Effective implementation of the Sport Education Model in physical education: A meta-analysis of participant and intervention characteristics

PLOS One | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0331228 October 16, 2025 12 / 17 such as age (learning stage), gender, and athletic background [51]; (2) Variations in intervention characteristics, such as differences in the implementation cycle and frequency of SEM, which may lead to varying levels of effect strength [28]. For the purposes of this study, the participant-related moderating variables were categorized into three groups: learning stages, experience, and class sizes. The intervention-related moderating variables were categorized into frequency, dura- tion of each session, and experimental period. Regarding learning stages, SEM’s impact on students’ physical education outcomes differed significantly across various stages of learning. Specifically, SEM had a significant large positive effect on secondary school students (Effect size = 1.055, P = 0.003), while its effect on university students was smaller (Effect size = 0.174, P = 0.042), and it did not reach statistical significance for elementary students (P = 0.404). These differences may be closely related to the psy- chological needs, learning motivation, and cognitive development characteristics of students at different developmental stages [28,53]. The significant effect of SEM on secondary students may primarily stem from SEM’s ability to fulfill stu- dents’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. According to SDT, secondary students are generally more moti- vated to achieve a sense of autonomy and team affiliation in their learning [44]. SEM enhances intrinsic motivation and

positive emotional experiences significantly through role-playing, team competitions, and continuous contextual teaching [20]. Additionally, secondary students typically possess a certain level of sports skills, enabling them to better understand and execute complex team strategies and role tasks, which further amplifies the positive effects of SEM [48]. Although SEM had a smaller effect on university students (Effect size = 0.174, P = 0.042), the result was still statisti- cally significant. This could be attributed to the strong external motivation for university students’ participation in physical education, such as obtaining credits or passing exams [37,45]. While SEM’s team collaboration and competition models may stimulate university students’ interest, its role-playing and long-duration features may be less appealing to univer- sity students who already possess strong self-management skills [37]. Furthermore, university-level physical education courses are typically elective, with limited time, making it difficult to fully implement the extended cycle requirements of SEM [54]. SEM did not significantly impact elementary students (P = 0.404), possibly due to their cognitive development level and the challenges in classroom management [48]. Elementary students are often more reliant on external rewards and teacher guidance, making it difficult for them to understand and perform complex role divisions and team strategies. For example, the role of a referee requires students to have a strong knowledge of rules and practical experience to per- form competently.

In terms of learning experience, SEM has a significant positive effect on students with no prior SEM participation expe- rience (Effect size = 0.604, P = 0.011), with its effect size even exceeding the overall effect (Effect size = 0.590, P < 0.001). This result highlights SEM’s positive impact on students’ physical education learning during their initial exposure, which may be closely related to its novelty and contextual features [36,37]. These characteristics of SEM effectively stimulate students’ intrinsic motivation [36], thus enhancing their interest and engagement in learning. According to the Novelty Effect [55,56], students typically exhibit higher levels of interest and involvement when first encountering new teaching methods [57]. Additionally, SEM’s contextual and authentic design enables students to better perceive the meaning and value of physical education, thereby fostering sustained learning motivation [3]. Through its seasonal system and role tasks, SEM not only enhances students’ sense of participation and confidence [43,44] but also reduces the negative impact of traditional physical education [21], which often overemphasizes physical fitness and competition [3]. As a result, students without prior SEM experience are more likely to accept and integrate this teaching model, leading to significant learning outcomes. Regarding class sizes, SEM’s effects on students’ physical education learning outcomes vary significantly across differ-

ent class sizes. Specifically, SEM has the greatest impact on students in small class sizes (Effect size = 1.058, P = 0.005), showing a significant large positive effect; it also has a significant moderate positive effect on students in medium class sizes (Effect size = 0.791, P = 0.010); however, the effect size for students in large class sizes did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.837). The significant effect of SEM in small class sizes (Effect size = 1.058) can be attributed to several