Capabilities in Physical Education: A Comparative Analysis of School Heads’ and Teachers’ Perspectives

Davidsol Mendoza, Maryjane Calabia
{"title":"Capabilities in Physical Education: A Comparative Analysis of School Heads’ and Teachers’ Perspectives","authors":"Davidsol Mendoza, Maryjane Calabia","doi":"10.56003/pessr.v3i1.347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Effective education delivery relies on PE teachers’ abilities. Research indicates that students’ school performance significantly depends on the quality of PE teaching.\nObjectives: This study focused on assessing instructional capabilities in physical education. Specifically, it examined how school heads and teachers evaluated teachers’ abilities in content knowledge, pedagogical skills, communication, and professionalism. Additionally, the study compared assessments between the two groups.\nMethods: The study employed a descriptive research design involving 98 physical education teachers and 59 school heads from the Division of Batangas City. Data collection utilized a researcher-made questionnaire and interviews. Statistical analysis involved weighted mean and independent t-tests for data interpretation.\nResults: The assessment revealed valuable insights regarding PE teachers’ instructional capabilities. Administrators acknowledged strengths in lesson introduction and accurate content delivery. However, areas for improvement included integrating key elements and promoting higher-order thinking skills. PE teachers felt confident introducing lessons but recognized a need to refine performance demonstrations. Administrators praised diverse teaching methods but suggested creating more challenging experiences. Communication skills were positive, with room for improvement in grammatical accuracy. PE teachers expressed dedication to student physical education but identified a need for more decisive leadership in school-based activities. The findings highlighted specific improvement needs while emphasizing contrasting perceptions between administrators and PE teachers.\nConclusion: The assessment found that physical education (PE) teachers are capable in delivering junior high school PE. However, they need familiarity with emerging trends to enhance instruction. School heads and PE teachers have differing views on instructional capabilities, attributed to assessment sources: administrators rely on scheduled observations, while PE instructors use self-assessment and daily teaching experiences.","PeriodicalId":435448,"journal":{"name":"Physical Education and Sports: Studies and Research","volume":"277 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Education and Sports: Studies and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56003/pessr.v3i1.347","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Effective education delivery relies on PE teachers’ abilities. Research indicates that students’ school performance significantly depends on the quality of PE teaching. Objectives: This study focused on assessing instructional capabilities in physical education. Specifically, it examined how school heads and teachers evaluated teachers’ abilities in content knowledge, pedagogical skills, communication, and professionalism. Additionally, the study compared assessments between the two groups. Methods: The study employed a descriptive research design involving 98 physical education teachers and 59 school heads from the Division of Batangas City. Data collection utilized a researcher-made questionnaire and interviews. Statistical analysis involved weighted mean and independent t-tests for data interpretation. Results: The assessment revealed valuable insights regarding PE teachers’ instructional capabilities. Administrators acknowledged strengths in lesson introduction and accurate content delivery. However, areas for improvement included integrating key elements and promoting higher-order thinking skills. PE teachers felt confident introducing lessons but recognized a need to refine performance demonstrations. Administrators praised diverse teaching methods but suggested creating more challenging experiences. Communication skills were positive, with room for improvement in grammatical accuracy. PE teachers expressed dedication to student physical education but identified a need for more decisive leadership in school-based activities. The findings highlighted specific improvement needs while emphasizing contrasting perceptions between administrators and PE teachers. Conclusion: The assessment found that physical education (PE) teachers are capable in delivering junior high school PE. However, they need familiarity with emerging trends to enhance instruction. School heads and PE teachers have differing views on instructional capabilities, attributed to assessment sources: administrators rely on scheduled observations, while PE instructors use self-assessment and daily teaching experiences.
体育能力:校长和教师观点的比较分析
背景:有效的教育取决于体育教师的能力。研究表明,学生的学习成绩在很大程度上取决于体育教学的质量:本研究的重点是评估体育教师的教学能力。具体而言,研究考察了学校领导和教师如何评价教师在教学内容知识、教学技能、沟通和专业精神方面的能力。此外,研究还比较了两组之间的评价:本研究采用描述性研究设计,涉及八打雁市分区的 98 名体育教师和 59 名校长。数据收集采用了研究人员制作的问卷和访谈。统计分析采用加权平均数和独立 t 检验来解释数据:评估揭示了有关体育教师教学能力的宝贵见解。管理者肯定了体育教师在课程导入和准确传授内容方面的优势。然而,需要改进的地方包括整合关键要素和促进高阶思维能力。体育教师对课程导入充满信心,但也认识到需要改进表演示范。管理人员赞扬了多样化的教学方法,但建议创造更具挑战性的体验。沟通技巧方面,体育教师表现积极,但在语法准确性方面还有待提高。体育教师表达了对学生体育教育的奉献精神,但认为在校本活动中需要更果断的领导。评估结果突出了具体的改进需求,同时强调了管理者和体育教师之间截然不同的看法:评估发现,体育教师有能力开展初中体育教学。结论:评估发现,体育教师有能力开展初中体育教学,但他们需要熟悉新趋势,以加强教学。学校领导和体育教师对教学能力的看法不同,这归因于评估来源:行政人员依赖于计划观察,而体育教师则使用自我评估和日常教学经验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书