Teachers’ Perspectives on Nutrition and Physical Education Teaching Practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study investigates Nutrition and Physical Education and its role in student empowerment as a precondition for subsequent healthy habits and lifestyle, drawing on teachers’ perspectives in the province of Ontario, where the researcher is based. The teacher perspective is distinguished, as it is these ground level experts who are in the best position to discuss the education carried out, as well as evaluate the outcome for their students, and identify the specific challenges of the process. The critical value lens of empowerment is operationalized to investigate the lasting impact of the education upon the students. To this end, the dynamic interaction of policy, teachers and students is of interest, during the respective teacher practice process, filtering through the challenges, to produce the final outcome of student empowerment for healthy habits and lifestyle. Accordingly, the respective past and current teachers are considered, their backgrounds, workplaces and communities, their particular Health Education programs, as well as any challenges experienced by them. Specifically, a Questionnaire and several interviews explore which factors inform the teacher practice of nutrition and physical education teaching, what influences what the teachers do pedagogically when they teach nutrition and physical education, how the teachers evaluate effectiveness of the education they provide, what are the challenges encountered by the teachers during this process, and what are the teachers’ perspectives about the relationship between their teaching practices and student empowerment in the formation of healthy habits, and subsequently, a healthy lifestyle? Findings of the investigation point to a wide range of factors which directly and indirectly inform the teacher practice of nutrition and physical education teaching; numerous important direct and indirect conditions impacting the teaching practice of the participants are observed; various types of instruments employed for evaluation purposes are identified; and many challenges of direct and indirect nature encountered by the teachers during this process are uncovered. Nonetheless, the participants confirm the belief that Health Education provided leads to the formation of healthy habits and a healthy lifestyle. In conclusion, implications for policy, practice, and theory are discussed, as well as recommendations are offered for future research.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".