What happens when a Taekwondo practitioner studies physical education pedagogy and educational technology, and then starts asking questions about how digital tools can transform school-based physical activity? You get one of the most productive early-career research agendas in physical education today.
In a recent episode of the podcast, I sat down with Dr. Taemin Ha, assistant professor at Queens College, City University of New York, to talk through his research on technology integration in physical education and school-wide physical activity. Dr. Ha is being honored this summer as an AIESEP Early Career Scholar in Taipei — a well-deserved recognition for someone who has been publishing at a remarkable pace.
From Taekwondo to Ed Tech to Physical Education Research
Dr. Ha's path to his current research is anything but conventional. Born and raised in South Korea, he spent years after high school teaching and performing Taekwondo across Japan, Spain, France, Italy, England, and beyond. Those experiences sparked a deeper interest in sport pedagogy and coaching, eventually leading him to pursue his undergraduate degree in kinesiology at California State University, San Bernardino.
While searching for graduate programs, he stumbled across an assistantship in the educational technology program at the same university — and something clicked. After completing his master's in ed tech, he pursued his doctorate at the University of Northern Colorado (UNC). Working with the UNC Active Schools Institute, he developed expertise in physical education teacher education (PETE) and technology integration within school-based physical activity. It was there, mentored by researchers like Dr. Brian Dauenhauer, Dr. Jamie McMullen, and Dr. Jennifer Krause, that his research line truly took shape.
Building the Tool First: The CSPAP-TPQ
Before conducting his dissertation research, Dr. Ha did something most doctoral students would politely decline — he developed and validated an entirely new measurement instrument as a pilot study for his doctoral dissertation. The CSPAP Technology Practice Questionnaire (CSPAP-TPQ) was born out of a simple gap in the literature: there was no validated tool to examine technology use specifically in the context of school-based physical activity.
His original dissertation plan involved developing and implementing a technology-integrated physical activity intervention in K-12 schools. However, when the COVID-19 pandemic hit during his second year at UNC, he was forced to pivot from the planned intervention. Rather than viewing this as a setback, he saw an opportunity to develop the CSPAP-TPQ.
Using the Delphi method, he collaborated with 24 field experts through multiple rounds of validation and followed up with test-retest reliability assessments with roughly 50 PE teachers. The result was a questionnaire that maps technology use across the five components of the Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program (CSPAP) model — from PE classes to before- and after-school programs to family and community engagement.
What the Research Actually Found
His dissertation, structured as two complementary studies, surveyed roughly 400 "Active Schools Champions" across the country — a broad group including PE teachers, classroom teachers, administrators, and community members.
Some findings were intuitive: PE teachers lean heavily on audio systems during class; before- and after-school programs run largely off YouTube videos and screens; email dominates when communicating with families. But one finding stood out. When Dr. Ha ran regression models to identify what predicts technology use, school characteristics — size, locale, resources — didn't matter much. What mattered was whether the teacher was licensed or certified. Professional preparation, not environment, drove adoption.
His second study added a mixed-methods lens using the Diffusion of Innovation framework. Both quantitative data and follow-up interviews with high- and low-tech users pointed to the same conclusion: teachers adopt technology when it feels easy to use and when they've had the chance to try it out first. Personal tech use in everyday life also carried over meaningfully into professional practice.
The takeaway? Quality professional development that allows for hands-on exploration — not just top-down mandates — is where investment needs to go.
A Systematic Review and What Comes Next
More recently, Dr. Ha published a systematic review of technology-infused physical activity interventions in K-12 schools. After screening down to 58 studies, he found that technology was being used in a variety of roles — as a measurement tool (e.g., accelerometers, pedometers), as the intervention itself (e.g., exergaming, mobile apps), and as educational, communication, or management support (e.g., Kahoot, Google Classroom, ClassDojo).
The most encouraging finding: 44 of those 58 studies showed significant improvements in physical activity-related outcomes. But Dr. Ha was quick to add an important caveat — effectiveness is never guaranteed. The specific tool, the school context, and the intentionality behind implementation all shape whether technology actually helps or just adds noise.
Looking ahead, his goal is to design and test whole-school interventions that examine technology's impact not just in the gym, but across the entire school day. He's currently running a feasibility study — losing an accelerometer or two along the way, as field researchers do — and working toward future publications that will fill a real gap in the evidence base.
The Bottom Line
Dr. Ha's closing message was simple and worth repeating: he is not a blind advocate for technology. He doesn't believe in using it for the sake of using it. But he does believe that in the world today's students are growing up in, there are meaningful spaces where the right tools, used intentionally, can genuinely support physical activity and student wellbeing.
"It's about using the right tools at the right time," he said. "Technology is literally a tool — it must be implemented properly and intentionally to be successful."
That framing — thoughtful, evidence-driven, and grounded in the realities of schools — is exactly what this field needs more of. Keep an eye on Dr. Taemin Ha's work. The publications are already piling up, and the most interesting research is still ahead.
This blog is based off of the following articles:
Ha, T., Dauenhauer, B., Krause, J., McMullen, J., & Farber, M. (2025). Comprehensive school physical activity program technology practice questionnaire (CSPAP-TPQ). *Educational Technology Research and Development*, *73*(1), 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10399-1
Ha, T., Dauenhauer, B., McMullen, J., & Krause, J. (2025). Attributes contributing to the use of technology in school-based physical activity promotion: A diffusion of innovations approach. *Journal of Teaching in Physical Education*, *44*(2), 366–376. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2024-0052
Ha, T., Chey, W. S., Fan, X., Oh, J., & Bernstein, E. (2025). Technology use in physical education: Insights from New York State teachers. *Journal of Teaching in Physical Education*. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2024-0343
Ha, T., Moon, J., Yu, H., Fan, X., & Paulson, L. (2025). A systematic review of technology-infused physical activity interventions in K-12 school settings: Effectiveness, roles, and implementation strategies. *International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity*, *22*, 113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-025-01811-x
This blog post was written with the assistance of AI to support clarity and accessibility. It is intended to help disseminate and discuss research findings with a broader audience. However, for the most accurate and reliable information—including conclusions and practical applications—please refer to the original peer-reviewed publication on which this blog is based. The peer-reviewed article remains the most authoritative source.