects identified on different dimensions of their self-regulation. Divergences also emerged regarding the implied dimensions and processes of self-regulation, underscoring the importance of using a mixed-methods design to measure self-regulation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".