1. Daum, D. N., & Buschner, C. (2012). The Status of
High School Online Physical Education in the United
States. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,
31(1), 86-100.
Tyler Goad
2. The Story of Bridgett Driscoll
Your choices are to:
• Get out of the way
• Hop on board
• Get run over!
3. Descriptive Quantitative Survey
• Purpose: To describe the current status of online physical
education in the United States.
• Research questions guiding the study:
– How does the design/implementation of online physical
education courses align with the NASPE national standards?
– What content and domains of learning (cognitive, affective,
psychomotor, and health related fitness) are being taught in
online physical education?
– What are the qualifications of online physical education
teachers?
– What are the modes of communication between the teacher
and the student?
– What are the current student completion and student attrition
rates for high school online physical education?
4. Background and Significance
• OLPE is a rapidly growing field with an estimated
one million K-12 students enrolled
– 22 states offer OLPE courses (2012).
– 10 of those require a certified physical education
teacher to instruct them.
• The delivery of wellness for life and similar OLPE
courses has been met with some skepticism
• Most notably questions arise about the quality of
the courses and the ability to verify that student
participation in activity (Mohnsen, 2012).
6. Analysis Methods
• Data Analysis
– Negative case analysis used to look into outlier data
and identify themes
• Categorization of results
– Teacher qualifications
– Course content
– Student physical activity
– Student motivation and online challenges
– Maintaining teach/learner communication
– Teacher perceptions of OLPE
7. Findings/Main arguments
• Teacher’s biggest concern (voiced in this study) is
ensuring verification of student activity.
– Also concern in addressing the affective domain
• Fitness for Life the most common course taught
by participants.
– Blackboard LMS was the most prevalent
• Limited training before teaching OLPE
– 75% of indicated they had “some training” (n=24) and
25% said they had none (n=8)
8. Fleetly
• Allows students to select workouts based
on their individual fitness goals
• Students complete the workouts via
instructions on screen & logging their
sets/reps/weight or time/distance.
• Ability for the students to read or watch a
video of each exercise/lift/movement
before performing the task.
• Video
9. Conclusions
• Train has left the station
– discussion surrounding OLPE is no longer about its
validity, but how to effectively administer it.
• OLPE is more prevalent now than ever before
– OLPE curriculum focuses heavily on the cognitive
domain
– Teachers of OLPE are in large part new to the field
– Many programs do not meet NASPE standards.
• “Collection of teacher responses demonstrates
support, hesitation, and even opposition about
online physical education from those who teach
it.”
10. Implications for Future Research
• Future studies in OLPE are needed to address
– student/teacher perceptions
– OLPE curriculum theory/ design
– Instruments to evaluate OLPE programs
– The medians in which the programs are
administered (LMS, devices, fitness trackers, etc.).
11. Questions?
• Do any of you have experience teaching
online?
– Challenges?
• Where do you see OLPE in 10 years
• Are there certain types of physical education
courses that you can’t see translating well
online
Editor's Notes
22 female 10 male
8 from Virginia
Found that most courses focus on the cognitive domain.
-Mobile learning management systems are relatively new and their features are constantly updating as more sophisticated devices come on the market.
Institutions or course instructors planning to implement m-learning initiatives need to strongly consider the quality of mobile support offered by their LMS provider. Adequate course design planning that caters to mobile LMS strength and accounts for potential deficiencies in the system is a key factor in student’s acceptance of mobile learning in higher education.
What I’m showing you is a application project that could be used for 4-6 week unit.
Benefits: Free, dedicated site, premade workouts loaded on device (separated into goal categories), and each exercise generally has written instructions as well as a video demonstration.
Video demonstrations allow you to get active quicker. Allows teacher to correct small things rather than teach whole movement. This allows for more skilled students to get active quicker and focus on those who need more attention.
Students become more self directed
Need to go over safety in this one.
- The reality is that the demand for online learning is not going away and the question is no longer “if OLPE is practical” but what is the most effective way of administering OLPE that needs to be answered (Daum & Buschner, 2012; Mohnsen, 2012).
The simple adoption of mobile technologies does not ensure effective integration methods.
-Aid academic institutions with their decisions to implement mobile technologies into similar online fitness for life courses.
-Improve the quality, effectiveness, and method of delivery of online physical education
- Students often cite lack of a social component in OLPE as a barrier
-Fitbit, Jawbone Up, Map-my-fitness, MOVband, Nike+ Fuelband, Polar Loop, Omron Activity Monitor, and Moves app can be paired with mobile devices to track students’ level of activity (Mosier, 2014).
