Physical activity across the curriculum: year one process evaluation results

Gibson, Cheryl; Smith, Bryan; DuBose, Katrina D.; Greene, Jerry L.; Bailey, Bruce W.; Williams, Shannon L.; Ryan, Joseph J.; Schmelzle, Kristin H.; Washburn, Richard A.; Sullivan, Debra K.; Mayo, Matthew S.; Donnelly, Joseph E.

doi:10.1186/1479-5868-5-36

Cited by 108 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The barriers and facilitators documented during the HEALTHY study are similar to those reported in similar school-based intervention studies promoting physical activity and/or nutrition, including Lifestyle Education for Activity Program (LEAP), Middle-School Physical Activity and Nutrition (M-SPAN), Pathways, Peers Running Organized Play (PROPS), Physical Activity Across the Curriculum (PAAC), and Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls (TAAG) [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. Common facilitators reported include interest and support from various school members (i.e., school board member, school administrators, school office staff, teachers, students, and parents), schools that had made physical activity and nutrition a priority prior to study, schools already implementing practices and strategies similar to intervention components, teachers collaborating with one another during implementation, and teachers and food service staff who were motivated and actively engaged in intervention implementation [18][19][20][21][22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…These barriers include financial constraints in the school food service system, inadequate facility space to implement activities or store equipment, lack of school personnel to deliver intervention components, and faculty and staff turnover [18][19][20][22][23][24]. Other barriers related to logistical issues in terms of food and beverage ordering problems, school districts with highly centralized food service systems impeding individual school nutrition changes, school scheduling problems, and teacher time constraints [18][19][20][22][23][24][25]. Some teachers reported being unable to implement intervention components due to school prioritization of nonhealth-related curricula and standardized testing requirements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of barriers related to teachers or food service staff, including resistance to change, lack of motivation and participation in intervention delivery, lack of compliance in intervention delivery, and lack of communication and cooperation among teachers and staff in intervention implementation [18,20,22,25]. Finally, student barriers related to decreases in student interest in intervention activities over time [19,22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

School factors as barriers to and facilitators of a preventive intervention for pediatric type 2 diabetes

Hall

Schneider

Thompson

et al. 2013

Behav. Med. Pract. Policy Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

School-based interventions are essential to prevent pediatric obesity and type 2 diabetes. School environmental factors influence implementation of these interventions. This article examines how school factors acted as barriers to and facilitators of the HEALTHY intervention. The HEALTHY study was a cluster-randomized trial of a multicomponent intervention implemented in 21 schools. Interview data were analyzed to identify barriers and facilitators. Barriers included teacher frustration that intervention activities detracted from tested subjects, student resistance and misbehavior, classroom management problems, communication equipment problems, lack of teacher/staff engagement, high cost and limited availability of nutritious products, inadequate facility space, and large class sizes. Facilitators included teacher/staff engagement, effective classroom management, student engagement, schools with direct control over food service, support from school leaders, and adequate facilities and equipment. Contextual barriers and facilitators must be taken into account in the design and implementation of school-based health interventions. KEYWORDSSchool, Intervention, Prevention, Health behavior, Diabetes, Obesity Type 2 diabetes is a chronic and progressive disease with complications that can include heart disease, stroke, kidney failure, loss of vision, and limb amputation [1]. The alarming prevalence of overweight and obesity among American children and adolescents and the connection with type 2 diabetes represent a serious public health concern for the twenty-first century [2,3]. Researchers estimated that approximately one in three children born in the year 2000 in the United States will develop diabetes in their lifetime [4].Recent findings on activity and dietary patterns of children and adolescents in the United States demonstrate the presence of problematic health behaviors. Findings from the National Survey of Children's Health and the Youth Risk Behavior Survey showed that approximately 78 % of youth did not eat fruits or vegetables five or more times per day [5], 29 % of youth drank a nondiet soda at least once per day [5], 64 % of youth did not engage in 20 min of daily vigorous physical activity for most days of the week [6], and 50 % of youth engaged in sedentary behaviors, such as playing video games or watching television for multiple hours a day [6].In light of the prevalence of unhealthful dietary and activity patterns among youth and their connections with overweight, obesity, and type 2 diabetes, population-level approaches to improve environmental contexts by promoting physical activity and healthful diet are essential. Schools are ideal settings for basing public health interventions aimed at preventing the development of serious health conditions because of the existing resources and infrastructure, and aside from the home, Implications Practice: School-based obesity interventions should take into account student interests and involvement, classroom skills of teachers delivering the interv...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

School factors as barriers to and facilitators of a preventive intervention for pediatric type 2 diabetes

Hall

Schneider

Thompson

et al. 2013

Behav. Med. Pract. Policy Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is not to say that a process evaluation should be conducted in lieu of testing for an effect, nor that the process evaluation will fully explain why this initial HPSS model did not have a significant impact on behavior, but rather turning to the process data at this point may shed light on what aspects of the intervention were well received and executed and where improvements can be made. "Process evaluations are not a miracle ingredient", but can be an effective way to map progress made during a school-based intervention in terms of curriculum changes, knowledge development, quality assurance, and enjoyment [69,70]. Alternately, since uptake was slower than anticipated, it may be that additional time was needed for the program to be adopted sufficiently to impact student behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

“…Several studies have targeted teachers' perceptions of their use of physical activity (Cothran, Hodges-Kulinna, & Garn, 2010;Dinkel, Schaffer, Snyder, & Lee, 2017;Gately, Curtis, & Hardaker, 2013;Gibson et al, 2008;Howie, NewmanNorlund, & Pate, 2014;Maeda & Murata, 2004;Martin & Murtagh, 2015;McMullen, Kulinna & Cothran, 2014;Stylianou, Hodges-Kulinna, & Naiman, 2016). However, few studies have been done on teachers who self-initiate regular physical activity in their classrooms-independent of a specific program or study that is aimed to increase student activity levels.…”

Section: Physical Activity and School Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Focusing elementary students with active classrooms: exploring teachers perceptions of self-initiated practices

Foran

Mannion

Rutherford

2017

iejee

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of our study was to explore the perceptions of elementary teachers who routinely prioritized physical activity in their classrooms. Researchers are reporting improved student academic test results following physical activity sessions, however, classroom teachers are challenged in balancing curricular and other expectations. Hence, teachers who voluntarily implement physical activity have views that are unique and important for promoting the practice to others. We interviewed seven teachers from grades 1-6, using the qualitative constructivist approach to grounded theory qualitative research. Teachers valued physical activity because it enhanced their students' focus on classroom activities. Common attributes amongst the teachers were active lifestyles, previous employment experiences using physical activity, and a pedagogical approach prioritizing physical activity throughout the day. Additionally, the teachers perceived that belonging to schools with a culture of movement was important. Teachers view physical activity as a teaching asset when they perceive a positive impact on their students' ability to focus. Specific teacher attributes and a school environment that embraces physical activity may predispose teachers to these views, and represent areas that should be further explored. Pre-service courses could be one way to provide teachers with experience and a repertoire of easy physical activities.

show abstract

Physical activity across the curriculum: year one process evaluation results

Cited by 108 publications

References 25 publications

School factors as barriers to and facilitators of a preventive intervention for pediatric type 2 diabetes

School factors as barriers to and facilitators of a preventive intervention for pediatric type 2 diabetes

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

Focusing elementary students with active classrooms: exploring teachers perceptions of self-initiated practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About