SILLIMAN UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
BACHELOR OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Online Class in Physical Education:

Impact to the Holistic Learning of the
Grade 12 Senior High School students in
Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig

Case Study

In partial fulfillment of the requirements in SPE 61/ED 65- Research 1 in PE & Wellness
First Semester of the School Year 2020-2021

Research Proponent:

Hope B. Villar

Submitted to:

Mrs. Kathleen E. Dellona

 Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

I. Background of the Study

Education gives us knowledge of the world around and changes it into

something better. It develops us in a perspective of looking at life. It helps us

build opinions and have points of view on things in life (Doumbia, 2013). In other

words, Education plays a vital role in our life since it molds us to become aware

of the environment and helps us become competent individual as we face

different circumstances and challenges in life along the way. On the other side of

the coin, life doesn’t always come in a brighter side, there are things that hinder

the pursuit of having good education and one concrete example is the current

pandemic situation, the novel corona virus. Students are forced to enroll online

classes just to steer clear of having academic freeze in school year 2020-2021

and continue education with the absence of having face to face interaction.

In addition, online classes are suitable to some subjects especially in

an asynchronous class set-up but there are also subjects that really needs face

to face interaction just like in the field of Physical Education where students are

assessed base on their actual performance. According to Silberman (2017) active

hands on teaching strategies and learning activities are designed to take students

out of their seats or classroom. This shows that active teaching involves active

participation on the part of the student rather than passive recipients. In this case,

interaction towards students and teacher’s physical field activities is a must in

 order to provide holistic knowledge and transfer effective learning to the students.

On the other hand, in every darkness, there’s always light that will give silver

linings to every situation. Teachers should also be innovative and creative amidst

of this educational crisis, teachers should learn how to generate outside the box

ideas that may somehow contribute to the students learning and fill the different

shortcomings of Online Distance Learning.

II. Statement of the problem

The purpose of this study is to know what is the impact of online class

in Physical Education towards the holistic learning of the students. In this crisis,

students are still adjusting to the new normal way of education that’s why the

researcher comes up with this study to know the possible outcome of this ODL

(Online Distance Learning) specifically in the field of Physical Education.

To achieve this purpose, the following research problem are stated.

1. Do online class in Physical Education gives positive impact to the students?

2. Do online class in Physical Education gives negative impact to the students?

III. Significance of the Study

The researcher is looking forward for a better outcome of the research,

he believes that the result of this study is very important and beneficial to the

following:

Students- with the outcome of this research, the students will be able to realize

how important physical education is, they will be able to adjust themselves to the

new mode of learning and realize that in this desperate situation, they must learn

to adopt the new normal and never let the situation hinder them in becoming an

effective learner.

Physical Education Teachers- we can’t deny the fact that teachers are not that

powerful enough to handle bunch of students online, it’s really not easy for

teachers to teach students one at a time and knowing the fact that in molding

someone to learn especially in physical education, it needs face to face

interaction in order to guide students be on the right path in performing different

physical activities, that’s why with the help of this research, teachers will be able

to see their lapses and shortcomings during the online class and it will also help

them become competent teachers especially in creating unique strategies that

may contribute to the learning process of the students.

Future Researchers- This study is helpful in giving prior knowledge about the

topic that serves as their guide in making the paper. This will also give them idea

about timely problems in Education that needs to be given attention immediately.

IV. Scope and Limitations

The study concentrates on the Online class in Physical Education:

Impacts to the Holistic Learning of the Grade 12 Senior High School students in

Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig. The researcher will conduct a survey and

Interview Grade 12 Senior High School students in a form of online

communication. The timeframe was set for S.Y. 2020-2021.

V. Definition of Terms

Impact- have a strong effect on someone or something.

Holistic- characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately

interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole.

Online class- is a course conducted over the Internet. They are generally

conducted through a learning management system, in which students can view

their course syllabus and academic progress, as well as communicate with fellow

students and their course instructor.

Synchronous- Synchronous learning refers to all types of learning in which

learners and instructors are in the same place, at the same time, in order for

learning to take place. This includes in-person classes, live online meetings when

the whole class or smaller groups get together.

Asynchronous- Asynchronous classes are just the opposite. Instructors provide

materials, lectures, tests, and assignments that can be accessed at any time.

Students may be given a timeframe, usually a one-week window, which they

need to connect at least once or twice.

 Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter discusses the literature related to this research and is

compromised of the following sections: a summary of the theories that deals with

the effects of teacher immediacy behavior towards the students learning in an

online class mode of learning, Student’s positive and negative experiences in an

online class setting, struggles and benefits of having online and traditional

classes, description of how Physical Education should be taught effectively, and

an overview of the studies related to the impacts of having online classes towards

the holistic learning of students in the field of Physical Education. These provide

a rich background in the conduct of this research.

I. Related Literature

Effects of teacher immediacy behavior towards the students learning in an online class

mode of learning.

Bunch of research has explored the impact of teacher immediacy

behaviors on student motivation for learning in the traditional classroom. In the

traditional classroom, teacher immediacy behaviors generally refer to verbal and

non-verbal behaviors directed to students that reinforce a feeling of closeness

including behaviors such as eye contact, nodding, calling students by name, and

sharing personal stories. Hutchinson observed that most of the research on

instructional immediacy has occurred in the area of instructional communication.

Due to the changes in the instructional vehicle, more studies are beginning to
examine instructional immediacy as it related to online learning. The term

‘immediacy’ in online courses appears to be somewhat of a contradiction in terms

because of the lack of physical presence and the delay in responding since the

nature of most online course’s centers on asynchronous interaction. Social

Cognitive Theory can be used as a framework to examine immediacy behaviors

in the online classroom. Within this theory, immediacy behaviors that provide

social and status incentives can be implemented that positively impact student

motivation, cognitive learning, and satisfaction. Furthermore, immediacy

behaviors can improve students’ self-efficacy as they master content and

experience success in the online class.

Historically, due to online courses having higher dropout rates than

traditional face to face courses. Research has shown that instructors can

enhance student satisfaction and achievement in online courses by creating a

sense of community. Students report that a sense of community or

connectedness is a major factor in increasing their satisfaction in online courses.

Specifically, through instructional immediacy behaviors and student-to-student

interactions, there are many ways instructors can build a sense of community.

The three primary relationships or interactions in an online course that can build

that sense of community and connectedness are teacher-student, student-

student, and student-content.

Researchers examined a new type of interaction that may contribute to

connectedness as well, that of the interaction between the student and the

computer. Based on Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory, LaRose and Whitten

examined immediacy behaviors in light of the social status they provided to

students. They found that in online courses immediacy behaviors motivate

learning by providing social and status incentives. When looking at computer

immediacy, LaRose, and Whitten examined the qualities of computer interactions

that lead to feelings of closeness. They noted how computers tend to have a

holding power on the user which they attribute to computer immediacy. They also

observed how the computer itself can provide social status because today’s

digital students recognize and use the computer as a social networking tool as

well as a productivity tool.

LaRose and Whitten posited that instructional immediacy can be

provided vicariously to students in an online course when instructors interact

through discussion boards which are supported by Bandura’s (1986) Social

Cognitive Theory. In an online course, students can observe how an instructor

reacts to another student’s posting, see the type of written feedback provided,

and experience vicarious immediacy. This too can improve motivation as

students experience vicariously rewarding student-teacher interactions that

enhance cognitive learning.

The theory supports the importance of immediacy behaviors, which

states that online students depend more on validation from interaction with their

professors because of the lack of face-to-face interaction. Online interactions

between the student and the instructor, whether synchronous or asynchronous,

can increase a student’s self-efficacy. Increased World Academy of Science,

Engineering, and Technology 11 2007 469 self-efficacy positively affects

motivation because it improves a student’s belief in their ability to be successful

in completing a specific task. As Keller’s noted in his ARCS Model of Motivation,

motivation is necessary for successful learning. Keller and Suzuki examined the

importance of motivation in an online learning environment and applied the ARCS

Model and found that helping create a learning environment that fosters intrinsic

motivation and increased student confidence (self-efficacy).

In a study evaluating different components of online courses, United

States educators in an online graduate teacher education program rated online

discussion as the least useful component in online courses (Lee, 2018).

Learners’ disinterest for online course discussion is not an isolated issue; both in

the United States and overseas, learners have shown distaste for online course

discussions. Fung (2015) documented the interests in online discussion of

students enrolled in teacher education programs in Hong Kong and found an

overall lack of student interest in online class discussions. According to Fung

(2015), students wanted to spend their time completing the course readings

rather than discussing the course material online with their classmates. Winograd

(2017) found a similar tendency among business majors in the United States who

reported that online discussions are a waste of time.

Feeling a sense of connection to other classmates can be a valuable

resource for motivating students, especially in larger classes (Sweet &

Michaelson, 2018). While some students enjoy interacting with fellow classmates,

creating friendships with them, and helping them understand the class content,

time limitations can negatively impact students’ ability to participate in the social

aspect of an online course.

Collaborative discussions can promote critical thinking skills and the

long-term retention of information (Hew & Cheung, 2017) as well as help students

focus on in-depth discussion (Qui, Hewitt, & Brett, 2014). To cultivate a social

presence in online classes, instructors have a variety of options. Whole class

instruction provides an opportunity for all class members to interact, but in large
classes, trying to read a large number of postings by a large number of

classmates can result in cognitive overload. In addition, Nonnecke and Preece

(2017) and Hew and Cheung (2017) note that as the group size increases,

individuals feel less of a need to contribute to the conversation.

An alternative is small group discussion. However, there are different

opinions about how large or how small the group should be. Schellens and

Valcke (2015) found that students in smaller online discussion groups of 8 to 10

displayed higher levels of knowledge construction than students in larger online

discussion groups of 15 to 18 students. Hew and Cheung (2017) concluded that

for online discussions, the ideal group size is ten students per group. Sweet and

Michaelson (2018) noted that many cooperative learning strategies recommend

four students per group, but for Team Based Learning, they recommend five to

seven students in a group. Meanwhile, with the Think, Pair, Share approach,

each student individually reflects on a question, locates a partner, and then

shares their thoughts with the partner.

After deciding the type of grouping to be used in an online course,

instructors face decisions on whether to have the instructor or students lead the

online class discussions. However, the research on having the course instructor

lead the online discussion has yielded mixed results (Hew & Cheung, 2017).

Dykman and Davis (2016) as well as Gilmore and Warren (2018) emphasized the

need for the instructor to interact in online course discussions. Furthermore, Xie,

DeBacker, and Ferguson (2015) and Rollag (2016) noted that when the instructor

displays little or no involvement in the online class discussions, the students feel

ignored and are less willing to contribute. However, Zhu (2017) cautions that if

the instructor offers his or her expert opinion to every student post, discussion
can be stifled, and An, Shin, and Lim (2018) found that when the instructor kept

his or her involvement in online discussion to a minimum, the students more

freely discussed their points of view. Furthermore, Mazzolini and Maddison

(2018) reported that as the instructor increased his or her participation in online

discussions, students posted less frequently and posted shorter discussion

threads.

Student’s positive and negative experiences in an online class setting

As higher education institutions struggle to meet the growing demand

for education from non-traditional students, many are turning to hybrid and online

courses. These courses, free up classroom space, allow faculty to reach a wider

audience using technology; and are therefore cost effective. But what learning

experiences do these courses provide students? Understanding the students'

experiences in these courses has implications on the effectiveness of the

teaching strategies. This study describes the characteristics of hybrid and online

courses, the students' positive and negative experiences in hybrid and online

courses, and what can be done to improve hybrid and online courses.

Twelve students enrolled in a hybrid course and 41 students in an

online course were interviewed for this qualitative study. Additional data was

obtained from the class' online discussion forums. Flexibility in the class schedule

and the instructor's availability were positive experiences for the hybrid course.

Convenience, instructor availability, and online interactions were cited as

positives for the online course while the negatives were technology hiccups and a

sense of feeling lost in Cyberspace. Training faculty and familiarizing students

with online course environments are recommended to improve online and hybrid

courses.

Traditionally, learning has been assumed to take place in a classroom

or face-to-face environment where the instructor and students are physically

together. But not all students learn the same way and therefore the traditional

approach is not ideal for all students (Young, 2016). Therefore, the notion that

learning only takes place in face-to-face environments has since been challenged

and overtaken by the use of the Internet and network technologies to provide a

means of communication to learners wherever they are located (Stacey et al,

2018). The current paradigm shift in higher education, from traditional classroom

settings to distance education program delivery via the internet (Ryan et al,

2017), has ensured that every student is fully engaged in at least some class

activities. In addition, instructors are using technology as part of instructional

strategies to overcome limited budget constraints and serve the growing numbers

of non-traditional students.

Today, hybrid and online courses are among the delivery strategies

widely used. In the traditional format, the teacher develops and transmits the

content to the students who learn in a face-to-face environment (Knowles, 2015).

Although during a set period of time, learners are frequently provided with

activities that require them to be active rather than listen and or watch passively

(Berg, 2016; Knowles, et al, 2015; Perry 2016), the instructional approach may

generate productive interaction among all participants in the class. However, the

face-to-face approach has a number of shortcomings, namely: 1) it requires the

students and the instructor to be in the same room; 2) instruction can be

inconsistent; and 3) lack of flexibility. In addition, the diverse skill levels of the
students in the class presents another challenge. As each student comes to class

with a different purpose, expectation, experience, and ability within a given topic,

the normal "one-size-fits-all" course does not produce effective results in this

situation. The pace of classroom instruction may only be applicable to a few

students and may limit activities that can be performed in a classroom setting.

The shortcomings of the face-to-face approach have paved the way for

alternative approaches such as hybrid and web-based courses. Characteristics of

Hybrid Courses A hybrid course, also known as web-enhanced/assisted, or

blended course, is a course that combines elements of face-to-face instruction

with elements of distance teaching (Lorenzetti, 2017). In most cases, through the

use of technology, hybrid courses allow students to first meet new information,

concepts and procedures outside the classroom before the class physically

meets.

Struggles and benefits of having online and traditional classes

The other modality, classroom teaching, is a well-established

instructional medium in which teaching style and structure have been refined over

several centuries. Face-to-face instruction has numerous benefits not found in its

online counterpart (Xu and Jaggars, 2016).

First and, perhaps most importantly, classroom instruction is extremely

dynamic. Traditional classroom teaching provides real-time face-to-face

instruction and sparks innovative questions. It also allows for immediate teacher

response and more flexible content delivery. Online instruction dampens the

learning process because students must limit their questions to blurbs, then grant

the teacher and fellow classmates time to respond (Salcedo, 2010). Over time,
however, online teaching will probably improve, enhancing classroom dynamics

and bringing students face-to face with their peers/instructors. However, for now,

face-to-face instruction provides dynamic learning attributes not found in Web-

based teaching (Kemp and Grieve, 2014).

Second, traditional classroom learning is a well-established modality.

Some students are opposed to change and view online instruction negatively.

These students may be technophobes, more comfortable with sitting in a

classroom taking notes than sitting at a computer absorbing data. Other students

may value face-to-face interaction, pre and post-class discussions, communal

learning, and organic student-teacher bonding (Roval and Jordan, 2004). They

may see the Internet as an impediment to learning. If not comfortable with the

instructional medium, some students may shun classroom activities; their grades

might slip and their educational interest might vanish. Students, however, may

eventually adapt to online education. With more universities employing computer-

based training, students may be forced to take only Web-based courses. Albeit

true, this doesn't eliminate the fact some students prefer classroom intimacy.

Third, face-to-face instruction doesn't rely upon networked systems. In

online learning, the student is dependent upon access to an unimpeded Internet

connection. If technical problems occur, online students may not be able to

communicate, submit assignments, or access study material. This problem, in

turn, may frustrate the student, hinder performance, and discourage learning.

Fourth, campus education provides students with both accredited staff

and research libraries. Students can rely upon administrators to aid in course

selection and provide professorial recommendations. Library technicians can help

learners edit their papers, locate valuable study material, and improve study
habits. Research libraries may provide materials not accessible by computer. In

all, the traditional classroom experience gives students important auxiliary tools

to maximize classroom performance.

Fifth, traditional classroom degrees trump online educational degrees

in terms of hiring preferences. Many academic and professional organizations do

not consider online degrees on par with campus-based degrees (Columbaro and

Monaghan, 2009). Often, prospective hiring bodies think Web-based education is

a watered-down, simpler means of attaining a degree, often citing poor

curriculums, unsupervised exams, and lenient homework assignments as

detriments to the learning process.

Finally, research shows online students are more likely to quit class if

they do not like the instructor, the format, or the feedback. Because they work

independently, relying almost wholly upon self-motivation and self-direction,

online learners may be more inclined to withdraw from class if they do not get

immediate results.

The classroom setting provides more motivation, encouragement, and

direction. Even if a student wanted to quit during the first few weeks of class,

he/she may be deterred by the instructor and fellow students. F2F instructors

may be able to adjust the structure and teaching style of the class to improve

student retention (Kemp and Grieve, 2014). With online teaching, instructors are

limited to electronic correspondence and may not pick-up on verbal and non-

verbal cues.

Both F2F and online teaching have their pros and cons. More studies

comparing the two modalities to achieve specific learning outcomes in

participating learner populations are required before well-informed decisions can

be made. This study examined the two modalities over eight (8) years on three

different levels.

Online and traditional education share many qualities. Students are still

required to attend class, learn the material, submit assignments, and complete

group projects. While teachers, still have to design curriculums, maximize

instructional quality, answer class questions, motivate students to learn, and

grade assignments. Despite these basic similarities, there are many differences

between the two modalities. Traditionally, classroom instruction is known to be

teacher-centered and requires passive learning by the student, while online

instruction is often student-centered and requires active learning.

In teacher-centered, or passive learning, the instructor usually controls

classroom dynamics. The teacher lectures and comments, while students listen,

take notes, and ask questions. In student-centered, or active learning, the

students usually determine classroom dynamics as they independently analyze

the information, construct questions, and ask the instructor for clarification. In this

scenario, the teacher, not the student, is listening, formulating, and responding

(Salcedo, 2010).

In education, change comes with questions. Despite all current reports

championing online education, researchers are still questioning its efficacy.

Research is still being conducted on the effectiveness of computer-assisted

teaching. Cost-benefit analysis, student experience, and student performance are

now being carefully considered when determining whether online education is a

viable substitute for classroom teaching. This decision process will most probably

carry into the future as technology improves and as students demand better

learning experiences.
 Thus far, “literature on the efficacy of online courses is expansive and

divided” (Driscoll et al., 2012). Some studies favor traditional classroom

instruction, stating “online learners will quit more easily” and “online learning can

lack feedback for both students and instructors” (Atchley et al., 2013). Because of

these shortcomings, student retention, satisfaction, and performance can be

compromised. Like traditional teaching, distance learning also has its apologists

who aver online education produces students who perform as well or better than

their traditional classroom counterparts (Westhuis et al., 2006).

The advantages and disadvantages of both instructional modalities

need to be fully fleshed out and examined to truly determine which medium

generates better student performance. Both modalities have been proven to be

relatively effective, but, as mentioned earlier, the question to be asked is if one is

truly better than the other.

Description of how Physical Education should be taught effectively

Physical education became a subject matter in schools (in the form of

German and Swedish gymnastics) at the beginning of the 19th century

(Hackensmith, 1966). Its role in human health was quickly recognized. By the

turn of the 20th century, personal hygiene and exercise for bodily health were

incorporated in the physical education curriculum as the major learning outcomes

for students (Weston, 1962). The exclusive focus on health, however, was

criticized by educator Thomas Wood (1913; Wood and Cassidy, 1930) as too

narrow and detrimental to the development of the whole child. The education

community subsequently adopted Wood’s inclusive approach to physical

education whereby fundamental movements and physical skills for games and
sports were incorporated as the major instructional content. During the past 15

years, physical education has once again evolved to connect body movement to

its consequences (e.g., physical activity and health), teaching children the

science of healthful living and skills needed for an active lifestyle (NASPE, 2004).

Sallis and McKenzie (1991) published a landmark paper stating that

physical education is education content using a “comprehensive but physically

active approach that involves teaching social, cognitive, and physical skills, and

achieving other goals through movement” (p. 126). This perspective is also

emphasized by Siedentop (2009), who states that physical education is education

through the physical. Sallis and McKenzie (1991) stress two main goals of

physical education: (1) prepare children and youth for a lifetime of physical

activity and (2) engage them in physical activity during physical education. These

goals represent the lifelong benefits of health-enhancing physical education that

enable children and adolescents to become active adults throughout their lives.

Physical Education as Part of Education

In institutionalized education, the main goal has been developing

children’s cognitive capacity in the sense of learning knowledge in academic

disciplines. This goal dictates a learning environment in which seated learning

behavior is considered appropriate and effective and is rewarded. Physical

education as part of education provides the only opportunity for all children to

learn about physical movement and engage in physical activity. As noted, its goal

and place in institutionalized education have changed from the original focus on

teaching hygiene and health to educating children about the many forms and

benefits of physical movement, including sports and exercise. With a dramatic

expansion of content beyond the original Swedish and German gymnastics

programs of the 19th century, physical education has evolved to become a

content area with diverse learning goals that facilitate the holistic development of

children (NASPE, 2004).

To understand physical education as a component of the education

system, it is important to know that the education system in the United States

does not operate with a centralized curriculum. Learning standards are

developed by national professional organizations such as the National

Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) and/or state education

agencies rather than by the federal Department of Education; all curricular

decisions are made locally by school districts or individual schools in compliance

with state standards. Physical education is influenced by this system, which leads

to great diversity in policies and curricula. According to NASPE and the American

Heart Association (2010), although most states have begun to mandate physical

education for both elementary and secondary schools, the number of states that

allow waivers/exemptions from or substitutions for physical education increased

from 27 and 18 in 2006 to 32 and 30 in 2010, respectively. These expanded

waiver and substitution policies (discussed in greater detail later in the chapter)

increase the possibility that students will opt out of physical education for

nonmedical reasons.

Curriculum Models

Given that curricula are determined at the local level in the United

States, encompassing national standards, state standards, and state-adopted

textbooks that meet and are aligned with the standards, physical education is
taught in many different forms and structures. Various curriculum models are

used in instruction, including movement education, sport education, and fitness

education. In terms of engagement in physical activity, two perspectives are

apparent. First, programs in which fitness education curricula are adopted are

effective at increasing in-class physical activity (Lonsdale et al., 2013). Second, in

other curriculum models, physical activity is considered a basis for students’

learning skill or knowledge that the lesson is planned for them to learn. A paucity

of nationally representative data is available with which to demonstrate the

relationship between the actual level of physical activity in which students are

engaged and the curriculum models adopted by their schools.

Movement Education

Movement has been a cornerstone of physical education since the

1800s. Early pioneers (Francois Delsarte, Liselott Diem, Rudolf von Laban)

focused on a child’s ability to use his or her body for self-expression (Abels and

Bridges, 2010). Exemplary works and curriculum descriptions include those by

Laban himself (Laban, 1980) and others (e.g., Logsdon et al.,1984). Over time,

however, the approach shifted from concern with the inner attitude of the mover

to a focus on the function and application of each movement (Abels and Bridges,

2010). In the 1960s, the intent of movement education was to apply four

movement concepts to the three domains of learning (i.e., cognitive,

psychomotor, and affective). The four concepts were body (representing the

instrument of the action); space (where the body is moving); effort (the quality

with which the movement is executed); and relationships (the connections that

occur as the body moves—with objects, people, and the environment; Stevens-
Smith, 2004). The importance of movement in physical education is evidenced by

its inclusion in the first two NASPE standards for K-12 physical education

(NASPE, 2004; see Box 5-7 later in this chapter). These standards emphasize

the need for children to know basic movement concepts and be able to perform

basic movement patterns. It is imperative for physical educators to foster motor

success and to provide children with a basic skill set that builds their movement

repertoire, thus allowing them to engage in various forms of games, sports, and

other physical activities

Sport Education

One prevalent physical education model is the sport education

curriculum designed by Daryl Siedentop (Siedentop, 1994; Siedentop et al.,

2011). The goal of the model is to “educate students to be players in the fullest

sense and to help them develop as competent, literate, and enthusiastic

sportspersons” (2011, p. 4, emphasis in original). The model entails a unique

instructional structure featuring sport seasons that are used as the basis for

planning and teaching instructional units. Students are organized into sport

organizations (teams) and play multiple roles as team managers, coaches,

captains, players, referees, statisticians, public relations staff, and others to

mimic a professional sports organization. A unit is planned in terms of a sports

season, including preseason activity/practice, regular-season competition,

playoffs and/or tournaments, championship competition, and a culminating event

(e.g., an awards ceremony or sport festivity). Depending on the developmental

level of students, the games are simplified or modified to encourage maximum

participation. In competition, students play the roles noted above in addition to

the role of players. A sport education unit thus is much longer than a conventional

physical education unit. Siedentop and colleagues (2011) recommend 20 lessons

per unit, so that all important curricular components of the model can be

implemented.

Findings from research on the sport education model have been reviewed twice.

Wallhead and O’Sullivan (2005) report that evidence is insufficient to support the

conclusion that use of the model results in students’ developing motor skills and

fitness and learning relevant knowledge; some evidence suggests that the model

leads to stronger team cohesion, more active engagement in lessons, and

increased competence in game play. In a more recent review, Hastie and

colleagues (2011) report on emerging evidence suggesting that the model leads

to improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness (only one study) and mixed evidence

regarding motor skills development, increased feeling of enjoyment in

participation in physical education, increased sense of affiliation with the team

and physical education, and positive development of fair-play values. The only

study on in-class physical activity using the model showed that it contributed to

only 36.6 percent activity at the vigorous- or moderate-intensity levels (Parker

and Curtner-Smith, 2005). Hastie and colleagues caution, however, that because

only 6 of 38 studies reviewed used an experimental or quasi-experimental

design, the findings must be interpreted with extreme caution. The model’s merits

in developing motor skills, fitness, and desired physical activity behavior have yet

to be determined in studies with more rigorous research designs.

Fitness Education
 Instead of focusing exclusively on having children move constantly to

log activity time, a new curricular approach emphasizes teaching them the

science behind why they need to be physically active in their lives. The

curriculum is designed so that the children are engaged in physical activities that

demonstrate relevant scientific knowledge. The goal is the development and

maintenance of individual student fitness. In contrast with the movement

education and sport education models, the underlying premise is that physical

activity is essential to a healthy lifestyle and that students’ understanding of

fitness and behavior change result from engagement in a fitness education

program. The conceptual framework for the model is designed around the health-

related components of cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength and

endurance, and flexibility. A recent meta-analysis (Lonsdale et al., 2013)

suggests that physical education curricula that include fitness activities can

significantly increase the amount of time spent in vigorous- or moderate-intensity

physical activity.

Several concept-based fitness education curriculum models exist for

both the middle school and senior high school levels. They include Fitness for

Life: Middle School (Corbin et al., 2007); Personal Fitness for You (Stokes and

Schultz, 2002); Get Active! Get Fit! (Stokes and Schultz, 2009); Personal Fitness:

Looking Good, Feeling Good (Williams, 2005); and Foundations of Fitness

(Rainey and Murray, 2005). Activities in the curriculum are designed for health

benefits, and the ultimate goal for the student is to develop a commitment to

regular exercise and physical activity. It is assumed that all children can achieve

a health-enhancing level of fitness through regular engagement in vigorous- or

moderate-intensity physical activity.

 Randomized controlled studies on the impact of a science-based

fitness curriculum in 15 elementary schools showed that, although the curriculum

allocated substantial lesson time to learning cognitive knowledge, the students

were more motivated to engage in physical activities than students in the 15

control schools experiencing traditional physical education (Chen et al., 2008),

and they expended the same amount of calories as their counterparts in the

control schools (Chen et al., 2007). Longitudinal data from the study reveal

continued knowledge growth in the children that strengthened their understanding

of the science behind exercise and active living (Sun et al., 2012). What is

unclear, however, is whether the enthusiasm and knowledge gained through the

curriculum will translate into the children’s lives outside of physical education to

help them become physically active at home.

To incorporate standards and benchmarks into a fitness education

model, a committee under the auspices of NASPE (2012) developed the

Instructional Framework for Fitness Education in Physical Education. It is

suggested that through this proposed comprehensive framework, fitness

education be incorporated into the existing physical education curriculum and

embedded in the content taught in all instructional units.

II. Conceptual Framework

Independent Dependent
Variable Variable

hinders the pursuit of

having good
education
negative effects
burden to the
student's learning
Online class in
Physical
Education conducive for
learning

positive effects
student's learning is
effective
 Chapter III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This phase of the research outlines the process of the study. It gives a

comprehensive account on the research design, research locale, research

respondents, research instrument, data collection procedure, treatment of data, and

ethical considerations.

I. Research Design

The study used the descriptive design. This design consisted of

quantitative data collection and analysis.

The main purpose in using quantitative approach is to learn about a

particular group of people, known as a sample population. Using scientific inquiry,

quantitative research relies on data that are observed or measured to examine

questions about the sample population. By the same token, this approach will

provide numerical analysis about the concern of this research and one way or

another would help provide concrete basis to support the stand of this research.

II. Research Locale

The study was conducted in the local area of Bislig. Specifically, in the

growing school of Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig. The respondents were

interviewed through online survey form since education at this moment is being

done through online class and face to face class is not applicable at this very
 moment as well. The researcher also gathered important data from the school

that may somehow beneficial to the research in the long run. The study was

conducted in the 2nd semester of the academic year 2020-2021.

III. Research Respondents

The respondents of this study were formed by five different strands of

senior high school grade 12 students. The strands are the following: ABM

(Accountancy, Business, and Management), STEM (Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics) GAS (General Academic Strand), TVL (Technical-

Vocational-Livelihood), and HUMSS (Humanities and Social Sciences) that

reached to a total population of 491 grade 12 senior high school students

For better view, Table 1 shows how the students were grouped

accordingly. The chunking of students was done according to their field of

specialization and section in each strand.

Table 1. The Subject of the Study

STRAND Field of Section Number of Total no. of

Specialization Students Students
ABM ABM-A 35
73
ABM-B 38
STEM STEM-A 30 30
GAS GAS-A 35
74
GAS-B 39
H.E-A 40 40
Home Economics
H.E-B 42 42
ICT-A 34
TVL Information ICT-B 33
Communication 131
ICT-C 31
and Technology
ICT-D 33
Shielded Metal Arc SMAW-A 37
72
Welding SMAW-B 35
 HUMSS HUMSS-A 29 29
491

IV. Research Instrument

The researcher used various of research instruments to gather enough

data that would support the outcome of the research. One of the instruments used

was the researcher-made questionnaire checklist, it gathered the needed data for

the student’s profile. The draft of the questionnaire was drawn out based on the

researcher’s readings, previous studies, professional literature, published and

unpublished thesis relevant to the study. In preparing the questionnaire, the

researcher made sure that the questions are checked thoroughly for any offensive

and foul questions, purpose and reasons upon conducting the survey were also

well explained to the respondents and before the survey was conducted, it was

assured first that the questions were checked and validated by the research

adviser. In addition, in constructing the questionnaire, the researcher also

included open-ended questions to accommodate free formatted views related to

the topics or issues.

The researcher also gathered previous grades and scores before

online class had happened for better comparison to the present performance of

the students after having online class as their mode of learning.

V. Data Collection Procedure

Before the researcher conducted the survey, he first made a request

letter to Andres Soriano Colleges of Bislig asking permission formally to use their

school as the main focus of the research and as well as making their students as

respondents in sufficing the outcome of the research. After the approval, the
 researcher retrieves the request letter for future references. In doing the survey,

the questionnaire was disseminated to all the grade 12 students through the use

of google form. To make sure that all of the grade 12 students were able to

receive the questionnaire, the researcher collaborated with the advisers of each

strand and asked to share the google form to their respective group chat for easy

access towards the students. The students were given enough time to answer the

questions. After data gathering, since in google forms answers on the

questionnaires are tallied automatically, the results will then be analyzed to apply

statistical treatment to be used in the study.

VI. Treatment of Data

To determine the survey results of the grade 12 senior high school

students, the mean, mean percentage and standard deviation of each questions

were computed.

VII. Ethical Considerations

In the research making, the researcher made sure that answers from

the students are kept privately to avoid threats and respect someone’s privacy. In

addition, in making the research as well, the researcher also considers different

ways in order to come up with a legit data. He thoroughly read each article that

were used in making the research and he also made sure that in gathering data,

there should be no bias in making a stand, and there should be no single person

who will get affected by each of the said statements that were raised.
 Chapter IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter gives a comprehensive account on how the data are presented,

analyzed and interpreted. The presentation of tables subscribe to how the sub-

problems are given in the first chapter.

Sub-problem no.1. Do online class in Physical Education gives positive impact

to the students?

Table 2 depicts the result of the first question provided for the students to

answer. This will clearly explain the stand of each students if online class really do

provide positive impact to them.

The finding shows that majority of the students answered NO to the first

question that has been disseminated to the students. There are 371 students who

participated on the said survey and 301 students chose to believe that having online

class in Physical Education doesn’t really give positive impact to them. On the other

hand, even though majority of the students believed that online class in Physical

Education doesn’t give any positive impact at all, still, the remaining 70 people

believed that one way or another, having online class in Physical Education provides

positive impact to their learning.

Table 2. Do online class in Physical Education gives positive impact to the

students?

STRAND Field of Section Number of No. of YES NO

Specialization Students students
participate
d
ABM ABM-A 35 20 2 18
ABM-B 38 19 0 19
STEM STEM-A 30 25 3 22
GAS GAS-A 35 29 8 21
GAS-B 39 30 11 19
H.E-A 40 31 8 23
Home Economics
H.E-B 42 36 6 30
ICT-A 34 28 9 19
TVL
Information ICT-B 33 25 2 23
Communication
ICT-C 31 28 8 20
and Technology
ICT-D 33 26 4 22

Shielded Metal SMAW-A 37 30 1 29

Arc Welding SMAW-B 35 24 0 24
HUMSS HUMSS-A 29 20 8 12

TOTAL 491 371 70 301

Sub-Problem no. 2. Do online class in Physical Education gives negative

impact to the students?

Table 3 shows the amount of number of students who give stand pertaining to

the second question provided on the questionnaire. Based on the gathered data, 269

students out of 371 who participated the survey said that having online class in

Physical Education really do gave negative impact to their learning. However, in

contrary, there are also 102 students who said that online classes don’t really give

negative impact to their learning.

Table 2. Do online class in Physical Education gives negative impact to the

students?

STRAND Field of Section Number of No. of YES NO

Specialization Students students
participate
d
ABM ABM-A 35 20 19 1
ABM-B 38 19 16 3
STEM STEM-A 30 25 16 9
GAS GAS-A 35 29 17 12
GAS-B 39 30 20 10
H.E-A 40 31 25 6
Home Economics
H.E-B 42 36 30 6
ICT-A 34 28 15 13
TVL
Information ICT-B 33 25 18 7
Communication
ICT-C 31 28 20 8
and Technology
ICT-D 33 26 17 9

Shielded Metal SMAW-A 37 30 21 9

Arc Welding SMAW-B 35 24 20 4
HUMSS HUMSS-A 29 20 15 5

TOTAL 491 371 269 102

 Chapter V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The last chapter of this research points out the highlights of this study. This

comprehensively replicated in the summary, conclusions and recommendations.

Summary

The study investigated the impact of an online class in physical education on

the holistic learning of the grade 12 senior high school students in Andres Soriano

Colleges of Bislig. It dealt with the survey form disseminated to all grade 12 students

in ASCB, with the absence of face-to-face class due to the new mode of learning

caused by the novel coronavirus, the survey form was done through a social media

platform and google form. The questions were evenly distributed to all sections and

‘twas answered and returned ahead of time for analysis and interpretation of data.

The answers from the respondents will be a great help to give conclusions to the

main focus of this research.

After analyzing and interpreting the data, the researcher was able to sort out

the number of students who give stand on the set questions given in the survey. The

researcher was able to find out the students who play neutral on the said problem.
Findings

Based from the presentation, analysis and interpretation of data, these

findings are herein given:

1. For the first question in the survey, students were asked if do online classes

gives a positive impact on their learning. Based on the results, 301 out of 371

students who participated said that having online class as the mode of

learning in teaching physical education doesn’t give any positive impact at all

on the learning process of the students.

2. On the second question, the same respondents were asked vice versa if do

online class gives a negative impact on their learning. It was found that out of

371 students who participated, 269 of the majority said that online class in

physical education gives a negative impact on the learning of the students.

3. For fair treatments of data, as the researcher thoroughly analyzed the two

questions given in the survey, he found out that in the given survey, there are

students who are neutral on their stand. Supposedly, in the first question,

those 301 students who said NO, should also be the same number of

students who will say YES to the second question, knowing the fact that on

the first question, they already said that online class doesn’t have a positive

impact to their learning. There are only 269 students who chose to say YES

on the second question, it only means that there are indeed students who

believe that even if an online class may not have any positive impact on the

learning process, still, it doesn’t immediately mean that online class will have

a negative impact to their learning.

So, to get the middle ground of this stand, the researcher subtracted

the number of students who said NO to the first question (301) from the
 number of students who said YES to the second question (269) to get the

number of students who shifted their answer to have a neutral stand. The

researcher found out that 32 students believe that online class doesn’t give

both positive and negative impact to their learning and vice versa there 32

students as well who believe that online class gives a positive and negative

impact to their learning.

Conclusions

Even though there are 32 students out of 371 who play neutral about the

impact of having online class as a mode of learning in Physical Education, still, the

majority of the students believed that online class doesn’t really give a positive

impact on their learning. This means that even though teachers were doing efforts

just to impart holistic knowledge to the students, still, it’s not enough if the new mode

of learning is applied. In addition, this suffices the stand that online class doesn’t

absolutely give positive impact to the students because, for the second question that

was asked on the survey, the majority as well believed that online class just only give

a negative impact to the student’s learning. In Physical Education, students should

be taught healthy lifestyle, exercises, and workouts but how can a student achieve

those if even in this subject, they are more prone to unhealthy habits due to so much

exposure of radiation caused by the online class. That's why, it leads the researcher

to the conclusion that with this new mode of learning in Physical Education, learning

will be ineffective, for based on the results gathered on the survey, online class in

this field is really not conducive for learning.

Recommendations

From the forgoing conclusions, these recommendations are given:

1. The new mode of learning and teaching in Physical Education should be more

improvised. Teachers should look for alternatives that could best deliver

lessons effectively. Teachers should also look for activities that will make

students more focused on doing physical activities rather than just facing

laptops, computers at home.

2. Since the face-to-face class is still not applicable for the next term, the teacher

should always monitor student’s performance to know the lapses and

shortcomings of the class. Teachers should also consider listening to every

student’s concern so that in one way or another, students will be monetized

and be on track.

3. Synchronous classes should be utilized for productive discussions, teachers

should make use all of the time in every session so that for the next

asynchronous class, performance tasks and activities will be given and

students will know what to do and can be able to accomplish the task given.

Teachers should also consider giving tasks that are related to the lessons that

were discussed.

4. Virtual training should also be applied during the Internet video conference.

Though physical interaction is difficult to apply in this new mode of learning,

still, teachers should be innovative and creative in delivering training online

that is part of the objectives found in the curriculum guide in Physical

Education.
5. Teachers should also consider attending different webinars that will help them

be enlightened for new ideas that can be helpful and beneficial in this online

learning.