Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Children (Basel) ; 7(10)2020 Sep 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32992838

ABSTRACT

The adoption of school-based running programs has rapidly increased over the last five years in the UK and globally. However, there is currently a lack of information on how these initiatives are implemented, and whether they are generalizable and/or sustainable. This study evaluated the implementation (including reach, fidelity, and dose) of a school-based running program over seven months to inform future delivery. This observational study used a mixed-method, single-group, before-and-after design strengthened by multiple interim measurements to evaluate the implementation of an optional school-based running program. Five state-funded primary schools in Leicestershire, UK, participated, with 17 teachers and 189 (81 boys (47.4%) and 90 girls (52.6%)) Year 5 pupils (aged 9-10 years) from eight classes. During the 2016/2017 academic year, data were collected via several measures (including interviews, focus groups, observations, questionnaires, and teacher implementation logs) at multiple levels (i.e., school and individual) and at multiple time points during implementation. Follow up qualitative data were also collected during 2017/2018. The school-based running program achieved good reach, with 100% of pupils opting to participate at some point during the academic year. All schools implemented the program with good fidelity, although the level of implementation varied between schools and over time. The average number of sessions held per week ranged from 0.94-3.89 with the average distance accumulated per pupil per week ranging from 0.02 to 2.91 kilometers and boys being more likely than girls to be classed as high-level participators. Despite an initial drop off in participation over time, all schools remained engaged in the program and continued to implement it until the end of the school year. Contextual features (e.g., staff capacity and resources) differed between schools and influenced the quality of implementation and the frequency of delivery. The school-based running program is simple, inexpensive, and versatile and can be implemented by schools with relative ease. However, schools are diverse settings, with unique challenges to ongoing delivery. Thus, planned adaptations, specific to each school's context, are likely necessary to sustain participation in the longer term and should be considered prior to implementation.

2.
J Sport Exerc Psychol ; 42(1): 48-58, 2020 Feb 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31982000

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: School-based running programs that promote daily (or regular) walking/jogging/running are an emerging public health initiative. However, evaluation of these programs has predominantly used quantitative measures that limit understanding and explanations of contextual influences on pupil participation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to qualitatively explore pupils' experiences of participating in a primary-school-based running program (Marathon Kids) to provide relevant insights and inform program developments. METHODS: Nine semistructured focus groups were conducted with a purposeful sample of 50 pupils (26 girls and 24 boys) between 6 and 10 years of age from 5 primary schools in England. All schools had delivered the running program for 5-9 months during the 2015-16 academic year. Transcripts were analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: Pupils identified a range of organizational, interpersonal, and intrapersonal factors that they believed influenced their participation in the program. Six themes were identified as being important to pupils' experiences: Marathon Kids as an enabling program, pupils' autonomy to participate, peer influence on participation (e.g., development of social cohesion), teacher influence on delivery (e.g., fidelity of implementation), logistics and suitability of the school environment, and appropriateness of program resources. CONCLUSIONS: School-based running programs can offer an enjoyable physical activity experience for children; however, it is important to understand how current delivery approaches influence pupils' participation. Aspects that were believed to facilitate enjoyment included pupil autonomy to participate, perceived benefits of participation (including psychosocial outcomes), and a supportive school environment. Further research is required to identify the type and level of support required by schools to sustain pupil participation in running programs so that their perceived value is maintained.

3.
BMC Public Health ; 18(1): 1189, 2018 Oct 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30342500

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in school-based interventions which deliver opportunities for additional physical activity time outside of physical education (PE). A practical and cost-effective approach may be school running programmes. Consequently, many school-based running initiatives are currently being implemented in a grass-roots style movement across the UK. However, research on the implementation of physical activity programmes in schools is notably underdeveloped. Therefore, this qualitative study aimed to better understand the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a running programme, Marathon Kids (MK), within primary schools in England. METHODS: Two sets of semi-structured interviews were conducted, the first with each of the three core members of staff responsible for MK, and the second with each of the MK school staff Champions from 20 primary schools. Also, nine focus groups were conducted with 55 pupils (6-10 years) from five of the schools; all were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were identified surrounding the barriers and facilitators to implementation: features of the programme (e.g. ethos and resources), school climate (e.g. culture; whole school engagement; PE and physical activity policies and goals; and physical environment) and programme implementation decisions (e.g. aspirations and planning and sustainability). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that the barriers and facilitators to implementation are wide-ranging and include programme, organisational and system-level factors. Collectively pointing towards the need for a preparation period before implementation to understand schools' readiness to implement and context-specific factors, both regarding organisational capacity and programme specific capacity.


Subject(s)
Health Services Accessibility , Program Development , Running , School Health Services/organization & administration , Child , England , Female , Focus Groups , Humans , Male , Qualitative Research , Retrospective Studies
4.
BMJ Open ; 8(5): e022176, 2018 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29764890

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Schools are promising settings for physical activity promotion; however, they are complex and adaptive systems that can influence the quality of programme implementation. This paper presents an evaluation of a school-based running programme (Marathon Kids). The aims of this study are (1) to identify the processes by which schools implement the programme, (2) identify and explain the contextual factors affecting implementation and explications of effectiveness and (3) examine the relationship between the level of implementation and perceived outcomes. METHODS: Using a realist evaluation framework, a mixed method single-group before-and-after design, strengthened by multiple interim measurements, will be used. Year 5 (9-10 years old) pupils and their teachers will be recruited from six state-funded primary schools in Leicestershire, UK.Data will be collected once prior to implementation, at five discrete time points during implementation and twice following implementation. A weekly implementation log will also be used. At time point 1 (TP1) (September 2016), data on school environment, teacher and pupil characteristics will be collected. At TP1 and TP6 (July 2017), accelerometry, pupil self-reported physical activity and psychosocial data (eg, social support and intention to be active) will be collected. At TP2, TP3 and TP5 (January, March and June 2017), observations will be conducted. At TP2 and TP5, there will be teacher interviews and pupil focus groups. Follow-up teacher interviews will be conducted at TP7 and TP8 (October 2017 and March 2018) and pupil focus group at TP8. In addition, synthesised member checking will be conducted (June 2018) with a mixed sample of schools. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study was obtained through Loughborough University Human Participants Ethics Subcommittee (R16-P032 & R16-P116). Findings will be disseminated via print, online media and dissemination events as well as practitioner and/or research journals.


Subject(s)
Health Promotion/methods , Running/statistics & numerical data , School Health Services/standards , Schools , Child , Female , Focus Groups , Humans , Male , Program Evaluation , Research Design , United Kingdom
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...