The effect of the Sport Education Model in physical education on student learning attitude: a systematic review

Junlong Zhang,Wensheng Xiao,Kim Geok Soh,Gege Yao,Mohd Ashraff Bin Mohd Anuar,Xiaorong Bai,Lixia Bao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18243-0

IF: 4.5

2024-04-02

BMC Public Health

Abstract:Abstract Background 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. Purpose The purpose of this review is to elucidate the influence of the SEM on students' attitudes toward physical education learning. Methods 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. Results 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. Conclusions 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. Systematic review registration ( https://inplasy.com/ ) (INPLASY2022100040).

public, environmental & occupational health

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper is a systematic review aimed at exploring the impact of the Sport Education Model (SEM) on students' learning attitudes in physical education. There is currently evidence indicating that SEM can effectively improve students' athletic abilities and stimulate their enthusiasm for sports. However, there is a relative lack of comprehensive evaluations on how SEM affects students' attitudes towards physical education.

The research method followed the guidelines of the PRISMA statement. A systematic search was conducted in databases such as PubMed, SCOPUS, EBSCOhost (SPORTDiscus and CINAHL Plus), and Web of Science. Thirteen eligible articles related to SEM, attitudes towards physical education, and students were selected for analysis. The selected studies had quality scores ranging from 11 to 13, with most of them having a high risk of bias and only one study having a moderate risk of bias.

The results showed significant differences in cognitive and affective aspects between SEM interventions and Traditional Teaching (TT). Most studies indicated that SEM was superior to TT in improving students' affective and cognitive attitudes. However, the research also pointed out some limitations of the existing studies, such as a lack of data on middle school students, gender differences, inadequate intervention frequency per week, insufficient control of environmental differences between groups, inadequate testing and consideration of model fidelity, and learning content factors.

In conclusion, despite some limitations, SEM is more effective than TT in improving students' attitudes towards physical education learning. Future research needs to address the aforementioned limitations in order to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of SEM and to guide curriculum designers, practitioners, and policymakers in optimizing the teaching effectiveness of physical education.