“The Game Changers”: How Equity-Driven Pedagogical Scaffolding Reduces Participation Disparities in Physical Education

Abstract

Achieving gender equity and social inclusiveness remains a key priority in education. In the context of Physical Education (PE), fostering inclusive practices is critical to ensuring all students, regardless of gender, ability, or social status, can participate meaningfully. By examining the impact of three pre-service teachers’ (PSTs) equity-driven pedagogical practices on gender equity and student engagement in game-based activities, this study investigates how targeted pedagogical interventions can reduce gender disparities in engagement and promote inclusivity in student game interactions within PE classes. Specifically, we aimed to determine whether students of different sexes exhibit similar engagement rates, identify any existing disparities, examine changes in these disparities during the intervention, assess the equity and inclusiveness of student game interactions, and explore the link between these interactions and engagement rates. A total of three PSTs were engaged in a yearlong study, divided into two units: basketball (3v3) and volleyball (4v4). A pedagogical scaffolding intervention aimed at fostering equity and inclusion was implemented through their yearlong engagement in school-placement teaching practices. Data concerning students’ participation in game-based activities were collected in the first and last unit of the schoolyear (Basketball—first semester; and Volleyball—second semester). Engagement rates, measured as participation time (PT) and Rate of Play (RoP), were recorded through video analysis. A Social Network Analysis (SNA) was used to evaluate the equity and inclusiveness of student interactions. Initial disparities in engagement rates favoured boys in both sports. However, post-test results indicated a significant increase in engagement for both sexes, with disparities decreasing over the intervention period. Basketball showed a significant reduction in gender differences in RoP (p < 0.05), while volleyball results indicated no significant gender disparities post-intervention. The SNA revealed more equitable and inclusive game interactions over time, particularly in volleyball. The results suggest the pedagogical intervention’s effectiveness in increasing students’ engagement and reducing game-based gender disparities. These findings underscore the importance of deliberate scaffolding strategies to enhance equity and inclusion, highlighting the potential of the reported strategies for fostering a more inclusive and engaging environment for all students.

1. Introduction

The United Nations’ 2030 Sustainable Development Goals [1] stress the importance of gender equity and social inclusiveness as vital components of quality education and child development. In Physical Education (PE), promoting equity and inclusion requires more than just ensuring access to activities; it involves actively dismantling barriers that prevent meaningful engagement [2]. Research has consistently shown that despite these efforts, certain students (often marginalized based on gender, ability, or social status) tend to be excluded from full participation.

Traditional PE often perpetuates systemic inequities, constraining opportunities for girls and lower-status students. Studies show these students frequently experience exclusion, particularly in gameplay dominated by aggressive or skilled peers [3,4]. This exclusion hinders their development and reinforces social inequalities, as marginalized students receive fewer opportunities to develop essential skills [5]. The phenomenon of “competent bystanders” describes students that might possess the necessary “baseline” skills to be engaged, but choose not to participate, due to social dynamics, such as fear of failure, lack of confidence, or peer dominance [6], particularly in competitive gameplay settings where more experienced and skilled students (i.e., athletes) are usually dominant, exacerbating their feelings of inadequacy and exclusion [7].

Evidence from numerous studies highlights the marginalization of girls in PE settings, often leaving them to navigate these environments with little support. For instance, a study by Enright and O’Sullivan [8] found that girls often feel sidelined during PE, especially in team sports. Additionally, research by Hills [9] underscores that girls often perceive PE as a male-dominated space, leading to lower levels of participation and enjoyment. Another study by Olafson [10] reveals that girls are often assigned passive roles or excluded from active play, resulting in reduced opportunities for skill development and engagement. These findings are supported by Garrett [11], who observed that girls’ participation in PE is frequently limited by gendered expectations and stereotypes, which discourage them from fully engaging in physical activities. Collectively, these studies illustrate how girls are marginalized in PE, facing systemic barriers that limit their involvement and development in these settings.

Student-centred pedagogies (SCPs), such as Sport Education [12], Cooperative Learning [13], and Game-Based Approaches [14], have proven effective in promoting equity and inclusion in PE by adapting activities to individual needs and fostering positive social interactions. These approaches prioritize student autonomy, collaboration, and engagement through developmentally appropriate activities, shifting the teacher’s role from instructor to facilitator [13,15]. The Sport Education model involves students taking on roles like referees, coaches, and players, which encourages responsibility and ownership [16]. Cooperative Learning enhances mutual care and inclusiveness through teamwork and peer support [13]. Game-Based Approaches, focusing on small-sided games, cater to varying skill levels, allowing students to showcase abilities beyond motor skills, such as strategic thinking and game interpretation [14]. By promoting physical, cognitive, social, and emotional development, these pedagogies contribute to a more equitable PE experience [17]., ensuring students of diverse abilities can find meaningful roles in the learning environment.

Importantly, SCPs are grounded in several core principles that shape their effectiveness. First, the role of the teacher shifts from being an instructor to a facilitator, progressively transferring responsibility to the students, which encourages them to take ownership of their learning. Second, activities are modified by the teacher to address the diverse needs of learners, ensuring that each student can participate meaningfully. Third, SCPs emphasize tasks that stimulate decision-making, critical thinking, and problem-solving, which are essential for fostering active engagement and autonomy. Fourth, students work collaboratively in small groups, relying on peer interaction to complete activities, thereby promoting cooperation and mutual support. When these pedagogical principles are systematically integrated into PE, it can be described as a student-centred endeavour [18].

Ultimately, the success of these models hinges on the teacher’s ability to effectively facilitate learning, hence, irrespective of the specificity of a particular approach, ultimately, it is the teacher that provides the “student-centredness”. A considerable part of this process requires teachers to act as facilitators [19], guiding and supporting students while gradually allowing them to take ownership of their learning [20]. This notion is encapsulated in the concept of pedagogical scaffolding. Scaffolding processes, although contingent, are adaptative and non-linear in nature (i.e., can take many forms, be it strategies for the gradual modelling of student’s behaviours, or progressing in the complexity of questioning and feedback) and should be designed in accordance with each student’s needs. Hence, these processes are indispensable (and inevitable) for teachers to effectively place each student at the centre of the learning process. For instance, by designing activities catering to diverse needs (e.g., modified rules and games), teachers can scaffold the participation of every student regardless of their physical acumen, ensuring a more equitable participation in PE activities [21]. Effective scaffolding also involves managing social interactions to foster a supportive environment, encouraging collaboration and positive social interactions crucial for development [22].

SCPs encourage students to support equity by fostering peer-teaching dynamics and promoting social justice awareness. Students are encouraged to support less-skilled peers by providing engagement opportunities, feedback, and collaborative problem-solving, enhancing learning experiences and social integration [23]. This proactive approach mitigates participation disparities, promoting a more inclusive PE environment [24]. Extensive research shows equity and inclusion do not automatically emerge from SCPs. Often, these approaches are grounded in teacher-centred methods, lacking the skills to conduct effective scaffolding, modify activities, design appropriate tasks, and transfer decision-making to students [25].

Attaining equity- and inclusion-oriented SCPs in PE is a complex endeavour requiring advanced teaching skills [25]. This demands diverse knowledge and significant investment in pedagogical scaffolding abilities to diversify teaching strategies [26]. These skills support student learning, collaborative interactions, and goal setting, requiring appropriate mediation, decision-making power transfer, and design of modified game-based activities [27]. Thus, teachers must proactively enact the educational potential of SCPs by planning and teaching an ‘augmented pedagogical approach’ to equity and inclusion. In this study, we implemented an evidence-based 4-level pedagogical scaffolding framework (see Methods) designed by Farias and Mesquita [28] for deliberate teaching of equity and inclusion in PE.

Traditional metrics such as Rate of Play (RoP) and participation time (PT) have long been the cornerstone measures for assessing student involvement in PE. These metrics provide clear, quantifiable data that allow educators to gauge student activity levels and general engagement. Farias et al. [23], however, argue that while participation time offers insight into the quantity of engagement, it lacks the depth required to capture the underlying social dynamics within team settings, such as how students negotiate participation and respond to peer dynamics.

Despite their usefulness, these metrics are limited in their ability to fully represent the social complexity inherent in group activities. For example, they do not track whether participation is equitable or which students take on central versus peripheral roles in game interactions. Moreover, they miss subtle forms of inclusion and exclusion that occur within student groups, particularly in game-based activities where social hierarchies (e.g., skill-based) can dictate access to play and peer collaboration. This gap in understanding social interaction patterns highlights the need for more sophisticated analytical tools.

Social Network Analysis (SNA) directly addresses these limitations by providing a more in-depth view of student interactions and social relationships within PE activities. Unlike traditional metrics that focus solely on the quantity of participation (e.g., how much a student played), SNA examines the quality and structure of social interactions, offering a detailed map of peer dynamics, tracking the nature of students’ roles and interactions during gameplay. It highlights which students occupy central positions in the network (e.g., those frequently engaged in game-critical interactions), and which students remain on the periphery (those less involved or excluded). Hence, capturing the social complexity that traditional engagement measures overlook.

By revealing patterns of inclusion, exclusion, and subgroup formations, SNA allows to see which students are disproportionately involved or marginalized during gameplay. This can provide crucial insight into how equitable and inclusive the learning environment truly is, beyond what PT or RoP can reveal. For example, while the RoP might show that a particular student was frequently engaged in gameplay, the SNA can reveal whether that engagement was distributed equitably across different students or if peer interactions remained concentrated within certain cliques. In this sense, the combination of SNA and engagement metrics provides a more comprehensive understanding of how SCPs affect equity and inclusion in PE by addressing both the quantity and quality of student participation, offering valuable insights for creating more inclusive environments.

While SCPs show promise in promoting equity and inclusion, their implementation faces several challenges. Teachers often struggle with designing inclusive activities, effectively transferring decision-making to students, and managing their roles as facilitators [25]. These challenges underscore both the need for targeted professional development and ongoing support to ensure the successful implementation of SCPs and the achievement of desired outcomes, as well as more competent measurements of teachers’ pedagogical impact in promoting equity and inclusion in PE. Hence, this study embraced the integration of SNA with traditional engagement metrics to provide a broader, clearer view into equity and inclusion in PE. This combined approach not only enhances the understanding of individual participation but also sheds light on the complex social interactions that underpin student engagement. By leveraging these insights, teachers can better understand, design, and implement strategies that foster an inclusive and equitable PE environment.

2. Research Aims and Questions

This study aims to assess student engagement disparities and explore the presence of equity and inclusion within students’ social networks during game-based activities. These assessments were conducted throughout the implementation of an evidence-based, student-centred scaffolding structure designed to enhance participation and foster a more equitable and inclusive environment, as applied by PSTs. Specifically, the study seeks to address the following research questions:

i. Engagement Improvements: Do students of different sexes exhibit equitable engagement rates? The aim is to determine how any existing inequities are affected (pre–post-test) during a PST’s implementation of a student-centred approach with augmented focus on equity and inclusion.

ii. Equity and Inclusion in Game Interactions: Does the network of student game interactions become more equitable and inclusive from the beginning to the end of each unit?

iii. Relationship Between Engagement and Interaction Networks: What is the relationship between equity and inclusion in students’ game interactions and their engagement rates?

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Design

This longitudinal study employs a quasi-experimental teaching experiment design [29], predominantly focusing on quantitative analysis, to assess the impact of an evidence-based, student-centred scaffolding structure on students’ engagement, equity, and inclusion in GBAs.

A Teaching-Experiment Methodology (TEM) provides a rich analysis of the instructional practices and classroom dynamics of PSTs. The TEM involves iterative cycles of teaching and observing, where researchers directly engage in teaching to explore and understand students’ learning processes. Through this methodology, initial qualitative observations of PSTs’ practices were conducted to identify key instructional strategies and interactions. These observations informed the design of the study, leading to the development of a structured framework for examining the impact of the student-centred scaffolding approach. Although the TEM provided the foundational qualitative insights, the primary focus of this study is on quantitative methods. The qualitative observations served to frame the quantitative analysis, allowing for the identification of critical practices and interactions to be measured. The main aim is to quantify engagement and social network dynamics using a multidimensional approach of well-established engagement rates and innovative SNA metrics.

The longitudinal aspect of the study is crucial for capturing changes over time. Data were collected at multiple points throughout the intervention (four moments, across two teaching units, i.e., one pre-test, and post-test in each unit) to identify trends and shifts in engagement, equity, and inclusion. This approach enables a deeper understanding of how the scaffolding structure influences students’ experiences in PE over an extended period. By integrating TEM, this study not only measures the impact of the student-centred scaffolding structure quantitatively but also benefits from the detailed qualitative foundation provided by the teaching experiment. This mixed-methods approach ensures a comprehensive analysis of the scaffolding’s effectiveness in enhancing student engagement, equity, and inclusion in GBA.

3.2. The PETE Programme

The PETE programme under scrutiny in the broader doctoral research project from which this study emerges, prepares the PSTs to implement a student-centred approach to PE rooted in the fundamental tenets of student-centred pedagogies. These pedagogies encompass instructional strategies tailored to diverse learning styles, recognizing that each student benefits from varied approaches, whether through visual demonstrations, hands-on experiences, or verbal explanations. The programme emphasizes the flexible use of peer teaching and cooperative learning dynamics, as well as game-based learning, inclusive of both traditional and developmentally appropriate modified games tailored to accommodate diverse abilities, thereby ensuring equitable participation and success for all.

The PSTs’ training unfolds through three main processes:

i.

Experiential Learning: PSTs engage in experiential learning of SCAs and sports content, embodying the curriculum through active participation in gameplay and gaining in-depth knowledge of teaching models (i.e., ‘living the curriculum’).

ii.

Peer-Teaching Activities: PSTs learn to shape the sport content through peer-teaching activities, working in teams to develop lesson plans and task progressions.

iii.

Micro-Teaching: Each team of PSTs teaches a model-based unit to a sixth-grade class, taking full responsibility for unit design and subsequent learning activities (detailed information provided in Supplement S1).

Moreover, the PETE programme instils a model-based approach where persistent team affiliation, roleplaying, autonomous decision-making, and routines of small group learning and collaborative problem-solving dynamics aim at fostering an inclusive learning environment. This approach nurtures essential skills such as shared decision-making, effective communication, and supportive social interactions, encouraging students with distinct characteristics to work together and appreciate collective effort.

3.3. The Evidence-Based Scaffolding Structure

Central to this programme is a PETE-developed scaffolding structure [28] (Supplement S1) designed to help PSTs scaffold the emergence of equitable and inclusive participation in PE game-based activities and students’ social development, gradually empowering them as active promoters of equitable and inclusive learning contexts. The scaffolding structure is a 4-level intervention: activity-based, context-based, social-based, and learner mediated-based teaching strategies; see Supplement S2 and plays a pivotal role in guiding PSTs towards creating learning environments that prioritize equity and inclusion. The implementation of this scaffolding structure and the overall delivery of the SCAs are closely monitored by one university supervisor and one experienced teacher from the cooperating school. The activity-based scaffolding involves modifying tasks to cater to different ability levels, ensuring equitable participation, and recognizing various competencies, including leadership and social contributions. Context-based scaffolding promotes self-awareness and critical reflection on discrimination, deconstructs stereotypes, and fosters a safe, inclusive learning environment that enhances well-being and social cohesion. Social-based scaffolding places students in leadership roles to mediate social interactions and encourages positive peer-teaching and collaboration. Learner-mediated scaffolding teaches PSTs to self-assess their ability to design inclusive environments, transfers decision-making power to students, and scaffolds active engagement in self- and peer-assessment activities while identifying sources of exclusion.

3.4. Context and Participants

The research context for this study centres on the school placement component within the PETE programme. During this yearlong placement, spanning three school terms (450 h), PSTs are placed in diverse cooperative schools where they assume the role of a full teacher and are responsible for planning, implementing, and evaluating PE lessons for a class of students over the school year. The cooperative school selected for this study was renowned for its collaborative ethos and culture of openness to innovative teaching practices, making it an ideal site for investigating the practical application of student-centred pedagogies in PE.

In selecting the PSTs for this study, a purposive sampling approach was employed based on specific criteria: volunteers who demonstrated a strong commitment to embracing student-centred pedagogies throughout their PETE journey, taught secondary school classes where game-based activities were mandatory as per the national curriculum, and maintained over 90% attendance in all course units during the first year of the PETE programme. Three 23-year-old PSTs, identified as “Ms. Blue”, “Mr. Purple”, and “Mr. Green”, each were charged with teaching PE to a 10th-grade class (total of 78 students) with an average age of 15.2 years, which also participated in this study. In the first semester of the school placement (from September to December), the PSTs conducted a game-based unit of basketball (18 lessons of 45 min each). In the second semester of the school placement (from January to June) the PSTs conducted a second game-based unit of basketball (18 lessons of 45 min each). In the first unit, students were organized into persistent, heterogeneous learning teams. In the second unit, the team affiliations remained the same to allow a clearer follow-up (e.g., evolution of the gameplay networks of social interactions). A condensed description of the PSTs’ pedagogical intervention is outlined in

Table 1. Overview of the PSTs’ instructional techniques.

	First Semester	Second Semester
Instructional Models	Sport Education and Direct Instruction	Sport Education, Direct Instruction, Cooperative Learning, Game-Step Approach, and Peer-Teaching.
Content delivery, monitoring and teaching Style	Teacher pedagogical leadership over instructional processes	Shared teacher-/student-led (e.g., monitoring task practice).
Intentions (primarily)	Maintaining Direction. Keeping the learning on target; maintaining the students’ pursuit of a particular objective (physical–motor-skill-focused)	Structuring understanding. Establishing a bridge between content; providing explanatory structures that organize and justify the learning content.
Settings and operations	Pre-lesson/post-session briefings in-task intervention	Pre-lesson/post-session briefings In-task intervention Guided Practice Reflective small group discussions (e.g., questioning in between gameplay breaks).
Strategies	Instructing, explaining, and demonstrating (some) questioning and student-led warm-ups	Instructing, and explaining. Student-led demonstrations questioning, cues, and hints.

and

Table 2. The features of the PSTs application of the scaffolding structure.

	First Term	Second Term
Level 1	(-) Equitable game/task adjustments (e.g., player-to-player pressing, one-arm distance, safety zones) (-) Equitable task-rotation systems (-) Graded Competition events (-) Student-led goal setting (choosing appropriate fitness goals) (-) Inclusive scoring systems (awarding extra points for the shooting attempts of less proficient students’)	(-) Equitable and Inclusive game/task adjustments (e.g., contingent to students’ skill: choosing how to serve, allow a second touch, no-spikes allowed)
Level 2	(none)	(-) Team charts: Social development (e.g., most supportive teammate) and inclusive performance records (focus on qualitative criteria; process rather than outcomes) (-) Awards and celebration of equity, inclusion, and social development outcomes (e.g., most empathetic peer-coach)
Level 3	(-) Verbal accountability of inclusive behaviours (e.g., you need to help your teammates!”).	(-) Verbal accountability of inclusive behaviours (-) Ethical Panel (social-oriented group discussions) (-) Empathy exercises (consider different prespectives) (-) Video elicitation of positive sports behaviours
Level 4	(none)	(-) Complementary roles (Equity supervisor, i.e., judging and acting on inequitable incidents)

.

3.5. Data Collection

Following a quasi-experimental protocol, every lesson was recorded using a strategically positioned digital camera to capture a comprehensive view of the gymnasium. This setup facilitated detailed post-lesson reviews and allowed for a thorough re-examination of significant events. The researcher also observed (in person) every lesson carried out by the PSTs’ lessons throughout each semester, keeping detailed field notes, allowing carefully map the PSTs’ overall pedagogical intervention, such as the features of their application of the scaffolding structure. Gameplay data were extracted from both the initial (pre-test) and concluding (post-test) lessons of each game-based unit where students participated in two 5 min games in each unit (3v3 in basketball, and 4v4 in volleyball). In both units, two teams included one substitute player, ensuring equitable rotation and parity in students’ gameplay analysis.

