This item was submitted to Loughborough’s Institutional Repository
(https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/) by the author and is made available under the
following Creative Commons Licence conditions.
For the full text of this licence, please go to:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/
1
1
School based physical activity interventions – effectiveness, trends,
issues, implications and recommendations for practice
Lorraine Cale and Jo Harris
School of Sport and Exercise Sciences
Loughborough University
Loughborough
LE 11 3TU
Tel: 01509 226302
Fax: 01509 226301
Correspondence to:
Lorraine Cale at the above address
L.A.Cale@lboro.ac.uk
2
2
Abstract
The promotion of physical activity within schools and Physical Education
(PE) has attracted growing interest in recent years. Schools have been
acknowledged as the primary institution with responsibility for promoting
activity in young people and more specifically, school PE has been
recognized as having a key role to play. Given this, and based on previous
reviews of the findings of formally evaluated interventions, this paper
considers the evidence for the effectiveness of school based physical activity
interventions and highlights the key trends and a number of issues
concerning their type, target population, design, implementation and content.
Earlier reviews have provided comprehensive summaries of the
effectiveness of physical activity interventions but they have not provided
specific guidance for teachers’ practice in schools. Thus, whilst it is
acknowledged that the existing literature is not sufficiently extensive to
provide definitive guidelines for schools, this paper considers the
implications for practice and presents recommendations for future physical
activity programmes, initiatives and interventions.
Introduction
Given the growing concerns over the physical activity levels of many young
people and the possible health consequences, targeted efforts to promote
physical activity would seem to be warranted. In this respect, the promotion
of physical activity within schools and the physical education (PE) curriculum
has attracted growing interest in recent years. Schools have been
acknowledged as the primary institution with responsibility for promoting
3
3
activity in young people (Cardon and Bourdeaudhuij, 2002; McBride and
Midford, 1999; Sallis and Owen, 1999). More specifically, school PE has
been recognized as having a key role to play (see for example, Armstrong
2002; Cale, 2000a; Cardon and Bourdeaudhuij, 2002; McKenzie, 2001;
Shephard and Trudeau, 2000). Indeed, McKenzie (2001) views PE as the
most suitable vehicle for the promotion of active, healthy lifestyles among
young people. According to Stone and colleagues (1998), school based
physical activity interventions have an inherent advantage over interventions
in other settings because programmes can become institutionalized into the
regular school curriculum, staff development and other infrastructures. It is
perhaps not surprising therefore, that they are the most common form of
physical activity intervention with young people.
Furthermore, the role of schools and PE in promoting health and the link
between health and education has increasingly been recognized by
Government in the United Kingdom (UK). Harris and Penney (2000, p. 252)
note how official and semi official pronouncements on behalf of Government
have clearly identified PE as ‘critical in educating and providing opportunities
for young people to become independently active for life,’ whilst Green
(2004) reports that the encouragement of lifelong participation in sport and
physical activity is an implicit and explicit theme in government policy
towards health promotion generally and PE and sport in schools in
particular. This is evidenced in a number of publications in recent years that
have attested to the desirability of utilizing schools and PE in order to
promote lifelong participation in sport and physical activity (e.g., Department
4
4
for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), 2001; Department of Health (DoH),
1999; 2005a; 2005b; DCSM London Strategy Unit, 2002). Perhaps the most
recent and significant example of this was the launch of the National PE,
School Sport and Club Links Strategy in October 2002, which is being
delivered by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) and DCMS and
being supported by a Government investment of £459 million over three
years. The aim of the strategy is to:
‘increase the percentage of school children in England who spend a
minimum of two hours each week on high quality PE and school sport
within and beyond the curriculum (from 25 per cent in 2002) to 75 per
cent by 2006.’ (DfES, 2003, p.2).
In December 2004, a further £519 million was allocated to continue and build
on the Strategy from 2006/07 to 2007/08, to extend the target to 85 per cent
of children spending at least two hours a week on high quality PE and school
sport by 2008 (DfES, 2004).
This interest and level of investment is perhaps being fuelled by concerns
generally over young people’s health and more recently by the alleged
‘obesity epidemic’ and ‘alarming’ rise in childhood obesity, as well as by the
general acceptance of a biomedical model of health as an appropriate
response and means of intervention (Johns, 2005). Yet interestingly, the
‘obesity discourse,’ with its inherent uncertainties, ambiguities and conflicts
of knowledge has been critiqued and contested elsewhere, as has the
uncritical acceptance of PE’s role in the prevention or treatment of obesity