The use of digital technologies in the sport and physical education lesson: Fostering need-supportive behaviours in physical education teachers

Stuart Evans, Charlene Willis

Article ID: 2527
Vol 5, Issue 1, 2024
VIEWS - 142 (Abstract)


In primary and high school settings, the benefits of incorporating technology into curricula have been addressed by several studies; however, wearable technology integration as experienced by physical education teachers is less prevalent. Physical education teachers’ lack of confidence teaching P.E. using wearables, along with a lack of appropriate preparation and unclear curricula frameworks that define how wearables could be used, are additional factors which require further exploration. As such, due consideration of the opportunities and barriers that physical education teachers encounter with wearable usage is presented. This article contributes to pedagogical practices in physical education using wearable technology. This is achieved by highlighting the opportunities that wearable technology presents as a student learning support tool as wearable allow cross curriculum learning opportunities with science, technology, engineering and mathematics. In this paper, the practicality and curriculum relevance of wearable usage in physical education is highlighted. Our paper discusses implications for research and practice and provides a knowledge base for the establishment of professional development courses based on teacher needs.


wearables; education; physical education; teaching; health; physical literacy; technology

Full Text:



1. Thelen E, Schöner G, Scheier C, et al. The dynamics of embodiment: A field theory of infant perseverative reaching. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2001; 24(1): 1-34. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x01003910

2. Piaget J. Science of education and the psychology of the child. Trans. D. Coltman. Orion. 1970.

3. Roetert EP, Jefferies SC. Embracing Physical Literacy. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 2014; 85(8): 38-40. doi: 10.1080/07303084.2014.948353

4. Prince SA, Adamo KB, Hamel M, et al. A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: a systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2008; 5(1): 56. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-5-56

5. Yang CC, Hsu YL. A Review of Accelerometry-Based Wearable Motion Detectors for Physical Activity Monitoring. Sensors. 2010; 10(8): 7772-7788. doi: 10.3390/s100807772

6. Sousa AC, Ferrinho SN, Travassos BF. The Use of Wearable Technologies in the Assessment of Physical Activity in Preschool- and School-Age Youth: Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(4): 3402. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20043402

7. Girginov V, Moore P, Olsen N, et al. Wearable technology-stimulated social interaction for promoting physical activity: A systematic review. Lu Z, ed. Cogent Social Sciences. 2020; 6(1). doi: 10.1080/23311886.2020.1742517

8. Salmon J, Arundell L, Hume C, et al. A cluster-randomized controlled trial to reduce sedentary behavior and promote physical activity and health of 8-9 year olds: The Transform-Us! Study. BMC Public Health. 2011; 11(1). doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-759

9. Mavilidi MF, Mason C, Leahy AA, et al. Effect of a Time-Efficient Physical Activity Intervention on Senior School Students’ On-Task Behaviour and Subjective Vitality: the ‘Burn 2 Learn’ Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial. Educational Psychology Review. 2020; 33(1): 299-323. doi: 10.1007/s10648-020-09537-x

10. Almusawi HA, Durugbo CM, Bugawa AM. Innovation in physical education: Teachers’ perspectives on readiness for wearable technology integration. Computers & Education. 2021; 167: 104185. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104185

11. Taylor KH, Hall R. Counter-Mapping the Neighborhood on Bicycles: Mobilizing Youth to Reimagine the City. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. 2013; 18(1-2): 65-93. doi: 10.1007/s10758-013-9201-5

12. Sherin MG, Russ RS, Sherin BL, Colestock A. Professional vision in action: An exploratory study. Issues in Teacher Education 2008; 17(2): 27-46.

13. Lyons L, Silva BL, Moher T, et al. Feel the burn. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. Published online June 24, 2013. doi: 10.1145/2485760.2485791

14. Evans S, Willis C, James, D, Lee J. Fun, Fitness and STEM in Remote Indigenous Communities: a STEMfit Approach. 2023. Presented at the National Youth Sport Conference, November 2023, Adelaide, Australia.

15. Chu SL, Garcia BM, Rani N. Research on wearable technologies for learning: a systematic review. Frontiers in Education. 2023; 8. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1270389

16. Bartholomew JB, Jowers EM. Physically active academic lessons in elementary children. Preventive Medicine. 2011; 52: S51-S54. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.01.017

17. Díaz P, Ioannou A, Bhagat KK, et al. Learning in a Digital World. Springer Singapore; 2019. doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-8265-9

18. Holding RK, Jovanovic P. Examining benefits and challenges of using wearable technologies for K-12 students: a review of the literature. Proceedings of ICERI2020 Conference 2020.

