Optimizing learning outcomes in physical education: A comprehensive systematic review of hybrid pedagogical models integrated with the Sport Education Model

Epidemiology (STROBE) statement [64]. Referring to the 9 assessment criteria chosen by Shen and Shao for the structure of typical publications in this research domain: (1) Description of PM Hybridizations, (2) Characteristics of the Participants, (3) Reasonable Design of the Study, (4) Detailed Data Collection, (5) Detailed Data Analysis, (6) Validity and Reliability, (7) Inclu- sion of Models’ Fidelity, (8) Report of Learning Outcomes, and (9) Discussion of Results. Each item was scored as 1 (yes) or 0 (no). The total quality score for each included study was deter- mined by summing individual scores. Studies scoring 7 or above were categorized as "high quality," those scoring between 4 and 6 were classified as "moderate quality," and those scoring below 4 were classified as "low quality" [3]. Manuscripts had to score at least 4 points for inclu- sion. Two independent researchers (J.Z. and M.A.) assessed the selected studies. The final scores were reviewed and discussed by a research team composed of other co-authors, with any discrepancies negotiated with a third researcher (K.G.S) until a consensus was reached. 3. Results 3.1 Study background The majority of the 30 studies were conducted in Western countries, with the highest number in Spain (13), followed by Portugal (10), China (3), the United States (2), Turkey (1), and Aus- tralia (1). The earliest article in this field was published in 2000 [52], with 20 articles published in the last five years, indicating that research on the hybridization of PM with SEM in physical education has become a recent focal point.

3.2 Participants The majority of studies examined the effects of hybrid PMs in physical education classes for primary and secondary school students, with a combined sample size of 2,399 participants. Specifically, 70% of the studies focused on middle school students, totaling 1,238 participants, while seven studies targeted elementary school students, with 733 participants. Interestingly, no studies addressed university students. Additionally, two studies reported participant num- bers but did not specify the ages of the students. The hybrid PMs curriculum primarily cen- tered around sports such as soccer, basketball, volleyball, handball, taekwondo, frisbee, and various game-based activities like invasion games and batting/fielding games. Table 1. (Continued) Sources Purpose Sample Characteristics Hybrid Length of Unit /Content Data Collection Study Design & Analysis Learning Outcomes Silva et al. (2022) [60] Portugal Investigating students’ perceptions about lived learning experiences and active involvement in SEM-SGA 25 students as participants (aged be- tween16 and17 years old) who SEM— SGA 26 lessons volleyball Diary and interviews Qualitative: thematic analysis method Cognitive; effective Stran et al. (2012) [61] The United States To assess pre-service teachers’ perceptions of SEM-TGFU and analyze the facilitators and barriers they encountered during model implementation 22 pre-service teachers, comprising 14 males and 9 females, with an average age of 23. Additionally, there are 162 grade 5 students, aged 10–11 years old SEM— TGFU 20 lessons Invasion games

Focus group interviews, critical incident reflections, lesson plans, and observations Qualitative: thematic analysis method Cognitive, affective Wei et al. (2020) [62] China Analysis of the effects of SEM-TPSR on students’ responsibility and exercise self-efficacy 204 students SEM— TPSR 15-week (45 hours) Questionnaires Quantitative: regression analysis Affective cognitive https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0311957.t001 PLOS ONE A systematic review of hybrid pedagogical models integrated with Sport Education Model PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0311957 December 4, 2024 10 / 22