The Effectiveness of Physical Education Lessons on Students' Physical Competence: A Comparison between Dynamic and Traditional Schools

Background and Purpose
Childhood represents a critical period for establishing healthy physical activity patterns, as behaviors initiated during these formative years often persist into adulthood 1. Consequently, physical education (PE) classes can play a pivotal role in fostering a sustained commitment to physical activity among students . Research by Castelli et al. indicates that while only a small percentage of children participate in daily physical activity classes, evidence suggests that thoughtfully designed physical education programs, offered both before and after school, can effectively engage children and increase overall physical activity levels.
One such program that has gained traction in recent years, particularly in Iran, is the dynamic school physical education program . The dynamic school model emphasizes the provision of high-quality physical education lessons and extracurricular sports activities, creating opportunities for physical activity and fostering an active lifestyle throughout life. This is achieved through the utilization of all available school spaces (e.g., classrooms, corridors, courtyards) and the strategic engagement of internal and external stakeholders (e.g., parents, school staff, volunteers, community organizations), with the goal of providing enriching experiences for all students both during and beyond regular school hours .
It is hypothesized that this dynamic approach, compared to traditional physical education models, has a more pronounced effect on children's physical literacy. This is because, in traditional school settings, students often engage in sports activities within the physical education classroom without clear objectives or structured guidance. In such settings, the physical education teacher primarily serves as a class controller, focusing on preventing injuries rather than implementing a well-defined program of instruction. Furthermore, traditional schools often lack adequate facilities for conducting meaningful physical education lessons, resulting in diminished student motivation. It has also been observed that in these schools, time allocated for physical education is frequently reallocated to other academic subjects, such as mathematics .
Considering the importance of pedagogical methods within physical education classrooms and acknowledging the limited research specifically examining indicators of physical competence development among students, the present study was undertaken. While some related indicators have been explored in the context of studies evaluating teacher creativity, school environment, and student quality of life, a comprehensive examination of physical competence development was lacking. Given the increasing implementation of specialized physical education classrooms and dynamic playgrounds in elementary schools across the country, this study aimed to compare the impact of dynamic and traditional school physical education models on student physical activity levels in 2023.
 Methods
This study employed a semi-experimental design with pre- and post-tests and a control group. The participants comprised 9-year-old male students (third grade) from a dynamic school and a traditional school in Zahedan city. Participants were randomly assigned to either an experimental group (n = 31, dynamic school) or a control group (n = 34, traditional school). The control group continued with their normal activities, while the experimental group participated in dynamic school activities.
Inclusion criteria for the study included parental consent, absence of mental and physical disorders based on student health records, and non-participation in extracurricular sports activities outside of school. Exclusion criteria included non-attendance during pre- or post-testing.
During the pre-test phase, all participating students completed the Canadian Agility and Motor Skills Assessment (CAMSA) and the Progressive Aerobic Cardiovascular Endurance Run (PACER) test in a sports hall, and their physical activity levels were assessed using a pedometer. These measurements served as baseline data.
The experimental group then participated in structured physical education lessons for three months, consisting of 24 sessions. These lessons involved games designed according to the handbook for first elementary school physical education and the knowledge and attitude section of the physical education teaching manual . The control group engaged in free activities during their physical education class time.
Following the three-month intervention, all students were re-evaluated for physical literacy using the same instruments as in the pre-test phase. Data analysis involved analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) to compare the effect of the interventions on dependent variables between the two groups, controlling for the effect of pre-test scores. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 24.
Findings
The scores from each test were calculated and analyzed. Table 2 presents the means for the experimental and control groups. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) results are presented in Table 3. The results indicated no significant difference between the two groups for CAMSA scores (p = 0.498) or PACER test scores (p = 0.235). However, a significant difference was observed in pedometer readings between the two groups.
Conclusion
The findings of this study suggest that dynamic school physical education programs, as implemented in this context, do not significantly improve motor performance or cardiorespiratory fitness among students compared to traditional physical education programs. However, dynamic school programs do have a significant positive impact on students' overall physical activity levels.
The lack of significant improvement in motor performance and cardiorespiratory fitness in the experimental group, relative to the control group, may be attributed to the fact that the control group spent a considerable amount of class time engaged in vigorous activities. This unstructured activity may have inadvertently enhanced their motor skills and cardiorespiratory endurance. Furthermore, the relatively short duration of the study may have limited the potential for the dynamic school approach to produce more pronounced and lasting improvements in aerobic endurance.
Article Message
The findings of this study indicate that while dynamic school physical education programs did not produce significant improvements in motor performance or cardiorespiratory endurance over a short intervention period, they did significantly increase students’ daily physical activity levels. This highlights the importance of structured school environments, enriched physical spaces, and the use of game-based, participatory teaching approaches in encouraging children to be more physically active during the school day. However, to achieve more profound and lasting effects on students' physical competence, such interventions need to be implemented as long-term, developmentally appropriate programs with a focus on teaching fundamental motor skills and fostering physical literacy. Therefore, dynamic school models can serve as an effective framework for promoting an active lifestyle among children—provided that key factors such as teacher training, resource allocation, curriculum design, and sufficient instructional time are adequately addressed. These insights offer practical guidance for educational policymakers, school administrators, and PE teachers seeking to enhance physical activity engagement and health outcomes among primary school students.