Against the backdrop of the "Healthy China 2030" initiative and the development of a strong sports nation, university physical education shoulders a crucial mission to enhance national fitness. This study aims to systematically analyze the value and problems of current university general track and field textbooks and to explore pathways for their modern reform. The research posits that existing textbooks play a significant role in standardizing teaching and systematically imparting knowledge, serving as a core vehicle for implementing the "Health First" philosophy, fostering students' lifelong sports awareness, and disseminating sports culture. However, they also reveal three major bottlenecks in practice: in , there is a "technique-oriented" bias that prioritizes competition over health, coupled with an outdated knowledge system; in content system, the rigid, linear structure fails to accommodate individual student differences, leading to a disconnect between theory and practice; in , the static, text-and-image-based presentation lacks modern appeal and interactivity, failing to stimulate student interest. To address this, the study proposes a systematic development path for textbooks. In form guiding philosophy, a paradigm shift from a "technique-oriented" approach to one centered on "student health and development" is essential. In , an open framework that is "modular, stratified, and engaging" should be constructed. In , an "integrated media" digital textbook incorporating modern technology needs to be created. In content system presentation format evaluation system, a diverse, process-oriented approach should be advocated and integrated. The ultimate goal of this "ecological reconstruction" is to transform the track and field textbook from a mere vehicle for knowledge transmission into a dynamic portal that empowers students to cultivate lifelong exercise habits and lead a healthy lifestyle, thereby effectively enhancing the educational outcomes of university physical education in the new era.
Zhaoming Huang (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: