Poor training may be hampering physical activity boost in primary schools: study

Poor professional development may be hampering a £320m campaign to improve the physical health of children in primary schools, a study suggests.

The government commits to funding (the physical education and sport premium for primary schools) schools in England to help their pupils to be physically active.

Schools choose how to spend their allocation of funds, and a portion is expected to be spent on training teachers.

A Cambridge University study indicated that many school interventions to promote physical activity and reduce sedentary behavior have been implemented around the world.

These “have largely failed to change student behaviour”, according to the research, and the team looked to staff training for possible answers.

They found that key ingredients were often missing from the training teachers received.

In a review of trials covering data from hundreds of schools internationally, many of them in the UK, the researchers found little evidence, for example, that teachers had clear goals to work towards.

They also found little evidence that teachers received regular feedback on their practice, or were provided with resources that prompted the integration of the program into the school day.

The study suggests that these deficiencies make it significantly less likely that the health promotion activities in which they are being trained will be sustained or have a positive impact on the students.

Mairead Ryan, a PhD researcher at the Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit and the University of Cambridge School of Education, said schools needed clearer guidance on how to invest in the right training.

“This funding can have a tremendous impact on children’s health and education, but schools could be better supported to identify and deliver effective professional development for their staff,” he said.

“Our findings highlight features in professional development programs that school staff may look for and that providers should include.”

Ms. Ryan and her team reviewed staff training documented in reports of 51 randomized controlled trials of new physical activity programs in schools.

Eight of these trials were conducted in Great Britain, eight in the United States, 10 in Australia, and the remainder in 16 other countries.

Collectively, they covered tens of thousands of students in hundreds of schools: on average, each trial collected evidence from 14 schools and 800 students.

“Professional development activities that have lasting impact look like ongoing conversations between providers and teachers,” said Ms. Ryan.

“Instead, what we generally saw in these shows were isolated instructional events.”

According to the research, effective training tended to involve a clear demonstration of the activity teachers were to implement, opportunities to practice it, clear objectives, allotted planning time, and routine feedback.

He also generally ensured that resources, such as sports equipment, were on hand to further integrate the program into the school day.

However, these features were absent from most of the training programs the researchers reviewed.

Professor Riikka Hofmann, from the Cambridge School of Education, said: “Quality professional development is often overlooked in the context of primary physical education and schools should be supported to use this funding to invest in a reliable professional development with proven features.

“Students bear the costs of this, particularly those with limited opportunities to be active outside of school.”

Dr Esther van Sluijs, Program Leader at the Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit, said: “Regular physical activity is important for children’s physical health, as well as for their well-being and academic performance.

“Our findings are especially timely given that this additional funding is not guaranteed for years to come.”

The research is published in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.