Comparison of Health and Academic Indices between Campus Recreation Facility users and Nonusers

Abstract

Body mass index (BMI), electronic media (EM) use, International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) scores, selected nutrient intake, smoking, and grade point averages (GPA) were compared between campus recreation (CR) facility users and nonusers at a public, four-year institution in the mid-Atlantic region. Participants (n = 1034) were categorized by CR visits: nonusers, low users (>0 to <1 visit/wk), moderate users (≥1 to <3 visits/wk), or high users (≥3 visits/wk). Significant (p < .05) main effects between user groups were found for BMI, EM use, IPAQ scores, fat intake, smoking, and GPA. High users had better GPA (3.35 vs. ≤3.15 for others), IPAQ scores (8135 MET-min/wk vs. <6800 MET-min/wk for others), and lower fat intake (<30% of total calories vs. >30.9% of total calories for others) than all other groups. High users also had lower BMI (22.8 kg/m2) than moderate users and nonusers (>23.9 kg/m2) and lower EM use (5.56 hr/d) than nonusers (6.55 hr/d). These results indicate that CR visitations are favorably associated with academic achievement and good health.

Tracking Changes of Chinese Pre-Service Teachers’ Aerobic Fitness, Body Mass Index, and Grade Point Average Over 4-years of College

“…However, it was also reported that there was no relationship between AF and GPA [41]. While fitness was not measured, Todd and colleagues examined the use of fitness facilities and GPA and reported a positive association [49]. A study done by Keating and associates indirectly supported the positive relationship between fitness (i.e., the frequency of strength exercise) and GPA [13].…”

The relationship between Sense of Community and Job satisfaction among employees in Campus Recreation Center

“…Todd and colleagues (2009) investigated student academic performance based on the frequency of CRC visits through the quantitative method. Results indicated that those who used CRC above three times a week had a better GPA compared to non-users and low users (Todd et al, 2009).…”

“…Students can not only exercise but also interact with classmates while they participate in programs. Other scholars found the use of CRCs positively influences students' lives in diverse ways, such as enhancing academic performance (Belch, Gebel, & Maas, 2001;Todd et al, 2009), promoting psychological as well as physical health (Haines, 2001;Bryant et al, 1995), enhanced engagement in social interactions (Dalgarn, 2001;Artinger et al, 2006;Miller, 2011), and improving college retention rates (Hall, 2006;Miller, 2011;Kampf & Teske, 2013).…”

“…Academic achievement has been examined as one of the important benefits of the use of CRCs. Many scholars have examined the relationship between the utilization of CRCs and academic achievements of students (Todd et al, 2009;Huesman, Brown, Lee, Kellogg, & Radcliffe, 2007;Roddy, Pohle-Krauza, & Geltz, 2017). Todd and colleagues (2009) investigated student academic performance based on the frequency of CRC visits through the quantitative method.…”

“…Bryant, Banta, and Bradley (1995) also found that students who engage in recreation programs experience the benefits of stress reduction, self-confidence, and friendships based on meeting people at CRCs. Other benefits found from using campus recreation programs include improved academic performance (Todd, Czyszczon, Carr, & Pratt, 2009), social interactions (Henchy, 2011), and school retention (Lindsey & Sessoms, 2006;Kampf & Teske, 2013). The study of Roddy et al (2017) also revealed data on gender differences in response to CRCs, where female students who utilized these facilities more often had higher GPAs on average than those who didn't.…”