Capacity building in and for health promoting schools: Results from a qualitative study

Gugglberger, Lisa; Dür, W.

doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2010.08.019

Cited by 61 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Leger, 1998). An "implementation gap" has been observed by several authors (Gugglberger & Dür, 2011;RobertsGray, Gingiss, & Boerm, 2007;Rohrbach, Grana, Sussman, & Valente, 2006), where health programmes, although designed for schools, are not successfully implemented when subjected to the everyday workings of school life.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of factors which can affect the implementation of a health promotion programme under the Schools for Health in Europe framework

Bennett¹,

Cunningham

Molloy

2016

Evaluation and Program Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Health Promoting Schools concept helps schools to promote health in a sustainable and long-term fashion. However, developing the capacity to promote health in this way can be challenging when a busy teaching curriculum must be fulfilled. This study aimed to identify factors which affect the acceptability of health promotion programmes to the everyday school environment.Semi-structured qualitative interviews were audio-taped with primary school teachers in one Irish county and transcribed verbatim. The resulting transcripts were analysed using content analysis.Thirty-one teachers were interviewed. The factors which may adversely affect the acceptability of health promotion programmes include the: attitude of teachers towards an additional extra-curricular workload; lack of confidence amongst teachers to lead health promotion; and different organisational cultures between schools.When health promotion programmes under the Health Promoting Schools concept are being implemented, it's important to consider: the readiness for change amongst teachers; the resources available to increase staff capacity to promote health; and the ability of a programme to adapt to the different organisational cultures between schools.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of factors which can affect the implementation of a health promotion programme under the Schools for Health in Europe framework

Bennett¹,

Cunningham

Molloy

2016

Evaluation and Program Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because "it is assumed that a lack of resources, knowledge and supporting structures for schools are hindering factorsfor the successful implementation of health promotion", HPSS addressed each of these within the four action zones, based on the CORE principles [42]. This model saw a variety of school-wide events and policy changes occur over the two academic years tracked.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This model saw a variety of school-wide events and policy changes occur over the two academic years tracked. In addition to creating opportunities for leadership, teamwork, and knowledge growth approximately $36, 000(CAD) in grant money was given to the schools for procurement of resources of their choice [42]. Financial resources are considered a key stepping stone to build capacity in schools, and in this case the funds were for a variety of equipment, such as weights, yoga mats, spin bikes, bosu balls, fitness videos, smoothie blenders, and heart rate monitors; support services such as substitute teachers to cover for additional coaching time, zumba and banghra dance instructors; and events such as 10k race training, health fairs and jump rope for heart.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…R-resources were provided to support teaching and learning in relation to the four Action Zones. Cognizant of the need for resources in schools to build capacity and for teacher training and support to implement the model, each intervention school was allotted $4,100 at the beginning of the school year to purchase necessary equipment, or for professional development and staff support, or events; and a $2,500 grant to support infrastructure or environmental changes at the school [42,43]. Schools were instructed to spend the monies as it best fit their needs and were only required to submit a financial statement of how the monies were spent.…”

Section: The Hpss Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Health Promoting Secondary Schools: Community-Based Research Examining Voice, Choice and the School Setting

Higgins¹

2013

J Child Adolesc Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Health Promoting Secondary Schools (HPSS) was a 'whole school' program across five intervention and five control high schools in British Columbia, Canada designed to improve the Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity (MVPA) and healthy eating behaviors of grade 10 students. HPSS was implemented over one school year (2011)(2012) and included classroom activities, changes to school policies, input from teachers and students, student leadership opportunities, and was tailored for each school. Teachers were provided with choicebased Physical Education (PE) and health curricula, as well as monetary grants to purchase equipment and supplies. This manuscript presents an overview of the development and evaluation of HPSS.Methods: This initiative employed mixed methods for data collection and analyses, including standardized questionnaires, focus groups, accelerometers, and fitness testing over three phases of data collection (T1, T2, T3); five key survey variables are discussed here to provide initial results on the effect of the HPSS model. The SHAPES Questionnaire and 20-meter shuttle run were used to assess these outcome measures.Results: A repeated measures ANOVA showed a decline in total MVPA (F = 89.29, p < 0.01, d=1.01) and weekday MVPA (F=136.33, p<0.01, d=0.25) across groups pre to post-test; an interaction effect for fitness (F=5.66, p<0.05, d=0.25); a significant decline in Sugar Sweetened Beverages (SSB) over time for both conditions (F=10.85, p < 0.01, d=0.35) ; a non-significant trend towards decreased screen time for the intervention group; and a significant interaction for fitness (F = 5.66, p < 0.05, d=0.29).Time 1 to Time 3 was significant for fruit and vegetable intake (F=5.94, p<0.05) and approached a significant interaction in favor of the control group (F=2.95, p=0.06, d=0.59), and an interaction for weekday PA (F=3.38, p<0.05, d=0.70). Conclusions:Although many of the variables in this initial analysis did not yield a statistically significant treatment effect, looking to effect sizes, trends, qualitative data and contextual factors may be helpful at this time in order to refine the program and adhere to the goal of creating an initiative that can be improved and modified to be utilized in other. It is also promising to see that the intervention group fared better in terms of fitness and weekday MVPA decline than the control group despite the obstacles faced during the intervention year.

show abstract

“…As previous research illustrated, intervening via a whole school approach is quite demanding for a school in terms of planning and organization (Gugglberger & Dür, 2011). Parsons and Stears added to this with their summary of specific goals and aims needed to properly fine-tune comprehensive HPS interventions (Parsons & Stears, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and implementation of a tailored health promoting school in The Netherlands: Lessons learned

Busch¹,

Leeuw²,

Schrijvers³

2013

IJRSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the lessons learned from the design and implementation of a whole school Health Promoting School (HPS) pilot on a high school in The Netherlands. This pilot aims to improve a range of health behaviours in adolescents via the Whole School Approach of Health Promoting Schools framework of the WHO-supported Schools for Health in Europe initiative (SHE). Eleven semi-structured interviews were held with key stakeholders in the intervention's design and implementation. Results showed that becoming a HPS should be considered a comprehensive curriculum change that requires significant organizational investments. By integrating the intervention instead of implementing it "as is" into school's existing infrastructure the additional burden to the curriculum was minimized; this was important for intervention relevance and it strengthens feelings of intervention ownership and motivation among teachers. Also, implementation should be led by a steering group of professionals from health sciences and education as well as parents, students and teachers from the school to combine knowledge on practical feasibility and evidence based practices. Teachers should be further educated to increase competence in their new role. Lastly, a central coordinator with proper personal competencies and power to get things done is necessary to steer these developments. Since not all schools are able to make the necessary investments, successfully becoming a HPS is not feasible for just any school at any point in time; it has to be considered a well-planned comprehensive system change. Schools with competing problems such as school violence or organizational struggles should postpone HPS developments.

show abstract

Capacity building in and for health promoting schools: Results from a qualitative study

Cited by 61 publications

References 29 publications

An evaluation of factors which can affect the implementation of a health promotion programme under the Schools for Health in Europe framework

An evaluation of factors which can affect the implementation of a health promotion programme under the Schools for Health in Europe framework

Health Promoting Secondary Schools: Community-Based Research Examining Voice, Choice and the School Setting

Development and implementation of a tailored health promoting school in The Netherlands: Lessons learned

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About