Research on Innovative Teaching Strategies in Physical Education Empowered by New Technology
, and
Feb 03, 2025
About this article
Published Online: Feb 03, 2025
Received: Sep 23, 2024
Accepted: Jan 09, 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-0001
Keywords
© 2025 Yong Wang et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
The comparison analysis results of the analysis of stage action appraisal
| Evaluation stage | Experimental group(X±S) | Control group(X±S) | T | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Week 2 | 72.41±1.72 | 71.76±1.88 | 0.715 | 0.143 |
| Week 3 | 75.23±1.76 | 73.85±1.42 | 1.047 | 0.064 |
| Week 4 | 79.31±2.24 | 76.57±3.51 | 2.626 | 0.081 |
| Week 5 | 81.67±2.12 | 78.41±3.35 | 5.052 | 0.004 |
| Week 6 | 84.21±1.97 | 80.15±1.64 | 6.741 | 0.003 |
| Week 7 | 86.49±1.58 | 81.36±1.44 | 7.118 | 0.000 |
| Week 8 | 88.14±1.47 | 82.61±1.68 | 10.315 | 0.000 |
FMS test comparison analysis results
| Evaluation index | Experimental group(X±S) | Control group(X±S) | T | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Squat | 2.12±0.38 | 2.31±0.40 | -0.638 | 0.493 |
| Stepped over the rack | 1.94±0.51 | 2.05±0.43 | -0.516 | 0.615 |
| Straight arrow | 1.94±0.49 | 1.91±0.60 | 0.164 | 0.706 |
| Shoulder activity degree | 2.61±0.75 | 2.65±0.48 | -0.442 | 0.731 |
| Keep your legs on your back | 2.56±0.29 | 2.35±0.71 | 1.481 | 0.158 |
| Push-ups | 2.49±0.47 | 2.58±0.45 | -0.517 | 0.602 |
| General assessment | 1.71±0.67 | 1.63±0.54 | 0.611 | 0.547 |
The comparison analysis results after the experiment
| Evaluation index | Group | Number | X±S | T | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Action skill | Experimental group | 50 | 86.43±2.14 | 6.418 | 0.001 |
| Control group | 50 | 81.27±1.61 | |||
| Expressiveness | Experimental group | 50 | 80.74±2.17 | 4.816 | 0.002 |
| Control group | 50 | 76.35±2.96 | |||
| Total score | Experimental group | 50 | 90.34±2.32 | 8.225 | 0.000 |
| Control group | 50 | 81.87±14.62 |
Pearson correlation analysis results
| HE | SE | PU | PEU | AU | BI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HE | Pearson correlation | 1 | 0.531** | 0.556** | 0.567** | 0.529** | 0.543** |
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| Case number | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | |
| SE | Pearson correlation | 0.531** | 1 | 0.545** | 0.582** | 0.526** | 0.557** |
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| Case number | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | |
| PU | Pearson correlation | 0.556** | 0.545** | 1 | 0.604** | 0.602** | 0.529** |
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| Case number | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | |
| PEU | Pearson correlation | 0.567** | 0.582** | 0.604** | 1 | 0.582** | 0.634** |
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| Case number | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | |
| AU | Pearson correlation | 0.529** | 0.526** | 0.602** | 0.582** | 1 | 0.657** |
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| Case number | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | |
| BI | Pearson correlation | 0.543** | 0.557** | 0.529** | 0.634** | 0.657** | 1 |
| Sig. (two-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
| Case number | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 | 438 |
Independent coefficient
| Model | Unnormalized coefficient | Standardized coefficient Beta | t | Sig. | Common linear statistics | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | Standard error | Tolerance | VIF | ||||
| Constants | 0.932 | 0.146 | 6.046 | 0.000 | |||
| Perceived usefulness | 0.256 | 0.034 | 0.284 | 5.561 | 0.000 | 0.496 | 2.015 |
| Behavioral intention | 0.131 | 0.035 | 0.145 | 2.764 | 0.006 | 0.462 | 2.163 |
| Attitude toward using | 0.197 | 0.032 | 0.231 | 4.357 | 0.000 | 0.460 | 2.174 |
| Perceptual ease of use | 0.234 | 0.031 | 0.263 | 5.372 | 0.000 | 0.519 | 1.926 |