Research design

A qualitative case-study design was used to obtain an in-depth understanding of participants’ experiences and perceptions and of the contextual factors affecting implementation of the Physical Fitness common course. The case-study approach enabled examination of institutional practices within their real-world setting.

Study setting

The study was conducted at Bahir Dar University, a public university in Ethiopia where the Physical Fitness common course is compulsory for first-year undergraduate students.

Participants and sampling

Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants with direct experience of planning, delivering, supervising, or attending the course. Participants included five Physical Fitness instructors, one course chair, one department head, and 72 first-year students. The students represented 72 course sections and were organised into eight focus groups of nine participants.

Data collection

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and document analysis to support methodological triangulation. Interviews with instructors, the course chair, and the department head explored perceptions of course objectives, instructional practices, assessment procedures, monitoring mechanisms, and implementation challenges. Focus group discussions with first-year students examined their experiences of the course, levels of participation, perceptions of assessment, and views on fairness and effectiveness.

Relevant policy and institutional documents were reviewed, including the Ministry of Education harmonised curriculum framework, the course syllabus or departmental course guide, assessment guidance, and institutional directives relating to the Physical Fitness course. Interviews and focus groups were conducted in Amharic, audio-recorded with participants’ consent, and supplemented with field notes.

Data analysis

Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim in Amharic and translated into English. Data were analysed thematically using an inductive approach. The process involved familiarisation with the data, initial coding, development of candidate themes, review and refinement of themes, and interpretation. Codes were grouped into broader themes concerning policy–practice gaps, instructional and assessment challenges, student engagement, and institutional factors affecting course implementation. Findings from document analysis were integrated with interview and focus group data to corroborate or contrast emerging themes.

Ethical considerations

The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles applicable to research involving human participants and the institutional procedures of Bahir Dar University. Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained before data collection, and confidentiality and anonymity were maintained throughout the study.

Instructor commitment and instructional variability

Participants consistently reported that the course was not delivered in the same way across sections. Some instructors were described as highly committed, actively supervising practical sessions and encouraging participation, whereas others were perceived as less engaged. Differences were also reported in lesson planning, feedback, attendance requirements, and supervision of practical activities.

Instructors and academic leaders associated these differences with the absence of a standardised system for monitoring course delivery. They also noted that the course was sometimes treated as less important than credit-bearing courses, which reduced institutional attention and instructional rigour. Consequently, students enrolled in the same compulsory course experienced different learning conditions.

Weak monitoring and accountability mechanisms

Weak institutional monitoring and accountability emerged as a central theme. Although the Ministry curriculum framework emphasises structured implementation and quality assurance, participants reported limited university-level oversight of course delivery. Classroom observations, performance reviews, and structured reporting were described as irregular or absent.

Document analysis also indicated that institutional guidance did not clearly define the roles, responsibilities, and performance indicators of instructors responsible for the course. This lack of operational guidance limited accountability and allowed inconsistent practices to continue without systematic feedback or corrective action.

Compromised assessment integrity within the pass/fail system

Assessment represented one of the clearest areas of divergence between policy and practice. The pass/fail grading system was intended to encourage participation and reduce performance-related pressure, but participants reported unintended consequences. In some cases, students were awarded a passing grade despite limited attendance or minimal participation in practical sessions.

Instructors expressed differing views about assessment standards. Some considered that the pass/fail system restricted their ability to distinguish between active and inactive students, whereas others reported pressure to avoid student complaints or additional administrative work. Students also described unclear assessment criteria and perceived differences in grading standards across sections.

Uneven student participation and engagement

Student engagement varied substantially. Some students participated actively in practical sessions and recognised the health benefits of the course. Others reported low motivation, particularly when they believed that consistent attendance and effort were not necessary to obtain a passing grade.

The combination of pass/fail grading and weak enforcement of attendance requirements appeared to encourage a compliance-oriented approach among some students. Rather than viewing the course as an opportunity to develop lifelong physical-activity habits, they treated it as a requirement that could be completed with minimal effort.

Misalignment between policy intentions and institutional practice

The policy documents placed strong emphasis on inclusion, equity, health promotion, and active participation. However, these principles were not consistently reflected in institutional practice. The absence of standardised assessment tools, limited monitoring, and variable instructional commitment contributed to a disconnect between policy goals and classroom realities.

Participants considered the national policy framework to be clear, but emphasised that its implementation required stronger institutional ownership, operational guidance, and systematic quality-assurance mechanisms. Without these supports, course delivery remained fragmented and uneven.

Instructional quality and instructor commitment

A major finding was the variability in instructor commitment and course delivery. This observation is consistent with literature emphasising the influence of teacher competence, preparation, and engagement on students’ learning experiences and satisfaction (3). Professional development and reflective practice have also been described as important mechanisms for helping physical education teachers clarify learning intentions, evaluate their own practice, and support lifelong participation in physical activity (4). In the present study, the absence of standardised supervision and professional support appears to have amplified differences among course sections.

Monitoring, accountability, and institutional support

The limited monitoring and accountability mechanisms identified in this study indicate that a clear curriculum framework alone is insufficient to ensure consistent implementation. Effective implementation requires structures for supervision, feedback, evaluation, and institutional follow-up. Reflective and systematic pedagogical approaches may help connect curriculum goals with everyday teaching practice (4). Digital tools may also offer opportunities to support teacher competence, documentation, and engagement, although their effectiveness depends on appropriate institutional infrastructure and implementation (5).

Assessment integrity and the pass/fail grading system

The findings raise concerns about the way the pass/fail system was interpreted and applied. Although this approach may reduce performance pressure, insufficiently defined criteria may weaken accountability and encourage minimal participation. Previous work has highlighted the role of assessment in shaping students’ motivation and participation in physical education (6). Assessment should therefore communicate clear expectations and distinguish meaningful engagement and learning from simple course completion. More broadly, assessment policies should be aligned with their educational context and intended outcomes (7).

Student motivation and engagement

Uneven participation reflects the close relationship among instructional quality, assessment, motivation, and engagement. Teachers play a central role in supporting students’ psychological needs and the quality of their engagement in physical education (8). Evidence based on self-determination theory also suggests that autonomous motivation is associated with the adoption and maintenance of exercise and physical-activity behaviours (9). Student-centred learning environments and active use of digital technology may further support intrinsic motivation and academic engagement (10). These findings indicate that the course should move beyond attendance-based compliance and provide meaningful experiences capable of supporting long-term physical-activity habits.

Policy implementation

The misalignment between national policy and institutional practice is consistent with implementation research showing that clear policy objectives do not automatically translate into effective delivery. Successful implementation also depends on organisational infrastructure, leadership, training, monitoring, feedback, and sustained support for those responsible for delivery (11). In the context of the Physical Fitness common course, stronger institutional ownership and clearer operational guidance are required to translate policy principles into consistent teaching, assessment, and student experiences.

Implications for policy and practice

The findings suggest several priorities. Instructor preparation and continuing professional development should be strengthened to reduce variability in course delivery. Quality-assurance mechanisms should include standardised reporting, periodic classroom or practical-session observation, peer review, and clearly defined responsibilities. Assessment procedures should be revised to balance the motivational intent of pass/fail grading with transparent measures of attendance, participation, learning, and fitness-related outcomes. Finally, the course should incorporate engaging and student-centred pedagogies that help students understand the personal relevance of physical activity beyond the immediate requirement to pass the course.

Study limitations

The findings should be interpreted within the context of a single university and a purposively selected sample. The qualitative design provides detailed contextual understanding but does not establish the prevalence of the identified problems or allow statistical generalisation to other institutions. In addition, the findings rely partly on participants’ perceptions and may be affected by recall or social-desirability bias. Nevertheless, triangulation across interviews, focus groups, and documents strengthened the credibility of the analysis.