Evaluation of Daily Physical Activity (DPA) policy implementation in Ontario: surveys of elementary school administrators and teachers

Kenneth R Allison, Karen Vu-Nguyen, Bessie Ng, Nour Schoueri-Mychasiw, John J M Dwyer, Heather Manson, Erin Hobin, Steve Manske, Jennifer Robertson, Kenneth R Allison, Karen Vu-Nguyen, Bessie Ng, Nour Schoueri-Mychasiw, John J M Dwyer, Heather Manson, Erin Hobin, Steve Manske, Jennifer Robertson

Abstract

Background: School-based structured opportunities for physical activity can provide health-related benefits to children and youth, and contribute to international guidelines recommending 60 min of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per day. In 2005, the Ministry of Education in Ontario, Canada, released the Daily Physical Activity (DPA) policy requiring school boards to "ensure that all elementary students, including students with special needs, have a minimum of twenty minutes of sustained MVPA each school day during instructional time". This paper reports on the first provincial study evaluating implementation fidelity to the DPA policy in Ontario elementary schools and classrooms. Using an adapted conceptual framework, the study also examined associations between implementation of DPA and a number of predictors in each of these respective settings.

Methods: Separate cross-sectional online surveys were conducted in 2014 with Ontario elementary school administrators and classroom teachers, based on a representative random sample of schools and classrooms. An implementation fidelity score was developed based on six required components of the DPA policy. Other survey items measured potential predictors of implementation at the school and classroom levels. Descriptive analyses included frequency distributions of implementation fidelity and predictor variables. Bivariate analyses examining associations between implementation and predictors included binary logistic regression for school level data and generalized linear mixed models for classroom level data, in order to adjust for school-level clustering effects.

Results: Among administrators, 61.4 % reported implementation fidelity to the policy at the school level, while 50.0 % of teachers reported fidelity at the classroom level. Several factors were found to be significantly associated with implementation fidelity in both school and classroom settings including: awareness of policy requirements; scheduling; monitoring; use of resources and supports; perception that the policy is realistic and achievable; and specific barriers to implementation.

Conclusions: Findings from the surveys indicate incomplete policy implementation and a number of factors significantly associated with implementation fidelity. The results indicate a number of important implications for policy, practice and further research, including the need for additional research to monitor implementation and its predictors, and assess the impacts of study recommendations and subsequent outcomes of a reinvigorated DPA moving forward.

Keywords: Administrators; Daily physical activity; Evaluation; Fidelity; Implementation; Policy; School; Surveys; Teachers.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Conceptual framework of DPA studies, adapted from Chaudoir et al. [51]. The conceptual framework for this study is a derivative adapted from Chaudoir et al.’s “A multi-level framework predicting implementation outcomes” [45] and used under CC BY. The framework was adapted by further dividing organizational level factors into: 1) organizational-macro and 2) organizational-micro. A component demonstrating the potential benefits and impacts of implementation was also added. Using this framework, the study examined how factors at the organizational-micro and teacher levels may influence DPA implementation fidelity in Ontario elementary schools and classrooms
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
School- and classroom-level implementation fidelity to overall DPA policy and individual policy requirements

References

    1. Janssen I, Leblanc AG. Systematic review of the health benefits of physical activity and fitness in school-aged children and youth. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010;7:40. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-7-40.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . The association between school-based physical activity, including physical education, and academic performance. 2010.
    1. Loprinzi PD, Cardinal BJ, Loprinzi KL, Lee H. Benefits and environmental determinants of physical activity in children and adolescents. Obes Facts. 2012;5(4):597–610. doi: 10.1159/000342684.
    1. Lees C, Hopkins J. Effect of aerobic exercise on cognition, academic achievement, and psychosocial function in children: a systematic review of randomized control trials. Prev Chronic Dis. 2013; 10; doi:10.5888/pcd10.130010.
    1. Biddle SJ, Asare M. Physical activity and mental health in children and adolescents: a review of reviews. BJSM Online. 2011;45(11):886–95. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2011-090185.
    1. World Health Organization . Global recommendations on physical activity for health. 2010.
    1. Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology . Canadian physical activity guidelines and Canadian sedentary behaviour guidelines. 2011.
    1. Colley RC, Garriguet D, Janssen I, Craig CL, Clarke J, Tremblay MS. Physical activity of Canadian children and youth: accelerometer results from the 2007 to 2009 Canadian Health Measures Survey. Health Rep. 2011;22(1):1–9.
    1. Allison KR, Adlaf EM, Dwyer JJ, Lysy DC, Irving HM. The decline in physical activity among adolescent students: a cross-national comparison. Can J Public Health. 2007;98(2):97–100.
    1. Dobbins M, Husson H, DeCorby K, LaRocca RL. School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; 2; doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007651.pub2.
    1. Kahn EB, Ramsey LT, Brownson RC, Heath GW, Howze EH, Powell KE, et al. The effectiveness of interventions to increase physical activity: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22(4):73–107. doi: 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00434-8.
    1. Sun C, Pezic A, Tikellis G, Ponsonby AL, Wake M, Carlin JB, et al. Effects of school-based interventions for direct delivery of physical activity on fitness and cardiometabolic markers in children and adolescents: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Obes Rev. 2013;14(10):818–38. doi: 10.1111/obr.12047.
    1. Bassett DR, Fitzhugh EC, Heath GW, Erwin PC, Frederick GM, Wolff DL, et al. Estimated energy expenditures for school-based policies and active living. Am J Prev Med. 2013;44(2):108–13. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.10.017.
    1. Institute of Medicine . Educating the student body: taking physical activity and physical education to school. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2013.
    1. Rasberry CN, Lee SM, Robin L, Laris BA, Russell LA, Coyle KK, et al. The association between school-based physical activity, including physical education, and academic performance: a systematic review of the literature. Prev Med. 2011;52(Suppl 1):S10–20. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.01.027.
    1. Fedewa AL, Ahn S. The effects of physical activity and physical fitness on children’s achievement and cognitive outcomes: a meta-analysis. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2011;82(3):521–35. doi: 10.1080/02701367.2011.10599785.
    1. Physical and Health Education Canada. Cross-Canada check-up on physical education. . Accessed 10 Jun 2014.
    1. Woodward-Lopez G, Mattes M, Baecker A, Sheehan K, Madsen K, Crawford P. Physical education research for kids (PERK): a study for the California Task Force on Youth and Workplace Wellness. 2010.
    1. Ontario Ministry of Education . Policy/program memorandum no. 138: Daily physical activity in elementary schools, grades 1-8. 2005.
    1. Allison KR, Schoueri-Mychasiw N, Robertson J, Hobin E, Dwyer J, Manson H. Development and implementation of the Daily Physical Activity policy in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective analysis. PHEnex Journal. 2014;6(3):1–7.
    1. Education A. Daily physical activity initiative. 2005.
    1. British Columbia Ministry of Education . Daily physical activity: planning and resource guide: kindergarten to grade 12. 2011.
    1. Nunavut Department of Education . Consolidation of Education Act. 2014.
    1. Olstad DL, Campbell EJ, Raine KD, Nykiforuk CIJ. A multiple case history and systematic review of adoption, diffusion, implementation and impact of provincial daily physical activity policies in Canadian schools. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:385. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1669-6.
    1. McLeroy KR, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K. An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Q. 1988;15(4):351–77. doi: 10.1177/109019818801500401.
    1. Cardon GM, Van Acker R, Seghers J, De Martelaer K, Haerens LL, De Bourdeaudhuij IMM. Physical activity promotion in schools: which strategies do schools (not) implement and which socioecological factors are associated with implementation? Health Educ Res. 2012;27(3):470–83. doi: 10.1093/her/cys043.
    1. Mâsse LC, McKay H, Valente M, Brant R, Naylor PJ. Physical activity implementation in schools: a 4-year follow-up. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(4):369–77. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.06.010.
    1. Brown KM, Elliott SJ. ‘It’s not as easy as just saying 20 minutes a day’: exploring teacher and principal experiences implementing a provincial physical activity policy. Univers J Public Health. 2015;3(2):71–83. doi: 10.13189/ujph.2015.030204.
    1. Kennedy CD, Cantell M, Dewey D. Has the Alberta daily physical activity initiative been successfully implemented in Calgary schools? Paediatr Child Health. 2010;15(7):e19–24.
