Abstract

Objective

The university period is a critical stage of personal development, and improving the physical fitness of university students is crucial to their academic performance, quality of life, and future. However, in recent years, the physical fitness level of Chinese university students has shown a decreasing trend. This study aimed to investigate the effects of a blended learning model on the physical fitness of Chinese university students through a 16-week intervention.

Methods

A total of 78 first-year students from a public university in Henan Province were recruited for this study via a cluster randomized controlled trial (CRCT) design. The participants were divided into an experimental group (blended learning) and a control group (traditional learning). The intervention lasted for 16 weeks, and physical fitness indices such as body mass index (BMI), lung capacity, sit and reach, pull-ups/sit-ups, standing long jumps, 50-meter runs, and 1000/800-meter runs were measured before and after the intervention. Statistical analyses were conducted via generalized estimating equation (GEE) modeling, with the significance level set at P鈥�&濒迟;鈥�0.05.

Results

Both learning models significantly improved students鈥� physical fitness after 16 weeks. However, the blended learning model resulted in more significant improvements in lung capacity, sit and reach, pull-ups/sit-ups, standing long jumps, and 50-meter runs (P鈥�<鈥�0.05). No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of BMI or 1000/800-meter run.

Conclusions

The 16-week blended learning model effectively promoted physical fitness among university students, especially in terms of their lung capacity, flexibility, strength and speed.

Introduction

The university period is a critical stage in personal development, and the physical fitness of university students is not only related to their academic performance and quality of life but also has a far-reaching impact on social development and the future of the country [1]. However, in recent years, the overall physical fitness level of university students has generally shown a downward trend, with the proportions of overweight and obese individuals continuing to rise [2, 3]. According to the Ministry of Education in 2020, the physical fitness failure rate among Chinese university students is as high as 30%, which is significantly higher than that among elementary, middle, and high school students. In addition, compared with 2016, only 49.57% of university students exercise for more than one hour each day, a decrease of 8.37% [4]. Studies have shown that scientific and active physical exercise has a positive effect on the physical health of university students and can effectively reduce the risk of chronic diseases such as cardiovascular diseases [2, 5].

Physical education is a primary means of enhancing students鈥� exercise awareness, physical activity, and physical fitness [4, 6]. However, with the advancement of society and the rapid development of information technology, physical education in Chinese universities is facing numerous challenges [7]. First, the majority of universities still employ traditional physical education teaching methods. This teacher-centered approach results in students passively receiving knowledge and skills, which diminishes their interest in physical activity and reduces their motivation to actively exercise outside of class [4, 8]. Second, traditional teaching methods neglect students鈥� differences, and due to limited classroom time, it is difficult for teachers to achieve differentiated teaching and fail to meet students鈥� diverse needs [9]. In addition, the traditional teaching model relies on teachers鈥� teaching ability and limited teaching resources, making it difficult to meet the increasingly diverse learning needs of modern students [10]. Moreover, the evaluation system of traditional PE teaching is also obviously insufficient, with a single assessment method, ignoring the importance of process evaluation and making it difficult to comprehensively and objectively reflect students鈥� learning outcomes [4]. Research shows that effective teaching methods, such as BMI, lung capacity, speed, and endurance levels, can significantly improve university students鈥� physical fitness [2, 11].

Blended learning (BL), as a new learner-centered teaching model, is increasingly adopted by higher education institutions worldwide [12, 13]. Blended learning is defined as 鈥渁 thoughtful integration of traditional face-to-face teaching with online resources鈥� [14]. This learning approach combines the advantages of both online and face-to-face learning, giving full play to the teacher鈥檚 leading role in the teaching process while emphasizing students鈥� autonomy and creativity in the learning process [15]. In the blended learning model, students can choose the most suitable learning methods, adjust their learning pace independently, and watch online learning resources repeatedly [16, 17]. Additionally, the blended learning model provides students with more opportunities to communicate with teachers and peers, thereby enhancing their learning experience [18, 19]. Research shows that shifting from a traditional teaching model to a learner-centered blended learning model helps students engage more actively in learning, improves their knowledge mastery and application abilities, and enhances learning outcomes [20, 21].

