phd in physical education 2021

Program Information

The major objectives of doctoral study at Springfield College are:

A.  Professional Preparation

The curriculum provides a foundation through courses and other learning experiences for successful candidates to obtain a high degree of preparation in a chosen field of specialization. This includes:

• advanced knowledge and skills;
• critical examination of the assumptions underlying the knowledge and techniques in the field;
• re-evaluation of the techniques in light of increasing knowledge and in respect to the effect on humanity;
• creative contribution to the advancement of physical education, including exercise physiology and sport and exercise psychology;
• understanding of the relation of physical education, exercise physiology, and sport and exercise psychology to other fields of knowledge ;
• awareness of ethical responsibility in the use of knowledge and skills for humane purposes.

B.  Research

Through the doctoral program, successful candidates acquire new skills, an interest in the discovery of new knowledge, and the ability to carefully validate such knowledge.  The research portion of the program includes:

• the history, development and critical examination of the various methods of logical thought and the application of these to the discovery of new knowledge;
• understanding the scientific method including its assumptions and implications;
• learning new techniques of research: laboratory, clinical, statistical, and other;
• developing an intellectual approach toward development  and testing of hypotheses;
• conducting a piece of original research under the supervision of appropriate faculty.

C.   Humanics Orientation

Springfield College is dedicated to the education of the whole person - spirit, mind, and body.  The focus of education at Springfield College is not only imparting knowledge and the search for knowledge but also applying wisdom in the use of that knowledge in service to people.  This implies:

• wide gauged sophistication of the student and not merely a narrow specialization in any given field;
• achievement of an optimal balance of knowledge, skill, attitude and purpose;
• attainment of a personal integration of thought, feeling, and action in terms of a philosophy of life.

The desired data stated above are not matters that can be fully measured by tests and examinations.  In the doctoral program, there is an atmosphere that emphasizes these values and stimulates the student to achieve a personal system of values.  One purpose of the doctoral preparation is to produce professional persons who add the goal of serving humankind to scholarly and scientific interests.

D.   Accepted Standards

The doctoral program at Springfield College is distinctive in accordance with the overall objectives of the College and fully meets generally accepted standards for the highest professional attainment in graduate education in the United States.

The following sections of this document describe the specific requirements and procedures for the Ph.D., with specializations in exercise physiology, sport and exercise psychology, and teaching and administration.  The doctoral degree is awarded by the College, but the College must look to the faculty of the student’s field of specialization for high-level preparation in that field.

Admission to the Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Physical Education Program

The objective of the Ph.D. program in Physical Education in harmony with the philosophy of the College is educating the whole person in spirit, mind, and body for leadership in service to others.  It is concerned not only with imparting of knowledge and the search for knowledge but also with wisdom in the use of that knowledge in service to others. The Ph.D. program in Physical Education is designed to prepare individuals for positions in higher education in the areas of teaching and administration, exercise physiology, and/or sport and exercise psychology. Upon successful completion of the program, we expect individuals to be leaders in higher education in their chosen specialization.

Persons who wish to study toward the Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Physical Education degree at Springfield College must submit a formal application at least six weeks prior to the beginning of the semester in which they wish to enroll. Application forms may be obtained on line from Graduate Admissions.

The requirements for admission are as follows:

• Master’s degree with satisfactory record from an accredited institution. (Note: Students may apply into the PhD program but must have a minimum of 30 semester hours completed. The Master’s degree must be completed by the first year of admission in the doctoral program. Failure to complete this requirement would lead to suspension of all PhD coursework until the Master’s degree is conferred.
• Evidence of personal and professional qualities that show promise of outstanding educational, scholarly, and social leadership in the applicant’s chosen specialization.
• A personal interview, prior to acceptance, with the Program Coordinator of the applicant’s chosen specialization.
• Submission of GRE scores taken within five years of the date of the application.
• Official transcripts from all previous college/university work.
• 3.0 graduate GPA
• Three letters of recommendation - Recommendations should speak specifically to the candidate’s ability to succeed in the program and in the profession.
• A curriculum vita
• Students who have or will receive a Bachelor’s and Master’s degree from Springfield College are not eligible for the PhD without completing at minimum 30 graduate credits at another accredited institution of higher education.

International Applicants

Springfield College recognizes the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL); International English Language Testing System (IELTS); Michigan English Language Assessment Battery (MELAB); and Pearson Test of English (PTE) Academic as proof of English proficiency. Scores from other English language proficiency tests will be considered on a case by case basis.

Students who do not meet English language requirements may be eligible for a conditional acceptance.  Students with a conditional acceptance are required to take English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) classes (which carry undergraduate credit), and may be awarded an unconditional offer upon successful completion of pre-approved ESOL classes, an acceptable score on an English language proficiency test, or upon recommendation from ESOL faculty.

More information regarding International applications can be obtained from the Doggett International Center’s homepage.

Doctoral Advisement for the Ph.D. Program

The process of advisement of doctoral students is as follows:

The department chair with consultation of the program coordinator, assigns each doctoral student to an academic advisor in his/her chosen specialization. The advisor is appointed during the first semester of the student’s attendance or not later than the completion by the student of nine semester hours of work. Once appointed, the advisor shall call a meeting with the student to discuss the student’s training and experience, strengths and weaknesses, and professional objectives. On the basis of this discussion, along with an evaluation of the student’s credentials and doctoral requirements, the advisor shall identify the specified requirements of the student’s doctoral program. A copy of this individualized program tracking sheet shall be given to the student, the Department Chair, Program Coordinator/Graduate Coordinator, and Registrar. The information from the individualized program tracking sheet will be included in the student’s degree audit which is the official program tracking record for the student.

Transfer of Credit

Graduate courses in which the student earned a grade of B or better from accredited institutions may be transferred and applied toward the Doctor of Philosophy degree provided that:

• Such work fits into the student’s doctoral program
• It falls within the acceptable time limit for doctoral credit or as otherwise approved with an extension of the default time period.
• When determining transfer credit from a student’s master program, credits will only be accepted if it is determined that they would be considered valid for the entire length of the ten year time period (please refer to time limits for the Ph.D.)

General Program Requirements

The minimum residency requirement for the Ph.D. in Physical Education is one academic year in full-time graduate study at Springfield College. Residence for the master’s degree at Springfield College or elsewhere does not meet this requirement.  Students are expected to complete the minimum number of semester hours identified in their specialization area. All work toward the Ph.D. in physical education must be completed within 10 years of admission. Academic credit accepted for the master’s degree may be counted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the doctorate provided it fits into the student’s program and falls within the acceptable time limit for doctoral credit. For specific information regarding time limits, please refer to the Time Limits section for specifics. Students must maintain a minimum GPA of 3.0 (B) in all coursework. A grade of a C+ or lower on any 12 hours of graduate work will disqualify a student from the Ph.D. in physical education program.

Degree Information

Contact information, i. program requirements (64 credits).

The Ph.D. program in Physical Education is designed to provide broad based preparation in the field of physical education and it offers students the opportunity to design a program of study to meet their educational goals. The intent of the program is to expose students to various sub-disciplines in the field from which they will build a specific area of research study. This preparation ensures a more holistic and inclusive view of physical education than is found in many programs where specialization in one area is the emphasis.

This approach to graduate education is in concert with the mission of the College, which advocates the education of the whole person in spirit, mind, and body for leadership in service to humanity. Graduates will have the necessary research expertise to continue as lifelong researchers and contributors to the body of knowledge in physical education. They will be prepared to teach in their research area as well as the various sub-disciplines at all educational levels. Graduates who have focused their studies in administration will be qualified to lead and develop programs in the private and public sectors. The completion of the program is viewed by the College as the first step taken by its graduates in assuming positions of leadership in the field of physical education.

Program of Study

The Ph.D. program in physical education consists of courses and learning experiences in the following areas:

Physical Education/Athletic Administration/ General Studies.  This is the student’s field of professional specialization. A program of study provided by the physical education and health education, and exercise science and sport studies faculty will help the student attain a thorough preparation of high quality. The program includes course work in pedagogical content knowledge and issues in higher education designed to prepare Ph.D. students for entry to a higher education teaching career.

Research.  Theory and practice in research are to include problems of logical and critical thinking, the scientific method, and techniques of research, as well as a piece of original research, the doctoral dissertation, conducted under faculty supervision. The dissertation is the crowning achievement of doctoral study. The problem selected should grow out of the candidate’s personal and professional interests. The dissertation may be an original contribution to knowledge or an original application of existing knowledge to the solution of a practical problem in the field.

General Education.  Consistent with the Humanics philosophy, the educational program at Springfield College, both undergraduate and graduate, prepares students not only in their field of professional specialization, but also with liberal education, and personal growth and awareness of the surrounding social scene.  Consequently, the program includes a series of non-professional courses as an integral part of the program to help the student develop as a sensitive and growing person, as a sophisticated citizen, and as an educator with wide interests and goals. A minimum of six semester hours of exclusively graduate (600-level) general education courses are designated specifically in the college offerings as “Core courses”.

Preparing Future Faculty Series.  Modeled after the preparing future faculty program designed by the Association of American Colleges and Universities, this series of coursework introduces students to academia; exposes students to the teaching, service, and scholarship responsibilities of faculty members; supports development of pedagogical skills and higher education settings; and aids the transition from doctoral student to faculty member.

Dissertation area.  Where the general nature of the intended dissertation can be identified sufficiently early in a student’s program, course work and other registrations are recommended to enhance the student’s qualifications to conduct the dissertation.

Electives.  Selection of electives provides effective support of the total Ph.D. program and results from consultation between the student and the advisor.

The actual number of semester hours is likely to be more than the minimum stated. Flexibility is encouraged to provide for the particular educational needs of each student. The requirements in each case will be determined not only on the extent of graduate credit accumulated, but with a view toward optimum preparation for the student in the intended field of service.

The allocation of semester hours of credit in the areas is as follows:

Concentration Requirements (24 credits)

Students select from one of the following concentration areas:

A. Physical Education Teacher Education Track

• PHED 629 - Curriculum Construction in Physical Education Credits: 3
• PHED 660 - Advanced Instructional Strategies Credits: 3
• PHED 670 - Supervision and Mentoring Credits: 3
• PHED 680 - Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in Physical Education Credits: 3
• PHED 721 - Research on Teaching K-12 Physical Education Credits: 3
• PHED 731 - Seminar in Physical Education Teacher Education Credits: 2
• PHED 741 - Fieldwork in Physical Education Teacher Education Credits: 4

and one of the following:

MOST 624 - Motor Learning and Control    

PHED 635 - Motor Development and Analysis    

B. Athletic Administration Track

• PHED 627 - Facility Design, Operation and Maintenance in Athletics Credits: 3
• PHED 633 - Athletic Administration Credits: 3
• PHED 645 - Finance in Athletics Credits: 3
• PHED 675 - Legal Issues in Physical Education and Athletics Credits: 3
• PHED 683 - Leadership in Athletics Seminar Credits: 2
• PHED 686 - Graduate Field Experience Credits: 1-4

(Must be taken for a minimum of 4 credits to meet program requirements)

C. General Studies Track

General Studies - students select 18 credits of coursework listed here, plus 6 credits of electives in consultation with the academic advisor.

• MOST 624 - Motor Learning and Control Credits: 3
• PHED 635 - Motor Development and Analysis Credits: 3

Cognate Studies (6 credits)

Select a minimum of six credits from one of the following areas:

A. Adapted Physical Education

• PHED 663 - Adapted Physical Education and Recreation Credits: 3

PHED 612 - Adapted Physical Education Assessment and Implementation    

AEXS 613 - Exercise for Special Populations    

B. Health Promotion

• HLTH 610 - Issues in Public Health and Health Promotion Credits: 3
• HLTH 614 - Planning of Health Promotion Programs Credits: 3

C. Legal and Ethical Dimensions

• PHED 620 - Philosophy of Sport Credits: 3

EDUC 620 - Higher Education Law    

PHED 675 - Legal Issues in Physical Education and Athletics      

D. Motor Behavior

Select any twp of the following:

• AEXS 604 - Neuromuscular Physiology and Exercise Credits: 3

E. Physiological Mechanisms

• AEXS 610 - Advanced Exercise Physiology Credits: 3

AEXS 604 - Neuromuscular Physiology and Exercise    

AEXS 606 - Environmental Physiology    

F. Psychosocial Aspects

• PHED 658 - Sport in Society Credits: 3
• AEXS 678 - Sport Psychology Credits: 3

Research (25 credits)

• RSCH 615 - Qualitative Research Methodology Credits: 3
• RSCH 620 - Educational and Psychological Statistics I Credits: 3
• RSCH 712 - Dissertation Proposal Design Credits: 2
• RSCH 720 - Educational Psychology Statistics II Credits: 3
• RSCH 735 - Doctoral Dissertation Credits: 1-14

(taken for a total of 14 credits to meet program requirements)

Preparing Future Faculty Series (9 credits)

• AEXS 716 - Scholarly Writing Credits: 2
• PHED 710 - Doctoral Seminar Credits: 2
• PHED 715 - Instructional Effectiveness in Higher Education Credits: 3
• PHED 718 - Seminar in Higher Education Credits: 2

Time Limits for the Ph.D.

In view of the present rate of expansion of knowledge and the general desirability of completing the requirements for the Ph.D. within a definite period of time, the following time limitation will be observed:

The default time period for a PhD in Physical Education is ten years from the date of acceptance into the program.

When determining transfer credit from a student’s master program, credits will only be accepted if it is determine that they would be considered valid for the entire length of the ten year time limit.  If credit is accepted toward the doctoral program that would only be considered valid for a period of time less than the ten years, then the time period should be adjusted accordingly.

Graduate academic work, to be given full credit toward the requirements for the Ph.D., whether in transfer or completed in residence, must have been secured within ten years prior to the date of one’s candidacy for the Ph.D. degree. In special circumstances, credit for work completed beyond the ten-year limit will be recognized, but only upon special recommendation of the student’s advisor and approval by the Program Coordinator/Graduate Coordinator.

All requirements for the Ph.D. degree, including the dissertation must be completed within a period of five years after the student has passed the qualifying examinations and has been matriculated as a candidate for the degree. Failure to complete the requirements within the time limit stated above will mean that the student will be expected to repeat the qualifying examination in order to reestablish candidacy.  Following requalification, a maximum of three years of additional candidacy is prescribed. A student who does not complete all requirements by the end of this three-year period is subject to dismissal from the doctoral program.

Plagiarism is defined as the appropriation of, and use as one’s own, the writings and ideas of another. Intent to deceive does not have to be present for plagiarism to occur. Students should be cautious when “borrowing” material from other sources. Rewording (paraphrasing) of an author’s ideas does not absolve the student from giving credit and making the appropriate citation. Students who plagiarize are subject to dismissal from the graduate program.

Per APA Rule 6.02 “Self-plagiarism refers to the practice of presenting one’s own previously published work as though it were new” (p. 170). “The core of the new document must constitute an original contribution to knowledge, and only the amount of previously published material necessary to understand that contribution should be included, primarily in the discussion of theory and methodology” (p. 16). “Avoid charges of self-plagiarism by familiarizing yourself with the ethical standards regarding duplicate publication and the legal standards of fair use (see also section 1.10)” p. 170.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Healthy Eat Act Living
• v.2(3); 2022
• PMC10521999

Physical Education Teachers’ Perceived Effectiveness in Association with Student Attendance, Teacher Adaptability, External Educational Supports, and Teaching Format During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Ann pulling kuhn.

1 Department of Pediatrics, University of Maryland School of Medicine, USA

Hannah R. Thompson

2 Community Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, USA

Collin A. Webster

3 School of Sport, Exercise, and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham Dubai, UAE

Charlene Burgeson

4 Action for Healthy Kids, Chicago, IL, USA

Jamie Chriqui

5 Division of Health Policy and Administration, School of Public Health, University of Illinois Chicago, USA

Tevin Okutoyi

Erin r hager.

6 Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, USA

Associated Data

Spring 2020 pandemic-control policies included an abrupt shift to remote teaching, which may have affected physical education (PE) teachers’ perceived effectiveness. This study examined K-12 PE teachers’ perceived effectiveness in association with student attendance, teacher adaptability, PE supports, teaching format (in-person, remote synchronous, remote asynchronous, etc.), and teacher- and school-level demographics at three time points (pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020, Spring 2020, 2020–2021 school year). An electronic survey was developed by an expert panel and distributed to U.S. public school PE teachers (convenience sampling via school health-related organizations). For analyses, teacher perceived effectiveness was dichotomized (very/extremely effective= “1”; not at all/slightly/moderately effective= “0”). Logistic regression models assessed associations between perceived effectiveness and independent variables (student attendance, teacher adaptability, PE supports, teaching format, and demographic variables) at each time point. Respondents ( n =134; M age=46) were mostly female (62%), general PE teachers (82%, versus adapted), had a graduate degree (66%), had >11 years of teaching experience (63%), and from 26 states. Perception of being very/extremely effective was highest pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020 (93%), lowest in Spring 2020 (12%), and recovered somewhat in 2020–2021 (45%). During the 2020–2021 school year, teachers had greater odds of perceiving they were more effective if they reported having higher student attendance (OR 1.06 [CI:1.02–1.09], p >.001) and higher adaptability (OR 1.22 [CI: 1.09–1.37], p >.001), adjusting for gender, education level, years of experience, grade level taught, and Title I status. Professional development opportunities are needed for remote teaching of PE to enhance teachers’ adaptability and perceived effectiveness during potential future school closures.

Schools are recognized as a logical setting for improving student physical activity (PA) behaviors, skills, values, and beliefs, since students spend a majority of their time there (IOM, 2013). Opportunities to improve these behaviors include physical education (PE) and other school-based PA opportunities (e.g., before or after school PA programs), which are beneficial to student health and academic outcomes and can have long-term positive effects on PA habits into adulthood ( Bailey, 2006 ; Kuhn et al., 2021; Trudeau et al., 1999 ). Spring 2020 pandemic-control policies included school closures, which forced schools to change how instruction was delivered and affected whether and how students received PE and other PA opportunities provided by schools ( Pavlovic et al., 2021 ). As a result, most PE teachers shifted to remote teaching, where trial-and-error methods were used to implement PE virtually ( Jeong & So, 2020 ). During this time, many PE teachers adapted to implementing PE online by focusing on providing PA opportunities at home and outdoors while encouraging student self-monitoring and goal setting ( Gobbi et al., 2020 ). However, PE teachers also reported implementation challenges, including difficult communication with students, lack of student participation, limited student access to virtual content and technology, difficulty meeting students’ needs, and having a remote work arrangement ( Centeio et al., 2021 ; Pavlovic et al., 2021 ). Studies have demonstrated how these challenges, along with the isolation of remote teaching, negatively impacted PE teachers’ perceived effectiveness of their teaching and student learning ( Chan et al., 2021 ; Mercier et al., 2021 ).

Teacher effectiveness can be defined in terms of growth in student learning and is closely tied to PE program effectiveness ( Burroughs et al., 2019 ; Goe, 2007 ; McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2014 ). Interventions to enhance PE teacher effectiveness have shown to increase student PA while in PE ( Powell et al., 2016 ). Additionally, it is recommended that a measure of PE teacher effectiveness include student engagement in PA both in and outside of PE ( McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2013 ). Student engagement has been found to predict teacher effectiveness as measured by course evaluations, but student attendance is required for students to be engaged ( Richmond et al., 2015 ). Overall, student attendance declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, and school districts that were not providing in-person instruction had even lower attendance rates than school districts that provided in-person instruction during the 2020–2021 school year ( Carminucci et al., 2021 ).

The abrupt change in teaching format could be another factor related to teachers’ perceived effectiveness. Prior to the pandemic, one study reported that classroom teachers were unprepared for remote teaching in a virtual format, as the majority of teacher preparation programs did not formally prepare teachers for this mode of program delivery ( Rehn et al., 2018 ; Graziano & Bryans-Bongey, 2018 ). During the pandemic, PE and classroom teachers perceived a decrease in their teaching effectiveness and noted a lack of social interaction due to remote learning formats which were synchronous (i.e., real-time online instruction), asynchronous (i.e., online independent learning) or hybrid (i.e., combination of in-person instruction and either synchronous or asynchronous remote learning) ( Chan et al., 2021 ; Flack et al., 2020 ; Hamilton et al., 2021 ; Mercier et al., 2021 ).

During COVID-19-related school closures, adapting to remote teaching was crucial for PE teachers, as PE is a unique subject in which demonstration by the teacher and practice by students are required to learn skills. Adaptability is the ability to adapt to a changing environment and is an attribute necessary for change ( Lehman et al., 2002 ). The ability to adjust instructional practices to meet student needs is known as a characteristic of effective teaching that promotes student engagement and positive student outcomes ( Collie & Martin, 2016 ; Darling-Hammong, 2005 ; Williams & Baumann, 2008 ). Teacher adaptability for in-service teachers can be strengthened by professional development that includes active learning, effective instruction application, and reflection ( Parsons et al., 2016 ). For preservice teachers, adaptability can be enhanced through educational psychology units in teacher education courses, scenario-based learning, and engagement with in-service teachers ( Granziera et al., 2016 ). Since PE teachers were forced to adapt to remote teaching during the pandemic, it is essential to understand how their perceived adaptability may have related to their perceived effectiveness during this time.

Prior to the pandemic, studies showed that the presence of external supports including equipment, facilities and funding, school and district leadership, school and district policies, and professional development were necessary for effective PE implementation ( Government Accountability Office, 2012 ; Carson et al., 2014 ; Agron et al., 2010 ; Chriqui et al., 2013 ; Braga et al., 2017 ). During the pandemic, changes in the presence of these factors could have affected teachers’ perceived effectiveness. One qualitative study showed that professional development for remote teaching, administrative support, and equipment were necessary for successful implementation of PE during the pandemic ( Vilchez et al., 2021 ). Furthermore, a survey of 226 teachers from three U.S. states found that teachers lacked professional development for remote teaching specific to PE ( Johnson et al., 2021 ). However, less is understood about how the presence or absence of these supports could have related to teachers’ perceived effectiveness throughout the pandemic.

Factors at the teacher- and school-level could also be related to teachers’ perceived effectiveness of their teaching and student learning during the pandemic. Teacher-level factors studied in relation to effectiveness during non-pandemic times include gender, education level, and years of experience. In one study using a survey to evaluate teacher effectiveness, men reported higher perceived effectiveness than women ( Roy & Halder, 2018 ). However, another study found that gender and education level were not correlated with teacher effectiveness ( Slater et al., 2012 ). Years of experience has been found to be related to teacher effectiveness in that teachers with more experience were more effective than teachers with less experience ( Buela & Joseph, 2015 ; Slater et al., 2012 ). Factors at the school-level that may be related to teacher effectiveness include school level and title I status (i.e., a status designated to a school by a federal program that provides financial assistance to schools with large populations of children from low-income families to ensure that all children meet challenging state academic standards) ( U.S. Department of Education, 2019 ). Studies have found that middle school teachers were less effective (measured via teacher observations) than elementary school teachers in Math and English and language arts (ELA) and other research has shown that school socioeconomic status was positively related to students’ achievement ( Mihaly & Mccaffrey, 2015 ; Akay & Karadag, 2019 ; Xuan et al., 2019 ).

Although other studies examined PE teacher effectiveness during the pandemic, this study sought to understand how the abrupt transition to remote teaching in Spring 2020 affected teachers’ perceived effectiveness of their teaching and student learning before and at two timepoints during the pandemic ( Chan et al., 2021 ; Mercier et al., 2021 ). The purpose of this study was to examine PE teachers’ perceived effectiveness in association with student attendance, student engagement, teacher adaptability, external PE supports, and teaching format, while controlling for teacher- and school-level demographics at three time points: pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020, during Spring 2020 school closures, and in the 2020–2021 school year following the onset of the pandemic. We hypothesized that perceived effectiveness would be associated with higher student attendance, higher teacher adaptability, having more external supports for PE, and teaching in-person without physical distancing at all three time points.

Study Design

An electronic survey that assessed PE teacher effectiveness, student attendance and engagement, teacher adaptability, external supports for teaching, teaching format, and teacher- and school-level demographics was developed by an expert panel from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Physical Activity Policy Research Evaluation Network (PAPREN) school wellness working group. Survey items were found through literature searches and adapted from established measures. The survey was pilot tested by in-service PE teachers for feedback on wording/phrasing that needed to be adjusted and the time it took to complete. Questions assessed outcomes at three time points (i.e., pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020, during Spring 2020, and in the 2020–2021 school year). Outcomes were assessed retrospectively for pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020 and Spring 2020, while 2020–2021 data were collected in real time. The electronic survey was posted to social media platforms (e.g., Twitter) and sent via email to PE teachers in the U.S. by PE related organizations, including the Society for Health and Physical Educators (SHAPE) America, SHAPE Maryland and California, Active Schools, the National Consortium for Physical Educators for Individuals with Disabilities (NCPEID), and the Maryland and West Virginia State Departments of Education. The survey was disseminated between November 2020 and May 2021. One organization resent the survey each month with their monthly newsletter and the social media post was re-shared multiple times. We ensured that participants did not respond to the survey multiple times by examining IP addresses and their corresponding survey answers to ensure uniqueness of responses. Participants provided consent by clicking on the survey link, and IRB approval was granted by the University of Maryland School of Medicine (HP-00093542).

PE teachers’ perceived effectiveness

Given the participant burden of using a full scale to assess effectiveness, we adapted a previously-used single-item measure to assess PE teachers’ perceived effectiveness during the pandemic at three time points ( Mercier et al., 2021 ). The item read “How effective did you perceive your teaching and student learning of PE at each time point?” Responses were on a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not at all effective) to 5 (extremely effective). Effectiveness was dichotomized for analysis and reporting below so that 1 included ‘very effective’ and ‘extremely effective’ and 0 included ‘moderately effective,’ ‘slightly effective,’ and ‘not at all effective.’ The variable was dichotomized this way so that our findings would show associations with the “ideal” answers (i.e., very and extremely effective).

Estimated percent of student attendance

Teachers were asked to estimate the percent of student attendance using a single item that read “Please estimate the percent of students that attended your PE and/or adapted PE class at each time point.” Responses were on a continuous sliding scale from 0 to 100 percent.

Estimated percent of student engagement

Estimated percent of student engagement was assessed using a single item that read “Please estimate the percent of students that were engaged in your PE and/or adapted PE class at each time point.” Responses were on a continuous sliding scale from 0 to 100 percent. As a preamble to the question, we defined engagement as “the degree of attention, curiosity, interest, optimism, and passion that students show when they are learning or being taught” ( The Glossary of Education Reform, 2016 ).

PE teacher adaptability

Teacher adaptability was assessed via a total of five items, including four adapted items from the Texas Christian University Organizational Readiness Scale (TCU ORC-D4) ( Lehman et al., 2002 ). For example, the TCU ORC-D4 question “You are able to adapt quickly when you have to make changes” was slightly modified to “You have been able to adapt quickly to make changes to implement PE and/or adapted PE during the pandemic.” Additionally, one question was added by the authors to examine teachers’ adaptability for using technology that read “You have been able to adapt to using online or app-based physical activity assessments to monitor student physical activity during PE.” Responses were on a five-point Likert type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). For analysis purposes, one item was reverse coded: “You have sometimes been too cautious or slow to implement PE and/or adapted PE during the pandemic.” Based on the TCU ORC-D4 scoring guide, scores were obtained by summing the responses, dividing the sum by the number of items included (i.e., 5), then multiplying by 10 to rescale scores from 10 to 50.

External PE supports

Teachers self-reported the environmental, leadership and wellness team, policy, and professional development supports that were available for PE at each time point. Participants indicated whether each support was present before, during, or in the school year following the pandemic. Items were based on supports identified in a conceptual model for school-wide physical activity ( Carson et al., 2014 ). Responses were summed to create a sum score for each time point, with higher scores indicative of more supports (items listed in Table 3 ).

PE teachers’ self-reported supports for PE at each timepoint

Note. 28 teachers stopped the survey halfway and did not provide responses to these questions, thus decreasing the sample size.

Teaching format

Teaching format was self-reported for each time point. Options included: (a) teaching in-school without physical distancing, (b) teaching in-school with physical distancing, (c) hybrid (both in-person and remote) learning, (d) synchronous remote learning, (e) asynchronous remote learning, and (f) PE not permitted. Participants could select more than one format for each time point.

Demographics

Teachers self-reported teacher-level demographic variables including gender, primary role (general PE teacher, adapted PE teacher, or both), age, level of education, years of teaching experience, and the state they taught in. Teachers also self-reported school-level demographic variables including grade level taught (i.e., elementary, middle, multiple grade levels), Title I status, total student enrollment, and the number of full- and part-time PE teachers at their school. Data on school district locale and race/ethnicity were collected from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) based on zip code, if provided.

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive analyses were performed for continuous variables by calculating means and standard deviations and for categorical variables by calculating frequencies. We were unable to calculate the response rate since we did not know the number of individuals on many of the PE-related organizations’ listservs and were unable to know how many people came across the survey posted on social media. We assessed internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha for the adaptability scale. Binary logistic regression models were run to assess associations between the dependent variable (perceived effectiveness) and independent variables (% student attendance, teacher adaptability, PE supports, teaching format, and demographic variables) at each time point. We assessed multicollinearity and found that student engagement was correlated with student attendance (Pearson correlation, r =.5). Since we chose a more conservative threshold for excluding pairs of correlated predictors in the models (r=.5), engagement was excluded from the main analyses ( Booth et al., 1994 ). The first model (pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020) included estimated % student attendance, teacher adaptability sum score, and PE support sum score for pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020. The second (Spring 2020) and third models (2020–2021 school year) included estimated % student attendance, adaptability sum score, PE support sum score, and teaching format. The fourth model (2020–2021 school year) included estimated % student attendance, adaptability sum score, PE support sum score, teaching format and adjusted for teacher gender, education level, years’ experience, grade level taught, and school Title I status. Teaching format was not included in the first model because instruction was primarily in-person prior to the pandemic. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 26.

Participant Characteristics

Table 1 shows participant characteristics. The sample included 134 public school PE teachers from 26 states from all four regions of the U.S. The mean age was 46 (SD=10.4), and most were female (62%), general PE teachers (82%), had a graduate degree (66%), and had between 0–10 years of teaching experience (37%). The schools where teachers worked were primarily elementary (66%), had Title I status (54%), had a midsize student enrollment (i.e., 400–1199 students; 52%), were in suburban locations (44%), and had a student racial/ethnic composition of >50% white students (65%). Participants’ self-reported average number of full-time PE teachers working at their school was 2.17 and the average number of part-time PE teachers working at their school was .33.

Sample characteristics ( N =134)

Note. The full analytic sample was 134. The sample size for characteristics varies due to incomplete responses.

Estimated Attendance, Engagement, and Teaching Format

Figure 1 shows PE teachers’ estimated percent of students that attended and were engaged in PE at each time point with the teaching format for each time point. Pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020, PE teachers’ estimated attendance and engagement averaged 94% and 91% respectively, while 88% of teachers reported teaching in school without physical distancing. During the Spring of 2020, PE teachers’ estimated attendance and engagement averaged 38% and 40% respectively while 48% of teachers reported asynchronous remote learning. During the 2020–2021 school year, PE teachers’ estimated attendance and engagement averaged 73% and 70% respectively, while 77% of teachers reported teaching in more than one format.

PE teachers’ estimated percent of students that attended and were engaged in PE at each time point. Frequency of PE teaching format at each timepoint is shown in table below the figure.

PE Teachers’ Perceived Effectiveness

PE teachers’ perceptions of their effectiveness of teaching and student learning at each time point is shown in Supplementary Material 1 . Pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020, 93% of teachers perceived their teaching and student learning to be very or extremely effective. During the Spring of 2020, only 12% of teachers perceived their teaching and student learning to be very or extremely effective. During the 2020–2021 school year, 45% of PE teachers perceived their teaching and student learning to be very or extremely effective.

PE Teacher Adaptability

Table 2 shows PE teachers’ self-reported adaptability. 70% of teachers reported agreeing or strongly agreeing that they were able to adapt quickly to make changes to implement PE during the pandemic. 88% of teachers reported agreeing or strongly agreeing that they were willing to try new ideas to implement PE during the pandemic even if some staff members were reluctant. The average score for adaptability was 35.64 (range: 22–50) and the Cronbach’s alpha was .57.

PE teachers’ self-reported Organizational Readiness for Change – Adaptability Scale

Note. n =133. Cronbach’s alpha=0.57

PE Supports

Table 3 shows self-reported supports for PE at each time point. Teachers averaged 9.72 supports pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020, 6.07 supports during the Spring of 2020, and 8.64 supports during the 2020–2021 school year.

Characteristics Associated with Teachers’ Perceived Effectiveness

Table 4 presents the results of the adjusted logistic regression models that examined characteristics associated with teachers’ perceived effectiveness. In model 1, there were no significant associations with teachers’ perceived effectiveness pre-pandemic 2019–early 2020. In model 2 during the spring of 2020, asynchronous remote learning (Adj. OR .01, p =.012) was significantly associated with teachers’ perceived effectiveness, meaning that teachers were .01 times less likely to perceive themselves to be very or extremely effective if they were in an asynchronous remote learning format versus not. In model 3 during the 2020–2021 school year, higher student attendance (Adj. OR 1.05, p =001) and higher adaptability scores (Adj. OR 1.19, p <.001) were significantly associated with teachers’ perceived effectiveness, meaning that teachers who reported higher rates of student attendance and adaptability scores had 1.05 and 1.19 times the odds of perceiving themselves as very or extremely effective, respectively. In model 4 during the 2020–2021 school year, higher student attendance (OR 1.06, p <.001) and higher adaptability scores (OR 1.22, p <.001) remained significantly associated with teachers perceived effectiveness after adjusting for covariates.

Adjusted logistic regression models for attendance, adaptability, PE support, demographics, and PE format in relation to perceived effectiveness

Significant regression coefficients are in bold fonts. Dependent variable: Teachers’ perceived effectiveness dichotomized (1=very or extremely effective; 0=not at all – moderately effective). Each item under PE delivery format was a separate variable; the referent group for each delivery format was “No.” Model 1 adjusted for PE support sum score. Models 2 and 3 adjusted for PE support sum score and PE delivery format. Model 4 adjusted for PE support sum score, PE delivery format, gender, education level, years of experience, grade level taught, and Title I status.

This study examined PE teachers’ perceived effectiveness in association with student attendance, teacher adaptability, external supports for PE, teaching format (in-person, remote synchronous, remote asynchronous, etc.), and teacher- and school-level demographics at three time points in a national sample of PE teachers. We found that teacher effectiveness, adaptability, student attendance and engagement, and external PE supports all decreased during Spring 2020 and partially rebounded during the 2020–2021 school year. We also found that student attendance and teacher adaptability were positively associated with teachers’ perceived effectiveness during the 2020–2021 school year, highlighting the importance of supporting and strengthening teachers’ adaptability for changing teaching formats from in-person to remote teaching. With the significant declines seen in children’s PA from before to during the pandemic, it will be important to address these issues to continue providing PE and other school-based PA opportunities in case of future school closures ( Kuhn et al., 2022 ). Presented below are implications and future directions for research and practice regarding PE teachers’ perceived effectiveness during remote teaching.

