Development and students’ evaluation of a blended online and offline pedagogy for physical education theory curriculum in China during the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

The outbreak and continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the implementation of physical education theory (PET) curriculums among global colleges and universities. This study aimed to describe the design and students’ evaluation of a blended “Sports Multimedia Courseware Design” course among Chinese university students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using information communication technologies, a 4-month blended course was developed, which consisted of 36 credits (18-credit online self-learning + 18-credit offline group-learning). A total of 1300 Chinese university students who majored in physical education, completed the blended course from Mar to Jun 2020, among which 238 (69.75% males; 21 ± 1.2 years) were randomly recruited to evaluate the course in terms of three aspects: (1) online self-learning, (2) offline group-learning, and (3) overall learning outcomes. A descriptive analysis was conducted using the IBM SPSS 27.0. Students’ overall positive evaluation supported a successful development and implementation of the blended course. Over 90% of students fulfilled the learning tasks and satisfied with the online learning resources. About 83% of students indicated high levels of autonomous motivation and engagement in online self-learning. Approximately 88% of students showed positive attitudes to the offline group-learning content, while the participation rate (60%) was relatively lower than of the online self-learning. Over 50% of the students indicated self-improvements in diverse aspects after attending the blended course. Blended online and offline pedagogy shows apparent promise in delivering the PET course among Chinese university students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further application and comprehensive evaluation are warranted in the future.

Blended learning in physical education: A systematic review

“…Blended learning is a pedagogical framework based on multiple theories of teaching and learning. This review discovered that the theories presented in the articles include self-determination theory (SDT) ( 22 , 31 ), WSQ-based flipped learning model ( 29 ), ARQI-based flipped learning model ( 30 ), constructivism theory ( 34 , 37 ), hybrid learning theory ( 35 ), post-humanism theory ( 37 ), cognitive apprenticeship and reflective practice theory ( 36 ), ICRA-based flipped learning model ( 39 ), and 3C model ( 42 ). However, of the 22 articles included in this review, 12 articles did not report a theoretical framework that was used to guide their research and teaching practice.…”

“…There were 10 articles involving sports courses such as the Physical Activity and Wellness course ( 22 ), Sports Coaching course ( 23 ), and Sports Management course ( 40 ). There were also two articles on theory courses ( 37 , 42 ). In addition, most of the current blended learning articles explored dancing ( 27 , 29 , 30 , 38 ), followed by basketball ( 28 , 31 ), football ( 26 ), Wushu ( 35 ), billiards ( 36 ), and badminton ( 39 ).…”

“…Even though studies have been investigating blended learning in single sports, such as dance, basketball, football, and Wushu, the sports categories are limited and lack richness. Moreover, this review discovers that the physical education theory (PET) curriculum is currently a less studied ( 37 , 42 ), probably because it is mainly conducted in higher education. However, it still has a vital role to play in the development of physical education.…”

“…However, from the review of 22 articles, blended learning in physical education has generally met researchers' expectations. For instance, several studies mentioned the positive impacts of blended learning on students' learning effects, self-efficiency, interaction, and satisfaction ( 23 , 27 , 28 , 32 , 35 ), as well as their perceptions, motivation, and attitude ( 31 , 36 , 38 , 41 , 42 ). Furthermore, other topics such as the task load ( 29 , 30 ), attendance ( 24 ), self-assessment tools ( 25 ), skills and career development ( 26 ), and psychological needs in sports ( 33 ) were also conducted.…”

Differences in the Effect of Offline, Blended, and Online Learning in Statistics Learning on Physical Education Students

“…Offline learning activities also do not require computers and laptops because the types of activities are writing and collecting work (Bolatov et al, 2022). Offline learning is commonly known as traditional learning that provides a face to-face learning activity in a conventional face to-face classroom setting (Liu et al, 2022).…”