MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411133148 · doi:10.1177/18369391251349550

Teaching Practices, Self-Efficacy and the Physical Activity Environment in Aotearoa, New Zealand Early Childhood Education Centres

2025· article· en· W4411133148 on OpenAlexaff
Wendy L. Pirie, Andrew Gibbons, Scott Duncan, Rachel A. Jones, Brianne A. Bruijns, Patricia Tucker, Nigel Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Journal of Early Childhood · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAotearoaEarly childhood educationSelf-efficacyEarly childhoodPhysical activityPedagogyPsychologySociologyDevelopmental psychologyGender studiesMedicineSocial psychologyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early Childhood Education (ECE) has potential to influence physical activity levels and participation among children. Factors include early childhood educator’s teaching practices, self-efficacy and quality of the movement environment. A cross-sectional study of early childhood teachers’ self-reported, self-efficacy using online Early Childhood Educator Confidence in Outdoor Movement, Physical Activity, Sedentary and Screen Behaviours (ECE-COMPASS) Questionnaire and ECE movement environment from Movement Environment Rating Scale (MOVERS) was assessed. Descriptive statistics were conducted to analyse data. Early childhood teachers (n = 42) rated (means [SD]) for task (7.2 ± 2.3) and barrier (7.0 ± 2.5) self-efficacy (out of 10). ECE (n = 6) movement environment quality (out of 7); 1 (4.0 ± 1.1), 2 (4.0 ± 0.4), 3 (3.8 ± 0.6), 4 (4.0 ± 0.6) and overall total score (4.0 ± 0.3). Early childhood teachers rate themselves as self-efficacious in delivering physical activity; however, quality of the movement environment was adequate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian Journal of Early ChildhoodSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207