Teacher effectiveness, adaptability, student attendance and engagement, and external PE supports showed a substantial decline in Spring 2020 and rebounded in the 2020–2021 school year. The results showed that teacher effectiveness decreased during Spring 2020, which is in line with other studies that found that PE teachers perceived themselves to be less effective ( Chan et al., 2021 ; Mercier et al., 2021 ). Likewise, declines in student attendance and engagement reported in the present study were also in line with national data showing substantial declines in student attendance and enrollment during the 2020–2021 school year ( Carminucci, 2021 ). The number of PE supports declined during Spring 2020 as well. Although outcomes rebounded during the 2020–2021 school year, they did not return to pre-pandemic levels. These declines may indicate that schools were not prepared for the abrupt transition to remote teaching. In the future, teachers should be offered more professional development for remote teaching so that they are better able to adapt to changes in the mode of program delivery, for both synchronous and asynchronous formats, thereby improving the amount of PA opportunities provided to students. Synchronous remote learning may more closely simulate in-person instruction and help to increase teachers’ perceived effectiveness when online PE is necessary.

This study demonstrated that teachers’ perceived effectiveness was negatively associated with asynchronous remote learning during Spring 2020 but was positively associated with their estimated student attendance and perceived adaptability during the 2020–2021 school year. During Spring 2020, most teachers (48%) reported using asynchronous remote learning, which may have catered better to students who did not have easy internet access. Although the asynchronous format may have been perceived as more flexible for teachers compared to the synchronous format, teachers perceived themselves to be less effective while teaching in this format ( Hamilton et al., 2021 ). Since the odds ratio for asynchronous remote learning was small (.01), the odds were not much worse than teachers would feel less effective during asynchronous remote learning. However, the odds were stronger that teachers would feel effective when they scored higher on adaptability and perceived student attendance to be higher, which highlights the importance of strengthening teachers’ adaptability through additional professional development so that they can adjust to student needs and continue providing effective instruction and PA opportunities. This finding is in line with previous research, since the ability to adjust instructional practices to meet student needs is a characteristic of effective teaching ( Collie & Martin, 2016 ). The finding that student attendance was associated with teacher effectiveness was not surprising. Perhaps teachers perceived students who attended the class to also be engaged by participating and interacting with the content, which could have led them to perceive that their instruction was effective ( Richmond et al., 2015 ). In the adjusted model, demographic variables were not associated with teachers’ perceived effectiveness suggesting that all teachers were affected by the pandemic regardless of demographics. Although 66% of teachers held a graduate degree, the results are in line with previous research that showed no associations between level of education and teacher effectiveness ( Slater et al., 2012 ).

Strengths and Limitations

This study had several strengths and limitations. This study examined variables at three time points to describe changes over time, however we used a self-report survey that required participants to retrospectively answer questions, which may have resulted in recall bias. We may have also encountered common method bias, in which constructs may share some degree of variance due to being collected by the same respondents ( Podsakoff et al., 2003 ). Although the single-item measure used to assess teacher effectiveness had practical value alongside the inclusion of multiple measures in the survey (e.g., student engagement), and the item was previously used in another study among PE teachers during the pandemic, it was not validated and may lack conceptual rigor. However, the single-item measures were pilot-tested prior to data collection. We recommend that more robust scales be used in follow-up research about teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as other future events that may bear upon school systems in similar ways ( Kyrgiridis et al., 2014 ). The convenience sample was not ideal, but it was diverse in terms of grade level taught and years of experience and represented teachers from 26 states. Our sample ( n =134; M age=46; 62% female; 66% graduate degree; 63% >11 years of teaching experience) was comparable to a larger randomly selected sample from a nationally representative study ( n =407; M age=42; 49% female; 58% advanced degree; M years of teaching experience=15 years) ( Webster et al., 2020 ). However, most of the data (68%) came from respondents in three states, which may limit generalizability.

Conclusions

The present study provides useful information about trends in PE teachers’ practices and perceptions in tandem with the COVID-19 pandemic, which greatly disrupted teaching practices and student learning. The results highlight the importance of enhancing teachers’ adaptability through additional professional development for remote teaching so that they are better able to adapt to changes in the mode of program delivery, for both asynchronous and synchronous formats. Ensuring that effective PE instruction is provided during remote learning may benefit students’ health and academic outcomes, and may positively influence their PA behaviors into adulthood ( Bailey, 2006 ; Trudeau et al., 1999 ). Future research should use qualitative approaches to help enrich our understanding of these practices and perceptions and inform the evolving discourse surrounding recommendations for teaching PE remotely.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1.

PE teachers’ ( n =108) perceptions of their effectiveness of teaching and student learning at each time point. Variable was dichotomized in regression model: 1=very/extremely effective and 0=not at all-moderately effective.

Acknowledgments

This work is a product of the Physical Activity Policy Research and Evaluation Network (PAPREN), a thematic network of the CDC’s Prevention Research Center network. PAPREN is supported by Cooperative Agreement Number U48DP006381 from CDC. The findings and conclusions in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position of the CDC. The authors have no conflicts of interest. The authors would like to acknowledge and thank members of the PAPREN school wellness working group for their contributions to the study design and survey development. The authors would also like to thank SHAPE America, SHAPE Maryland and California, Active Schools, the National Consortium for Physical Educators for Individuals with Disabilities, and the Maryland and West Virginia State Departments of Education for disseminating the survey on our behalf.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, All; Methodology, All; Analysis, A.K., E.R., J.C.; Writing – Original Draft, A.K.; Writing – Reviewing and Editing, All.

Human Subjects Statement

The Institutional Review Board at the University of Maryland School of Medicine approved this study.

• Agron P, Berends V, Ellis K, Gonzalez M. School Wellness Policies: Perceptions, Barriers, and Needs Among School Leaders and Wellness Advocates*. Journal of School Health. 2010; 80 (11):527–535. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2010.00538.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Akay E, Karadag E. Multilevel Analyses of Student, Parent, and School Indicators of Achievement in High School Transition in Turkey. School Community Journal. 2019; 29 (2):31–62. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bailey R. Physical Education and Sport in Schools: A Review of Benefits and Outcomes. Journal of School Health. 2006; 76 (8):397–401. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2006.00132.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Booth G, Niccolucci M, Schuster E. Identifying Proxy Sets in Multiple Linear Regression: An Aid to Better Coefficient Interpretation; Research paper INT (USA) US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: Ogden, UT, USA. 1994 [ Google Scholar ]
• Braga L, Jones E, Bulger S, Elliott E. Empowering teachers to implement innovative content in physical education through continuous professional development. Teacher Development. 2017; 21 (2):288–306. doi: 10.1080/13664530.2016.1235608. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Buela S, Joseph MC. Relationship between personality and teacher effectiveness of high school teachers. The International Journal of Indian Psychology. 2015; 3 (1):57–70. [ Google Scholar ]
• Burroughs N, Gardner J, Lee Y, Guo S, Touitou I, Jansen K, Schmidt W. Teaching for Excellence and Equity: Analyzing Teacher Characteristics, Behaviors and Student Outcomes with TIMSS. Springer International Publishing; 2019. A Review of the Literature on Teacher Effectiveness and Student Outcomes; pp. 7–17. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carminucci J, Hodgman S, Rickles J, Garet M. National Survey of Public Education’s Response to COVID-19: Student Attendance and Enrollment Loss in 2020–21. A. I. f. R. (AIR) 2021. https://www.air.org/sites/default/files/2021-07/research-brief-covid-survey-student-attendance-june-2021_0.pdf .
• Carson RL, Castelli DM, Beighle A, Erwin H. School-based physical activity promotion: a conceptual framework for research and practice. Childhood obesity (Print) 2014; 10 (2):100–106. doi: 10.1089/chi.2013.0134. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Centeio E, Mercier K, Garn A, Erwin H, Marttinen R, Foley J. The Success and Struggles of Physical Education Teachers While Teaching Online During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 2021; 40 (4):667–673. doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2020-0295. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chan W-k, Leung KI, Học CK, Wuc W, Lam KY, Wong NL, Chan C-yG, Leung KM, Tse AC-Y. Effectiveness of online teaching in physical education during covid-19 school closures: A survey study of frontline physical education teachers in Hong Kong. Journal of Physical Education and Sport. 2021 [ Google Scholar ]
• Chriqui JF, Eyler A, Carnoske C, Slater S. State and district policy influences on district-wide elementary and middle school physical education practices. Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP. 2013; 19 (3 Suppl 1):S41–48. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0b013e31828a8bce. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Collie RJ, Martin AJ. Adaptability: An important capacity for effective teachers. Educational Practice and Theory. 2016; 38 (1):27–39. doi: 10.7459/ept/38.1.03. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Darling-Hammong L, Bransford J. Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. Jossey-Bass; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Flack CB, Walker L, Bickerstaff A, Earle H, Margetts C. Educator perspectives on the impact of COVID-19 on teaching and learning in Australia and New Zealand. Pivot Professional Learning. 2020 [ Google Scholar ]
• Gobbi E, Maltagliati S, Sarrazin P, di Fronso S, Colangelo A, Cheval B, Escriva-Boulley G, Tessier D, Demirhan G, Erturan G, Yüksel Y, Papaioannou A, Bertollo M, Carraro A. Promoting Physical Activity during School Closures Imposed by the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Physical Education Teachers’ Behaviors in France, Italy and Turkey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17 (24) doi: 10.3390/ijerph17249431. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goe L. The Link between Teacher Quality and Student Outcomes: A Research Synthesis. 2007 [ Google Scholar ]
• Granziera H, Collie RJ, Martin AJ. Adaptability: An Important Capacity to Cultivate among Pre-Service Teachers in Teacher Education Programmes. Psychology Teaching Review. 2016; 25 (1):60–66. [ Google Scholar ]
• Graziano KJ, Bryans-Bongey S. Surveying the National Landscape of Online Teacher Training in K–12 Teacher Preparation Programs. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education. 2018; 34 (4):259–277. doi: 10.1080/21532974.2018.1498040. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamilton FA, Skelley DL, Hile KA. A Whole New World: PreK-12 Teachers’ Perceptions of Instruction during a Pandemic. Journal of Curriculum, Teaching, Learning and Leadership in Education. 2021; 6 (1):6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jeong H-C, So W-Y. Difficulties of Online Physical Education Classes in Middle and High School and an Efficient Operation Plan to Address Them. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17 (19):7279. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/19/7279 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson J, Daum D, Norris J. I Need Help! Physical Educators Transition to Distance Learning During COVID-19 [Article] Physical Educator. 2021; 78 (2):119–137. doi: 10.18666/tpe-2021-v78-i2-10866. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuhn AP, Kowalski AJ, Wang Y, Deitch R, Selam H, Rahmaty Z, Black MM, Hager ER. On the Move or Barely Moving? Age-Related Changes in Physical Activity, Sedentary, and Sleep Behaviors by Weekday/Weekend Following Pandemic Control Policies. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19 (1):286. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/286 . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kyrgiridis P, Derri V, Emmanouilidou K, Chlapoutaki E, Kioumourtzoglou E. Development of a Questionnaire for Self-Evaluation of Teacher Effectiveness in Physical Education (SETEQ-PE) Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science. 2014; 18 (2):73–90. doi: 10.1080/1091367X.2013.866557. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lehman WE, Greener JM, Simpson DD. Assessing organizational readiness for change. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2002; 22 (4):197–209. doi: 10.1016/s0740-5472(02)00233-7. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McKenzie TL, Lounsbery MA. Physical education teacher effectiveness in a public health context. Research quarterly for exercise and sport. 2013; 84 (4):419–430. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McKenzie TL, Lounsbery MA. The pill not taken: Revisiting physical education teacher effectiveness in a public health context. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2014; 85 (3):287–292. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Medicine Io. In: Educating the Student Body: Taking Physical Activity and Physical Education to School. Kohl HW III, Cook HD, editors. National Academies Press; (US): 2013. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Copyright 2013 by the National Academy of Sciences All rights reserved. [ CrossRef ]
• Mercier K, Centeio E, Garn A, Erwin H, Marttinen R, Foley J. Physical Education Teachers’ Experiences With Remote Instruction During the Initial Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 2021; 40 (2):337–342. doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2020-0272. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mihaly K, Mccaffrey DF. Grade-Level Variation in Observational Measures of Teacher Effectiveness. Designing Teacher Evaluation Systems. 2015:7–49. doi: 10.1002/9781119210856.ch2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Office, U. S. G. A. K-12: School-based physical education and sports programs. Washington, DC: 2012. Retrieved from https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-12-350.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Parsons AW, Ankrum JW, Morewood A. Professional Development to Promote Teacher Adaptability [Article] Theory Into Practice. 2016; 55 (3):250–258. doi: 10.1080/00405841.2016.1173995. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pavlovic A, DeFina LF, Natale BL, Thiele SE, Walker TJ, Craig DW, Vint GR, Leonard D, Haskell WL, Kohl HW. Keeping children healthy during and after COVID-19 pandemic: meeting youth physical activity needs. BMC Public Health. 2021; 21 (1):485. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10545-x. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Podsakoff P, Mackenzie S, Lee J, Podsakoff N. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. 2003; 88 (5):879–903. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Powell E, Woodfield LA, Nevill AM. Increasing physical activity levels in primary school physical education: The SHARP Principles Model. Preventive Medicine Reports. 2016; 3 :7–13. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pulling Kuhn A, Stoepker P, Dauenhauer B, Carson RL. A Systematic Review of Multi-Component Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program (CSPAP) Interventions. American Journal of Health Promotion. 2021; 35 (8):1129–1149. doi: 10.1177/08901171211013281. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reform TGoE. Student Engagement. 2016. https://www.edglossary.org/student-engagement/
• Rehn N, Maor D, McConney A. The specific skills required of teachers who deliver K–12 distance education courses by synchronous videoconference: implications for training and professional development. Technology, Pedagogy and Education. 2018; 27 (4):417–429. doi: 10.1080/1475939X.2018.1483265. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Richmond AS, Berglund MB, Epelbaum VB, Klein EM. a+(b1) Professor–student rapport+(b2) humor+(b3) student engagement=(Ŷ) Student ratings of instructors. Teaching of Psychology. 2015; 42 (2):119–125. [ Google Scholar ]
• Roy RR, Halder UK. Teacher effectiveness: A self-report study on secondary school teachers. International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews. 2018; 5 (24):36–46. [ Google Scholar ]
• Slater H, Davies NM, Burgess S. Do Teachers Matter? Measuring the Variation in Teacher Effectiveness in England*. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. 2012; 74 (5):629–645. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0084.2011.00666.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Trudeau F, Laurencelle L, Tremblay J, Rajic M, Shephard RJ. Daily primary school physical education: effects on physical activity during adult life. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 1999; 31 (1) https://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Fulltext/1999/01000/Daily_primary_school_physical_education__effects.18.aspx . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• US Department of Education, N. C. f. E. S. Study of the Titel I, Part A Grant Program Mathematical Formulas (NCES 2019-016), Education Summary, Introduction, and Chapter 1. 2019 [ Google Scholar ]
• Vilchez JA, Kruse J, Puffer M, Dudovitz RN. Teachers and School Health Leaders’ Perspectives on Distance Learning Physical Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic. The Journal of school health. 2021; 91 (7):541–549. doi: 10.1111/josh.13030. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Webster CA, Mîndrilă D, Moore C, Stewart G, Orendorff K, Taunton S. Measuring and Comparing Physical Education Teachers’ Perceived Attributes of CSPAPs: An Innovation Adoption Perspective. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 2020; 39 (1):78–90. doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2018-0328. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams TL, Baumann JF.Contemporary research on effective elementary literacy teachers. 57th yearbook of the National Reading Conference; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xuan X, Xue Y, Zhang C, Luo Y, Jiang W, Qi M, Wang Y. Relationship among school socioeconomic status, teacher-student relationship, and middle school students’ academic achievement in China: Using the multilevel mediation model. PloS one. 2019; 14 (3):e0213783. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213783. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

phd in physical education 2021

PhD Physical Education is a research-based doctorate course which involves deep research in advanced Physical Education topics like Biomechanics, Sports Nutrition, Management in Physical Education, Technology in Physical Education, etc. The minimum duration of the course is 3 years, but it can be extended to 5 years. 

A candidate must complete Masters in Physical Education with minimum 55% aggregate marks to be eligible for PhD Physical Education. They should also have adequate Physical Education skills as they may be tested during Personal Interview.

The Admission to PhD Physical Education is mostly Entrance Based. Most colleges take a personal interview of the shortlisted candidates after the entrance exam for final selection. Some important entrance exams for this course include UGC-NET, CSIR-UGC-NET, etc. 

PhD Physical Education involves advanced level research in all the aspects of Physical Education. 

• The main aim of the course is to understand and discover new techniques involved in physical education, their advantages and disadvantages. 
• It covers topics like training methods in different sports, Biomechanics, Sports Nutrition, etc. 
• Along with the core Physical Education subjects, it also covers management related subjects like Sports Management, Technology and its applications in Physical Education, etc. 
• The candidate will have to complete a coursework at the beginning of the course. It will train them on how to perform a good research and how to write an effective thesis. 
• The candidates will have to select one topic on which they will conduct their research. The candidates will be trained on that topic in detail. 
• After completion of the training, the candidates will have to perform an independent or assisted research on the basis of their research ideas. 
• After completion of the research and submission of the thesis, the candidates will be granted the PhD degree in Physical Education. 

Physical Education is an important field with multiple applications. With growing awareness on health issues, the demand for Physical Education teachers and trainers are also increasing. Some of the major benefits of doing PhD in Physical Education are as follows:

• The candidates with PhD Physical Education can join the schools, colleges and universities as sports instructors, Yoga instructors and Physical Education Teachers. 
• The average annual salary for PhD Physical Education candidates ranges between INR 3,50,000 – 5,00,000. 
• Various gyms, fitness centres, health centres, etc hire Physical Education candidates for various positions. 
• They can become Gym Instructors, Sports Nutritionists, Fitness trainers, Sports Managers, etc. 
• The demand for Physical Education Trainers is expected to grow at a rate of 1-2% for the coming years. 
• The candidates who complete a PhD in Physical Education can also start their own fitness centres and become self-independent. 

The detailed admission process for PhD Physical Education courses is discussed below in a stepwise manner. 

• Step 1: Application Process:  The candidates will have to apply for the entrance exams and colleges where they wish to get admission separately. The application must be properly checked before submission to ensure that it is error free. After submitting the form, take a print copy and keep it with yourself for future reference. 
• Step 2: Entrance Exam:  Most of these entrance exams are conducted online. The admit cards are released approximately 10 days prior to the entrance exam. 
• Step 3: Merit List:  After the declaration of Entrance Exam results, the colleges will prepare a merit list of shortlisted candidates who have scored above the prescribed cutoff marks. 
• Step 4: Personal Interview:  The shortlisted candidates will be called for a personal interview. The candidates will be asked questions on their research ideas during this interview. 
• Step 5: Document Verification:  The selected candidates will have to present appropriate documents to prove their eligibility. 

Finally, the eligible candidates will be granted admission to the course. 

What is the Eligibility Criteria for PhD Physical Education?

The Eligibility criteria for PhD Physical Education program are:

• Hold a Masters in Physical Education from a recognized university. 
• Minimum 55% aggregate marks to be eligible for PhD Physical Education. 
• Possess adequate Physical Education skills as they may be tested during Personal Interview.
• Candidates need to qualify the entrance exams such as UGC-NET, CSIR-UGC-NET, etc. 
• Most colleges take a personal interview of the shortlisted candidates after the entrance exam for final selection.

What are the top PhD Physical Education Entrance Exams?

Most of the colleges admit students to PhD Physical Education courses on the basis of national level entrance exams like UGC-NET, UGC-CSIR-NET, etc. But some colleges like BHU, AMU, etc may conduct their own entrance exams. 

Some important points to keep in mind while preparing for PhD Physical Education Entrance Exams are as follows. 

• The candidates must complete the entire syllabus well in advance, so that they can have at least 1-2 months time in hand for revision. 
• The candidates must practice as many sample question papers as they can. This will help them to get habituated with the question pattern and types of questions asked. 
• The candidates must also try to complete one question paper within a stipulated time, so that they can have an idea of the time period within which they need to write the exam. 
• The candidates must maintain a score book of their daily practice, so that they can keep a track of their progress. 
• The candidates must identify their weak areas and work on them properly.

Some important subjects from where questions are generally asked in the subject specific section are tabulated below. 

How to Get Admission in Top PhD Physical Education Colleges?

The candidates must keep in mind the following things to get admission in top PhD Physical Education colleges. 

• The candidates must score well in the entrance exam if they wish to get admission in the top colleges offering PhD Physical Education. 
• The cutoff marks of UGC-NET for PhD Physical Education in 2019 was 62.67%. The admission cutoff for top colleges generally ranges between 70-85%.
• The candidates must look to attempt at least 90% of the total question paper during the examination so that they can easily qualify the cutoff. 
• The candidates must also have a clear understanding of their research proposal. They will be asked questions on their research proposal during the personal interview. 
• The candidates must also have good knowledge of various physical education skills as they may be tested by the interview panel

Similar Posts

Pharmacy technician license vs certification.

Whenever you dream of becoming a pharmacist, are you worried about getting inaccurate information? Well, no longer need to worry, as this article provides the most accurate information available on pharmacy technician license vs certification. On KoboGuide we show you, pharmacy technician license vs certification california,pharmacy technician license application,pharmacy technician salary,pharmacy technician certification,pharmacy technician courses,state…

types of manufacturing engineering

One of the main jobs of a manufacturing engineer is to meld commercial systems and procedures with scientific breakthroughs. Many different types of companies need skilled manufacturing engineers, from toy makers to aerospace missile designers. Most manufacturing engineers specialize and often companies list manufacturing engineering jobs under other names such as Process Engineer, Manufacturing Director, or Plant…

waseda university international tuition fees

Waseda University is one of Japan’s National Universities, and has its headquarters located in Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo. It boasts of high acceptance rates among its applicants and that has kept it high in the rankings from year to year. Read more about Waseda University, waseda university scholarship, waseda university tuition fee, waseda university english program and…

ba vs bs computer science rutgers

Check out this article if you need to discover details about ba vs bs computer science rutgers. Are you tired of spending endless time looking for relevant information online? That’s exactly why this article is what you need. You can read on for detailed information about uva ba vs bs computer science,is a ba in…

masters in veterinary science in usa

Master’s programs are usually taught at universities or colleges. They are higher-level educational programs that can be completed in about two to three years. Depending on the school, they can even be earned online. Examples of master’s degrees are Master of Fine Arts, Master of Business Administration, Master of Education, Master of Nursing, Master of…

Masters In Robotics And Automation In Canada

A Masters of Robotics and Automation from Canada will help the professionals from various industries to learn the essentials of this new technology as well as to stay ahead of the curve. As innovators in this field, they will be able to develop products which are safe and efficient. If you need a site which…

Innovation in Eye Care, Research & Education

• See us on facebook
• See us on linkedin
• See us on instagram

Annual Report 2021

•  A note from our Chair

•  An eye-brain connection: Groundbreaking advancements for neurorehabilitation patients

•  Shedding light on rare diseases

• Saving vision with gene therapies

> Biorepository: A new key to precision health

•  Eye care at all ages: Bringing vision restoration to pediatric patients

•  New center tackles rapidly growing myopia prevalence

•  My second chance at sight: A patient’s hopeful journey after optic nerve stroke

•  Global impact: Generous donors support global health efforts for cataract blindness

•  A hopeful view on eyesight: Grateful patient celebrates Dr. Kuldev Singh’s 30th anniversary in 2022

•  Why give?

•  Fighting blindness across borders

•  Stanford Belize Vision Clinic: Training the next generation of eye care providers

•  Training for global care: Ophthalmology resident sets up two eye care programs in the Middle East

•  Mentorship leads to new gene therapy discoveries

•  3D bioprinting to eliminate corneal blindness

•  Big data to transform patient care

•  Inventing a new outlook: Restoring sight with electronic photoreceptors and augmented reality glasses

•  Eye care at the microscopic level

•  Awards and honors

Biorepository

A new key to precision health

The lack of laboratory models for human eye diseases is a roadblock to translational research, but it drove  Vinit Mahajan, MD, PhD,  associate professor of ophthalmology and vice chair for research, to forge a scientific path that promises to lead to medical discoveries. The  Byers Eye Institute Biorepository  has been established since 2018, and allows the collection of thousands of biospecimen samples, creating a repository of data never before assembled.

By studying the fluid from human eyes undergoing surgery, Mahajan and co-director  Prithvi Mruthyunjaya, MD, MHS, associate professor of ophthalmology, are leading a department-wide collaboration to support personalized medicine breakthroughs with an immediate impact on patient care. Faculty are unveiling disease mechanisms, finding drugs to repurpose into effective new treatments, and developing novel small molecule therapies.

Mahajan and Mruthyunjaya sat down to share their experiences.  

Q: What prompted you to create the Biorepository?

VM:  We knew eye tissues and fluids discarded during surgery hold the molecular clues researchers need to cure eye diseases. Researchers could benefit from using these “liquid biopsies” to identify key protein biomarkers and answer critical clinical questions: What’s the right drug for a patient? Is this an infection or autoimmune condition? Is it hereditary? Will this eye cancer metastasize? Will a patient go blind?

PM:  Protein biomarkers can take the guesswork out of patient care and potentially guide clinical therapy and clinical trials. Analyzing the molecular makeup of diseased tissues can explain drug therapy failure and reveal rare disease mechanisms in humans.  

Q: What impact has the Biorepository had on the department’s research?

VM:  A major goal is to expand and support the application of translational proteomics, the large-scale study of proteins, throughout the department. We are also collecting stem cells and DNA for genetic testing.

PM:  Using diseased tissue from patients, Mahajan and I were the first to identify proteins from inside the eye that predict survival risk in patients with ocular melanoma, a lethal eye cancer. For the first time we will be able to tell which patients are at highest risk and need the most aggressive monitoring and treatment. Our findings also point to personalized patient therapies and could aid disease surveillance.

VM:  My lab identified a new metabolic therapy approach to treat genetic eye disease and macular degeneration. Dr.  Andrea Kossler  is studying thyroid eye disease and ocular surface inflammatory diseases; Drs.  Robert Chang ,  Wen-Shin Lee ,  Yang Sun , and  Jeffrey Goldberg  are looking at glaucoma; Dr.  Joyce Liao  is studying optic nerve disease; Dr.  Charles Lin  is investigating corneal infections; Dr.  Yang Sun  is also using human stem cells collected from patients with rare diseases; and partnerships with industry are helping to focus their drug development programs on the right targets.  

THE PROCESS

STEP 1: Ophthalmic surgical specimens are processed and preserved on MORLI, a laboratory on wheels computer system with a bar code scanner.

STEP 2:  Flash freezing and transporting specimens to an -80 degree Fahrenheit laboratory freezer allows for long term storage and preservation.

STEP 3:  Research findings can then be transferred to the clinical setting.

Q: What are some of the obstacles to preserving tissues for molecular research?

VM:  Linking the operating room and research labs was a major challenge that we solved. It requires collaborations between OR staff, surgeons and research scientists, clinical research coordinators, protein biochemists, and bioinformaticians. The  Mobile Operating Room Laboratory Interface  ( MORLI ) now links the operating room with the laboratory, bringing people together who would normally never cross paths.

Q: Tell me more about MORLI.

VM:  The MORLI is a “laboratory on wheels” designed with all the required instruments and devices. This makes it possible for the surgical team to immediately process specimens in the operating room and maintain specimen integrity. The MORLI has a computer, bar code scanner, and all the lab supplies necessary for processing and preserving tissue samples.

PM:  Collecting and tracking ophthalmic surgical specimens with the MORLI has facilitated the collection of high-quality research samples whose molecular profiles are well-preserved. So far, we have collected over 3,000 human surgical samples. We now perform advanced molecular analyses on samples straight out of the operating room.

Q: What happens once the specimens are collected?

VM:  Typically, specimens are flash frozen and transported to a -80 degrees Fahrenheit laboratory freezer for preservation. Flash freezing tissue allows us to save and study the molecules that would otherwise degenerate in minutes. In some instances, we’ve actually done the biochemical tests just outside the operating room door.

Q: How are specimens tracked?

VM:  Surgical staff use iPads to obtain consent from patients using patient privacy protection measures. Key clinical data is entered into a database linked to the barcoded sample tubes and samples are stored in secure freezers.

Q: What broader impact does the Biorepository have on research?

PM:  We have a system for creating an efficient biorepository of human eye tissue samples, which can be applied to any type of biological tissue. These samples are shared with researchers at Stanford and collaborators across the country and around the world.

VM:  A collection of human tissue samples so carefully collected and preserved is priceless. Converting our research findings into clinical diagnostics and therapies and expanding this platform into multi-center studies will further our department’s commitment to providing patient care based on the broader goals of precision health.

By MARYANN MAHAJAN

MaryAnn joined Mahajan's lab in 2008. She earned her B.A. in English at the University of California, Berkeley and attended graduate school at the University of California, Los Angeles where she earned a secondary teaching credential. She is a writer and editor and also performs histological phenotyping of mouse eyes.

Banning Twitter users reduced misinformation and improved discourse after Jan. 6, Northeastern research suggests

Twitter’s decision to purge the accounts of 70,000 “misinformation traffickers” following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol reduced the amount of false information on the social media platform, according to new Northeastern University research.

The study , led by David Lazer, a distinguished professor of political science and computer/information science at Northeastern, examined more than 550,000 Twitter users who used the platform during the election cycle between June 2020 and February 2021.

In their analysis, researchers aimed to answer two central questions — did Twitter’s removal of these accounts reduce misinformation, and what impact did the bans have on the behavior of users who followed the accounts?

Misinformation is sharing of false information that users sometimes believe to be true.

Following Twitter’s purge of accounts between Jan. 8 and Jan. 12, 2021, Lazer says they saw about a 50% reduction in the sharing of tweets and retweets with web links with false information.

“It suggests that deplatforming can be effective at reducing the amount of misinformation on a platform,” Lazer says. “It also highlights the power platforms have to control discourse on the platform.”

There are, however, limits to the study, Lazer notes. First, the data was collected around a specific period in U.S. history, and the information captured has limited generability to how the platform might function during other periods.

The Twitter of today is much different than the Twitter of three years ago, Lazer says.

Second, researchers cannot definitely say the entire reduction in misinformation was a direct result of Twitter removing accounts since other factors could have been at play.

In 2022, billionaire Elon Musk purchased Twitter and has made major structural changes to the company, including dissolving its trust and safety team and reinstating accounts . Reports have also shown misinformation on the platform increasing following his takeover.

Conducting research on Twitter has also become a challenge since it no longer provides free access to its application programming interface, or API, which are pieces of software that allow for the retrieval of data. Access is now very expensive, costing as much as tens of thousands of dollars a month .

Lazer questions how the current Twitter regime would respond if something similar to the Capitol attack were to happen during this election cycle.

“Clearly, under current management one would guess they wouldn’t do anything. Should that worry us? That’s a question,” Lazer says.

Lazer hopes his research “contributes to the broader literature and our understanding of what interventions affect the prevalence of misinformation.”

“My hope is that we have shed some light under the effects of deplatforming on misinformation, but it’s clearly not the last word,” he says. “Even if we had studied every platform in 2020, 2024 is going to be different, so we confront the challenge that the future isn’t necessarily like the past.”

Adults returning to college for a graduate degree: What to know

After a health scare, Kim Posillico returned to school for a long-delayed master's degree. Credit: Morgan Campbell

After graduating from college in 2006, Kim Posillico planned to continue her studies — but life got in the way.

While pursuing her master’s degree part time, Posillico, 49, of Oakdale, said she was also juggling being a mother and working as a middle school English teacher.

“It was a lot,” she recalled.

Posillico wound up leaving graduate school. But after suffering two strokes in February 2021, she said she was inspired to try again. In May, she finally got her master’s degree from Stony Brook University.

“It’s a lot harder to do things when you’re older. I don’t have the same experiences as most of the other people in our classes,” she said. But, she noted, “I also had other opportunities to include things I have learned in my 49 years that they did not know. It’s very good because we can bounce off one another.”

From breaking news to special features and documentaries, the NewsdayTV team is covering the issues that matter to you.

By clicking Sign up, you agree to our privacy policy .

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 31% of full-time and 62% of part-time graduate students were over 30 as of fall 2021.

“There are plenty of people who might have started school or are working in the field and they realized, ‘Maybe this isn’t what I want to do with my life full time,’ ” said Frederick Koromi, director of graduate admissions at Stony Brook University.

Ephraim Hathaway had just such an epiphany in 2020.

After graduating from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Hathaway, 34, of Manhattan, said he worked for eight years at Shell as an on-site representative and drilling engineer. As he traveled across the country for his job, he found that he liked talking to people about their well-being. When work briefly shut down during the pandemic, Hathaway said he began to reevaluate his career choice.

“I just had the time to reflect on . . . what was most important to me, and that was those conversations I’ve had with people about what they want to do to be healthy,” he said.

After attending postbaccalaureate programs to fulfill his prerequisites and working with patients, Hathaway said he was accepted into Hofstra University’s medical school and started studying to become a doctor in the summer of 2023.

Of the gap between undergraduate and medical school, he said, “I needed that time . . . to be more sure of who I was.”

MOTIVATING FACTORS

According to Frederick Koromi, director of graduate admissions at Stony Brook University, there are many reasons someone may return to school later in life, including changing careers; needing to obtain further certification in their field; or taking time off to start a family before pursuing an advanced degree. 

The average annual cost of a two-year master's degree program is $20,000-$25,000 at a public university or college, and $50,000 or more at a private institution, according to Koromi.

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE  

Looking to finance your academic dreams? Experts offer the following suggestions:

• Fill out the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form to determine your eligibility for federal grants, work-study funds and loans.
• Search for scholarship opportunities at  bit.ly/46yEKbr .
• Consider private student loans.
• Check whether your employer offers tuition assistance or reimbursement programs.

HOW TO PREPARE

Those who are uncertain they want to go to graduate school can try non-degree study courses, which offer an opportunity to gauge their interest without committing to a degree program.  Postbaccalaureate courses, taken after completion of an undergraduate degree, can help an individual transitioning to a different career or professional school who need to meet certain prerequisites.

'This entire street is a hamburger highway' Join Newsday food writer Andi Berlin as she eats at burger restaurants along Long Beach Road, which she has dubbed the "Hamburger Highway."

Get more on these and other NewsdayTV stories

Most Popular

Latest videos, stay logged in..

The Newsday app makes it easier to access content without having to log in.

Unlimited Digital Access Only 25¢ for 5 months