Wearable Technologies in School Physical Education: A Systematic Review of Pedagogical Implications
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17309/tmfv.2026.1.07Keywords:
wearable technologies, school-based physical education, student motivation, personalised learning, technology integrationAbstract
Background. Wearable technologies such as heart rate monitors, accelerometers, and fitness trackers are increasingly integrated into school-based physical education (PE) to enhance instructional strategies, student engagement, and personalised learning. Yet empirical evidence on their pedagogical effectiveness remains fragmented.
Purpose. This systematic review synthesises research on wearable technology applications in school-based PE, examining their integration into teaching strategies, student motivation and participation, and personalised feedback.
Methods. A systematic search across Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, SPORTDiscus, and PsycINFO identified 12 peer-reviewed studies published between 2010 and 2025. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), and results were synthesised narratively.
Results. Wearable technologies facilitated diverse instructional strategies including real-time feedback, self-monitoring, gamification, and goal setting. Their use increased student motivation, participation, and enabled personalised feedback, although data privacy and ethical concerns were noted. Teacher digital literacy and pedagogical competence influenced implementation effectiveness.
Conclusions. Wearable technologies offer significant pedagogical benefits for school-based PE by enhancing motivation, participation, and personalisation. Successful implementation requires thoughtful instructional design, teacher readiness, and careful ethical management of student data. Future research should investigate long-term outcomes and professional development models for educators.
Downloads
References
Lin, K.-C., Wei, C.-W., Lai, C.-L., Cheng, I.-L., & Chen, N.-S. (2021). Development of a badminton teaching system with wearable technology for improving students’ badminton doubles skills. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(2), 945–969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09935-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09935-6
Wort, G. K., Wiltshire, G., Peacock, O., Sebire, S., Daly-Smith, A., & Thompson, D. (2021). Teachers’ perspectives on the acceptability and feasibility of wearable technology to inform school-based physical activity practices. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 3, Article 777105. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.777105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2021.777105
Boiché, J., Escalera, M. Y., & Chanal, J. (2020). Students’ physical activity assessed by accelerometers and motivation for physical education during class: Should we consider lessons as a whole or only active periods? PLOS ONE, 15(3), e0229046. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229046 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229046
Xu, Y., Peng, J., Jing, F., & Ren, H. (2024). From wearables to performance: How acceptance of IoT devices influences physical education results in college students. Scientific Reports, 14(1), Article 23776. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-75071-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-75071-3
Cunningham-Rose, R., Garrett, N., Lonsdale, C., & Harris, N. (2024). The acute effect of heart rate monitor projection on exercise effort in school students. European Physical Education Review, 31(3), 415–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X241280834 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X241280834
Gråstén, A., Yli-Piipari, S., Huhtiniemi, M., Salin, K., Seppälä, S., Lahti, J., Hakonen, H., & Jaakkola, T. (2019). Predicting accelerometer-based physical activity in physical education and total physical activity: The self-determination theory approach. Journal of Human Sport and Exercise, 14(4), 757–771. https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2019.144.05 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2019.144.05
Zhang, Z., & Wang, X. (2024). Wearable sports smart glasses real-time monitoring and feedback mechanism in physical education. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and Technology, 10, Article 5531. https://doi.org/10.4108/eetpht.10.5531 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4108/eetpht.10.5531
Siacor, K. H., Ng, B., & Liu, W. C. (2024). Fostering student motivation and engagement through teacher autonomy support: A self-determination theory perspective. International Journal of Instruction, 17(2), 583–598. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2024.17232a DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2024.17232a
Esmonde, K. (2019). Tracing the feedback loop: A Foucauldian and actor-network-theory examination of heart rate monitors in a physical education classroom. Sport, Education and Society, 24(7), 689–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2018.1432480 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2018.1432480
Zhang, Z., Rittisom, S., & Hongseanyatham, P. (2025). Utilizing wearable technology to enhance physical education teaching in Chinese high schools. International Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews, 5(3), 77–86. https://doi.org/10.60027/ijsasr.2025.5788 DOI: https://doi.org/10.60027/ijsasr.2025.5788
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. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Viciana, J., Mayorga-Vega, D., Martínez-Baena, A., Hagger, M. S., Liukkonen, J., & Yli-Piipari, S. (2019). Effect of self-determined motivation in physical education on objectively measured habitual physical activity: A trans-contextual model. Kinesiology, 51(1), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.26582/k.51.1.15 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26582/k.51.1.15
Kerner, C., & Goodyear, V. A. (2017). The motivational impact of wearable healthy lifestyle technologies: A self-determination perspective on Fitbits with adolescents. American Journal of Health Education, 48(5), 287–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2017.1343161 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2017.1343161
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Rodgers, M., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Roberts, H., Britten, N., & Popay, J. (2009). Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: Effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function. Evaluation, 15(1), 49–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389008097871 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389008097871
Keogh, A., Argent, R., Anderson, A., Caulfield, B., & Johnston, W. (2021). Assessing the usability of wearable devices to measure gait and physical activity in chronic conditions: A systematic review. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 18(1), Article 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00931-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00931-2
Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-syntheses. Annual Review of Psychology, 70(1), 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803
Higgins, J. P. T. (Ed.). (2019). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Stone, M. J., Knight, C. J., Hall, R., Shearer, C., Nicholas, R., & Shearer, D. A. (2023). The psychology of athletic tapering in sport: A scoping review. Sports Medicine, 53(4), 777–801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-022-01798-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-022-01798-6
Gee, A. (2024). Review of Zotero. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 36(4), 334–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2024.2417126 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2024.2417126
Kellermeyer, L., Harnke, B., & Knight, S. (2018). Covidence and Rayyan. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 106(4), 580–583. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.513 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.513
Hong, Q. N., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., O’Cathain, A., Rousseau, M.-C., Vedel, I., & Pluye, P. (2018). The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Education for Information, 34(4), 285–291. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221
Souto, R. Q., Khanassov, V., Hong, Q. N., Bush, P. L., Vedel, I., & Pluye, P. (2015). Systematic mixed studies reviews: Updating results on the reliability and efficiency of the mixed methods appraisal tool. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 52(1), 500–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.08.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.08.010
Hong, Q. N., Pluye, P., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., O’Cathain, A., Rousseau, M.-C., & Vedel, I. (2019). Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: A modified e-Delphi study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 111, 49–59.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.008
Almusawi, H. A., Durugbo, C. M., & Bugawa, A. M. (2021). Innovation in physical education: Teachers’ perspectives on readiness for wearable technology integration. Computers & Education, 167, Article 104185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104185 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104185
Guijarro-Romero, S., Mayorga-Vega, D., Casado-Robles, C., & Viciana, J. (2025). Effect of a gamified-based intermittent teaching unit in physical education on schoolchildren’s accelerometer-measured weekly physical activity: A cluster-randomized controlled trial (School-Fit study). Revista de Psicodidáctica, 30(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicod.2024.500156 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicoe.2024.500156
Layne, T., Simonton, K., & Irwin, C. (2022). Effects of a sport education instructional model and heart rate monitor system on the physical activity and jump rope performance of fourth-grade students. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 22(4), 889–899. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2022.04113 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2022.04113
Lindberg, R., Seo, J., & Laine, T. H. (2016). Enhancing physical education with exergames and wearable technology. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(4), 328–341. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2016.2556671 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2016.2556671
Sit, C. H. P., Huang, W. Y., Yu, J. J., & McKenzie, T. L. (2019). Accelerometer-assessed physical activity and sedentary time at school for children with disabilities: Seasonal variation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(17), Article 3163. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16173163 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16173163
Smith, J. D., Schroeder, C., & Smith, R. M. (2019). Pedometer accuracy and metabolic cost in elementary school children while walking, skipping, galloping, and sliding. The Physical Educator, 76(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2019-V76-I1-8392 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2019-V76-I1-8392
Stöckel, T., & Grimm, R. (2021). Psychophysiological benefits of real-time heart rate feedback in physical education. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 651065. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651065 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651065
Goodyear, V. A., Armour, K. M., & Wood, H. (2019). Young people learning about health: The role of apps and wearable devices. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(2), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1539011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1539011
Goad, T., Towner, B., Jones, E., & Bulger, S. (2019). Instructional tools for online physical education: Using mobile technologies to enhance learning. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 90(6), 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2019.1614118 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2019.1614118
Casey, A., Goodyear, V. A., & Armour, K. M. (2017). Rethinking the relationship between pedagogy, technology and learning in health and physical education. Sport, Education and Society, 22(2), 288–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2016.1226792 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2016.1226792
Creaser, A. V., Frazer, M. T., Costa, S., Bingham, D. D., & Clemes, S. A. (2022). The use of wearable activity trackers in schools to promote child and adolescent physical activity: A descriptive content analysis of school staff’s perspectives. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(21), Article 14067. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114067 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114067
Jovanovic, P., & Kay, R. (2022). Exploring ethical issues with using wearable technology in K–12 classrooms: A review of the literature. Journal of Digital Life and Learning, 2(2), 3–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51357/jdll.v2i2.203
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Zuoxian Zhao, Yingxue Su
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