At present, blended learning has been widely applied in Chinese university physical education courses, such as basketball, soccer, badminton, and swimming [22,23,24,25]. In blended physical education, students can learn independently according to their own learning pace through various forms, such as videos and online quizzes. Offline practice, on the other hand, promotes skill mastery and physical fitness through targeted instruction, individual practice, and group practice [26]. Studies have shown that blended learning can effectively improve students鈥� exercise attitudes, satisfaction, motor skills, and learning outcomes [27,28,29]. However, there is limited research on the effects of blended learning on the physical fitness of Chinese university students. Therefore, this study aims to explore the effects of the blended learning model on the physical fitness of Chinese university students through experimental investigation.

Methods

Participants

This study followed the CONSORT statement and adopted a cluster randomized controlled trial (CRCT) design. Sample size calculations were based on G-Power 3.1 software [30], with the effect size determined from previous studies (effect size鈥�=鈥�0.20). With a Type I error (伪) of 0.05 and a power (1 - 尾) of 0.80, the minimum sample size should be 52 students. Considering the design effect of cluster randomization and an expected dropout rate of 20%, the total sample size for this study should be 78 students, with 39 students in each group.

The researchers recruited 83 volunteers from a first-year basketball class at a public university in Henan Province. The exclusion criteria were as follows: a history of medical conditions or long-term medication use (e.g., heart disease, respiratory disorders, or bone or muscular injuries); recent (i.e., within the past year) experience with a similar blended learning intervention; recent (i.e., within the past year) participation in other exercise interventions or training, or a habit of playing basketball; and unexplained withdrawal from the experiment.

Figure听1 shows the study protocol. A total of 78 students met the criteria and were assigned to the experimental and control groups. Four participants in the control group and 5 participants in the experimental group withdrew from the experiment. Therefore, data from 34 participants in the experimental group and 35 participants in the control group were analyzed. All the students voluntarily participated in the study and provided informed consent, and the study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Universiti Putra Malaysia (Approval No. JKEUPM 2022鈥�030).

Fig. 1

CONSORT flow diagram

Intervention

The experimental group and the control group were taught from 10:00 to 11:30 a.m. every Monday and Tuesday, respectively, with the teaching experiment lasting for 16 weeks. The same teacher instructed both groups, and in addition to the teaching methods, the teaching content, process, and requirements were kept consistent (see Table听1). Both groups included three main phases: preclass, during-class, and afterclass, with in-class instructions consisting of a 20-minute preparation session, a 60-minute basic session, and a 10-minute conclusion session (see Table听2).

The control group adopted a traditional learning model, where students relied primarily on the teacher鈥檚 explanations and demonstrations during class. Preclass preparation and afterclass review were dependent mainly on students鈥� self-discipline, without any additional structured guidance or supervision. In contrast, the experimental group implemented a blended learning model. Students in the experimental group watched instructional videos provided by the teacher through MOOC learning platform before class. These videos were recorded by experienced coaches or physical education experts, with each video lasting less than 10听min, making it easy for students to watch and understand at any time.

In addition, the discussion forum on the MOOC platform allows students to share and discuss technical difficulties in videos with their classmates or the instructor, helping them to better engage in learning and deepen their understanding. Since students had a preliminary understanding of the new content before class, more time in the experimental group鈥檚 classroom instruction could be devoted to skill and physical fitness training, enabling the teacher to provide personalized guidance to more students.

After class, the students in the experimental group were required to complete an automatically graded quiz through the online platform, which provided the correct answers and explanations to help them promptly correct mistakes. The quiz consisted of only six multiple-choice questions designed to reinforce learning outcomes. In addition, the experimental group enhances the learning experience through the establishment of WeChat groups, where teachers release learning videos and task requirements two days before class to remind students to preview, and through instant interaction. Online learning logs and attendance records were used to track student learning and participation. All students are encouraged to follow a daily routine and are required to inform the instructor of any changes in exercise habits.

