Generative AI–Enabled Reconstruction of University General Physical Education: Application Scenarios, Mechanisms, and Risk Boundaries

Authors

  • Liang Shang Southwest University of Political Science & Law image/svg+xml Author
  • Yao Jiankang Wuhan Optics Valley No. 4 Junior High School, Wuhan, Hubei, China. Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.65514/6q2g1n84

Keywords:

University general physical education; Generative artificial intelligence; Teaching model; Human–AI collaboration; PE learning self-efficacy; Self-regulated learning

Abstract

The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is moving higher education beyond the digitization of resources toward interactive, personalized, and intelligent learning support. Although GenAI has been widely discussed in language learning, writing, engineering, and medical education, university general physical education (PE) has distinctive characteristics, including embodied practice, motor-skill acquisition, real-time interaction, and safety risks. These features make it inappropriate to transfer generic "AI-assisted teaching" models directly into PE. Drawing on conceptual analysis and an integrative narrative review, this article examines how GenAI can be incorporated into university general PE without weakening embodied practice, teacher professional judgment, or student agency. It synthesizes literature on GenAI in higher education, artificial intelligence in PE, social cognitive theory, self-regulated learning, and human-centered AI, and shifts the central question from what the technology can do to what role it should play in PE. The article identifies appropriate uses in pre-class diagnosis and preparation, low-risk in-class knowledge support, differentiated task design, post-class reflection, and support for autonomous physical activity. On this basis, a Teacher–GenAI–Student collaborative model is proposed. The model assigns professional judgment, safety control, and formal evaluation to teachers; low-risk cognitive support such as explanation, goal decomposition, task generation, and structured reflection to GenAI; and embodied practice and learning decisions to students. Four potential mechanisms—differentiated support, PE learning self-efficacy, learning engagement, and self-regulation—are further identified, together with governance boundaries concerning hallucinations, physical safety, privacy, algorithmic bias, cognitive offloading, and teacher AI literacy. The article contributes a stage-specific framework that positions GenAI as a scaffold around physical practice rather than as a substitute for it. Its educational value lies in extending support across time and space while preserving teacher professionalism and students’long-term capacity for autonomous physical activity.

References

1.Albaloul, O., Marttinen, R., & Killian, C. (2024). Unlocking educational potential: How physical education teachers can thoughtfully benefit from using ChatGPT for planning, instruction, and assessment. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 95, 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2024.2378776

2.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.

3.Bond, M., Khosravi, H., De Laat, M., Bergdahl, N., Negrea, V., Oxley, E., Pham, P., Chong, S. W., & Siemens, G. (2024). A meta systematic review of artificial intelligence in higher education: A call for increased ethics, collaboration, and rigour. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00436-z

4.Chen, S., & Cheung, A. C. K. (2025). Effect of generative artificial intelligence on university students learning outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 49, 100737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100737

5.Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2024). The educational affordances and challenges of ChatGPT: State of the field. TechTrends, 68, 380–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-024-00939-0

6.Lee, Y., & Kim, D. (2025). Evolving professionalism in the AI era: Implementing generative AI in physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 96(3), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2024.2444586

7.Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO.

8.Qian, Y. (2025). Pedagogical applications of generative AI in higher education: A systematic review of the field. TechTrends, 69, 1105–1120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-025-01100-1

9.Trendowski, T. (2025). Five ways to use generative artificial intelligence in physical education. Strategies, 38(2), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/08924562.2024.2444202

10.Wang, P., Jing, Y., & Shen, S. (2025). A systematic literature review on the application of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) in teaching within higher education: Instructional contexts, process, and strategies. The Internet and Higher Education, 65, 100996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2025.100996

11.Yang, Y., Luo, J., Yang, M., Yang, R., & Chen, J. (2024). From surface to deep learning approaches with Generative AI in higher education: An analytical framework of student agency. Studies in Higher Education, 49(5), 817–830. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2327003

12.Zhou, T., Wu, X., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., & Zhang, S. (2024). Application of artificial intelligence in physical education: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 8203–8220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12128-2

13.Zhu, G., Dai, X., Jiang, S., Wang, Z., Liang, M., Pan, Y., & Tao, Y. (2026). Generative AI in physical education and health: A narrative review and conceptual framework for interdisciplinary thematic learning. Frontiers in Public Health, 14, 1842782. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1842782

14.Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.

Downloads

Published

2026-09-24

How to Cite

Generative AI–Enabled Reconstruction of University General Physical Education: Application Scenarios, Mechanisms, and Risk Boundaries. (2026). Journal of Contemporary Economics and Management, 2(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.65514/6q2g1n84

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.