MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415785536 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v14n6p14

The Exercise Science Practice Model: A Framework for Integrating Critical Thinking, Reflective Practice, and Professional Reasoning in Exercise Science Education

2025· article· W4415785536 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patti Sawyer-Simmons, Mark Erickson, P Laurent, Rob Sillevis

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningCurriculumReflective practiceBiopsychosocial modelProfessional developmentCurriculum frameworkCritical thinkingCognitionExperiential learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Exercise Science Practice Model (ESPM) is a foundational framework that unifies professional education, reasoning, and practice within the field of Exercise Science. Unlike allied health disciplines such as physical therapy, occupational therapy, and athletic training, Exercise Science has lacked an established practice model to guide curriculum design, professional identity, and accreditation. The ESPM bridges this gap by integrating the biopsychosocial model with critical thinking and clinical reasoning frameworks, emphasizing reflective, ethical, and evidence-based decision-making. Grounded in constructivist and transformative learning theories, the model promotes active, student-centered learning through case studies, simulations, and reflective exercises that cultivate higher-order cognitive skills.The ESPM is organized into six interrelated domains —Psychosocial, Assessment, Diagnosis, Prognosis, Intervention, and Outcome —that together provide a structured, cyclical approach to client management. Each domain incorporates both technical competencies and reflective reasoning, aligning with standards established by the American College of Sports Medicine (2020) and the National Strength and Conditioning Association (2025). Implementation within a regional University curriculum demonstrated enhanced student engagement, improved integrative reasoning, and strengthened professional identity. Preliminary outcomes suggest that ESPM fosters critical inquiry, ethical awareness, and interprofessional collaboration, aligning with current educational reforms in health sciences.Ultimately, the ESPM advances Exercise Science education by providing a replicable, evidence-informed framework that promotes curricular coherence, professional legitimacy, and the cultivation of reflective, competent practitioners prepared for the evolving demands of preventive health and performance science.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.029
Scholarly communication0.0140.011
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.516 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207