physical education performance tasks

Subject Knowledge >

Performance Tasks: Physical Education

* Evaluated Practicum

Performance Tasks revised 21 Jul 09

Other Portfolio Pages: Introduction - Teaching Philosophy - Subject Knowledge - Instructional Strategies Assessment - Adaptive Instruction - Credentials

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Physical Education

Physical education is the foundation of a Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program. 1, 2 It is an academic subject characterized by a planned, sequential K–12 curriculum (course of study) that is based on the national standards for physical education. 2–4 Physical education provides cognitive content and instruction designed to develop motor skills, knowledge, and behaviors for physical activity and physical fitness. 2–4 Supporting schools to establish physical education daily can provide students with the ability and confidence to be physically active for a lifetime. 2–4

There are many benefits of physical education in schools. When students get physical education, they can 5-7 :

• Increase their level of physical activity.
• Improve their grades and standardized test scores.
• Stay on-task in the classroom.

Increased time spent in physical education does not negatively affect students’ academic achievement.

Strengthen Physical Education in Schools [PDF – 437 KB] —This data brief defines physical education, provides a snapshot of current physical education practices in the United States, and highlights ways to improve physical education through national guidance and practical strategies and resources. This was developed by Springboard to Active Schools in collaboration with CDC.

Secular Changes in Physical Education Attendance Among U.S. High School Students, YRBS 1991–2013

The Secular Changes in Physical Education Attendance Among U.S. High School Students report [PDF – 3 MB] explains the secular changes (long-term trends) in physical education attendance among US high school students over the past two decades. Between 1991 and 2013, US high school students’ participation in school-based physical education classes remained stable, but at a level much lower than the national recommendation of daily physical education. In order to maximize the benefits of physical education, the adoption of policies and programs aimed at increasing participation in physical education among all US students should be prioritized. Download the report for detailed, nationwide findings.

Physical Education Analysis Tool (PECAT)

The  Physical Education Curriculum Analysis Tool (PECAT) [PDF – 6 MB] is a self-assessment and planning guide developed by CDC. It is designed to help school districts and schools conduct clear, complete, and consistent analyses of physical education curricula, based upon national physical education standards.

Visit our PECAT page  to learn more about how schools can use this tool.

• CDC Monitoring Student Fitness Levels1 [PDF – 1.64 MB]
• CDC Ideas for Parents: Physical Education [PDF – 2 MB]
• SHAPE America: The Essential Components of Physical Education (2015) [PDF – 391 KB]
• SHAPE America: Appropriate Instructional Practice Guidelines for Elementary, Middle School, and High School Physical Education [PDF – 675 KB]
• SHAPE America: National Standards and Grade-Level Outcomes for K–12 Physical Education 2014
• SHAPE America: National Standards for K–12 Physical Education (2013)
• SHAPE America Resources
• Youth Compendium of Physical Activities for Physical Education Teachers (2018) [PDF – 145 KB]
• Social Emotional Learning Policies and Physical Education
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A Guide for Developing Comprehensive School Physical Activity Programs . Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2013.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. School health guidelines to promote healthy eating and physical activity. MMWR . 2011;60(RR05):1–76.
• Institute of Medicine. Educating the Student Body: Taking Physical Activity and Physical Education to School . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2013. Retrieved from  http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18314&page=R1 .
• SHAPE America. T he Essential Components of Physical Education . Reston, VA: SHAPE America; 2015. Retrieved from   http://www.shapeamerica.org/upload/TheEssentialComponentsOfPhysicalEducation.pdf  [PDF – 392 KB].
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Association Between School-Based Physical Activity, Including Physical Education, and Academic Performance . Atlanta, GA; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2010.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Health and Academic Achievement. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2014.
• Michael SL, Merlo C, Basch C, et al. Critical connections: health and academics . Journal of School Health . 2015;85(11):740–758.

Healthy Youth

To receive email updates about this page, enter your email address:

Exit Notification / Disclaimer Policy

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
• Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
• You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
• CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website.

What is a Performance Task? (Part 1)

Defined Learning

Performance Task PD with Jay McTighe — Blog

A performance task is any learning activity or assessment that asks students to perform to demonstrate their knowledge, understanding and proficiency. Performance tasks yield a tangible product and/or performance that serve as evidence of learning. Unlike a selected-response item (e.g., multiple-choice or matching) that asks students to select from given alternatives, a performance task presents a situation that calls for learners to apply their learning in context.

Performance tasks are routinely used in certain disciplines, such as visual and performing arts, physical education, and career-technology where performance is the natural focus of instruction. However, such tasks can (and should) be used in every subject area and at all grade levels.

Characteristics of Performance Tasks

While any performance by a learner might be considered a performance task (e.g., tying a shoe or drawing a picture), it is useful to distinguish between the application of specific and discrete skills (e.g., dribbling a basketball) from genuine performance in context (e.g., playing the game of basketball in which dribbling is one of many applied skills). Thus, when I use the term performance tasks, I am referring to more complex and authentic performances.

Here are seven general characteristics of performance tasks:

• Performance tasks call for the application of knowledge and skills, not just recall or recognition.

In other words, the learner must actually use their learning to perform . These tasks typically yield a tangible product (e.g., graphic display, blog post) or performance (e.g., oral presentation, debate) that serve as evidence of their understanding and proficiency.

2. Performance tasks are open-ended and typically do not yield a single, correct answer.

Unlike selected- or brief constructed- response items that seek a “right” answer, performance tasks are open-ended. Thus, there can be different responses to the task that still meet success criteria. These tasks are also open in terms of process; i.e., there is typically not a single way of accomplishing the task.

3. Performance tasks establish novel and authentic contexts for performance.

These tasks present realistic conditions and constraints for students to navigate. For example, a mathematics task would present students with a never-before-seen problem that cannot be solved by simply “plugging in” numbers into a memorized algorithm. In an authentic task, students need to consider goals, audience, obstacles, and options to achieve a successful product or performance. Authentic tasks have a side benefit — they convey purpose and relevance to students, helping learners see a reason for putting forth effort in preparing for them.

4. Performance tasks provide evidence of understanding via transfer.

Understanding is revealed when students can transfer their learning to new and “messy” situations. Note that not all performances require transfer. For example, playing a musical instrument by following the notes or conducting a step-by-step science lab require minimal transfer. In contrast, rich performance tasks are open-ended and call “higher-order thinking” and the thoughtful application of knowledge and skills in context, rather than a scripted or formulaic performance.

5. Performance tasks are multi-faceted.

Unlike traditional test “items” that typically assess a single skill or fact, performance tasks are more complex. They involve multiple steps and thus can be used to assess several standards or outcomes.

6. Performance tasks can integrate two or more subjects as well as 21st century skills.

In the wider world beyond the school, most issues and problems do not present themselves neatly within subject area “silos.” While performance tasks can certainly be content-specific (e.g., mathematics, science, social studies), they also provide a vehicle for integrating two or more subjects and/or weaving in 21st century skills and Habits of Mind. One natural way of integrating subjects is to include a reading, research, and/or communication component (e.g., writing, graphics, oral or technology presentation) to tasks in content areas like social studies, science, health, business, health/physical education. Such tasks encourage students to see meaningful learning as integrated, rather than something that occurs in isolated subjects and segments.

7. Performances on open-ended tasks are evaluated with established criteria and rubrics.

Since these tasks do not yield a single answer, student products and performances should be judged against appropriate criteria aligned to the goals being assessed. Clearly defined and aligned criteria enable defensible, judgment-based evaluation. More detailed scoring rubrics, based on criteria, are used to profile varying levels of understanding and proficiency.

Let’s look at a few examples of performance tasks that reflect these characteristics:

Botanical Design (upper elementary)

Your landscape architectural firm is competing for a grant to redesign a public space in your community and to improve its appearance and utility. The goal of the grant is to create a community area where people can gather to enjoy themselves and the native plants of the region. The grant also aspires to educate people as to the types of trees, shrubs, and flowers that are native to the region. Your team will be responsible for selecting a public place in your area that you can improve for visitors and members of the community. You will have to research the area selected, create a scale drawing of the layout of the area you plan to redesign, propose a new design to include native plants of your region, and prepare educational materials that you will incorporate into the design.

Check out the full performance task from Defined STEM , here: Botanical Design Performance Task . Defined STEM is an online resource where you can find hundreds of K-12 standards-aligned project based performance tasks.

Evaluate the Claim (upper elementary/ middle school)

The Pooper Scooper Kitty Litter Company claims that their litter is 40% more absorbent than other brands. You are a Consumer Advocates researcher who has been asked to evaluate their claim. Develop a plan for conducting the investigation. Your plan should be specific enough so that the lab investigators could follow it to evaluate the claim.

Moving to South America (middle school)

Since they know that you have just completed a unit on South America, your aunt and uncle have asked you to help them decide where they should live when your aunt starts her new job as a consultant to a computer company operating throughout the region. They can choose to live anywhere in the continent.

Your task is to research potential home locations by examining relevant geographic, climatic, political, economic, historic, and cultural considerations. Then, write a letter to your aunt and uncle with your recommendation about a place for them to move. Be sure to explain your decision with reasons and evidence from your research.

Accident Scene Investigation (high school)

You are a law enforcement officer who has been hired by the District Attorney’s Office to set-up an accident scene investigation unit. Your first assignment is to work with a reporter from the local newspaper to develop a series of information pieces to inform the community about the role and benefits of applying forensic science to accident investigations.

Your team will share this information with the public through the various media resources owned and operated by the newspaper.

Check out the full performance task from Defined STEM here: Accident Scene Investigation Performance Task

In sum, performance tasks like these can be used to engage students in meaningful learning. Since rich performance tasks establish authentic contexts that reflect genuine applications of knowledge, students are often motivated and engaged by such “real world” challenges.

When used as assessments, performance tasks enable teachers to gauge student understanding and proficiency with complex processes (e.g., research, problem solving, and writing), not just measure discrete knowledge. They are well suited to integrating subject areas and linking content knowledge with the 21st Century Skills such as critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, communication, and technology use. Moreover, performance-based assessment can also elicit Habits of Mind, such as precision and perseverance.

For a collection of authentic performance tasks and associated rubrics, see Defined STEM : https://www.definedstem.com

For a complete professional development course on performance tasks for your school or district, see Performance Task PD with Jay McTighe : http://www.performancetask.com

For more information about the design and use of performance tasks, see Core Learning: Assessing What Matters Most by Jay McTighe: http://www.schoolimprovement.com

Article originally posted: URL: http://performancetask.com/what-is-a-performance-task | Article Title: What is a Performance Task? | Website Title:PerformanceTask.com | Publication date: 2015–04–12

Written by Defined Learning

More from defined learning and performance task pd with jay mctighe — blog.

Why Should We Use Performance Tasks? (Part 2)

How will we evaluate student performance on tasks? (Part 6)

How Can We Differentiate Performance Tasks? (Part 4)

How Should We Teach Toward Success with Performance Tasks? (Part 7)

Recommended from medium.

How to become a Senior Designer — from an ex-Google, Meta Designer

Growth starts with you, stepping up proactively, building opinions and voicing opinions like an owner, despite your fear and doubt….

Sufyan Maan, M.Eng

ILLUMINATION

What Happens When You Start Reading Every Day

Think before you speak. read before you think. — fran lebowitz.

Medium's Huge List of Publications Accepting Submissions

Karolina Kozmana

Common side effects of not drinking

By rejecting alcohol, you reject something very human, an extra limb that we have collectively grown to deal with reality and with each….

Hazel Paradise

How I Create Passive Income With No Money

Many ways to start a passive income today.

Torsten Walbaum

Towards Data Science

What 10 Years at Uber, Meta and Startups Taught Me About Data Analytics

Advice for data scientists and managers.

10 Seconds That Ended My 20 Year Marriage

It’s august in northern virginia, hot and humid. i still haven’t showered from my morning trail run. i’m wearing my stay-at-home mom….

Text to speech

Educating the Student Body: Taking Physical Activity and Physical Education to School (2013)

Chapter: 5 approaches to physical education in schools.

Approaches to Physical Education in Schools

Key Messages

•  Because it is guaranteed to reach virtually all children, physical education is the only sure opportunity for nearly all school-age children to access health-enhancing physical activities.

•  High-quality physical education programs are characterized by (1) instruction by certified physical education teachers, (2) a minimum of 150 minutes per week (30 minutes per day) for children in elementary schools and 225 minutes per week (45 minutes per day) for students in middle and high schools, and (3) tangible standards for student achievement and for high school graduation.

•  Students are more physically active on days on which they have physical education.

•  Quality physical education has strong support from both parents and child health professional organizations.

•  Several models and examples demonstrate that physical education scheduled during the school day is feasible on a daily basis.

•  Substantial discrepancies exist in state mandates regarding the time allocated for physical education.

•  Nearly half of school administrators (44 percent) reported cutting significant time from physical education and recess to increase time spent in reading and mathematics since passage of the No Child Left Behind Act.

•  Standardized national-level data on the provision of and participation, performance, and extent of engagement in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity are insufficient to allow assessment of the current status and trends in physical education in the United States.

•  Systematic research is needed on personal, curricular, and policy barriers to successful physical education.

•  The long-term impact of physical education has been understudied and should be a research priority to support the development of evidence-based policies.

P hysical education is a formal content area of study in schools that is standards based and encompasses assessment based on standards and benchmarks. It is defined in Chapter 1 as “a planned sequential K-12 standards-based program of curricula and instruction designed to develop motor skills, knowledge, and behaviors of healthy active living, physical fitness, sportsmanship, self-efficacy, and emotional intelligence.” As a school subject, physical education is focused on teaching school-aged children the science and methods of physically active, healthful living (NASPE, 2012). It is an avenue for engaging in developmentally appropriate physical activities designed for children to develop their fitness, gross motor skills, and health (Sallis et al., 2003; Robinson and Goodway, 2009; Robinson, 2011). This chapter (1) provides a perspective on physical education in the context of schooling; (2) elaborates on the importance of physical education to child development; (3) describes the consensus on the characteristics of quality physical education programs; (4) reviews current national, state, and local education policies that affect the quality of physical education; and (5) examines barriers to quality physical education and solutions for overcoming them.

PHYSICAL EDUCATION IN THE CONTEXT OF SCHOOLING

Physical education became a subject matter in schools (in the form of German and Swedish gymnastics) at the beginning of the 19th century (Hackensmith, 1966). Its role in human health was quickly recognized. By the turn of the 20th century, personal hygiene and exercise for bodily health were incorporated in the physical education curriculum as the major learning outcomes for students (Weston, 1962). The exclusive focus on health, however, was criticized by educator Thomas Wood (1913; Wood and Cassidy, 1930) as too narrow and detrimental to the development of the whole child. The education community subsequently adopted Wood’s inclusive approach to physical education whereby fundamental movements and physical skills for games and sports were incorporated as the major instructional content. During the past 15 years, physical education has once again evolved to connect body movement to its consequences (e.g., physical activity and health), teaching children the science of healthful living and skills needed for an active lifestyle (NASPE, 2004).

Sallis and McKenzie (1991) published a landmark paper stating that physical education is education content using a “comprehensive but physically active approach that involves teaching social, cognitive, and physical skills, and achieving other goals through movement” (p. 126). This perspective is also emphasized by Siedentop (2009), who states that physical education is education through the physical. Sallis and McKenzie (1991) stress two main goals of physical education: (1) prepare children and youth for a lifetime of physical activity and (2) engage them in physical activity during physical education. These goals represent the lifelong benefits of health-enhancing physical education that enable children and adolescents to become active adults throughout their lives.

Physical Education as Part of Education

In institutionalized education, the main goal has been developing children’s cognitive capacity in the sense of learning knowledge in academic disciplines. This goal dictates a learning environment in which seated learning behavior is considered appropriate and effective and is rewarded. Physical education as part of education provides the only opportunity for all children to learn about physical movement and engage in physical activity. As noted, its goal and place in institutionalized education have changed from the original focus on teaching hygiene and health to educating children about the many forms and benefits of physical movement, including sports and exercise. With a dramatic expansion of content beyond the original Swedish and German gymnastics programs of the 19th century, physical education has evolved to become a content

area with diverse learning goals that facilitate the holistic development of children (NASPE, 2004).

To understand physical education as a component of the education system, it is important to know that the education system in the United States does not operate with a centralized curriculum. Learning standards are developed by national professional organizations such as the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) and/or state education agencies rather than by the federal Department of Education; all curricular decisions are made locally by school districts or individual schools in compliance with state standards. Physical education is influenced by this system, which leads to great diversity in policies and curricula. According to NASPE and the American Heart Association (2010), although most states have begun to mandate physical education for both elementary and secondary schools, the number of states that allow waivers/exemptions from or substitutions for physical education increased from 27 and 18 in 2006 to 32 and 30 in 2010, respectively. These expanded waiver and substitution policies (discussed in greater detail later in the chapter) increase the possibility that students will opt out of physical education for nonmedical reasons.

Curriculum Models

Given that curricula are determined at the local level in the United States, encompassing national standards, state standards, and state-adopted textbooks that meet and are aligned with the standards, physical education is taught in many different forms and structures. Various curriculum models are used in instruction, including movement education, sport education, and fitness education. In terms of engagement in physical activity, two perspectives are apparent. First, programs in which fitness education curricula are adopted are effective at increasing in-class physical activity (Lonsdale et al., 2013). Second, in other curriculum models, physical activity is considered a basis for students’ learning skill or knowledge that the lesson is planned for them to learn. A paucity of nationally representative data is available with which to demonstrate the relationship between the actual level of physical activity in which students are engaged and the curriculum models adopted by their schools.

Movement Education

Movement has been a cornerstone of physical education since the 1800s. Early pioneers (Francois Delsarte, Liselott Diem, Rudolf von Laban) focused on a child’s ability to use his or her body for self-expression (Abels and Bridges, 2010). Exemplary works and curriculum descriptions include those by Laban himself (Laban, 1980) and others (e.g., Logsdon et al.,

1984). Over time, however, the approach shifted from concern with the inner attitude of the mover to a focus on the function and application of each movement (Abels and Bridges, 2010). In the 1960s, the intent of movement education was to apply four movement concepts to the three domains of learning (i.e., cognitive, psychomotor, and affective). The four concepts were body (representing the instrument of the action); space (where the body is moving); effort (the quality with which the movement is executed); and relationships (the connections that occur as the body moves—with objects, people, and the environment; Stevens-Smith, 2004). The importance of movement in physical education is evidenced by its inclusion in the first two NASPE standards for K-12 physical education (NASPE, 2004; see Box 5-7 later in this chapter).

These standards emphasize the need for children to know basic movement concepts and be able to perform basic movement patterns. It is imperative for physical educators to foster motor success and to provide children with a basic skill set that builds their movement repertoire, thus allowing them to engage in various forms of games, sports, and other physical activities (see also Chapter 3 ).

Sport Education

One prevalent physical education model is the sport education curriculum designed by Daryl Siedentop (Siedentop, 1994; Siedentop et al., 2011). The goal of the model is to “educate students to be players in the fullest sense and to help them develop as competent, literate, and enthusiastic sportspersons” (2011, p. 4, emphasis in original). The model entails a unique instructional structure featuring sport seasons that are used as the basis for planning and teaching instructional units. Students are organized into sport organizations (teams) and play multiple roles as team managers, coaches, captains, players, referees, statisticians, public relations staff, and others to mimic a professional sports organization. A unit is planned in terms of a sports season, including preseason activity/practice, regular-season competition, playoffs and/or tournaments, championship competition, and a culminating event (e.g., an awards ceremony or sport festivity). Depending on the developmental level of students, the games are simplified or modified to encourage maximum participation. In competition, students play the roles noted above in addition to the role of players. A sport education unit thus is much longer than a conventional physical education unit. Siedentop and colleagues (2011) recommend 20 lessons per unit, so that all important curricular components of the model can be implemented.

Findings from research on the sport education model have been reviewed twice. Wallhead and O’Sullivan (2005) report that evidence is insufficient to support the conclusion that use of the model results in

students’ developing motor skills and fitness and learning relevant knowledge; some evidence suggests that the model leads to stronger team cohesion, more active engagement in lessons, and increased competence in game play. In a more recent review, Hastie and colleagues (2011) report on emerging evidence suggesting that the model leads to improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness (only one study) and mixed evidence regarding motor skills development, increased feeling of enjoyment in participation in physical education, increased sense of affiliation with the team and physical education, and positive development of fair-play values. The only study on in-class physical activity using the model showed that it contributed to only 36.6 percent activity at the vigorous- or moderate-intensity levels (Parker and Curtner-Smith, 2005). Hastie and colleagues caution, however, that because only 6 of 38 studies reviewed used an experimental or quasi-experimental design, the findings must be interpreted with extreme caution. The model’s merits in developing motor skills, fitness, and desired physical activity behavior have yet to be determined in studies with more rigorous research designs.

Fitness Education

Instead of focusing exclusively on having children move constantly to log activity time, a new curricular approach emphasizes teaching them the science behind why they need to be physically active in their lives. The curriculum is designed so that the children are engaged in physical activities that demonstrate relevant scientific knowledge. The goal is the development and maintenance of individual student fitness. In contrast with the movement education and sport education models, the underlying premise is that physical activity is essential to a healthy lifestyle and that students’ understanding of fitness and behavior change result from engagement in a fitness education program. The conceptual framework for the model is designed around the health-related components of cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength and endurance, and flexibility. A recent meta-analysis (Lonsdale et al., 2013) suggests that physical education curricula that include fitness activities can significantly increase the amount of time spent in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity.

Several concept-based fitness education curriculum models exist for both the middle school and senior high school levels. They include Fitness for Life: Middle School (Corbin et al., 2007); Personal Fitness for You (Stokes and Schultz, 2002); Get Active! Get Fit! (Stokes and Schultz, 2009); Personal Fitness: Looking Good, Feeling Good (Williams, 2005); and Foundations of Fitness (Rainey and Murray, 2005). Activities in the curriculum are designed for health benefits, and the ultimate goal for the student is to develop a commitment to regular exercise and physical

activity. It is assumed that all children can achieve a health-enhancing level of fitness through regular engagement in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity.

Randomized controlled studies on the impact of a science-based fitness curriculum in 15 elementary schools showed that, although the curriculum allocated substantial lesson time to learning cognitive knowledge, the students were more motivated to engage in physical activities than students in the 15 control schools experiencing traditional physical education (Chen et al., 2008), and they expended the same amount of calories as their counterparts in the control schools (Chen et al., 2007). Longitudinal data from the study reveal continued knowledge growth in the children that strengthened their understanding of the science behind exercise and active living (Sun et al., 2012). What is unclear, however, is whether the enthusiasm and knowledge gained through the curriculum will translate into the children’s lives outside of physical education to help them become physically active at home.

To incorporate standards and benchmarks into a fitness education model, a committee under the auspices of NASPE (2012) developed the Instructional Framework for Fitness Education in Physical Education. It is suggested that through this proposed comprehensive framework, fitness education be incorporated into the existing physical education curriculum and embedded in the content taught in all instructional units. The entire framework, highlighted in Box 5-1 , can be viewed at http://www.aahperd.org/naspe/publications/upload/Instructional-Framework-for-Fitness-Education-in-PE-2012-2.pdf (accessed February 1, 2013).

Emergence of Active Gaming in Fitness Education

Today, active gaming and cell phone/computer applications are a part of physical activity for both youth and adults. Accordingly, fitness education in school physical education programs is being enhanced through the incorporation of active video games, also known as exergaming. Examples of active gaming programs with accompanying equipment include Konami Dance Dance Revolution (DDR), Nintendo Wii, Gamebikes, Kinect XBOX, Xavix, and Hopsports. These active games have been incorporated into school wellness centers as high-tech methods of increasing student fitness levels to supplement the traditional modes for attaining vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity (Greenberg and Stokes, 2007).

Bailey and McInnis (2011) compared selected active games with treadmill walking and found that each game—DDR, LightSpace (Bug Invasion), Nintendo Wii (Boxing), Cyber Trazer (Goalie Wars), Sportwall, and Xavix (J-Mat)—raised energy expenditure above that measured at rest. Mean metabolic equivalent (MET) values for each game were comparable to or

Instructional Framework for Fitness Education in Physical Education

Technique: Demonstrate competency in techniques needed to perform a variety of moderate to vigorous physical activities.

•  Technique in developing cardiovascular fitness.

• Technique when developing muscle strength and endurance activities.

• Technique in developing flexibility.

• Safety techniques.

Knowledge: Demonstrate understanding of fitness concepts, principles, strategies, and individual differences needed to participate and maintain a health-enhancing level of fitness.

•  Benefits of physical activity/dangers of physical inactivity.

• Basic anatomy and physiology.

• Physiologic responses to physical activity.

• Components of health-related fitness.

• Training principles (overload, specificity, progression) and workout elements.

• Application of the Frequency Intensity Time Type principle. Factors that influence physical activity choices.

Physical activity: Participate regularly in fitness-enhancing physical activity.

•  Physical activity participation (e.g., aerobic, muscle strength and endurance, bone strength, flexibility, enjoyment/social/personal meaning).

• Create an individualized physical activity plan.

• Self-monitor physical activity and adhere to a physical activity plan.

Health-related fitness: Achieve and maintain a health-enhancing level of health-related fitness.

•  Physical fitness assessment (including self-assessment) and analysis.

• Setting goals and create a fitness improvement plan.

• Work to improve fitness components.

• Self-monitor and adjust plan.

• Achieve goals.

Responsible personal and social behaviors: Exhibit responsible personal and social behaviors in physical activity settings.

•  Social interaction/respecting differences.

• Self-management.

• Personal strategies to manage body weight.

• Stress management.

Values and advocates: Value fitness-enhancing physical activity for disease prevention, enjoyment, challenge, self-expression, self-efficacy, and/or social interaction and allocate energies toward the production of healthy environments.

•  Value physical activity.

• Advocacy.

• Fitness careers.

• Occupational fitness needs.

Nutrition: Strive to maintain healthy diet through knowledge, planning, and regular monitoring.

•  Basic nutrition and benefits of a healthy diet.

• Healthy diet recommendations.

• Diet assessment.

• Plan and maintain a healthy diet.

Consumerism: Access and evaluate fitness information, facilities, products, and services.

•  Differentiate between fact and fiction regarding fitness products.

• Make good decisions about consumer products.

SOURCE: NASPE, 2012. Reprinted with permission.

higher than those measured for walking on a treadmill at 3 miles per hour. Graf and colleagues (2009), studying boys and girls aged 10-13, found that both Wii boxing and DDR (level 2) elicited energy expenditure, heart rate, perceived exertion, and ventilatory responses that were comparable to or greater than those elicited by moderate-intensity walking on a treadmill. Similar results were found by Lanningham-Foster and colleagues (2009) among 22 children aged 10-14 and adults in that energy expenditure for both groups increased significantly when playing Wii over that expended during all sedentary activities. Staiano and colleagues (2012) explored factors that motivated overweight and obese African American high school students to play Wii during school-based physical activity opportunities. They found greater and more sustained energy expenditure over time and noted that players’ various intrinsic motivations to play also influenced their level of energy expenditure. Mellecker and McManus (2008) determined that energy expenditure and heart rate were greater during times of active play than in seated play. Fawkner and colleagues (2010) studied 20 high school–age girls and found that dance simulation games provided an opportunity for most subjects to achieve a moderate-intensity level of physical activity. The authors conclude that regular use of the games aids in promoting health through physical activity. Haddock and colleagues (2009) conducted ergometer tests with children aged 7-14 and found increased oxygen consumption and energy expenditure above baseline determinations. Maddison and colleagues (2007), studying children aged 10-14, found that active video game playing led to significant increases in energy expenditure, heart rate, and activity counts in comparison with baseline values. They conclude that playing these games for short time periods is comparable to light- to moderate-intensity conventional modes of exercise, including walking, skipping, and jogging. Mhurchu and colleagues (2008) also conclude that a short-term intervention involving active video games is likely to be an effective means of increasing children’s overall level of physical activity. Additionally, Sit and colleagues (2010), studying the effects of active gaming among 10-year-old children in Hong Kong, found the children to be significantly more physically active while playing interactive games compared with screen-based games.

Exergaming appears to increase acute physical activity among users and is being used in school settings because it is appealing to students. Despite active research in the area of exergaming and physical activity, however, exergaming’s utility for increasing acute and habitual physical activity specifically in the physical education setting has yet to be confirmed. Further, results of studies conducted in nonlaboratory and nonschool settings have been mixed (Baranowski et al., 2008). Moreover, any physical activity changes that do occur may not be sufficient to stimulate physiologic changes. For example, White and colleagues (2009) examined the effects

of Nintendo Wii on physiologic changes. Although energy expenditure was raised above resting values during active gaming, the rise was not significant enough to qualify as part of the daily 60 minutes or more of vigorous-or moderate-intensity exercise recommended for children.

While collecting data on the effects of Nintendo Wii on 11-year-olds in New Zealand, White and colleagues (2009) found that active video games generated higher energy expenditure than both resting and inactive screen watching. They determined, however, that active gaming is a “low-intensity” physical activity. Therefore, it may be helpful in reducing the amount of sedentary behavior, but it should not be used as a replacement for more conventional modes of physical activity. Sun (2012) found that active gaming can increase student motivation to engage in physical activity, but the motivation may decrease as a result of prolonged exposure to the same games. This study also found that exergaming lessons provided less physical activity for children than regular conventional physical education. For inactive children, however, the exergaming environment is conducive to more active participation in the game-based physical activities than in conventional physical education (Fogel et al., 2010). Finally, Sheehan and Katz (2012) found that among school-age children the use of active gaming added to postural stability, an important component of motor skills development.

From the research cited above, as well as ongoing research being conducted by the Health Games Research Project funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, active gaming is promising as a means of providing young children an opportunity to become more physically active and helping them meet the recommended 60 or more minutes of vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity per day. Different types of games may influence energy expenditure differentially, and some may serve solely as motivation. Selected games also appear to hold greater promise for increasing energy expenditure, while others invite youth to be physically active through motivational engagement. The dynamic and evolving field of active gaming is a promising area for future research as more opportunities arise to become physically active throughout the school environment.

Other Innovative Programs

While several evidence-based physical education programs—such as the Coordinated Approach to Child Health (CATCH) and Sports, Play, and Active Recreation for Kids (SPARK)—are being implemented in schools, many innovative programs also have been implemented nationwide that are motivating and contribute to skills attainment while engaging youth in activities that are fun and fitness oriented. These programs include water sports, involving sailing, kayaking, swimming, canoeing, and paddle boarding; adventure activities such as Project Adventure; winter sports, such as

snow skiing and snowshoeing; and extreme sports, such as in-line skating, skateboarding, and cycling.

Differences Among Elementary, Middle, and High Schools

Instructional opportunities vary within and among school levels as a result of discrepancies in state policy mandates. Although the time to be devoted to physical education (e.g., 150 minutes per week for elementary schools and 225 minutes per week for secondary schools) is commonly included in most state mandates, actual time allocation in school schedules is uncertain and often left to the discretion of local education officials.

With respect to content, in both elementary and secondary schools, physical activity is an assumed rather than an intended outcome except in the fitness education model. The goals of skill development and knowledge growth in physical education presumably are accomplished through participation in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity. Data are lacking, however, to support the claim that physical activity offered to further the attainment of skills and knowledge is of vigorous or moderate intensity and is of sufficient duration for children to reap health benefits.

Children in Nontraditional Schools

Research on physical education, physical activity, and sports opportunities in nontraditional school settings (charter schools, home schools, and correctional facilities) is extremely limited. Two intervention studies focused on charter schools addressed issues with Mexican American children. In the first (Johnston et al., 2010), 10- to 14-year-old children were randomly assigned to either an instructor-led intervention or a self-help intervention for 2 years. The instructor-led intervention was a structured daily opportunity for the students to learn about nutrition and to engage in structured physical activities. The results indicate that the children in the instructor-led intervention lost more weight at the end of the intervention than those in the self-help condition. In the second study (Romero, 2012), 11- to 16-year-old Mexican American children from low-income families participated in a 5-week, 10-lesson, hip-hop dance physical activity intervention. In comparison with data collected prior to the intervention, the children reported greater frequency of vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity, lower perceived community barriers to physical activity, and stronger self-efficacy for physical activity. Collectively, the results of these two studies suggest that a structured physical activity intervention can be effective in enhancing and enriching physical activity opportunities for Mexican American adolescents in charter schools.

Research on physical activity among home-schooled children is also limited. The only study found was published in 2004 (Welk et al., 2004). It describes differences in physical fitness, psychosocial correlates of physical activity, and physical activity between home-schooled children and their public school counterparts aged 9-16. No significant differences were found between the two groups of children on the measures used, but the researchers did note that the home-schooled children tended to be less physically active.

Research on physical education and physical activity in juvenile correction institutions is equally scarce. Munson and colleagues (1985, 1988) conducted studies on the use of physical activity programs as a behavior mediation intervention strategy and compared its impact on juvenile delinquents’ behavior change with that of other intervention strategies. They found that physical activity did not have a stronger impact than other programs on change in delinquent behavior.

Fitness Assessment

All states except Iowa have adopted state standards for physical education. However, the extent to which students achieve the standards is limited since no accountability is required.

An analysis of motor skills competency, strategic knowledge, physical activity, and physical fitness among 180 4th- and 5th-grade children demonstrated that the physical education standards in force were difficult to attain (Erwin and Castelli, 2008). Among the study participants, fewer than a half (47 percent) were deemed motor competent, 77 percent demonstrated adequate progress in knowledge, only 40 percent were in the Healthy Fitness Zone on all five components of the Fitnessgram fitness assessment, and merely 15 percent engaged in 60 or more minutes of physical activity each day. Clearly most of the children failed to meet benchmark measures of performance for this developmental stage. This evidence highlights the need for additional physical activity opportunities within and beyond physical education to enhance opportunities for students to achieve the standards.

Relationships among these student-learning outcomes were further decomposed in a study of 230 children (Castelli and Valley, 2007). The authors determined that aerobic fitness and the number of fitness test scores in the Healthy Fitness Zone were the best predictors of daily engagement in physical activity relative to factors of gender, age, body mass index (BMI), motor skills competency, and knowledge. However, in-class engagement in physical activity was best predicted by aerobic fitness and motor skills competence, suggesting that knowledge and skills should not be overlooked in a balanced physical education curriculum intended to promote lifelong physical activity.

As an untested area, student assessment in physical education has been conducted on many indicators other than learning outcomes. As reported in a seminal study (Hensley and East, 1989), physical education teachers base learning assessment on participation (96 percent), effort (88 percent), attitude (76 percent), sportsmanship (75 percent), dressing out (72 percent), improvement (68 percent), attendance (58 percent), observation of skills (58 percent), knowledge tests (46 percent), skills tests (45 percent), potential (25 percent), and homework (11 percent). These data, while several years old, show that most learning assessments in physical education fail to target relevant learning objectives such as knowledge, skills, and physical activity behavior. The development of teacher-friendly learning assessments consistent with national and/or state standards is sorely needed.

Fitness assessment in the school environment can serve multiple purposes. On the one hand, it can provide both teacher and student with information about the student’s current fitness level relative to a criterion-referenced standard, yield valid information that can serve as the basis for developing a personal fitness or exercise program based on current fitness levels, motivate students to do better to achieve a minimum standard of health-related fitness where deficiencies exist, and possibly assist in the identification of potential future health problems. On the other hand, an overall analysis of student fitness assessments provides valuable data that can enable teachers to assess learner outcomes in the physical education curriculum and assess the present curriculum to determine whether it includes sufficient fitness education to allow students to make fitness gains throughout the school year. Fitness assessment also provides a unique opportunity for schools to track data on students longitudinally. The ultimate goal of assessing student fitness in the school environment should be to educate students on the importance of maintaining a physically active lifestyle throughout the life span.

When administering fitness assessments in the school setting, caution is essential to ensure confidentiality of the results. The results and their interpretation should be shared with students and parents/guardians to have the greatest impact. To ensure the greatest benefits from fitness assessment, NASPE (2010) developed a position statement on “Appropriate Uses of Fitness Measurement.” Table 5-1 outlines appropriate and inappropriate practices related to fitness testing in schools and other educational settings.

When fitness assessment becomes part of a quality physical education program, teaching and learning strategies will guide all students to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to maintain and improve their personal health-related fitness as part of their commitment to lifelong healthy lifestyles. Teachers who incorporate fitness education as a thread throughout all curricula will make the greatest impact in engaging and motivating

TABLE 5-1 Appropriate and Inappropriate Practices Related to Fitness Testing in Schools and Other Educational Settings

students to participate in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity in order to maintain and/or improve their personal health-related fitness. For example, the development of the Presidential Youth Fitness Program with the use of a criterion-referenced platform provides students with the educational benefits of fitness assessment knowledge (see Box 5-2 ). The emergence of one national fitness assessment, Fitnessgram, along with professional development and recognition protocols, further supports fitness education in the school environment.

Online Physical Education

Online physical education is a growing trend. Fully 59 percent of states allow required physical education credits to be earned through online courses. Only just over half of these states require that the online courses be taught by state-certified physical education teachers. Daum and Buschner (2012) report that, in general, online physical education focuses more on cognitive knowledge than physical skill or physical activity, many online courses fail to meet national standards for learning and physical activity

Presidential Youth Fitness Program

The Presidential Youth Fitness Program, launched in September 2012, is a comprehensive program that provides training and resources to schools for assessing, tracking, and recognizing youth fitness. The program promotes fitness testing as one component of a comprehensive physical education curriculum that emphasizes regular physical activity. The program includes a health-related fitness assessment, professional development, and motivational recognition. A key to the program’s success is helping educators facilitate a quality fitness assessment experience. The Presidential Youth Fitness Program was developed in partnership with the Cooper Institute; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance; and the Amateur Athletic Union.

The implementation of the Presidential Youth Fitness Program aligns with the Institute of Medicine report Fitness Measures and Health Outcomes in Youth, the result of a study whose primary purpose was to evaluate the relationship between fitness components and health and develop recommendations for health-related fitness tests for a national youth survey (IOM, 2012b). The report includes guidance on fitness assessments in the school setting. It confirms that Fitnessgram, used in the Presidential Youth Fitness Program, is a valid, reliable, and feasible tool for use in schools to measure health-related fitness. Use of the Fitnessgram represents a transition from the current test, which focuses on performance rather than health and is based on normative rather than criterion-referenced data, to a criterion-referenced, health-related fitness assessment instrument. Accompanying the assessment, as part of a comprehensive program, are education and training through professional development, awards, and recognition.

SOURCE: Presidential Youth Fitness Program, 2013.

guidelines, and teachers are not concerned about students’ accountability for learning.

Although online courses differ from traditional in-school physical education courses in the delivery of instruction, the standards and benchmarks for these courses must mirror those adopted by each individual state, especially when the course is taken to meet high school graduation requirements.

NASPE (2007a, p. 2) recommends that all physical education programs include “opportunity to learn, meaningful content, appropriate instruction, and student and program assessment.” If an online physical education program meets these standards, it may be just as effective as a face-to-face program. Online physical education can be tailored to each student’s needs, and it helps students learn how to exercise independently. The full NASPE position statement on online physical education can be found at http://www.ncpublic-schools.org/docs/curriculum/healthfulliving/resources/onlinepeguidelines.pdf (accessed February 1, 2013). The physical education policy of one online school, the Florida Virtual School, is presented in Box 5-3 .

Florida Virtual School’s Physical Education Policy

Sections 1001.11(7) and 1003.453(2) of the Florida Statutes require that every school district have a current version of its Physical Education Policy on the district website. This document satisfies that requirement.

Florida law defines “physical education” to mean:

“the development or maintenance of skills related to strength, agility, flexibility, movement, and stamina, including dance; the development of knowledge and skills regarding teamwork and fair play; the development of knowledge and skills regarding nutrition and physical fitness as part of a healthy lifestyle; and the development of positive attitudes regarding sound nutrition and physical activity as a component of personal well-being.

Florida Virtual School [FLVS] courses are designed to develop overall health and well-being through structured learning experiences, appropriate instruction, and meaningful content. FLVS provides a quality Physical Education program in which students can experience success and develop positive attitudes about physical activity so that they can adopt healthy and physically active lifestyles. Programs are flexible to accommodate individual student interests and activity levels in a learning environment that is developmentally appropriate, safe, and supportive.”

SOURCE: Excerpted from FLVS, 2013.

Online physical education provides another option for helping students meet the standards for physical education if they lack room in their schedule for face-to-face classes, need to make up credit, or are just looking for an alternative to the traditional physical education class. On the other hand, online courses may not be a successful mode of instruction for students with poor time management or technology skills. According to Daum and Buschner (2012), online learning is changing the education landscape despite the limited empirical research and conflicting results on its effectiveness in producing student learning. Through a survey involving 45 online high school physical education teachers, the authors found that almost three-fourths of the courses they taught failed to meet the national guideline for secondary schools of 225 minutes of physical education per week. Most of the courses required physical activity 3 days per week, while six courses required no physical activity. The teachers expressed support, hesitation, and even opposition toward online physical education.

Scheduling Decisions

Lesson scheduling is commonly at the discretion of school principals in the United States. The amount of time dedicated to each subject is often mandated by federal or state statutes. Local education agencies or school districts have latitude to make local decisions that go beyond these federal or state mandates. Often the way courses are scheduled to fill the school day is determined by the managerial skills of the administrator making the decisions or is based on a computer program that generates individual teacher schedules.

Successful curriculum change requires supportive scheduling (see Kramer and Keller, 2008, for an example of curriculum reform in mathematics). More research is needed on the effects of scheduling of physical education. In one such attempt designed to examine the impact of content and lesson length on calorie expenditure in middle school physical education, Chen and colleagues (2012) found that a lesson lasting 45-60 minutes with sport skills or fitness exercises as the major content would enable middle school students to expend more calories than either shorter (30-40 minutes) or longer (65-90 minutes) lessons. The evidence from such research can be used to guide allocation of the recommended weekly amount of physical education (150 minutes for elementary schools, 225 minutes for secondary schools) to achieve optimal health benefits for youth. Additional discussion of scheduling is provided later in this chapter in the section on solutions for overcoming the barriers to quality physical education.

IMPORTANCE OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION TO CHILD DEVELOPMENT

As discussed in Chapter 3 , there is a direct correlation between regular participation in physical activity and health in school-age children, suggesting that physical activity provides important benefits directly to the individual child (HHS, 2008). Physical activity during a school day may also be associated with academic benefits ( Chapter 4 ) and children’s social and emotional well-being (HHS, 2008; Chapter 3 ). Physical education, along with other opportunities for physical activity in the school environment (discussed in Chapter 6 ), is important for optimal health and development in school-age children. It may also serve as a preventive measure for adult conditions such as heart disease, high blood pressure, and type 2 diabetes.

Little has been learned about the short- and long-term effectiveness of physical education in addressing public health issues (Pate et al., 2011). Because the learning objectives of physical education have not included improvement in health status as a direct measure, indirect measures and correlates have been used as surrogates. However, some promising research, such as that conducted by Morgan and colleagues (2007), has demonstrated that students are more physically active on days when they participate in physical education classes. Further, there is no evidence of a compensatory effect such that children having been active during physical education elect not to participate in additional physical activity on that day. Accordingly, quality physical education contributes to a child’s daily accumulation of physical activity and is of particular importance for children who are overweight or who lack access to these opportunities in the home environment (NASPE, 2012).

Unlike other physical activity in school (e.g., intramural or extramural sports), physical education represents the only time and place for every child to learn knowledge and skills related to physical activity and to be physically active during the school day. It also is currently the only time and place for all children to engage in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity safely because of the structured and specialist-supervised instructional environment. It is expected that children will use the skills and knowledge learned in physical education in other physical activity opportunities in school, such as active recess, active transportation, and intramural sports. For these reasons, physical education programming has been identified as the foundation on which multicomponent or coordinated approaches incorporating other physical activity opportunities can be designed and promoted.

