Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Descriptive research shows high acceptability of a 3Es-Modeled training module for movement competency, indicating effective integration in physical education.
This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability of an instructional material for PATHFit 1; Movement Competency Training, developed using the 3Es Model-Engage, Explain and Evaluate, to enhance the learning experience in physical education course. A descriptive research design was employed to assess the learning module’s acceptability based on its objectives, content, organization, graphics, and relevance. The study was conducted at Marinduque State University (MarSU), specifically within the College of Education, involving freshmen education students enrolled in the PATHFit 1 course. These students, selected through purposive sampling, were the primary users of the learning module and provided feedback on its usability and effectiveness. Data were gathered after the workbook's integration into the course and were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The general weighted mean scores for the learning module’s components were calculated to measure its acceptability. Findings revealed that the learning module’s objectives received a high rating of 4.360, categorized as “Highly Valid/Acceptable.” Specifically, the indicators "measurable and result-oriented" objectives scored the highest (4.43), while "attainable" and "time-bounded" objectives scored slightly lower (4.31). The study concludes that the module’s objectives are well-aligned with student expectations and instructional goals, though there is room for improvement in ensuring that all objectives are attainable and manageable within the course's timeframe. The results suggest that the 3Es-Modeled learning module is an effective instructional tool for enhancing physical education and comprehensive physical activity (PA) learning experiences.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Genil Labaguis (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: