Teachers’ preferences of teaching primary physical education: curriculum preferences





curriculum preference, physical education, primary education, teacher, teaching preference


Background and Study Aim. Physical education teachers play an important role in helping students to understand the importance of physical activity. By maximizing physical activity time in physical education, physical education teachers can influence physical activity needs of students. The present study was aimed at analysing and comparing teachers’ preferences of teaching primary physical education. Material and Methods. Survey instrument (teachers’ preferences) was carried out five months (May – September, 2022) through an intentional sampling with survey group size of 1300 physical education teachers of primary education: (i) Preschool and elementary pedagogy (50.76%, n = 660), (ii) Related pedagogy (49.24%, n = 640). Pearson correlation coefficient (r), chi-square test (χ2) (inferential) and descriptive statistics were used to analyse and compare the data. Results. Physical education is often viewed as a marginal subject within the curriculum, however after analysing the data, on average, 63.54% (n = 826) of survey group believes that physical education is just as important as any other school subject (p ˂ .01). According to 52% (n = 676) of survey group, games are popular teaching activity in physical education (p ˂ .01). About 40.50% (n = 526) of survey group does not enjoy teaching dance in physical education (p ˂ .01). About 37.55% (n = 488) of survey group considers teaching health and fitness as demanding (p ˃ .05) and athletics and gymnastics (36.06%, n = 468) as undemanding (p ˂ .01). Conclusions. Primary physical education is an important component of curriculum and provides unique challenges for those involved with its teaching.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Stefan Adamčák, Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica

stefan.adamcak@umb.sk; Faculty of Arts, Department of Physical Education and Sport; Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica; Banska Bystrica, Slovakia.

Michal Marko, Academy of Arts

michalmarkojv@gmail.com; Faculty of Performing Arts, Academy of Arts; Banska Bystrica, Slovakia.

Pavol Bartík, Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica

pavol.bartik@umb.sk; Faculty of Arts, Department of Physical Education and Sport, Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica; Banska Bystrica, Slovakia.


1. Yuliani S, Hartanto D. Perceptions of education role in developing society: Case study at Riau, Indonesia. Edu. Learn., 2017; 6(1): 143–157. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v6n1p143
2. L’Roe J, Kimambo NE, Strull R, Kuzaara D, Kyengonzi F, Naughton-Treves L. ‘Education is the land I give them’ – mothers’ investments in children’s future livelihoods amid growing land competition in rural Uganda. J. Land Use Sci., 2022; 17(1): 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/1747423X.2022.2027533
3. Avramidis E, Norwich B. Teachers’ attitudes towards integration/ inclusion: A review of the literature. Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ., 2010; 17(2): 129–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250210129056
4. Kim S, Raza M, Seidman E. Improving 21st-century teaching skills: Key to effective 21st-century learners. Res. Comp. Int. Educ., 2019; 14(1): 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499919829214
5. Milić M, Radić Hozo E, Maulini C, De Giorgio A, Kuvačić G. What is the place of physical education among the teaching priorities of primary school teachers? An empirical study on importance, qualification and perceived teachers’ competence. Educ. Sci., 2022; 12(9): 613. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci12090613
6. De-la-Peña C, Fernádez-Cézar R, Solano-Pinto N. Attitude towards mathematics of future teachers: How important are creativity and cognitive flexibility?. Front. Psychol., 2021; 12: 713941. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg .2021.713941
7. Ökmen B, Şahin Ş, Kılıç A. A critical view to the primary school teaching. Int. J. Contemp. Educ. Res., 2020; 7(1): 54–70. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.633051
8. Tsangaridou N. Educating primary teachers to teach physical education. Eur. Phys. Educ. Rev., 2012; 18 (3): 275–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X12450788
9. Bleazby J. Why some school subjects have a higher status than others: The epistemology of the traditional curriculum hierarchy. Oxf. Rev. Educ., 2015; 41(5): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2015.1090966
10. Iannucci C, Richards KA. Teaching multiple school subjects role conflict. Kinesiol. Rev., 2022; 11(3): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1123/kr.2021-0039
11. Subramaniam R, Silverman S. Middle school students’ attitudes toward physical education. Teach. Teach . Educ., 2007; 23(5): 602–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.02.003
12. Zeng H. Attitudes of high school students toward physical education and their sport activity preferences. J. Soc. Sci., 2011; 7(4): 529–537. https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2011.529.537
13. Jenkinson KA, Benson AC. Barriers to providing physical education and physical activity in Victorian State secondary schools. Aust. J. Teach. Educ., 2010; 35(8): 1. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2010v35n8.1
14. Masurier GL, Corbin CB. Top 10 reasons for quality physical education. J. Phys. Educ. Recreat. Dance, 2006; 77(6): 44 –53. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2006.10597894
15. Griggs G, Fleet M. Most people hate physical education and most drop out of physical activitiy: In search of credible curriculum alternatives. Edu. Sci., 2021; 11(11): 701. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110701
16. Sappleton N, Lourenço F. Email subject lines and response rates to invitations to participate in a web survey and a face-to-face interview: Sound of silence. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol., 2016; 19(5): 611–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2015.1078596
17. Andrade C. Limitations of online surveys. Indian J. Psychol. Med., 2020; 42(6): 575–576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0 253717620957496
18. Sharpe D. Chi-square test is statistically significant: Now what?. Prac. Assess. Res. Eval., 2015; 20(1): 8. https://doi.org/10.7275/tbfa-x148
19. Turhan SN. Karl Pearson’s chi-square tests. Educ. Res. Rev., 2020; 15(9): 575–560. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR20 19.3817
20. Richards K, Gaudreault K, Starck J, Woods A. Physical education teachers’ perceptions of perceived mattering and marginalization. Phys. Educ. Sport Pedagogy, 2018; 23(4): 445–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/1740 8989.2018.1455820
21. Balga T, Antala B. Opinions of physical education teachers on the position of physical education among other subjects in Slovakia. 7th International Scientific Conference; 2020 Mar 19-20; Serbia. Leposaviq: 2020. P.65-70.
22. Liușnea C. The importance of physical education classes in actual European context. Ann. Dunarea Jos., 2018; 1(1): 21–27. https://doi.org/10.35219/efms.2018.1.04.
23. Fügedi B, Capel S, Dancs H, Bognár J. Satisfaction and preferences of physical education students and head of physical education department: Meeting the new curricular expectations. J. Hum. Sport Exerc., 2016; 11(1): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2016.111.01
24. Fintor JG. Everyday physical activity of students in Nyíregyháza. Prac. Theo. Syst. Educ., 2015; 10(2): 115-130. https://doi.org/10.1515/ptse-2015-0011
25. Vasícková J, Neuls F, Svozil Z. Popularity of school physical education and its effect on performed number steps. J. Phys. Educ. Sport, 2015: 15(1): 40–46. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2015.01007
26. Pereira RJ, Silva RMF, Assunção JGS, Farinha MG. Devaluation of sports culture in school environment. Res., Soc. Dev., 2022; 11(12): e501111234814. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i12.34814
27. Aboshkair KA. The role of physical education in school. J. Emerg. Technol. Innov. Res., 2022; 9(1): 156–161.
28. Martínez RS, Founaud MP, Aracama A, Oiabide A. Sports teaching, traditional games and understanding in physical education: Tale of two stories. Front. Psychol., 2020; 11: 581721. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.5 81721
29. Alzan AB, Ismail N, Fauzi NFM, Talib R. Playing traditional games vs. free-play during physical edu-cation lesson to improve physical ecitivity: A comparison study. Pedagogy Phys. Cult. Sports, 2021; 25 (3): 178–187. https://doi.org/10.15561/26649837.2021.0306
30. Nemec M, Adamčák Š, Marko M. Popularity and common isues of teaching sports games at elementary schools in Slovakia. J. Sports Sci. Med., 2022: 37(1): 89–100. https://doi.org/10.18276/cej.2022.1-08
31. Robinson DB, Randall L, Andrews E. Physical education teacher’ (lack of) gymnastics instructions: An exploration of a neglected curriculum requirement. Curric. Stud. Health Phys. Educ., 2020; 11(1): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/25742981.2020.1715232
32. Engdahl C, Lundvall S, Barker D. ‘Free but not free-free’: Teaching creative aspects of dance in physical education teacher education. Phys. Educ. Sport Pedagogy, 2021; 1:13. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2021.201 4435
33. Gibbs B, Quennerstedt M, Larsson H. Teaching dance in physical education using exergames. Eur. Phys. Educ. Rev., 2017; 23(2): 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X16645611
34. Sjöblom P, Eklund G, Fagerlund P. Student teachers’ views on outdoor education as a teaching method-two cases from Finland and Norway. J. Adventure Educ. Outdoor Learn., 2021; 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/1472 9679.2021.2011338




How to Cite

Adamčák S, Marko M, Bartík P. Teachers’ preferences of teaching primary physical education: curriculum preferences. Pedagogy of Physical Culture and Sports. 2023;27(1):63-70. https://doi.org/10.15561/26649837.2023.0108

Abstract views: 123 / PDF downloads: 79