Open Journal Systems

ICT-Driven instructional and assessment strategies for physical education in the new normal

Roberto S. Bondoc Jr.

Article ID: 2155
Vol 9, Issue 4, 2024, Article identifier:

VIEWS - 239 (Abstract) 233 (PDF)

Abstract

Technology shaped the educational system since it enabled teachers to build several instructional methods that are both flexible and effective. It is undeniable that the use of ICT-aided teaching strategies in physical education enable the Physical Education (PE) teachers to adapt to the shifting educational environment. It has been established that several forms of ICT-aided methods were utilized by physical education teachers based on the applicability of these strategies and the teachers’ abilities to put them into practice. The purpose of this study was to determine the use of ICT-aided strategies across HEIs and secondary schools. There were total of 130 PE instructors from HEIs and secondary schools who participated in the study. Descriptive-comparative design was employed to emphasize the need to determine how nominal characteristics influenced competencies. Notably, the findings indicated that demonstration-based assessment was applicable among HEIs because of the intensive physical education curriculum. Male PE instructors were more competent in applying formative assessment and demonstration-based assessment. Competency of PE instructors within these metrics was remarkably high with an emphasis on self-efficacy. Teachers’ engagement to ICT-aided strategies reflected their teaching competencies having traces of motivational, leniency, and flexible learning. Limitations of the study represent the need to assess other factors that were relevant in teaching other that being described (e.g., social, economic, organizational). Nevertheless, ICT-aided strategies transformed the competencies of PE instructors towards sustainable learning in new normal.

Keywords

ICT-aided strategies; instruction delivery; physical education; self-efficacy

Full Text:

PDF



References

1. Naji S. The Impact of ICT on Schools. IOSR Journal of Business and Management. 2017, 19(01): 83–85. doi: 10.9790/487x-1901078385

2. Kretschmann R. Developing competencies by playing digital sportsgames. US-China Education Review. 2010, 7(2): 67–75.

3. Kretschmann R. Physical education in the year 2100-Scenarios and visions of future school sports development (German). In: Frei P, Körner S (editors). Ungewissheit. Sportpädagogische Felder im Wandel (pp. 221–226). Hamburg: Czwalina; 2010.

4. Kretschmann R. Evaluation of an Informal Introduction to Departmental Student’s Life via an E-Learning Environment Performed by the Departmental Student Commission of a Department of Sport Science – Initiating a Digital Learning Culture. International Journal of Health, Physical Education and Computer Science in Sports. 2011, 4(1): 8–11.

5. Martin AJ. The Student Motivation Scale: A Tool for Measuring and Enhancing Motivation. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools. 2001, 11: 1–20. doi: 10.1017/s1037291100004301

6. Elliot AJ, Covington MV. Educational Psychology Review. 2001, 13(2): 73–92. doi: 10.1023/a: 1009009018235

7. Meece JL, Glienke BB, Burg S. Gender and motivation. Journal of School Psychology. 2006, 44(5): 351–373. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.004

8. Sallis JF, McKenzie TL. Physical Education’s Role in Public Health. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1991, 62(2): 124–137. doi: 10.1080/02701367.1991.10608701

9. Prensky M. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon. 2001, 9(5): 1–6. doi: 10.1108/10748120110424816

10. Chen TL. Integrating Lecture Capture and Clickers in the Economics Classroom via Bring Your Own Device. IJERN. 2022.

11. Kretschmann R. Exergames and Health Promotion – Nintendo Wii Sports: Physiological Measures vs. Perceived Opinions. In: Sánchez Molina JAs, Carballo Iglesias O, González Valeiro MAn (editors). Physical education professionals in the promotion of an active lifestyle: Proceedings of the Congress of the International Association of Schools of Physical Education (AIESEP) (Spanish). Alcoy: Alto Rendimiento; 2011.

12. Salama R, Uzunboylu H, Alkaddah B. Distance learning system, learning programming languages by using mobile applications. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences. 2020, 7(2): 23–47. doi: 10.18844/prosoc.v7i2.5015

13. Mercier K, Centeio E, Garn A, Erwin H, Marttinen R, Foley J. Physical education teachers’ experiences with remote instruction during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Teaching in Physical education. 2021, 40(2), 337–342.

14. Dunn KE, Mulvenon SW. A critical review of research on formative assessments: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessments in education. Practical assessment, research, and evaluation. 2019, 14(1), 7

15. Sudakova NE, Savina TN, Masalimova AR, Mikhaylovsky MN, Karandeeva LG, Zhdanov SP. Online formative assessment in higher education: bibliometric analysis. Education Sciences 2022, 12(3), 209.

16. Stanja J, Gritz W, Krugel J, Hoppe A, Dannemann S. Formative assessment strategies for students' conceptions—The potential of learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2023, 54(1), 58–75.

17. Sardareh SA, Mohd Saad MR. Defining assessment for learning: a proposed definition from a sociocultural perspective. Life Science Journal. 2013, 10(2): 2493–2497.

