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 13 / 17 factors: (1) High-frequency interaction and personalized feedback: Small class sizes allow for more frequent interaction between teachers and students, enabling more targeted feedback [28]. This immediate feedback and high engagement help students gain a stronger sense of competence and achievement in physical education [41]; (2) Role division and contextual authenticity: SEM’s emphasis on role-playing (e.g., referee, team captain, coach) is more easily implemented and managed in small classes. Students can better understand and perform role tasks, thereby improving teamwork and self-management skills [28]; (3) Promoting autonomy and relatedness: According to SDT, personalized guidance and role-playing in small classes help satisfy students’ needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, further enhancing their intrinsic motivation [41,44]. SEM also has a significant moderate effect on students in medium class sizes (Effect size = 0.791, P = 0.010). The advantages of medium class sizes include: (1) Effective resource allocation and teamwork: Medium-sized classes strike a balance between providing students sufficient opportunities for role-playing and practice while effectively utilizing teach- ing resources (e.g., facilities and equipment) [28]. This resource allocation helps students enhance their physical skills through moderate levels of competition and collaboration [42]; (2) Effective implementation of contextual teaching: SEM’s

seasonal system and competitive format are easier to implement and manage in medium-sized classes, allowing stu- dents to better experience teamwork and contextualized physical learning [43]; (3) Moderate improvement in motivation and engagement: Medium class sizes avoid the pressure associated with the individualized focus of small classes while reducing the issue of “passive participation” common in large classes [7]. Therefore, the lack of significant effects in large class sizes (P = 0.837) may be due to challenges in role distribution and management, insufficient personalized feedback, and the prevalence of “passive participation.” In terms of intervention frequency, SEM demonstrates significant differences in its impact on student’s physical edu- cation learning outcomes across various intervention frequencies. Specifically, SEM produces a significant large positive effect at an intervention frequency of 2 lessons per week (Effect size = 1.820, P = 0.008), and a significant small positive effect at ≤1 lesson per week (Effect size = 0.484, P = 0.009), whereas no statistically significant effect is observed for frequencies greater than 2 lessons per week (P = 0.979). These findings suggest that an intervention frequency of two lessons per week is optimal for SEM implementation, potentially due to its alignment with students’ learning load and adaptability [3,28]. The reasons behind the best effects of 2 lessons per week may include: (1) balanced frequency that

ensures recovery and continuity: This frequency allows for adequate recovery while maintaining consistent learning, preventing skill degradation [37]; (2) effectiveness of role-playing and feedback: It provides students multiple opportunities for role-playing and teamwork each week, coupled with timely feedback that enhances interpersonal skills [42], knowledge understanding [20], game performance [37], physical activity (PA) [20], autonomy [41,44], and competence [41,44]; (3) avoidance of overtraining effects: Higher frequencies (>2 lessons per week) may lead to fatigue and burnout, ultimately diminishing learning outcomes [3]. The lower effects observed at ≤1 lesson per week can be attributed to: (1) extended learning intervals that hinder skill retention: The infrequent sessions make it challenging for students to maintain continu- ous learning, leading to decreased skill retention and team synergy [20,40]; (2) insufficient role-playing frequency: The low frequency of role-playing and contextual teaching struggles to foster students’ identified regulation and external regulation, thereby undermining learning effectiveness [20,40]. In terms of session duration, SEM produces a significant large positive effect with intervention sessions lasting ≥60 minutes (Effect size = 1.002, P < 0.001), whereas a significant small positive effect is observed with session durations of 30–60 minutes (Effect size = 0.295, P = 0.011). These results suggest that sessions exceeding 60 minutes are most effec-

tive for SEM, potentially due to the time demands of role-playing and the complexity of teamwork. The reasons behind the optimal effect at ≥60 minutes per session include: (1) sufficient time for role-playing and feedback: The role-playing and competitive elements emphasized by SEM require extended periods for students to fully experience role tasks and receive feedback [37,38]; (2) necessity of teamwork and strategy execution: Longer sessions provide adequate time for students to implement team strategies, improving collaboration and responsibility [5,37]; (3) alignment with Cognitive