What Actually Differs between Traditional Teaching and Sport Education in Students’ Learning Outcomes? A Critical Systematic Review

Abstract

This systematic review aimed to examine the main findings concerning to the investigations focused on compare, within Physical Education context, the influence of Sport Education (SE) and Traditional Teaching (TT) on students’ learning outcomes. A literature search was conducted on nine electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Academic Search Ultimate, ERIC, Education Source, APA PsycINFO and APA PsycARTICLES). Inclusion criteria were defined before the selection process. Accordingly, were only included articles that (i) were published in peer-reviewed international journals indexed in Journal Citation Reports or Scientific Journal Rankings; (ii) were available in full-text; (iii) were published in English, Portuguese or Spanish; (iv) were performed within Physical Education context; and (v) provided specifically a comparison between the effects of SE and TT on students’ learning outcomes. Globally, twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The manuscripts’ methodological quality was assessed through Downs and Black checklist, with all studies displaying moderate quality. Results showed that comparisons among SE and TT tend to analyze team sports activities sampling high-school students via quasi-experimental designs, with more than half of them were published over the past five years. Also, these investigations typically focused on the differences between both models on the development of personal and social skills, as well as its impact on the motor and cognitive domains. In this respect, although the results tend to point out increases in both SE and TT, superior values are achieved when SE is implemented. The analysis of the teaching-learning process using alternative research methods and designs (i.e., experimental studies, qualitative data, longitudinal analysis, action-research and case studies), longer units with appropriate planning, and the report of model’s fidelity so that robust findings can endorse the teachers’ praxis, must be a concern in future studies.

Impact of the MooN Physical Education Program on the Socio-Emotional Competencies of Preadolescents

“…The educational system should emphasize students' personal and social development as a fundamental goal of current education [21,38]. Furthermore, in recent years, the scientific literature has been increasingly interested in teaching models that significantly impact students through high-quality learning environments [28].…”

“…Furthermore, in recent years, the scientific literature has been increasingly interested in teaching models that significantly impact students through high-quality learning environments [28]. Along these lines, with relevant empirical support, research promotes the SEM as an effective and positive model [38][39][40][41]43]. Similarly, physical and sports interventions within active educational environments (such as in physical education) that are effectively applied (SEM) are beneficial for students from a comprehensive perspective [22,23,29].…”

“…A possible explanation for these results could be the constructive and significant methodologies used in the intervention (e.g., cooperative learning, positive interdependence, decision-making, responsibility roles) contextualized from the SEM [36] and the SEL [13,15]. In this sense, the educational intervention implementation in preadolescents (a critical and sensitive, vital stage for the personal, social, and emotional development of students) with active and participatory experiences such as the one applied in the current study could promote socio-emotional competencies (interpersonal and intrapersonal) [18], and some motivational and autonomy indicators at an early age [38,42,43]. All this is favored by students' participation in an alternative sport and team game, which, in line with other previous studies, improves their interpersonal skills [25,45] and relationship with classmates [46,47].…”

“…In recent years, the SEM has generated significant interest in scientific literature, with the publication of different reviews [38][39][40][41][42] and meta-analyses [43]. It is an effective teaching model that shows significant improvements in the educational context, in both students' well-being [44] and socio-emotional development [25,37,40,45].…”

“…Bessa et al [38] note in a recent systematic review of the SEM that no research in primary education has been found that explicitly compares SEM-based interventions with TM-DI-based interventions. Other authors also highlight the importance of investigating the impact of SEM-based interventions in children [49,50].…”