2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (8) ◽  
pp. 927-934 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inbal Marcu ◽  
David Oppenheim ◽  
Nina Koren-Karie

1992 ◽  
Vol 267 (33) ◽  
pp. 23742-23745
Author(s):  
R.S. Hurst ◽  
M.P. Kavanaugh ◽  
J Yakel ◽  
J.P. Adelman ◽  
R.A. North

2021 ◽  
pp. 1356336X2199521
Author(s):  
Rita Silva ◽  
Cláudio Farias ◽  
Isabel Mesquita

The purpose of this study was to unpack the challenges and constraints encountered by preservice and novice teachers when implementing student-centred models, and to describe the methodological characteristics of research conducted on this topic between 2004 and 2020. The procedure had a three-step approach: (a) searching for publications in electronic databases; (b) selecting studies based on inclusion criteria; and (c) refining this selection to identify research-based papers. 29 articles were selected, most of which were from Europe and North America. The most researched model was Sport Education, and studies considering novice teachers were scarce. The predominant methodology across studies involved multiple qualitative data sources and inductive analysis. Our major finding was the identification of three themes reflecting distinct challenges to the implementation of student-centred models: (a) teacher-related challenges (i.e. pervasive beliefs, occupational socialization, managerial- and instruction-related); (b) student-related challenges (i.e. student resistance to engaged participation in student-centred models); and (c) external challenges (i.e. context- and environment-related). Physical education teacher education should invest in training preservice teachers to: (a) manage the dynamics of students’ cooperative interactions and peer-assisted learning; (b) design developmentally appropriate small-sided games and problem-solving contexts, and (c) scaffold the gradual transfer of responsibility to students for their engagement in persistent learning team activities. Longer studies and the inclusion of student perspectives will be particularly valuable for future investigations.


Polymer ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 707-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej Kloczkowski ◽  
Taner Z. Sen ◽  
Robert L. Jernigan

Biochemistry ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 56 (20) ◽  
pp. 2537-2548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erica A. Frankel ◽  
Christopher A. Strulson ◽  
Christine D. Keating ◽  
Philip C. Bevilacqua

2008 ◽  
Vol 364 (1519) ◽  
pp. 861-866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Ghirlanda ◽  
Elisa Frasnelli ◽  
Giorgio Vallortigara

Recent studies have revealed a variety of left–right asymmetries among vertebrates and invertebrates. In many species, left- and right-lateralized individuals coexist, but in unequal numbers (‘population-level’ lateralization). It has been argued that brain lateralization increases individual efficiency (e.g. avoiding unnecessary duplication of neural circuitry and reducing interference between functions), thus counteracting the ecological disadvantages of lateral biases in behaviour (making individual behaviour more predictable to other organisms). However, individual efficiency does not require a definite proportion of left- and right-lateralized individuals. Thus, such arguments do not explain population-level lateralization. We have previously shown that, in the context of prey–predator interactions, population-level lateralization can arise as an evolutionarily stable strategy when individually asymmetrical organisms must coordinate their behaviour with that of other asymmetrical organisms. Here, we extend our model showing that populations consisting of left- and right-lateralized individuals in unequal numbers can be evolutionarily stable, based solely on strategic factors arising from the balance between antagonistic (competitive) and synergistic (cooperative) interactions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document