Research on Innovative Teaching Strategies in Physical Education Empowered by New Technology
, et
03 févr. 2025
À propos de cet article
Publié en ligne: 03 févr. 2025
Reçu: 23 sept. 2024
Accepté: 09 janv. 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-0001
Mots clés
© 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 |