Adhering to the procedural guidelines outlined by Laporta [30], several key aspects were maintained. Firstly, the context of participation remained consistent in terms of total time played, with all analyses based on a baseline of 10 min for both pre-test and post-test games. Secondly, aligning with the principles of the Sport Education model, pre-test and post-test games followed the formal competition schedule of the respective units. Lastly, to capture students’ ‘raw’ networks of peer interaction, free from the influence of the PSTs strategies, the game formats used in the pre-test and post-test stages adhered strictly to the formal rules of the game, with no individual adjustments despite modifications to game-based tasks during the units.

Furthermore, as a control measure, the PSTs’ interventions were monitored and supported by two key figures: a cooperative teacher and a university supervisor. The cooperative teacher provided daily follow-up and post-lesson reflection sessions to help the PSTs enhance their pedagogical practices. These sessions focused on refining the scaffolding process and brainstorming solutions for acute equity-related challenges. The university supervisor conducted weekly work-based meetings, offering theoretical insights and addressing specific problems encountered by the PSTs (e.g., how to become more competent facilitators of equitable learning), thereby providing a robust theoretical foundation to support their practical challenges. The specific data-collection protocol was as follows:

• Pre-Test Phase:

  ○

  Conduct initial 3v3 basketball and 4v4 volleyball games.

  ○

  Record each game using strategically positioned digital cameras to ensure comprehensive coverage of the gymnasium.

  ○

  Ensure each game runs for a total of 10 min, divided into two 5 min segments for each unit.

  ○

  Maintain consistent game formats, adhering strictly to the formal rules without any adjustments.

• The PST’s Intervention Phase:

  ○

  PSTs’ implement the pedagogical interventions over a series of lessons, incorporating the student-centred scaffolding structure as per the PETE regulations.

  ○

  Monitor and record interventions to ensure fidelity to the intended pedagogical approaches.

• Post-Test Phase:

  ○

  Conduct final 3v3 basketball and 4v4 volleyball games.

  ○

  Record each game under the same conditions as the pre-test phase, ensuring a total of 10 min of gameplay.

  ○

  Maintain the same game formats and conditions to ensure consistency between pre-test and post-test phases.

3.6. Engagement Rates

Motor engagement rates were assessed through two primary metrics: participation time and Rate of Play. Participation time refers to the total amount of time each student actively engaged in gameplay, while Rate of Play measures the frequency of specific game actions, such as ball touches, per unit of time.

i.

Participation Time:

Video recordings were analyzed to measure the total duration each student spent actively participating in gameplay. This included periods when students were directly involved in game actions (e.g., ball handling, passing, shooting) as well as their movement and positioning on the court. The analysis accounted for both on-court and off-court times (e.g., rotating as substitutes), providing a comprehensive measure of each student’s engagement. The time count was paused during the following events [31]: When (i) the ball went out of bounds; (ii) the teams swapped courts; (iii) the teacher, peer-coaches, or any team member stopped the game to explain, provide instructions, or demonstrate skills; (iv) assistance was given to injured players; (v) disciplinary situations were managed; (vi) students or teams swapped roles (e.g., player-managerial); and (vii) the student being observed left the field to swap places with a substitute player.

ii.

Rate of Play:

The frequency of specific game actions, such as ball touches, was recorded using an Oslin, Mitchell, and Griffin [32] Game Performance Assessment Instrument. To calculate the Rate of Play for each student, the total number of game actions was divided by their participation time. This method provided insights into the intensity and quality of each student’s engagement, highlighting disparities in active participation and involvement in crucial game moments.

3.7. Social Network Analysis

The examination of students’ gameplay through video analysis provided the basis for constructing a double-entry table (Supplement S2). This table recorded the codification of students involved and the frequency of interactions between them. The linkage criterion between students was established based on both successful and intentionally directed unsuccessful passes. This dataset was then input into a Social Network Visualizer computer programme (v.3.1) to generate visual representations of students’ networks of peer interaction and compute metrics pertaining to students’ gameplay participation profiles, including the clustering coefficient, density, and degree prestige.

The clustering coefficient measures the tendency of nodes in the network to form sub-groups or clusters, serving as a key indicator of learning teams’ positive cooperation and overall equity in students’ gameplay connections. Lower clustering values signify equitable interaction among students, fostering meaningful engagement. Higher clustering values indicate diminished equity, a tendency to form interactional sub-groups, and a preference for ‘favourite peers’ over equitable peer engagement [33].

The density metric assesses the proportion of interactions occurring among network members relative to the total number of potential relationships. It serves as a crucial indicator of inclusivity in students’ participation profiles. High density suggests that most individuals within the network are interconnected, indicating inclusive engagement, ball-sharing, and collaborative actions. Conversely, low density indicates less inclusive gameplay relationships, where some students dominate interactions, while others are marginalized [34].

The degree prestige is a centrality measure that outlines the prominence of a node within the social network based on the number of connections it has. It delineates the perceived value of each student within their learning team’s gameplay dynamics. A student with higher skill levels is likely to receive the ball more frequently, resulting in higher degree prestige. This centrality designates the student as a pivotal element, more socially connected and engaged in peer interactions. Similar prestige levels among students indicate equitable involvement within the network, signifying that all individuals are perceived as equally valuable [35]. Monitoring changes in degree prestige over time can help identify shifts in participation patterns and whether all students are equitably engaged and valued during gameplay. Refer to Ribeiro, Mesquita, and Farias [36] for further insights on the SNA metrics.

Importantly, to account for the differences in sport structures and pedagogical models employed, we applied a within-unit analysis for each sport (basketball and volleyball). Hence, the focus of this study was to assess the progress in engagement and inclusivity within each sport from pre-test to post-test, rather than to compare outcomes directly between basketball and volleyball. This approach allowed us to mitigate potential biases of establishing between-unit comparisons, which could arise from the inherent differences in the sports’ game dynamics.

3.8. Coders Training and Reliability

To ensure the reliability of the coding processes, both intra-observer and inter-observer procedures were implemented. The research team established clear criteria for successful and unsuccessful actions across all categories of the instrument related to gameplay coding. Initially, two coders—one an experienced coach and the other an external coder not associated with the study—collaboratively coded one minute of gameplay for each student in each sport, using data not included in the final dataset. This collaborative effort continued until they achieved over 90% agreement on the coded gameplay actions.

After reaching this agreement, the team member independently coded all gameplay actions. A randomly selected sample of the coded data, comprising 25% of the database (exceeding the 15% value recommended by Hopkins [37], was re-coded by both coders three weeks after the initial coding. Intra-observer and inter-observer reliability, measured using Cronbach’s alpha, were both higher than 0.90, indicating strong agreement [38]. Similar procedures were applied to the participation time dataset, where intra-observer and inter-observer reliability exceeded 0.96, demonstrating very high reliability.

3.9. Data Analysis

To develop a comprehensive understanding of the effects of the pedagogical interventions on engagement, equity, and inclusion, and explore the relationship between engagement rates and social interaction patterns, offering a holistic view of the learning environment, the following protocol was implemented:

• Observations Analysis:

  ○

  Conduct detailed post-lesson reviews of the field notes to identify significant events (e.g., major strategies)

  ○

  Analyze post-lesson reviews data to build a comprehensive and robust synopsis of the key aspects of the PSTs’ intervention.

• Quantitative Analysis:

  ○

  Extract engagement rates, including play rate and participation time, from the recorded footage (baseline of 10′ gameplay).

  ○

  Compare pre-test and post-test engagement rates to assess changes over time.

  ○

  Extract SNA metrics to map out and analyze the social interactions and connectivity patterns among students (baseline of 10′ gameplay).

  ○

  Identify central and marginalized students to understand inclusion and equity within the group dynamics.

Further descriptive analysis was meticulously conducted to scrutinize data quality, identifying and rectifying any potential input errors. Levene tests confirmed homoscedasticity in the distribution. However, normality violations were observed in the density (pre-test for basketball: p < 0.05) and clustering variables (across both units and data collection moments: p < 0.05). Despite these violations, parametric tests were chosen due to their resilience to normality assumption breaches. Descriptive statistics were calculated for all variables. To explore comparisons between pre-tests and post-tests concerning the SNA measures and the participation time and Rate of Play, paired-samples t-tests were employed. Between-sex differences were examined using one-way ANOVAs. The significance level was set at p < 0.05. Effect sizes were estimated using Cohen’s d, with a large effect size defined as d > 0.8, moderate between 0.8 and 0.5, and small as <0.5. All statistical procedures were executed using SPSS 29.0 software (IBM, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The SNA measures were further interpreted using graph theory principles (Clemente et al., 2016, [33]).

3.10. Ethical Considerations

The study adhered to the European Data Protection Regulation and the ethical guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration (see Supplement S3). All data were securely stored in an encrypted database and deleted upon completion of the analysis. Formal permissions to conduct the study were obtained from the ethical committee of both the university overseeing the PST’s school placement (CEFADE 12-2023) and the secondary school where the placement occurred.

4. Results

4.1. Equity and Inclusion in Gameplay Network Interactions

The density and clustering scores (

Table 3. Density and clustering scores.

	First Semester (Basketball—3v3)				Second Semester (Volleyball—4v4)
	Density		Clustering		Density		Clustering
	Pre-T	Post-T	Pre-T	Post-T	Pre-T	Post-T	Pre-T	Post-T
Ms. Blue	0.647	1	0.167	0	0.927	1	0.041	0.019
Mr. purple	0.903	0.836	0.054	0.125	0.833	0.854	0.078	0
Mr. Green	0.425	0.953	0.726	0.175	0.697	1	0.383	0
$\overline{\mathrm{x}}$ (SD)	0.658 (0.226)	0.930 (0.121)	0.268 (0.348)	0.100 (0.201)	0.819 (0.185)	0.951 (0.092)	0.168 (305)	0.006 (0.031)

Notes: $\overline{\mathrm{x}}$ (SD) = Mean (standard deviation).

) analysis in both semesters reveal noteworthy changes from pre-test to post-test. In the first semester (Basketball—3v3), density increased significantly for Ms. Blue (from 0.647 to 1.000) and Mr. Green (from 0.425 to 0.953), while Mr. Purple’s density slightly decreased (from 0.903 to 0.836). Clustering scores showed mixed results, with Ms. Blue and Mr. Green displaying a reduction (0.167 to 0.000 and 0.726 to 0.175, respectively), and Mr. Purple showing an increase (0.054 to 0.125). In the second semester (Volleyball—4v4), the density scores for all teachers increased, with Ms. Blue and Mr. Green reaching the maximum score of 1.000, while Mr. Purple showed a slight increase from 0.833 to 0.854. Clustering scores decreased or remained low for all teachers. The t-tests revealed significant changes in both density and clustering from pre-test to post-test (

Table 4. Pre-test to post-test differences in density and clustering.

		$\overline{\mathbf{x}}$ Diff.	SD.	t	p	d
First semester (Basketball—3v3)	Density	−0.272	0.296	−3.889	<0.01	0.917
	Clustering	0.168	0.333	2.140	<0.05	0.504
Second semester (Volleyball—4v4)	Density	−0.132	0.198	−3.264	<0.05	0.666
	Clustering	0.161	0.309	2.557	<0.05	0.522

Notes: $\overline{\mathrm{x}}$ Diff. = Mean difference (i.e., Pre-test mean–Post-test mean); SD. = standard deviation.

), confirming equity and inclusion improvements in students’ gameplay networks of interaction.

Table 5. Prestige scores.

	First Semester (Basketball—3v3)				Second Semester (Volleyball—4v4)
	Girls		Boys		Girls		Boys
	Pre-T	Post-T	Pre-T	Post-T	Pre-T	Post-T	Pre-T	Post-T
Ms. Blue	0.219	0.232	0.274	0.277	0.275	0.381	0.377	0.346
Mr. Purple	0.208	0.201	0.270	0.276	0.271	0.292	0.351	0.346
Mr. Green	0.189	0.209	0.316	0.240	0.345	0.456	0.405	0.301
$\overline{\mathrm{x}}$ (SD)	0.205 (0.147)	0.213 (0.070)	0.285 (0.101)	0.266 (0.097)	0.303 (0.196)	0.388 (0.205)	0.371 (0.107)	0.337 (0.094)

Notes: $\overline{\mathrm{x}}$ (SD) = Mean (standard deviation).

identifies girls’ and boys’ prestige scores in the pre-test and post-test of both semesters. In the first semester, boys had significantly higher pre-test prestige scores compared to girls (Boys’ pre-test = 0.274, 0.270, and 0.316; and Girls’ pre-test = 0.219, 0.208, and 0.189; ANOVA: F(1) = 12.726, p < 0.01, η² = 0.152). Post-test results showed slight changes for both sexes, with both boys’ and girls’ scores generally increasing. However, the analysis between pre-test and post-test (

Table 6. Pre-test to post-test differences in prestige in each unit.

		$\overline{\mathbf{x}}$ Diff.	SD.	t	p	d
First semester (Basketball—3v3)	Girls	−0.012	0.156	−0.468	0.321	0.156
	Boys	0.016	0.156	0.587	0.281	0.139
Second semester (Volleyball—4v4)	Girls	−0.080	0.265	−1.993	<0.05	0.239
	Boys	0.038	0.147	1.399	<0.05	0.155

Notes: $\overline{\mathrm{x}}$ Diff. = Mean difference (i.e., Pre-test mean–Post-test mean); SD. = standard deviation.

) showed that these changes were not significant. However, in the second semester, the prestige scores for girls increased significantly (Ms. Blue: from 0.275 to 0.381; Mr. Green: from 0.345 to 0.456), while boys’ scores slightly decreased, leading to a more balanced prestige distribution between sexes (Volleyball ANOVA: F(1) = 0.029, p = 0.866, η² = 0.000).

4.2. Student Rates of Motor Engagement

The engagement rates, measured by the Rate of Play (RoP) and participation time (PT) (

Table 7. Engagement rates scores: Rate of Play and participation time.

	First Semester (Basketball—3v3)								Second Semester (Volleyball—4v4)
	PT				RoP				PT				RoP
	Pre-T		Post-T		Pre-T		Post-T		Pre-T		Post-T		Pre-T		Post-T
	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys	Girls	Boys
Ms. Blue	8.24 (1.47)	8.61 (0.64)	9.26 (.076)	9.27 (0.11)	1.42 (0.45)	2.17 (0.70)	2.58 (0.63)	2.57 (0.46)	6.40 (0.56)	5.86 (0.95)	8.06 (0.65)	8.23 (0.64)	1.23 (0.68)	0.99 (0.35)	2.86 (0.72)	2.82 (0.85)
Mr. purple	8.10 (1.07)	8.51 (0.40)	9.26 (0.21)	9.21 (0.18)	1.77 (0.75)	2.02 (0.42)	2.67 (0.33)	2.82 (0.50)	3.99 (0.76)	4.44 (0.99)	7 (1.03)	6.90 (0.59)	1.35 (0.90)	0.89 (0.70)	2.54 (0.62)	2.62 (0.97)
Mr. Green	6.47 (0.47)	7.58 (0.22)	8.60 (0.20)	8.60 (0.30)	2.01 (0.31)	3.30 (0.26)	3.78 (0.18)	4.04 (0.25)	5.18 (0.39)	4.86 (0.35)	7.12 (0.24)	7.63 (0.20)	1.22 (0.20)	1.11 (0.19)	2.89 (0.21)	2.60 (0.18)
$\overline{\mathrm{x}}$ (SD)	7.60 (1.14)	8.23 (1.63)	9.04 (0.87)	9.02 (0.53)	1.73 (0.77)	2.50 (1.35)	3.01 (0.76)	3.14 (1.04)	5.19 (0.75)	5.05 (1.47)	7.39 (0.96)	7.59 (0.52)	1.27 (0.78)	1 (1.04)	2.76 (0.77)	2.68 (0.45)

Notes: PT = participation time; RoP = Rate of Play; Pre-T = Pre-test; Post-T = Post-test; $\overline{\mathrm{x}}$ (SD) = Mean (standard deviation).

) indicated significant improvements from pre-test to post-test across both semesters. In the first semester, girls and boys both increased their PT and RoP, with girls showing a higher increase in PT (Ms. Blue: from 8.24 to 9.26; Mr. Purple: from 8.10 to 9.26) and RoP (Ms. Blue: from 1.42 to 2.58; Mr. Green: from 2.01 to 3.78). Boys also showed significant increases but to a lesser extent, leading to a decrease in the disparity between sexes. The mean differences and associated t-tests confirmed significant improvements for both girls (PT: t = −6.204, p < 0.01; RoP: t = −8.201, p < 0.01) and boys (PT: t = −6.411, p < 0.01; RoP: t = −3.507, p < 0.01).

In the second semester, both girls and boys demonstrated significant increases in their engagement rates (

Table 8. Pre-test to post-test differences in engagement rates.

			Mean Diff.	SD.	t	p	d
First semester (Basketball—3v3)	PT	Girls	−1.349	1.46	−6.204	<0.01	0.925
		Boys	−0.747	0.558	−6.411	<0.01	1.337
	Rop	Girls	−1292	1.057	−8.201	<0.01	1.223
		Boys	−0.643	0.879	−3.507	<0.01	0.731
Second semester (Volleyball—4v4)	PT	Girls	−2.382	1.328	−9657	<0.01	1.793
		Boys	−1.356	1.245	−7.798	<0.01	0.891
	Rop	Girls	−1.379	0.980	−7.579	<0.01	1.07
		Boys	−1.724	0.993	−7.160	<0.01	1.654

Mean Diff. = Mean difference (i.e., Pre-test $\overline{\mathrm{x}}$–Post-test $\overline{\mathrm{x}}$); SD. = standard deviation.

), though the patterns differed slightly from the first semester. Girls showed notable improvements in both participation time and Rate of Play. For instance, Ms. Blue’s PT increased from 1.42 to 2.58 and her RoP from 6.40 to 8.06. Mr. Green also showed substantial increases in PT (from 2.01 to 3.78) and RoP (from 5.18 to 7.12). Boys also experienced increases in PT and RoP, but the magnitude of the changes was smaller compared to the girls. Specifically, Mr. Purple’s PT increased from 1.77 to 2.67, and his RoP from 3.99 to 7.00. Although both sexes improved, the disparities between them narrowed significantly by the post-test, with no significant differences in engagement rates observed between sexes in volleyball (PT: p = 0.265; RoP: p = 0.330).

5. Discussion

This study explored engagement disparities and the presence of equity and inclusion within students’ social networks during game-based activities. The findings illustrate that, while boys initially displayed higher engagement levels than girls, the gap decreased substantially by the end of each semester. This improvement in engagement for both genders reflects a positive shift toward more equitable participation, suggesting that the pedagogical strategies employed were effective in fostering more inclusive and active involvement across sports.

5.1. The Role of Sex in Engagement Rates

The analysis of engagement rates revealed that initially, boys exhibited higher PT and RoP compared to girls in both the basketball and volleyball units. This finding is consistent with existing literature that often identifies gender disparities in physical education, with boys frequently showing higher levels of activity and engagement [3,4]. However, our study observed a reduction in these disparities by the end of the intervention. Specifically, in the volleyball unit, the difference between boys’ and girls’ engagement rates decreased significantly from the pre-test to the post-test. This aligns with research indicating that targeted pedagogical strategies can effectively promote greater equity in student participation [20]. Hence, our study offers a novel perspective by demonstrating that these disparities can be significantly reduced through longitudinal and targeted pedagogical interventions. Unlike prior studies that have highlighted persistent gender differences despite various interventions, our findings suggest that specific strategies implemented by PSTs can effectively level the playing field. Specifically, in the volleyball unit, the difference between boys’ and girls’ engagement rates decreased significantly from the pre-test to the post-test. This reduction was not just a marginal improvement but a substantial shift towards gender parity in engagement rates, showcasing the potential for well-structured interventions to create immediate positive outcomes.

Previous research has documented the effectiveness of inclusive teaching strategies and cooperative learning in promoting equitable participation [39]. However, our study extends this knowledge by focusing on the specific role of PSTs in implementing these strategies and monitoring their impact over a defined period. The interventions in our study included activity-based scaffolding and context-based scaffolding, which were designed to modify tasks to accommodate different ability levels and promote self-awareness and critical reflection among students. Furthermore, our research highlights the dynamic nature of engagement disparities, showing that with intentional and sustained efforts, significant progress can be made in a relatively short time. This is particularly important because it demonstrates that PSTs, even while still in their training phase, can effectively foster an inclusive and equitable learning environment. This finding contrasts with some prior studies where long-term professional development and extensive experience were deemed necessary to achieve similar outcomes [40].

Overall, our study contributes new insights into the potential for rapid and impactful change in gender disparities in physical education through targeted interventions by PSTs. It underscores the importance of equipping future educators with the skills and strategies needed to create inclusive and equitable learning environments, thereby challenging the notion that significant changes in gender disparities require extensive time and resources. This adds a valuable dimension to the existing body of research, highlighting the critical role of pre-service education in addressing and mitigating gender disparities in student engagement rates.

5.2. The Pedagogical Intervention Effect on Existing Inequities

The significant decrease in gender disparities in engagement rates over the course of the pedagogical intervention suggests that the strategies implemented were effective in reducing these differences. For instance, the observed reduction in the gap in PT and RoP between boys and girls, particularly in the volleyball unit, indicates that the intervention fostered a more inclusive environment. This is in line with findings by Dyson and Casey [13], who noted that well-designed pedagogical approaches can mitigate gender-based disparities in PE settings. The reduction in disparities was notable in volleyball, where differences between genders were minimized from the pre-test to the post-test. In contrast, basketball showed persistent but reduced differences, indicating that while progress was made, some disparities remained. This gradual improvement supports the notion that while pedagogical interventions can substantially reduce disparities, achieving ‘complete’ equity may require sustained and comprehensive efforts [28].

Additionally, the varying results between basketball and volleyball highlight the importance of context and sport-specific factors in designing interventions. Basketball, being a more physically demanding and fast-paced game, might present more challenges in achieving immediate equity compared to volleyball. This insight underscores the need for adaptable and sport-specific strategies when addressing gender disparities in PE, as different sports may require different approaches to foster inclusivity. Overall, our research provides evidence that targeted pedagogical interventions by PSTs can effectively reduce gender disparities in engagement rates in PE settings. It also emphasizes the importance of ongoing efforts and the need for context-sensitive approaches to achieve and sustain gender equity in student engagement.

5.3. Equity and Inclusion in Students’ Game Interactions

Regarding the equity and inclusiveness of student game interactions, the analysis of clustering and density measures indicated varying outcomes. In basketball, there was a notable increase in density from pre-test to post-test, which suggests that students were more engaged and distributed across the court. This improvement reflects enhanced inclusivity in game interactions, as more students were involved in active play. However, clustering remained relatively stable, which could imply that while participation was more evenly distributed, the social dynamics of game interactions were less affected. In volleyball, the stability in clustering and density throughout the intervention suggests that while overall engagement improved, the fundamental structure of game interactions remained consistent. This outcome is consistent with literature suggesting that while engagement levels can be enhanced through pedagogical changes, altering the deeper social dynamics of game interactions can be more challenging [7,41].

The observed stability in clustering during both basketball and volleyball units indicates that even as more students became involved in the play, the tendency to form subgroups or cliques remained. This finding highlights a critical area for future research and intervention. While increasing overall participation is a significant step towards inclusivity, ensuring that social interactions are equitable and inclusive requires additional strategies. These might include focused team-building exercises, explicit teaching of social skills, and structured opportunities for all students to take on different roles within the game. However, additional interventions beyond scaffolding processes could disrupt these social subgroups and foster more inclusive interactions. For instance, research emphasizes the value of team-building exercises and cooperative games, where students are encouraged to collaborate toward shared goals in breaking down social hierarchies and promote inclusive interactions [42].

Incorporating these activities into PE curricula could help mitigate the persistence of social subgroups by encouraging students to work with a wider variety of peers. Role-switching activities are another powerful intervention, as they allow students to experience different roles within a team or group setting. For instance, rotating leadership or decision-making roles can help redistribute power dynamics and provide marginalized students with opportunities to engage more fully [43]. These role-switching activities not only challenge pre-existing group structures but also promote empathy and perspective-taking among students, which are key elements of fostering social inclusion.

In addition to these interventions, the use of structured reflection sessions after team-building exercises or role-switching activities could further enhance their impact. Reflective discussions allow students to process their experiences, articulate their feelings, and gain awareness of social dynamics within their groups. These sessions also offer teachers an opportunity to address any inequities that arise during group interactions and guide students toward more inclusive behaviours. By integrating these strategies, PE teachers can create more dynamic, equitable social environments where students from diverse backgrounds and abilities can thrive [44]. This nuanced understanding of equity in game interactions underscores the complexity of achieving true inclusivity, which involves not only physical participation but also the quality and inclusiveness of social interactions.

5.4. Equity, Inclusion, and Engagement Rates

The observed improvements in equity and inclusivity of student game interactions were accompanied by significant increases in engagement rates. This suggests a positive relationship between the inclusiveness of game interactions and overall student engagement. The increased PT and RoP across both genders, particularly in the volleyball unit, demonstrate that as the environment became more inclusive, engagement levels also rose. This finding aligns with research by MacPhail and Tannehill [14], which underscores the critical role of an inclusive environment in enhancing student engagement in physical education settings. Their study indicates that when students feel valued and included, their motivation and participation significantly increase. Similarly, Parker and Curtner-Smith [7] found that inclusive pedagogical practices, such as differentiated instruction and positive reinforcement, foster higher levels of student engagement and enjoyment in physical activities.

The link between equity, inclusion, and engagement, which until now has been theoretically called for in previous works [24] emphasizing that equitable participation opportunities and inclusive teaching strategies lead to improved social interactions and a sense of belonging among students, now has a stronger empirical basis from this study. In this study, the PSTs’ interventions, which focused on creating equitable and inclusive game environments, seem to have effectively reduced disparities in engagement rates between genders. This increased equity, as highlighted by Ennis [45], who argued that gender equity in physical education is vital for fostering a positive and engaging learning experience for all students. By ensuring that both boys and girls had equal opportunities to participate and contribute, the interventions promoted a more balanced and inclusive environment, leading to increased overall engagement.

Importantly, the use of distinct instructional models for each sport was a necessary adaptation to the specific learning goals of basketball and volleyball. While this allowed for more tailored pedagogical interventions, it may have introduced some variability in how participation and engagement were measured across units. Future research should consider the implications of such methodological differences and explore more consistent pedagogical frameworks when comparing student engagement across multiple sports. Despite these challenges, the within-unit progress observed suggests that carefully designed pedagogical interventions can promote greater equity and inclusion in PE settings. Ultimately, this issue emphasizes the importance of considering the unique demands of each sport when designing interventions aimed at reducing gender disparities and fostering inclusive participation.

5.5. Pedagogical Implications for Teacher Education

This study underscores the central role of PSTs in promoting equity and inclusion in PE through the effective use of scaffolding strategies. Based on both the study’s findings and recent literature, several recommendations emerge to enhance teacher education programmes.

First, integrating scaffolding into the teacher education programmes’ curriculum is essential. Recent studies highlight the importance of contingent scaffolding, which involves adjusting instructional support informed by continuous assessment of students’ needs [46]. Scaffolding, as we argue, should thus become a core element of teacher education, particularly focusing on activity-based adaptations and context-based scaffolding. To effectively promote more inclusive and equitable learning environments, it is fundamental that PSTs must be trained to recognize student needs quickly and adapt their approaches accordingly. Including simulated teaching experiences with structured reflection has the potential to provide PSTs with the opportunity to practice their scaffolding skills and assess the impact of their interventions on student participation.

Managing social and peer dynamics further builds on the importance of scaffolding [47]. As discussed previously, the nature of social interactions directly affects students’ engagement and inclusion in learning activities [28]. Thus, PSTs education would benefit from in-depth training on how to scaffold these dynamics, ensuring that marginalized students are integrated into group activities as early as possible. Cooperative learning models, as explored by Casey [24], may support the development of environments where students not only acquire sports skills but also equity-related social skills, such as empathy, positive communication, and democratic leadership. However, these social outcomes, often sidelined by teachers when setting students’ learning goals, are not automatic and thus require teachers’ intentionality.

Furthermore, social scaffolding can be a complex endeavour, and thus training the PSTs to reflect on the importance dynamics allows PSTs to better understand the role of social dynamics in managing equity within learning groups. Hence, reflective practice remains critical, enabling PSTs to assess their own scaffolding strategies and adapt their teaching approaches [19]. Moreover, PSTs should possess the pedagogical tools to effectively extend (or scaffold) reflexive habits to the PE students, as their ability to reflect and self-assess emerging inequities allows them to co-create more inclusive environments (e.g., actively support their peers’ learning).

Sport-specific adaptations and scaffolding remain another important element. The differing outcomes between sports like basketball and volleyball in this study highlight the need for context-sensitive instructional approaches. Some sports pose unique challenges to equitable participation, requiring tailored scaffolding methods. Research by Lieberman, Houston-Wilson and Grenier [48], and Dockerty and Pritchard [49] emphasize the importance of sport-specific pedagogical strategies, including task modification and differentiated instruction. These approaches allow teachers to create more inclusive settings that accommodate students’ varying skills and backgrounds. Teacher education programmes should thus offer specialized modules that explore the unique challenges of different sports and their implications for equity.

6. Conclusions and Final Considerations

In conclusion, the results from this study indicate the potential of pedagogical scaffolding intervention implemented in effectively reducing disparities in engagement rates and improving inclusivity in students’ game interactions. Initially, boys showed higher engagement compared to girls, but these disparities were reduced significantly by the end of the intervention, particularly in volleyball. This finding underscores the effectiveness of targeted pedagogical strategies in fostering equity in physical education settings.

The network of game interactions became more equitable, with increased density suggesting broader student involvement. This improvement in density reflects enhanced inclusivity, as more students participated actively in gameplay. However, the stability in clustering dynamics indicates that while overall participation was more evenly distributed, the social interactions and group formations within the games remained relatively unchanged. This suggests that while engagement levels can be boosted through pedagogical interventions, altering the deeper social structures of game interactions requires additional, focused efforts.

The positive correlation between improved inclusivity and increased engagement rates underscores the effectiveness of the pedagogical strategies used. These findings align with the existing literature on the benefits of inclusive teaching approaches in physical education, which emphasize the importance of creating equitable and supportive learning environments [13]. By reducing barriers to participation and actively promoting inclusivity, educators can enhance student engagement and ensure that all students benefit from physical education activities. Henceforth, by integrating scaffolding into teacher education, focusing on managing social dynamics, fostering reflective practice, and tailoring sport-specific strategies, we offer actionable strategies for teacher education programmes to help PSTs navigate the complexities fostering inclusive and equitable learning in PE.

Future research should explore the long-term impacts of such interventions and investigate additional strategies to address persistent social dynamics within game interactions. For example, incorporating structured team-building exercises and explicit teaching of social skills may help to further break down existing barriers and promote more inclusive social interactions. Additionally, longitudinal studies could provide insights into the sustainability of the observed improvements and identify best practices for maintaining and enhancing inclusivity over time.

However, the findings of this study must be interpreted in light of certain limitations, particularly regarding the use of two different sports with distinct game structures and pedagogical approaches. Basketball, as a contact invasion sport, and volleyball, as a split-court, non-contact sport, naturally offer different participation dynamics, which may have influenced gender engagement patterns. The observed reductions in gender disparities within each sport unit suggest that the interventions were effective in their respective contexts. However, the inherent differences between the sports may have impacted the magnitude of these changes, with basketball continuing to exhibit some persistent disparities compared to volleyball.

Overall, the findings suggest that fostering equity and inclusion in game interactions is not only beneficial for social dynamics but also plays a significant role in enhancing student engagement in physical education. This positive relationship between inclusivity and engagement reinforces the importance of implementing inclusive pedagogical practices to create a supportive and engaging learning environment for all students. Our study’s findings suggest that targeted interventions can initiate positive changes rather ‘quickly’, but long(er)-term commitment and continuous refinement of strategies may be crucial for maintaining such positive outcome.

7. Limitations and Future Directions

While our study demonstrates the potential for targeted interventions to reduce gender disparities, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the sport-specific instructional models used for basketball and volleyball may have introduced variability in how participation and engagement were measured. Future research should explore more consistent pedagogical frameworks across different sports to allow for clearer comparisons. Additionally, although significant progress was made, achieving full equity in sports like basketball may require longer-term interventions or more comprehensive strategies. Finally, the scalability of these interventions in different educational settings remains a challenge, and further research is needed to test their effectiveness in larger, more diverse populations.

In conducting this study, we recognize that inherent differences between basketball (an invasion/contact sport) and volleyball (a split-court/non-contact sport) may have introduced variability in participation levels, particularly between genders. While these two sports are mandated by the PE curriculum and provide valuable insight into distinct types of game structures, their contrasting characteristics could potentially bias the findings related to gender equality in student engagement. For instance, the nature of volleyball as a split-court sport inherently limits direct physical interaction, while basketball involves higher levels of contact, which could have influenced gender dynamics in participation.

Moreover, this study’s design involved distinct pedagogical approaches tailored to each sport, which, while essential for maximizing the learning experience, could have further influenced the outcomes. These variations in instructional models between units were necessary due to the different skill sets and strategies required in each sport but may have introduced an additional layer of complexity when interpreting the results. Given that this study was conducted in real-world school settings, not in controlled laboratory conditions, other extraneous factors beyond the intervention may have also influenced student engagement. Therefore, the findings should be interpreted with caution, particularly when attempting to generalize the results across other sports or PE contexts. Future research should aim to explore similar interventions across a more homogeneous range of sports or employ a randomized controlled trial design to better control for these variables.