Table 1 Basketball teaching plan

Table 2 Basketball teaching implementation

Evaluation

The teaching effectiveness was assessed by an experienced fitness expert via a double-blind method, and the subjects were tested in strict accordance with the 鈥淣ational Student Physical Health Standard (2014 Revised)鈥� (see Table听3). The NSPHS (2014 Revision), issued by the Ministry of Education of China, is a standard for individual assessment of students鈥� physical fitness in terms of physical morphology, physical function, and physical fitness (strength, speed, endurance, flexibility, and agility). The NSPHS (2014 revision) is a well-established and validated physical fitness measurement tool that has been widely used in Chinese universities [3, 31, 32].

Body mass index (BMI)鈥�=鈥墂eight (kg)/ [height (m)]² was used as the indicator of body shape; lung capacity was used as the indicator of physical function; and physical fitness was used as the indicator of 50-meter run, standing long jump, sit-and-reach, sit-ups (females), pull-ups (males), 800-meter run (females), and 1000-meter run (males). Each subject was tested once before and once after the intervention, with the same evaluator conducting both tests, following a fixed order of the items (as mentioned above), and using fixed instruments (specialized instruments for the National Student Physical Health Test). Each item was scored out of a maximum of 100 points.

Table 3 National student physical health standard (2014)

Statistics

In this study, data were recorded using a spreadsheet program (Excel). The assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances were preliminarily assessed via the skewness and kurtosis test and Levene鈥檚 test. To determine the effects of the intervention, a generalized estimating equation (GEE) model was used for data analysis. The effect size was determined on the basis of common criteria (d鈥�=鈥�0.2 indicates a small effect; d鈥�=鈥�0.5 indicates a medium effect; d鈥�=鈥�0.8 indicates a large effect) [33]. Finally, the data were statistically processed via SPSS 26.0 software, with differences considered statistically significant at P鈥�&濒迟;鈥�0.05.

Results

The effects of the two learning models on university students鈥� physical fitness are summarized in Table听4. Overall, after 16 weeks of instruction, both models significantly improved the physical fitness of the university students; however, the blended learning model had a significant effect (p鈥�<鈥�0.05) on the enhancement of students鈥� lung capacity, sit-and-reach, pull-ups/sit-ups, standing long jump, and 50-meter run.

Table 4 Effects of blended learning on physical fitness

Specifically, for the time effect, after 16 weeks, the traditional basketball learning model had a smaller effect on the improvement in university students鈥� physical fitness for all the tested indicators. In contrast, the blended basketball learning model had a small effect on the 1000/800-meter run but a moderate effect on lung capacity, sit-and-reach, standing long jump, and 50-meter run and a large effect on BMI and pull-ups/sit-ups.

For the group effect, the 16-week blended learning model had a moderate effect on sit-and-reach, pull-up/sitting-up, standing long jump, and 50-meter runs and a small effect on BMI, lung capacity, and the 1000/800-meter run compared with traditional learning.

Discussion

The study demonstrated that after 16 weeks of the blended learning intervention, students鈥� BMI, lung capacity, sit-and-reach, pull-up/sit-up, standing long jump, 50-meter run, and 1,000/800-meter run improved significantly. These results are consistent with those of previous studies, which also revealed significant improvements in BMI [34], lung capacity [34], sit-and-reach [35, 36], 1-minute sit-up/pull-up [35,36,37], standing long jump [35,36,37], 50-meter run [37], and 1000/800-meter run [37]. The findings can be explained by the fact that the blended learning model, by integrating online resources and offline instruction, not only provides students with a flexible and personalized learning experience but also ensures adequate training time and instruction in the classroom, which results in a more effective improvement in their physical fitness.

In addition, the results revealed differences between the experimental group and the control group in the posttest for lung capacity, sit-and-reach, pull-ups/sit-ups, standing long jump, and the 50-meter run. Several studies are in line with the above findings: Al Qudah et al. (2018) explored the effects of a 14-week blended learning intervention on the elements of physical fitness of Jordanian sixth-grade students [38]. The results showed that blended learning had a positive and significant effect on students鈥� physical fitness scores. Similarly, Mischenko et al. (2020) explored the effect of a blended learning model on the physical fitness of 30 12-year-old girls and reported that speed, strength, coordination, endurance, and flexibility were greater in the blended learning model than in the traditional learning model [35]. Similarly, Yin and Hu (2021) reported that, compared with traditional learning, a 16-week blended learning intervention significantly improved students鈥� physical fitness [34]. However, studies have reported opposite results for sit-and-reach and 50-meter runs [39]. It is challenging to draw definitive conclusions on the effects of blended learning on physical fitness due to differences in intervention duration and measures. Due to differences in intervention duration and measures, it is challenging to draw a definitive conclusion on the effects of blended learning on physical fitness. Therefore, more research is needed to compare the effects of blended learning and traditional learning on physical fitness.

This study revealed that there was no significant difference in body mass index (BMI) between blended learning and traditional learning models, and a study supported these results [40]. BMI is a widely used international standard for assessing body fat and overall health status [41]. University students鈥� BMI is influenced by various factors, including sedentary behavior, screen time, dietary habits, genetics, psychological state, and physical activity [42,43,44,45]. Among these factors, increased sedentary behavior and screen time reduce physical activity, negatively affecting students鈥� physical fitness [46]. In addition, the frequent consumption of takeout is also an important factor affecting Chinese university students鈥� BMI, with data showing that 64% of them order takeout more than three times a week and order fast food, dessert, and milk tea more frequently [39]. More importantly, although exercise intervention is an important means of weight loss, it usually needs to be combined with dietary intervention to achieve significant results [32]. Since no dietary intervention was conducted in this study, the change in BMI may not have been significant. Furthermore, although the blended learning and traditional learning methods differ in terms of teaching methods, the teaching content and frequency were the same under both models, which could also be a reason for the insignificant change in BMI.

In the 1000/800-meter run, the difference in effectiveness between blended learning and traditional teaching models was also not significant. Three studies reported the same results [36, 39, 47]. Muscular endurance refers to the ability of a muscle or muscle group to perform repeated contractions over an extended period under resistance [48]. The lack of significant differences between the two groups may be because the improvement in muscular endurance requires specific load and intensity stimuli, which gradually allow the muscles to adapt to external resistance [49, 50]. However, the frequency of only one PE session per week, whether blended learning or traditional teaching models, is not sufficient to provide enough physiological stimuli to effectively induce these adaptive changes. In addition, students鈥� muscular endurance struggles to improve significantly because of the lack of rationalization between the training load of each class and the subsequent recovery process. This suggests that it is difficult to achieve the desired physical fitness enhancement effects by relying solely on the existing teaching arrangement and that the curriculum design may need to be adjusted to increase the training frequency and optimize load management.

In conclusion, this study provides strong evidence that a 16-week blended learning model effectively promotes university students鈥� physical fitness. However, this study has the following limitations: first, the sample was only from the basketball class at a public university in Henan Province, which is small and may limit the generalization of the results; second, the 16-week intervention period and 90-minute weekly class frequency may not be sufficient to significantly improve certain fitness indicators; in addition, variables that may affect the results, such as the students鈥� dietary habits and lifestyles, were not controlled; another limitation is that the study was restricted to the basketball program and did not cover other sports programs; and lastly, the lack of comparative gender analysis is an important limitation due to the mixed sample of participants. This may have masked potential differences in male and female students鈥� responses to the interventions, which are critical for fully understanding the effects of educational interventions. Therefore, future research should consider expanding the sample size, extending the intervention duration, controlling for additional variables, and incorporating gender-specific analyses. These steps would help to explore the effects of blended learning in various physical education programs more comprehensively, thereby enhancing the applicability and relevance of the findings.