19. Siering L, Ludden GDS, Mader A, et al. A Theoretical Framework and Conceptual Design for Engaging Children in Therapy at Home—The Design of a Wearable Breathing Trainer. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2019; 9(2): 27. doi: 10.3390/jpm9020027

20. Lee VR, Drake J, Williamson K. Let’s Get Physical: K-12 Students Using Wearable Devices to Obtain and Learn About Data from Physical Activities. TechTrends. 2015; 59(4): 46-53. doi: 10.1007/s11528-015-0870-x

21. Shadiev R, Hwang W-Y, Liu TY. A study of the use of wearable devices for healthy and enjoyable English as a foreign language learning in authentic contexts Educational Technology & Society. 2018; 21(4): 217-231.

22. Engen BK, Gi TH, Mifsud L. Wearable technologies in the K-12 classroom: Cross-disciplinary possibilities and privacy pitfalls. Journal of Interactive Learning Research. 2018; 29(3): 323-341.

23. Lindberg R, Seo J, Laine TH. Enhancing Physical Education with Exergames and Wearable Technology. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. 2016; 9(4): 328-341. doi: 10.1109/tlt.2016.2556671

24. World Health Organisation. Promoting Physical Activity through Schools: Policy Brief. Available online: (accessed on 2 January 2024).

25. Creaser AV, Frazer MT, Costa S, et al. The Use of Wearable Activity Trackers in Schools to Promote Child and Adolescent Physical Activity: A Descriptive Content Analysis of School Staff’s Perspectives. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(21): 14067. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192114067

26. Villalba A, González-Rivera MD. Integration of ICT in Physical Education for the improvement of the educational intervention: perception and proposals. In: González JE (coordinator). Trends and innovation in higher education JAPSS, 2016, pp. 307-322.

27. Zhu X, Dragon LA. Physical activity and situational interest in mobile technology integrated physical education: A preliminary study. Acta Gymnica. 2016; 46(2): 59-67. doi: 10.5507/ag.2016.010

28. Evans SA, James D, Rowlands D, et al. Variability of the Center of Mass in Trained Triathletes in Running After Cycling: A Preliminary Study Conducted in a Real-Life Setting. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living. 2022; 4. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2022.852369

29. Pyle B, Esslinger K. Utilizing Technology in Physical Education: Addressing the Obstacles of Integration. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin. 2014; 80(2): 35-39.

30. Cuckle P, Clarke S. Mentoring student‐teachers in schools: views, practices and access to ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2002; 18(3): 330-340. doi: 10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.00244.x

31. Grainger R, Tolhurst D. (2005). Organisational factors affecting teachers' use and perception of information & communications technology. In Proceedings of the 2005 South East Asia Regional Computer Science Confederation (SEARCC) Conference-Volume 46. Australian Computer Society, Inc. 2005. pp. 13-22.

32. Hixon E, So HJ. Technology’s Role in Field Experiences for Preservice Teacher Training. Educational Technology & Society 2009; 12(4): 294–304

33. Thibaut L, Knipprath H, Dehaene W, et al. Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Teaching Integrated STEM: the Impact of Personal Background Characteristics and School Context. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 2018; 17(5): 987-1007. doi: 10.1007/s10763-018-9898-7

34. Boeve-de Pauw J, Ardies J, Hens K, et al. Short and long term impact of a high-tech STEM intervention on pupils’ attitudes towards technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2020; 32(2): 825-843. doi: 10.1007/s10798-020-09627-5

35. Marttinen R, Landi D, Fredrick RN, et al. Wearable Digital Technology in PE: Advantages, Barriers, and Teachers’ Ideologies. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 2020; 39(2): 227-235. doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2018-0240

36. Borthwick AC, Anderson CL, Finsness ES, et al. Special Article Personal Wearable Technologies in Education: Value or Villain? Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education. 2015; 31(3): 85-92. doi: 10.1080/21532974.2015.1021982

37. Bower M, Sturman D. What are the educational affordances of wearable technologies? Computers & Education. 2015; 88: 343-353. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.013

38. Kibbe DL, Hackett J, Hurley M, et al. Ten Years of TAKE 10!®: Integrating physical activity with academic concepts in elementary school classrooms. Preventive Medicine. 2011; 52: S43-S50. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.01.025

39. Ma JK, Mare LL, Gurd BJ. Classroom-based high-intensity interval activity improves off-task behaviour in primary school students. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism. 2014; 39(12): 1332-1337. doi: 10.1139/apnm-2014-0125

40. Kim Y, Searle K. Empowering Student Voice through Interactive Design and Digital Making. Computers in the Schools. 2017; 34(3): 142-151. doi: 10.1080/07380569.2017.1348082


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2024 Stuart Evans, Charlene Willis

License URL: