skip to main content
10.1145/3323771.3323783acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicietConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Use of Quantitative Content Analysis to Redesign the University Physical Education Course Based on Students' Reflections

Published:29 March 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

A formative evaluation of teaching, considering both students' perceptions and teachers' experiences, is essential for class plan improvement. This study investigated the class improvement process, involving the study of these two populations' input. Specifically, we examined a physical education (PE) teacher's class process by analysing all freshmen students' perceptions of that class via a quantitative content analysis. The course units were arranged in a particular order and those of 2015 were redesigned. We extracted eight codes after text mining students' responses: educational materials, group cohesion, play skills, game, interaction, others, self, and positive emotion. After the 2015 course ended, we re-analysed the students' class perceptions. The occurrence rates of 'interaction', 'group cohesion', and 'educational materials' were higher during the early stages in both units; game-based instruction had a positive effect on students' emotions. Thus, we identified the problem with the placement of course units and implemented improvement measures.

References

  1. Marsh, C., Day, C., Hannay, L., and McCutcheon, G. 1990. Reconceptualizing School-Based Curriculum Development. The Falmer Press, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Hau-fai Law, E. and Nieveen, N. 2010. Preface. In School as Curriculum Agencies, E. Hau-fai Low and N. Nieveen, Eds. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, 1--3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Amano, M. 1993. Theory and Practice of Education. Jusonbo, Tokyo.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Edmond & Nienke, 2010. Preface. In School as Curriculum Agencies, E. Hau-fai Low and N. Nieveen, Eds. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, vii--viii.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Kennedy, K. 2010. School-based curriculum for New Times. In School as Curriculum Agencies, E. Hau-fai Low and N. Nieveen, Eds. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, 4--17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Kiuchi, A. 2012. Encouragement of health-promoting intervention studies in college physical education. Japan Journal for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance in Universities, 9, 3--22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. 2001. Inquiry and participation in search of a world worthy of human aspiration. In Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice, P. Reason and H. Bradbury, Eds., Sage, London, 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Siedentop, D. 1983. Developing Teaching Skills in Physical Education. Mayfield Publishing Company, Mountain View, California.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Iwata, Y. 2013. Considerations on the explicit exaggeration of teaching material for goal-type game in elementary school physical education. J. of Phys. Educ. 61, 74--75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kikuchi, N. and Nakazawa, K. 2013. AY 2012 Survey on students' lifestyle. The University of Aizu Center for Cultural Research and Studies Annual Review 21, 128.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Nakazawa, K., and Kikuchi, N. 2015. AY 2014 Survey on students' lifestyle. The University of Aizu Center for Cultural Research and Studies Annual Review 21, 131.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Use of Quantitative Content Analysis to Redesign the University Physical Education Course Based on Students' Reflections

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ICIET 2019: Proceedings of the 2019 7th International Conference on Information and Education Technology
      March 2019
      338 pages
      ISBN:9781450366397
      DOI:10.1145/3323771

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 29 March 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)10
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader