Impact of Active Methodologies in Higher Education in the Field of Sports Science and Physical Education: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Nowadays, the use of active methodologies in higher education has become increasingly important, particularly in fields such as sports science and physical education, as they place students at the centre of the teaching and learning process. The aim of this review is to analyze the impact of active methodologies on learning aspects and educational variables among students of physical education and sports sciences in higher education. The guidelines set out in the PRISMA statement were followed, with a search conducted on the Web of Science, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, PubMed and Dialnet databases, analyzing studies published between 1 January 2021 and 31 May 2026. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261387580). The selection and assessment of the methodological quality of the chosen articles were carried out using standardized tools. Twenty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. The results highlighted that pedagogical approaches such as service learning, the flipped classroom, cooperative learning, and gamification, amongst others, had a positive impact on students’ social, motivational, procedural and cognitive development, and that technological support is increasingly being used in conjunction with these pedagogical models. In conclusion, active methodologies are an effective strategy in higher education within the field of sport, although their positive impact can only be maximized through rigorous and context specific pedagogical application.

1. Introduction

Higher education is currently undergoing a transformation driven by the need for social, technological and economic change [1,2]. Consequently, university education cannot be limited to the transmission of purely theoretical and practical content; rather, it requires the development of cross-cutting skills, critical thinking, problem-solving and teamwork [3,4]. Furthermore, within the fields of sports science and physical education (PE), this transformation calls for the adoption of pedagogical approaches that prioritize reflection, autonomy and meaningful learning [5,6,7].

Within this context, active methodologies emerge as a key tool. These are defined as pedagogical strategies in which the student’s active participation is the central element, prioritizing the construction of knowledge and the development of competences [8,9,10]. In this regard, active methodologies contribute positively to the holistic development of students, particularly by fostering their cognitive, motivational, social and procedural dimensions [11,12,13].

With respect to this, active methodologies promote the cognitive aspect by encouraging the use of critical thinking, greater understanding and the construction of knowledge [14,15,16]. Moreover, they promote the motivational aspect by increasing students’ interest, engagement and autonomy in relation to the subjects [10,17]. At the same time, various studies have highlighted how the social dimension also improves with the use of these models, as they foster the development of social interaction amongst peers and teamwork [18,19]. Similarly, the more practical aspects of the teaching–learning process are also positively affected, as the implementation of active methodologies leads to the acquisition of various skills, particularly within the field of sport [20,21].

In the field of sports science and PE, various active methodologies, such as gamification, cooperative learning, service learning, and the flipped classroom, improve educational outcomes [22,23]. Gamification incorporates game mechanics to enhance motivation, participation, cognitive development, peer cooperation, and enjoyment [24,25,26,27,28]. Cooperative learning fosters positive interdependence, individual responsibility, and peer interaction [29,30], which reinforces intrapersonal skills, teamwork, self-confidence, and emotional regulation, provided that the interventions are ongoing rather than one-time events [20,31,32,33]. Service learning connects academic content with community needs [34,35], promoting meaningful learning, civic engagement, and the application of knowledge in the real world when learning objectives are closely aligned with the service provided [34,36,37]. Finally, the flipped classroom shifts theoretical instruction outside the classroom to maximize active practice during class [38,39], which increases active participation, autonomy, student satisfaction [40,41,42], and academic performance [43,44], although its success depends largely on rigorous instructional design and a balanced workload [41]. In addition to these models, other active strategies, such as game-based learning, Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU), Sports Education (SEM) and project-based learning, amongst others, offer new ways of tailoring teaching to specific learning objectives and contexts [22,45].

One of the most significant aspects of the use of active methodologies is the influence of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), as these have established themselves as a highly significant pedagogical resource [46,47]. Within this technological framework, these tools facilitate a wide range of scenarios, such as the combination of practical motor skills and theoretical aspects, immediate feedback, and independent work, whether in face-to-face, digital or blended learning settings [48,49]. In addition, the use of ICT is associated with improvements in motivation, engagement and performance, particularly when mobile apps, videos or social media are used [46,50]. However, the actual impact depends not so much on the presence of technology as on its correct application by the teacher, on teacher training in the use of these resources, and on the characteristics of each group in which the intervention takes place [50,51]. For all these reasons, ICTs broaden the range of methodological options available to teaching staff and facilitate the adaptation of university teaching to digital contexts [47,52,53].

Despite the scientific evidence, the implementation of active methodologies in higher education is inconsistent and is influenced by the tendency of teaching staff to favour a traditional model [54,55,56]. Additionally, there are other difficulties, such as a lack of pedagogical training, a limited time to design the various interventions, limitations in teachers’ digital competence, and institutional barriers [57,58,59]. Although several reviews have examined specific active methodologies in Physical Education and sport, most have focused on single models or on non-university populations [60,61]. This review therefore synthesizes evidence across multiple active methodologies implemented specifically in higher-education sport sciences and PE programmes, organizing findings according to cognitive, motivational, social and procedural learning dimensions. Consequently, the main objective of this review is to analyze the impact of active methodologies on learning aspects and educational variables among students of physical education and sports sciences in higher education.

2. Materials and Methods

This study is based on a systematic review that followed the PRISMA methodological guidelines [62], with the aim of providing an overview of the current scientific literature on the application of active methodologies in higher education, and specifically in the context of sports science and PE. Furthermore, to ensure transparency, reduce bias and avoid overlap with other systematic reviews, the protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420261387580). The review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 checklist [62].

With regard to the methodological design, this is a systematic review based on the PICO model [63]; however, no comparators were included. Based on this scope, the research question was formulated as follows: to what extent do active teaching methodologies influence the cognitive, motivational, social and procedural dimensions of higher education students studying sport science and PE?

With respect to the search strategy, terms relating to active methodologies, the context of higher education and the fields of physical activity and sport science and PE were combined in order to identify relevant studies and minimize the loss of relevant records (Table 1).

Table 1. Search strategy and Boolean search terms.

Search Strategy
(“active learning” OR “active methodology”) AND (“higher education” OR “university” OR “universities” OR “college” OR “undergraduate” OR “postgraduate” OR “graduate” OR “tertiary education” OR “faculty” OR “academic” OR “bachelor” OR “master”) AND (“sport” OR “physical education” OR “kinesiology” OR “exercise science” OR “physical activity” OR “sport science”).

Moreover, in order to precisely define the search and selection of studies, a set of eligibility criteria was established. These criteria made it possible to narrow down the relevant research, ensuring consistency with the subject of the study and facilitating the screening process for the identified registers (Table 2).

Table 2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Inclusion Criteria	Exclusion Criteria
Original scientific articles published in peer-reviewed academic journals.	Reviews (systematic, narrative, integrative, meta-analyses), methodological articles, theoretical proposals and editorials.
Studies conducted in the context of higher education.	Studies conducted in non-university stages.
Studies that address active methodologies or student-centred teaching approaches.	Studies describing teaching experiences without explicit reference to active methodologies.
Empirical studies with a clearly defined methodological design, including a clear description of participants, context and instruments/procedures.	Studies without an empirical design or lacking sufficient methodological description to assess study quality.
Studies published between January 2021 and May 2026.	Studies published outside the established time period.
Manuscripts with full-text access in the selected databases.	Duplicate manuscripts and studies without full access to information.
Studies whose main focus is PE or sport science.	Higher education studies not primarily focused on PE or sport science.

Taking all of the above into account, the search was carried out in reference databases, limiting the time period to between 1 January 2021 and 31 May 2026, yielding a total of 3525 articles (Table 3).

Table 3. Databases and information sources used in the systematic search.

WoS	Scopus	Dialnet	SportDISCUS	PUBMED
n = 249	n = 11	n = 29	n = 211	n = 3025

Firstly, 186 duplicate articles were excluded, leaving 3339 studies for selection. Next, two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts, resulting in the exclusion of 3209 records. The main reasons for exclusion at this stage were: (1) studies conducted in non-university educational settings (elementary, secondary, or vocational education); (2) studies not focused on physical education or sports science; (3) studies describing teaching experiences without explicit reference to active methodologies; (4) reviews, theoretical proposals, editorials, or methodological articles rather than empirical studies; and (5) studies published outside the established time frame. Following the screening of titles and abstracts, 129 articles were selected for full-text evaluation.

A second selection was then conducted, this time of the full-text articles. After reviewing the full texts, 105 articles were excluded for the following reasons: (1) lack of empirical data or insufficient methodological description to assess the quality of the study; (2) participants not enrolled in institutions of higher education; (3) a primary focus not centred on physical education or sports science; (4) teaching experiences without a clear application of active methodologies; and (5) inability to access the full-text versions. Finally, the search was concluded by selecting a total of 24 articles, which met the inclusion and exclusion criteria for data extraction. The process described is detailed in the following PRISMA flowchart (Figure 1).

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram.

Once the selection process was complete, the methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the 2018 version of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), which incorporates design-specific criteria [64]. Each study was assessed criterion by criterion according to its methodological design (qualitative, quantitative non-randomized, quantitative descriptive or mixed methods). The results of the methodological appraisal are reported in Table 4.

Table 4. Methodological quality appraisal of included studies using the MMAT (2018).

Author	Design	1	2	3	4	5
Cebrián-Cifuentes et al. [65].	Quantitative non-randomized	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Crisol-Moya & Caurcel-Cara [12].	Quantitative descriptive	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Navandar et al. [66].	Qualitative	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Ruíz-Montero et al. [67].	Qualitative	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Camacho-Sánchez et al. [68].	Mixed methods	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Ortuondo et al. [69].	Quantitative non-randomized	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Peña-González et al. [70].	Quantitative non-randomized	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Flores-Aguilar et al. [27].	Qualitative	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Hu et al. [71].	Quantitative non-randomized	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Peña-González et al. [72].	Quantitative non-randomized	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes
Ribeiro-Silva et al. [19].	Qualitative	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Casterad et al. [73].	Quantitative descriptive	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Solera-Alfonso et al. [13].	Qualitative	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Temirkhanov et al. [74].	Quantitative descriptive	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Zach & Avugos [75].	Mixed methods	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Ceballos-Bernal & Correa-Bautista [76].	Quantitative non-randomized	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Lobo-de-Diego et al. [77].	Qualitative	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
López-Carril et al. [78].	Quantitative non-randomized	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes
Pizarro-Mateo et al. [79].	Quantitative non-randomized	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Rakha [16].	Quantitative non-randomized	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Rakha [80].	Quantitative non-randomized	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Sotoca-Orgaz et al. [81].	Mixed methods	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Yousef et al. [21].	Quantitative non-randomized	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Montoro-Pérez et al. [82].	Quantitative descriptive	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes

Columns 1–5 correspond to the five design-specific methodological quality criteria of the MMAT (2018) for each study type (qualitative, quantitative non-randomized, quantitative descriptive, or mixed methods).

Four researchers specializing in active methodologies independently assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Agreement among the reviewers in their quality assessments was substantial (Fleiss kappa > 0.70). Disagreements were resolved through discussion. In addition, inter-rater reliability was calculated for the title/abstract screening and full-text eligibility assessment stages. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts, and the same procedure was followed for full-text assessment. Disagreements at all stages were resolved through discussion and, when necessary, consultation with a third reviewer.

Finally, a coding manual was developed to record the main characteristics of the selected studies.

3. Results

In order to address the research question, a coding manual was drawn up to record and organize the most relevant data from the 25 selected articles. Ten categories were established, including authorship, publication date, article title, sample size (small, medium, large and very large), objective, design (qualitative, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized quantitative, descriptive quantitative or mixed methods), methodology used, dimension analyzed (cognitive, motivational, social, procedural), results/conclusions and quality (Table 5).

Table 5. Categories established for the analysis of the articles in the systematic review.

Category 1	Category 2	Category 3	Category 4	Category 5
Author	Year	Title	Sample	Objective
Category 6	Category 7	Category 8	Category 9	Category 10
Design	Methodology used	Dimension analyzed	Results and conclusions	Quality

Firstly, with regard to the year of publication, it can be seen that there was a higher volume of scientific output in 2025, with a total of eight publications, followed by 2021, 2023 and 2024, with four studies each. Meanwhile, 2022 recorded three manuscripts and 2026 just one, although this latter figure relates only to research published up to June (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Distribution of studies by year of publication.

Secondly, taking into account the characteristics of the sample, six studies had a small sample size (10–49 participants), nine included medium-sized samples (50–99 participants), seven used large samples (100–299 participants) and three worked with very large samples (≥300 participants). Furthermore, regarding the participants’ profile, most of the studies involved sports science students (n = 16), five studies involved PE students, two articles involved combined samples of sports science and PE students and one study involved postgraduate students (PE) (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Distribution of studies based on sample characteristics.

Thirdly, based on the study design, eleven studies with a non-randomized quantitative design were analyzed, six with a qualitative design, four with a descriptive quantitative approach, and three using mixed methods. No clinical trials were identified (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Distribution based on the methodological design of the included studies.

Fourthly, the articles were analyzed based on the methodologies used; a total of 28 methodological strategies were recorded, as four studies were identified that combined strategies, an aspect considered to be a hybridisation of methodologies. The most common pedagogical models were gamification (n = 4), cooperative learning (n = 4), service learning (n = 3) and the flipped classroom (n = 3), accounting 50 per cent of the articles. Another interesting aspect regarding methodologies is that 12 studies explicitly related to the use of ICT (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Distribution of studies according to the active methodologies present in the studies.

Finally, with regard to the dimension analyzed, a total of 36 codings were recorded, as some studies addressed more than one dimension. Twelve studies analyzed the motivational dimension, eleven the cognitive dimension, seven studies the social dimension, and four the procedural dimension. Furthermore, 10 codes involved simultaneous analysis of multiple dimensions (two dimensions per study), which explains why the number of codes exceeds the number of articles (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Distribution of studies according to the dimensions identified in the included studies.

Based on this process, a summary was drawn up to provide an overview of the body of studies (Table 6).

Table 6. Characteristics of the studies included in this systematic review on the use of active methodologies in PE and sports science in higher education.

Author	Year	Title	Sample	Objective	Design	Methodology Used	Dimension Analyzed	Results and Conclusions
Cebrián-Cifuentes et al. [65].	2021	Analysis of teachers’ digital competence and use of ICT resources following a university-based intervention process, based on the implementation of an innovative gamification methodology.	86 university students (38 sports science). Medium.	To analyze the effect of a gamified intervention on teachers’ digital competence in initial PE teacher training.	Quantitative non-randomized	Gamification	Cognitive	The university students improved their academic performance and enhanced their knowledge and use of technological resources following the intervention.
Crisol-Moya & Caurcel-Cara [12].	2021	Active Methodologies in Physical Education: Perception and Opinion of Students on the Pedagogical Model Used by Their Teachers.	303 university students (145 sports science and 158 PE). Very large.	To examine students’ perceptions of active methodologies and to study personal/academic differences and correlations between the factors analyzed.	Quantitative descriptive	Various active methodologies (problem-based learning, project-based learning, case studies, cooperative work)	Motivational	Students rated the active methodologies positively, highlighting their impact on intrinsic motivation and satisfaction with learning.
Navandar et al. [66].	2021	The use of Instagram in the Sports Biomechanics Classroom	171 sports science university students. Large.	To analyze the change in students’ perceptions of the use of Instagram as a learning tool, within an active methodology for biomechanical analysis.	Qualitative	Social media-based learning (Instagram)	Motivational	Students view the use of Instagram for learning biomechanical analysis positively, increasing its perceived usefulness as a source of information and a platform for presenting work.
Ruíz-Montero et al. [67].	2021	Development of prosocial competencies in PETE and Sport Science students. Social justice, Service-Learning and Physical Activity in cultural diversity contexts.	30 PE and sports science university students. Small.	To assess the development of prosocial skills in university studies through the service-learning methodology within a context of cultural diversity.	Qualitative	Service learning	Social	Prosocial skills are enhanced, with particular emphasis on organization, proactivity and optimism, self-esteem, as well as tolerance and respect.
Camacho-Sánchez et al. [68].	2022	Gamified Digital Game-Based Learning as a Pedagogical Strategy: Student Academic Performance and Motivation.	126 sports science university students. Large.	To analyze the effect of a pedagogical experience on university students, comparing the results with a traditional methodology and with various gamified activities.	Mixed methods	Gamification + digital game-based learning	Cognitive and motivational	By improving academic performance and motivation among all participants, gamified digital game-based learning emerges as an effective tool that promotes active learning, enhances performance and maintains high levels of motivation.
Ortuondo et al. [69].	2022	Effects of an intervention based on cooperative learning on the physical self-concept of trainee physical education teachers.	53 PE university students. Medium.	To assess changes in physical self-concept following an intervention based on cooperative learning, and to analyze differences by gender.	Quantitative non-randomized	Cooperative learning	Social	University students’ physical self-concept improved following the implementation of cooperative learning.
Peña-González et al. [70].	2022	The Student-Coach Role as an Active Learning Method in Higher Education: A Longitudinal Study.	316 sports science university students. Very large.	To compare academic performance in the Football module between students who did and did not participate in the active ‘student-coach’ role methodology.	Quantitative non-randomized	Student-coach role	Cognitive	Improves academic performance and promotes learning, particularly when students take on practical roles such as that of a coach.
Flores-Aguilar et al. [27].	2023	“I Learned More Because I Became More Involved”: Teacher’s and Students’ Voice on Gamification in Physical Education Teacher Education.	74 sports science university students. Medium.	To analyze the views of students and the lecturer on a gamification experience applied to initial PE teacher training.	Qualitative	Gamification	Motivational	Gamification was viewed positively; it enhanced motivation, engagement and learning by creating a novel and more engaging experience.
Hu et al. [71].	2023	Research on the design and application of “MOOC  +  flipped classroom” for basketball courses in colleges and universities from the perspective of education modernization.	64 sports science university students. Medium.	To examine the impact of the MOOC + flipped classroom model on the teaching of basketball at university, with a view to enhancing students’ skills and providing a theoretical and practical basis to support this model.	Quantitative non-randomized	Flipped classroom + MOOC	Procedural and social	The combination of MOOCs and the flipped classroom promotes educational modernization and contributes to student engagement, cooperation, skills development, and autonomy in university basketball.
Peña-González et al. [72].	2023	The effect of a combination of flipped classroom and gamification on university student is perceived teaching quality, subject satisfaction and academic performance.	102 sports science university students. Large.	To analyze the effects of an activity based on the flipped classroom and gamification on teaching quality, satisfaction with the subject and academic performance, with the aim of assessing the impact of these active methodologies.	Quantitative non-randomized	Flipped classroom + gamification	Cognitive	The flipped classroom and gamification promoted engagement, satisfaction, and academic performance, collectively demonstrating a positive impact compared with traditional teaching.
Ribeiro-Silva et al. [19].	2023	Educating Teachers for Sustainability and Social Justice: A Service-Learning Project in Physical Education Initial Teacher Education.	72 PE university students. Medium.	To examine the influence of service learning linked to Olympic values on teacher training, in relation to social skills, and to examine its potential to promote inclusive and sustainable education	Qualitative	Service learning	Social	The service-learning methodology fostered attitudes of social commitment and sustainability; moreover, behavioural changes were observed in terms of social responsibility within teaching practice.
Casterad et al. [73].	2024	Participatory evaluation in Higher Education: trends and their impact on training in sports sciences.	147 sports science university students. Large.	To analyze the effect of an active and participatory methodology on the development of university students’ skills and to assess how this approach helps to tailor teaching to their needs.	Quantitative descriptive	Student-centred	Cognitive	Active methodology promotes meaningful learning and the development of skills. The combination of participation, reflection and feedback enables improvements to students’ learning.
Solera-Alfonso et al. [13].	2024	University students’ perceptions of the application of a cooperative methodology in the initial training of Physical Education teachers: a qualitative study.	293 PE university students. Large.	To investigate students’ perceptions of the use of cooperative learning in higher education and to analyze its benefits and affect engagement and teamwork.	Qualitative	Cooperative learning	Social	Cooperative learning promotes social skills and peer learning, although assessment and the use of tools need to be improved to optimize its application.
Temirkhanov et al. [74].	2024	Investigating the conception of collaborative learning (CL) and student engagement in the acquisition of practical skills (SEPSA) among prospective physical education and sports students.	310 sports science university students. Very large.	To analyze the relationship between collaborative learning and skills acquisition, and to examine its impact on the development of competences in higher education	Quantitative descriptive	Cooperative learning	Procedural and motivational	University students improved their acquisition of practical skills with collaborative learning, which increased their self-efficacy, motivation, and engagement.
Zach & Avugos [75].	2024	Co-teaching in higher education: implications for teaching, learning, engagement, and satisfaction.	50 sports science university students. Medium.	To assess the impact of co-teaching on students and teaching staff, evaluating its benefits, challenges, and contribution to student satisfaction.	Mixed methods	Co-teaching	Motivational and social	Co-teaching improved student engagement, satisfaction, and camaraderie, as well as strengthening communication with teaching staff.
Ceballos-Bernal & Correa-Bautista [76].	2025	Effectiveness of an educational intervention based on interactive scenarios to improve attitudes towards sports statistics: a quasi-experimental study.	50 sports science university students. Medium.	To examine the effectiveness of an intervention based on interactive scenarios in improving attitudes towards statistics among sports science students.	Quantitative non-randomized	Interactive scenarios	Cognitive and motivational	The interactive scenario methodology improves students’ attitudes towards statistics, particularly by reducing their perception of difficulty.
Lobo-de-Diego et al. [77].	2025	Service Learning and the promotion of physical activity in community centres during the initial training of physical education teachers.	10 university students PE. Small.	To assess the influence of service learning on teacher training and examine the development of skills in real-life situations.	Qualitative	Service learning	Procedural and social	Service learning fosters teaching skills in real-life contexts, promotes active lifestyles, and is establishing itself as a model with social value.
López-Carril et al. [78].	2025	Pinterest in Higher Education: Insights From a Sport Management Course.	247 sports science university students. Large.	To ascertain students’ views on the use of Pinterest as a teaching and learning tool in a sports management module.	Quantitative non-randomized	Social media-based learning (Pinterest)	Cognitive	The use of Pinterest is associated with an improved perception of learning; also, its use enhances professional skills in real-world contexts.
Pizarro-Mateo et al. [79].	2025	Effects of a hybrid sport education and TGfU unit on pre-service PE teachers’ PNB and autonomy.	38 sports science university students. Small.	To examine the effect of a hybrid approach combining active methodologies in handball on basic psychological needs and support for autonomy among university students.	Quantitative non-randomized	SEM + TGfU	Motivational	The hybrid approach improved autonomy and competence, whilst also promoting student motivation and engagement.
Rakha [16].	2025a	Promoting online teaching through active learning strategies: applications and innovations.	23 postgraduate students (PE). Small.	To assess the effect of online active learning strategies on cognitive performance and attitudes towards online teaching.	Quantitative non-randomized	Online cooperative learning	Cognitive and motivational	The methodology used encouraged student motivation and participation, and also improved cognitive performance
Rakha [80].	2025b	Cooperative learning with QR codes technology: enhancing cognitive achievement and attitudes among students.	30 sports science university students. Small.	To examine the effectiveness of a cooperative learning intervention combined with QR codes in improving students’ cognitive performance and attitudes towards the subject.	Quantitative non-randomized	Cooperative learning supported by QR codes	Cognitive and motivational	The use of cooperative learning with QR codes improves students’ cognitive performance and attitudes, promoting participation and motivation.
Sotoca-Orgaz et al. [81].	2025	Impact of a Serious Board Game on the Academic Performance of Future Physical Education Teachers.	27 university students PE. Small.	To analyze the impact of applying an active methodology based on a board game on academic performance, motivation and transfer to professional practice amongst future PE teachers.	Mixed methods	Game-based learning	Cognitive and motivational	The use of board games improves academic performance, increases motivation and promotes transfer to real-life teaching contexts.
Yousef et al. [21].	2025	Impact of flipped classroom strategy and learning on the acquisition of basic skills among students in the basketball 1 course at Birzeit University.	66 sports science university students. Medium.	To examine the effect of the active ‘flipped classroom’ methodology on the acquisition of basic basketball skills.	Quantitative non-randomized	Flipped class-room	Procedural	The flipped classroom is a more useful tool than the traditional method for the acquisition of basic basketball skills
Montoro-Pérez et al. [82].	2026	Simulation-Based Educational Practices and Their Relationship with Emotional Intelligence and Stress Coping Skills: An Exploratory Case Study in First Aid Training for Physical Activity and Sports Sciences Students.	77 sports science university students. Medium.	To analyze the relationship between educational practices in simulated environments, stress coping styles, and levels of emotional intelligence.	Quantitative descriptive	Simulation-based learning	Cognitive and motivational	Simulation-based learning was positively associated with improvements in students’ emotional intelligence and stress coping styles.

4. Discussion

The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the impact of active methodologies on learning aspects and educational variables among students of physical education and sports sciences in higher education.

Overall, the included studies reported generally favourable associations between active methodologies and academic performance, skills acquisition, motivation and practical competencies [65,67,68,71]. Nevertheless, these findings should be interpreted cautiously because most of the included studies were non-randomized, descriptive, qualitative or mixed methods studies. With this in mind, the findings are consistent with the existing literature across various educational contexts and disciplinary fields, confirming the effectiveness of these pedagogical models not only in sports science but also in other areas of knowledge [11,83,84]. In this regard, other studies have also highlighted robust results at primary and secondary school levels, reinforcing the cross-curricular nature and applicability of these methodologies [85,86].

With regard to the research question, the results were organized according to four dimensions, with the aim of identifying the educational impact of active methodologies. With regard to the cognitive dimension, several studies reported improvements associated with these models in academic performance, comprehension, reflection, problem-solving and decision-making [16,65,68,70,72,73,76,79,81,82,83]. Similarly, these findings are consistent with other research in the field which has highlighted the usefulness of active methodologies in enhancing cognitive skills such as analysis, comprehension, reflection and decision-making [14,16,61].

With regard to the motivational dimension, the included studies reported higher levels of interest in the subject, satisfaction with the learning experience and student engagement when active methodologies were implemented [12,16,27,66,68,74,75,76,80,81,82,83]. Other studies concur with this finding, highlighting that these improvements are due to the fact that these pedagogical models place students in a more active and central role within the teaching–learning process [22,55,87].

In the social dimension, several studies reported favourable outcomes related to collaboration, teamwork, communication and social engagement, particularly in service-learning interventions [13,19,67,69,71,75,78]. However, some studies noted that this positive impact must be interpreted with caution, as there is limited clarity regarding which components of the methodological approaches underpin this effectiveness [88,89].

With regard to the procedural dimension, the studies suggested that active methodologies may support the acquisition and consolidation of practical skills. However, this dimension is also the least developed in isolation, as it is usually linked to other dimensions [21,71,74,78]. In addition, models involving the use of digital resources enable learners to translate theoretical content into practical application, a highly relevant aspect in the field of PE and sports science [12,20].

Additionally, with regard to the methodologies used, the most common are gamification, cooperative learning, service learning and the flipped classroom [13,16,19,21,27,65,67,68,69,71,72,74,78,81]. Taken together, these models share a common focus on the learner as the centre of learning and on teamwork [29,38,40]. However, each one emphasizes different aspects of learning, suggesting that their selection also responds to specific pedagogical objectives [11,90]. Generally speaking, this review is consistent with other studies, which also identified active methodologies as collaborative, motivating and practice-oriented approaches [20,24,33].

In addition to the active methodologies mentioned above, the review also identified other active approaches, including simulation-based learning, game-based learning, SEM, TGfU, MOOCs, interactive scenarios, project-based learning, student-centred learning, student-coach role and social-network-based learning [12,16,45,66,68,70,71,73,75,76,78,79,80,81,82]. Although these methodologies appeared less frequently, their inclusion highlights the diversity of active pedagogical approaches applied in higher education programmes in sports science and PE. Taken together, these approaches broaden our understanding of how active methodologies can be applied in accordance with different learning objectives, student profiles and educational contexts [68,70,73,76,79,81].

With regard to the characteristics of the sample, it was observed that the majority of studies involved medium (50–99 participants) and large (50–299 participants) sample sizes, which can be considered a positive factor as it lends greater consistency to the results and facilitates their generalization [91]. Furthermore, the vast majority of studies were conducted with sport science students, whereas fewer focused specifically on PE students. This concentration limits the transferability of the findings to other higher education programmes and to different institutional or educational contexts [34,35]. However, this concentration on a specific participant profile appears to stem, to a large extent, from the fact that the evidence has been developed mainly in very specific contexts, which may influence the way in which the results are interpreted and applied in other higher education settings [92,93].

Another important aspect is the prominent role played by the use of new technologies, or the combination of methodologies and technological resources, in a considerable proportion of the studies analyzed [16,21,65,66,68,71,72,76,79,81,82,83]. Various studies have indicated that this combination meets the needs of students, thereby promoting a more participatory teaching–learning process [94,95]. In the context of higher education, and particularly in degree programmes related to sport, the use of ICT appears to be well suited to the characteristics of teaching [96]. Consequently, the increasing use of technology suggests its gradual integration into this educational field. However, digital resources should be understood as complementary tools, since their educational value depends on their alignment with learning objectives, teacher training, accessibility and their coherent integration into instructional design [52].

With regard to trends in the use of active methodologies, the review carried out highlights a growing interest in the use of such approaches, which appears to be linked to a consolidation of learner-centred approaches or to a trend towards more innovative educational initiatives [97,98]. On this point, not only has higher education seen an increase in the use of active methodologies, but this can also be seen as part of a much broader movement encompassing the entire education system, in response to the need to promote more meaningful learning [99]. However, there is greater evidence of the application of these models at other educational stages, such as primary and secondary education [20,97]. It is worth noting that the application of these approaches in sports education is one of the most developed areas, with specific models from the field of sports sciences, such as the SEM or TGfU [20,100].

Furthermore, the findings suggest that the renewal of PE in higher education could be oriented toward more active, practical, and contextualized approaches [12,19,101]. However, the evidence supports this possibility primarily based on students’ perceptions, the educational experiences described, and the observed associations, rather than on conclusive evidence of its causal effectiveness [12,102]. In this context, active methodologies are associated with greater student participation, reflection, decision-making, and the integration of theory with practice, although their implementation requires careful planning, specific teacher training, and appropriate institutional conditions [10,103]. Consequently, it is possible to consider these pedagogical models as a promising framework for reorienting the content and activities of university physical education and sports instruction toward more authentic experiences, especially when they incorporate principles of inclusion, assessment, safety, and collaboration with real-world practice contexts [104,105,106].

Finally, the rise of active methodologies in higher education, particularly in the field of sports science and PE, reflects a trend amongst lecturers towards seeking a teaching and learning process that is transferable to their practice and more meaningful. However, the available evidence does not allow the effectiveness or causal impact of these approaches to be established definitively. Moreover, the role of technology is becoming increasingly important in today’s educational context, characterized by digitalisation and the integration of technological resources into everyday life, as well as their combination with these new pedagogical models. However, it is important to continue exploring the educational effects of these approaches, as well as their feasibility and potential limitations, in order to develop relevant teaching proposals for university education in the field of sports science.

5. Conclusions

Based on the evidence analyzed, it can be concluded that the implementation of learner-centred pedagogical approaches, such as cooperative learning, the flipped classroom, service learning and gamification, was generally associated with favourable outcomes across several dimensions of learning. In particular, these pedagogical approaches foster motivation, social skills, cognitive development and the acquisition of procedural skills, suggesting their potential as useful approaches for promoting meaningful, active and participatory learning in the university context.

Although cooperative learning, the flipped classroom, service learning, and gamification were the most frequently used approaches, this does not necessarily indicate that the other active methodologies are less relevant or effective; rather, it reflects the diversity of the available evidence.

The results highlight the increased use of technological resources as complementary elements to active methodologies. In relation to this, it is worth noting that the appropriate use of digital tools may support continuous feedback, student autonomy and the creation of more dynamic and interactive learning environments. However, the educational value of active methodologies does not depend solely on the incorporation of technology, but rather in their appropriate alignment with learning objectives and their coherent integration into the instructional design.

Despite the positive findings of this review, variations in the implementation of different strategies, as well as differences in teacher training or institutional conditions may significantly influence the results obtained from one study to another. It is therefore essential to prioritize adequate teacher training and pedagogical planning to ensure that these methodologies lead to improvements in the teaching and learning process.

Furthermore, in the context of higher education, the findings of this review reinforce the strategic role of active methodologies as a cornerstone of pedagogical innovation geared towards the development of students’ competences. Additionally, they contribute to the transformation of the teaching role and of the university system itself, promoting more flexible and collaborative learning environments. In this regard, the adoption of these methodological approaches is presented as a sound pathway towards more innovative, inclusive and lifelong learning-centred university models, thereby enhancing the quality and relevance of higher education in the field of sport.

However, some limitations of the review are, firstly the methodological diversity of the included studies makes direct comparison difficult. Second, the predominance of non-randomized, descriptive, qualitative and mixed methods studies limits the possibility of drawing firm causal conclusions. Third, all included studies reported favourable findings, and no null, negative or contradictory results were identified. This homogeneity may reflect a genuine tendency, but it may also indicate possible publication or selection bias. Fourth, no specific search for grey literature was conducted; consequently, unpublished theses, conference proceedings, institutional reports and other non-commercial sources may have been missed. Finally, the concentration of research in specific sport science contexts and the smaller number of studies focused specifically on physical education may limit the transferability of the findings to other higher education programmes.

Finally, based on the results obtained, several avenues for future research are proposed: a) the development of experimental studies to establish more robust relationships between the use of active methodologies, learning outcomes and their respective dimensions; b) a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of different pedagogical models depending on the context, the student profile or the specific discipline; and c) a more in-depth examination of the role of technology as a mediating factor in learning within higher education, particularly in relation to the development of competences and academic performance.