Department of Sports Studies, Faculty of Education Studies, University Putra Malaysia, 43400, Seri Kembangan, Malaysia.
School of Physical Education, Huzhou University, Huzhou, 313000, China.
BMC Public Health. 2024 Apr 2;24(1):949. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-18243-0.
Evidence indicates that the Sport Education Model (SEM) has demonstrated effectiveness in enhancing students' athletic capabilities and fostering their enthusiasm for sports. Nevertheless, there remains a dearth of comprehensive reviews examining the impact of the SEM on students' attitudes toward physical education learning.
The purpose of this review is to elucidate the influence of the SEM on students' attitudes toward physical education learning.
Employing the preferred reporting items of the Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement guidelines, a systematic search of PubMed, SCOPUS, EBSCOhost (SPORTDiscus and CINAHL Plus), and Web of Science databases was conducted in mid-January 2023. A set of keywords associated with the SEM, attitudes toward physical education learning, and students were employed to identify relevant studies. Out of 477 studies, only 13 articles fulfilled all the eligibility criteria and were consequently incorporated into this systematic review. The validated checklist of Downs and Black (1998) was employed for the assessment, and the included studies achieved quality scores ranging from 11 to 13. The ROBINS-I tool was utilized to evaluate the risk of bias in the literature, whereby only one paper exhibited a moderate risk of bias, while the remainder were deemed to have a high risk.
The findings unveiled significant disparities in cognitive aspects (n = 8) and affective components (n = 12) between the SEM intervention and the Traditional Teaching (TT) comparison. Existing evidence suggests that the majority of scholars concur that the SEM yields significantly superior effects in terms of students' affective and cognitive aspects compared to the TT.
Nonetheless, several issues persist, including a lack of data regarding junior high school students and gender differences, insufficient frequency of weekly interventions, inadequate control of inter-group atmosphere disparities resulting from the same teaching setting, lack of reasonable testing, model fidelity check and consideration for regulating variables, of course, learning content, and unsuitable tools for measuring learning attitudes. In contrast, the SEM proves more effective than the TT in enhancing students' attitudes toward physical learning.
( https://inplasy.com/ ) (INPLASY2022100040).
有证据表明，体育教育模式（SEM）已被证明能有效提高学生的运动能力并激发他们对体育运动的热情。然而，目前仍缺乏全面的综述来考察 SEM 对学生体育学习态度的影响。
本综述旨在阐明 SEM 对学生体育学习态度的影响。
本研究采用系统综述和荟萃分析（PRISMA）声明指南的首选报告项目，于 2023 年 1 月中旬对 PubMed、SCOPUS、EBSCOhost（SPORTDiscus 和 CINAHL Plus）和 Web of Science 数据库进行了系统检索。使用与 SEM、体育学习态度和学生相关的一组关键词来确定相关研究。在 477 项研究中，只有 13 项文章符合所有纳入标准，因此被纳入本系统综述。采用 Downs 和 Black（1998）的经过验证的清单进行评估，纳入研究的质量评分为 11 至 13 分。使用 ROBINS-I 工具评估文献中的偏倚风险，只有一篇论文显示中度偏倚风险，其余论文均为高度偏倚风险。
研究结果揭示了 SEM 干预与传统教学（TT）比较在认知方面（n=8）和情感成分方面（n=12）存在显著差异。现有证据表明，大多数学者认为，与 TT 相比，SEM 在学生的情感和认知方面产生了显著更好的效果。
尽管如此，仍存在一些问题，包括缺乏关于初中学生和性别差异的数据、每周干预的频率不足、同一教学环境下由于组间氛围差异导致的控制不足、缺乏合理的测试、模型保真度检查和对调节变量的考虑，当然还有学习内容和不适合测量学习态度的工具。相比之下，SEM 比 TT 更能有效提高学生对体育学习的态度。