Coordinated approaches in one form or another have existed since the early 1900s, but it was not until the 21st century that physical education was acknowledged as the foundation for these approaches. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2010), the National Association

of State Boards of Education (NASBE; 2012), and NASPE (2004, 2010) all support this view because physical education provides students with the tools needed to establish and maintain a physically active lifestyle throughout their life span. As discussed in Chapter 3 , research on motor skills development has provided evidence linking physical skill proficiency levels to participation in physical activity and fitness (Stodden et al., 2008, 2009). Exercise psychology research also has identified children’s perceived skill competence as a correlate of their motivation for participation in physical activity (Sallis et al., 2000). When school-based multicomponent interventions include physical activities experienced in physical education that are enjoyable and developmentally appropriate, such coordinated efforts are plausible and likely to be effective in producing health benefits (Corbin, 2002). Accordingly, two of the Healthy People 2020 (Healthy People 2020, 2010) objectives for physical activity in youth relate to physical education: “PA-4: Increase the proportion of the Nation’s public and private schools that require daily physical education for all students ” and “PA-5: Increase the proportion of adolescents who participate in daily school physical education.” 1

The importance of physical education to the physical, cognitive, and social aspects of child development has been acknowledged by many federal, state, and local health and education agencies. Many private entities throughout the country likewise have offered their support and recommendations for strengthening physical education. For example, the Institute of Medicine (2012a), in its report Accelerating Progress in Obesity Prevention: Solving the Weight of the Nation , points to the need to strengthen physical education to ensure that all children engage in 60 minutes or more of physical activity per school day. Similarly, the National Physical Activity Plan (2010), developed by a group of national organizations at the forefront of public health and physical activity, comprises a comprehensive set of policies, programs, and initiatives aimed at increasing physical activity in all segments of schools. The plan is intended to create a national culture that supports physically active lifestyles so that its vision that “one day, all Americans will be physically active and they will live, work, and play in environments that facilitate regular physical activity” can be realized. To accomplish this ultimate goal, the plan calls for improvement in the quantity and quality of physical education for students from prekindergarten through 12th grade through significant policy initiatives at the federal and state levels that guide and fund physical education and other physical activity programs. Specifically, the plan prescribes seven specific tactics presented in Box 5-4 .

_________________________

1 Available online at http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/pdfs/PhysicalActivity.pdf (accessed February 1, 2013).

Medical professional associations, such as the American Cancer Society (ACS), American Diabetes Association (ADA), and American Heart Association (AHA), have long acknowledged the importance of physical education and have endorsed policies designed to strengthen it. A position statement on physical education from the ACS Cancer Action Network, ADA, and AHA (2012) calls for support for quality physical education and endorses including physical education as an important part of a student’s comprehensive, well-rounded education program because of its positive impact on lifelong health and well-being. Further, physical education policy should make quality the priority while also aiming to increase the amount of time physical education is offered in schools.

Recently, private-sector organizations—such as the NFL through its Play60 program—have been joining efforts to ensure that youth meet the guideline of at least 60 minutes of vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity per day. One such initiative is Nike’s (2012) Designed to Move: A Physical Activity Action Agenda , a framework for improving access to physical activity for all American children in schools. Although the framework does not focus exclusively on physical education, it does imply the important role of physical education in the action agenda (see Box 5-5 ).

Finally, in response to First Lady Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move initiative, the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD) launched the Let’s Move In School initiative, which takes a holistic approach to the promotion of physical activity in schools. The purpose of the initiative is to help elementary and secondary schools launch the Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program (CSPAP), which is focused on strengthening physical education and promoting all opportunities for physical activity in school. The CSPAP in any given school is intended to accomplish two goals: (1) “provide a variety of school-based physical activity opportunities that enable all students to participate in at least 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity each day” and (2) “provide coordination among the CSPAP components to maximize understanding, application, and practice of the knowledge and skills learned in physical education so that all students will be fully physically educated and well-equipped for a lifetime of physical activity” (AAHPERD, 2012). The five CSPAP components, considered vital for developing a physically educated and physically active child, are physical education, physical activity during school, physical activity before and after school, staff involvement, and family and community involvement (AAHPERD, 2012). Schools are allowed to implement all or selected components.

An AAHPERD (2011) survey indicated that 16 percent of elementary schools, 13 percent of middle schools, and 6 percent of high schools (from a self-responding nationwide sample, not drawn systematically) had implemented a CSPAP since the program was launched. Although most schools

National Physical Activity Plan: Strategy 2

The National Physical Activity Plan’s Strategy 2 is as follows:

Strategy 2: Develop and implement state and school district policies requiring school accountability for the quality and quantity of physical education and physical activity programs.

1. Advocate for binding requirements for PreK-12 standards-based physical education that address state standards, curriculum time, class size, and employment of certified, highly qualified physical education teachers in accordance with national standards and guidelines, such as those published by the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE).

2. Advocate for local, state and national standards that emphasize provision of high levels of physical activity in physical education (e.g., 50 percent of class time in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity).

sampled (90 percent) provided physical education, the percentage declined through middle school and high school, such that only 44 percent of high schools provided physical education to seniors. In most schools (92 percent), classes were taught by teachers certified to teach physical education.

More than 76 percent of elementary schools provided daily recess for children, and 31 percent had instituted a policy prohibiting teachers from withholding children from participating in recess for disciplinary reasons. In 56 percent of elementary schools that had implemented a CSPAP, physical activity was encouraged between lessons/classes; in 44 percent it was integrated into academic lessons; and in 43 percent the school day started with physical activity programs.

The percentage of schools that offered intramural sports clubs to at least 25 percent of students declined from 62 percent of middle schools to

3. Enact federal legislation, such as the FIT Kids Act, to require school accountability for the quality and quantity of physical education and physical activity programs.

4. Provide local, state, and national funding to ensure that schools have the resources (e.g., facilities, equipment, appropriately trained staff) to provide high-quality physical education and activity programming. Designate the largest portion of funding for schools that are underresourced. Work with states to identify areas of greatest need.

5. Develop and implement state-level policies that require school districts to report on the quality and quantity of physical education and physical activity programs.

6. Develop and implement a measurement and reporting system to determine the progress of states toward meeting this strategy. Include in this measurement and reporting system data to monitor the benefits and adaptations made or needed for children with disabilities.

7. Require school districts to annually collect, monitor, and track students’ health-related fitness data, including body mass index.

SOURCE: National Physical Activity Plan, 2010.

50 percent of high school for males, and from 53 to 40 percent, respectively, for females. Interscholastic sports were offered in 89 percent of high schools. Among them, approximately 70 percent involved at least 25 percent of the male student population participating and 58 percent involved at least 25 percent of the female student population participating. Sixty-five percent of high schools had “cut” policies, which could limit the enrollment of students in interscholastic sports.

CHARACTERISTICS OF QUALITY PHYSICAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

As noted, a high-quality physical education program can help youth meet the guideline of at least 60 minutes of vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity per day. This increase in physical activity should be bal-

Nike’s Designed to Move: A Physical Activity Action Agenda

1. Universal access: Design programs that are effective for every child, including those who face the most barriers to participating in physical activity.

2. Age appropriate: Physical activities and tasks that are systematically designed for a child’s physical, social, and emotional development, as well as his or her physical and emotional safety, are a non-negotiable component of good program design.

3. Dosage and duration: Maximum benefit for school-aged children and adolescents comes from group-based activity for at least 60 minutes per day that allows for increased mastery and skill level over time.

4. Fun: Create early positive experiences that keep students coming back for more, and let them have a say in what “fun” actually is.

5. Incentives and motivation: Focus on the “personal best” versus winning or losing.

6. Feedback to kids: Successful programs build group and individual goal setting and feedback into programs.

7. Teaching, coaching, and mentorship: Teachers of physical education, coaches, and mentors can make or break the experience for students. They should be prepared through proper training and included in stakeholder conversations. A well-trained physical activity workforce shares a common commitment and principles that promote physical activity among children. Great leaders create positive experiences and influence all learners.

SOURCE: Excerpted from Nike, 2012.

anced with appropriate attention to skill development and to national education standards for quality physical education (see Box 5-6 ). In a recent literature review, Bassett and colleagues (2013) found that physical education contributes to children achieving an average of 23 minutes of vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity daily. However, the time spent in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity could be increased by 6 minutes if the physical education curriculum were to incorporate a standardized curriculum such as SPARK (discussed in detail below) (Bassett et al., 2013). Thus, it is possible for physical education to contribute to youth meeting at least half (30 minutes) of their daily requirement for vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity. To help children grow holistically, however, physical education needs to achieve other learning goals when children are active. To this end, physical education programs must possess the quality characteristics specified by NASPE (2007b, 2009b,c) (see Box 5-6 ). Designing and implementing a physical education program with these characteristics in mind should ensure that the time and curricular materials of the program enable students to achieve the goals of becoming knowledgeable exercisers and skillful movers who value and adopt a physically active, healthy lifestyle.

Findings from research on effective physical education support these characteristics as the benchmarks for quality programs. In an attempt to understand what effective physical education looks like, Castelli and Rink (2003) conducted a mixed-methods comparison of 62 physical education programs in which a high percentage of students achieved the state physical education learning standards with programs whose students did not achieve the standards. Comprehensive data derived from student performance, teacher surveys, and onsite observations demonstrated that highly effective physical education programs were housed in cohesive, long-standing departments that experienced more facilitators (e.g., positive policy, supportive administration) than inhibitors (e.g., marginalized status as a subject matter within the school). Further, effective programs made curricular changes prior to the enactment of state-level policy, while ineffective programs waited to make changes until they were told to do so. The teachers in ineffective programs had misconceptions about student performance and, in general, lower expectations of student performance and behavior.

Examples of Evidence-Based Physical Education Curricular Programs

Two large-scale intervention studies—SPARK and CATCH—are discussed in this section as examples of how programs can be structured to increase vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity in physical education classes.

NASPE’s Characteristics of a High-Quality Physical Education Program

Opportunity to learn

• All students are required to take physical education.
• Instructional periods total 150 minutes per week (elementary schools) and 225 minutes per week (middle and secondary schools).
• Physical education class size is consistent with that of other subject areas.
• A qualified physical education specialist provides a developmentally appropriate program.
• Equipment and facilities are adequate and safe.

Meaningful content

• A written, sequential curriculum for grades PreK-12 is based on state and/or national standards for physical education.
• Instruction in a variety of motor skills is designed to enhance the physical, mental, and social/emotional development of every child.
• Fitness education and assessment are designed to help children understand, improve, and/or maintain physical well-being.
• Curriculum fosters the development of cognitive concepts about motor skill and fitness.
• Opportunities are provided to improve emerging social and cooperative skills and gain a multicultural perspective.
• Curriculum promotes regular amounts of appropriate physical activity now and throughout life.

The aim of SPARK, a research-based curriculum, is to improve the health, fitness, and physical activity levels of youth by creating, implementing, and evaluating programs that promote lifelong wellness. Each SPARK program “fosters environmental and behavioral change by providing a coordinated package of highly active curriculum, on-site teacher training, extensive follow-up support, and content-matched equipment focused on the development of healthy lifestyles, motor skills and movement knowledge, and social and personal skills” (SPARK, 2013).

Appropriate instruction

• Full inclusion of all students.
• Maximum practice opportunities for class activities.
• Well-designed lessons that facilitate student learning.
• Out-of-school assignments that support learning and practice.
• Physical activity not assigned or withheld as punishment.
• Regular assessment to monitor and reinforce student learning.

Student and program assessment

• Assessment is an ongoing, vital part of the physical education program.
• Formative and summative assessments of student progress are conducted.
• Student assessments are aligned with state/national physical education standards and the written physical education curriculum.
• Assessment of program elements that support quality physical education is conducted.
• Stakeholders periodically evaluate the effectiveness of the total physical education program.

SOURCE: Adapted from NASPE, 2009c.

Research supports the use of SPARK as a platform for improving the quality of physical activity instruction in schools. The SPARK curriculum has demonstrated the ability to improve student activity levels, increase the number of minutes of vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity for students, and provide sustainable and positive change in a school district (Myers-Schieffer and Thomas, 2012). In one study, researchers found that “the children were positive about this specific curriculum. This is gratifying because one of the goals of the program was to engender positive feeling

in the students toward physical activity” (McKenzie et al., 1994, p. 213). In another study, a SPARK intervention is credited with exposing students to an increase in motor skills drills, which in turn led to a higher level of manipulative motor skills acquisition (McKenzie et al., 1998). As a result of improved activity levels, students who participated in the SPARK curriculum improved their times in the 1-mile run and sit-up tests (Sallis et al., 1997). Finally, System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time (SOFIT) classroom observations revealed that students in SPARK classes increased their time spent in vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity per class from 17.8 to up to 40.2 minutes compared with students in non-SPARK classes, who engaged in 17.8 minutes of vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity per class. Teachers involved in the SPARK intervention offered increased levels of fitness promotion and provided students with an increased amount of general instruction and increased minutes of attention per week (McKenzie et al., 1997; Myers-Schieffer and Thomas, 2012).

The CATCH program teaches children in grades K-8 how to be healthy throughout their lifetimes through a coordinated approach that involves engaging the community, families, and educators to work together. The goal of CATCH is to impact children’s health behaviors positively, improve the school health environment, and influence and change school health policies and practices in order to reduce and eliminate health risk factors and risk-related behaviors of students (Perry et al., 1990). CATCH significantly increases the physical activity levels of students during physical education class and provides a wide range of learning experiences for students of all abilities.

CATCH began as a clinical trial from 1991 to 1994 in four regional sites: Tulane University in New Orleans; the University of California, San Diego; the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis; and the University of Texas in Houston. The participants were elementary school children in grades 3 through 5 and included children from multiethnic backgrounds. Upon completion of the main trial, CATCH had succeeded in producing positive and lasting changes in children’s behaviors, including decreasing fat consumption and increasing physical activity (Luepker et al., 1996). The changes were maintained for 3 years postintervention (Nader et al., 1999).

National Standards

Because physical education is part of the curriculum in schools, its quality should be judged only by whether and to what extent children have learned and benefited from it. In a landmark document on learning goals, Moving into the Future: National Standards for Physical Education , NASPE (2004) proposes six student learning standards specifying both conceptual and behavioral characteristics that a physically educated person must pos-

sess and display (see Box 5-7 ). These characteristics encompass knowledge, skill, behavior, and confidence critical to the development and maintenance of health and to the enjoyment of a physically active, healthful lifestyle.

Certified Physical Education Specialists as the Main Teaching Force

If standards are the gauge for quality, teachers make the difference in a particular school in terms of the extent to which students can achieve the standards. Research has made clear that certified physical education specialists can provide more and longer opportunities for students to meet physical activity guidelines compared with classroom teachers trained to teach physical education (McKenzie et al., 2001). Moreover, when teachers are taught strategies to encourage vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity in physical education class, a significant increase in physical activity can be expected (Lonsdale et al., 2013). The role of certified physical

Standards for a Physically Educated Person

education specialists in health-enhancing physical education has become increasingly critical (McKenzie, 2007). The evidence is unequivocal regarding the need for a continued effort to train physical education specialists and the need for schools to continue to employ them as the main teaching force designing and implementing health-enhancing physical education programs to the fullest extent.

Aside from serving as the instructional leader for physical education, physical education specialists can serve as expert resources for classroom teachers in the implementation of classroom physical activity breaks and recess (discussed in detail in Chapter 6 ). Their expertise in age-appropriate physical activity helps ensure that students are participating in activities that are fun and engaging. Additionally, as the catalyst for a healthy school environment, the physical education specialist can assist in the design and delivery of intramural programs provided before and after school, as well as serve as a community outreach specialist for onsite activity partnerships. For physical education specialists interested in a more formal role as a physical activity leader at their school, NASPE has developed a director of physical activity certification program.

It is a commonly held notion of society that to maintain the quality of education, schools should hire teachers certified to teach in the subject matter areas in which they are licensed. Unfortunately, in the United States, not all physical education classes are taught by certified physical education specialists. Indeed, 68 percent of elementary schools allow classroom teachers (generalists) to teach physical education (NASPE, 2012). Certification or licensure of middle/junior high school and high school physical education teachers is required in only 82 percent and 90 percent of states (NASPE, 2012), respectively. Only 37 states (72 percent) have a requirement for professional development and continuing education hours/credit for physical education teachers to maintain or renew their certification, with renewal time ranging from 3 to 5 years (NASPE, 2012). Twenty-eight states (55 percent) allow temporary/emergency certificates to teach physical education that are valid for 1 to 3 years (NASPE, 2012). The basic requirements for emergency certification include a bachelor’s degree in teaching or in any area except physical education. Only 31 states (60 percent) support physical education teachers going through the national board certification process, and only New York requires each school district to have a licensed physical education specialist serving as a physical education coordinator (NASPE, 2012).

Preservice Education for Teachers

Teaching physical education to children effectively and safely requires specific knowledge about children and their physical/mental development,

body composition (anatomy) and functions (physiology and biomechanics), and motor skills development and acquisition. In addition, teaching physical education requires substantial knowledge and skill in pedagogy—the science and art of teaching. Box 5-8 lists the NASPE standards for beginning physical education teachers who have completed a bachelor’s teacher training program and those who have completed advanced (master’s-level) training.

These standards are accompanied by measurement rubrics (unacceptable, acceptable, and target, with target being exemplary) developed jointly by NASPE and the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) for evaluating physical education teacher education programs across the country (the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico). NCATE identified a total of 133 physical education teacher education programs as “nationally recognized.” The committee was unable to determine how many programs nationwide have met the minimum standards (not at the nationally recognized level) or locate reliable information on the total number of physical education teacher education programs. A Web search using the term “physical education” resulted in two different but relatively reliable statistics: 720 (College Board, 2013) and 1,945 (Peterson’s, 2013). But the data sources did not distinguish between physical education teaching majors and other kinesiology concentrations (e.g., sports medicine, exercise physiology/fitness). Statistics on the number of physical education teacher education programs and their quality based on the NASPE standards are needed.

The current wave of effort to curb physical inactivity among youth has begun to influence teacher education programs. According to a national survey study (Kulinna et al., 2010), current teacher candidates believe that helping K-12 students become physically active and fit is the first priority of physical education, followed by helping them actualize their own goals, develop motor skills, and become responsible. These data appear to suggest that physical education teacher education programs are beginning to turn from a traditionally sports- and skills-centered model to a more comprehensive, physical activity– and health-centered model. This change is important in that the role of both current and future physical education teachers extends beyond merely teaching their classes to advancing public health goals (McKenzie, 2007).

In many universities, however, teacher education programs in physical education have either been reduced or eliminated because of the decline in physical education requirements, which has resulted in a decrease in the number of physical education teachers being employed. Concomitantly, physical education teacher education programs are experiencing an unprecedented crisis. A recent report indicates that, in school year 2008-2009, only 23 doctorate-granting kinesiology departments offered doctoral programs

National Association for Sport and Physical Education Standards for Beginning Physical Education Teachers

Initial Standards

1. Scientific and theoretical knowledge: Physical education teacher candidates know and apply discipline-specific scientific and theoretical concepts critical to the development of physically educated individuals.

2. Skill-based and fitness-based competence: Physical education teacher candidates are physically educated individuals with the knowledge and skills necessary to demonstrate competent movement performance and health-enhancing fitness as delineated in the NASPE K-12 standards.

3. Planning and implementation: Physical education teacher candidates plan and implement developmentally appropriate learning experiences aligned with local, state, and national standards to address the diverse needs of all students.

4. Instructional delivery and management: Physical education teacher candidates use effective communication and pedagogical skills and strategies to enhance student engagement and learning.

that were training future teacher educators (Boyce and Rikard, 2011a). A total of 140 doctoral students were receiving training offered by 114 professors (including part-time), and 11 percent of those professors were planning to retire. Boyce and Rikard (2011a) report that in the past 13 years, 479 doctoral students graduated as physical education teacher educators—36.8 each year on average—89 percent of whom were able to find positions in colleges and universities. During the same period, 61 positions were open, only 39 of which were filled (64 percent), with an applicant pool of 38 candidates with earned degrees and 13 who completed the doctoral course-work but did not complete the dissertation research (Boyce and Rikard, 2011b). Clearly there is a shortage of physical education teacher educators

5. Impact on student learning: Physical education teacher candidates use assessments and reflection to foster student learning and inform decisions about instruction.

6. Professionalism: Physical education teacher candidates demonstrate dispositions essential to becoming effective professionals.

Advanced Standards

1. Professional knowledge: Advanced physical education teacher candidates come to understand disciplinary content knowledge, the application of content knowledge to teaching physical education, and modes of inquiry that form the bases for physical education programs and instruction.

2. Professional practice: Advanced physical education teacher candidates (AC) use content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) to design and conduct appropriate learning experiences that facilitate and enhance the growth of learners.

3. Professional leadership: Advanced physical education teacher candidates are continuous, collaborative learners who further their own professional development and use their abilities to contribute to the profession.

SOURCE: Excerpted from NASPE, 2009a.

in higher education institutions. Because of a lack of national tracking data on physical education graduates, the extent to which the teacher educator shortage has impacted and will impact the need to supply quality physical education teachers to the nation is unclear.

Professional Development

In all educational settings, professional development for teachers and administrators is a continuous process of acquiring new knowledge and skills that relate to an educator’s profession or academic subject area, job responsibilities, or work environment. Professional development is essential for improving classroom instruction and student achievement (Ball and

Cohen, 1999; Cohen and Hill, 2000). Through a variety of delivery methods, professional development activities may include credit or noncredit courses, classroom or online venues, workshops, seminars, teleconferences, and webinars, with the ultimate goal of improving the delivery of instruction to enhance student achievement.

Yoon and colleagues (2007) assert that a strong link exists among professional development, teacher learning and practice, and student achievement. Figure 5-1 , which aligns with the research on effective professional development (Kennedy, 1998; Loucks-Horsley and Matsumoto, 1999; Cohen and Hill, 2000; Garet et al., 2001; Fishman et al., 2003; Guskey and Sparks, 2004), illustrates how (1) professional development enhances teacher knowledge and skills, (2) better knowledge and skills improve classroom teaching, and (3) improved teaching raises student achievement.

The most impactful statement of government policy on the preparation and professional development of teachers was the 2002 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (Whitehurst, 2002), known as the No Child Left Behind Act. While Title I of the act places highly qualified teachers in the classroom, Title II addresses the same goal by funding professional development for teachers. The importance of quality professional development is well documented in the act.

Professional development, according to the No Child Left Behind Act, should be offered to improve teachers’ knowledge of the subject matter they teach, strengthen their classroom management skills, advance their understanding and implementation of effective teaching strategies, and build their capabilities to address disparities in education. The act states that high-quality professional development programs should have the characteristics listed in Box 5-9 .

Although there is a substantial literature on professional development, only a few high-quality studies relate teachers’ professional development experiences to student outcomes. Recommendations for high-quality professional development tend to emphasize the importance of

FIGURE 5-1 Logic model of the impact of professional development on student achievement.

Characteristics of a High-Quality Professional Development Program

1. It is sustained, intensive, and content-focused to have a positive and lasting impact on classroom instruction and teacher performance.

2. It is aligned with and directly related to state academic content standards, student achievement standards, and assessments.

3. It improves and increases teachers’ knowledge of the subjects they teach.

4. It advances teachers’ understanding of effective instructional strategies founded on scientifically based research.

5. It is regularly evaluated for effects on teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Intensive and focused in-service training.

SOURCE: No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Public Law 107-110, 115 stat. 1425 (2002).

intense, content-focused experiences, as well as opportunities for peer collaboration and structured induction experiences for new teachers. Wiley and Yoon (1995) and Kennedy (1998) suggest that teaching practice and student achievement are likely to improve when professional development is focused on academic content and curriculum that are aligned with standards-based reform.

Kulinna (2012) used Guskey and Sparks’ (2004) Model of Teacher Change to determine whether students’ physical activity and BMI changed after their teacher underwent a 1-year professional development program. Significant increases in students’ physical activity levels were found, but no significant changes in BMI. Looking at the effect of professional development on changes in behavior among physical education teachers, Martin and colleagues (2008) found that, following a variety of professional development experiences and follow-up sessions, teachers showed increases in their efficacy in attaining motor skills objectives, physical activity and fitness knowledge objectives, and personal and social objectives. These

results lend support to the value of professional development in enhancing teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy for teaching the curriculum. McCaughtry and colleagues (2006) explored the factors that make teacher professional development successful and what success might mean in terms of teachers’ instructional practices and feelings about change. Results indicated that after teachers completed professional development the resources they gained enabled them to improve their instruction by teaching more content, maximizing student learning opportunities, teaching diverse learners, teaching to development, and increasing classroom safety.

Learning Forward (formerly known as the National Staff Development Council) provides research-based guidelines to assist districts in aligning local professional development programs with qualitative standards. Its Standards for Professional Learning were revised in 2011 and are guided by the relationship between professional learning and student results (see Box 5-10 ). According to Learning Forward (2012):

• When professional learning is standards based, it has greater potential to change what educators know, are able to do, and believe.

• When educators’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions change, they have a broader repertoire of effective strategies to use in adapting their practices to meet performance expectations and students’ learning needs.

• When educator practices improve, students have a greater likelihood of achieving results.

• When student results improve, the cycle repeats for continuous improvement.

• Professional learning standards provide a foundation on which to design professional learning experiences at the district or school level that will assist educators in acquiring the necessary knowledge, skills, and tools.

As a recognized means of providing physical education teachers with the tools necessary to enhance student achievement, quality professional development should be provided on a regular basis with follow-up support, along with a method for determining its effectiveness in meeting both curricular and pedagogical standards. Furthermore, to enhance the fitness achievement of students, school-based professional development should provide instruction on the integration of fitness testing into a curriculum and should include training in protocols, the interpretation and communication of results, and the setting and achievement of fitness goals and recommendations for developing healthy living habits for both students and their parents (IOM, 2012a).

Standards for Professional Learning

Learning communities: Professional learning that increases educator effectiveness and results for all students occurs within learning communities committed to continuous improvement, collective responsibility, and goal alignment.

Leadership: Professional learning that increases educator effectiveness and results for all students requires skillful leaders who develop capacity, advocate, and create support systems for professional learning.

Resources: Professional learning that increases educator effectiveness and results for all students requires prioritizing, monitoring, and coordinating resources for educator learning.

Data: Professional learning that increases educator effectiveness and results for all students uses a variety of sources and types of student, educator, and system data to plan, assess, and evaluate professional learning.

Learning designs: Professional learning that increases educator effectiveness and results for all students integrates theories, research, and models of human learning to achieve its intended outcomes.

Implementation: Professional learning that increases educator effectiveness and results for all students applies research on change and sustains support for implementation of professional learning for long-term change.

Outcomes: Professional learning that increases educator effectiveness and results for all students aligns its outcomes with educator performance and student curriculum standards.

SOURCE: Learning Forward, 2012.

POLICIES THAT AFFECT THE QUALITY OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Instructional opportunities for physical activity and physical education are mandated by most states. In comparison with data prior to 2006, more states have developed mandates for physical education at both the elementary and secondary school levels. However, most mandates lack a specified time allocation that ensures meeting the NASPE recommendation of 150 and 225 minutes per week for elementary and secondary schools, respectively (McCullick et al., 2012), despite the fact that physical education has been considered a cornerstone for developing schoolwide multicomponent interventions to address the issue of physical inactivity in schools. Some obstacles to the implementation of quality physical activity are listed in Box 5-11 .

According to Title IX of the No Child Left Behind Act (Part A Sec 9101-11), core academic subjects include “English, reading or language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, eco-

Obstacles to Implementation of Quality Physical Education

1. Class periods dedicated to physical education are declining at all school levels.

2. Existing discrepancies between policy and implementation with respect to specific time allocation contribute to a reduction in actual instructional time for physical education.

3. There is a potential shortage of physical education specialists to influence the design and maintenance of quality physical education programs.

4. Reductions in active learning time and opportunities in physical education contribute to potential student underachievement on national standards.

5. Disparities may exist in instructional opportunities for children in nontraditional learning settings.

nomics, arts, history, and geography.” If physical education were designated as a core academic subject, it would receive much-needed policy attention that would enhance its overall quality with respect to content offerings, instruction, and accountability. In support of the inclusion of physical education as a core subject, Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) reintroduced the Promoting Health for Youth Skills in Classrooms and Life (PHYSICAL) Act on February 27, 2013, to support and encourage the health and well-being of elementary and secondary school students.

With physical education not being considered a core subject, and amid growing concern regarding the increase in childhood obesity and physical inactivity, several national studies and reports have emphasized the importance of implementing state statutes, laws, and regulations both mandating time requirements for physical education and monitoring compliance. Yet although several national governmental, nongovernmental, private industry, and public health organizations have recommended specific day and time/minute requirements for physical education, no standardized state policy has emerged.

Analysis of State Statutes and Administrative Codes

In the United States, school policies on curriculum and school-based activities are determined by local education agencies according to state laws governing educational activities. Decisions about what to teach, who will teach it, and what level of resources will be provided are made by the state, county or district, and school administration. To better understand the status of state statutes, administrative codes, and policies impacting physical education in schools, the committee analyzed NASBE’s State School Health Policy Database (NASBE, 2012; www.nasbe.org/healthy_schools [accessed February 1, 2013]). Of importance to this analysis is the distinction made between state statutes and administrative codes, which accords with the definition proffered by Perna and colleagues (2012): “At the state level, the 2 primary official public policy levers referred to as ‘codified law’ used for developing school-based physical education policy are 1) statutory laws (laws enacted by the given State legislature); and 2) administrative laws (rule and regulations by state executive branch agencies, such as the Department of Education)” (p. 1594). A second point to note is that in descriptions of physical education graduation requirements, it is impossible to differentiate among “credit,” “Carnegie unit,” and “course” so as to determine the exact time requirements for graduation.

Using the NASBE database, the committee performed an overall analysis of policies on physical education and physical activity of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis revealed that 45 states (88 percent) mandate physical education; 22 states (23 percent) require it

with mandatory minutes, while 25 states (49 percent) have no mandatory minutes and 4 (0.07 percent) leave the required number of minutes up to local decision makers. A majority of states allow for waivers or substitutions for physical education (see the discussion below). Fitness assessment is required in 15 states (29 percent), and other curricular assessments are required in 4 states (0.07 percent). Twenty-six states (53 percent) require physical education grades to be included in a student’s grade point average. Forty-three states (84 percent) require some degree of physical education for high school graduation, with a range of 0.5 to 3.75 credits. One state (0.02 percent) requires K-12 physical education but does not require 4 years of physical education for high school graduation.

Although no federal policies requiring physical education presently exist, the above evidence shows that the majority of states require physical education. However, the number of days and time required vary greatly by state and local school district, as does the amount of physical education required for high school graduation. Given the reduced time for physical activity in school through recess, and absent the implementation of stronger policies, schools have not only the opportunity but also the responsibility to nurture in youth the skills, knowledge, and confidence to develop and maintain a healthy lifestyle. The consensus among states indicated by the mandates for physical education summarized above, together with the discrepancies in specific policies, may suggest the need for general guidelines or a federal-level mandate that can serve to guide a collective effort to address the prevalence of childhood inactivity and obesity.

Policies That Support Physical Education

In addition to policies that directly require offering physical education in schools, other policies support physical education opportunities in schools. In 2004 the U.S. government issued a mandate, under the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004, requiring school districts that receive funds under this act to establish local school wellness policies. These policies were to include provisions for physical activity and healthy eating, thus expanding schools’ responsibility for providing physical activity to school-age children. The enactment of this mandates made schools “the central element in a community system that ensures that students participate in enough physical activity to develop healthy lifestyles” (Pate et al., 2006, p. 1215). Several government agencies and organizations have recommended embedding a specific number of days and minutes of physical education into each school’s or district’s wellness policy. Although school districts are required to include goals for physical activity in their local school wellness policies, they are not required to address physical education specifically.

Policies That Hinder Physical Education

Some policies have contributed to the substantial reduction in the opportunities for school-age children to be physically active, such as by shortening or eliminating physical education classes. These reductions can be attributed to budget cuts and increased pressure for schools to meet academic standards imposed by the federal government.

No Child Left Behind Act

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires that states develop assessment and accountability measures to verify performance improvements in the subject areas of reading and mathematics (P.L. No. 107-110, Section 115). Specifically, federal funding is now dependent on schools making adequate progress in reading and mathematics. No Child Left Behind requires all public schools receiving federal funding to administer statewide standardized annual tests for all students. Schools that receive Title I funding through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 must make adequate yearly progress in test scores (e.g., each year 5th graders must do better on standardized tests than the previous year’s 5th graders). If required improvements are not made, schools are penalized through decreased funding. If a school produces poor results for 2 consecutive years, improvement plans must be developed for the school. If a school does not make adequate progress for 5 consecutive years, a full restructuring of the school is mandated.

Under the act, physical education, music, and art are considered “nonessential” subjects and are not a main focus of the school learning environment. In response to the act, schools have devoted more time in the school day to instruction in reading and mathematics. Since the act was passed, 62 percent of elementary schools and 20 percent of middle schools have increased instructional time in reading/language arts and mathematics (Center on Education Policy, 2008). Unfortunately, 44 percent of school administrators reported that these increases in instructional time for reading and mathematics were achieved at the expense of time devoted to physical education, recess, art, music, and other subjects (Center on Education Policy, 2007, 2008) (see Table 5-2 ).

The emphasis on high-stakes testing and pressure for academic achievement in the core subjects has had unintended consequences for other subjects throughout the school day. In developing master schedules, school site administrators have been forced to make difficult decisions regarding the allotment of time for “nonessential” subjects. The average reduction in instructional time in these “nonessential” subjects has been 145 minutes per week. As discussed earlier, however, no evidence suggests that physical education and physical activity have a negative effect on student achievement

TABLE 5-2 Changes in Time Allocation in Elementary Schools Since 2001-2002

SOURCE: Center on Education Policy, 2007, District Survey, item 19 (revised Tables IT-2A, IT-16, and IT-17).

or academic outcomes (CDC, 2010). On the contrary, positive academic-related outcomes (e.g., improved on-task classroom behavior, cognitive development, academic performance) have been associated with physical education and physical activity (see Chapter 4 ).

The Center on Education Policy (2007) conducted an analysis of 2006-2007 survey data from 349 school districts on the amount of time devoted to specific subjects to determine the impact of the No Child Left Behind Act. Shifts in instructional time toward English language arts and mathematics and away from other subjects were relatively large in a majority of school districts that made these types of changes. Sixty-two percent of districts reported increasing time in elementary schools in English language arts and/or mathematics since 2001-2002. A higher proportion of urban districts (76 percent) than rural districts (54 percent) reported such increases.

Districts that increased instructional time for English language arts and/or mathematics did so by 43 percent on average. Districts that also reduced instructional time in other subjects reported total reductions of 32 percent, on average. Eight of 10 districts that reported increasing time for English language arts did so by at least 75 minutes per week, and more than half (54 percent) did so by 150 minutes or more per week. Among districts that reported adding time for mathematics, 63 percent added at least 75 minutes per week, and 19 percent added 150 minutes or more per week.

Most districts that increased time for English language arts or mathematics also reported substantial cuts in time for other subjects or periods, including social studies, science, art and music, physical education, recess,

and lunch. Among the districts that reported both increasing time for English language arts or mathematics and reducing time in other subjects, 72 percent indicated that they reduced the time for one or more of these other subjects by a total of at least 75 minutes per week. For example, more than half (53 percent) of these districts cut instructional time by at least 75 minutes per week in social studies, and the same percentage (53 percent) cut time by at least 75 minutes per week in science (Center on Education Policy, 2007).

Districts that reported an increase in instructional time for elementary school English language arts spent an average of 378 minutes per week on this subject before No Child Left Behind was enacted. After the act became law, they spent 520 minutes per week. The average increase for English language arts was 141 minutes per week, or a 47 percent increase over the level prior to the act (Center on Education Policy, 2007; see district survey items 18 and 19 in Table IT-18A). Table 5-3 shows the specific amounts of time cut from various subjects in districts that reported decreases.

Districts with at least one school identified as “in need of improvement” under the act were far more likely than districts not in need of improvement to decrease time in certain subjects so as to devote more time to English language arts and mathematics (78 versus 57 percent). For example, 51 percent of districts with a school in need of improvement reported decreased time in social studies, compared with 31 percent of districts with no school in need of improvement (Center on Education Policy, 2007).

TABLE 5-3 Time Cut from Subjects or Periods in Districts Reporting Decreases in Instructional Time

NOTE: * = sample size too small to allow reporting of data on minutes per week; NCLB = No Child Left Behind. SOURCE: Center on Education Policy, 2007, District Survey items 18 and 19 (Table IT-18B).

Exemptions from Physical Education Requirements

The 2012 Shape of the Nation Report includes documentation of the multiple reasons students may be exempt from physical education classes. Thirty-three states permit school districts or schools to allow students to substitute other activities for physical education. The most common substitutions are Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC), inter-scholastic sports, marching band, cheerleading, and community sports. Twenty-eight states allow schools and school districts to grant exemptions/waivers from physical education time or credit requirements. Reasons for exemptions/waivers include health, physical disability, religious belief, and early graduation; six states leave the reasons to the local schools or school districts. Although it would seem reasonable that some substitution programs such as JROTC or cheerleading might accrue physical activity comparable to that from physical education, these programs do not necessarily offer students opportunities to learn the knowledge and skills needed for lifelong participation in health-enhancing physical activities. Research on the impact of exemptions/waivers from physical education is lacking. No evidence currently exists showing that students receive any portion of the recommended 60 minutes or more of vigorous- or moderate-intensity physical activity through substituted activities sanctioned by their schools.

BARRIERS TO QUALITY PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SOLUTIONS

Barriers other than the policies detailed above hinder efforts to improve and maintain high-quality physical education. This section reviews these barriers, along with some solutions for overcoming them.

Morgan and Hanson (2008) classify barriers that hinder schools from implementing quality physical education programs as either institutional (outside the teacher’s control) or teacher related (arising from teacher behavior). Table 5-4 lists institutional and teacher-related as well as student-related barriers identified by various authors.

Dwyer and colleagues (2003) examined Toronto teachers’ perspectives on why children were not engaged in daily physical education. They identified three categories of barriers: lower priority for physical education relative to other subjects, lack of performance measures for physical activity, and lack of sufficient infrastructure. Jenkinson and Benson (2010) surveyed 270 secondary school physical education teachers in Victoria, Australia, and asked them to rank order the barriers they perceived to providing quality physical education. The results are shown in Table 5-5 . The institutional

TABLE 5-4 Barriers to the Delivery of Physical Education and Physical Activity Programs to Primary and Secondary School Students

NOTES: PA = physical activity; PE = physical education; sport = sport education. SOURCES: a Barroso et al., 2005; b Boyle et al., 2008; c Dagkas and Stathi, 2007; d DeCorby et al., 2005; e Dwyer et al., 2003; f Dwyer et al., 2006; g Morgan and Bourke, 2005; h Morgan and Hansen, 2008; i Mowling et al., 2004; j Salvy et al., 2009; k Sherar et al., 2009; l Xiang et al., 2002.

TABLE 5-5 Physical Education Teachers’ Ranking of Barriers to Providing Quality Physical Education (PE) in Victorian State Secondary Schools

NOTE: I = institutional barrier; SD = standard deviation. SOURCE: Jenkinson and Benson, 2010.

barriers listed in this table are similar to those identified for U.S. schools in Table 5-4 .

Jenkinson and Benson (2010) also presented teachers with a list of barriers to student participation in physical education and physical activity in three categories: institutional, teacher-related, and student-related. The teachers were asked to rank the top five barriers they perceived. Results are presented in Table 5-6 .

Finally, Gallo and colleagues (2006) found that the greatest process barriers to assessing students in physical education were grading students on skill levels and abilities; time constraints; class size; and record keeping, especially when assessing students on skills, cognitive knowledge, and fitness.

Two key barriers to physical education identified in the studies summarized above are staffing and funding. These barriers reflect a lack of support structure in schools for quality physical education.

TABLE 5-6 Perceived Barriers to Student Participation in Physical Education and Physical Activity in Victorian State Secondary Schools: Physical Education Teachers’ Ranking (from most [“5”] to least [“1”] influential)

NOTE: a Ranking = based on most frequently ranked as number 1 barrier; b I = institutional barrier, T = teacher-related barrier, S = student-related barrier; c PE = physical education; d PA = physical activity; e Sport = sport education. SOURCE: Jenkinson and Benson, 2010.

As noted earlier in this chapter, physical education is short staffed. State mandates have placed pressure on schools to preserve instructional resources for the high-stakes tested core subject areas at the expense of non-core subjects. For example, when a state mandates a maximum class size of 20 students per teacher in all core subjects, with noncompliance resulting in some form of penalty, an elementary school with an average of 25 students per teacher is forced to hire additional teachers in these subjects to meet the state mandate. Consequently, the school must shrink its teaching force in noncore subjects, such as physical education, to balance its budget. If noncore classes are to be preserved, their class sizes must increase, with fewer teachers serving more students. As a result, it becomes difficult to implement a quality program, and physical education teachers perceive their programs as being undervalued.

According to the Government Accountability Office report K-12 Education: School-Based Physical Education and Sports Programs (GAO, 2012), school officials cite budget cuts and inadequate facilities as major challenges to providing physical education opportunities for students. Budget cuts have affected schools’ ability to hire physical education teachers, maintain appropriate class sizes, and purchase sufficient equipment. As noted earlier, lack of equipment and limited access to facilities are cited as top barriers in the study by Jenkinson and Benson (2010) (see Tables 5-5 and 5-6 ). Limited budgets have a negative impact on a school’s ability to purchase enough physical education equipment to engage all students in increasingly large class sizes and cause physical education teachers to abandon quality evidence-based physical education programs and resort to large-group games and “throw out the ball” activities. Students disengaged as a result of such practices may prefer sedentary activities to more active lifestyles. A NASPE (2009a) survey found that the median physical education budget for physical education programs nationally was $764 per school ($460 per elementary school, $900 per middle school, and $1,370 per high school).

Solutions for Overcoming the Barriers

For many adolescents who have few opportunities to be active outside of the school day, quality physical education becomes the only option for physical activity. For students in large urban communities, physical education classes serve as a safe environment in which to be physically active under adult supervision in a structured environment. For students with dis-

abilities in particular, physical education classes are one of the only outlets for physical activity. For these reasons, it is crucial to overcome the above barriers to quality physical education. Some school districts have found ways to do so and provide robust physical education programs.

The barrier of limited time during the school day can be overcome through creative scheduling that makes use of every minute of the day in a constructive manner. For example, Miami-Dade County Public Schools is the fourth largest school district in the United States, in a large urban minority-majority community with large budgetary shortfalls and attention in schools being diverted to academic requirements. Yet the district has always had daily physical education in its elementary schools taught by a certified physical education teacher. This is accomplished by scheduling physical education during the classroom teacher’s planning time. In addition, students receive school board–mandated recess for either 20 minutes two times per week or 15 minutes three times per week. Figures 5-2 and 5-3 show examples of elementary school teacher schedules that demonstrate how 150 minutes of time for physical education can be incorporated successfully into any master schedule.

Other positive examples, identified in the report Physical Education Matters (San Diego State University, 2007), include successful case studies from low-resource California schools. The report acknowledges, however, that advancing such opportunities will require policy changes at the state, district, and local levels. These changes include securing grant funds with which to implement high-tech physical education wellness centers, staff commitment to professional development, administrative support, physical education being made a priority, community support, use of certified physical education teachers, and district support. Identifying the need to reform physical education guided by evidence-based findings, the report concludes that (1) curriculum matters, (2) class size matters, (3) qualified teachers matter, (4) professional development matters, and (5) physical environment matters. If programs are to excel and students are to achieve, delivery of the curriculum must be activity based; class sizes must be commensurate with those for other subject areas; highly qualified physical education specialists, as opposed to classroom teachers, must be hired to deliver instruction; professional development in activity-focused physical education must be delivered; and school physical education facilities, such as playing fields and indoor gym space and equipment, must be available.

A separate report, Physical Education Matters: Success Stories from California Low Resource Schools That Have Achieved Excellent Physical Education Programs (San Diego State University, 2007), notes that when funding from a variety of grant resources, including federal funding, became available, schools were able to transition to high-quality programs using innovative instructional strategies. Those strategies included well-

FIGURE 5-2 Example of a schedule demonstrating time for 150 minutes per week of physical education. NOTE: Sample is taken from a teacher schedule in a traditional elementary school. SOURCE: Large Urban Public School District, Miami-Dade County Public Schools.

ness centers and active gaming, which engaged students in becoming more physically active. Administrative support was found to be a key factor in turning programs around, along with staff commitment and professional development. Having certified physical education teachers and making physical education a priority in the schools were other key factors. External factors further strengthened programs, including having school district support, having a physical education coordinator, and using state standards to provide accountability. Additional ways to overcome the barriers to quality physical education include scheduling time for physical education, ensuring reasonable class size, providing nontraditional physical education activities, making classes more active and fun for all students, and acknowledging the importance of role modeling and personal investment and involvement in participation in physical activity among staff.

Still another way to overcome the barriers to quality physical education is to assist administrative decision makers and policy makers in understand-

FIGURE 5-3 Example of a schedule demonstrating time for 150 minutes per week of physical education. NOTES: Sample is taken from a teacher schedule in a combination special education and disabilities (SPED)/Spanish-language elementary class. PE = physical education; S.S. = social studies. SOURCE: Large Urban Public School District, Miami-Dade County Public Schools.

ing the correlation between physical education and academic achievement (see Chapter 4 ). The report Active Education: Physical Education, Physical Activity and Academic Performance by Active Living Research (Trost, 2009) cites evidence that “children who are physically active and fit tend to perform better in the classroom and that daily physical education does not adversely affect academic performance. Schools can provide outstanding learning environments while improving children’s health through physical education.” The findings reported include the following (p. 6):

• “In some cases, more time in physical education leads to improved grades and standardized test scores.”
• “Physically active and fit children tend to have better academic achievement.”
• “Evidence links higher levels of physical fitness with better school attendance and fewer disciplinary problems.”
• “There are several possible mechanisms by which physical education and regular physical activity may improve academic achievement, including enhanced concentration skills and classroom behavior.”
• “Additional research is needed to determine the impact of physical activity on academic performance among those children who are at highest risk for obesity in the United States, including black, Latino, American Indian and Alaska Native, and Asian-American and Pacific Islander children, as well as children living in lower-income communities.”

Physical education is a formal content area of study in schools, it is standards based, and it encompasses assessment according to standards and benchmarks. Select curriculum-based physical education programs have been described in this chapter to show the potential of high-quality physical education in developing children into active adults. Such models provide the only opportunity for all school-age children to access health-enhancing physical activities. Curriculum models for physical education programs include movement education, which emphasizes the importance of fundamental motor skills competence as a prerequisite for engagement in physical activity throughout the life span; sport education, which emphasizes helping students become skillful players in lifetime sports of their choosing; and fitness education, which imparts physical fitness concepts to students, including the benefits and scientific principles of exercise, with the goal of developing and maintaining individual fitness and positive lifestyle change. The emergence of a technology-focused fitness education curriculum and the new Presidential Youth Fitness Program offer further motivational opportunities for students to engage in lifelong physical activities.

Because quality physical education programs are standards based and assessed, they are characterized by (1) instruction by certified physical education teachers, (2) a minimum of 150 minutes per week for elementary schools and 225 minutes per week for middle and high schools, and (3) tangible standards for student achievement and for high school graduation. Quality professional development programs are an essential component for both novice and veteran teachers to ensure the continued delivery of quality physical education.

An analysis of datasets from NASPE, NASBE, and Bridging the Gap reveals that the implementation of supportive physical education policies varies from state to state and from school to school. Since passage of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001, several studies and reports have identi-

fied a decline in physical education resulting from the shifting of time to academic subjects. Because physical education is not a high-stakes tested content area, the implementation of supportive policies often is hindered by other education priorities. Although the above analysis indicates that 30 states (74.5 percent) mandate physical education, most policies do not require specific amounts of instructional time, and more than half allow for waivers or exemptions. In addition, an unintended consequence of the No Child Left Behind Act has been disparities in access to physical education and physical activity opportunities during the school day for Hispanic students and those of lower socioeconomic status. In high school, relying on students to elect physical education after meeting the minimum required credit hours (one credit in all states but one) appears to be unfruitful.

Strengthening of school physical education has received support from the public, health agencies, and parents. Parents recently surveyed expressed favorable views of physical education. Specifically:

• A majority of parents (54-84 percent) believe that physical education is at least as important as other academic subjects (CDC, 2010).
• Ninety-one percent believe that there should be more physical education in schools (Harvard School of Public Health, 2003).
• Seventy-six percent think that more school physical education could help control or prevent childhood obesity (NASPE, 2009a).
• Ninety-five percent believe that regular daily physical activity helps children do better academically and should be a part of the school curriculum for all students in grades K-12 (NASPE, 2003).

Additionally, many public and private organizations have proposed initiatives aimed at developing a comprehensive school-based strategy centered on curriculum physical education. As the largest institution where children spend more than half of their waking hours on school days, schools can play a pivotal role in increasing students’ physical activity levels by providing access for all to quality physical education, along with physical activities throughout the school environment, the subject of Chapter 7 .

AAHPERD (American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance). 2011. 2011 Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program (CSPAP) survey report. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

AAHPERD. 2012. Let’s move in school . www.aahperd.org/letsmoveinschool (accessed April 15, 2012).

Abels, K. W., and J. M. Bridges. 2010. Teaching movement education: Foundations for active lifestyles . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.

ACS (American Cancer Society) CAN (Cancer Action Network), ADA (American Diabetes Association), and AHA (American Heart Association). 2012. Physical education in schools—both quality and quantity are important: A statement on physical education from the American Cancer Society and Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN), the American Diabetes Association (ADA), and the American Heart Association (AHA). Dallas, TX: AHA.

Bailey, B., and K. McInnis. 2011. Energy cost of exergaming: A comparison of the energy cost of 6 forms of exergaming. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 165(7):597.

Ball, D. L., and D. K. Cohen. 1999. Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional development. In Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice, Jossey-Bass education series, edited by L. Darling-Hammond and G. Sykes. San Francisco, CA: ERIC. Pp. 30-32.

Baranowski, T., R. Buday, D. I. Thompson, and J. Baranowski. 2008. Playing for real: Video games and stories for health-related behavior change. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 34(1):74-82.

Barroso, C. S., C. McCullum-Gomez, D. M. Hoelscher, S. H. Kelder, and N. G. Murray. 2005. Self-reported barriers to quality physical education by physical education specialists in Texas. Journal of School Health 75(8):313-319.

Bassett, D. R., E. C. Fitzhugh, G. W. Heath, P. C. Erwin, G. M. Frederick, D. L. Wolff, W. A. Welch, and A. B. Stout. 2013. Estimated energy expenditures for school-based policies and active living. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 44(2):108-113.

Boyce, B., and G. L. Rikard. 2011a. Characteristics of PETE doctoral level institutions: Descriptions of programs, faculty and doctoral students. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 30(2):103-115.

Boyce, B., and G. L. Rikard. 2011b. A comparison of supply and demand for PETE professionals in higher education in the United States. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 30(2):116-128.

Boyle, S. E., G. L. Jones, and S. J. Walters. 2008. Physical activity among adolescents and barriers to delivering physical education in Cornwall and Lancashire, UK: A qualitative study of heads of P.E. and heads of schools. BMC Public Health 8(1):273.

Castelli, D., and J. E. Rink. 2003. A comparison of high and low performing secondary physical education programs. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 22(5):512.

Castelli, D. M., and J. A. Valley. 2007. The relationship of physical fitness and motor competence to physical activity. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 26(4):358-374.

CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2010. The association between school based physical activity, including physical education, and academic performance. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Center on Education Policy. 2007. Choices, changes, and challenges: Curriculum and instruction in the NCLB era. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.

Center on Education Policy. 2008. A call to restructure restructuring: Lessons from the No Child Left Behind Act in five states. Washington, DC: Center on Education Policy.

Chen, A., R. Martin, H. Sun, and C. D. Ennis. 2007. Is in-class physical activity at risk in constructivist physical education? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 78(5):500-509.

Chen, A., R. Martin, C. D. Ennis, and H. Sun. 2008. Content specificity of expectancy beliefs and task values in elementary physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 79(2):195-208.

Chen, A., H. Sun, X. Zhu, and C. D. Ennis. 2012. Influences of personal and lesson factors on caloric expenditure in physical education. Journal of Sport and Health Science 1(1):49-56.

Cohen, D., and H. Hill. 2000. Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. The Teachers College Record 102(2):294-343.

College Board. 2013. College search . https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/college-search (accessed March 18, 2013).

Corbin, C. B. 2002. Physical activity for everyone: What every physical educator should know about promoting lifelong physical activity. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 21(2):128-144.

Corbin, C., G. Le Masurier, and D. Lambdin. 2007. Fitness for life: Middle school . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Dagkas, S., and A. Stathi. 2007. Exploring social and environmental factors affecting adolescents’ participation in physical activity. European Physical Education Review 13(3):369-384.

Daum, D. N., and C. Buschner. 2012. The status of high school online physical education in the United States. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 31(1):86-100.

DeCorby, K., J. Halas, S. Dixon, L. Wintrup, and H. Janzen. 2005. Classroom teachers and the challenges of delivering quality physical education. Journal of Educational Research 98(4):208-221.

Dwyer, J. J., K. R. Allison, M. Barrera, B. Hansen, E. Goldenberg, and M. A. Boutilier. 2003. Teachers’ perspective on barriers to implementing physical activity curriculum guidelines for school children in Toronto. Canadian Journal of Public Health 94(6):448-452.

Erwin, H. E., and D. M. Castelli. 2008. National physical education standards: A summary of student performance and its correlates. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 79(4):495-505.

Fawkner, S. G., A. Niven, A. G. Thin, M. J. MacDonald, and J. R. Oakes. 2010. Adolescent girls’ energy expenditure during dance simulation active computer gaming. Journal of Sports Sciences 28(1):61-65.

Fishman, B. J., R. W. Marx, S. Best, and R. T. Tal. 2003. Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education 19(6):643-658.

FLVS (Florida Virtual School). 2013. Florida Virtual School physical education policy . http://www.flvs.net/myFLVS/student-handbook/Pages/Policies/PEPolicy.aspx (accessed March 13, 2013).

Fogel, V. A., R. G. Miltenberger, R. Graves, and S. Koehler. 2010. The effects of exergaming on physical activity among inactive children in a physical education classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 43(4):591-600.

Gallo, A. M., D. A. Sheehy, K. Patton, and L. Griffin. 2006. Assessment benefits and barriers: What are you committed to? Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 77(8):46-50.

GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office). 2012. K-12: School-based physical education and sports programs. Washington, DC: GAO.

Garet, M. S., A. C. Porter, L. Desimone, B. F. Birman, and K. S. Yoon. 2001. What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal 38(4):915-945.

Graf, D. L., L. V. Pratt, C. N. Hester, and K. R. Short. 2009. Playing active video games increases energy expenditure in children. Pediatrics 124(2):534-540.

Greenberg, J., and R. Stokes. 2007. Developing school site wellness centers . Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

Guskey, T., and D. Sparks. 2004. Linking professional development to improvements in student learning. In Research linking teacher preparation and student performance: Teacher education yearbook , Vol. XII, edited by E. M. Guyton and J. R. Dangel. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. Pp. 233-247. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southwest/pdf/rel_2007033.pdf (accessed April 1, 2013).

Hackensmith, C. W. 1966. History of physical education . New York: Harper & Row.

Haddock, B. L., S. R. Siegel, and L. D. Wikin. 2009. The addition of a video game to stationary cycling: The impact on energy expenditure in overweight children. Open Sports Sciences Journal 2:42.

Hastie, P. A., D. M. de Ojeda, and A. C. Luquin. 2011. A review of research on sport education: 2004 to the present. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 16(2):103-132.

Healthy People 2020. 2010. Healthy People 2020: Physical activity objectives . http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=33 (accessed March 14, 2013).

Hensley, L., and W. East. 1989. Testing and grading in the psychomotor domain. Measurement concepts in physical education and exercise science. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

HHS (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). 2008. Physical activity guidelines for Americans. Washington, DC: HHS.

IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2012a. Accelerating progress in obesity prevention: Solving the weight of the nation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

IOM. 2012b. Fitness measures and health outcomes in youth . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Jenkinson, K. A., and A. C. Benson. 2010. Barriers to providing physical education and physical activity in Victorian state secondary schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 35(8):1.

Johnston, C. A., C. Tyler, B. K. McFarlin, W. S. C. Poston, C. K. Haddock, R. S. Reeves, and J. P. Foreyt. 2010. Effects of a school-based weight maintenance program for Mexican-American children: Results at 2 years. Obesity 18(3):542-547.

Kennedy, M. 1998. Form and substance of inservice teacher education. Research Monograph No. 13. Madison: National Institute for Science Education, University of Wisconsin.

Kramer, S. L., and R. Keller. 2008. An existence proof: Successful joint implementation of the IMP curriculum and a 4 × 4 block schedule at a suburban U.S. high school. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 39(1):2-8.

Kulinna, P. H. 2012. Increasing physical activity: A comprehensive professional development effort. Biomedical Human Kinetics 4:6-11.

Kulinna, P. H., T. Brusseau, M. Ferry, and D. Cothran. 2010. Preservice teachers’ belief systems toward curricular outcomes for physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 81(2):189-198.

Laban, R. 1980. The mastery of movement . Plymouth: Macdonald & Evans.

Lanningham-Foster, L., R. C. Foster, S. K. McCrady, T. B. Jensen, N. Mitre, and J. A. Levine. 2009. Activity promoting games and increased energy expenditure. Journal of Pediatrics 154(6):819.

Learning Forward. 2012. Standards for professional learning: Standards list . http://www.learningforward.org/standards/standards-list#.UUhuMKK7mXw (accessed March 19, 2013).

Logsdon, B., K. Barrett, and B. Logsdon. 1984. Movement—the content of physical education. Physical Education for Children 295-355.

Lonsdale, C., R. R. Rosenkranz, L. R. Peralta, A. Bennie, P. Fahey, and D. R. Lubans. 2013. A systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in school physical education lessons. Preventive Medicine 56(2):152-161.

Loucks-Horsley, S., and C. Matsumoto. 2010. Research on professional development for teachers of mathematics and science: The state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics 99(5):258-271.

Luepker, R. V., C. L. Perry, S. M. McKinlay, P. R. Nader, G. S. Parcel, E. J. Stone, L. S. Webber, J. P. Elder, H. A. Feldman, C. C. Johnson, S. H. Kelder, M. Wu, and CATCH Collaborative Group. 1996. Outcomes of a field trial to improve children’s dietary patterns and physical activity. The child and adolescent trial for cardiovascular health. CATCH collaborative group. Journal of the American Medical Association 275(10):768-776.

Maddison, R., C. N. Mhurchu, A. Jull, Y. Jiang, H. Prapavessis, and A. Rodgers. 2007. Energy expended playing video console games: An opportunity to increase children’s physical activity? Pediatric Exercise Science 19(3):334.

Martin, J. J., N. Mccaughtry, P. Hodges-Kulinna, and D. Cothran. 2008. The influences of professional development on teachers’ self-efficacy toward educational change. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 13(2):171-190.

McCaughtry, N., J. Martin, P. H. Kulinna, and D. Cothran. 2006. What makes teacher professional development work? The influence of instructional resources on change in physical education. Journal of In-Service Education 32(2):221-235.

McCullick, B. A., T. Baker, P. D. Tomporowski, T. J. Templin, K. Lux, and T. Isaac. 2012. An analysis of state physical education policies. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 31(2):200-210.

McKenzie, T. L. 2007. The preparation of physical educators: A public health perspective. Quest 59(4):346-357.

McKenzie, T. L., J. E. Alcaraz, and J. F. Sallis. 1994. Assessing children’s liking for activity units in an elementary school physical education curriculum. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 13(3):206-215.

McKenzie, T. L., J. F. Sallis, B. Kolody, and F. N. Faucette. 1997. Long-term effects of a physical education curriculum and staff development program: SPARK. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 68:280-291.

McKenzie, T. L., J. E. Alcaraz, J. F. Sallis, and E. Faucette. 1998. Effects of a physical education program on children’s manipulative skills. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 17:327-341.

McKenzie, T. L., E. J. Stone, H. A. Feldman, J. N. Epping, M. Yang, P. K. Strikmiller, L. A. Lytle, and G. S. Parcel. 2001. Effects of the catch physical education intervention: Teacher type and lesson location. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 21(2):101-109.

Mellecker, R. R., and A. M. McManus. 2008. Energy expenditure and cardiovascular responses to seated and active gaming in children. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 162(9):886.

Mhurchu, C. N., R. Maddison, Y. Jiang, A. Jull, H. Prapavessis, and A. Rodgers. 2008. Couch potatoes to jumping beans: A pilot study of the effect of active video games on physical activity in children. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 5(1):8.

Morgan, C. F., A. Beighle, and R. R. Pangrazi. 2007. What are the contributory and compensatory relationships between physical education and physical activity in children? Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 78(5):407-412.

Morgan, P., and S. Bourke. 2008. Non-specialist teachers’ confidence to teach PE: The nature and influence of personal school experiences in PE. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 13(1):1-29.

Morgan, P. J., and V. Hansen. 2008. Classroom teachers’ perceptions of the impact of barriers to teaching physical education on the quality of physical education programs. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 79(4):506-516.

Mowling, C. M., S. J. Brock, K. K. Eiler, and M. E. Rudisill. 2004. Student motivation in physical education breaking down barriers. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 75(6):40-45.

Munson, W. W. 1988. Effects of leisure education versus physical activity or informal discussion on behaviorally disordered youth offenders. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 5(4):305-317.

Munson, W. W., S. B. Baker, and H. M. Lundegren. 1985. Strength training and leisure counseling as treatment for institutionalized juvenile delinquents. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 2(1):65-75.

Myers-Schieffer, T., and K. T. Thomas. 2012. Fifteen years of promise in school-based interventions: A meta-analysis. Kinesiology Reviews 1:155-169.

Nader, P. R., E. J. Stone, L. A. Lytle, C. L. Perry, S. K. Osganian, S. Kelder, L. S. Webber, J. P. Elder, D. Montgomery, H. A. Feldman, M. Wu, C. Johnson, G. S. Parcel, and R. V. Luepker. 1999. Three-year maintenance of improved diet and physical activity: The CATCH cohort. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 153(7):695-704.

NASBE (National Association of State Boards of Education). 2012. State School Health Policy Database. http://www.nasbe.org/healthy_schools/hs (accessed May 1, 2013).

NASPE (National Association for Sport and Physical Education). 2003. Parents’ view of children’s health and fitness: A summary of results. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

NASPE. 2004. Physical activity for children: A statement of guidelines for children ages 5-12. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

NASPE. 2004. Moving into the future: National standards for physical education. St. Louis, MO: Mosby.

NASPE. 2007a. Initial guidelines for online physical education: Position paper. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

NASPE. 2007b. Position statement: What constitutes a highly qualified physical education teacher. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

NASPE. 2009a. Physical education trends in our nation’s schools: A survey of practicing K-12 physical education teachers. Port Washington, NY: Roslow Research Group.

NASPE. 2009b. School physical education program checklist—how does your program rate? Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

NASPE. 2009c. NASPE resource brief: Quality physical education. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

NASPE. 2010. Opportunity to learn: Guidelines for elementary, middle, and high school physical education. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

NASPE. 2012. Instructional framework for fitness education in physical education. Guidance document. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

NASPE and AHA. 2010. Shape of the nation report: Status of physical education in the USA. Reston, VA: AAHPERD.

National Physical Activity Plan. 2010. National Physical Activity Plan. Columbia, SC: The National Physical Activity Plan. http://www.nationalactivityplan.org (accessed February 1, 2013).

Nike. 2012. Designed to move: A physical activity agenda. Beaverton, OR: Nike.

Parker, M. B., and M. Curtner-Smith. 2005. Health-related fitness in sport education and multi-activity teaching. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 10(1):1-18.

Pate, R. R., M. G. Davis, T. N. Robinson, E. J. Stone, T. L. McKenzie, and J. C. Young. 2006. Promoting physical activity in children and youth: A leadership role for schools. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Physical Activity Committee) in collaboration with the Councils on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young and Cardiovascular Nursing. Circulation 114(11):1214-1224.

Pate, R. R., J. A. Mitchell, W. Byun, and M. Dowda. 2011. Sedentary behaviour in youth. British Journal of Sports Medicine 45(11):906-913.

Perna, F. M., A. Oh, J. F. Chriqui, L. C. Mâsse, A. A. Atienza, L. Nebeling, T. Agurs-Collins, R. P. Moser, and K. W. Dodd. 2012. The association of state law to physical education time allocation in US public schools. American Journal of Public Health 102(8):1594-1599.

Perry, C. L., E. J. Stone, G. S. Parcel, R. C. Ellison, P. R. Nader, L. S. Webber, and R. V. Luepker. 1990. School-based cardiovascular health promotion: The Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health (CATCH). Journal of School Health 60(8):406-413.

Peterson’s. 2013. Physical education colleges . http://www.petersons.com/college-search/SearchResults.aspx?q=%22physical%20education%22&c=UG (accessed March 18, 2013).

Presidential Youth Fitness Program. 2013. Presidential Youth Fitness Program: Promoting health and activity for America’s youth . http://www.presidentialyouthfitnessprogram.org/index.shtml (accessed March 1, 2013).

Rainey, D. L., and T. D. Murray. 2005. Foundations of personal fitness . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Robinson, L. E. 2011. Effect of a mastery climate motor program on object control skills and perceived physical competence in preschoolers. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 82(2):355-359.

Robinson, L. E., and J. D. Goodway. 2009. Instructional climates in preschool children who are at risk. Part I: Object-control skill development. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 80(3):533-542.

Romero, A. J. 2012. A pilot test of the Latin active hip hop intervention to increase physical activity among low-income Mexican-American adolescents. American Journal of Health Promotion 26(4):208-211.

Sallis, J. F., and T. L. McKenzie. 1991. Physical education’s role in public health. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 62(2):124-137.

Sallis, J. F., T. L. McKenzie, J. E. Alcaraz, B. Kolody, N. Faucette, and M. F. Hovell. 1997. The effects of a 2-year physical education program (SPARK) on physical activity and fitness in elementary school students: Sports, play and active recreation for kids. American Journal of Public Health 87(8):1328-1334.

Sallis, J. F., J. J. Prochaska, and W. C. Taylor. 2000. A review of correlates of physical activity of children and adolescents. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 32(5):963-975.

Sallis, J. F., T. L. McKenzie, T. L. Conway, J. P. Elder, J. J. Prochaska, M. Brown, M. M. Zive, S. J. Marshall, and J. E. Alcaraz. 2003. Environmental interventions for eating and physical activity: A randomized controlled trial in middle schools. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 24(3):209-217.

Salvy, S.-J., J. N. Roemmich, J. C. Bowker, N. D. Romero, P. J. Stadler, and L. H. Epstein. 2009. Effect of peers and friends on youth physical activity and motivation to be physically active. Journal of Pediatric Psychology 34(2):217-225.

San Diego State University. 2007. Physical education matters: Success stories from California low resource schools that have achieved excellent P.E. programs. Los Angeles: The California Endowment.

San Diego State University. 2008. Physical education matters: A full report from The California Endowment . Los Angeles, CA: The California Endowment.

Sheehan, D. P., and L. Katz. 2012. The impact of a six week exergaming curriculum on balance with grade three school children using Wii Fit Plus. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport 11(3):5-22.

Sherar, L. B., N. C. Gyurcsik, M. L. Humbert, R. F. Dyck, S. Fowler-Kerry, and A. Baxter-Jones. 2009. Activity and barriers in girls (8-16 years old) based on grade and maturity status. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 41(1):87.

Siedentop, D. L. 1994. Sport education: Quality PE through positive sport experiences . Chicago, IL: Human Kinetics.

Siedentop, D. L. 2009. Introduction to physical education, fitness, and sport . 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Siedentop, D. L., P. A. Hastie, and H. Van der Mars. 2011. Complete guide to sport education . Chicago, IL: Human Kinetics.

Sit, C. H., J. W. Lam, and T. L. McKenzie. 2010. Children’s use of electronic games: Choices of game mode and challenge levels. International Journal of Pediatrics [epub ahead of print].

SPARK (Sports, Play, and Active Recreation for Kids). 2013. What is SPARK? http://www.sparkpe.org/what-is-spark (accessed March 14, 2013).

Staiano, A., A. Abraham, and S. Calvert. 2012. Motivating effects of cooperative exergame play for overweight and obese adolescents. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology 6(4):812.

Stevens-Smith, D. 2004. Teaching spatial awareness to children. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 75(6):52.

Stodden, D. F., J. D. Goodway, S. J. Langendorfer, M. A. Roberton, M. E. Rudisill, C. Garcia, and L. E. Garcia. 2008. A developmental perspective on the role of motor skill competence in physical activity: An emergent relationship. Quest 60(2):290-306.

Stodden, D., S. Langendorfer, and M. A. Roberton. 2009. The association between motor skill competence and physical fitness in young adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 80(2):223-229.

Stokes, R., and S. Schultz. 2002. Personal fitness for you Winston-Salem, NC: Hunter Textbooks.

Stokes, R., and S. L. Schultz. 2009. Get active! Get fit! Winston-Salem, NC: Hunter Textbooks.

Sun, H. 2012. Exergaming impact on physical activity and interest in elementary school children. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 83(2):212-220.

Sun, H., A. Chen, X. Zhu, and C. D. Ennis. 2012. Curriculum matters: Learning science-based fitness knowledge in constructivist physical education. Elementary School Journal 113(2):215-229.

Trost, S. 2009. Active education: Physical education, physical activity and academic performance. San Diego, CA: Active Living Research, San Diego State University.

Wallhead, T., and M. O’Sullivan. 2005. Sport education: Physical education for the new millennium? Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 10(2):181-210.

Welk, G. J., J. A. Schaben, and M. Shelley. 2004. Physical activity and physical fitness in children schooled at home and children attending public schools. Pediatric Exercise Science 16(4):310-323.

Weston, A. 1962. The making of American physical education . New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

White, K., A. E. Kilding, and G. Schofield. 2009. Energy expenditure and enjoyment during Nintendo ® Wii active video games: How do they compare to other sedentary and physical activities? New Zealand: AUT University, Center for Physical Activity and Nutrition (CPAN).

Whitehurst, G. J. 2002 (March 5). Research on teacher preparation and professional development: A paper presented at the White House Conference on Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers . Washington, DC.

Wiley, D. E., and B. Yoon. 1995. Teacher reports on opportunity to learn: Analyses of the 1993 California Learning Assessment System (CLAS). Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 17(3):355-370.

Williams, C. S. 2005. Personal fitness: Looking good/feeling good. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.

Wood, T. D. 1913. The ninth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (part 1) . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Wood, T. D., and R. F. Cassidy. 1930. The new physical education: A program of naturalized activities for education toward citizenship . New York: Macmillan.

Xiang, P., S. Lowry, and R. McBride. 2002. The impact of a field-based elementary physical education methods course on preservice classroom teachers’ beliefs. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 21:145-161.

Yoon, K. S., T. Duncan, S. W.-Y. Lee, B. Scarloss, and K. Shapley. 2007. Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Issues and Answers Report, REL 2007, No. 033. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs (accessed April 1, 2013).

This page intentionally left blank.

Physical inactivity is a key determinant of health across the lifespan. A lack of activity increases the risk of heart disease, colon and breast cancer, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, osteoporosis, anxiety and depression and others diseases. Emerging literature has suggested that in terms of mortality, the global population health burden of physical inactivity approaches that of cigarette smoking. The prevalence and substantial disease risk associated with physical inactivity has been described as a pandemic.

The prevalence, health impact, and evidence of changeability all have resulted in calls for action to increase physical activity across the lifespan. In response to the need to find ways to make physical activity a health priority for youth, the Institute of Medicine's Committee on Physical Activity and Physical Education in the School Environment was formed. Its purpose was to review the current status of physical activity and physical education in the school environment, including before, during, and after school, and examine the influences of physical activity and physical education on the short and long term physical, cognitive and brain, and psychosocial health and development of children and adolescents.

Educating the Student Body makes recommendations about approaches for strengthening and improving programs and policies for physical activity and physical education in the school environment. This report lays out a set of guiding principles to guide its work on these tasks. These included: recognizing the benefits of instilling life-long physical activity habits in children; the value of using systems thinking in improving physical activity and physical education in the school environment; the recognition of current disparities in opportunities and the need to achieve equity in physical activity and physical education; the importance of considering all types of school environments; the need to take into consideration the diversity of students as recommendations are developed.

This report will be of interest to local and national policymakers, school officials, teachers, and the education community, researchers, professional organizations, and parents interested in physical activity, physical education, and health for school-aged children and adolescents.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

Move Your Way® Toolkit for Schools

This toolkit is for anyone working to encourage physical activity in a school setting — like physical education and health education teachers, classroom teachers, coaches, after-school program leaders, and school administrators. Others promoting student health and well-being — like school nurses and parent teacher associations (PTAs) — can also use the information in this toolkit to support their work. 

Want to learn about the Move Your Way campaign? Check out this short video ! 

Browse this toolkit to:

Learn how physical activity benefits students — at school and beyond

Make a plan to get students moving, step into action , share move your way materials with parents and caregivers.

Kids and teens need movement to grow healthy and strong. Regular physical activity strengthens muscles and bones, helps prevent health problems like diabetes and heart disease, and reduces symptoms of anxiety and depression. 

Physical activity also has clear benefits for life at school. For example, students who are physically active tend to:

• Have better grades
• Miss fewer school days
• Have better focus in class 

Beyond that, physical activity in schools can help support school connectedness — students’ belief that peers and adults in the school support, value, and care about their well-being. School connectedness can make it less likely that students engage in risky behaviors like substance use and help improve students’ mental and physical health and well-being.

• Browse CDC Healthy Schools’ Physical Education and Physical Activity webpage for facts, figures, and frameworks.
• Learn about School Connectedness and how to promote it.
• Check out these 10 Actionable Tips to Support Youth Mental Health Through Sports [PDF - 2.2 MB] .

Whether you’re starting a school-wide physical activity initiative or you just want to provide students, parents, and caregivers with educational materials — it helps to make a plan. That way, you can be sure everybody is on the same page and working toward a clearly defined goal. Use these tips to plan your physical activity project:

• Set clear, achievable goals. What are you trying to achieve with your efforts? It helps to be specific — instead of “Get students to be more active,” set clearly defined goals like “Get students to move for at least 10 minutes each day during recess.” 
• Build support within your school. Who in your school community can support your physical activity project? Consider involving school leadership, PTA representatives, or other teachers. 
• Involve students. Try to include students of all ages in the planning process — they can add an important perspective and voice. Students can also serve as “ambassadors” to promote physical activity and model healthy behaviors for their peers.
• Keep accessibility top of mind. Make sure your physical activity project or initiative is accessible to everyone in the school community. For example, do you need to adapt activities to work for students with movement limitations or non-verbal communication styles? Or choose playground equipment suitable for students who use mobility devices? 
• Find partners in your community. Don’t forget about the larger community outside of school — are there organizations or individuals who can support your physical activity efforts? Think local health departments, hospitals, or community organizations. Also consider partnerships that might help you better engage all students, like an organization that could donate adaptive equipment. Use this National Youth Sports Strategy (NYSS) Champions directory to find organizations in your area that focus on youth with disabilities.
• Evaluate your progress. When trying a new strategy, it’s important to assess what’s working well — and what isn’t. Check in with school leadership and other teachers regularly: Have they noticed a difference in students’ activity levels? What problems are they experiencing? You can also use more formal evaluation measures like surveys. 

Want to learn more about planning a community-wide physical activity campaign? Check out the Move Your Way Community Playbook .

Move Your Way in the field: Building community partnerships

Move Your Way campaign pilot community Southern Nevada Health District (SNHD) partnered with the student wellness club at a local elementary school to plan and host a Move Your Way event for students. Students collaborated with their physical education teacher to create lesson plans focused on the Physical Activity Guidelines. After the student-led lesson, all students were encouraged to get active outside. Parents, faculty, and staff joined the students as they walked, ran, or skipped laps around the school. SNHD attended the event, offered more information about the campaign, and distributed Move Your Way materials to families. 

Now that you’ve made a plan, it’s time to put it into action. Try the strategies below to get students moving throughout the school day and beyond. And use Move Your Way’s engaging materials in English and Spanish to support your efforts!

Around school

Kids and teens spend a big chunk of their time at school — that’s why creating a school environment that encourages physical activity is so important. Start with these simple tips:

• Show the benefits of getting active at a glance. Print the “60 Minutes” Poster for Kids and hang it in hallways, classrooms, and the gym.
• Focus on fun. Getting physically active is a great way to build some play into the school day and enhance learning. Whether it’s playing active games or having a classroom dance party — just have fun with it!

In the classroom

Try these strategies to encourage physical activity in the classroom:

• Take movement breaks. Getting up and moving together can get antsy students back on track and reduce disruptive behaviors. Try arm circles, jumping jacks, or running in place — and consider incorporating yoga and other mindfulness activities to help improve students’ focus and lower anxiety and stress.
• Add activity to academics. Why not use movement to practice and reinforce academic lessons? For example, play a round of “beach ball spelling” — where students take turns calling out the letters of a word as they throw a beach ball to one another. Or you can set up movement-based learning stations so students can stand and walk around the classroom while completing tasks.
• Get smart about getting active. Use the Fact Sheet for Kids to teach students the what, how, and why of physical activity — and send home a copy of the Fact Sheet for Parents .
• Make a pledge. Print the Move Your Way Pledge Sheet and have students write down how they plan to get active. Then hang students’ pledge sheets up in the classroom. At the end of the week, ask students to share their experiences: Did they meet their physical activity goals? If not, how can the school community support them? 
• Check out CDC Healthy Schools’ Classroom Physical Activity webpage for additional resources and strategies.
• For more movement break ideas and printable cards, download this CDC fact sheet [PDF - 4.1 MB] .

Recess is an opportunity for students to have unstructured playtime with their friends — and you can use this time to encourage them to get creative and have fun while getting active. Try these tips:

• Call on young artists. Use chalk or paint to draw game boards or areas for activities like hopscotch on sidewalks or blacktops. This is also a great way to engage older students in creating something for their peers.
• Promote active play. Offer a variety of games and activities so each child can find something they enjoy. And you don’t have to plan every activity yourself — let kids design and lead their own games to help them build leadership and social skills. If your budget allows, consider investing in play equipment like jump ropes, playground balls, or bean bag toss games to support different ways to play. 
• Plan for bad weather days. Identify indoor spaces where students can get moving when it’s raining or too cold or hot to spend recess outside — like the gym, empty classrooms, or a spacious hallway. You might have to create a schedule to avoid overcrowding.
• Get your community involved. Ask local businesses to donate new or gently used adaptive play equipment — or partner with nearby community centers, YMCAs, or gyms to provide access to indoor activity spaces.
• Check out CDC Healthy Schools’ Recess webpage to learn about strategies and policies for recess planning.
• Get more tips for Active Outdoor Recess and Active Indoor Recess .
• Use this Painted Play Spaces Playbook [PDF – 1.2 KB] as a guide to add colorful game designs to outdoor play areas.
• Looking for games that don’t require equipment? Check out this Game Library for ideas.  

Avoid using physical activity to discipline students

Kids and teens are much more likely to get moving if they have positive associations with physical activity. That’s why it’s important not to use physical activity as a punishment (like having kids run laps) or take away opportunities for getting active (like not allowing students to go to recess).

During school events

Take advantage of school events — like open houses and back-to-school festivities — to educate parents, caregivers, and people in the community about the benefits of physical activity. Try these tips:

• Set up shop. Decorate a table or booth with the Move Your Way posters for parents — and use them as conversation starters to talk with people about physical activity. You can also hand out the Fact Sheet for Kids and the Fact Sheet for Parents . 
• Engage local partners. Local health departments, hospitals, or community organizations with a physical activity focus may be willing to set up a table and share educational materials — and even hand out goodies like water bottles, jump ropes, or balls.
• Show (and tell). If you have multimedia equipment available, consider streaming the Move Your Way videos for families during the event. 
• Get moving together. Incorporating movement breaks or active games into events can help parents and caregivers remember the joy of physical activity. Need inspiration? Watch this video showcasing accessible exercises.
• Create a challenge! Many kids love a bit of friendly competition — and they love getting their adults involved. Set up a sack race, obstacle course, or a scavenger hunt and have kids compete against parents, caregivers, or teachers.  

Use the Move Your Way teen video challenge to engage older students

Most young kids naturally want to move,   but encouraging older middle school or high school students to get active can be tough. If you’re looking for a way to engage older students, consider a multimedia classroom project — like the Move Your Way teen video challenge! 

The  Tips for Creating Your Own Move Your Way ®  Teen Video Fact Sheet [PDF - 805 KB] has everything teens need to get started, and they can watch the  Move When You Can and  Try Something Different videos for inspiration. Consider making it an assignment or an extra credit activity. Or make it a raffle —  students who create a video get the chance to win a prize!

Want to learn more about making physical activity accessible for youth with disabilities?

Explore the National Center on Health, Physical Activity and Disability’s educator webpage . 

Interested in customizing materials for your school? You can swap out photos or add your school’s logo to Move Your Way materials through the  CDC State and Community Health Media Center. If you have questions about using Move Your Way materials, want to create your own, or would like help implementing physical activity strategies in your school, please contact ODPHP.

One of the best ways to encourage physical activity outside school is to get families moving together. Getting active as a family not only helps kids and teens stay healthy — it also means everyone gets to reap the benefits of physical activity. The Move Your Way campaign has lots of resources to help families find activities that fit their lives and create healthy, sustainable routines. Try the strategies below to support parents and caregivers in getting the family active.

Hand out educational materials

You can print these materials and send them home with students — or hand them out at school events.

• The Fact Sheet for Parents helps parents and caregivers understand what kinds of activity kids and teens need to stay healthy and offers tips for helping kids get active.
• The Sports Fact Sheet for Parents helps parents and caregivers understand the benefits kids and teens can get from playing sports and offers tips to help them get their kids involved.
• With the Pledge Sheet , parents can be role models for their kids by showing how they’ll get active and making a commitment to move more.

Promote physical activity in your newsletter, email, or blog

Use or adapt the content below to promote physical activity in your email outreach, newsletter, or blog. 

Subject: Get tips to get your kids moving

Body copy:  It’s no secret that kids and teens need regular physical activity — it makes their bodies grow strong, it helps them stay at a healthy weight, and it can even help them focus better in the classroom. 

How much is enough? Kids and teens need at least 60 minutes of physical activity throughout the day. That includes a mix of heart-pumping movement like running, dancing, or jumping rope, plus activities that strengthen muscles and bones — like playing sports or climbing at the playground. Use this interactive tool to help you fit more activity into your kids’ day.

But the best way to encourage kids and teens to get active? Get the whole family moving so everyone can enjoy the benefits of physical activity!

Check out the Move Your Way campaign for actionable tips and resources to add more physical activity to your family’s routine. 

Promote Physical Activity Through Social Media 

Use Move Your Way sample messages, graphics, and GIFs to promote physical activity on your own or your school’s social media channels. You can adapt the messages to fit your needs!

Add Move Your Way to your website 

Want to make Move Your Way part of your website? Download the Move Your Way web badges and widget for an easy way to add physical activity resources to your site. 

• With the Move Your Way Activity Planner web badge and widget , school staff, parents, caregivers, and other adults can use an interactive tool to help them build their own personalized weekly activity plan.
• The Move Your Way Parent Interactive Graphic web badge links parents and caregivers to an interactive tool they can use to see how kids can fit in 60 minutes of activity a day. 

The Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.

Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by ODPHP or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.

You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.

• Request a Demo

Educators Blog

What is a Performance Task?

By Jay McTighe,

A performance task is any learning activity or assessment that asks students to perform to demonstrate their knowledge, understanding and proficiency. Performance tasks yield a tangible product and/or performance that serve as evidence of learning. Unlike a selected-response item (e.g., multiple-choice or matching) that asks students to select from given alternatives, a performance task presents a situation that calls for learners to apply their learning in context.

Performance tasks are routinely used in certain disciplines, such as visual and performing arts, physical education, and career-technology where performance is the natural focus of instruction. However, such tasks can (and should) be used in every subject area and at all grade levels.

 Performance tasks can be used to engage students in meaningful learning. Since rich performance tasks establish authentic contexts that reflect genuine applications of knowledge, students are often motivated and engaged by such “real world” challenges.

When used as assessments, performance tasks enable teachers to gauge student understanding and proficiency with complex processes (e.g., research, problem-solving, and writing), not just measure discrete knowledge. They are well suited to integrating subject areas and linking content knowledge with the 21st Century Skills such as critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, communication, and technology use.   New research shows that such performance tasks lead to deeper understanding and can improve student achievement up +39%.

To learn how educators can create and implement effective performance tasks that drive student achievement, visit www.PerformanceTask.com .

  Jay McTighe is a nationally recognized educator and author of the award-winning and best-selling Understanding by Design series with Grant Wiggins.

Editors Note: This is an excerpt from the article " What is a Performance Task ( Part  1)" published on the PerformanceTask.com blog. 

Subscribe to the #1 PBL Blog!

Receive new articles in the world of Project Based Learning, STEM/STEAM, and College & Career Readiness. 

• Project-Based Learning (368)
• STEM/STEAM (169)
• College and Career Readiness (54)
• Professional Learning (52)
• Career-Connected Learning (36)
• Social and Emotional Learning (35)
• Computer Science (15)
• Assessment (6)
• Highlights (1)

Subscribe to our blog

What to Expect from the Physical Education edTPA

Sponsored school(s).

Novice teacher performance has a new standard: the edTPA (formerly known as simply the TPA). The edTPA is a nationally designed pre-service assessment tool that was designed to determine if new teachers are prepared for teaching at all levels and all subjects—and K-12 physical education is no exception.

The Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning, and Equity (SCALE) at Stanford University developed the edTPA when it became clear that performance-based assessments of teaching were crucial to ensuring that novice teachers were prepared for the job. It was designed as a national framework for the assessment of pre-service teachers and allows teacher preparation program providers and state boards to better determine if a physical education teacher is ready for the job.

The edTPA supports Common Core State Standards that emphasize focused, coherent, and centered instruction.

Teacher Prep Programs and States that have Implemented the edTPA

There are currently 523 educator preparation programs in 34 states (including the District of Columbia) currently participating in the edTPA.

The following states have statewide policies in place requiring a state-approved performance assessment as part of program completion or for state licensure:

• Washington (21 participating institutions)
• Oregon (17 participating institutions)
• Minnesota (31 participating institutions)
• Wisconsin (41 participating institutions)
• New York (107 participating institutions)
• Connecticut (2 participating institutions)
• Tennessee (13 participating institutions)
• Georgia (60 participating institutions)
• Hawaii (4 participating institutions)

The following states are taking steps toward implementation:

• Massachusetts

The following states have at least one teacher preparation program either participating or trying out edTPA:

• South Carolina
• North Carolina
• West Virginia
• Pennsylvania
• Connecticut
• Rhode Island

K-12 Physical Education Teacher Performance Assessment: An Overview

The purpose of the edTPA K-12 Physical Education assessment is to measure a teacher’s readiness to teach physical education at the K-12 level. The assessment was designed with a focus on the principles from research and theory and based on the findings that successful teachers:

• Are able to understand student needs and apply knowledge that reflects this understanding
• Are able to develop a knowledge of content standards and subject-specific pedagogy related to physical education subject matter
• Can take into consideration the research and theory of how students learn
• Can take into consideration and analyze the evidence that concerns instruction on student learning

Students are evaluated on five components of the teaching practice through this physical education assessment:

• Instruction
• Analyzing teaching
• Academic language

K-12 Physical Education Teacher Performance Assessment: Breaking it Down

The edTPA K-12 Physical Education assessment encourages the implementation of three tasks:

Planning for Assessment and Instruction

Assessing Student Learning

Instructing and Engaging Students in Learning

Students are required to plan three to five consecutive physical education lessons (referred to as learning segments), with the length of the learning segment depending on how frequently and how long the class is taught.

Each task consists of a number of planning rubrics to guide the teacher in completing the assessment:

This task includes (among others):

• Providing relevant context information
• Identifying a segment to plan, teach, and analyze student learning
• Psychomotor
• Affective learning domains related to movement patterns, health-enhancing fitness, and/or performance concepts

Rubric 1: Planning for Developing Competencies in Physical Education

Rubric 2: Planning to Support Varied Student Learning Needs

Rubric 3: Using Knowledge of Students to Inform Teaching and Learning

Rubric 4: Identifying and Supporting Language Demands

Rubric 5: Planning Assessments to Monitor and Support Student Learning

• Obtaining required permission for video recording of students
• Identifying lessons from the learning segment in Task 1
• Choosing lessons to show interaction with students
• Focusing students as to represent a range of psychomotor competencies within the class

Rubric 6: Learning Environment

Rubric 7: Engaging Students in Learning

Rubric 8: Strengthening Student Competencies through Active Monitoring

Rubric 9: Subject-Specific Pedagogy

Rubric 10: Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness

• Selecting one formal, performance-based assessment from the learning segment chosen to evaluate students’ competencies in cognitive, psychomotor, and/or affective domains related to performance concepts, health-enhancing fitness, and/or movement patterns
• Reviewing the class results to identify quantitative and qualitative patterns of learning within and across learners in the class
• Using video clips to illustrate patterns in student learning

Rubric 11: Analysis of Student Learning

Rubric 12: Providing Feedback to Guide Learning

Rubric 13: Student Use of Feedback

Rubric 14: Analyzing Students’ Language Use and Physical Education Learning

Rubric 15: Using Assessment to Inform Instruction

K-12 Physical Education Teacher Performance Assessment: Setting it in Motion

To complete the edTPA K-12 Physical Education assessment, students must successfully complete these steps:

• Select one physical education class for the assessment
• Provide the appropriate context information in the form of a template
• Identify a learning segment to plan, teach, and analyze
• Identify a central focus that will be addressed, along with the content standards and objectives, in the learning segment
• Select language demands required by the task and write a lesson plan for each lesson in the learning segment; lesson plans should include:

a)    State-adopted physical education content standards or AAHPERD/NASPE standards

b)   Learning objectives that are associated with the content standards across all domains

c)    Informal and formal assessments (that include evaluation criteria, types of assessments, and what is being assessed)

d)   Instructional strategies and learning tasks

e)    Instructional materials, equipment, and resources

• Submit original lesson plans
• Select and submit key instructional materials
• Submit copies of all written assessments

Back to Top

• PE Teacher Resources
• PE Teacher Careers
• PE Teacher Degrees
• PE Teacher Requirements
• PE Teacher Salaries

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

• Knowledge Base
• Extended Learning

Performance Tasks

A performance task is any learning activity or assessment that asks students to  perform  to demonstrate their knowledge, understanding and proficiency. Performance tasks yield a tangible product and/or performance that serve as evidence of learning. Unlike a selected-response item (e.g., multiple-choice or matching) that asks students to select from given alternatives, a performance task presents a situation that calls for learners to apply their learning in context.

For more information of the design and use of performance tasks and performance task assessment, we’ve published a seven part series at  https://blog.performancetask.com/  , authored by Jay McTighe.

Defined STEM Performance Task Project Outline

Set the stage.

• Introduction
• Career Video & Guiding Questions

Explore the Background ( GRASP)

• Goal – Each performance task begins with a Goal. The goal provides the student with the outcome of the learning experience and the contextual purpose of the experience and product creation.
• Role – The Role is meant to provide the student with the position or individual persona that they will become to accomplish the goal of the performance task. The majority of roles found within the tasks provide opportunities for students to complete real-world applications of standards-based content. The role may be for one student or in many instances can serve as a small group experience. Students may work together or assume a part of the role based upongroup dynamics. These roles will require student(s) to develop creative and innovative products demonstrating their understanding of the content through the application of the content and a variety of skills across disciplines.
• Audience  – The performance tasks contain an Audience component. The audience is the individual(s) who are interested in the findings and products that have been created. These people will make a decision based upon the products and presentations created by the individual(s) assuming the role within the task. Click here for an article on the importance of audience within a performance task.
• Situation  – The Situation provides the participants with a contextual background for the task. Students will learn about the real-world application for the task. Additionally, this section builds connections with other sections of Defined STEM. This is the place that may invite students to consider various video resources, simulations, language tasks, and associated websites when appropriate. This section of the performance task will help the students connect the authentic experience with content and concepts critical to understanding.
• having a student complete all products within a task;
• having students complete a number of products based upon content application and/or student interest;
• having a student complete certain products based upon the educator’s decision to maximize content, concept, and skill application;
• having student work as part of a cooperative group to complete a product or the products; and/or
• having students complete products based upon the strength of their multiple intelligences.

Do the Research

• Learning Objects
• Research Resources
• Constructed Response

Design Process & Product Creation

• The Design Process
• Submitting your work

Final Reflections

Was this article helpful, related articles.

• What We Offer

Connect With Us!

Human Kinetics is moving to summer hours. Starting May 31 – August 2, our hours will be Mon – Thurs, 7am – 5pm CDT. Orders placed on Friday with digital products/online courses will be processed immediately. Orders with physical products will be processed on the next business day.

800.747.4457

Mon-Thurs 7am - 5pm CST

Get in touch with our team

Frequently asked questions

• Fitness & Health
• Sport & Exercise Science
• Physical Education
• Strength & Conditioning
• Sports Medicine
• Sport Management

Learn the advantages of using performance-based assessments

This is an excerpt from performance-based assessment for middle and high school physical education-2nd edition by jacalyn lund & mary fortman kirk..

Many of the things that physical educators do during an instructional unit can be easily turned into performance-based assessments. By making a few modifications, writing out criteria for the performance, and gradually including performance-based assessments throughout a unit, a teacher can begin to transform current assessment practices into performance-based assessments.

Performance-based assessments provide several instructional advantages in physical education and can greatly increase the effectiveness of instruction and evaluation systems. This section considers some advantages of using performance-based assessments.

Direct Observations of Student Learning

Performance-based assessments allow teachers to assess areas of learning that traditional assessments do not address. Many traditional assessments do not directly measure progress toward the teacher's final learning objectives. For example, at the secondary level, a physical educator's goal is usually to teach a student how to play a game or do an activity. However, while skill tests may evaluate performance of discrete skills in a fairly closed (unchanging) environment, they do not evaluate a student's ability to use these skills and “put it all together” during game play. Additionally, game play, involves making decisions about which skill to use and thus requires students to evaluate a complex environment. Skill tests are merely an approximation of what a student must be able to do. Although they do represent a first step in learning, obtaining high scores on a skill test is usually not the teacher's ultimate goal for the unit.

Direct observation of students performing in a real-world setting provides a powerful way to measure both their knowledge and their ability to apply it. Traditional assessments are designed to measure students' learning indirectly. For example, when students take a test about tennis rules, the teacher assumes that the test measures the degree to which a student knows the rules, and if the questions are valid then this is a reasonable assumption. However, a student might know the rules of tennis and demonstrate that knowledge on a written test yet be unable to apply them during a game. Skill tests and written tests give teachers a useful way to sample students' learning during instruction, but actual assessment of game play allows teachers to see whether students can combine the pieces into a meaningful entity.

Thus performance-based assessments allow teachers to access information not available through traditional testing. Assessments must measure how well students meet the teacher's goals or targets for the unit. When a teacher's goals include game play or some type of student performance, then performance-based assessments provide an excellent way to determine whether students have achieved those goals.

Good Instructional Alignment

Put simply, instructional alignment means that teachers test what they teach. Cohen's research (1987) revealed the power of instructional alignment strategies. Teachers in his study demonstrated a significant difference in student learning when their assessments matched student learning. When applying instructional alignment principles, teachers decide on a target, then test what they teach. This approach may seem logical, but the fact is that not all teachers use it. Some teachers use written tests to evaluate learning for activity units. Too often, the material covered by a test comes from a one- or two-page handout on the history or rules of a game or sport, which means that the test ignores all the skill and game-play instruction involved in the unit. In performance-based assessment, in contrast, the assessment can be the instructional task. Students know exactly what is expected of them and are given multiple opportunities to meet preannounced teacher expectations and criteria. Thus instruction and assessment work together in performance-based assessments, which leads to strong instructional alignment and enhances students' learning.

Interesting Assessments

Since performance-based assessments usually involve real-world tasks, students tend to find them more engaging and challenging. Rather than studying just enough to get a good grade on a test, students spend many hours engaged in their projects and often explore and use sources beyond the teacher and textbook. In addition, when an assessment simulates what a person in the field might do, students have several role models to emulate (e.g., announcing a game like Harry Caray, doing basketball analysis like Pat Summitt, or dancing like Michael Flatley or Julianne Hough). When an assessment results in a product or performance, students accomplish something they can be proud of.

Instructional Feedback

Because they have a formative component, performance-based assessments provide high-quality feedback to students throughout the assessment. Since students have access to the rubric that is used to judge the final product, they can self-assess and peer-assess as they move through the assessment and receive additional feedback. The overall purpose of assessment should be to enhance learning, and the primary reason to assess should be to give feedback to students about their progress. The second reason for doing assessments is to provide information to the teacher that can be used to shape instruction. Thus, instead of doing assessment at the end of the unit, teachers can enhance students' learning by integrating assessment throughout the instructional process.

Measurement of Multiple Objectives and Concepts

These days, physical education is often squeezed into an instructional curriculum loaded with classes that students were not required to take 10 years ago. As a result, physical education teachers must make every minute count. Because performance-based assessments are linked with instruction, the two can be accomplished simultaneously, thus increasing instructional efficiency. Game play provides opportunities for teachers to assess students' skill, use of strategy, knowledge of rules, and affective-domain attributes. Additionally, physical education teachers can often work with other teachers to do assessments that display competence in multiple areas. For example, written assessments could be used to evaluate learning in both English and physical education, and fitness assessments could also be used to measure biology content knowledge. Assessments involving other subject areas can be completed outside the gym, which maximizes time available for activity.

Active Student Learning

Performance-based assessments can empower students by giving them freedom to make choices, within parameters set by teachers, about the direction that their learning should take. Giving students this kind of ownership of their learning process can be a powerful motivator. In addition, because students understand what their learning should look like, students are more likely to experience success with performance-based assessments. Not only do the lessons have a more lasting effect—performance-based assessments require students to do something, which makes them more likely to retain the knowledge they use—but also may lead students to other projects and activities. Indeed, whether they involve writing or the use of psychomotor skills, performance-based assessments should encourage students to go outside the confines of the class for additional learning. As a result, an assessment may not be the end or culmination of learning so much as it is the beginning of engagement with a newfound area of interest.

Higher-Order Thinking Skills

Higher-order thinking skills, which are important for success as an adult, must be nurtured and developed throughout a student's school career. Performance-based assessments prompt students to use higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The more opportunities students are given to practice these skills, the more proficient they become at using them. For example, a teacher might call on students to use higher-order thinking skills in physical education by giving them a scouting assignment in which they analyze the skills and strategies of future opponents in a badminton tournament. Another option would be to have students create a dance for an upcoming performance or design a play for use in an upcoming game.

Multiple Chances to Get It Right

Some educators see assessment in a purely evaluative light: students have one chance to prove that they have learned the required material. In contrast, because of its formative focus, performance-based assessments give students multiple chances to succeed. Indeed, in life outside the classroom, people often have multiple chances to demonstrate competence without penalty. Did you pass your lifesaving exam the first time you took it? If you didn't, that setback did not mean that you could never become a lifeguard. It just meant that more work was necessary before you met the criteria. In much the same way, performance-based assessments allow students multiple opportunities to meet the criteria or standard of excellence set by the teacher.

When game-play assessments are used during a tournament, the grade should be determined not by averaging a student's early performance with that from later games but by using results from his or her best performance. Errors made during a game in the early stages of learning should not be held against the student because improvement with experience is the expectation. When dancers make errors while performing for their video recording, they can do another take. When a student's written work misses the mark, he or she is allowed to rewrite. Educators who administer an assessment only once must recognize that in the world outside the classroom people often have multiple chances to demonstrate proficiency. Athletes compete in many contests, dancers put on many shows, and skaters perform in numerous competitions. Thus, giving students multiple opportunities to achieve success provides more of a real-world experience than a one-shot evaluation provides.

Students' Enjoyment

Because assessments are challenging and simulate real-world experiences, students find them interesting and engaging. Time on task in class tends to be high and students are willing to spend additional time outside of class to complete their projects. Afterward, when students consider their accomplishments, they have a strong sense of satisfaction and pride, since the product or performance provides a tangible, concrete demonstration of their achievement.

This is an excerpt from Performance-Based Assessment for Middle and High School Physical Education, Second Edition .

Latest Posts

• Identifying Weakness in the Knee Extensors
• Massage and soft-tissue release for shin splints
• How to work with tight hip flexors
• Measuring joint range of motion
• Analyzing the Speed Requirements of a Sport
• Speed and Strength

Case study of a health optimizing physical education-based comprehensive school physical activity program

Affiliations.

• 1 University of Idaho 875 Perimeter Drive, Moscow, Idaho, 83844, United States. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 2 University of South Carolina 902 Sumter Street, Columbia, SC, 29208, United States. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 3 Methodist University 540 Ramsey Street, Fayetteville, NC, 28311, United States. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 4 University of South Carolina 902 Sumter Street, Columbia, SC, 29208, United States. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 5 University of South Carolina 902 Sumter Street, Columbia, SC, 29208, United States. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 6 University of South Carolina 902 Sumter Street, Columbia, SC, 29208, United States. Electronic address: [email protected].
• 7 University of South Carolina 902 Sumter Street, Columbia, SC, 29208, United States. Electronic address: [email protected].
• PMID: 30326329
• DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.10.006

In this article, we report a qualitative case study, in which we examined enablers and barriers related to the development, implementation, and sustainability of a comprehensive school physical activity program (CSPAP) aligned with the Health Optimizing Physical Education (HOPE) curriculum model at a middle school. Literature on program-diffusion and school-university partnerships guided data collection and analysis. Data sources included semi-structured interviews with the program implementation team (n = 9) and the school's health and physical education teachers (n = 7); a focus group interview with students; documents (e.g., lesson plans), and observations. Constant comparison techniques were used to code and draw out themes from the data. Findings revealed the extensive effort needed for program implementation and highlighted the importance of strong external support mechanisms, conducting needs assessments, and training teachers to market physical activity programming. Partnerships may provide critical support for schools in their efforts to generate and sustain CSPAPs.

Keywords: Evaluation; Physical activity; Physical education; Whole-of-school approach.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

• Health Promotion / organization & administration*
• Interviews as Topic
• Needs Assessment
• Physical Education and Training / organization & administration*
• Program Evaluation
• Qualitative Research
• School Health Services / organization & administration*
• Socioeconomic Factors
• Teacher Training / organization & administration
• Urban Population

Virtual Tour

Experience University of Idaho with a virtual tour. Explore now

• Discover a Career
• Find a Major
• Experience U of I Life

More Resources

• Admitted Students
• International Students

Take Action

• Find Financial Aid
• View Deadlines
• Find Your Rep

Helping to ensure U of I is a safe and engaging place for students to learn and be successful. Read about Title IX.

Get Involved

• Clubs & Volunteer Opportunities
• Recreation and Wellbeing
• Student Government
• Student Sustainability Cooperative
• Academic Assistance
• Safety & Security
• Career Services
• Health & Wellness Services
• Register for Classes
• Dates & Deadlines
• Financial Aid
• Sustainable Solutions
• U of I Library

• Upcoming Events

Review the events calendar.

Stay Connected

• Vandal Family Newsletter
• Here We Have Idaho Magazine
• Living on Campus
• Campus Safety
• About Moscow

The largest Vandal Family reunion of the year. Check dates.

Benefits and Services

• Vandal Voyagers Program
• Vandal License Plate
• Submit Class Notes
• Make a Gift
• View Events
• Alumni Chapters
• University Magazine
• Alumni Newsletter

U of I's web-based retention and advising tool provides an efficient way to guide and support students on their road to graduation. Login to VandalStar.

Common Tools

• Administrative Procedures Manual (APM)
• Class Schedule
• OIT Tech Support
• Academic Dates & Deadlines
• U of I Retirees Association
• Faculty Senate
• Staff Council

Department of Movement Sciences

Mailing Address: College of Education, Health and Human Sciences University of Idaho 875 Perimeter Drive MS 2401 Moscow, Idaho 83844-2401

Phone: 208-885-7921

Fax: 208-885-5929

Email: [email protected]

Physical Education & Physical Activity Pedagogy, M.Ed.

Career information is not specific to degree level. Some career options may require an advanced degree.

Current Job Openings and Salary Range

in ID, WA, OR, MT and HI

Entry-Level

Senior-Level

• Career Options
• Health Specialties Teacher, Postsecondary
• Recreation and Fitness Studies Teacher, Postsecondary
• Adapted Physical Education Specialist
• Athlete and Sports Competitor
• Coach or Scout
• Athletic Trainer
• Fitness Trainer and Aerobics Instructor

Regional Employment Trends

Employment trends and projected job growth in ID, WA, OR, MT & HI

*Job data is collected from national, state and private sources. For more information, visit EMSI's data sources page .

• Degree Prep

A physical education degree provides graduates with the opportunity to help a sedentary generation plagued with decreasing wellness (e.g., obesity, low levels of fitness). A background in one or more of the disciplines of health, physical education, recreation and dance is helpful in preparing you to enter these degree programs. If you want to be on the forefront of a field that increasingly needs trained professionals, you should consider a graduate degree in P.E. pedagogy.

• Degree Roadmap

An M.Ed. degree in physical education and physical activity pedagogy has two options:

• Option 1 provides certified teachers an opportunity to continue their education in the study of physical activity pedagogy. 
• Option 2 provides applicants with an undergraduate degree an opportunity to get a graduate degree plus teacher certification in physical education. 

Download a PDF of the Physical Education and Physical Activity Pedagogy coursework .

• Professional Licensing

Completion of the program will make you eligible to sit for the Standard Instructional Certificate  with Physical Education endorsement.

• Scholarships

Visit the  Financial Aid office  for more available scholarships.

Movement Sciences (MVSC) Scholarships

• Application and Descriptions  (PDF)
• MVSC Assistantship page
• Hands-On Learning

With research opportunities imbedded within the community public schools, graduate students in physical education pedagogy have extensive opportunities to conduct intensive research and to learn hands-on and teach within the University of Idaho community. Students involved in character education are involved in creating curriculum for sports teams or in gathering data from our new servant leadership online certificate course for coaches.

• Job Openings and Salary Range
• Employment Trends

Advanced Physical Education

The program offers opportunities to become involved in nationally-recognized research and to work hand-in-hand with local schools and communities to promote movement, physical activity, fitness and wellness.

• Program can be completed in one year or multiple years.
• online for certified physical education teachers
• on-campus master's plus initial teacher certification
• WRGP eligible
• Students can enter fall, spring or summer semester.
• Students are involved in problem-based research addressing physical activity pedagogy in their setting.

News and Features

Movement Sciences

Meet our Faculty

Physical Education

Stand out. In school or out.

Create what’s true to you, whatever you’re into. Save over 60% on the Creative Cloud All Apps plan if you’re a student.

          See terms

Dream Bigger.

Quickly create, add to, remove or replace images with simple text prompts right in Adobe Photoshop with Generative Fill.  Learn more

Make spectacular images. Get noticed.

Create and edit photos, stories, icons, infographics, and more for social media, promotion, or hobbies with Adobe Photoshop. Learn more

Always. Be. Collaborating.

Adobe Acrobat helps you cruise through your projects. Edit, organize, and share PDFs, notes, and illustrations. Learn more

From merch to memes, artboards to blogs.

Whether your projects are for school, work, or fun, Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator will help you knock them out of the park. Learn more about Illustrator

See all Creative Cloud mobile and desktop apps

Inspiration can’t wait till you get home.

Try these free mobile apps today..

Lightroom for mobile

Grab one or more photos and make quick social posts, snaps, tweets, and memes that get noticed — while you’re still out and about. Learn more

Adobe Express

Quickly and easily make standout content from thousands of beautiful templates.  Learn more

Acrobat Reader

Reliably view, print, sign, and comment on PDFs no matter where you are. Learn more

Explore Adobe’s creativity and design apps.

Edit and combine images for posters, flyers, social collages, and websites.

Acrobat Pro

Create, comment, highlight, share and do more with your PDFs.

Illustrator

Create graphics and illustrations like logos, infographics, and t-shirt designs.

Premiere Pro

Create pro-quality videos like documentaries, short films, and more.

Design page layouts for print and digital campus flyers, magazines, and eBooks.

Edit and share photos anywhere for social posts, club websites, and blogs.

After Effects

Cinematic visual effects and motion graphics.

Photoshop Express

Edit and transform your photos on the go.

Easily make standout graphics, photos and more in no time.

Adobe Fresco

Rediscover the joy of drawing and painting anywhere.

Substance 3D Collection apps for students

Model, texture, and render 3D assets and scenes. Free for eligible students and teachers. Not included in Creative Cloud All Apps.  See what’s included.

Design and share interactive experiences in augmented reality.

See all Creative Cloud desktop and mobile apps

To stand out, jump in.

Try creative cloud today..

After your free trial, your Adobe Creative Cloud membership is only         .  See terms

Purchase by phone:  800-585-0774

Student eligibility

Terms and conditions

Terms and Conditions

Students and teachers.

Introductory Pricing Terms and Conditions

    Creative Cloud Introductory Pricing

Eligible students 13 and older and teachers can purchase an annual membership to Adobe® Creative Cloud™ for a reduced price of     for the first year. At the end of your offer term, your subscription will be automatically billed at the standard subscription rate, currently at    (plus applicable taxes), unless you elect to change or cancel your subscription. This pricing is valid for purchases of an annual plan, which requires a 12-month contract. This pricing is available for first time membership only and limited to eligible education customers who purchase directly from the Adobe Store or by calling Adobe Sales. This pricing is not available to OEM, commercial or volume licensing customers. This pricing is limited to one (1) purchase of one (1) Creative Cloud annual membership per customer. Offer may not be assigned, exchanged, sold, transferred, or combined with any other discount or offer, or redeemed for cash or other goods and services. This pricing is subject to change without notice. Void where prohibited, taxed or restricted by law.

One Year Prepaid Creative Cloud Introductory Pricing

Eligible students 13 and older and teachers can purchase an annual membership to Adobe® Creative Cloud™ for a reduced price of     for the first year. At the end of your offer term, your subscription will be automatically billed at the standard subscription rate, currently at     (plus applicable taxes), unless you elect to change or cancel your subscription. This pricing is available for first time membership only and limited to eligible education customers who purchase directly from the Adobe Store or by calling Adobe Sales. This pricing is not available to OEM, commercial or volume licensing customers. This pricing is limited to one (1) purchase of one (1) Creative Cloud annual membership per customer. Offer may not be assigned, exchanged, sold, transferred, or combined with any other discount or offer, or redeemed for cash or other goods and services. This pricing is subject to change without notice. Void where prohibited, taxed or restricted by law.

What's included

Language Navigation

Substance 3D Collection for students

Substance 3D apps for students

What’s included:

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Children (Basel)
• PMC10297587

Sports Games and Motor Skills in Children, Adolescents and Youth with Intellectual Disabilities

Nikola aksović.

1 Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Priština, 38218 Priština, Serbia; moc.liamg@pn78rikok

Tatiana Dobrescu

2 Department of Physical Education and Sport Performance, Vasile Alecsandri University, 600115 Bacau, Romania; [email protected]

Saša Bubanj

3 Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Niš, 18000 Niš, Serbia; moc.liamg@elasjnabub (S.B.); [email protected] (M.K.); moc.liamg@9moknedar (M.R.); moc.liamg@cikrunpilif (F.N.)

4 Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia; moc.liamg@72lokined

Bojan Bjelica

5 Faculty of Physical Education and Sports, University of East Sarajevo, 71126 Lukavica, Bosnia and Herzegovina; moc.liamg@acilejbpiv (B.B.); moc.liamg@31ineleznalim (M.Z.)

Filip Milanović

6 University Children’s Hospital, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia

Miodrag Kocić

Milan zelenović, marko radenković, filip nurkić, dejan nikolić, jovan marković.

7 Faculty of Pedagogy, University of Kragujevac, 31000 Užice, Serbia; [email protected]

Milena Tomović

8 Sports Medicine Laboratory, Department of Physical Education and Sports Science, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece; moc.liamg@38civomotanelim

Ana-Maria Vulpe

(1) Background: Sports games are one of the best ways of engaging in physical activity for individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) and Down syndrome (DS). This systematic review of the current literature aims to identify and sum relevant data on motor skills and clarify whether there are positive effects of sports programs in motor skills games in children, adolescents, and youth with ID and DS. (2) Methods: The systematic review of the papers was carried out following the methodological guidelines and by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) consensus. The following electronic databases were researched: PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and ERIC from 2001 to 2023. (3) Results: The basketball test battery can be used to improve and monitor basketball training. Basketball players with lower levels of ID achieved better results, especially those with disabilities of the II and III degrees. Futsal has a positive impact on the coordination, and the differences between the test results of the vertical jump with and without an arm swing, that can be seen indirectly as a coordination factor, were statistically significant. (4) Conclusions: Basketball is recommended as an effective and practical rehabilitation program for children, adolescents, and youth with ID and DS. Futsal is an interesting and helpful activity for individuals with ID as well.

1. Introduction

An intellectual disability (ID) is defined as a condition where the individual is physically impaired or physiologically underdeveloped, which is especially characterized by the disruption of those abilities during the developmental period and contributes to a general level of intelligence and speech and cognitive, motor, and social abilities [ 1 ]. ID is generally defined as having an IQ score below 70, along with limitations in adaptive functioning (i.e., the ability to learn and apply skills, solve problems, and adapt to new situations), which can significantly impact an individual’s daily living skills, communication abilities, and social interactions. There are different levels of intellectual disability, ranging from mild, moderate, severe to profound, depending on the degree of impairment in cognitive and adaptive functioning [ 2 ]. Numerous diseases and conditions are associated with various degrees of intellectual disabilities. Within the term ID, there are several conditions, such as Down syndrome (DS), Turner syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome, phenylketonuria, fragile X-chromosome syndrome, Rett syndrome, autism, childhood cerebral palsy, and many others [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Approximately 2% of children in the general population have some degree of ID, while this percentage is reported to be up to 25% among children with cerebral palsy [ 11 ]. In children with epilepsy, ID occurs in around 9% of cases [ 12 ].

ID is a condition of delayed or incompletely developed mental abilities until the age of 18, whether caused by hereditary factors or due to illness [ 13 ]. The developmental characteristics of this population are common in all spheres and primarily expressed in cognition deficits, reduced levels of adaptive behavior, and slow motor development [ 14 , 15 ]. As a result, motor test results of adolescents with an ID attending a special high school lag three to four years behind in comparison to adolescents attending a regular high school [ 16 ]. Children with ID have low levels of physical fitness relative to their peers without ID. Coordination, balance, endurance, muscle power, explosive power, and sprinting are particularly important for the general motor behavior in individuals with ID [ 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Numerous studies indicate that children with ID have low levels of cardiovascular endurance, muscle strength, muscular endurance, speed, balance, and agility [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Rimmer [ 25 ] indicated the problem of an increase in physical inactivity and obesity in individuals with ID, recommending professionals begin with various health promotions, including greater involvement in physical activity. Additionally, it should be said that children with ID are socially challenged and want to isolate themselves, which may be a contributor to their physical inactivity [ 21 ]. Thus, physical activity in children and adolescents with ID leads to motor skills development, and one of the best-organized activities is sports games.

Sports games are one of the best ways of engaging children and adolescents with disabilities in physical activity, because sports are considered a product of physical and cognitive potential [ 26 , 27 ]. Physical potential includes physical fitness, while cognitive potential includes intelligence, as a multidimensional area, including reasoning, planning, decision-making, rapid learning, and learning from experience [ 28 ]. Sport helps athletes with ID to increase their self-confidence and play a key role in socializing and collaborating with people with some degree of illness [ 29 ]. As far as team sports are concerned, basketball is very popular in sports and physical education programs because it implies different physical capacities and significantly contributes to the development of these individuals [ 30 ], especially for children and individuals with ID [ 31 , 32 ]. Basketball is a very popular activity and sports education program for people with ID because it implies motor skills [ 32 ] such as running, jumping, kicking, passing, and running the ball [ 29 , 31 ].

DS is a congenital autosomal anomaly that occurs due to a trisomy of chromosome 21 [ 33 , 34 ]. Numerous studies have indicated that muscle strength is considered a significant fitness parameter in individuals with DS [ 6 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. Carmeli and associates [ 38 ] compared the muscle strength of individuals with ID and those with DS and indicated that people with DS and some other IDs have a lower level of muscle strength than individuals with only an ID. The muscular strength of the upper and lower extremities of individuals with DS is 50% less than in individuals with ID but without DS [ 36 , 39 , 40 ]. Muscle strength, endurance, and dynamic stability in individuals with DS are considered to be significant factors in a good quality of life and functional independence [ 41 ]. Some studies suggested that progressive resistance training can be used to develop muscle strength in children, adolescents, and individuals with DS [ 40 , 42 , 43 ], while other studies [ 44 , 45 ] indicated that this training method increases the risk of disabilities.

This review aims to present the effects of sports games on motor skills in children, adolescents, and youth with ID and DS. Thus, this systematic review of the current literature aims to identify and sum the relevant data on motor skills and clarify whether there are positive effects of sports programs in motor skills games in children, adolescents, and youth with ID and DS.

2. Materials and Methods

The systematic review of the papers was carried out following the methodological guidelines and by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) consensus [ 46 ].

2.1. Search Strategy

The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and ERIC from 2001 to 2023. The search was carried out based on a combination of keywords: intellectual disabilities, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, sports games, effect, basketball, football, soccer, futsal, and handball.

All headlines and abstracts were reviewed for the potential papers, which were included in the systematic review. The lists of previous and original research were also reviewed. The relevant studies were obtained when the studies completed the criteria for inclusion after detailed research. Wherever it was possible, the research strategy was modified and adapted to each database research to increase the sensitivity of this review paper.

2.2. Criteria for Inclusion

Type of study:

• Randomized controlled and non-randomized studies were examined and included in further analysis, while uncontrolled studies were excluded. This review included studies written in Serbian and English.

The sample of participants:

• Study participants included athletes (amateurs/professionals), children, adolescents, and youth, with and without ID, of both genders and any age (no restriction), regardless of the degree of disability.

Type of intervention:

• Studies that determine the effects of sports game programs on individuals with ID were examined regardless of the length and type of study.

The type of obtained results:

• The preliminary results obtained for our systematic review were motor skills after the training program. Studies were included if the impact of sports game programs on the physical fitness abilities of athletes was demonstrated. Secondary results, which are primarily related to the systematic review of papers, consisted of the following variables: psychosocial characteristics, anthropometric characteristics, heart rate, blood pressure, obesity, and cholesterol.

2.3. Criteria for Exclusion

• Studies written in a language which was not Serbian or English;
• Duplicates;
• Conference abstracts.

2.4. Data Extraction

The collected research projects used for this review are shown in Table. For each study, the following parameters were shown: (1) study characteristics including author (s) and year of publication; (2) information about participants such as sample size, gender, age, and groups; (3) aim of the study; (4) duration of the training program; (5) key findings of the studies obtained by the authors.

One hundred and two articles were identified from the database search, with an additional six articles identified through reference lists. After removing duplicates and eliminating articles based on title and abstract screening, forty-six studies remained. An evaluation of the remaining forty-six studies was conducted independently by two researchers. Following the final screening process, seventeen studies were included in the systematic review ( Table 1 ). Details of the study selection process are presented in Figure 1 .

Flow chart diagram of the study selection.

3.1. Characteristics of Participants with Intellectual Disabilities

Ten studies included both male and female participants [ 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 ].

Five studies included male participants [ 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 ]. The gender of the participants was not specified in two studies [ 32 , 62 ].

Most studies had adolescents [ 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 ], youth [ 47 , 54 ], children [ 32 ], children and adolescents [ 55 ], adolescents and adults [ 48 ] or children, and adolescents and adults [ 62 ].

3.2. Characteristics of the Studies

The duration of the training program ranged from four weeks to four years. The most common duration of the training program was eight weeks (seven studies) [ 48 , 49 , 50 , 52 , 53 , 58 , 60 ], six months (three studies) [ 47 , 54 , 62 ], eight months (two studies) [ 59 , 63 ], thirty-three (one study) [ 56 ], seven months (one study) [ 57 ], twelve weeks (one study) [ 55 ], five weeks (one study) [ 32 ] and four weeks (one study) [ 51 ].

The most frequent duration of the training sessions was two hours per week (4 × 30 min) [ 49 , 50 , 53 ], (2 × 60 min) [ 52 , 57 ], and four and a half hours per week (3 × 90 min) [ 55 , 56 , 58 , 60 ], then three hours per week (3 × 60 min) [ 54 , 63 ], four hours per week (4 × 60 min) [ 59 ], one hour and a half per week (1 × 90 min) [ 48 ], and one hour per week (2 × 30 min) [ 32 ].

The duration or length of the experimental program and training sessions were not stated in one study [ 61 ].

Regarding sports game programs, basketball was the most commonly represented program [ 32 , 47 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 53 , 57 , 59 , 61 ]. Some studies had basketball players with ID as their sample [ 47 , 59 ]. Studies Özer and associates [ 63 ] and Baran and associates [ 60 ] identified the effects of Special Olympics (SO) Unified Sports Soccer (UNS) programs on physical fitness, football skills, and psychosocial characteristics of anthropometry in children athletes with and without ID, while the study of Niemeier and associates [ 48 ] evaluated the effectiveness of SO Fit 5 health program in improving health measures for individuals with ID. Maano and associates [ 57 ] aimed to analyze the effects of alternative sports competitions. Ilkim and Akyol [ 55 ] assessed the effects of a table tennis exercise program on reaction times in children with DS. Naczk and associates [ 56 ] estimated the influence of a thirty-three-week swimming program on aerobic capacity, physical fitness, level of adjustment and function in water, and body composition of adolescents with DS. Further details of the included studies are shown in Table 1 .

The systematic review and characteristics of the included studies.

Note: EXP, Experimental group; CON, Control group; ID, Intellectual Disability; IDID, Intellectual Disability; DS, Down syndrome; PE, Physical Education; SO, Special Olympics; UNS, Unified Sports Soccer; SSGs, Small-sided games; FAS, Friendship Activity Scale; BH, Ball handling; PS, Passing scores; R, Reception; SS, Shooting scores; LST, Leg strength test; WST, Wall squat test; DHGS, Dominant hand grip strength; NDHGS, Non-dominant hand grip strength; VJ, Vertical jump; VJAS, Vertical jump with arms swing; SBJ, Standing broad jump; SLJ, Standing long jump; SONL, Standing on one leg; MPUS, Push-ups; AS, Aquatic skills; SAS, Static arm strength; TS, Trunk strength; EFS, Endurance/functional strength; FBT, Flamingo balance test; RT, Reaction time; MSIT, Sit-and-reach; MHTG, Hand tapping; SOL, Speed of limb; PCR, 16m Pacer; SHD, One-minute single-handed dribble; OMS, One-minute shoot, MTDA, Throwing darts; AC, Athletic competence; SA, Social acceptance; PA, Physical appearance; GSW, General self-worth; FAH, Flexed-arm hang; MSAR, Sit and reach; PQ, Psychological questionnaires; MCUP, Modified curl-up RB, Receiving ball; BMI, Body Mass Index; BM, Body mass; BF, Percent body fat; H, Height; W, Weight; WH, Weight-height ratio, WC, Waist circumference; HC, Hip circumference; DP, Diastolic pressure; AP, Average arterial pressure; HR, Heart rate; RHR, Resting heart rate; 6MWT, Six-minute walk test; HC, Half court; FC, Full court;; IM, Initial measurement; FM, Final measurement; ES, Effect size; NC, No statistically significant changes p > 0.05; ±, Mean and standard deviation; ↑, Statistically significant increase p < 0.05; ↑↑, Statistically significant increase p < 0.01; ↓, Statistically significant decrease p < 0.05.

4. Discussion

The primary purpose of this review was to determine the effects of sports game programs on motor skills in children, adolescents, and youth with intellectual disabilities and DS. A review of research to date has found that sports game programs, particularly basketball, represent a safe and reliable way to exercise, and an effective and practical rehabilitation program for individuals with ID. Additionally, the college football program has a positive impact on the speed of concentric contraction of the leg-extensor muscles, and therefore, on the reflective impulse.

Studies consisting of basketball players clearly show the positive effects of basketball programs on the motor skills of children, adolescents, and youth with ID. The basketball test battery can be used to improve and monitor basketball training [ 32 , 47 , 59 , 64 ]. Basketball training has contributed to positive changes in the final measurement regarding improved ball handling (BH), reception (R), as well as passing scores (PS) and shooting scores (SS). Mohammadi and associates [ 32 ] clearly showed that the study participants who were given easy goals improved their free-throw shooting performance in basketball, compared to a group who were given difficult goals and did not improve their performance.

The results indicate that basketball players with lower levels of ID achieve better results, as the best results were obtained in basketball players with level II and III of ID [ 29 , 47 ], and significant differences were obtained between level categories (I, II, III) of ID in all fields [ 59 ]. Additionally, the explosive power of the legs contributes the most to the increase in ID levels II and III [ 63 ].

Studies consisting of students, adolescents, and adults also show the benefit of basketball programs on motor abilities [ 49 , 51 ] and muscular strength of the upper and lower extremities in people with ID [ 64 ]. However, Stanišić and associates [ 49 ] indicate that an eight-week specially designed basketball program contributes to an increase in specifically motor skills of adolescents but not physical fitness, and the key reason is probably the short time spent in training.

The study of Tsimaras and associates [ 64 ], whose training program lasted four years, indicated differences in all tests between males with and without ID. The experimental group that participated in the four-year basketball training had higher absolute and relative values of the extensors and flexors of both knees, while the experimental group that exercised recreationally had greater antagonistic activity of the extensors and flexors of both knees. It should be emphasized that both experimental groups have higher antagonistic activity of the extensors and flexors of both knees than the control group. Hemayattalab and Movahedi [ 65 ] examined the effect of five different variations of physical exercise on learning in adolescents with ID regarding throwing free throws. They indicated that it is cognitively related to physical exercise and significantly contributes to the success of free throws in people with ID. A specially adapted basketball training program also has a positive effect on the physical fitness of basketball players, especially in the term of heart rate (HR) and a six-minute walking test (6MWT), but without changes in anthropometric dimensions, thus providing limited information on the effects; these results support the design of a full-scale experiment on this topic [ 50 ]. Therefore, basketball is a safe and reliable way to exercise for people with ID because it implies sustained and continuous physical activity and is therefore recommended as an effective and practical rehabilitation program for individuals with ID. In addition, the futsal program implemented with individuals with ID contributed to improving the results of the vertical jump test, which is an indicator of the explosive power of the legs, but without statistically significant differences. However, that experimental program had an even more significant impact on the coordination, and the differences between the test results—a vertical jump with and without an arm swing, which can be seen indirectly as a coordination factor—were statistically significant. The results of this research recommended futsal as a very interesting and helpful activity for individuals with ID [ 62 ].

Studies conducted by the SO UNS program are helpful for young people with and without ID, as it reduces behavior problems, social competence (SC), and the Friendship Activity Scale (FAS) in conjunction with physical education classes; in addition, it improves the relationship of youth without ID to participants with ID [ 63 ]. Baran and associates [ 60 ] point to the importance of the UNS program eight weeks after full-time physical education, which shows significantly higher physical fitness and soccer skills in males with and without ID compared to a control group that did not participate in any sport after regular physical education classes. It should be emphasized that there were no differences in behavior and interaction between groups and that the experimental group that had basketball SO training and school competitions performed better than the experimental group that had SO running training and school competitions [ 57 ]. Thus, SO training and the UNS program successfully increase the fitness abilities and performing abilities of football skills and reduce behavioral problems, SC, and FAS. The positive effect of SO Fit 5 training on resting heart rate (RHR), blood pressure, and BMI in adolescents and adults with ID was confirmed in the study [ 48 ].

In addition to those with ID, those included were also individuals with DS, which will be explained in more detail in the following section. Cai and Baek [ 54 ] obtained results that clearly show the positive effects of a 24-week basketball program on improving body composition, flexibility, balance, aerobic capacity, and basketball functional abilities in individuals with DS. The positive effects of the basketball program were confirmed by Aydogan and Demirok [ 61 ], who investigated the effects of basic basketball movements on the effectiveness and persistence of video modeling lessons. The results of the study showed that teaching by video models is an effective method in providing basic basketball skills to adolescents with DS.

It should be emphasized that no additional studies have been found that examine the effects of (collective) sports games programs on motor skills in children, adolescents, and youth with DS. On the other hand, there are studies that confirm the positive effects of swimming and table tennis programs in children and adolescents with DS. Ilkim and Akyol [ 55 ] showed that the reaction times of children with DS who participated in table tennis activities were better in comparison to the control group. Naczk and associates [ 56 ] indicated that a thirty-three-week swimming program has positive effects on muscle strength, aquatic skills, and health status in adolescents with DS.

Ince [ 52 ] emphasized that an eight-week BH program contributed to a statistically significant increase in upper and lower extremity muscle strength in adolescents and adults with DS as well as an increased leg strength test (LST), wall squat test (WST), and dominant handgrip strength (DHGS); however, there were no changes in the vertical jump (VJ), standing broad jump (SBJ) and non-dominant handgrip strength tests (NDHGS). It is interesting to note that there were no differences between groups, although the control group did not participate in any of the activities. In addition to the positive effect on motor skills or muscle strength, the positive effect of twelve-week training on anthropometric characteristics, body composition, blood fat, and blood pressure in individuals with and without DS did not contribute to the reduction in low-density lipoproteincholesterol [ 66 ]. Other studies confirm the positive effects of exercise programs on muscle strength in children with DS [ 67 , 68 ]. Therefore, muscle strength is a significant fitness parameter that needs to be developed, which means that further studies are needed to find possible factors that would contribute to the increase in muscle strength in children, adolescents, and youth with DS.

5. Conclusions

This is the first review study to investigate whether there are positive effects of sports game programs on motor skills in individuals with ID and DS. Basketball is recommended as an effective and practical rehabilitation program for people with ID and DS, including fitness parameters, motor skills, and interaction aspects. Basketball players with lower levels of ID achieve better results, especially those with ID II and III degrees, especially regarding better fitness abilities. However, some disagreements can certainly be attributed to the individual characteristics of the sample of participants. SO training and the UNS program successfully increase the fitness abilities and performance of soccer skills, reduce behavioral problems, SC, and FAS, which once again, confirmed the importance of basketball and futsal sports games, either in young people with or without ID. In individuals with DS, training programs contribute to a statistically significant increase in upper and lower extremity muscle strength; additionally, positive effects on anthropometric characteristics, body composition, blood fat, and blood pressure should be emphasized. Further studies are needed to investigate the possible factors that would contribute to the increase in muscle strength in those people.

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.A., S.B., B.B., F.M. and M.T.; methodology, D.N.; validation, S.B., M.K., D.N., J.M. and M.T.; formal analysis, D.N.; investigation, N.A., T.D., S.B., B.B., F.M., M.K., M.Z., M.R., D.N., J.M., M.T. and A.-M.V.; data curation, S.B., M.K., M.Z. and M.T.; writing—original draft preparation, N.A., M.K., M.Z., J.M. and M.R.; writing—review and editing, N.A., T.D., S.B., B.B., M.K., M.Z., M.R., F.N. and J.M.; visualization, T.D., F.M., M.Z., M.R., F.N., M.T. and A.-M.V.; supervision, N.A., T.D., S.B., B.B., F.M., M.K., F.N., D.N., J.M. and A.-M.V.; project administration, N.A., T.D. and A.-M.V.; funding acquisition, T.D. and A.-M.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.