18. O’Shaughnessy SM, Joyce P. Summative and Formative Assessment in Medicine: The Experience of an Anaesthesia Trainee. International Journal of Higher Education. 2015, 4(2). doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v4n2p198

19. Weeldenburg G, Borghouts L, Laak T van de, et al. TARGETing secondary school students’ motivation towards physical education: The role of student-perceived mastery climate teaching strategies. PLOS ONE. 2022, 17(9): e0274964. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274964

20. Chavez J, Ceneciro C. Hybridization of Learning Management Systems in Tertiary Schools. IOER International Multidiciplinary Research Journal. 2021, 3(4): 116–122.

21. Urdan T, Kaplan A. The origins, evolution, and future directions of achievement goal theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2020, 61: 101862. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101862

22. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Publications; 2017.

23. Ryan RM, Deci EL, Vansteenkiste M, et al. Building a science of motivated persons: Self-determination theory’s empirical approach to human experience and the regulation of behavior. Motivation Science. 2021, 7(2): 97–110. doi: 10.1037/mot0000194

24. Aelterman N, Vansteenkiste M, Haerens L, et al. Toward an integrative and fine-grained insight in motivating and demotivating teaching styles: The merits of a circumplex approach. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2019, 111(3): 497–521. doi: 10.1037/edu0000293

25. Moustakas L, Robrade D. The Challenges and Realities of E-Learning during COVID-19: The Case of University Sport and Physical Education. Challenges. 2022, 13(1): 9. doi: 10.3390/challe13010009

26. de Souza Júnior AF, de Oliveira MRR, de Araújo AC. The debate of digital technology in the continuing Physical Education teacher education: uses and concepts for teaching and learning. Retos: nuevas tendencias en educación física, deporte y recreación. 2022, (46): 694–704.

27. Ali L, Dmour NAHHA. The Shift to Online Assessment Due to COVID-19: An Empirical Study of University Students, Behaviour and Performance, in the Region of UAE. International Journal of Information and Education Technology. 2021, 11(5): 220–228. doi: 10.18178/ijiet.2021.11.5.1515

28. Krishnan J, Black RW, Olson CB. The Power of Context: Exploring Teachers’ Formative Assessment for Online Collaborative Writing. Reading & Writing Quarterly. 2020, 37(3): 201–220. doi: 10.1080/10573569.2020.1764888

29. Shahat MA, Ambusaidi AK, Treagust D. Omani Science Teachers’ Perceived Self-Efficacy Beliefs for Teaching Science as Inquiry: Influences of Gender, Teaching Experience, and Preparation Programme. Journal of Turkish Science Education. 2022, 19(3).

30. Abdzadeh Y, Baker W. Cultural awareness in an Iranian English language classroom: A teaching intervention in an interculturally “conservative” setting. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca. 2020, 9(1): 57–80. doi: 10.1515/jelf-2020-2030

31. Opie TR, Livingston B, Greenberg DN, et al. Building gender inclusivity: disentangling the influence of classroom demography on classroom participation. Higher Education. 2019, 77(1): 37–58. doi: 10.1007/s10734-018-0245-2

32. Cooper LA. Impact of Conscious Discipline on Teacher Efficacy and Burnout: Perspectives for Elementary Teachers. International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership. 2019, 15(14). doi: 10.22230/ijepl.2019v15n14a882

33. Cruz RA, Manchanda S, Firestone AR, et al. An Examination of Teachers’ Culturally Responsive Teaching Self-Efficacy. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children. 2019, 43(3): 197–214. doi: 10.1177/0888406419875194

34. Isil A. Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, performance and personal outcomes of Turkish physical education teachers. Educational Research and Reviews. 2015, 10(3): 328–337. doi: 10.5897/err2014.2016

35. Fröberg A, Lundvall S. Sustainable Development Perspectives in Physical Education Teacher Education Course Syllabi: An Analysis of Learning Outcomes. Sustainability. 2022, 14(10): 5955. doi: 10.3390/su14105955

36. Eroglu C, Unlu H. Self-efficacy: Its effects on physical education teacher candidates’ attitudes toward the teaching profession. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. 2015, 15(1).

37. Aarskog E. ‘No assessment, no learning’: exploring student participation in assessment in Norwegian physical education (PE). Sport, Education and Society. 2020, 26(8): 875–888. doi: 10.1080/13573322.2020.1791064

38. Mödinger M, Woll A, Wagner I. Video-based visual feedback to enhance motor learning in physical education—a systematic review. German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research. 2021, 52(3): 447–460. doi: 10.1007/s12662-021-00782-y

39. Sigrist R, Rauter G, Riener R, et al. Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2013, 20(1): 21–53. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0333-8


DOI: https://doi.org/10.54517/esp.v9i4.2155
(239 Abstract Views, 233 PDF Downloads)

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Roberto S. Bondoc Jr.

License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/