Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study examined the lived experiences of PATHFIT instructors teaching parallel classes through flexible delivery modalities. It aimed to describe the instructional conditions, adaptive practices, challenges, and professional insights that shaped the implementation of PATHFIT in settings where multiple sections were handled simultaneously. A qualitative research design was employed, involving eight PATHFIT instructors selected through purposive sampling. Data were generated through in-depth interviews and analyzed through axial coding, clustering of significant experiences, formulation of meanings, and thematic analysis. Six major themes emerged: Structural Pressures of Parallel PATHFIT Delivery; Adaptive Reconstruction of Embodied Teaching; Distributed Class Governance and Engagement; Equity with Accountability; Safety, Strain, and Sustainable Practice; and Professional Growth and Institutional Conditions. The findings showed that parallel delivery required instructors to respond to large enrollments, limited instructional time, shared activity spaces, unequal student access, safety risks, and workload demands. Instructors sustained learning through modality-outcome alignment, reusable multimodal materials, visual demonstrations, peer facilitation, flexible assessment pathways, explicit safety protocols, and collegial support. However, the study also established that instructor adaptability could not permanently compensate for inadequate facilities, excessive class size, unreliable technology, insufficient staffing, and weak institutional support. The study concluded that sustainable parallel PATHFIT delivery depends on the integration of structural readiness, coherent embodied pedagogy, equitable access, shared class governance, safety, manageable workload, and institutional capacity. As a practical output, the study developed the Sustainable Parallel PATHFIT Delivery Framework and Implementation Toolkit to guide instructional planning, implementation, monitoring, and continuous improvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Litiatco et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: