Preservice Physical Education Teachers’ Perceptions of a Flipped Basketball Course: Benefits, Challenges, and Recommendations

in Journal of Teaching in Physical Education
View More View Less
  • 1 Nanyang Technological University
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year online subscription

USD  $64.00

1 year online subscription

USD  $86.00

Student 2 year online subscription

USD  $122.00

2 year online subscription

USD  $162.00

Purpose: Information and communication technologies can enable educators in the development of innovative and contextually relevant approaches for the provision of enhanced learning experiences. This study examined preservice physical education teachers’ perceptions of a flipped learning basketball course in a physical education teacher education program. Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight preservice physical education teachers (three females; Mage = 23.5 years) who had completed the course. Interview data were coded using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Results: Six main themes were identified reflecting benefits, challenges, and recommendations of flipped learning: (a) facilitate student-centered learning, (b) promote self-directed learning, (c) encourage real-world application, (d) insufficient avenues to assess understanding, (e) preclass preparation too time consuming, and (f) modification of materials and structure. Discussion/Conclusion: Flipped learning can potentially enhance preservice physical education teachers’ motivation for learning and increase active learning time in the sport-based courses in physical education teacher education. The identified challenges and recommendations are valuable for physical education teacher education educators to effectively prepare and execute flipped learning-based courses.

Koh, Li, and Mukherjee are with the Physical Education and Sports Science Academic Group, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Koh (koonteck.koh@nie.edu.sg) is corresponding author.
  • Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 114. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334345. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bergman, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class everyday. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589597. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Casey, A., Goodyear, V.A., & Armour, K.M. (2017). Rethinking the relationship between pedagogy, technology and learning in health and physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 22(2), 288304. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cregger, R., & Metzler, M. (1992). PSI for a college physical education basic instructional program. Educational Technology, 32(8), 5156.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227268. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gawrisch, K., Richards, K.A., & Killian, C. (2020). Integrating technology in physical education teacher education: A socialization perspective. Quest, 72(3), 260277. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Goodyear, V., & Dudley, D. (2015). “I’m a facilitator of learning!” Understanding what teachers and students do within student-centered physical education models. Quest, 67(3), 274289. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Killian, C.M., Graber, K.C., & Woods, A.M. (2016). Flipped instructional model in physical education. In Novak, D., Antala, B., & Knjaz, D. (Eds.), Physical education and new technologies (pp. 102111). Zagreb, Croatia: Croatian Kinesiology Association.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Knowles, M.S. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. New York: Association Press.

  • Koekoek, J., van der Mars, H., van der Kamp, J., Walinga, W., & van Hilvoorde, I. (2018). Aligning digital video technology with game pedagogy in physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 89(1), 1222. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krause, J.M., & Lynch, B.M. (2018). Faculty and student perspectives of and experiences with TPACK in PETE. Curriculum Studies in Health and Physical Education, 9(1), 5875. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krause, J.M., O’Neil, K., & Jones, E. (2020). Technology in physical education teacher education: A call to action. Quest, 72(3), 241259. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kretschmann, R. (2015). Physical education teachers’ subjective theories about integrating information and communication technology (ICT) into physical education. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology—TOJET, 14(1), 6896.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Liu, J., McBride, R.E., Xiang, P., & Scarmardo-Rhodes, M. (2018). Physical education pre-service teachers’ understanding, application, and development of critical thinking. Quest, 70(1), 1227. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Metzler, M. (2000). Instructor’s manual for the Personalized System Instruction series. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

  • Moraros, J., Islam, A., Yu, S., Banow, R., & Schindelka, B. (2015). Flipping for success: Evaluating the effectiveness of a novel teaching approach in a graduate level setting. BMC Medical Education, 15(1), 27. PubMed ID: 25884508 doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 8595. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Østerlie, O. (2018). Can flipped learning enhance adolescents’ motivation in physical education? An intervention study. Journal of Research in Arts and Sports Education, 2(03), 117. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

  • Porcaro, P.A., Jackson, D.E., McLaughlin, P.M., & O’Malley, C.J. (2016). Curriculum design of a flipped classroom to enhance hematology learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(3), 345357. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pritchard, T., Penix, K., Colquitt, G., & McCollum, S. (2012). Effects of a weight training personalized system of instruction course on fitness levels and knowledge. Physical Educator, 69(4), 342359.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sargent, J., & Casey, A. (2020). Flipped learning, pedagogy and digital technology: Establishing consistent practice to optimise lesson time. European Physical Education Review, 26(1), 7084. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Selwyn, N. (2016). Digital downsides: Exploring university students’ negative engagements with digital technology. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(8), 10061021. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smith, B., & McGannon, K.R. (2018). Developing rigor in qualitative research: Problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11(1), 101121. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Strayer, J.F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171193. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tearle, P., & Golder, G. (2008). The use of ICT in the teaching and learning of physical education in compulsory education: How do we prepare the workforce of the future? European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(1), 5572. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tou, N.X., Kee, Y.H.A., Koh, K.T., Camiré, M., & Chow, J.Y. (2020). Singapore teachers’ attitudes towards the use of information and communication technologies in physical education. European Physical Education Review, 26(2), 481494. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2015). Personalizing learning: Exploring student and teacher perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course. Computers & Education, 88, 354369. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ward, P., Tsuda, E., Dervent, F., & Devrilmez, E. (2018). Differences in the content knowledge of those taught to teach and those taught to play. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 37(1), 5968. doi:

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 345 345 82
Full Text Views 6 6 0
PDF Downloads 6 6 0