What happened next? Exploring the sustainability of a whole-of-school physical activity initiative

Ten Years of ‘Flying the Flag’: An Overview and Retrospective Consideration of the Active School Flag Physical Activity Initiative for Children—Design, Development & Evaluation

“…A larger proportion of non-DEIS (32%) schools are engaged with the ASF, compared to DEIS schools (21%). Paperwork, time commitments [ 21 , 28 ], and specific barriers for DEIS schools such as low literacy levels of pupils and parents [ 21 ], have been cited by teachers as barriers to adoption of the ASF. Specifically, surveying parents and students, required as part of the ASF, has been identified by DEIS-school teachers as a significant challenge for implementation of the ASF [ 21 ].…”

“…The strict and comprehensive nature of the success criteria ensure implementation fidelity, and that every child in an ASF school is experiencing the full benefits of the programme as intended by the ASF. The workload for teachers, however, is a barrier to implementation of the programme [ 21 , 28 ]. In the context of the current evaluation, for School 3, the PA pillar success criteria were the primary criteria implemented.…”

“…In addition, the very idea of having a ‘physical flag’ to display at the school gates as a sign of status and recognition has been highlighted as a key ‘extrinsic’ motivation for schools to engage with the programme [ 21 , 27 ]. The potential for the ASF to have a lasting impact on the school environment has also been highlighted, with studies reporting lasting changes on schools’ awareness of the importance of PA, on PA equipment and facilities, and on opportunities to engage in PA [ 21 , 28 ]. Barriers to engagement in the ASF have also been highlighted, with schools identifying time commitments and paperwork as potential disincentives [ 21 , 28 ].…”

“…The potential for the ASF to have a lasting impact on the school environment has also been highlighted, with studies reporting lasting changes on schools’ awareness of the importance of PA, on PA equipment and facilities, and on opportunities to engage in PA [ 21 , 28 ]. Barriers to engagement in the ASF have also been highlighted, with schools identifying time commitments and paperwork as potential disincentives [ 21 , 28 ]. In addition, findings suggest that socially disadvantaged schools may find it more difficult to implement some aspects of the ASF compared to socially advantaged schools [ 21 ].…”

Considerations for Individual-Level Versus Whole-School Physical Activity Interventions: Stakeholder Perspectives

“…Commensurate with this, in a recent qualitative study exploring experiences of adopting and implementing a whole-school physical activity programme (‘Transform-Us’) in Australia [ 36 ], the results showed that the school culture and values for physical activity among schools taking part positively impacted on intervention implementation by role-modelling and endorsing active behaviour as well as encouraging staff participation in the project. Furthermore, recent qualitative research with schools who had been implementing the Active School Flag in the Republic of Ireland recounts that positive and lasting changes to physical activity provision and participation brought about by participation in the Active School Flag programme were underpinned by changes in the culture around physical activity in those schools [ 37 ]. Collectively, these studies and the data presented here highlight a need for a collaborative approach within schools to create a positive culture towards physical activity.…”