Scheduled for Poster Session: Research Across the Disciplines II, Thursday, April 2, 2009, 3:00 PM - 4:30 PM, Tampa Convention Center: Exhibit Hall RC Poster Sessions


The Efficacy of Four Self-Directed School-Based Physical Activity Interventions

Pamela H. Kulinna1, Timothy A. Brusseau2, Catrine Tudor-Locke3, Donetta J. Cothran4, Hans van der Mars1 and Paul Darst1, (1)Arizona State University, Mesa, AZ, (2)State University of New YorkCollege at Brockport, Brockport, NY, (3)Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA, (4)Indiana University, Bloomington, IN

A comprehensive approach to increasing youth physical activity (PA) and decreasing obesity should have multiple components and it has been widely suggested that schools serve as a primary site (e.g., CDC, 1997). Recently, Shaya et al. (2008, p.189) reviewed 51 school-based obesity prevention interventions and concluded that there has been “no persistence of positive results.” One common concern with school-based interventions is that they may be viewed as “top down” and lack the necessary “buy in” from school personnel needed for long term change.

Purpose: The intent of this study was to evaluate four “bottom-up” school personnel-designed PA interventions supported for one year by a State Department of Education. Methods: Students were from four schools (K-5, K-6 or K-8) in one Southwestern US state that implemented their own year-long school-based PA intervention. Participants included 910 students (n=467 girls, n=443 boys) in the third through eighth grade (Age M 9.72; ± 1.00) with BMI (measured via digital scale and stadiometer) of 19.37 (± 4.18). Participants had the following backgrounds: Caucasian (46%), Hispanic (36%), African-American (9%), Native American (5%), and Asian/Pacific Islander (3%). Students wore a pedometer (Yamax Digiwalker SW-200) for five consecutive school (week) days at the beginning and end of the school year.

Analysis/Results: Descriptive statistics and t-tests were used to analyze the data. Paired samples t-tests showed that three of the four intervention schools significantly increased school day PA. School 1 (t(144) = -17.03, p < .001) implemented daily Physical Education (previously 1 day/week), structured recess, and classroom activity breaks thereby increasing PA from 3,940 (± 1,070) to 5,673 (± 1,269) steps. School 2 (t(101) = -6.62, p < .001) implemented daily physical education taught by a Specialist (instead of classroom teachers), added activity breaks and opened a wellness center which increased PA from 4,785 (± 919) to 5,990 (± 1,929) steps/school day. School 3 (t(137) = -6.50, p < .001) implemented structured recess, activity breaks, and a wellness room and PA increased from 4,791 (± 1,444) to 5,689 (± 1,554) steps/school day. Finally, school 4 had a slight decrease in school day PA from 4,868 (± 1,208) to 4,384 (± 1,483). This appeared to be a consequence of a lack of widespread teacher support for their activity breaks and structured recess program.

Conclusions: When schools develop their own PA intervention and have “buy in” from teachers, administrators, and students, significant increases in PA are attainable.


Keyword(s): health promotion, physical education PK-12, research

Back to the 2009 AAHPERD National Convention and Exposition (March 31 - April 4, 2009)