AI-MEDIATED EMBODIED LEARNING IN UNIVERSITY KINESIOLOGY EDUCATION: A MIXED-METHODS STUDY ON ENGAGEMENT AND WELL-BEING

Davide Di Palma

Abstract


Recent developments in artificial intelligence are reshaping university education in kinesiology. This mixed-methods quasi-experimental study examined the effects of AI-mediated hybrid learning ecosystems on engagement, motivation, self-efficacy and psychological well-being in 96 university students. The experimental group participated in a 10-week intervention using wearable devices, adaptive AI feedback and digital collaborative platforms, whilst the control group followed traditional activities. Results showed improvements in engagement, self-efficacy and well-being, while qualitative findings highlighted greater body awareness, self-regulation and inclusion. Overall, AI-mediated ecosystems appear to redefine the relationship between the body, digital data and learning in university education.


Keywords


Embodied Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Hybrid Learning Ecosystems, Kinesiology Education, Motor Learning

Full Text:

PDF PDF

References


Baca, A., & Kornfeind, P. (2012). Rapid feedback systems for elite sports training. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 11(4), 70–76.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.

Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Marín, V. I., & Händel, M. (2021). Emergency remote teaching in higher education: Mapping the first global online semester. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 1–24.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.

CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. CAST. http://udlguidelines.cast.org

Casey, A., Goodyear, V. A., & Armour, K. M. (2021). Digital technologies and learning in physical education: Pedagogical cases. Routledge.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.

Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2023). Artificial intelligence in higher education: The state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1–22.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.

Evans, J., Davies, B., & Rich, E. (2021). The body, embodiment and education: An interdisciplinary approach. Routledge.

Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage.

Girden, E. R. (1992). ANOVA: Repeated measures. Sage.

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27, 1–12.

Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Center for Curriculum Redesign.

Johnson, M. (2017). Embodied mind, meaning, and reason: How our bodies give rise to understanding. University of Chicago Press.

Kearney, M., Schuck, S., Burden, K., & Aubusson, P. (2012). Viewing mobile learning from a pedagogical perspective. Research in Learning Technology, 20, 1–17.

Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.

Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205–222.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Schaufeli, W. B., Martínez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464–481.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.

Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. In J. P. Mestre & B. H. Ross (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 55, pp. 37–76). Academic Press.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.

Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645.

Vygotskij, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wilson, A. D., & Golonka, S. (2013). Embodied cognition is not what you think it is. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 58.

Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(5), 1382–1414.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.32043/gsd.v10i2.1712

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 ITALIAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH EDUCATION, SPORT AND INCLUSIVE DIDACTICS

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Italian Journal of Health Education, Sports and Inclusive Didactics 

Publisher: Cares srl – REN Press (since 2026). Previously published by Gaia srl – Edizioni Universitarie Romane (2017–2025).

ISSN: 2532-3296 E-ISSN: 3103-5744