This study attempted to examine differences in physical activity levels between urban and rural primary school children. The sample consisted of 256 Greek-Cypriot children and their parents from two schools representing urban areas and three schools representing rural areas. Children's activity levels were assessed for 4 weekdays in the winter and for 4 weekdays in the summer using a pedometer (DW-200; Yamax, Tokyo, Japan). Daily step counts were used to describe children's activity levels. Parents completed a questionnaire assessing environmental variables in both seasons. Two-way ANOVAs indicated that urban school children were significantly more active in winter than rural school children (means = 13,583 +/- 4,313 versus 12 436 +/- 3610, P < 0.001) and that rural school children were significantly more active in the summer (means = 16,450 +/- 5134 versus 14,531 +/- 4,901, P < 0.001). Parents of children in rural schools reported more space available in the garden and in the neighbourhoods, and safer neighbourhoods than parents of children in urban schools, whereas children in urban schools had more exercise equipment available at home and were transported more frequently to places where they could be physically active. Results of this study suggest that intervention programmes to promote physical activity need to consider seasonal and geographical location differences in physical activity levels.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Previous research on mentoring in school-based training has indicated that although this is a very influential role it is often poorly conceived and prepared for. Dialogues appear to be characterised by a lack of challenge and reflection, knowledge bases for teaching are treated in very different ways, and roles, responsibilities and expectations are often unclear. The main aim of this study therefore was to gain a greater understanding of mentoring processes in pre-service training, through analyses of the perspectives of, and dialogues between, student-teachers and all those involved in their mentoring in one institution and its partner schools. Analyses of data focused on differences in the nature and content of discussions and conferences of student-teachers with class teachers, co-tutors and university supervisors. These analyses revealed large differences consistent with the mentoring model used, but provided little support for previous empirical claims.