    1. Mâsse LC, Naiman D, Naylor PJ. From policy to practice: implementation of physical activity and food policies in schools. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2013;10(1):71–82. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-10-71.
    1. Robinson DB, Melnychuk NE. A call for PE consultants and specialists: let’s get serious about implementing quality PE. Phys Health Educ J. 2006;72(3):6–11.
    1. Holt E, Bartee T, Heelan K. Evaluation of a policy to integrate physical activity into the school day. J Phys Act Health. 2013;10(4):480–7.
    1. Huberty J, Dinkel D, Coleman J, Beighle A, Apenteng B. The role of schools in children’s physical activity participation: staff perceptions. Health Educ Res. 2012;27(6):986–95. doi: 10.1093/her/cys071.
    1. Gladwin CP, Church J, Plotnikoff RC. Public policy processes and getting physical activity into Alberta’s urban schools. Can J Public Health. 2008;99(4):332–8.
    1. Dwyer JJM, Allison KR, LeMoine KN, Faulkner GE, Adlaf EM, Goodman J, et al. A survey of opportunities for school-based physical activity in Ontario Elementary Schools. Phys Health Educ J. 2008;73(4):36–42.
    1. Dwyer JJM, Allison KR, Barrera M, Hansen B, Goldenberg E, Boutilier MA. Teachers’ perspective on barriers to implementing physical activity curriculum guidelines for school children in Toronto. Can J Public Health. 2003;94(6):448–52.
    1. Barnett TA, O’Loughlin J, Gauvin L, Paradis G, Hanley J. Opportunities for student physical activity in elementary schools: a cross-sectional survey of frequency and correlates. Health Educ Behav. 2006;33(2):215–32. doi: 10.1177/1090198105277855.
    1. Patton I. School-based physical activity in children: an evaluation of the Daily Physical Activity program in Ontario elementary schools. London, ON: The University of Western Ontario; 2012.
    1. Bowins W, Beaudoin C. Experienced physical education teachers adapting to a new curriculum: perceived facilitators and inhibitors. PHEnex J. 2011;3(1):1–15.
    1. Leatherdale ST, Manske S, Faulkner G, Arbour K, Bredin C. A multi-level examination of school programs, policies and resources associated with physical activity among elementary school youth in the PLAY-ON study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010;7:6. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-7-6.
    1. Robertson-Wilson JE, Lévesque L. Ontario’s daily physical activity policy for elementary schools: is everything in place for success? Can J Public Health. 2009;100(2):125–9.
    1. Stone MR, Faulkner GE, Zeglen-Hunt L, Bonne JC. The Daily Physical Activity (DPA) policy in Ontario: is it working? an examination using accelerometry-measured physical activity data. Can J Public Health. 2012;103(3):170–4.
    1. Cancer Care Ontario, Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion . Taking action to prevent chronic disease: recommendations for a healthier Ontario. 2012.
    1. Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK, editors. Dissemination and implementation research in health: translating science to practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.; 2012.
    1. Chaudoir SR, Dugan AG, Barr CHI. Measuring factors affecting implementation of health innovations: a systematic review of structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation level measures. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):1–20. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-22.
    1. Canada Post . Addressing guidelines: 5.2 forward sortation area - the first segment of the postal code. 2014.
    1. Jones KR, Ezeife AN. School size as a factor in the academic achievement of elementary school students. Psychology. 2011;2(8):859–68. doi: 10.4236/psych.2011.28131.
    1. Ontario Ministry of Education . Healthy schools resource guide: daily physical activity in schools, grades 1 to 3. 2005.
    1. Ontario Ministry of Education . Healthy schools resource guide: Daily physical activity in schools, grades 4 to 6. 2005.
    1. Ontario Ministry of Education . Healthy schools resource guide: Daily physical activity in schools, grades 7 and 8. 2005.
    1. Ontario Ministry of Education . Healthy schools resource guide: Daily physical activity in schools, guide for school principals. 2006.
    1. Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM. Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. 3. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2009.
    1. Dwyer JJM, Allison KR, Lysy DC, LeMoine KN, Adlaf EM, Faulkner GEJ, et al. An illustration of a methodology to maximize mail survey response rates in a provincial school-based physical activity needs assessment. Can J Program Eval. 2010;24(2):157–68.
    1. Dwyer JJM, Allison KR, LeMoine KN, Adlaf EM, Goodman J, Faulkner GEJ, et al. A provincial study of opportunities for school-based physical activity in secondary schools. J Adolesc Health. 2006;39(1):80–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.10.004.
    1. FluidSurveys™. 2014. . Accessed 21 May 2015.
    1. McAlister AL, Perry CL, Parcel GS. Chapter 8: how individuals, environments, and health behaviors interact - Social Cognitive Theory. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, editors. Health behavior and health education. 4. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2008. p. 169.
    1. Cook C, Heath F, Russel RL. A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or internet-based surveys. Educ Psychol Meas. 2000;60(6):821–36. doi: 10.1177/00131640021970934.
    1. Carlson JA, Sallis JF, Chriqui JF, Schneider L, McDermid LC, Agron P. State policies about physical activity minutes in physical education or during school. J Sch Health. 2013;83(3):150–6. doi: 10.1111/josh.12010.
    1. Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Perna FM, Powell LM, Slater SJ, Chaloupka FJ. Association between state physical education (PE) requirements and PE participation, physical activity, and body mass index change. Prev Med. 2013;57(5):629–33. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.08.018.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren