ontario s daily physical activity policy exploring the
TRANSCRIPT
ONTARIO’S DAILY PHYSICAL ACTIVITY POLICY:
EXPLORING THE “HOW” AND “WHY” OF IMPLEMENTATION BY TEACHERS
by
Laura Zeglen
A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts
Graduate Department of Leadership, Higher and Adult Education
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
University of Toronto
© Copyright by Laura Zeglen (2013)
ii
ONTARIO’S DAILY PHYSICAL ACTIVITY POLICY:
EXPLORING THE “HOW” AND “WHY” OF IMPLEMENTATION BY TEACHERS Master of Arts, 2013
Laura Zeglen
Leadership, Higher and Adult Education
University of Toronto
ABSTRACT
Daily Physical Activity (DPA) is one component of Ontario’s Healthy Schools strategy. This
case study of two schools in geographically and culturally diverse contexts explores DPA
implementation according to the focus areas of the Ministry of Education. The conceptual
framework of Clune (1990) was employed to explore implementation according to three
perspectives, revealing disconnects between the policy mandate and educational contexts, as well
as potential improvements to the current policy. It was found that time constraints are the most
prominent barrier to DPA implementation, and that the primary focus of DPA for educators is
often provision, but not quality, of daily physical activities. It was also found that teachers’
perceptions of policy importance are a stronger predictor of implementation than a supportive
school administration, given there is no conflict with other school policies. Recommendations for
policy revisions are provided based on the findings.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This dissertation represents a culmination of many influences; from its original
conception to this final product, it has shifted forms many times. Previous to beginning my
Masters studies at OISE, I was fortunate to have worked in school-based health promotion
research in the Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, under the supportive guidance of
Dr. Guy Faulkner. My work there was the stimulus for undertaking this particular topic for my
Masters thesis. I envisioned that this work would represent a province-wide scan of
implementation of the Daily Physical Activity policy, which could be used to ascertain where
educators were falling short and what they could be doing better to improve health outcomes for
students.
However, upon commencing my studies at OISE, I was introduced to the notion of
different epistemological points of view, and I came to recognize that my initial conceptual
framework for this work represented a strictly positivistic stance. While education-based health
policies do have the potential to affect large-scale population health outcomes, there is much
more to evaluating policy than whether it is being adhered to or not. I decided I wanted to delve
into the different ways that educators perceived and navigated this policy, rather than simply
“measuring” their implementation according to the Ministry definition. This necessitated a more
in-depth study design, which would focus on far fewer schools. (I believe my original intent was
to include somewhere around twenty schools; this was pared down to ten, and then to four, and
eventually to just two schools!) With the well-informed guidance of my thesis supervisor, Dr.
Carol Campbell, I was able to construct a study design suited to these new aims. I also extend my
appreciation to my thesis advisory committee member, Dr. Nina Bascia, for providing the
literature that led to the development of my conceptual framework.
iv
Yet, this degree has been about more than just completing this thesis. It has been a time
of immense personal growth, and change, and there have been many people who have been
instrumental to my success throughout this process. Firstly, a special thanks to my husband
Brendan, who always believed in my abilities and supported me in many ways throughout this
degree. Thank you to my teachers and classmates at OISE, with whom I had many insightful
discussions, and who listened and gave feedback on the various revisions and changes to my
study design. In particular, thanks to Nicole for keeping in touch through what may have
otherwise been a very lonely process of writing! Thanks to my colleagues and friends in Dr.
Faulkner’s lab; particularly Agnes, for letting me share my uncertainties and always lending an
empathetic ear. Thank you to the fellows at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, where I
completed a collaborative fellowship program in public health policy; especially Cindy, for all
the laughs we shared in trying to wrap our heads around material that was far outside of our own
expertise, and for reaching out to work collaboratively on a research paper. Finally, I extend my
deepest gratitude to my amazing family; in particular, to my sister Carolyn, for lending her spare
room as a space to focus on my writing during a particularly tumultuous period of this degree.
Carolyn, your steadfast love and support were so crucial in keeping me focused on completing
this important piece of work!
Getting to this point has been an incredible journey, with many friendships made and
strengthened throughout, many lessons learned, and many new perspectives gained. I sincerely
look forward to what lies ahead, in this next chapter of my life.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................ iii
List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. vii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................. vii
List of Appendices ..................................................................................................................................... viii
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Preamble ....................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background of the Healthy Schools Strategy in Ontario .............................................................. 3
1.3 Ontario’s Daily Physical Activity Policy ..................................................................................... 6
Chapter 2: Review of Literature.................................................................................................................... 8
2.1 The Need for Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 8
2.2 What is known about the implementation and outcomes of DPA in Ontario? ........................... 10
2.2.1 Study 1: Outcome evaluation in the ideal case (London Region, Ontario) ......................... 10
2.2.2 Study 2: Process Evaluation of Implementation (Sudbury, Ontario) .................................. 11
2.2.3 Study 3: Process and Outcome evaluation (Toronto, Ontario) ........................................... 12
2.2.4 Study 4: Process Evaluation and Perceptions of DPA (London Region, Ontario) ............. 13
2.3 A New Conceptual Framework for Evaluating DPA .................................................................. 14
Chapter 3: Research Design and Methodology ........................................................................................... 18
3.1 The Case Study Approach........................................................................................................... 18
3.2 Components of the Case Study ................................................................................................... 20
3.2 .1 Surveys ................................................................................................................................ 21
3.2.2 Documentary Analysis ....................................................................................................... 23
3.2.3 Observations ...................................................................................................................... 26
3.2.4 Interviews .......................................................................................................................... 28
3.3 Data Organization and Analysis ............................................................................................... 29
3.3.1 Context Data ....................................................................................................................... 30
3.3.2 Implementation Data ........................................................................................................... 32
3.4 Methodological limitations ......................................................................................................... 34
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion of the Findings ..................................................................................... 36
4.1 Data Sources ............................................................................................................................... 36
4.2 Basic Demographic Information ................................................................................................. 37
4.3 The Context: Northern School .................................................................................................... 38
vi
4.3.1 Physical elements: What facilities are available for physical activity?.............................. 38
4.3.2 Economic elements: What financial barriers and/or facilitators exist for DPA? ................ 40
4.3.3 Policy elements: What rules and regulations affect opportunities for physical activity?.... 43
4.3.4 Socio-cultural elements: What are the attitudes, beliefs, values and cultural norms toward
DPA and physical activity in general? ................................................................................................ 47
4.4 The Context: GTA Suburban School .......................................................................................... 54
4.4.1 Physical elements: What facilities are available for physical activity?............................... 54
4.4.2 Economic elements: What financial barriers and/or facilitators exist for DPA? ................ 57
4.4.3 Policy elements: What rules and regulations affect opportunities for physical activity?.... 59
4.4.4 Socio-cultural elements: What are the attitudes, beliefs, values and cultural norms toward
DPA and physical activity in general? ................................................................................................ 62
4.5 Comparative Summary of the Two School contexts ................................................................... 67
4.6 Implementation .......................................................................................................................... 73
4.6.1 The School as Policy Mediator ........................................................................................... 73
4.6.2 The School as Policy Critic and the School as Policy Constructor ..................................... 83
4.6.3 Summary and Conclusions ................................................................................................ 100
Chapter 5: DPA Policy Analysis, Evaluation and Recommendations ...................................................... 104
5.1 DPA Policy Analysis ................................................................................................................ 104
5.2 DPA Policy Evaluation ............................................................................................................. 108
5.2.1 Grounded Theory of DPA Implementation ....................................................................... 109
5.2.2 Is the Ministry Framework Measuring the Right Things? ................................................ 112
5.2.3 Implications and Recommendations for the DPA Policy.................................................. 114
5.3 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 118
References ................................................................................................................................................. 119
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................ 125
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Demographics of the Northern and GTA Suburban School
Table 2: Summary of elements of the physical environment
Table 3: Summary of elements of the economic environment
Table 4: Summary of elements of the policy environment
Table 5: Summary of elements of the socio-cultural environment
Table 6: Summary of administrative leadership for DPA
Table 7: Summary of scheduling practices for DPA
Table 8: Summary of student leadership for DPA
Table 9: Summary of quality of daily physical activities
Table 10: Summary of resources for DPA
Table 11: Summary of partnership development around DPA
Table 12: Summary of stages of DPA implementation
Table 13: Teacher definitions of DPA policy
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Modified ANGELO framework for organizing contextual data
Figure 2: Data organization tool for DPA implementation
Figure 3: Revised School Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical Activity
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Participant Information Package
Appendix 2a: Healthy School Planner survey tool- Foundational Module
Appendix 2b: Healthy School Planner survey tool- Physical Activity Module
Appendix 3: Teacher Survey tool
Appendix 4: Ministry of Education School Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical
Activity
Appendix 5: System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time (SOFIT)
Appendix 6a: Semi-structured interview guide for Teachers
Appendix 6b: Semi-structured interview guide for Principals
Appendix 7: Analysis Grid for Elements Linked to Obesity (ANGELO) framework
Appendix 8: Modified ANGELO Framework for School Context, Compiled Data- Northern
School
Appendix 9: Modified ANGELO Framework for School Context, Compiled Data- GTA
Suburban School
Appendix 10: DPA Policy Implementation Framework, Compiled Data- Northern School
Appendix 11: DPA Policy Implementation Framework, Compiled Data- GTA Suburban School
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 PREAMBLE
In the past decade, there has been a wealth of research attributing high rates of childhood
obesity to inactivity, which in turn has been shown to increase the likelihood of chronic health
conditions in adulthood (e.g. Ball & McCargar, 2003; Janssen & Leblanc, 2010; Colley et al,
2011). In this context, Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer called for action from all levels of
government to address the issue of widespread overweight and obesity (Ministry of Health and
Long-Term Care, 2004). As part of the response to this call to action, Ontario’s Ministry of
Education mandated Program/Policy Memorandum 138: Daily Physical Activity (DPA) in
October of 2005 (Ministry of Education [MOE], 2005a). The DPA policy mandates that
elementary schools focus on curricular physical activity as part of the daily schedule, to address
the insufficient activity levels obtained by a majority of children across the province (Active
Healthy Kids Canada, 2011). In line with the provincial government’s commitment to supporting
a healthy school environment, the DPA policy aims to provide important opportunities for
children to be active on a regular basis.
A recent report outlining recommended public health interventions for the province of
Ontario proposed an evaluation of this education-based health policy (Cancer Care Ontario &
Public Health Ontario, 2012). However, as with any policy, evaluating the efficacy of DPA is
complex. Weiss (1998) describes how evaluators must know “what the program (policy) actually
does” and cannot measure outcomes based on assumptions that the policy is “doing what its
operators (say) it (is) doing” (p. 9; parentheses mark change from past tense). If DPA policy
outcomes are to be evaluated, it is vital to first gain a clear picture of how the policy is
operationalized at the school level, and why this is so.
2
Therefore, the research questions at hand are: “how is the DPA policy implemented
within different school contexts, and why is it implemented the way it is?” By addressing these
questions, the stage will be set for an evaluation of the policy itself and for identifying potential
improvements to the policy. These questions will be considered at the school level, and will be
centred around policy considerations outlined by the Ministry of Education (2006) for school
administrators.
Literature around education reform (e.g. Levin, 2008; Osborn & McNess, 2005)
consistently recognizes the importance of context in understanding teachers' implementation of
policies. Thus, to investigate how DPA is implemented and why this is so, an in-depth
exploration of the educational context- including aspects of the physical, economic, policy and
sociocultural environments operating within schools- is salient. To study policy implementation
as separate from the contexts in which it takes place would miss many of the key influences, and
hence, yield a relatively shallow understanding of why the policy might be working or why it
might not be.
This dissertation is divided into five chapters. Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the
DPA policy and the call to evaluate it, followed by a brief overview of the Healthy Schools
strategy in Ontario, how DPA fits within this strategy, and a more detailed description of the
DPA policy itself. Chapter 2 will provide a review of existing DPA policy evaluation literature,
and describe this study's conceptual framework. Chapter 3 will detail the research design and
methodology of this study. Chapter 4 will explore the results in terms of context and
implementation, using the conceptual framework outlined in the second chapter. Finally, Chapter
5 will provide an analysis and evaluation of Ontario’s DPA policy based on the combined results
of this study and other DPA policy evaluations.
3
1.2 BACKGROUND OF THE HEALTHY SCHOOLS STRATEGY IN ONTARIO
Over the past decade, Ontario's Ministry of Education has engaged a health promotion
lens in its policy work around Healthy Schools. The Ontario Healthy Schools strategy is a
comprehensive approach to school health developed over several years, encompassing multiple
aspects of holistic health and well-being; it includes physical activity, nutrition, mental health,
and prevention of substance abuse. Approaches comprise guiding policies for principals and
teachers, focused topics in the curriculum, attention to the physical environment of schools, and
a recognition program for schools who take on efforts to make their school "health-promoting"
(MOE, 2009).
As Kingdon elucidates, "Problems abound out there in the government's environment,
and officials pay serious attention to only a fraction of them" (2003, p. 114). The "problem" of
unhealthy school environments thus had to be recognized as sufficiently important to warrant the
place it now holds on the Ontario policy agenda, as evidenced by the creation of the Healthy
Schools strategy.
In his description of how policy problems come to be defined, Kingdon (ibid) names
three contributing factors: indicators, focus events and feedback. In relation to these three
factors, the "obesity epidemic" has undeniably played a key role in the Ontario government’s
focus on health-promoting schools. Indicators have included the rising prevalence of chronic
disease and its associated costs to the health care system, and the recognized link between these
factors to obesity (Tremblay & Willms, 2000; Public Health Agency of Canada & Canadian
Institute of Health Information, 2011; World Health Organization [WHO], 2002). While not a
discrete event, the obesity epidemic has been sensationalized around the world as a major
problem needing to be addressed. As evidenced by the proliferation of the term “obesity
4
epidemic” in scholarly research (for example, a University of Toronto Libraries catalogue search
conducted in May 2013, with the search term “obesity epidemic”, yielded 17,773 journal articles
and 54 books), together with the vast abundance of websites addressing it today, the obesity
epidemic appears to have become a phenomenon of crisis proportions (Lobstein, Baur & Uauy,
2004). As stated in a recent report by the WHO, "obesity is commonly considered one of the
most serious health challenges of the early 21st century" (WHO, 2012, p. 11). Finally, obesity-
related research studies are now commonplace outside of academia, from international health
authorities such as the WHO (http://www.who.int/) to non-profit organizations such as Physical
and Health Education Canada (http://www.phecanada.ca/programs/health-promoting-schools).
This feedback keeps the obesity epidemic, and strategies to counter it, prominent in the political
agenda.
In addition to the influence of the obesity epidemic, there have been various policy actors
within and beyond the education sector who have worked toward promoting their cause for
health-promoting school environments. The Ontario Healthy Schools strategy itself arose as part
of a larger, international movement recognizing the role of schools in promoting the health and
well-being of children, and by extension, society at large. A key foundational piece for Ontario's
strategy was the Global School Health Initiative, launched by the WHO in 1995. It sought "to
mobilize and strengthen health promotion and education activities at the local, national, regional
and global levels" and was "designed to improve the health of students, school personnel,
families and other members of the community through schools" (WHO, 2013, para 1). This
initiative is credited with introducing the notion of "Comprehensive School Health", an
internationally recognized framework for health-promoting schools. Comprehensive School
5
Health is the basis of Healthy Schools policy in all provinces and territories across Canada,
except Quebec (Joint Consortium for School Health, 2011).
The WHO initiative is also cited as a guiding force for the Ontario Healthy Schools
Coalition (OHSC), arguably one of biggest policy players toward health-promoting schools in
Ontario. The OHSC is the provincial chapter of the Canadian Association for School Health
(http://www.cash-aces.ca/index.asp), formed in 2000 as a response to "grave concerns about
reductions in school-based health and social services". It is comprised of a diverse group of
members from public health units, school boards, hospitals, mental health agencies, universities,
health-related organizations, education-related organizations, and parent and student
organizations, connected through an email listserv. In its inaugural year, the OHSC drafted a
resolution advocating for comprehensive approaches to school-based health promotion in
Ontario (Ontario Public Health Association, 2011), which in turn contributed to the creation of
the "Foundations for a Healthy School" framework that has become central to Ontario's Healthy
Schools strategy. The four pillars of this framework are quality instructions and programs, a
healthy physical environment, a supportive social environment, and community partnerships.
Other organizations supporting the Healthy Schools Movement, such as the Pan-Canadian Joint
Consortium for School Health (http://www.jcsh-cces.ca/index.php/school-health), also
incorporate this foundational framework into their work.
Along with these policy influences from interested stakeholders in children's health, the
Ontario Healthy Schools strategy was also aided by key provincial leaders in power at the time
that this focus area was gathering momentum. In particular, Ontario's Chief Medical Officer of
Health and Assistant Deputy Minister of Public Health, Dr. Sheila Basrur (in this role from
2004-2008), was an inspirational and influential public figure with a passion for public health
6
promotion (Sheela Basrur Centre, n.d.). Ontario's Premier, Dalton McGuinty (in this role from
2003-2012), had a self-proclaimed commitment to improving education, thus helping set
education (and by extension, the Healthy Schools strategy) as a priority area for government
action (Liberal Party of Ontario, 2011). Moreover, the public health and education sectors often
worked together in the province's work around Healthy Schools. In response to the Ministry of
Education's first health-promoting school policies in 2004, Dr. Sheila Basrur expressed that she
looked forward to "continuing our collaboration with the Ministry of Education to promote
healthy schools" (MOE, 2004). Likewise, the Ministry of Education quoted Dr. Basrur in its
health-related policy announcements (e.g. MOE, 2005b).
Thus, the creation of the Healthy Schools strategy has been a culmination of various
influencing factors. Not-for-profit organizations and special interest groups, such as the Ontario
Physical and Health Education Association (OPHEA), have kept the momentum going, as their
funding is often dependent upon the continued governmental focus on health promotion through
schools.
1.3 ONTARIO’S DAILY PHYSICAL ACTIVITY POLICY
Policy/Program Memorandum 138: Daily Physical Activity (DPA) addresses the physical
activity component of the Healthy Schools strategy, and was introduced in October of 2005
following a similar initiative in Alberta (MOE, 2005a; Alberta Education, 2008). As outlined in
its mandate, “The goal of daily physical activity is to enable all elementary students to improve
or maintain their physical fitness and their overall health and wellness, and to enhance their
learning opportunities” (MOE, 2005a, para 4). It prescribes, “a minimum of twenty minutes of
sustained moderate to vigorous physical activity each school day during instructional time” for
7
all elementary school children in Ontario, including those with special needs (MOE, 2005a, para
4). Within this mandate, there are key pieces to consider:
scheduling: students are to be active for at least twenty minutes each day of the school
week, during instructional time, i.e. recess and extracurricular physical activity is not
included in this twenty minutes;
intensity: the physical activity provided is to be moderate to vigorous, i.e. it must raise
students’ heart rates a certain amount above resting levels; and
inclusion: the physical activity must engage all students in the class, regardless of ability.
It is specified that this physical activity should ideally be provided in a single, sustained
twenty-minute block, but that two or more blocks of at least ten minutes would suffice
(ibid).
Furthermore, the flexible approaches to DPA implementation are described in the policy
memorandum:
Daily physical activity may be incorporated into the instructional day in a variety of
ways. For instance, twenty minutes or more of physical activity during a scheduled
health and physical education class would meet the daily physical activity
requirement. Since physical activity is only one component of a complete health and
physical education program, there will be days when a health and physical education
class does not include physical activity. On these days and on days when no health
and physical education class is scheduled, other opportunities for at least twenty
minutes of physical activity during the instructional day will need to be provided.
Integrating physical activity into other curriculum areas is one appropriate strategy.
(ibid, para 6)
Beyond specifics related to scheduling, intensity and inclusion, the policy is otherwise relatively
non-prescriptive in terms of how schools should approach implementation of this policy. Hence,
it is reasonable to expect that a wide variety of approaches would be observable in practice. This
research will work within this assumption, and strive to explicate some of the common
overarching influences on DPA implementation in evaluating the policy itself.
8
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 THE NEED FOR EVALUATION
As Young, Levin and Wallin have asserted, education policies may be intended to be
“vague enough to allow a wide variety of responses at the local level” (2003, p. 94). Such is the
case with Ontario’s DPA policy, which allows for a variety of approaches to suit different school
contexts across the province. DPA can take any form as best suited to the individual school, and
often even the individual class, so long as the students are fully engaged in sustained moderate to
vigorous movement for a minimum of twenty minutes each day. Currently, there is no formal
monitoring of this policy; schools must simply report their spending to their board, which is then
reviewed by the provincial Ministry of Education (from personal communication with Manager
of Healthy Schools and Student Well-Being, Ministry of Education, November 9, 2011). This
minimal accountability to implement DPA may logically result in many teachers failing to
implement it daily, if at all, or implementing it in ways other than originally intended by
policymakers.
The DPA policy presents itself as being based in research evidence. As discussed in
Chapter 1, this policy was created in response to a call to action from Ontario’s Chief Medical
Officer within a context of widespread research and public awareness of the negative effects of
physical inactivity. In its press release, the Minister of Education referred to research which had
shown physical fitness to be linked to academic achievement: “Research shows that students
who engage in daily physical activity demonstrate improved academic performance…Our
schools need to be in the business of helping students reach their full intellectual, emotional and
physical potential” (MOE, 2005b). In addition, the Daily Physical Activity guidebooks for
teachers (MOE, 2005c, d, e; MOE 2006) cite several research studies in support of such a policy
9
(Keays & Allison, 1995; Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, 2004; Veugelers & Fitzgerald,
2005; Active Healthy Kids Canada, 2005; Shepard, 1997).
McEwan and McEwan (2003) explain how evaluation is a key aspect of any research-
based program or policy. Weiss (1998) describes the purpose of an evaluation as “a means of
contributing to the improvement of the program or policy” (p. 4). Evaluations can also take on
different forms. Process evaluations study how a policy is being implemented while outcome
evaluations study the results and/or consequences of a policy, including unintended effects (ibid).
The term "process evaluation" has other synonyms in the research literature, including the term
“formative evaluation” (e.g. Government Social Research Unit, 2007). Similarly, "outcome
evaluations" are sometimes called “impact evaluations” (e.g. International Agency for Research
on Cancer, 2008).
To date, a variety of research has been undertaken to evaluate the implementation of
DPA policy in Ontario. Five small-scale policy evaluations specific to this policy were located in
total, each of which addressed some but not all of the mandated focus areas for DPA (i.e.
scheduling, intensity and inclusion). One outcome evaluation measured frequency and intensity
of DPA in a “best-case” scenario to determine the effectiveness of the policy when optimally
implemented (Patton, 2012a). Two process evaluations focused on overall amount of DPA
provided by teachers (Pascall, 2010; Stone, Faulkner, Zeglen-Hunt & Cowie-Bonne, 2012), with
the former collecting information on barriers and facilitators to implementation, and the latter
collecting objective measures of DPA intensity. Another pair of process evaluations examined
teachers’ and students' perspectives of the DPA policy and their self-reported adherence to the
policy mandate (Patton, 2012a; 2012b).
10
Through discussions with contacts at the Ontario Physical and Health Education
Association (OPHEA) and the Ministry of Education, I have learned that the Ontario government
commissioned a province-wide evaluation of the DPA policy in recent years; however, the report
has not been released. At the time of writing this dissertation, a team at Public Health Ontario
was also in the process of designing an evaluation of the DPA policy (from personal
communication with Research Scientist at Public Health Ontario, May 7, 2013). The research at
hand aims to contribute to the broader picture of DPA policy evaluation research in Ontario, by
exploring the influence of context on implementation, and illuminating potential improvements
to the current policy.
There are also evaluations of Alberta’s DPA initiative (e.g. Thompson, 2008; Robinson
& Melnychuk, 2008; Kennedy, Dewey & Cantell, 2010; Bates, 2006: Chorney, 2008). These will
not be discussed here, as the purpose of the proceeding section is to gain a broader understanding
of the policy process in Ontario; notwithstanding, they have been considered in the design of the
current policy evaluation.
2.2 WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOMES OF DPA IN ONTARIO?
2.2.1 STUDY 1: OUTCOME EVALUATION IN THE IDEAL CASE (LONDON REGION, ONTARIO)
Patton (2012a) conducted an outcome evaluation of DPA which sampled a single Junior
(grade 5/6) class. The teacher of this class self-identified as a strong proponent of DPA
implementing the program as mandated, and was considered to be a subject area specialist in
physical and health education. Students in this class wore accelerometers, devices that monitor
and measure intensity of physical activity over the course of the day, for four school days. It was
found that the amount of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) accumulated during
each 20-minute block of DPA was only 3.5 minutes on average, with very little difference
11
between boys and girls. Additionally, an average of 10 minutes of each DPA block was spent
being sedentary (e.g. during instructions, waiting for one's turn to participate, etc.). It was found
that DPA-based physical activity accounted for only 14% of students' daily MVPA, with the rest
of their school-day MVPA accumulated during recess. Hence, even when DPA is implemented
regularly, it may not be of sufficient intensity and duration for students to acquire the intended
health benefits. Patton suggests better guidance for teachers as to appropriate intensity activities
for DPA. He also suggests extending opportunities for students to have unstructured free play,
including recess time, as this is where they obtain a vast majority of their daily MVPA.
This evaluation is strong in its ability to objectively measure MVPA in relation to DPA
that is being implemented as mandated. It sheds light on where to focus efforts for DPA
provision; beyond making sure that it takes place for a certain frequency or duration, activities
must also be sufficiently vigorous and sustained for the full twenty minutes. Unfortunately, this
"best-case" of proper DPA implementation is aptly-named; it is ideal, not the norm. Existing
process evaluations have demonstrated that DPA implementation is widely inconsistent, both
within and between schools in various parts of the province.
2.2.2 STUDY 2: PROCESS EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTATION (SUDBURY, ONTARIO)
Pascall (2010) evaluated four schools within a single school board, specifically targeting
schools that differed in their geographic location to obtain a somewhat heterogeneous sample.
Data collection methods included documentary analysis of Ministry of Education policy
guidelines, as well as teacher surveys and teacher focus groups at each school to elicit scheduling
of DPA along with perceived facilitators and barriers to DPA implementation. It was not
specified which elementary-level grades these teachers taught. It was found that on average,
teachers were providing DPA three days per week instead of the mandated five, and that students
12
have an estimated 20 minutes of physical activity during each session (when time taken to travel
between locations in the school, changing, and time spent giving instructions is subtracted from
the total scheduled time).
The overriding reported barriers to DPA were lack of time (finding time in school
schedule, as well as planning time), low priority of DPA in the curriculum, teachers’ lack of
expertise (e.g. personal background not related to physical education, or unawareness of
available resources), and insufficient physical facilities/space. The key facilitators were a
supportive environment within the school (e.g. principal who is a “champion” for physical
fitness), board-level support (which eased after the first two years of the policy being
introduced), availability of equipment, and access to the school gymnasium.
This evaluation is strong in its sampling of multiple sites, to improve potential
implications being generated, as well for its consideration of specific details of DPA
implementation, such as actual time spent being active compared to simply measuring time
allocated in teachers’ schedules. Where this evaluation falls short is in its failure to measure
student engagement and intensity of DPA, both of which are key components of the policy
mandate.
2.2.3 STUDY 3: PROCESS AND OUTCOME EVALUATION (TORONTO, ONTARIO)
Stone and colleagues (2012) conducted a natural experiment of DPA implementation,
using accelerometer data and teacher class timetables collected as part of a larger research study.
The sample included grade 5 and 6 students and their teachers from 18 schools across the
Toronto District School Board. From looking at the class timetables, it was found that less than
half of students were in a class with DPA scheduled every day of the week. The content and
follow-through of scheduled DPA was not explored. Students in the study wore an accelerometer
13
for a minimum of two and up to five school days. In examining the accelerometer data, it was
found that not a single child achieved a sustained 20-minute bout of MVPA on any day of the
week. More positively, it was found that those students accumulating at least one sustained 5-
minute bout of MVPA were more active overall and more likely to meet Canadian physical
activity guidelines than their peers, and fewer of these children were overweight. The study
concluded that while the majority of schools are not meeting the scheduling and intensity
components of the DPA policy, the intended health benefits are potentially achievable if
implementation can be improved.
As with the study by Patton (2012a), a key strength of this evaluation is its provision of
objectively-measured physical activity intensity data. This research could be improved through
class observations. Observations would allow the researchers to determine whether poor student
engagement or insufficiently intense planned activities are the reason underlying no students
achieving a sustained 20 minute bout of MVPA during instructional time.
2.2.4 STUDY 4: PROCESS EVALUATION AND PERCEPTIONS OF DPA (LONDON REGION, ONTARIO)
In work related to that described in section 2.2.1, Patton (2012b) explored teachers'
implementation and perception of the DPA policy. Teachers from across 37 elementary schools
and all applicable grade levels (i.e. grade 1-8) were surveyed with regards to their approach to
policy implementation, perceived barriers and facilitators, and attitudes toward the policy itself.
39% of teachers indicated that they conduct DPA "sometimes", while another 16.3% said they
conduct it "rarely" or "never". Almost half of respondents (45%) claimed they were "somewhat
knowledgeable" about the DPA policy. 85% claimed to have sufficient resources available for
DPA, and 89% felt they had sufficient knowledge to lead DPA. Time constraints related to
planning and displacement of other subject areas were a found to be a prevailing barrier for
14
implementation of this policy. Facilitators included feelings of support from principals and
school administration; over 90% of respondents felt they were at least somewhat supported in
their implementation of DPA and other physical activity-related teaching endeavours.
Patton’s other DPA evaluation (2012a) elicited feedback, via surveys, of students in
grades 4-8 as to their own perceptions of DPA, as part of a process evaluation. Classes were
randomly selected for participation from across 25 schools in the region. Overall, it was found
that students tended to enjoy DPA, and a majority felt it was sufficiently vigorous to "get the
heart pumping (63%) and to burn off energy (64%)" (ibid, p. 119). However, it was also found
that less than half (46%) of students reported having DPA every day, and just over half (55%)
said their teachers demonstrated enthusiasm for the activity by participating in DPA with them.
Many students reported that poor behaviour was often a barrier to DPA, in that teachers often
withheld DPA when the class was not behaving as expected.
Although the randomized sampling design of these two studies implies potential
generalizability across contexts, the lack of attention to context may also be a limitation in not
allowing for any in-depth understanding of the reason for the disconnect between positive
perceptions and inconsistent provision of DPA.
Across all evaluations, implementation does not appear to be meeting the provincial
policy mandate in terms of scheduling or intensity. Inclusion of all students in DPA sessions was
not a focus in these studies.
2.3 A NEW CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING DPA
A majority of the previous evaluations, while focusing on slightly different aspects of
DPA, embody a policy-centric (versus context-centric) view of analyzing the policy. A policy-
centric view is one in which the policy mandate itself is the primary focus, and contextual factors
15
are considered variables affecting policy implementation and outcomes. A context-centric
perspective, on the other hand, places the characteristics of a place as the main focus, with policy
understood as something shaped by (or potentially irrelevant to) the contexts in which it is based.
Clune (1990) provides three perspectives through which curriculum policy can be
discussed: the school as policy mediator, the school as policy critic, and the school as policy
constructor. These perspectives fall along a continuum and represent, in order of mention,
analyses that are progressively "deeper in the school context and less tightly and necessarily
linked with policy as a reference point" (ibid, p. 257). Traditional policy evaluations would tend
to be best-suited to a policy mediator perspective, whereby school-level policy implementation
and decisions would be assessed in terms of their consistency with government mandates, and
evaluation is "oriented around the particular policy outcome" (ibid, p. 259). Indeed, in her
definition, Weiss (1998) describes evaluation as "the systematic assessment of the operation
and/or the outcomes of a program or policy, compared to a set of explicit or implicit standards"
(p. 4). The DPA evaluation by Stone et al (2012) is the clearest example of such a lens, while
that by Pascall (2010) also generally employs this lens by placing the mandated policy approach
as the central focus of his work. However, using narrowly-defined criteria of policy "success"
may risk portraying educators and/or administrators as resistant, or perhaps even incompetent, in
comparison to the prescribed mandate. It also downplays the important role of educators as
agents, instead conceptualizing them as simply implementers of top-down mandates. Such an
approach assumes the policy itself is the solution to something that has been recognized as a
problem, and that failing to follow the policy in a certain way may be detrimental to those
affected by it.
16
The policy critic and policy constructor lenses offer broader understandings of evaluating
DPA. The school as policy critic approach is an extension of the school as policy mediator, as
policy goals are still the primary point of reference. Where it progresses away from the policy
mediator approach is in allowing for "the possibility that the policy goals cannot be achieved at
the school level, or that the policies have adverse effects that outweigh the benefits of any goals
achieved" (Clune, 1990, p. 258). It considers the possibility that the policy goals may not be
ideally suited to a particular school context, or to schools in general, and thus should not be
striven toward without question. Patton's (2012a) outcome evaluation of DPA in the ideal case of
implementation is an example of such an approach, in that he recommends that the policy itself
may be flawed, and thus not capable of achieving its stated health goals despite optimal
implementation. Patton also demonstrates elements of this perspective in his other studies
(2012b) by exploring teacher and student perceptions and how these align with the reality of
their context as it relates to DPA implementation.
The school as policy constructor is the least policy-oriented and most contextualized
perspective. Clune describes schools in this context as "not simply or primarily the implementers
of exogenous policy commands; rather, they have their own complex, shifting and contradictory
agendas" (1990, p. 258). While it is feasible to evaluate locally constructed and enacted policies,
this approach may be the least well-suited to an evaluation of a broad-reaching policy, as it is
less focused around any central policy goals and can be messy to analyze. This approach requires
a study design that is more ethnographic, and "a model of schools and teachers as involved in the
social construction of reality" (ibid, p. 259). It is similar to the policy critic perspective in its
recognition that certain policies may not be feasible or desirable; it diverges with its view of
schools as potential policy makers. As Clune explains: “A close inspection of schools may
17
demonstrate how schools need to change, but it may also demonstrate that policy should change.
Policy may learn from schools as well as schools from policy, not simply about the weakness of
a particular policy, but also about entirely new possibilities” (ibid, p. 258).
The current study will collect a wide variety of contextual and implementation data
related to the DPA policy, and evaluate it through these three perspectives. Through the first
perspective, this will provide data for stakeholders interested in understanding whether the policy
is being implemented as prescribed. Through the second and third perspectives, this study will
also yield insights into the reasons behind various observed approaches to implementation,
explore whether this public health policy is realistically well-suited to the Ontario educational
context in the first place, and potentially illuminate novel policy possibilities.
18
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 THE CASE STUDY APPROACH
Given that school contexts and the characteristics of the teachers who work within them
are highly rich and variable, an experimental design attempting to reliably isolate the factors
responsible for DPA implementation and generalize these to all schools would be extremely
difficult to conduct. Furthermore, the questions at hand- “how is the DPA policy implemented
within different school contexts, and why is it implemented the way it is?"- beg for a more in-
depth analysis than a large sample requiring generalization could provide. As Yin (2009)
explains, case studies are the optimal method when: “(a) “how” or “why” questions are being
posed, (b) the investigator has little control over events, and (c) the focus is on a contemporary
phenomenon within a real-life context” (p. 2). The case study approach is fitting here as it allows
for a broad exploration of the context of each school while investigating the variations in
approaches to implementing this particular policy. This is achieved by gathering multiple sources
of evidence to describe what is happening in each case. Here, this evidence is comprised of
teacher and administrative surveys; provincially-monitored demographic data; teachers’ class
timetables; classroom and school community observations; and teacher, principal and key
informant interviews.
The collection of multiple sources of data is invaluable for triangulation; that is, when
findings from different sources corroborate one another and thus enhance the validity and
reliability of results (Miles & Huberman, 1984; Yin, 2009). In addition to multiple sources of
data being useful for triangulation, they can also illuminate discrepancies in findings. Smith and
Kleine (1986) have suggested that the use of multiple methods results in "different images of
understanding" and thus increases the "potency" of evaluation findings, by making sense of how
19
these different pieces relate to create divergent and shared realities. This can help the researcher
to recognize new aspects of the picture that have not previously been well-defined, if even at all.
Initially, a sampling frame for two schools within a single school board was developed.
In this framework, schools were to be selected based on having “average” academic performance
(i.e. EQAO1 test scores within 10% above or below the provincial averages), with one school
currently participating in the province’s Healthy Schools recognition program and one school
that had never been part of this program (MOE, 2012). This framework sought to control for
contextual factors to some extent, for ease of explaining DPA implementation. However, this
school board did not approve my ethics application due to concerns about the “evaluation” aspect
of the research. For practical reasons, a new sampling approach was required.
In the interest of time, and in recognizing the difficulty of convincing unfamiliar research
ethics committees that my evaluation would not negatively represent their board, schools were
identified based on access via a key liaison. The two schools chosen each contained a personal
acquaintance who could act as a communicative liaison between myself as the researcher and the
participants at their school. Having this person to vouch for my benign intentions, considering
the potential perceived threat of performance evaluation for some participants, was integral to the
collection of valid and reliable data. There was also a concerted effort that the selected schools
should represent distinct contexts from one another, so that the influence of context on policy
implementation could be explored. The first school that was included is a public elementary
school in an isolated, largely Aboriginal community in Northern Ontario (hereafter, referred to as
the Northern school); the second is a Catholic elementary school located in a relatively new
suburban subdivision in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA; hereafter, referred to as the GTA
1 EQAO stands for Education Quality and Accountability Office. The EQAO annually tests numeracy and literacy
among Grade 3 and Grade 6 students across the province, and for the most part, these scores are made available
online for the public to see (EQAO, 2013).
20
Suburban school). More of the detailed characteristics that distinguish these schools will be
described in the next chapter.
The findings from each case provided the basis for a comparative case study, with each
school representing a single "unit of analysis" (Yin, 2009). A DPA “gap analysis” tool, designed
by the Ministry of Education (2006) and provided to principals province-wide, will be the central
focus of the analysis. Key similarities and differences between the two school cases have been
highlighted in the development of a grounded theory around DPA policy implementation (i.e.
reasons why it has been implemented in a certain way in each context). Attention to detail in the
presentation of results for each case invites users of the research to make informed decisions
about the applicability of these findings to other schools, and possibly other contexts, beyond
those included in this study.
3.2 COMPONENTS OF THE CASE STUDY
Parallel data collection methods and tools were used for each school case. Principals and
some participants (i.e. those participating in interviews and classroom observations) were given
an information package (Appendix 1) describing my background as a researcher, the purpose of
the study, their role as study participants and what they could expect over the course of my data
collection at their school.
The sample at each school included three teacher participants (one of each teaching at the
Primary, Junior and Intermediate grade levels) who participated in a semi-structured interview
about their approach to DPA implementation and their perceptions of the policy itself. These
same teachers also had their classes observed for one, one and a half or two full school days.
(This variance in observation length was due to scheduling restraints, including flight
cancellations and snow days, which impacted the length of time available to observe each class.)
21
The sample also included the principal at each school, who took part in a semi-structured
interview to describe their school and their knowledge of implementation of DPA by their staff.
At the Northern school, a key informant was identified by the principal, and this individual
participated in an unstructured interview to provide additional contextual data about the school.
At each school, a survey about the school’s health environment was completed; this was done by
the key informant at the Northern school, and by the vice principal at the GTA school.
Additionally, the entire grade one through eight teaching staff was invited to complete an
anonymous survey about implementation of DPA in their own classroom, and teacher class
timetables were collected.
Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Toronto Research Ethics Board, and
a police reference check was completed prior to me visiting the schools. In lieu of ethics
approval from the two school boards, permission was granted by the principals at each of the two
schools based on my collegial relationship with the liaison at their school. All data was collected
over the winter term, between mid-February and early March. Arguably, DPA would be most
limited at this time of year for both schools, due to the inconvenience (or impossibility, in the
case of the Northern school on particularly cold days) of taking students outside.
As mentioned, four key measures of data collection were employed as part of this case
study: surveys, documentary analysis, observations and interviews. The methodology of each
measure will now be discussed in some detail.
3.2 .1 SURVEYS
"The purpose of survey research is to describe specific characteristics of a large group of
persons, objects or institutions" (Jaeger, 1997, p. 449). This school-wide data was useful in
22
developing a picture of school-wide contexts and approaches to DPA, and as a complement to
the more in-depth data collected from other measures.
Two separate survey tools were used. The first was the Healthy School Planner, of which
representatives from each school completed the Foundational and Physical Activity modules
(Joint Consortium for School Health, n.d.; Appendices 2a and 2b). This tool was designed by the
Propel Centre for Population Health Impact at the University of Waterloo, and the data collected
from each school also contributed to a Canadian database measuring school health across the
country. Completing the survey online generated a report for each module, ranking the school on
a continuum of ideal practices for each factor, and school representatives shared this report
directly with me. This included aspects of the social and physical environment, approaches to
teaching and learning, relevant school policies, and community partnerships. Items on the report
were considered individually and used as descriptive data for explicating the context at each
school. I did not conduct any analysis on the raw survey data, itself.
The second survey tool was developed for classroom teachers, and used to measure
implementation of DPA in each classroom (Appendix 3). The purpose of the surveys was to
elicit general information related to teacher characteristics (e.g. years of teaching experience,
grade taught, experience and/or specialization in health and physical education) and teachers'
approach to DPA from as many teachers at each school as possible. It also addressed perceived
barriers and facilitators to implementation, as well as personal perceptions toward the policy and
physical activity. This tool was designed for this study to gain a general picture of staff
characteristics at each school, and how DPA is approached at each school. The questions were
"closed" in nature, with teachers able to select from available responses but not provide their
own, with the exception of an "other" category for some questions and a final optional space for
23
comments at the end of the survey. It was felt that closed questions were the most appropriate for
the purpose of this measure, in order to reduce the burden on participants and thus maximize
rates of completion (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2000). Simple descriptive statistical analyses
were carried out for these data using Microsoft Excel©, including calculations of mean, median
and mode for various responses.
3.2.2 DOCUMENTARY ANALYSIS
Documentary analysis involves the careful study of documents. It is a common part of
case study research, often utilized as an important aspect of data triangulation (Yin, 2003;
Heffernan, n.d.). For the purposes of this study, the following documents were initially intended
for review: school demographic information listed on the Ontario Ministry of Education website;
teacher timetables (from all teachers at each school); and any in-school evaluation records of
DPA conducted by principals or school staff, since implementation in October 2005.
The strength of documentary analysis is that it provides historical data about the
phenomenon under study, so that participants do not need to rely on their memory to recall past
events (e.g. spending on policy implementation). In this case, it also provides a reliable point of
reference regarding official intentions of stakeholders (e.g. time in teachers’ daily timetables
dedicated to DPA, regardless of whether other events preclude its actual fulfillment). The
weakness of documentary analysis on its own is that it does not allow for explanation or
clarification from those affected by the documents, and could risk misinterpretation by the
researcher (e.g. assuming that because DPA is scheduled five days per week, that students are
actually participating in DPA five days per week). Due to the often hectic and unpredictable
nature of teaching (as illustrated in narrative snapshots in Young, Levin and Wallin, 2007; also,
from classroom observations in this study and from my personal experience as an elementary
24
school teacher), flexibility and adaptability to quickly-changing circumstances is commonplace
over the course of a normal school day. Strict adherence to official documents to draw
conclusions about practice in a school is likely to draw conclusions based on incomplete or
incorrect information. Fortunately, as the topic of study is a contemporary issue, interaction with
participants can be used to supplement the findings of this measure, and to fill any gaps left by
incomplete records.
School demographic information, including academic outcomes (as measured by EQAO
scores), socioeconomic status (as measured by percentages of students from lower-income
households and whose parents have some university education), and ethnicity (as measured by
number of students whose first language is not English) was acquired from the Ministry website
(MOE, 2013) and used to describe the context at each school. This data helped corroborate the
information gained from observations and interviews. Teacher timetables were collected at each
school, and analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis; frequency (i.e. number of
days per week) of scheduled DPA, length (i.e. total number of minutes allocated) and format (i.e.
part of physical education class, a separate lesson, or integrated into other subject lessons) of
each DPA session were the variables considered. Initially, it was intended that comparisons
would be made between and within schools, to determine whether certain grade levels or certain
schools adhere more closely to scheduling requirements (i.e. a minimum of twenty minutes, each
day of the school week), or if adherence to the requirements is relatively standard (or random)
across the schools.
In-school evaluation documents were also to be examined. According to the DPA policy,
school boards are to monitor implementation of the policy within schools (MOE, 2005a), and it
was assumed that accounts of such monitoring would be contained within school records. My
25
interest in these documents was to see: a) whether DPA is being monitored by school
administrators; b) if so, how often and how rigorously implementation is being monitored; and c)
which aspects have been focused upon in these evaluations (e.g. adherence to scheduling
requirements, or content of DPA sessions).
Unfortunately, access to all of these documents proved much less dependable than
anticipated. Some data (e.g. EQAO scores) were available online for the GTA Suburban school,
but not the Northern school. On the other hand, teacher timetables were easily obtained from a
central file in the office at the Northern school, while at the GTA Suburban school, the principal
determined that teachers should submit their timetables personally to ensure their consent. As
such, despite time-intensive efforts to collect these timetables, only those from the teachers
whose classes were observed were collected at the GTA school.
Furthermore, administrative DPA implementation records did not appear to be available.
At each school, principal and key informant interviews included a self-evaluation piece where
interviewees were asked to reflect on their school’s stage of DPA implementation according to
the Ministry of Education School Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical Activity (MOE,
2006; Appendix 4). In each case, the interviewee was unfamiliar with the framework, and made
their evaluations based on personal recall. As the researcher, I made the judgment call not to pry
for documentation of DPA implementation, sensing that such documentation did not exist and/or
was not used in school planning decisions, and wanting to minimize discomfort of the
interviewee who may have felt their professional practice was being evaluated negatively. If
monitoring had been done historically and was no longer being used, I concluded that it was not
salient to understanding implementation of DPA in the current context.
26
3.2.3 OBSERVATIONS
Observation, sometimes referred to as field research, involves observation of a group or
set of participants being studied. Observations are one of the common methods used in case
study research (Yin, 2003; Heffernan, n.d.), and they often serve as a method of triangulation
providing an alternative view that can be compared with data gathered in other ways. For the
purposes of the current study, I observed up to two full days in three different classes within each
of the participating schools, with one class in each of the grade divisions (primary, junior and
intermediate). By observing the day in its entirety, it allowed for observation of all types of DPA,
including spontaneously-included DPA. This approach also allowed for a greater sense of each
classroom context overall, and gave teachers the flexibility to implement DPA more "naturally"
(e.g. they could potentially reschedule DPA sessions during the day due to other interruptions,
rather than being forced to schedule it according to the timing of my visit).
The main advantage of observation as a study measure is that first-hand information is
provided without being filtered by the speaker, who may wish to convey a certain image or
message. Additionally, the researcher can gain a deeper understanding of practice in reality,
which cannot always be obtained through secondary data sources. Disadvantages include
observer bias, and a reliance on subjective measurement. As Langille and Rodgers (2010) relate,
issues of objectivity can be overcome by the observer making themselves aware of any potential
bias, and by setting clear objectives for the research, thus guiding aspects to which the observer
should attend and those to which they should not. As a measure of checking my own observer
bias, I also recorded subjective notes separate from my objective observation notes, to remind
myself of my feelings, thoughts and reactions at the time of observation that might impact my
interpretation of what was seen.
27
I took on the role of a complete observer, meaning I viewed the events of the session
without taking part (McMillan & Wergin, 2006). I recorded notes using a semi-structured
observation schedule; that is, there were certain aspects of focus for the session, including
student engagement and my perceived intensity of the activity, but I also took detailed notes
about the observation in general, including teacher and student behaviours and the content of the
session. The SOFIT observation tool (McKenzie, 2012; Appendix 5) was used as a basis for
items to look out for, but was not appropriate for the actual DPA sessions themselves, which
were often less than ten minutes in total length (and this tool is designed for a longer, more
formal physical education session). Observation of these sessions was somewhat challenging (i.e.
there were, on average, over twenty students, and participants were moving around in a
sometimes large and noisy space) and I had initially endeavored to have one or two additional
observers with whom I could corroborate and augment my own notes. However, given the time
commitment of needing to spend approximately 6 hours for each observation day, in addition to
the potential discomfort/impact on behaviour that may have been caused by having two
unfamiliar observers in the classroom, I decided this would not be appropriate.
Classes were selected on a volunteer basis, with an emphasis placed on the research goal
to determine how DPA is being implemented, and not to evaluate whether individual teachers are
implementing it well (to avoid only “champion” teachers volunteering to participate in the
study). Teachers were reminded that the session was to be representative of an average DPA
session in their class, and that they were not being "graded", to avoid teachers putting unusual
preparation into the session being observed.
28
3.2.4 INTERVIEWS
This main purpose of this piece of the research was to collect information about the
personalized, subjective experience of teachers and principals regarding the DPA policy. This
method was used to provide some triangulation and enrichment of findings from the surveys,
documentary analysis and observations. Compared to other similar methods, such as surveys or
focus groups, interviews offer a variety of strengths. Unlike surveys, which generally focus on
more “closed” types of questions to be enumerated, interviews allow participants to share
narratives and more detailed explanations of their answers. This gives the opportunity for richer
data, as well as the ability to seek clarification or elaboration of responses (Cohen, Manion &
Morrison, 2000). Additionally, the interviewer can provide clarification of questions if the
participant is not clear about what is being asked, to ensure the participant is answering the
question as intended, and not based on a misinterpretation of wording. When compared to focus
groups, the primary strength of interviews is that participants are not influenced by the presence
of peers, in front of whom they may wish to appear agreeable. Interviews allow confidentiality of
responses, as well as giving the full focus upon the individual who might otherwise feel silenced
by more vocal peers. The major weakness of interviews is that they are time-consuming, and
thus cannot reach the same number of participants as can be reached via surveys or focus groups
within the same amount of resources (McMillan & Wergin, 2006).
A semi-structured interview guide approach was employed (Appendices 6a and 6b2). As
is normally done with this type of interview approach, salient themes from the literature review
were used as a basis for interview discussions, with the actual sequence of questions decided
upon during the course of the interview based on the flow of the conversation (Patton, 1980, in
2 At the Northern school, an interview was also conducted with a key informant- a self-proclaimed "phys ed teacher
at heart"- when this informant was identified by the principal as someone with whom I should speak. This was an
unstructured interview, based on clarifying questions that had arisen during my time at the school.
29
Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2000). With this approach, the interviewer can also use
conversational probes to elicit elaboration or clarification from the interviewee. This method
provides the advantages of comprehensiveness (compared to unstructured, informal interviews,
where questions emerge from the interview context, and certain areas of interest may not be
addressed), ability to fill gaps (either from earlier data collection measures, or from unclear
responses requiring clarification), and conversational tone, which is likely to make the
participant more at ease, and more inclined to speak freely (Patton, 1980, in Cohen, Manion &
Morrison, 2000). The biggest disadvantage of this interview approach is that changing the
wording and sequence of questions reduces comparability between cases (ibid). However, this
weakness is of minimal concern, since the goal of this research has been to create an overall
picture of context and implementation at each site. Interviews were audio recorded and then
transcribed verbatim, with the exception of principal interviews (both declined to have their
interview recorded). The teacher participants for this piece were the same teachers whose classes
were observed (i.e. 3 teacher interviews per school). Interview data was explored using a
thematic code analysis.
3.3 DATA ORGANIZATION AND ANALYSIS
Efficient organization was paramount to dealing with the large amount of data collected.
All data were entered into electronic text form. Data from teacher surveys and timetables were
entered into Microsoft Excel © documents, and descriptive statistics (i.e. mean, median and
mode) were conducted for each question/indicator, for each school. Interview transcripts and
observation notes were typed and saved as Microsoft Word© documents. The Healthy School
Planner surveys and Ministry of Education School Finder data were saved in their original
electronic formats.
30
Once all data were available in electronic text form, they were divided into two main
categories: context data and implementation data. Naturally, there were some overlaps between
categories; when this occurred, data were entered into all applicable categories.
3.3.1 CONTEXT DATA
A key tenet of ecological approaches is that there is interaction between individuals and
the settings in which they occupy their time. The Ministry of Education recognizes the
importance of a health-promoting school environment in realizing the goals of the Healthy
Schools strategy, as outlined in its “Foundations for a Healthy School” (MOE, 2009). Likewise,
literature around educational reform (e.g. Levin, 2008; Osborn & McNess, 2005) consistently
recognizes the importance of context in understanding teachers' implementation of policies.
Thus, a socio-ecological framework was used to describe various aspects of the
interpersonal, organizational, community and policy level environments at each school. The
Analysis Grid for Elements Linked to Obesity (ANGELO) framework breaks down aspects of
these environments into more tangible elements: physical, economic, policy and socio-cultural
(WHO, 2012; Appendix 7). The ANGELO provides a useful tool for unpacking the various
elements in which teachers' daily professional practice is based, including both the immediate
context of the school as well as that of the community and beyond. Because the main focus of
this case study was on the immediate school context, as opposed to the broader societal context,
environmental elements were not divided into micro and macro levels as they are in the original
tool. It was also not seen as relevant to include elements of the nutritional environment, as the
focus of this evaluative case study is a physical activity policy. Therefore, a modified version of
the ANGELO (Figure 1) was used to house descriptive contextual data for each school.
31
Physical Elements
What facilities are available for physical activity?
Economic Elements What financial barriers/facilitators exist for promoting DPA and
physical activity?
Policy Elements What rules and regulations affect opportunities for physical activity?
Socio-cultural Elements What are the attitudes, beliefs, values and cultural norms toward DPA
and physical activity in general?
Figure 1: Modified ANGELO framework for organizing contextual data.
Each measure of data collected- Healthy School Planner and teacher surveys, Ministry of
Education School Finder data, timetables, observation notes and interview transcripts - was
carefully scanned for excerpts which appeared to correspond with each of the categories of the
framework. Applicable items were copied and pasted from their original source into the
summary table, maintaining the source identification (e.g. “interview transcript, primary
teacher”) so that potentially conflicting or unique/interesting data could later be traced and
explored, if necessary. Once this process was complete, each measure was scanned a second
time, and as many times thereafter as was seen necessary as new themes and ideas came to light,
and any additional items deemed relevant were added to the table.
Initially, the 4 pillars of the "Healthy Schools" framework - social and physical
environment; teaching and learning; healthy school policy; partnerships and services (MOE,
2009) - were considered as the most appropriate framework to organize the contextual data.
However, upon closer analysis, they were found to be less fitting. Although these four pillars fit
within the ANGELO framework, they do not fully encompass, or distinctly unpack, the various
socio-ecological influences for teachers to implement DPA. The 4 pillars represent a goal for the
ideal environment, whereas the ANGELO framework represents the various influences in the
actual environment. Thus, the ANGELO is believed to be a better tool for unpacking the ways in
which the environment may promote or negate implementation of daily physical activity.
32
3.3.2 IMPLEMENTATION DATA
Clune's (1990) conceptual framework of perspectives for describing policy
implementation in schools was described in Chapter 2. These are: 1) the school as policy
mediator, 2) the school as policy critic, and 3) the school as policy constructor. Each represents a
place on a continuum from more “policy-centric” to more “context-centric” points of view. In
the school as policy mediator perspective, the researcher measures educators’ implementation in
light of the policy expectations, and may assume that educators agree with the policy and would
generally work to meet its prescribed actions. In the school as policy critic approach, the
researcher seeks to understand whether the context of the school aligns with the goals of the
policy, and if policy fulfillment would be in the best interest of stakeholders at that school. Using
the policy constructor perspective, the researcher strives to recognize the goals of the school as
its own organization, and how elements of the policy may be changed to best reflect the goals
and needs of the organization. The latter two perspectives also allow for consideration of the
views of educators as policy actors, both individually and collectively.
The implementation data was first organized according to the perspective of school as
policy mediator. A framework modeled after the Ministry of Education DPA Implementation
Continuum (MOE, 2006; Appendix 4) was created to house the applicable implementation-
related data (Figure 2). The Ministry originally intended for this framework to be used as a “gap
analysis” tool for school principals to gauge their school’s progress toward optimal DPA
implementation (MOE, 2006) according to various specific focus areas. Thus, it is seen as an
ideal tool to encompass each of the pertinent areas of focus as identified by the Ministry of
Education.
33
Figure 2: Data organization tool for DPA implementation.
As with the context data, each measure of data collected was carefully scanned for items
corresponding with each category of the framework. A process identical to that used for the
context data was used to organize and analyze implementation-specific data for each school.
Once the framework was complete, items within each category in the table were arranged
according to themes. For example, under the category of “Leadership”, “Monitoring of DPA by
school administration” was one salient theme at both schools, and all corresponding items were
grouped under this theme. In the original Ministry tool, each of the six focus areas are described
in three stages of implementation, with specific indicators listed for each stage. Once all of the
data were organized according to themes, the findings for each category were compared against
the stage descriptions in the Ministry Framework and an evaluation was made as to the Ministry-
defined stage of implementation demonstrated by the school in each of these categories.
Leadership To what extent is DPA coordinated by an administrative body at the school?
Schedule How often are students given the opportunity to be physically active for 20 of
the 300 minutes of instructional time?
Student Leadership To what extent (if any) are students involved in a DPA planning committee?
Quality of DPA How many students are physically active for the entire DPA session?
How often are the activities offered inclusive, motivating, learner-centered
and/or success-oriented?
How often do activities result in an increase in breathing or heart rate?
How often do students set their own goals and monitor their own physical
activity levels?
Resources What resources are available to assist staff in DPA implementation?
How many staff have attended training specific to DPA?
Partnership Development To what extent have community partners been established to provide input and
direction for DPA?
34
Following this, the data was considered according to Clune's second and third
perspectives: the school as policy critic, and the school as policy constructor. These analyses
relied much more heavily on linking with the contextual data, as well as other research literature,
but maintained a general focus around the six focus areas of the Ministry.
3.4 METHODOLOGICAL LIMITATIONS
One criticism of case studies is that the conclusions they draw are not always adequately
grounded in objective, measurable “facts” (Yin, 2009). Indeed, in reporting the findings of this
case study, where I came to know many participants personally during the time I spent gathering
information, a major challenge was to maintain distance between my own feelings and my
interpretations of findings. It was often tempting to allow informal conversations outside of data
collection (e.g. teachers in one school commenting about school challenges during a weekend
social gathering) or personal reflections (e.g. a teacher’s teaching style reminding me of my own)
to colour my perception of data. Although my own background inevitably made its way into the
angle I chose in reporting what was observed- such is the reality of qualitative research- the use
of externally-developed conceptual frameworks to organize, analyse and synthesize the findings
will potentially mitigate the impact of my own bias. Additionally, I was vigilant in maintaining
an “audit trail” (Langille & Rodgers, 2010) of my work, making notes of my own subjective
thoughts and observations along the way to keep them separate from other more objective data.
It was also difficult at times to know what should be included as “data”, and what to
leave out (e.g. informal discussions about social problems in the community that fell outside the
scope of my data collection). Furthermore, something not mentioned at one school was
sometimes compared to the fact that it was mentioned at the other school (i.e. the lack of data
became data in and of itself). Without the comparison between schools, I would not have
35
necessarily thought to include certain details as findings, since they would not have emerged as a
theme from the data on their own. Thus, although case studies allow for consideration of a much
broader picture than other methods with more defined parameters, they certainly cannot ensure
that nothing is left out. Again, the lens and professional judgment of the researcher defines,
sometimes arbitrarily, what is considered worthy of mention and what it not.
36
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS
4.1 DATA SOURCES
As discussed, a large variety of data was collected in order to describe the contexts and
details of DPA policy implementation at the two schools. This served purposes of triangulation
(Yin, 2009), as well as helping to create a more complete picture of each school case than could
be gained through any individual measure of data collection. Compiled charts of the organized
data for context and implementation can be viewed in Appendices 8-11.
These data included surveys of the school health environment, according to a
comprehensive school health framework (Joint Consortium for School Health, 2011) that is
roughly aligned with the 4 pillars of school health in the “Foundations of a Healthy School”
(MOE, 2009; Appendices 2a and 2b). At the Northern school these surveys were completed by a
key informant (the school’s Student Success Teacher/School Effectiveness Lead) who was
identified by the principal as champion for physical education and health. At the Greater Toronto
Area (GTA) suburban school, the surveys were completed by the vice principal. Additionally, all
grade one through eight classroom teachers were invited to complete a survey about their own
experience with DPA, when a printed survey was placed in their school mailbox. The response
rate was high at both schools, with 83% and 75% of surveys completed and returned at the
Northern school and GTA school, respectively.
Results are also based on teacher class timetables (100% return rate at Northern school;
only 3 of 20 collected at the GTA school)and demographic data from the School Information
Finder (MOE, 2013). Full day classroom observation notes for one primary (grades 1-3), one
junior (grades 4-6) and one intermediate (grades 7-8) level teacher at each school (for a total of
six classroom observations) also contribute to the results. Additionally, semi-structured
37
interviews with each observed teacher and the principal at each school were employed, plus an
unstructured interview with the key informant at the Northern school (for a total of nine
interviews; five at the Northern school and four at the GTA school).
4.2 BASIC DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Before delving into an in-depth description of the various contextual factors of the two
schools, it will be useful to gain an overall snapshot of their demographics. These have been
summarized in the table below for ease of comparison:
Northern School GTA Suburban School
Community population
(Source: Statistics Canada, 2013)
Close to 1000 >700,000
School enrolment
(Source: MOE, 2013)
272 students; Grades JK-8* 509; Grades JK-8*
Teachers' union membership
(Source: Principal interviews)
Elementary Teachers' Federation of
Ontario
Ontario Elementary Catholic
Teachers Association
Average years of teaching
experience of staff
(Source: Teacher surveys)
6.6 years 15.5 years
Staff turnover
(Source: Principal and teacher
interviews)
Approximately 1-3 teachers are
replaced each year, as teachers leave
the community to work elsewhere
Majority of teachers have been at the
school since its opening in 2002, or
shortly thereafter
Student achievement: EQAO
scores (% +/- provincial average)
(Source: MOE, 2013)
Information not available*
(According to the Ministry website,
data may not be available for
privacy reasons or because the
Ministry of Education does not have
the information)
Grade 3 reading: +2%
Grade 3 writing: +7%
Grade 3 math: +5%
Grade 6 reading: +2%
Grade 6 writing: -4%
Grade 6 math: -20%
Ethnocultural background of
students
(Source: Principal interview; MOE,
2013)
Approximately 95% Cree, and 5%
"other" (Principal response)
Percentage of students whose first
language is not English: Information
not available*
Percentage who are new to Canada
from a non-English speaking
country: Information not available*
"Huge" ethnic mix (Principal
response)
Percentage of students whose first
language is not English: 15.7*
Percentage who are new to Canada
from a non-English speaking
country: 2.2*
Average socioeconomic
background of student families
(Source: Principal and teacher
interviews; MOE, 2013)
Low Middle to high
Table 1: Demographics of the Northern and GTA Suburban School. (*2011/2012 Ministry
of Education data)
38
Using a modified version of the Analysis Grid for Elements Linked to Obesity
(ANGELO) framework (Figure 1, Chapter 3; Appendix 7), elements of the context for physical
activity were identified and explored for their potential relation to the DPA policy. These
contextual elements included the physical, economic, policy and socio-cultural, each of which
contribute to the overall environment within which educators operate. Linking to the compiled
findings from the various forms of data, each of these will now be discussed in turn. After a
detailed look at each school context, a summary will be provided in which the two contexts can
be directly compared and contrasted in relation to each contextual element.
4.3 THE CONTEXT: NORTHERN SCHOOL
4.3.1 PHYSICAL ELEMENTS: WHAT FACILITIES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PHYSICAL ACTIVITY?
At the Northern school, one important barrier to DPA is the physical space. In the
Healthy School Planner survey, the key informant stated that this school has “less than adequate
facilities for student physical activity”, and the principal echoed this sentiment. Furthermore,
30% of teacher survey respondents indicated that insufficient facilities hindered their ability to
provide daily physical activity in their class. Indoor physical space for DPA is especially
imperative in this particular community, where students are indoor-bound for large periods of the
winter due to the extreme cold. One intermediate teacher pointed out that her students dislike
classroom-based DPA: "They act out and make it very difficult. So, whenever weather permits I
take them outside to the outdoor basketball court. It is much harder in the winter.” Intermediate
students (who are physically larger than their younger peers) require more room for DPA
activities, which the limited space of a classroom does not always afford.
Although the barrier of inadequate physical space is not unique to this school- indeed, it
is commonly-cited in evaluations of DPA (Patton, 2012a, 2012b; Pascall, 2010; Thompson,
39
2008)- in this case, it is amplified by limited access to the gym. The school building itself is
physically attached to two other institutions: the local Catholic elementary school and a post-
secondary college, all of which share a single gym. As a result, this school has access to its gym
only two and a half days per week, and classes share gym time (i.e. two teachers have physical
education scheduled at the same time and share the gym space). Notably though, the gym space
itself is large, and can comfortably accommodate two classes at once. The college does not use
the gym during elementary school hours, so there is no apparent scheduling conflict with them.
Beyond the gym, there are few other facilities in the school community for students to be
physically active indoors. As one teacher explained, “Physically, there’s- as far as the
community is concerned- there’s not as many options for the kids here…there’s not as many
organized sports so, they tend to just play outside a lot." At the time of the study, the community
curling rink was being used as a makeshift medical clinic, and the indoor swimming pool housed
at the high school had been closed indefinitely due to unsustainable maintenance costs. The one
available facility was the ice rink, used by the community for hockey and skating. One teacher
reported having taken her class here for a skating party earlier in the term.
Although physical space may be a barrier to DPA, the availability of equipment and
physical activity-related resources appears to be more than adequate, and may be a facilitator for
DPA at this school. It was noted that a majority of classrooms in the school have a TV and a
DVD player for teachers to use instructional videos for DPA, and all classrooms have a CD
player to incorporate music into their DPA routines. Other equipment for classroom-based DPA
is available to teachers who are aware of it. For example, one teacher at this school found an
unopened DPA instructional DVD left on her shelf from the teacher who had previously been in
that room. This teacher also tracked down stretching bands that had been purchased for DPA in
40
another classroom, but were not being used, and borrowed them for use in her own class.
Additionally, there is equipment available for outdoor physical activity, including “sets and sets
of skis” for students to use. One distinct advantage for this school, when weather permits, is the
availability of space in the local community for outdoor winter activities. As the key informant
shared with me, “Our teachers are out skiing all the time with their students. And snowshoeing,
all the time; skating, all the time.” Such resources provide an opportunity for a variety of
approaches to DPA, to help work around the limitations of the indoor gym facilities.
While DPA resources vary somewhat from one class to another, each class has access to
a resource book of Ministry-provided instructional ideas for DPA. These were mentioned as
being potentially useful for supply teachers, but based on observations and interviews, classroom
teachers only rarely, if ever, use these for their own DPA planning. In the comments section of
the teacher survey, one teacher vehemently stated: “Books and handouts are much less helpful
than the Ministry believes. The best DPA resources for reaching and motivating these kids are
the use of physical objects or fun/interesting videos, not more paperwork.”
4.3.2 ECONOMIC ELEMENTS: WHAT FINANCIAL BARRIERS AND/OR FACILITATORS EXIST FOR DPA?
Economic issues do not appear to be directly applicable to implementation of DPA. The
principal was the only participant who raised the connection between finances and this policy.
This particular school is a school authority (i.e. the school comprises its own “school board”),
and the principal perceived the funding here to be limited compared to other school boards
across the province3, thus limiting the funds available to spend on staff resources for DPA. The
principal also identified the person in the role of Student Success/School Effectiveness Lead as
the closest thing the school has to a physical education specialist, since this person is “very much
3 The principal’s perception of lower funding may not be accurate. In this case, the perception of inadequate funding
is more salient than the actual amount of funding, as it is affecting administrative decisions around school spending.
41
into” physical education and health, and is thus in a key position to advise teachers on excellent
provision of DPA. However, pending adequate funding the following year, this role may be
discontinued, and this direct and dedicated implementation support for teachers would be lost.
Notwithstanding, no teachers identified economic issues as a barrier or facilitator to how they
approached DPA in their class.
However, through observations, interviews and informal conversations with school staff,
it became apparent that poverty is a pressing concern in this community4. One might surmise that
this underlies many areas of concern at this school, including implementation of DPA. In each
class, breakfast is provided daily for all students. In interviews, the prohibitively expensive price
of fresh produce in this isolated community (e.g. $7.99 for a head of broccoli in the middle of
winter, which may or may not have arrived rotten at the grocery store) was identified as a major
barrier to health for all members of the community. In an interview, one teacher lamented that
parents will often buy “spam and wieners” for dinner. Healthy choices, which are often the more
expensive options, are simply not a priority; the same can be said in relation to physical activity,
as will be discussed in the section on elements of the socio-cultural environment. A conversation
with a local health coordinator, who had just begun a drop-in, after school health program at the
school, informed me that Type 2 diabetes is a major health problem in this community.
In an informal conversation with me outside of the scope of my data collection, one
teacher confided that many parents in the community are unemployed or underemployed, and
thus rely heavily on financial assistance from the government. Various teachers, in both informal
conversations and through formal interviews, indicated that many of these parents are plagued
4 It was anticipated that the Ministry of Education School Information tool could be used to ascertain economic
demographics for this school population. Unfortunately, the information provided the MOE website is inaccurate,
citing this school’s proportion of students coming from a lower-income household is 0% compared to the 16.5%
provincial average. My observations clearly demonstrate this is not the case (MOE, 2013).
42
with the social challenges often associated with living in conditions of poverty, including issues
of substance abuse and high rates of single parent families. Several of these teachers divulged
how many children at this school demonstrate considerable behavioral and learning challenges
associated with disadvantaged home lives, and one teacher explained that such behavioral issues
are a deterrent to implementing DPA: “I think DPA is very beneficial for the students; but
sometimes their poor behaviour and participation doesn't make incorporating DPA worthwhile.”
Portelli, Shields and Vibert (2007) describe various discourses as they relate to educating
“students at risk”. The deficit discourse “place(s) educational failure in individual and family
shortcomings rather than in institutional or structural practices and power relations” (Shields,
Bishop & Mazawi, 2005, as discussed in Portelli, Shields & Vibert, 2007, p. 8). It may be
conjectured that a deficit discourse is at play among many teachers at this school, who may
unwittingly be expecting their students to misbehave during DPA. When their expectations are
confirmed, they may be quick to blame the deficiency of their students and their family lives,
rather than recognizing other potential factors in the students’ poor behaviour, such as activities
that are ill-suited to student interests and needs.
Notwithstanding this, many participants gave reasons related to student behaviour as one
of the main benefits of DPA. The principal and several teachers mentioned frequent indoor
recesses as a reason to incorporate DPA during instructional time, as an opportunity “to let off
some steam” and to give students a mental break to help them refocus or re-energize. As one
teacher illustratively put it, “I think it gives them a chance just to let everything out; like when
they get really squirrelly after sitting here for an hour or so, and they just need to move...There’s
no point in fighting it.” Another teacher indicated that DPA is rejuvenating for not only her
students, but for her as well.
43
The negative health implications of poverty are broad and deeply-embedded here, and
this undeniably influences the priorities of teachers in their classroom practice. Indeed, 60% of
teacher survey respondents indicated that the time needed to focus on “other academic priorities”
was one of the main reasons they did not schedule DPA as often as the policy prescribes. On the
other hand, the health needs of students in this community may also raise the importance of a
health-focused policy such as DPA. In surveys and interviews, teachers made reference to
teaching students that physical activity is fun, to giving them ideas for how they can be active in
simple ways in their own time, and to helping them make links between physical activity and
general health and well-being. One teacher highlighted the connection between high rates of
diabetes in the community and the need to be physically active to address that. Another teacher
felt a sense of responsibility to make up for the lack of opportunities to be active outside the
school setting: “A DPA benefit is that we’re sort of taking up the load with physical activity...It
gets them moving for at least 20 minutes of the 60 or whatever it’s supposed to be now that kids
are supposed to have, because they’re not getting them.” Teachers at this school thus value DPA
for its link with student health benefits, and this is indirectly linked to economic factors.
4.3.3 POLICY ELEMENTS: WHAT RULES AND REGULATIONS AFFECT OPPORTUNITIES FOR PHYSICAL
ACTIVITY?
Much of the data in the first part of this section derives from the Healthy School Planner
surveys completed by this school’s Student Success teacher/School Effectiveness Lead (the key
informant). In these surveys, this key informant indicated the school administration is aware of
the need to create a healthy school community, and that some policy work is underway in this
area. The school improvement plan “includes all pillars of comprehensive school health [i.e.
teaching and learning, healthy physical and social environment, healthy school policy,
44
partnerships and services] at least somewhat” and uses multiple data sources to develop school
health goals that are “specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-limited”. Input
regarding physical activity initiatives, on the other hand, was stated to come mainly from a single
source. As the key informant elucidated in our interview:
Our school improvement plan has some points in there regarding student health. And
when we we’re talking about health, we mean it pretty holistically- the whole person.
But that’s written in our school improvement plan and our teachers are very aware of
the cultural issues with diabetes for example, and some of the limitations with diet.
It was also indicated that a majority of school staff had participated in “learning opportunities
related to creating a healthy school community in the last 12 months”. Despite most healthy
school initiatives being embedded in the school’s action plan and implemented school wide, it
was shown that few of these healthy initiatives are related to physical activity. Physical activity
policies are communicated at least once annually within the school community, through both
verbal and written methods.
In terms of assessment of school health policies, it was noted that in general, the school
formally assesses implementation and progress toward goals once annually. However,
implementation of physical activity-specific policies is reviewed less than once per year. With
regards to DPA, two teachers specifically mentioned that this policy is not closely monitored.
Two other teachers identified this as a barrier to regular provision of DPA, in comparison to
other school goals and policies to which teachers are held more accountable. As one participant
explained:
There’s not, for me as a teacher, a lot of accountability around whether I’m doing
DPA every day...sometimes when I hear that other teachers aren’t doing it, I wonder
why am I spending instructional time doing it? But I know the importance of it, so
I’ll still do it anyway.
45
The principal did not dispute the fact that DPA is not closely supervised. She explained, “I let
teachers do what they can with it... I allow teachers to make decisions that provide them with
ownership as well.” Yet, one newer teacher expressed her frustration with this approach to DPA
policy implementation:
I just think the administration or someone needs to…be more clear as to what we
should be doing, because right now, I don’t know if it’s just in our school or if it’s
everywhere, but I feel like it’s very ‘loosy goosy'.
Thus, there is clear scope for the policy expectations to be better defined, if not more closely
assessed, by the school administration. Furthermore, a more balanced policy focus on all aspects
of school health, including physical activity-related health initiatives, is warranted, as this aspect
of health appears to be receiving much less attention than areas such as nutrition.
Teachers have played an active role in defining health policy at this school, and
demonstrate the desire to continue doing so. As one participant outlined in her interview:
[The consistency of the school’s health message to students] has gotten a lot
better....But that was a lot of teacher-pushing, that new school health beverage
policy...A lot of people showed what was going on to convince the administration.
Teachers also expressed some policy recommendations to improve opportunities for physical
activity at school. These included the suggestion to open the gym for students during indoor
recess so they have a chance to move around more freely than they can in the classroom. Another
suggestion was to reconsider the restrictions of provincial policy around what is defined as
inclement weather:
If it’s -25 [degrees celcius] or lower with the wind chill, they have to stay inside,
which is kind of too bad because -25 up here is nothing to the kids. They’ll gladly go
play outside. But that’s the Ontario policy. I keep saying we should change it up
here.5
5 As a cultural outsider, I was impressed to note how appropriately the school students and staff dressed for the
extreme cold. It was a rather humorous sight for me to witness teachers “transform” in the staff room each morning,
46
At the time of this research, there were no structured opportunities through the school for
students to be active outside of instructional time. However, this is an exceptional year, with the
union for public elementary school teachers in Ontario being on a “work-to-rule” mandate (i.e.
not participating in extracurricular activities). Hence, this is not necessarily indicative of how
things are normally run at this school.
Another area of consideration regarding the school policy environment is the role of
students. Currently, students at this school do not play a role in shaping the policies that affect
them, as explained by both the principal and the key informant. However, involving students in
this respect is on the agenda for this school. As the key informant explained:
Student leadership is something that we are really hoping to work towards. We
haven’t had a student council in years. And looking to, again, a Ministry initiative
with having co-created success criteria in the classroom, that’s something that we’re
hoping to push towards.
It is possible that students, particularly less enthusiastic intermediate level students whose
teachers say they do not enjoy DPA, would be more engaged if actively involved in the planning
of it. Much like the principal here intends to do for her teaching staff, involving students in
setting the direction for their DPA would provide them with greater ownership of this policy
designed for their benefit.
School-specific policies may also facilitate or hinder implementation of Ministry policies
such as DPA. For example, limited access to the gym space means that teachers must rely more
heavily on their own classroom space for DPA, which does not enable certain forms of physical
activity (e.g. due to safety concerns). In her interview, one teacher commented: “We share a gym
with a school’s population that is just one quarter of ours, which doesn’t make any sense”.
as they partook in what had become their normal routine of removing snow pants, heavy-duty winter boots, and
multiple layers of thermal winter gear, eventually revealing their professional attire underneath.
47
Addressing the current arrangement of access to this space, whereby each school has equal
access, administrators at the two schools might work to ensure more proportionate access.
Finally, despite the merit of any policy, it is important that it not become lost amidst the
barrage of new education policies. As one participant illustrated: “It’s like dodgeball now.
People are like, do I have time to do this? Do I have time to do that? People, because they’re so
busy... it’s always adding, adding, adding, and where is the time coming from?” In response to
being shown the Ministry of Education’s School Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical
Activity (Appendix 4), the key informant at this school responded as such: “This is awesome!
Can I keep this?” Hence, having well laid-out measurable, step-by-step goals, as the Ministry has
done for various aspects of DPA policy, can resonate with administrators. It is important then
that administrators are aware of these evaluation frameworks. At this school, despite the
framework having been available since 2006, neither the principal nor key informant
acknowledged being familiar with it prior to being part of this study.
4.3.4 SOCIO-CULTURAL ELEMENTS: WHAT ARE THE ATTITUDES, BELIEFS, VALUES AND CULTURAL
NORMS TOWARD DPA AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN GENERAL?
Integration of health and physical activity into school life
In the Healthy School Planner surveys, it was indicated that this school “integrates health
and wellbeing during instructional and non-instructional time”. Concurring with this, one teacher
described an aspect that makes this school unique to other schools in the province: “I guess more
of an individual student is taken into account, and maybe more of a holistic approach versus just
academics.” While general student health was acknowledged as an important part of the
approach to curriculum, physical activity as a distinct component of healthy living was given less
prominence. Responses on the Healthy School planner surveys expressed the following: “Our
48
school sometimes encourages physical activity and/or rarely uses it for discipline”; “Our school
minimally engages students in the promotion of physical activity”; and “Our school community6
has encouraged physical activity to a minimal extent”. Moreover, students were not included in
planning of school-based physical activities: “Students with a range of skills and characteristics
do not play a leadership role in the organization of school activities” and “None of our students
are engaged in the planning of physical activities occurring outside of curriculum time”. It was
also indicated that equal student access to organized physical activities, inclusive of gender,
grade, ability and financial resources, was rarely available. Arguably, in this context, a policy
mandating physical activity during instructional time may not be seen as a priority by educators.
Formally recognized value of school health and DPA
Closely related to the policy elements already discussed is formal recognition by school
administration that school health is important. As indicated by the key informant via the Healthy
School Planner surveys, this school communicates that “healthier students are better learners” at
least annually, and “celebrates successful healthy school initiatives within or beyond the school
more than twice per year”. As previously mentioned, the school improvement plan includes
items specific to student health. Teachers recognized the formal mandate of DPA provision, with
90% of teachers indicating “fulfilling curriculum requirements” as one of the main reasons they
implement DPA.
Despite this, DPA policy appears not to be formally endorsed by administrators within or
beyond this school. The principal felt that this was a “good” policy, but came into her role
several years after it was introduced, and admitted she knows relatively little about it. She
conveyed that much of what she knows about the policy was learned through word of mouth, and
6 Here, the term “community” refers to the broader school community, including parents and local
organizations/partners.
49
that regarding this specific policy, “the Ministry hasn’t really told me anything”. Perhaps
following this, this principal confirmed that she does not closely monitor implementation of
DPA, and this was reiterated in teacher interviews. In terms of supporting teachers to be active
themselves, in line with the general goals of DPA, the key informant noted that: “Staff members
at our school have minimum support to engage in personal health and well-being activities.”
Additionally, there may not be a consistent message to students regarding the importance of
healthy living, as explained by one frustrated teacher: “It’s like the right hand’s not speaking
with the left hand...I know the DPA side, but it goes hand in hand with what the school’s serving
in terms of food and what they encourage and what they discourage.” It may be inferred that in
order for teachers to value DPA, there must be formal and consistent recognition of this as an
important area of focus, as demonstrated by school administration. As one teacher poignantly
stated: “I think with the effectiveness of the policy it’s all about how you internalize it...Because
DPA is not just something in a context, it’s about a concept; it’s about up-taking it other places
outside of the classroom.”
Community support of physical activity and DPA
The broader community, including parents, is not closely involved in the life of this
school. In the Healthy School Planner surveys, it was noted that “our school has some
partnerships with minimal supports” contributing to a healthy school community, and that the
school “promotes partnerships to supplement student access to different forms of physical
activity to some extent”. Examples of partnerships promoting student physical activity tended to
be community-based rather than school-based, with teachers at the school engaged as community
volunteers and/or school facilities used outside of school hours. An example of this was an
Aboriginal People's Alliance of Northern Ontario (APANO) program being introduced during
50
the time of the study, which used the school’s gym space after school hours to teach students
about healthy living through nutrition and physical activity. It was indicated that community
members rarely volunteer at this school for any events in general, despite the school recognizing
and celebrating the efforts of volunteers “to some extent”. Informal conversations with staff
corroborated this finding.
One of the questions posed in teacher interviews was “do you think that parents would
value a policy like DPA?” While one teacher simply said “probably not”, the others qualified
their negative answers by saying that it depends on whether parents are physically active in their
own lives. One teacher painted a rather dismal image of parental norms in this community:
I look at the parents that participate in anything the town offers, and it’s not the
greatest show-up or display...the parents that participate in what the town offers, if
it’s a baseball tournament or a soccer tournament, and then who quickly go out and
have a smoke...that gets relayed down to the kids.
Beyond parental attitudes and norms, the community at large was also described as one in which
physical activity opportunities are not well-established. One teacher explained:
I guess one of the barriers- I guess not really with the school but with the town-
there’s not that many physical activity community events for the students to do…
this morning, there was an announcement that the Friendship Centre was going to
have two age groups for basketball for 8 weeks. And if I ever hear announcements
like that- I went into another teacher’s room and I was like ‘FINALLY, the
community’s doing something!’ Because if it’s not the school and if it’s not a church
and if you’re not willing to shell out money for hockey tournaments, you’re not
going to have a lot to do.
It is important to note that parents’ views of DPA are being described here as perceived
by teachers, and not by parents themselves. Nevertheless, where teachers’ classroom practice is
influenced by what they perceive to be the expectations of these parents, DPA would not likely
be a priority.
51
Teacher attitudes toward physical activity and DPA
When surveyed, an overwhelming majority (90%) of teachers at this school indicated that
they have a “moderate to strong” interest in health and physical education, but no subject-
specific specialization for teaching it. Additionally, the key informant at this school self-
identifies as a physical education and health “champion”, and is similarly recognized by the
principal. All three teachers interviewed discussed recent opportunities for teachers at their
school to seek professional development (PD) around physical education, health and DPA, and
reported that these were well-attended by school staff. However, as the key informant alluded:
Often what you’re seeing is the same teachers who decided to go to the phys ed PD
in 2009 are the same ones who are going to the DPA PD in 2011. They’re the people
who see the value in it and want to increase their professional knowledge. So how do
you get the other ones?
Interviews made evident that DPA is not a commonly-discussed topic among teachers, either in
informal professional talks or in formal professional learning community settings. The principal
did not show concern with teachers’ professional knowledge around DPA, saying: “We do have
a number of teachers who are very active in their personal lives and that comes into their
classroom practice.” One teacher expressed her views around the motivation of teachers’
continuing self-education around DPA: “It’s great that teachers are wanting to do it [professional
development for DPA]...the teacher’s want to do it, they put extra effort into it...We need
supports, I guess. Healthy role models in the school are important.”
From the teacher survey data, 70% of teachers considered themselves to be physically
active role models for their students; another 20% were not sure, and only 10% believed they
were not. In a question about facilitators of DPA implementation, 50% of survey respondents
indicated they regularly provide DPA because they personally value physical activity and want
to model this for their students. When asked in interviews if they enjoyed having DPA in their
52
class, two of the three teachers said that they did. In classroom observations, it was seen that
these teachers also actively participated in DPA with their class. The third teacher replied:
“Some days [I enjoy it]. Sometimes I find it hard, and I find there’s a lot of behaviour issues that
can come out of it because they get really excited, and sometimes I find it difficult.”
Notwithstanding, this teacher still demonstrated that she values physical activity and wants to
foster this among her class:
I’ve always been really physically active, so I tell that to the kids and I try to explain
it as well. I think it’s important because you get so many good friends…I coach
soccer here, and I had a few of these students here on my team last year. It’s really
nice, and I try to encourage the kids to get involved.
Thus, it is apparent that teachers’ personal attitudes toward physical activity do not necessarily
translate into their approach to DPA. Other factors are also salient, such as the perceived fit of
DPA with achieving student health goals. This same teacher commented that DPA doesn’t
significantly contribute to student health: “Overall, is it going to help them to lose weight or
anything? I don’t think so. No.” As the key informant elucidated:
Teachers already feel they don’t have enough time to cover the curriculum
expectations and now they’re thinking ‘oh my god, now I’ve got to take 20 minutes
out of my instructional time to let the kids jump around and be silly’ so they don’t
see the value in it.
Responses were somewhat divided around whether teachers would continue to schedule
DPA if it were not mandatory; 70% said either “yes, definitely” or “yes, probably”, while 30%
replied with “probably not” or “definitely not”. The one teacher who indicated “definitely not”
also gave an explanatory comment for their response: “I feel under pressure with EQAO to get
through all units/strands before the end of May, in Language and Math, and make those my
priority areas.” High student absenteeism was also observed and raised as an issue by two of
three interviewees at this school. This presents a challenge to continuity of curriculum programs,
and may impact the vigilance with which teachers commit to scheduled DPA.
53
Reasons for implementing DPA included “it is beneficial for students’ physical and/or
mental health” (100% of respondents), and “it is beneficial for student learning” (60% of
respondents). The principal noted that teachers and students feel DPA is important, and all
teachers interviewed corroborated this with varying degrees of agreement. In spite of the school
policy data outlined in the previous section that suggests otherwise, the key informant declared:
I would say that’s high on our priorities list, is physical activity. So even though they
might not like to do DPA in their room all the time, [classroom teachers] are getting
out and doing things like skating or taking them and going snow shoeing or going for
walks and things like that.
Student attitudes toward physical activity and DPA
While not a specific focus of this study, the theme of student enjoyment as a barrier or
facilitator of DPA became evident through teacher interviews and surveys. 40% of survey
respondents indicated the fact that their students enjoy DPA as one of the reasons they provide it;
conversely, 20% of respondents said they do not provide DPA as often as prescribed because a
majority of students in their class do not enjoy it. One intermediate teacher emphatically stated:
“My students HATE DPA in the classroom. They act out and make it very difficult.” Another
teacher commented:
I find as you get older they don’t want to do it as much. Last year my grade 7/8 class,
they really didn’t have any interest in DPA... This year I try to find things they enjoy
like tag, or the game we did this morning, because then they actually do it.
Enjoyment of DPA was not found to be solely an age-specific phenomenon though, as a teacher
of a primary class also stated that many children in her class didn’t like to do it. This teacher
described her approach to engaging these students:
We have a lot of [very shy] kids...And I don’t know if it’s home life or whatever.
There’s a lot of anxiety… I try and make it fun for them. I think what works best
though is structured stuff...But I still see a lot of kids who are reluctant to participate.
54
However, not all children rebelled against DPA. A junior teacher shared her positive experience
with DPA: “Last year the counselor came in and said ‘what was your best time of the day?’ and
18 out of the 20 students said DPA. They like it.” Perhaps not coincidentally, this teacher’s
described and observed approach to DPA in her class was the most structured and focused of the
three observed classes at this school. This teacher also previously taught an intermediate class,
and did not mention any differences in student enjoyment of DPA between the age groups. Thus,
it would appear that strong leadership on the part of the teacher, rather than doing what will
generate the least resistance from students, is more effective for encouraging participation in
DPA, especially when students are tentative to begin with.
Overall, there are a variety of contextual considerations at play, including direct barriers
and facilitators for DPA, as well as more subtle influencing factors. These will be revisited in
section 4.5 in a comparative summary to the context findings of the second case study school,
and then considered in relation to implementation of DPA in section 4.6.
4.4 THE CONTEXT: GTA SUBURBAN SCHOOL
4.4.1 PHYSICAL ELEMENTS: WHAT FACILITIES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PHYSICAL ACTIVITY?
Perceptions about the facilities for physical activity at this school did not always appear
to be consistent with what was available. The results of the Healthy School Planner survey,
completed at this school by the vice principal, revealed students sometimes have access to a
variety of facilities and equipment outside of curriculum time, that indoor space for physical
activities is often available during inclement weather and that the school has a safe physical
environment with inclusive access. Despite this, facilities for students to be physically active
were rated as merely “adequate”.
55
In response to a question on the teacher survey regarding barriers to implementation of
DPA, 60% of teachers cited “inadequate facilities”, which is double the proportion of teachers
citing this barrier at the Northern school. Regarding indoor facilities, this school has a large
gym, which it does not share with any other institutions (e.g. other schools) during school hours.
This space was observed to be divided in half by a curtain one afternoon when the space was
needed for an assembly practice, such that the class scheduled to be in the gym during that period
did not need to surrender its physical education time. Hence, gym time for classes might be
increased by allowing more than one class to use the gym at the same time, either dividing the
gym or combining classes as was done at the Northern school.
As a school with declining enrolment, this school is also fortunate to have plenty of
physical space within the building which could theoretically house curricular physical activities.
It was observed that there are two full-time French classrooms where students go for French
instruction (rather than having the French teacher come to the students’ homeroom class, as is
done in the Northern school), as well as a classroom functioning as a student computer lab, and
an empty classroom that was in the process of being converted into a chapel. The principal
indicated that, in a previous year, this chapel space had been a games room where students with
behavioral challenges could go as a reward at recess, and could practice cooperative behaviour as
modelled by teachers. He explained that the school is now transitioning to the provision of
intramural sports in the gym to fulfill that purpose. Thus, there appears to be flexibility with how
extra space at this school is used, and surplus classrooms could feasibly be designed to be used
as a “DPA room” or something similar if there were support for such an idea.
The appropriateness of classroom space for DPA was explored in teacher interviews. In
her interview, the intermediate teacher shared: “I am lucky, because my room is much larger
56
than most. My room facilitates [in-class DPA] much better than most at this school; I would
guess that most people would say space is a barrier.” In line with this, the junior teacher
explained some of the difficulties she found with Ministry-provided resources for DPA:
The only dilemma is- look at this, 10 wall push-ups, 10 tucks jumps and so on in the
corner- there’s very little wall space here. I don’t know how I would do 10 wall
push-ups. .. We need the space for math equipment, our sacred space, etc. I tried
going around the desks, but we had trouble.
Possibly owing to the fact that young students occupy less physical space (i.e. their bodies are
smaller), the primary teacher did not discuss classroom space as an area of concern for DPA.
Both the intermediate and junior teacher also made use of the hallway for DPA where
appropriate space was not available in the classroom. This use of hallway and stair space also
facilitated new forms of physical activity. For example, the intermediate teacher incorporated
movement up and down the stairs as an illustrative component of a science unit on energy, and
the junior teacher was observed to lead her class on a brisk walk around the school hallways and
up and down each of the four stairwells for DPA.
This school is also fortunate to have more than adequate outdoor facilities for DPA.
Although these were not being utilized at the time of the study (due to the time of year), during
autumn and spring months all teachers have access to a baseball diamond and a large field which
was noted to be able to accommodate multiple soccer games at one time. There are also
basketball courts on a large paved area which is kept cleared during winter months, and thus
could potentially also be used for DPA on milder winter days.
Owing to this school being located in an affluent suburban community that is well-
connected to nearby communities/cities by public infrastructure, availability of nearby facilities
for physical activity (e.g. public swimming pools, community recreation centres, indoor ice
rinks) was not discussed as it was at the Northern school. The principal noted that the local
57
public health unit offered a “Swim to Survive” program for students at the local pool, and
commented that he would like to develop partnerships with local community centres to acquire
access to these facilities. Another teacher suggested that approximately two thirds of students are
involved in community sports outside of the school setting. Hence, availability of facilities
outside of the school would not be considered a barrier to DPA at this school as it is at the
Northern school.
As with facilities, resources and equipment for DPA were also perceived to be less than
adequate by those teachers interviewed. Similarly to the Northern school, a common complaint
was that the Ministry-provided books of activity ideas had limited value, in that they either
required space that was not available (e.g. wall space for wall push-ups), presented safety
concerns (e.g. students banging into desks) or were not sufficiently vigorous to achieve the
fitness-related goals of DPA. However, a variety of other resources are available to supplement
these. Each classroom was noted to have a CD player, and all teachers were either observed to
use these during DPA or alluded in their interviews that they are used for DPA. All classes had
also been provided with equipment for DPA when the policy was introduced; teachers described
a wide variety of items, from bubble wands to jump ropes to rubber chickens. While one teacher
noted that she would like to have more equipment for in-class DPA, others noted that they have
the opportunity to purchase more equipment, as needed, which is covered by the school budget.
Unlike the Northern school, TVs and DVD players were not widely available here, yet teachers
did not specifically identify that these were necessary for improving DPA.
4.4.2 ECONOMIC ELEMENTS: WHAT FINANCIAL BARRIERS AND/OR FACILITATORS EXIST FOR DPA?
At this school, economic elements did not present the same potential challenges toward
implementation of DPA as were observed at the Northern school. According to 2011/2012
58
school year data from the School Information Finder tool (MOE, 2013), just 5% of the student
population comes from lower-income households, and 52% of parents have some university
education (an indicator of wealth). Compared to the provincial averages of 16.5% and 36.9% for
these two items, respectively, this places the school above average in terms of the socioeconomic
status of its student body. Teachers and the principal agreed that “Yes, this area is affluent”, and
that the school demographic is middle to upper class.
It was also indicated in one teacher interview that this student body, compared to others
with which this teacher has worked in her 25 years of teaching, is more heavily involved in
organized sports activities outside of the school context: “I would say at least two thirds are
active. And I find with the whole school population, it’s an extremely active, team-sport oriented
group.” Opportunities to participate in such activities are generally more available to students
whose families can afford to enroll them. Another teacher mentioned that her class is performing
very well academically: “My class grades are fantastic. I have two kids in the class- three kids-
that have 3 or 4 Cs on their report cards. The rest are all As and Bs. Good, solid students.” While
these observations may not be directly economic in nature, arguably they are indicative of the
financial stability and security of families at this school, and following that, the general health of
these families.7 Thus, although not stated directly by staff at this school, a focus on health and
physical activity might be perceived as less salient here, with the notion that these needs are
largely being met in students’ home lives.
The only mention of an economic “barrier” around DPA was the principal’s desire that
outside service providers offering quality physical activity programming to the school should
obtain their own funding, such that the school is not left to foot the bill.
7 There are recognized links in the literature between health and socioeconomic status (Freund & McGuire, 1999).
59
4.4.3 POLICY ELEMENTS: WHAT RULES AND REGULATIONS AFFECT OPPORTUNITIES FOR PHYSICAL
ACTIVITY?
From a policy standpoint, this school has formally recognized the importance of a healthy
school environment. According to the Healthy School Planner surveys, all staff at this school
have participated in learning opportunities related to creating a healthy school community in the
last 12 months. This school implements most of its healthy school initiatives school-wide and
embeds them into the school’s action plan. This action plan includes all of the pillars of
comprehensive school health to some degree, and incorporates data from all groups within the
school community in its goal-setting, although the team creating this plan consists of just one or
two members from one perspective.
It was noted that physical activity initiatives are also somewhat embedded into these
plans. For example, the principal explained that one priority area of focus for this school year is
“Safe Schools”, which aims to create a positive school environment with respect to anti-bullying
and mental health. One aspect of the Safe Schools strategy is the Playground Activity Leaders in
Schools (PALS) program. In this program, older students (generally grades 4-7) are trained by a
child and youth worker to be “certified” to lead sports and other games at recess for students in
grades 1-4. These student leaders are encouraged to target and include students who are lonely or
not participating in other games at recess, although all young students are welcome to join in the
activities. Although physical activity is not the goal of this program, it is the medium through
which another school goal is being addressed. Similarly, the principal explained that intramural
sports were being organized for the first time this year, both as a behaviour management strategy
and “because it’s just good fun”. Despite not being rooted in health-related goals, this initiative
also works through increasing physical activity.
60
The Healthy School Planner surveys also indicated that the school reviews the
implementation of healthy school policies and practices at least annually, including those
specifically related to physical activity. Using existing information or gathering evidence, these
policies are updated at least once per year. The school also formally assesses its progress on
creating a healthy school community more than once per year. Physical activity policies and
practices are communicated at least annually to the broader school community, including
students, through multiple methods, both written and verbal. Students play a leadership role in
the organization of most school activities, including participation on a variety of committees and
councils such as the PALS program, as observed and as indicated by the school principal.
Currently, the school does not have student representation in the development of its action plan;
rather, students play a role in implementing strategies as outlined by school administration.
The principal stated that he does not “check up” on teachers with respect to DPA, and
that it is left up to teachers’ professional judgment to do what they feel is appropriate in their
class. While the theme of insufficient monitoring DPA was salient in the Northern school, it was
not specifically raised as an area of concern at this school.
Although administration may not hold teachers accountable to implementation of this
policy, there are a variety of school policies impacting the ways in which DPA is approached.
One example is the scheduling of planning time for primary teachers, part of which takes place
during their class physical education time slots twice per week; here, the teacher librarian takes
over the class to relieve the teacher. In an observation of this teacher librarian leading a primary
physical education class, she demonstrated competence in classroom management and provided
games which the students enjoyed and in which they were engaged. In an interview with the
primary teacher, it was noted that the teacher librarian coaches a variety of school teams, but
61
does not have any specialized training in physical education and health. There may be potential
to improve the quality of physical education instruction for primary students by investing in
training for this role. In some cases, administrative staffing decisions already reflect the need to
leverage the unique strengths of teachers. This is illustrated at the intermediate grade level,
where one teacher who is a physical education specialist (i.e. he has a university degree in
kinesiology) teaches physical education to both his class and another class, while the teacher
whose class he takes for physical education teaches her specialty- art- to his class.
Regarding DPA that takes place outside of physical education, other school policies often
appear to compete with rather than compliment consistent implementation. While the principal
explained that he was generally in favour of the idea of whole-school DPA (i.e. a routine
announced over the school audio system at a set time each day), he also explained how the
scheduling of other curriculum areas, particularly literacy and numeracy blocks each morning
but also French and physical education, made this nearly impossible in terms of finding a time
that was free for every class on a daily basis. Another teacher seconded this conclusion, saying:
“The literacy block expectations from the Ministry are so strict in terms of the number of
minutes, and you’ve got people who have French at different times, that you really can’t do that
in this particular environment.”
A large majority (83%) of survey respondents cited that time restraints related to other
academic priorities were a barrier to DPA implementation; 27% also indicated that other school
goals are more closely monitored and hence take priority over DPA. Further this, teachers spoke
in interviews to the time demands of other curriculum areas for integrating DPA into their own
classrooms: “I can’t foresee [DPA implementation] getting any better just because the day seems
so tight, to be perfectly honest. So that’s the challenge”; “I don’t know how to integrate it with
62
the amount of curriculum we’re expected to cover… for me to take a chunk of 20 minutes for
DPA, it takes a really big chunk out of whatever else you are doing.” Time pressures are
increased for teachers of grades in EQAO testing years: “There’s pressure to complete
everything by a certain date- therefore, taking 20 minutes a day is going to eat away at that ever-
dwindling time. It’s terrible! There is so much to cover, it is stressful.”
Finally, as with the situation at the Northern school, school staff perceive that DPA has
been lost among the multiple other policies and initiatives constantly being introduced. For
example, when presented with the Ministry of Education’s School Implementation Continuum
for Daily Physical Activity (Appendix 4), the principal was unfamiliar with this framework. As
one teacher explained:
There are so many initiatives- it’s one of the many. But I don’t think that it’s a
priority. I’m sorry to say that. Right now EcoSchools is a priority. That’s just started
here this year, as opposed to DPA. DPA came out a while ago. It’s almost as if you
have to reintroduce it. I don’t know- people have to want to know, they have to
realize that it’s part of healthy schools.
4.4.4 SOCIO-CULTURAL ELEMENTS: WHAT ARE THE ATTITUDES, BELIEFS, VALUES AND CULTURAL
NORMS TOWARD DPA AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN GENERAL?
Integration of health and physical activity into school life
In the Healthy School Planner surveys, it was indicated that this school “integrates health
and wellbeing during non-instructional time but not during instructional time”. Unlike the
Northern school where health was rarely addressed via physical activity, here the health focus
was strongly related to physical activity. Several indicators on these surveys demonstrated that
extra-curricular physical activity was an important aspect of the school culture: “Our school
sometimes encourages physical activity and/or rarely uses it for discipline”; “Our school fully
engages students in the promotion of physical activity”; and “Our school community has
encouraged physical activity to some extent”. Furthermore, students here are highly involved in
63
school-based activities: “Students with a range of skills and characteristics play a leadership role
in the organization of most school activities” and “Most of our students engage in the planning of
physical activity occurring outside of curriculum time.” It was also indicated that equal student
access to organized physical activities was “often available”, inclusive of gender, grade, ability
and financial resources. The PALS program and intramurals described by the principal are key
examples of these survey indicators in practice. It was also observed at a school assembly that
extracurricular sports were an important focus, and prestige was afforded to those who
participated on school teams.
The pride of place held by extracurricular physical activity at this school may also be
reflected somewhat in curricular physical activity, i.e. DPA. As one teacher shared, “At 2
o’clock- when it’s not winter- you’d see a lot of different classes out there doing various things.
So everyone’s out there at that time… we had a few classes out there playing soccer at one
point.” On the teacher survey, another teacher noted one of the facilitators for implementing
DPA in their class was that, “it is the norm at this school to be active as a class on a daily basis.”
It is also possible that DPA might be recognized as less important due to physical activity needs
being met through other avenues, such as intramurals and other extracurricular activities.
Formally recognized value of school health and DPA
According to the Healthy School Planner surveys completed by this school’s vice
principal, this school communicates that “healthier students are better learners” at least annually,
and “celebrates successful healthy school initiatives within or beyond the school more than twice
per year”. As previously mentioned, the school improvement plan addresses the four pillars of
comprehensive school health to at least some extent. A majority of teachers (87%) stated that
64
fulfillment of curriculum requirements was one of the facilitators for regular implementation of
DPA, hence a formal recognition of this policy.
DPA policy appears to be formally endorsed by the administration at this school, albeit
without strong leadership to encourage its actual implementation. The principal felt that this was
an important policy, and one teacher elucidated that, “Our principal actually has gone out and
purchased skipping ropes and equipment for the kids so he does believe in it [DPA].” However,
this teacher then continued to say: “And that’s how he supports us, and to remind us that it’s
important to include DPA. But beyond that…” Thus, while health and DPA are recognized as
important, DPA does not appear to rank as a priority focus in the eyes of the school leader.
Community support of physical activity and DPA
In stark contrast to the story at the Northern school, the parents of this school community
are very involved in the life of this school. Parental engagement with school life was observed
first hand, where approximately 10 rows of chairs were set up spanning the width of the school
gym to accommodate parents attending a mid-afternoon school assembly. In the Healthy School
Planner surveys, it was noted that community members regularly volunteer in the school and that
the school acknowledges and celebrates the contributions of its volunteers “to the full extent”. It
was indicated that the school fully encourages partnerships with other community organizations
to supplement student access to different forms of physical activity, yet currently such
partnerships to support a healthy school community are not well-established.
In response to the question, “do you think that parents value the DPA policy?” two of the
teachers interviewed felt parents may not even know about DPA. One of these teachers
explained, “It’s not something that’s generally talked about or celebrated. For example, I don’t
even evaluate it; it’s just part of our daily- it’s like eating lunch…both feed the body and they’re
65
both necessary for a healthy lifestyle.” In contrast to this, the third teacher interviewed
commented that students in her class value DPA and share this with their parents, and that she
has experienced having parents follow up with her if she failed to provide DPA on occasion.
Students at this school are also more likely to be involved in organized sports outside of school,
as previously mentioned. This may either positively influence parental perceptions of DPA, as
they already see some value in physical activity for their children, or negatively influence these
perceptions, if parents feel this need is already adequately met outside of curricular time.
Teacher and student attitudes toward physical activity and DPA
From teacher surveys, nearly three quarters (73%) of teachers at this school indicated that
they have a “moderate to strong” interest in health and physical education, but no subject-
specific specialization for teaching it. There is one teacher with a physical education and health
specialist degree (kinesiology). Unlike the Northern school, the only mention of recent
opportunities for teachers at their school to seek professional development (PD) around physical
education or DPA was the 20% of teacher survey respondents who said they had received this
PD at school at some point. In an interview, one teacher commented that the specialist teacher
had attended PD through the school, and that he is the “go-to guy for all things phys ed.”
Teacher survey data showed that 73% of teachers considered themselves to be physically
active role models for their students; another 20% were not sure, and only one respondent
believed they were not. Two thirds of survey respondents indicated they regularly provide DPA
because they personally value physical activity and want to model this for their students. One
teacher suggested that one way to enhance DPA would be to provide opportunities for teachers
to be active at school, through something like drop-in yoga classes before or after school. As she
explained:
66
That would create healthier minds. Because the kids are challenging these days, and
sometimes parents are challenging too…That would be a great support system to
have. I think if teachers are supported in this and then they’re going to realize the
benefits, and then they’re going to transfer that to the kids.
Providing this kind of support for teachers may be warranted, as it was indicated on the Healthy
School Planner survey that “staff members at our school have minimum support to engage in
personal health and well-being activities.”
All three teachers interviewed agreed that they enjoy DPA time in their class, that it is an
important policy to have in schools, and that physical activity plays and has long played an
important role in their own lives. One teacher expressed her regret that she cannot participate
with her students as fully as she once did, due to physical restrictions recently imposed upon her
by a medical condition: “it’s like ‘do as I say and not as I do’; I don’t like that philosophy where
I have to bow out.” In classroom observations, this teacher participated as much as her
restrictions would allow her to do, and was honest with her students about the reasons she was
not participating in every exercise. The other two teachers observed also participated as fully as
the activity would allow (i.e. when they did not need to referee students in a game).
Interestingly, responses were much divided as to whether teachers would continue to
schedule DPA if it were not mandatory; only 47% said either “yes, definitely” or “yes,
probably”, while another 47% said they were not sure. Just one teacher indicated “probably not.”
Reasons for implementing DPA included “it is beneficial for students’ physical and/or mental
health” (93% of respondents), and “it is beneficial for student learning” (73% of respondents).
Feedback from students was also explored as an important facilitator of DPA. 60% of
survey respondents expressed student enjoyment as a reason they implement DPA. The theme of
student enjoyment also came up in each of the teacher interviews. One teacher said her students
“are excited about having it… the majority of kids really respond to being active and just
67
participating”; another teacher said it was one way to keep her students engaged in school, and
the third said, “I get busy teaching, but I always have someone remind me about DPA.” It was
observed that the primary and junior classes engaged much more enthusiastically with DPA than
did the intermediate students, which somewhat parallels the findings at the Northern school.
Hand in hand with student enjoyment, behaviour management was also noted as a reason for
regularly incorporating DPA into the daily schedule. One teacher stated, “I find for the most part,
[kids being active] does keep the degree of behaviour issues to a minimum.” This sentiment was
echoed by both of the other teachers. The principal also alluded to this, but from a slightly
different angle, in saying that physical activity is especially beneficial for students who exhibit
behavioral difficulties in the classroom.
4.5 COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF THE TWO SCHOOL CONTEXTS
Physical Elements
The physical environment can be broadly broken down into the elements of facilities and
resources. In terms of access to facilities for DPA and other physical activity opportunities in the
broader community, the GTA school fared much better than the Northern school. Paradoxically,
double the proportion of teachers at the GTA school cited “inadequate facilities” as a barrier to
DPA implementation, compared to the Northern school. For resources, both schools generally
perceived that they had adequate resources in terms of equipment, but that Ministry-provided
informational resources were less than adequate.
Northern School GTA Suburban School
Physical
Elements:
What facilities
are available
for physical
activity?
This school has limited access to the gym,
which is shared with two other schools; this is
especially problematic for intermediate
teachers for whom DPA in the classroom is
challenging, and in cold winter months when
going outside is not an option.
There is generally good access to the gym and
extra classroom space at this school; however,
facilities are largely perceived by staff to be
less than adequate. There is potential for
space to be leveraged more effectively to
increase opportunities for DPA.
Table continued on next page
68
There are limited facilities outside of the
school setting for students to participate in
organized physical activity (e.g. curling rink
and swimming pool both closed; ice rink is one
of the only public facilities available in winter
months).
There are a range of facilities outside of the
school setting for students to participate in
organized physical activity (e.g. swimming
pool, community recreation centres, and
indoor and outdoor skating rinks all within
driving or public transit commuting distance).
There are adequate physical resources available for teachers to lead DPA; there is room for
improvement of Ministry-provided informational resources.
Table 2: Summary of elements of the physical environment.
Economic Elements
Economic elements were less central to the discussion of DPA specifically, but they may
potentially underlie policy implementation in an indirect manner. School funding was mentioned
as a challenge at the Northern school. The issue was not raised at the GTA school, except for a
point made that outside health organizations should bring their own funding rather than relying
on the school. (Another apparent paradox will later be noted in the discussion of implementation
data, relating to this point.)
Northern School GTA Suburban School
Economic
Elements: What
financial
barriers/facilitators
exist for DPA and
physical activity?
There is a perception by school administration
of lower funding for this school compared to
other school boards, thus limiting spending on
staff resources for DPA.
Funding limits may impede this school’s
ability to bring in community service
providers to contribute to DPA.
Systemic poverty in this community presents a
barrier to DPA, as other priority areas
(behaviour management and academics) are
more pressing for teachers.
Affluence of this community may
provide a barrier to DPA due to a sense
that students’ physical health needs are
generally met outside of curricular time.
Recognizable health concerns in the
community provide an impetus for DPA.
No specific economic facilitators for
DPA were identified.
Table 3: Summary of elements of the economic environment.
Socioeconomic status of the two school communities was vastly different, with a high poverty
rate at the Northern school contrasted with a more affluent community at the GTA school. It may
be surmised that a health-focused policy like DPA would be seen as more urgent in the context
of poverty and poorer health; however, both situations also raise their own barriers to the
69
perceived priority of DPA. For example, at a school where students come from wealthier homes,
it may be assumed (whether true or not) that parents are more able to provide them with
opportunities to be physically active outside of school; thus, schools might prioritize academics
over DPA. Likewise in the context of a more financially disadvantaged community, an academic
focus may take precedence as a means to overcome poverty.
Policy Elements
In the exploration of policy elements, some divergent themes were recognized between
schools. Both schools communicated and embedded health-focused policies into their school
action plan, although a specific focus on physical activity-related policies was only found at the
GTA school. Neither school’s administration closely monitors the implementation of DPA, but
this was only recognized as a point of concern at the Northern school. The importance of student
leadership around DPA and other school activities was recognized in both contexts, but was only
addressed in practice at the GTA school.8 Some teachers at the Northern school have been
actively involved in the work around health-related policies at their school, in response to health
concerns for the student body; no such policy activism on the part of teachers was identified at
the GTA school. At the GTA school, it was found that staffing decisions relevant to DPA
somewhat took teacher expertise into account, and this was also true for other subject areas.
Attention to subject expertise was not raised as a theme at the Northern school. Finally, in
relation to Ministry support for DPA policy implementation, it was found that administrative
resources (e.g. the Ministry of Education School Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical
Activity) were not familiar to school leaders. This may be a combined function of DPA being an
8 It is important to note that at the time of the study, the political climate in Ontario public schools was such that no
extracurricular activities were taking place. The Northern school was affected by this, but the GTA school, being
part of the Catholic teachers’ union, was not.
70
older policy, these resources not being more prominently available to administrators, and there
being an over-abundance of new education policies.
Northern School GTA Suburban School Policy Elements:
What rules and
regulations affect
opportunities for
physical activity?
Health-focused policies are embedded in the school action plan, and are reasonably well-
communicated and assessed.
Health policies related specifically to
physical activity are generally less of a
focus.
Health policies related specifically to
physical activity are a key focus.
DPA is not closely monitored at this school.
Lack of close monitoring of DPA is seen as
somewhat of a concern.
Lack of close monitoring of DPA is not
seen as a concern.
Teachers are actively involved in the health
policy-setting agenda at this school.
Teachers’ role in the health policy-setting
agenda was not mentioned.
A need has been recognized for students to be involved in a leadership capacity.
Students are not currently actively involved
as leaders in DPA of other areas.
Student leadership and involvement of
school activities, including those related to
physical activity, is an active focus area at
this school.
Staffing decisions relevant to DPA were not
mentioned; however, the Student Success
Teacher/School Effectiveness Lead
recognized the potential of her role as a DPA
leader.
Staffing decisions relevant to DPA take
teaching expertise into account to some
extent.
Ministry DPA policy resources for administrators should be reintroduced to increase
awareness, especially considering the decreased prominence of this as an older policy.
Table 4: Summary of elements of the policy environment.
Socio-cultural Elements
Of the four contextual aspects of the ANGELO, socio-cultural elements were the richest
in themes. Parallel to the policy elements at both schools, both schools integrated student health
into other areas of student life, but only the GTA school had physical activity as a central
component of this focus. Formally, DPA was not recognized as a priority at the Northern school,
but it was at the GTA school, although this was not well-demonstrated in practice. The two
schools differ greatly with respect to community support for DPA and other physical activity
71
initiatives, with the GTA school having a highly supportive and involved community of parents
and other members, and the Northern school having a noted lack of such support. Student
enjoyment of DPA is more consistent at the GTA school, and this factor appears to be an
important barrier or facilitator to teachers’ interest in implementation. Behaviour management
and health are recognized benefits of DPA at both schools. A majority of teachers self-identify as
having a moderate to strong interest in health and physical education but with no teaching
specialization in that area, though the proportion of teachers claiming this is higher at the
Northern school. There is one specialist teacher at the GTA school, but not at the Northern
school (although the Northern school does have a self-proclaimed physical and health education
“champion”). Finally, while nearly the same proportion of teachers at each school consider
themselves to be physically active role models for their students (70% at the Northern school and
73% at the GTA school), markedly less teachers at the latter school are confident that they would
continue to implement DPA if it were no longer mandated (70% versus 47%, respectively).
Northern School GTA Suburban School
Socio-cultural
Elements: What
are the attitudes,
beliefs, values and
cultural norms
toward DPA and
physical activity in
general?
Student health is recognized as an important area of focus.
Physical activity is not a prominent part of
the health focus at this school.
Physical activity is a prominent part of the
health focus at this school.
DPA is not formally recognized by school
administration as a priority.
DPA is formally recognized as important by
school administration, but less so in practice.
Parental and community support for DPA
appears to be minimal, and parents are not
actively involved in the school community.
Parents are actively involved in the school
community, some community partnerships
exist, and the community is generally
supportive of health and physical activity
initiatives (though not specifically DPA).
Some students do not enjoy DPA.
Teachers reporting this observed that their
students misbehaved or acted too shy to
participate, making it more difficult to lead
the rest of the class.
A majority of students at this school enjoy
DPA, and this is a facilitator for teachers to
implement in regularly.
Table continued on next page
72
DPA is valued by school staff for behaviour management and general student health
benefits.
90% of teacher survey respondents at this
school have a moderate to strong interest in
health and physical education, but no
specialization.
73% of teacher survey respondents at this
school have a moderate to strong interest in
health and physical education, but no
specialization.
There is no recognized specialist teacher,
but there is an identified “champion” in
health and physical education.
There is one recognized specialist teacher
for health and physical education.
Around 70% of teacher survey respondents consider themselves to be physically active role
models.
70% of teacher survey respondents say they
would continue to provide DPA if it were
not required.
47% of teacher survey respondents say they
would continue to provide DPA if it were
not required, 7% would not, and 47% are
not sure.
Table 5: Summary of elements of the socio-cultural environment.
Conclusion
Hence, there are several key considerations of school context, and these overlap and
diverge in many respects between these two schools. The following section will explore
implementation of the policy in these contexts using the three perspectives outlined in Chapter 2:
the school as policy mediator, school as policy critic, and school as policy constructor. Each of
these perspectives provides its own valuable approach to understanding implementation of DPA.
73
4.6 IMPLEMENTATION
4.6.1 THE SCHOOL AS POLICY MEDIATOR
According to the policy mediator perspective, school-level policy implementation is to be
assessed in terms of its consistency with policy goals, and evaluation is “oriented around the
particular policy outcome” (Clune, 1990, p. 259). Policy/Program Memorandum 138: Daily
Physical Activity (DPA) mandates, “a minimum of twenty minutes of sustained moderate to
vigorous physical activity each school day during instructional time” for all elementary school
children in Ontario, including those with special needs (MOE, 2005a, para 4). Thus, evaluating
the policy through this lens would require matching the findings with the success criteria of the
Ministry of Education. These success criteria are outlined in the Ministry of Education’s School
Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical Activity (Appendix 4). This is a three-stage rubric
for school principals and other administrators, broken down into six key areas: leadership,
schedule, student leadership, quality of daily physical activities, resources, and partnership
development (MOE, 2006). Stage 3 represents optimal policy implementation.
All data measures were organized and analyzed according to the various components of
the Continuum framework, and schools were ranked as being at a certain stage of
implementation based on stage definitions as outlined by the rubric. In the summary tables to
follow, these rankings are connoted as those “According to the School-Wide data”. In my
interviews with the school principals and the key informant at the Northern school, interviewees
were also asked to rank their school according to this rubric. This was to see how these leaders
perceived their school to be performing in relation to what the school-wide data suggested.
74
Leadership
In the Ministry’s Continuum framework, leadership is defined with respect to the level of
direction and guidance given to classroom teachers in their implementation of DPA. In Stage 1,
“Teachers are leading daily physical activities without any coordinated support or direction”.
Stage 2 is when, “School leader works with the principal to create an implementation committee
and a school-wide implementation plan”. In Stage 3, “School leader works with the principal and
an established implementation committee towards the full implementation of daily physical
activity in the school” (MOE, 2006, p. 37).
Northern School GTA Suburban School Leadership:
What stage?
As indicated by Principal: 1
As indicated by School Effectiveness
Lead/Student Success Teacher: 1
According to the School-wide data: 1
As indicated by Principal: 2
According to the School-wide data: 1
Who is leading
DPA, and what
is the level of
coordinated
support for
teachers?
There is recognition by administration that health and physical activity initiatives are
important, and this is well-communicated to the school community; however, DPA is not
specifically addressed within this.
Physical education planning is usually shared
between teachers who share gym time.
Physical education planning is done by
classroom teachers, or by other staff who
teach their class for them.
Outside of physical education, teachers largely lead their own DPA.
The administration at this school gives teachers freedom to implement DPA as best suits
them, and teachers are not monitored in their provision of DPA. Teachers do not have
coordinated support for curricular DPA.
One teacher specifically commented that lack of
monitoring and specific direction is problematic
in ensuring quality DPA.
Lack of monitoring and specific direction
for DPA was not acknowledged as a
concern.
The Student Success/School Effectiveness Lead
at this school is a champion for physical
education, health and DPA, and has the
potential to coordinate support for DPA if her
role is continued.
The principal at this school does not feel
that 20 minutes of daily DPA is feasible;
however, structured physical activity
opportunities are in place at the school
during extracurricular time.
Table 6: Summary of administrative leadership for DPA.
75
At the Northern school, both the principal and key informant identified their school as
being at Stage 1; the principal at the GTA school classified his school as being in Stage 2.
Adhering strictly to the rubric definitions, both schools would technically fall into Stage 1. In
both cases, DPA planning and instruction is the purview of classroom teachers alone, and neither
school has an implementation committee for curricular DPA. This classification is complicated,
however, by a number of other contextual factors, which will be discussed through the two
policy perspectives to follow.
Schedule
The second section of this framework is defined according to the frequency with which
students have opportunities to be physically active during instructional time. This does not
include extracurricular activities, such as interschool sports and intramural physical activities,
nor does it include unstructured play during recess periods. In Stage 1, “Students are
occasionally given opportunities to be physically active during the 300 minutes of instructional
time”. Stage 2 is when, “Students are often given opportunities to be physically active each day
for 20 minutes during the 300 minutes of instructional time”. In Stage 3, “Students are always
given opportunities to be physically active each day for 20 minutes during the 300 minutes of
instructional time” (MOE, 2006, p. 37).
At the Northern school, the principal and key informant identified their school as being at
Stage 3 and Stage 2, respectively. The principal at the GTA school classified his school as being
in Stage 2. Considering the data collected, it would appear that the Northern school is operating
at Stage 2 for its scheduling of DPA, and the GTA school is at Stage 1. This component was
difficult to ascertain; as discussed earlier in relation to policy contexts, neither school closely
monitors DPA implementation, and thus administrators did not have a clear picture of how the
76
policy is approached in each class. Furthermore, there was observed variation in formally
scheduled DPA within each school, and those teachers who did regularly schedule DPA did not
always have it for a full 20 minutes (see Table 6). Overall, it appeared to be scheduled more
consistently at the Northern school.
Northern School GTA Suburban School
Schedule: What
stage?
As indicated by Principal:3
As indicated by School Effectiveness
Lead/Student Success Teacher: 2
According to the School-wide data: 2
As indicated by Principal: 2
According to the School-wide data: 1
How often are
students given
the opportunity
to be physically
active during the
300 minutes of
instructional
time?
A majority of teachers have two 40-minute physical education periods per week.
Around 2/3 of classes have some form of
DPA scheduled every day of the week.
Only 1/3 of participants have some form of
DPA scheduled every day of the week.
The average DPA session (not including PE) is well below the 20 minute mark.
40% of teachers indicate DPA gets rescheduled or cancelled more often than other subject
areas. In the case of PE, this often happens when the gym is closed for other activities.
The gym was closed on two of four days
observed.
The gym was closed on two of five days
observed.
Teachers were observed to make DPA (outside of physical education) fit with the flow of
the day’s activities rather than adhering strictly to a set time.
100% of respondents indicated that DPA is
spontaneously added into the schedule at
least once per week; observations also
corroborated that schedules are relatively
fluid, and DPA scheduling did not often
match the timetable.
73% of respondents indicated that DPA is
spontaneously added into the schedule at
least once per week. It is sometimes used as
a transition activity between lessons or as an
energizer when students are losing focus.
Table 7: Summary of scheduling practices for DPA.
Student leadership
The third area of focus is student leadership, defined as the extent to which students are
involved in the planning and implementation in DPA. In Stage 1, “Students are not involved in
the planning or implementation of DPA”. In Stage 2, “Students are represented on daily physical
activity committees; however, their input and ideas have a limited impact on decisions and
77
direction of implementation”. In Stage 3, “Students are well represented on daily physical
activity committees, and students from all grade levels are active leaders in the planning and
implementation of daily physical activity” (MOE, 2006, p. 37).
Northern School GTA Suburban School Student
Leadership:
What stage?
As indicated by Principal: 1
As indicated by School Effectiveness
Lead/Student Success Teacher: 1
According to the School-wide data: 1
As indicated by Principal: 1
According to the School-wide data: 1
How are
students from
across the school
involved in
planning and
implementation
of DPA?
Students are not currently engaged as leaders
in any capacity. However, this is an identified
area of focus for the school, and could
potentially be addressed through DPA.
Older students are given formal
opportunities to be leaders in physical
activity and other areas of school life (e.g.
student council), but not in a way specific
to DPA.
Students are sometimes given opportunities to contribute to leading sections of physical
education classes or have a say in what they do for DPA.
Table 8: Summary of student leadership for DPA.
In all cases, school leaders identified their schools of being in Stage 1 for this indicator,
and the analysis of all other collected school data confirms this. As the principal of the Northern
school expressed, “We don’t have a [DPA] committee; as far as I’m concerned, that’s not
relevant. Maybe that makes us in Stage 1.” As will be explored within later policy perspectives,
there were also a number of other ways in which students at the GTA school took on leadership
roles, but these fell outside of the DPA policy.
Quality of daily physical activities
The fourth section of this framework focuses on the content of DPA sessions, including
physical education. In Stage 1, “Very few students are physically active for the full 20 minutes;
activities offered are rarely inclusive, motivating, learner-centred or success-oriented; tasks
rarely result in an increase in breathing or heart rate; and students rarely set their own goals and
do not know how to monitor their own physical activity levels”. In Stage 2, “Some students are
78
physically active for the full 20 minutes; activities offered are often inclusive, motivating,
learner-centred or success-oriented; tasks occasionally result in an increase in breathing or heart
rate; and students occasionally set their own goals and monitor their own physical activity
levels”. In Stage 3, “All students are physically active for the full 20 minutes; all activities
offered are inclusive, motivating, learner-centred or success-oriented; tasks always result in an
increase in breathing or heart rate; and students regularly set their own goals and monitor their
own physical activity levels” (MOE, 2006, p. 38).
Northern School GTA Suburban School Quality of Daily
Physical
Activities: What
stage?
As indicated by Principal: 3
As indicated by School Effectiveness
Lead/Student Success Teacher: 2
According to the School-wide data: 2
As indicated by Principal: 2-3
According to the School-wide data: 2
How many
students are
active for the
entire session?
How often are
the activities
offered inclusive,
motivating,
learner-centred
and success-
oriented?
How often do the
tasks result in
increased
breathing and
heart rate?
Student participation and engagement varied across classes.
Student participation was observed to be
excellent in the junior class, and much less
so in the primary and intermediate classes.
Student participation was observed to be
excellent in primary and junior classes, and
much less so in the intermediate class.
Physical education activities, although longer in total duration, are characterized by more
intermittent activity with rest in between.
In many observations, participation was
noted to ebb as the activity progressed.
In many observations, participation was
sustained as the activity progressed.
No students were observed to have physical disabilities or challenges, and teachers tended to
provide DPA catered to “middle of the road” abilities. The main focus was on maximizing
participation by catering to an ability level that was appropriate to the majority of the class.
Only one teacher mentioned motivation in
her description of DPA, saying that the use
of music helps motivate students for DPA.
Teachers were observed to use DPA as a
“transitional” activity to keep their students
motivated during the day. One teacher cited
competition and goals as motivating in DPA.
A common theme in the types of activities offered for DPA is that they are “fun” and based
on what students enjoy.
Some teachers mentioned continuity of specific activities through which students can gain
skills and progress over the course of the year.
A mix of intensity levels, primarily moderate, was observed in practice, with activities
sometimes resulting in a slight increase in breathing and heart rate.
80% of teachers reported that the average
DPA session is moderate or vigorous
intensity; 20% report it is only light activity.
Almost all teachers surveyed indicated that
the average DPA session is moderate
intensity.
Table continued on next page
79
How often do
students set their
own goals and
monitor their
own physical
activity?
Evidence of student goal-setting related to
DPA was not observed.
Students in one class were engaged in
planning for improving their own personal
fitness, and demonstrated some knowledge
of exercise physiology.
Some observations demonstrated that students are able to recognize their own physical
exertion in DPA. In both primary classes, students were observed to feel their heart “beating
hard”.
In one class, students were observed
completing a journal about their
participation in DPA activities.
In one class, the teacher encouraged students
to focus on their own fitness/abilities during
DPA activities (i.e. to do what they were
capable of doing).
Table 9: Summary of quality of daily physical activities.
At the Northern school, the principal and key informant rated their school’s quality of
daily physical activities as Stage 3 and Stage 2, respectively. The principal at the GTA school
ranked his school as being somewhere between Stages 2 and 3. According to the variety of other
school data collected, both schools would be classified as a Stage 2 (see Table 8). As with
schedule, choosing a stage classification for this indicator was challenging, again owing to the
variation of approaches to DPA exhibited across and even within classrooms at each school (i.e.
teachers’ approaches to DPA sometimes changed according to the time of year and their
students’ changing interests as the year progressed).
Resources
The fifth component of the Ministry’s DPA Continuum framework is resources. Here,
resources refer to both physical resources such as equipment and planning/activity idea literature,
and educational resources such as teachers’ access to professional development opportunities
around DPA. In Stage 1, “Limited resources are available to assist staff, and no one on staff has
been trained in the implementation of the daily physical activity initiative”. Stage 2 is defined as,
“Some resources are available to assist staff, and one lead teacher has attended training on the
implementation of the daily physical activity initiative”. Stage 3 is when, “A wide variety of rich
80
resources is readily available to assist staff, and all staff have attended training on the
implementation of the daily physical activity initiative” (MOE, 2006, p. 38).
Northern School GTA Suburban School Resources: What
stage?
As indicated by Principal: 1
As indicated by School Effectiveness
Lead/Student Success Teacher: 2
According to the School-wide data: 2-3
As indicated by Principal: 2
According to the School-wide data: 2
What resources
are available to
assist staff?
How many staff
have attended
training on
implementation
of the DPA
policy?
Overall it appears that there is an adequate variety of resources available for teachers.
Ministry-provided written resources for DPA implementation are not well-used.
Hands-on resources such as DVDs are much
better received by teachers.
Ministry-provided resources were felt to be
inadequate for inattention to safety, physical
space or exercise intensity concerns.
Many staff have attended some type of
training for DPA. There have been two
voluntary workshops in the last 4 years,
offered through the school, which were
attended by 50% or more of staff.
Some but not all teachers have received
DPA-specific training. No specific
opportunities offered through the school
were identified.
School Effectiveness Lead/Student Success
teacher identified herself as a “Phys Ed
teacher at heart” and acknowledges the role
she can play in helping teachers with DPA.
Teaching of physical education (but not
DPA) is sometimes delegated to specific
teachers; as such, these teachers have the
potential to become “specialists” in a sense.
However, the resource teacher who leads
physical education for primary classes did
not receive specific training for DPA or PE.
Table 10: Summary of resources for DPA.
The Northern school principal rated her school as Stage 1 in this respect, while the key informant
rated the school at Stage 2. The GTA principal also rated his school at Stage 2. In this case, the
GTA principal’s evaluation seems to align with the school-wide data, while the Northern school
representatives may actually have under-rated their school in this regard (they are actually
between Stages 2 and 3). As discussed previously in relation to the physical elements of the
school’s environment, physical resources at both schools appeared to be adequate or more.
Professional development in the form of workshops was stated to be more readily available for
teachers at the Northern school. This was due in part to the leadership on the part of the key
81
informant, a champion of physical education and health initiatives at this school, who actively
sought out opportunities for school staff to be educated in this regard.
Partnership development
The final component of the Ministry framework refers to partnerships with members of
the school community, which directly address the goals of DPA. Stage 1 is defined as “No
community partners have been established to provide input and/or direction for daily physical
activity”. In Stage 2, “Community partners have been established; however, they are providing a
limited level of input and/or direction for daily physical activity”. Stage 3 is when, “Community
partners have been established, and they provide valued input and/or direction for daily physical
activity” (MOE, 2006, p. 38).
Northern School GTA Suburban School Partnership
Development:
What stage?
As indicated by Principal: 2
As indicated by School Effectiveness
Lead/Student Success Teacher: 2
According to the School-wide data: 2
As indicated by Principal: 1
According to the School-wide data: 2
What
community
partnerships
have been
developed, and
what level of
support do they
offer for DPA?
There are some community partners who use
the school facilities to run physical activity
programs. These programs are not yet well-
established or consistent, and are not related
to curricular physical activity.
Community partners, including the City,
local public health unit and parent
volunteers, exist; however, the level of
coordinated community support for DPA is
not strong.
Student Success Teacher/School
Effectiveness Lead has played a role in
helping develop the new HPE curriculum;
she is a vital link for Ministry and other
partnerships (e.g. OPHEA) for professional
development around DPA.
There are no established networks for staff
professional development around DPA.
Principal has experience developing these
kind of partnership relationships, but raised
the important point that time, work and
sometimes money are involved in engaging
community partners.
Table 11: Summary of partnership development around DPA.
At the Northern school, both the principal and key informant identified their school as
being at Stage 2 for this indicator; the principal at the GTA school classified his school as being
82
in Stage 1. However, the analysis of school-wide implementation data demonstrates that both
schools are a Stage 2 in this respect. Particularly at the Northern school, where one member of
staff has been closely involved with the development of the revised Health and Physical
education curriculum which includes DPA, there are DPA-specific partnerships with other
experts that have been leveraged toward teacher professional development. At the GTA school,
the principal is cognizant of the need for more partnerships for curricular physical activity, such
as one currently in place with the local public health unit (providing swimming lessons to
students as part of a unit for physical education). In neither case are partnerships optimally
leveraged toward improving DPA, but the foundations do appear to be in place.
Summary and Conclusion
When the criteria of the Ministry of Education are the basis of the evaluation, it can be
concluded that both schools are performing below the highest levels outlined, particularly with
respect to leadership, student leadership, and at the GTA Suburban school, scheduling. As
summarized in Table 12, the Northern school appears to be doing slightly better in achieving
these measures of implementation, though both schools are similar overall.
Stage of Implementation
Northern School GTA Suburban School
Leadership 1 1
Schedule 2 1
Student Leadership 1 1
Quality of DPA 2 2
Resources 2-3 2
Partnership Development 2 2
Table 12: Summary of stages of DPA implementation.
The policy mediator perspective provides a useful way in which educational
administrators may monitor their school’s progress toward Ministry mandates around this policy.
83
Its greatest strength is its ability to provide specific areas of focus with clearly defined success
criteria. Tools such as the Ministry of Education’s School Implementation Continuum for Daily
Physical Activity provide direction for evaluators, as well as a common language through which
they may communicate with the Ministry and/or other schools regarding policy implementation.
The obvious weakness of such an approach is that it is necessarily narrow in scope, and may fail
to incorporate important contextual data, including salient barriers to policy implementation, and
other efforts toward general policy goals not encompassed within the policy itself. Far from
simply being a top-down process, policy implementation may also vary due to agency and
experiences of local actors, including students, teachers and school administrators. Furthermore,
a broader lens may illuminate departures from the original policy, which may yield improved or
innovative new directions for the policy to take.
4.6.2 THE SCHOOL AS POLICY CRITIC AND THE SCHOOL AS POLICY CONSTRUCTOR
As described earlier, Clune's (1990) three policy perspectives fall along a continuum
from most to least closely tied to a specific policy, and from least to most focused on context.
The school as policy critic approach is an extension of the school as policy mediator approach.
Using this lens to understand implementation of DPA, policy goals are still the primary point of
reference; hence, the six general areas of policy focus as outlined by the Ministry (MOE, 2006)
will still be used here. However, this perspective also allows for the possibility that certain policy
goals may not be achievable within the school context, or that they may not always be desirable.
Thus, schools will not simply be judged as excelling at policy provision or not; a more critical
approach will be used to understand implementation as it is.
The school as policy constructor is the least policy-oriented and most contextualized
perspective, and is a progression from the school as policy critic approach. In addition to
84
recognizing that certain policies may not be feasible or desirable, it also highlights how certain
adaptations of policy within individual schools may lead to improvements and innovations
around existing policies themselves. Because this perspective flows naturally from the school as
policy critic approach, and to avoid unnecessary repetition, implementation according to these
two perspectives will be explored simultaneously.
Leadership
As determined in the previous section, both schools were classified as being at the first
stage of implementation for this indicator: “Teachers are leading daily physical activities without
any coordinated support or direction”. The Ministry of Education calls for schools to have a
dedicated DPA planning and implementation committee to coordinate high-quality and
consistent DPA across the school. Yet, neither school had such a committee, and from principal,
key informant and teacher interviews, it did not appear that they intended to create such a
committee within the foreseeable future. As outlined in the descriptions of school policy
contexts, DPA is not closely monitored in either school. At the Northern school, this was
perceived as problematic, especially by one newer teacher who felt that her current approach was
not effective and craved more direction to guide her as to what she should be doing. In fact, even
the administration did not appear to be clear on the requirements of DPA, as exemplified by the
principal's statement regarding DPA: "the Ministry hasn't really told me anything." The fact that
both the principal and key informant identified their school as operating at Stage 1 for this
indicator also speaks to their recognition that there are improvements to be made in this area.
Contextual factors are important to consider here. While a DPA planning committee may
have been helpful in guiding implementation at the Northern school, this school was in a unique
circumstance of being on a “work-to-rule” mandate due to the political climate among Ontario
85
public school teachers this year. Thus, committees such as this would likely be considered above
and beyond teachers’ contractual obligations. As one teacher mentioned during our interview,
"We have professional learning communities, so we’re supposed to meet every month. It hasn’t
been going on just because of the politics this year and we can’t do anything extracurricular.”
Furthermore, as the key informant explained, teachers are already playing “dodgeball” with the
constant barrage of new educational policies and initiatives, and must already selectively focus
on a few of these. Even without the work-to-rule mandate, creating a committee specific to DPA
might be considered of low priority, especially considering the school’s current lack of specific
focus on physical activity initiatives, unless it was meaningfully integrated with other school
health committees and/or initiatives.
The Northern school also was in the unique position of having a full-time, dedicated
Student Success Teacher/School Effectiveness Lead, who described her role as such:
Basically, there’s 3 parts to it. One is coaching teachers towards best practices in all
domains- literacy, numeracy, phys ed, what have you. The second part to it is
working with at-risk students. And then the third part of it is being sort of a liaison
between Ministry initiatives and the school.
This was the key informant, who self-identified as a "phys ed teacher at heart". Within this role,
she identified how she might work to "coach" teachers and provide guidance around
implementation of DPA. Pending this role is continued, this might negate the need for a DPA
committee, as this teacher could act as the central source of guidance for other teachers.
Although this offers a promising compromise to a DPA committee in this context, this may not
be an option in other schools without the resources for a full-time member of staff committed to
this role, especially if this person does not have interest or expertise in the physical education
and health field.
86
At the GTA school, neither the principal nor teacher participants appeared concerned
with the lack of formal direction around DPA. The principal had considered the option of a
school-wide approach to DPA, conducted over the public announcement system; but this was
problematized by the issue of time constraints, which will be discussed in the following section.
The principal actually considered the school to be at Stage 2 for this indicator: “School leader
works with the principal to create an implementation committee and a school-wide
implementation plan”. However, this school did not have a DPA committee; instead, it had
various committees and leaders in charge of extracurricular physical activities not encompassed
by DPA (which must be within curricular time). Teachers at this school were observed to be
highly involved in leading extracurricular activities and participating in planning groups for
school events, and it is anticipated that the school culture would likely be supportive of a DPA
committee.
In the case of the GTA school, the narrow focus of the Ministry rubric may underrate this
school's efforts to address goals related to those of the DPA policy. The GTA school
incorporated a number of other extracurricular physical activity opportunities for students, which
may have lessened the perceived need to focus on curricular physical activity outside of physical
education. Committees and other leadership bodies were in place for coaching of interschool
sports, supervision and organization of intramural sports, and the administration of the
Playground Activity Leaders in Schools (PALS) program described earlier. Considering the
identified time constraints imposed by other curriculum areas, such an approach may present a
worthy solution to overcome this conflict while still addressing many of the goals of DPA.
Where it falls short is its inability to ensure that all students, regardless of ability, are included on
a daily basis. Furthermore, it must rely on staff to volunteer their time above and beyond their
87
professional obligations, as well as help from parent volunteers (as indicated by the principal).
While this was not felt to be an issue at this school, such may not universally be the case.
Schedule
The Northern school was found to be somewhat better at providing DPA every day of the
week; however, neither school demonstrated being at the optimal stage for scheduling, whereby
“Students are always given opportunities to be physically active each day for 20 minutes during
the 300 minutes of instructional time”. As discussed in the description of school contexts, other
curriculum demands- particularly literacy and math which are measured by provincial
standardized testing on a yearly basis- are often cited as a salient barrier to consistent scheduling
of DPA. DPA can be seen as a distraction to other more important work periods, as exemplified
by the key informant at the Northern school: “The downside is that because it’s not [always] a
scheduled-in period, it’s so easy to overlook it. ‘Oh, they’re working really quietly, and they’re
working really great. We don’t want to disturb it, let’s just keep it going.’” Moreover, the theme
of not enough available time was also raised. Citing other Ministry requirements, including a
daily 2 hours for literacy, 1 hour for math and 40 minutes for French, the principal at the GTA
school noted that, “[DPA is] important, but there is literally not enough time in a day to schedule
it in 5 times per week”.
Another important issue related to the theme of time is the very fact of scheduling 20
minutes for DPA, and not longer. Not a single teacher had a non-physical education (PE) DPA
session scheduled for longer than 20 minutes; in fact, the average length of scheduled non-PE
session was 10 minutes at the Northern school (for those teachers who actually did schedule
88
DPA outside of PE), and 7.5 minutes at the GTA school9. When teachers who do not schedule
non-PE DPA are included in the calculation, these values go down to under 7 minutes and 5
minutes, respectively. However, the prescription of 20 minutes per day may be misleading, as the
schedule actually needs to allow more than 20 minutes in order for students to be active for a full
20 minutes (allowing time for instructions, travelling to or setting up the space for the activity,
etc). As the GTA principal noted when he saw the Ministry implementation framework: “I think
for teachers, seeing the scheduling piece and for them and seeing that they are supposed to put in
more time would be very frustrating for them.” Unless the school day were to be extended to
longer than 300 minutes, or other Ministry-mandated curriculum demands are scaled back, it
does not appear feasible for teachers to schedule a minimum of 20 minutes of physical activity
for students on a daily basis. Alternatively, Patton (2012a) suggests that rather than forcing DPA
upon educators, it may make more sense to extend opportunities for unstructured free play, such
as lengthening recess time, as this is where students obtain a vast majority of their daily physical
activity.
Interestingly, principals at both schools rated their schools as performing more optimally
for this indicator (according to the Ministry framework) than the school-wide data have shown.
In a study examining the disconnect between reality and parents’ perceptions of their children’s
physical activity levels, a similar phenomenon was found (Berry et al, 2012). When individuals
recognize that they are not able to meet externally-defined goals due to barriers beyond their
control, such as time, Berry and colleagues suggest that a process of cognitive dissonance
(Festinger, 1957) may occur. In the face of time demands, cognitive dissonance for principals
may be reduced by denying insufficient scheduling of DPA is a problem at their school.
9 As previously mentioned, all class timetables were collected from the Northern school; however, only the
timetables of the three observed teachers were collected at the GTA school.
89
Student engagement is also a barrier to sustained 20-minute blocks of DPA. As was noted
in Table 9 in the discussion of quality of daily physical activities, student engagement in physical
activities is not always high, and in some cases was also observed to fade as the activity
progressed. This may have an important impact on teachers’ willingness to schedule 20 minutes
of DPA, in recognizing that their students may devolve into silly or off-task behaviour as they
become tired or lose interest in the activity. When attention span is a consideration for DPA, it
may make more sense to divide the scheduled time into two or more shorter blocks. Two
teachers at the GTA school specifically noted that this is how they implement DPA in their
classroom: in two shorter periods, once in the morning and once in the afternoon. Dividing DPA
into smaller blocks can also capitalize on the usefulness of DPA as a "transition" activity in
between lessons, as was identified by both of the primary teachers as well as the intermediate
teacher at the GTA school. It may thus serve as an energizer for students whose energy levels are
low after sitting for long periods, and provide the additional health benefit of breaking up
sedentary time. In addition to regular physical activity, limiting sedentary behaviour is also
recognized as an independent factor for the prevention of chronic disease and obesity (Marshall
& Ramirez, 2011).
Literature on children’s physical activity patterns also suggests that children’s physical
activity is qualitatively different from that of adults. Children’s movement tends to be
characterized by short, quick “bursts” of intense movement compared to the slower, more
sustained exercise of youth and adults (Bailey et al, 1995). This also has implications for the
appropriateness of DPA as mandated, which calls for a minimum of 20 minutes of sustained
moderate to vigorous activity.
90
Student Leadership
At both schools, it was found that students were not involved in DPA committees
regarding planning or implementation of the policy; this point may seem redundant, however,
considering neither school was found to have any form of DPA committee at all. Nevertheless,
the context at some schools may lend itself better than others to student involvement in a school
planning committee. At the Northern school, for example, the principal did not see such
committees to be relevant. At this school, where student absenteeism, behavioural challenges and
poverty are legitimate and pressing concerns, it is understandable that some educators might
want to focus on providing structured guidance wherever possible, to get students on the “right
track”. Yet, the key informant did elucidate, “Student leadership is something that we are really
hoping to work towards- we haven’t had a student council in years- and looking to, again, a
Ministry initiative with having co-created success criteria in the classroom.” Thus, it is apparent
that the school may not yet be ready for a DPA committee with student representation, but that it
may be a goal for the future.
In contrast, the student body at the GTA school was already observed to have many
active leaders in a number of school community action groups, including the student council,
Eco Schools Ambassadors, and Playground Activity Leaders in Schools (PALS). Furthermore,
the teacher of one intermediate class was observed to have given her students the responsibility
of planning their own DPA for the final semester of the school year, based on what they had
voted on as a class and incorporating in their previous learning around health and fitness. It
appears that a DPA committee at this school would be more immediately feasible than at the
Northern school, as many of the attitudes and norms toward student leadership have already been
established.
91
Having the requirement of student involvement in a DPA committee would necessarily
place many schools in Stage 1 of the Ministry implementation continuum. Using this framework
alone, many important details are missed, hence yielding the false impression that schools are not
addressing the need for student involvement in school-based physical activity initiatives when
actually, they are. To enhance the applicability of this framework to the reality of school
contexts, it may be wise to refine the stages of the continuum to include other ways in which
students may take on leadership roles in relation to DPA. This may include leadership in
extracurricular sports, as was demonstrated at the GTA school, as well as contributions to
planning and leading DPA within the classroom.
Quality of daily physical activities
As demonstrated in the discussion of the policy mediator perspective, the quality of
activities for DPA varies widely within schools, and cannot be neatly summed up. Overall, it was
found that both schools were operating at the middle stage with regards to this indicator,
whereby: “Some students are physically active for the full 20 minutes; activities offered are often
inclusive, motivating, learner-centred or success-oriented; tasks occasionally result in an increase
in breathing or heart rate; and students occasionally set their own goals and monitor their own
physical activity levels”. As with scheduling, principals at both schools somewhat overestimated
their school here as compared to what was indicated by the school-wide data.
A number of barriers were identified with respect to these four components of high
quality DPA. At both schools, the structure of physical education classes, whereby instructions
and organizational activities take up significant portions of the scheduled time, was a barrier to
sustained moderate to vigorous physical activity for all students. As one teacher observed about
DPA in her own classroom: "Overall, is it going to help them to lose weight or anything? I don’t
92
think so. No." At the Northern school, engaging students fully for the entire DPA session was
hindered by poor student attitudes toward DPA in some classes, as well as by cultural
considerations regarding the appropriateness of certain physical activities. The latter factor also
relates to the inclusiveness, motivation, learner-centeredness and success orientation of activities.
The primary barrier to providing sufficiently intense tasks was the available space; for example,
classroom space was commonly considered ill-suited to vigorous activities, due to limited room
for movement as well as the safety concerns of such movement in a space not designed for such
a purpose. No barriers were identified related to helping students set their own goals and monitor
their physical activity levels.
Ensuring a consistent quality of DPA, with regards to the criteria identified by the
Ministry, is closely tied to the theme of leadership. Because of the lack of top-down direction
around teachers’ approach to DPA, the types of activities provided are almost entirely up to the
discretion of individual classroom teachers. Despite recent opportunities for professional
development around DPA at the Northern school, teachers could not be forced to attend (and it is
not recommended that they should be forced). Ultimately, as identified by the key informant at
this school, it is the teachers who already have an interest in DPA who will be most likely to opt
into such training. Even so, some teachers who attended these training workshops are still
unclear as to what is expected of them for DPA (e.g. the teacher who colloquially described the
school’s approach to DPA as “loosy goosy”).
Principals are also cognizant of the need to allow their staff the freedom to use their
professional judgment around how to best approach this policy. As mentioned previously, the
Northern school principal said “I let teachers do what they can with it…I allow teachers to make
decisions that provide them with ownership as well.” Similarly, the GTA school principal stated,
93
“I don’t check up on the teachers; I leave it up to their professional judgment to do what they feel
is appropriate in their class”.
Hence, it is unclear what can be done to ensure consistently high quality of DPA across
classes; without enough direction, there is little accountability for teachers to put their best effort
into excellent implementation of this policy. On the other hand, with too much direction,
teachers may feel that their professionalism is being compromised, and/or may resort to strictly
technical adherence to the policy rather than embracing its deeper goals (Robinson &
Melnychuk, 2008). As Ranson (2003) alludes about increased accountability measures around
curriculum policy: “The preoccupation with these means of effectiveness often leads…to the
perverse fabrication of performance, constructions, and selections of the truth produced to create
the most beneficial account” (p. 469). Cohen (1990) provides an excellent portrayal of this
phenomenon in describing a teacher who followed certain curriculum guidelines to a tee, but
without reflecting on feedback from students. Ultimately, although she was doing everything
correctly in theory, her students were not benefiting because they were not meaningfully engaged
with the material. If teachers are coerced to implement DPA in a way that does not fit with their
teaching strengths and interests, quality might suffer, or teachers might simply say they are doing
what is being prescribed without following through.
Returning to the Ministry’s recommendation of a DPA planning and implementation
committee, building professional learning communities specific to the goals of this policy may
be relevant here. With respect to this, Hargreaves (2003) advocates for a shift from policies “that
seek to provide standardized practice to those that aim to strengthen teachers’ judgment and
opportunity to learn” (p. 134). In order for this to be feasible, the earlier-identified barriers
associated with establishing a DPA committee (or other related professional learning
94
community) would first need to be overcome. Once the stage is set in this regard, the quality of
teacher-led daily physical activities can be properly addressed.
When assessing the level of implementation of a policy, it is important to ascertain that
its implementers have a common understanding of what the policy involves. In their evaluation
of a similar DPA policy in Alberta, Kennedy, Cantell and Dewey (2010) specifically asked
participants to describe their own understanding of the policy and used this definition to measure
successful implementation. I thus incorporated this consideration into my own research, although
unlike Kennedy and colleagues, I used the Ministry of Education framework and not individual
definitions as my central measure of policy implementation. Teachers were asked “If someone
were to ask you what the DPA policy is, how would you describe it to them?” Their responses
are summarized in Table 13.
Table 13: Teacher definitions of DPA policy.
Primary Teacher,
Northern School
“Well, children are required to do 20 minutes of activity each day, and it’s just kind of
to teach them the importance of physical activity and that it’s just like anything else,
you need to take care of your body just like you do your brain, kind of thing. So, we do
different activities with the kids. Some of them are more structured…”
Primary Teacher, GTA
Suburban School)
“It’s 2 periods of continuous exercise of 20 minutes. And it basically is an opportunity
for kids to increase their heart rate to improve their physical health... it’s to be part of
your weekly plan as well as your day plan, so it has to be included within the course of
the day.”
Junior Teacher, Northern
School
“I would take it from the curriculum, in that it’s now in the phys ed curriculum for
each grade, and the idea. ..I guess there’s no specifics about what you’re supposed to
do for 20 minutes each day, but that it’s supposed to be each day for 20 minutes.”
Junior Teacher, GTA
Suburban School
“Well, that children- oh dear, this is my dilemma here. I know that the students have
to- I think it’s a minimum of 40 minutes a day?...Ok, 20 minutes of DPA. I guess I’m
thinking of phys ed. We have 40 minutes of phys ed twice a week. And the days we
have phys ed, we don’t insert DPA. But we can also have DPA throughout the day,
when we play games for 5 minutes at a time. So it’s not necessarily a 20 minute block
all at once, although we try to insert that. But that’s the extent of it. I don’t know. I
mean, the kids have to remain active… Active bodies, active minds!”
Intermediate Teacher,
Northern School
“Every day you should be incorporating the kids moving around for at least 20
minutes, probably better to have this all in one block, to get their heart rates up.”
Intermediate Teacher,
GTA Suburban School
“There are days when they need a lot of it; there are days when they need a lot of
movement...So, the curriculum, it says to provide them with daily exercise. And I like
that it doesn’t say, it says how long, but it doesn’t say it has to be one chunk, it doesn’t
say it has to be delivered at a particular time...I mean, it gives some suggestions in
terms of format, but it’s still flexible, and I think it has to be.”
95
In relation to “Schedule” and “Quality of Daily Physical Activities” (the two components
of the Ministry framework which relate directly to teachers’ classroom practice), participants’
perception of what DPA entails did not always align with what is prescribed. Thus, scoring low
on the implementation continuum in some cases may be a result of not knowing, rather than
inability or unwillingness to achieve the prescribed criteria. The most commonly described
aspects of DPA policy by teachers are the daily time requirement, and providing the opportunity
for children to be active. There is also a theme of flexibility regarding content and scheduling,
and of the health implications of DPA. Two teachers specifically referred to intensity: DPA is
meant to “get their heart rates up” and “increase their heart rate”. One teacher mentioned
teaching students why DPA is important: “to teach them the importance of physical activity and
that it’s just like anything else, you need to take care of your body just like you do your brain”;
others implied their own beliefs that it is important: “Active bodies, active minds!” and “I
believe that it should be definitely part of the day”.
Teachers did not speak to students monitoring their own exertion and/or setting fitness
goals, or to the need to provide inclusive, motivating, success-oriented and learner-centered
activities. It is worthy to note, however, that some teachers were observed talking to their
students about their exertion during or after DPA sessions; so although they may not have
defined is as part of the policy requirement during their interview, they did recognize this aspect
in practice.
Revisiting the Ministry’s Policy/Program Memorandum once again, it calls for “a
minimum of twenty minutes of sustained moderate to vigorous physical activity each school day
during instructional time” for all elementary school children in Ontario (MOE, 2005a, para 4).
As mentioned in Chapter 1, this mandate touches on the following 3 key points:
96
scheduling: students are to be active for at least twenty minutes each day of the school
week, during instructional time;
intensity: the physical activity provided is to be moderate to vigorous, i.e. it must raise
students’ heart rates a certain amount above resting levels; and
inclusion: the physical activity must engage all students in the class, regardless of ability.
The primacy of the time requirement in teachers’ understanding of DPA aligns with its
prominence of mention in the official policy mandate; it is also the most tangible and directly
measurable of the three listed policy requirements. Interestingly, the Ministry mandate does not
directly specify that students should be active for the entire session, and makes no mention of the
need for students to monitor their own exertion or set their own fitness goals. It seems peculiar
that the Ministry-developed gap analysis tool (i.e. the DPA Implementation Continuum
framework) is not exactly aligned with the official policy mandate. In this regard, it seems no
wonder that policy implementation by teachers is not at the optimal levels as defined. Although
reference is made to these other aspects of quality DPA in teacher guides (MOE 2005c, d, e), it
was mentioned that these written resources are underutilized. This will be discussed below.
Resources
The availability of resources, both equipment and information as well as opportunities for
teacher professional learning, was moderate to good at both schools. Acquiring an adequate
selection of such resources does not appear to present any insurmountable conflicts with the
school contexts. From what was observed, although some teachers identified the desire for more
or better resources, physical resources were a not barrier to optimal implementation of DPA at
these schools as teachers found ways to be creative with the resources they had.
97
The most consistently mentioned resource shortcoming was the Ministry-provided
informational resources. Through interviews and observations at both schools, it was found that
classroom teachers only rarely, if ever, use these resources to guide their own DPA planning. At
the GTA school, a common complaint was that these Ministry-provided books of activity ideas
were limited in that they either required space that was not available (e.g. wall space for wall
push-ups), presented safety concerns (e.g. students banging into desks) or were not sufficiently
vigorous to achieve the fitness-related goals of DPA. One teacher illustrated her dislike of the
Ministry’s approach to resource provision for policy implementation: “Books and handouts are
much less helpful than the Ministry believes. The best DPA resources for reaching and
motivating these kids are the use of physical objects or fun/interesting videos, not more
paperwork.” This may be an important consideration for the Ministry moving forward, in terms
of where financial resources should be invested. If long hours go into the development, printing
and distribution of paper-based informational resources that are not being used, this may call for
a re-evaluation of this approach to policy implementation. As the key informant at the Northern
school explained:
[The Ministry] worked to create all sorts of resources, like ideas for teachers and they
had all kinds of information out there. But yeah, it kind of goes back to, if you don’t
have one person who’s going to go around and be the champion of that, to really
cheerlead and really get in everybody’s face, it’s just going to die out. Now, those
binders are probably on a shelf somewhere.
In relation to the poor usage of these resources, one GTA school teacher explained, “in this
system…things come in and things go out. Things are reintroduced, they may be the same thing
that’s reintroduced to remind people.” It may be that DPA is due for a re-launch of sorts;
considering the poor feedback regarding existing informational resources, new informational
resources may need to take on a new form.
98
As mentioned, the Northern school was fortunate to have a physical education and health
champion on staff who has worked closely with the Ministry in developing the revised Health
and Physical Education curriculum. Since the introduction of the DPA policy, she leveraged her
professional networks to provide two separate opportunities for teachers at this school to attend
training workshops with experts who were visiting the area on other business. Being brand new
to her role as Student Success Teacher/School Effectiveness Lead at the time of the study, the
possibilities for maximizing DPA at this school were not yet fully explored. As she explained:
Technically speaking, in the Student Success role that is something I can do. So…[if]
a teacher says ‘I really need help with DPA. My kids just don’t listen or they’re not
motivated, lots of my resources are from the 80s and the kids just make fun of them’;
technically speaking, that could fall under my new position umbrella. I never really
thought of that, but it’s good to know.
Opportunities for professional development around DPA appeared much less readily
available at the GTA school. Perhaps owing to the fact that the average years of teaching
experience at this school is roughly 15.5 years (compared to roughly 6.5 years at the Northern
school), the need for professional training may be seen as less pressing, as teachers are perceived
to be able to maneuver new policies with less guidance. In the summary of economic context, a
paradox was alluded. This paradox is that the GTA school, while apparently better-funded,
actually reported fewer opportunities for staff professional development around DPA, thus
showing that increasing funding is likely not the solution to better implementation of this policy.
Partnership Development
Both schools demonstrated that, “Community partners have been established; however,
they are providing a limited level of input and/or direction for daily physical activity”. As
indicated in Table 11, and as just illustrated with professional networking by the key informant at
99
the Northern school, a variety of formal and informal partnerships exist between the school and
other members of the school community.
However, leveraging these partnerships is not always straightforward, and sometimes
may be seen as more trouble than it is worth. The GTA school principal described a past project
he had coordinated with various community partners, including parent volunteers, the city’s
transportation and parks and recreation departments, and a local business (Play It Again Sports).
Through many weeks spent coordinating, he was able to organize a free skating trip for
underprivileged students at his previous school. Of this experience, he reflects:
Transportation lent 3 school buses for free (and the school paid for 3); Play it Again
donated skates for kids who didn’t have any to wear; and the City donated the ice
time at a local arena. There were parent volunteers as well; kids of all ability levels
were able to participate. While this was a huge success story, it was also a lot of
work; and time is at a premium.
Further to this, he also expressed his frustration with community partners who approach the
school with high-quality programs, but ask the school for money to provide them. School
budgets have many demands upon them already, and it would be beneficial if community
partners had sponsorship or funding to be able to provide schools with the service at little to no
cost.
In the case of the Northern school, the community itself is much smaller and more closely
linked with the school already. For example, other organizations often use the school gym space
outside of school hours. Some of these organizations, such as the Aboriginal People’s Alliance of
Northern Ontario (APANO) and the local Friendship Centre, have recently partnered with the
school to provide after-school programs for students, held in the school gym, with health-related
aims. While these are not specific to DPA, they may have the potential to be linked with
curricular physical activity, if communication around goals is fostered between these partners
and the school. However, communication itself is a challenge. The biggest barrier to
100
communication here might be cultural, with the majority of school staff having Anglo-Saxon
cultural backgrounds, and many of these community partners being Aboriginal. As was
witnessed during an “Aboriginal Focus Group” event at the school, the local Aboriginal
volunteers did not speak much with the teachers, and vice versa. Communication here seemed to
be somewhat tense and I sensed an unspoken social discomfort.
Thus, with the possible exception of the Northern school key informant’s networking
relationships with other stakeholders to provide training for school staff, there were no
demonstrated alternate approaches to increasing partnership development around DPA
implementation. It appears that partnership development is largely a matter of relationship-
building through networking by school staff, as well as a spirit of volunteerism on the part of the
school community. To rely on these may not be realistic in terms of sustainability, as it requires
educators to go above and beyond their already-busy roles. The GTA principal’s
recommendation for grants or other funding for community partners is one potential solution, as
it alleviates the pressure from schools to seek out and pay for these services themselves.
4.6.3 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
To learn from the fact that both case study schools are performing below the expectations
outlined by the Ministry of Education, there are several important considerations in terms of
barriers and alternate policy approaches.
Staff and Student Leadership
The Ministry of Education’s School Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical
Activity (MOE, 2006; Appendix 4) requires that schools have a dedicated DPA planning and
implementation committee to be considered at optimal implementation. This planning committee
is intended to include school staff as well as students. Where made unfeasible by barriers, such
101
as time constraints, an overload of education policies/other school commitments, or a lack of
precedent to include student leaders on staff committees, schools would ne necessarily limited
from progressing past the lowest stage. Indeed, in terms of staff and student leadership, the lack
of a dedicated DPA committee at either school automatically rated them both as operating at
Stage 1.
Such a committee may be potentially efficacious, but is not necessarily the best or only
way to involve the school community as leaders around DPA. Schools may also leverage the
skills and passions of a physical education and health "champion" or "specialist" within the
school, such as the School Effectiveness Lead/Student Success Teacher at the Northern school.
This specialist could potentially also facilitate a professional learning community around DPA
and other health initiatives more broadly. Students at the GTA school appear more ready to
participate in planning for DPA, as they are already involved as leaders in a variety of other ways
at the school. Other more basic needs of students at the Northern school (e.g. attending to
problems of absenteeism) may be felt to be priorities before they are ready to be included as
leaders for DPA; however, one could also argue that empowering students in this way might
address these other areas of concern for student well-being and achievement. In any case, student
leadership with respect to DPA should not be measured only by their involvement in a DPA
committee, but also by involvement in other physical activity initiatives, including planning DPA
within their own class. To achieve inclusion-related goals of quality DPA, students with a
diverse range of interests and abilities should be encouraged to take on various leadership roles.
Thus, it is recommended that the "Leadership" and "Student Leadership" measures on the
Ministry’s framework be revised to include other forms of leadership in school physical activity
beyond a dedicated DPA committee. By including committees, professional learning
102
communities and programs that focus on physical activity and health initiatives more broadly,
this would encourage schools who are already making a move in the right direction, while also
facilitating other initiatives with similar goals as DPA.
Schedule and Quality of DPA
Schedule and quality of DPA are closely related to one another, in that they are both
aspects of the policy in practice at the classroom level. It does not appear there is enough time in
a day for teachers to provide 20 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) daily
during instructional time, due to other competing curricular demands. To include a regularly
scheduled period of 20 minutes might require lengthening the school day. A single 20-minute
block may also be unfeasible in terms of student engagement, and due to the nature of children’s
physical activity behaviour patterns (i.e. multiple short bursts rather than sustained). Thus, two or
more shorter blocks throughout the day may be more appropriate.
Both schools demonstrated a greater focus on the aspect of schedule over quality of DPA.
To address inconsistent quality of daily physical activities, more coordinated leadership (e.g. via
professional learning communities) around approaches to DPA are warranted. Both principals
expressed the importance of teacher ownership over their approach to DPA, and professional
learning communities are one way to maintain this sense of ownership while also providing
guidance.
Furthermore, since the type of physical activities allowed within a classroom context is
limited, the policy might also be reframed as a way to break up sedentary time, as sedentary time
is now recognized as an independent risk factor for chronic disease (Canadian Society for
Exercise Psychology, n.d.). Two studies objectively measuring intensity of DPA (Stone et al,
2012; Patton, 2012a) have both shown that the physical activity obtained during DPA tends to be
103
of insufficient duration or intensity to achieve health benefits. If teachers sense the activities they
are able to provide are unable to benefit student health by not being vigorous enough, there may
be less impetus to provide them. Patton (ibid) suggests that a greater focus could also be placed
on including all students in unstructured recess-time activity, as objectively-measured physical
activity data show students obtain significantly more vigorous activity during these periods than
during DPA. Although this would not include all students, it could be argued that providing
high-quality activities for some is more efficacious than providing low-quality activities for all.
Resources and Partnership Development
The final two aspects of the Ministry framework are resources and partnership
development. While teachers generally appeared to make good use of the physical resources they
had, informational resources were not well-used at either school, and may need to be provided in
a different format to be attractive and accessible for teachers to use. A reintroduction of the
policy itself, with professional development for all teachers focusing on high quality physical
activities, may be warranted, as it is no longer front of mind for most educators. In general,
increasing funding for resources appears not to be an efficient use of limited government funds.
Some formal and informal partnerships exist between each school and other members of
its community, but these partnerships did not provide meaningful input or direction for DPA at
either school. Leveraging these partnerships requires a great deal of work, and appears to be
largely a matter of relationship-building through networking by school staff. Thus, community
partnerships to support DPA may play a small role, but likely could not play a central role,
because of the time investment required to maintain them.
104
CHAPTER 5: DPA POLICY ANALYSIS, EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 DPA POLICY ANALYSIS
Education-based public health policies are promising in that they can reach large
segments of the population at a relatively low cost. The Ontario Healthy Schools strategy is a
broad approach to school health. It has been developed over several years, and spans many
aspects of holistic health and well-being: healthy eating, physical activity, bullying prevention,
personal safety and injury prevention, substance use, addictions and related behaviours, healthy
growth and development, and mental health (MOE, 2009). The DPA policy is one component of
the physical activity strand of this strategy. According to Policy/Program Memorandum 138,
“The goal of daily physical activity is to enable all elementary students to improve or maintain
their physical fitness and their overall health and wellness, and to enhance their learning
opportunities” (MOE, 2005a, para 4). According to the findings of the current study, as well as a
handful of other Ontario DPA policy evaluations (e.g. Stone, Faulkner, Zeglen-Hunt & Cowie-
Bonne, 2012; Patton, 2012a, 2012b; Pascall, 2010), implementation of DPA is highly
inconsistent across the province, and so far there is no evidence that it is poised to fully meet its
goals. Furthermore, Patton’s (2012a) outcome evaluation demonstrated that, even in a classroom
where the teacher was recognized and self-identified as someone implementing DPA in an
optimal way, students were still receiving well below the required 20 minutes of moderate to
vigorous physical activity. Thus, it is imperative to ask: what is the appropriateness of the policy
itself?
The Healthy Schools strategy has incorporated various approaches in its design. These
may be described using Vedung's (1998) typology of policy tools, cleverly labelled as "carrots"
(denoting economic means, such as tax incentives or disincentives), "sticks" (denoting regulatory
105
means, such as prescription or prohibition of certain actions) and "sermons" (denoting
informational or suasion means, such as advertising campaigns or public education).
Governments often move from less coercive to more authoritative policy tools (e.g. starting with
public education, followed by incentive programs, and eventually policies and laws) to establish
legitimacy of a given policy and hence its likelihood of being followed (ibid). In educational
policy, regulation and information (i.e. sticks and sermons) are by far the most common and
relevant policy tools. Because education is a public service, and the salary of teachers and
educational administrators is not based on their daily job performance, policy tools of the carrot
variety are seldom (if ever) employed in educational policy.
To employ Vedung's terms, DPA can be classified as a stick. In its mandate, the DPA
policy clearly outlines the requirements of teachers, stating teachers must ensure that: "all
elementary students, including students with special needs, have a minimum of twenty minutes
of sustained moderate to vigorous physical activity each school day during instructional time"
(MOE, 2005a). This is presented as a professional obligation, not a mere suggestion for practice.
However, the fact of highly inconsistent policy implementation questions whether this "stick"
may be lacking in certain respects.
In the official description of DPA's mandate (MOE, 2005a) and in principal and teacher
guidance documents (MOE, 2005c, d, e; MOE, 2006), the benefits of school-based physical
activity are stated, including references to research citing its potential links to academic
outcomes (Keays and Allison, 1995; Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, 2004; Veugelers
& Fitzgerald, 2005; Active Healthy Kids Canada, 2005; Shepard, 1997). As Vedung explains, "it
has been argued that regulation is effective in changing behaviour as long as there is social
consensus around the government policy underlying the regulatory instrument. The effectiveness
106
of a regulatory instrument is associated with its legitimacy" (1998, p. 71). DPA was introduced
in the context of widespread knowledge of the obesity epidemic and support for such an
initiative from various sectors of society, as discussed in Chapter 1. Additionally, some funding
was provided to school boards to support teachers and principals in training for DPA, including
training, and suggestions for implementation were provided in the form of printed resource
documents. In this and other qualitative studies of teachers' response to DPA policy in Ontario
and elsewhere (Barrett, 2011; Patton, 2012; Pascall, 2010), teachers agreed to the importance of
daily physical activity for their students; at the same time, many also admitted that they often let
other priority areas displace DPA from their schedule.
So, the question remains: if the regulation is seen as legitimate, and is well-supported by
research evidence and by stakeholders both within and outside of the Ministry of Education, why
does it appear not to have been effectively implemented by most teachers? There are various
barriers to implementation, as detailed in Chapter 4 through the school as policy critic lens.
Using Vedung’s explanation that policies often move from less coercive to more coercive means,
it is also possible that there have not been sufficient incentives (or threat of disincentives) for
educators to take dedicated action on this policy. To this end, Vedung remarks, "In general,
information programs seem to have effect when they strengthen well-reasoned self-interest"
(1998, p. 125).
Robertson-Wilson and Levesque (2009) explored the “policy preconditions” of DPA
policy in Ontario at the time of its introduction. Using Hogwood and Gunn’s (1990) framework,
which lists ten preconditions for successful policy implementation at a system level (e.g.
province-wide), the authors examined whether the proper system-wide supports and conditions
had been in place for DPA to succeed. Through an analysis of publicly-available policy
107
documents, the authors found that only half of the preconditions appeared to be in place.
Adequate time and sufficient resources, the required combination of resources, minimal
dependency relationships, perfect communication and co-ordination, and ability of authorities to
demand perfect compliance were all seen to be lacking in the DPA policy. As such, it might be
expected that this policy would often fail in practice. Interestingly, the findings of the current
study closely parallel these conclusions. Inadequate time was a common theme, and where this
barrier was cited, attention to quality of DPA also suffered. Communication, coordination and
structures to ensure compliance were also lacking. However, insufficient physical resources was
found to be more of a perceived than actual problem in the two schools. Dependency
relationships were also not found to be salient in the current study.
Vedung (1998) echoes Hogwood and Gunn (1990), in asserting that “the capacity to
ensure compliance is a necessary condition for effectiveness of a specific government
intervention by regulatory instruments" (1998, p. 71). However, simply introducing stricter
measures of accountability to DPA may not be the solution to this problem. As discussed in
Chapter 4, increasing accountability and policy monitoring without alleviating other competing
pressures could yield unintended effects. Burdening teachers with increased accountability to
practices may sometimes result in technical adherence to the policy (e.g. providing twenty
minutes of physical activity per day) but without attention to quality or purpose (Robinson &
Melnychuk, 2008; Thompson, 2008). This could ultimately be more negative than inconsistent
implementation, as educators and students alike may come to view DPA time as a begrudged
waste of time. Such an outcome would clearly be antithetical to the core purpose of the policy.
Not to mention, to implement systems of accountability would also require additional human and
financial resources, which would likely happen at the detriment of another existing program.
108
Furthermore, there is a larger question as to whether compliance and accountability are the
appropriate approaches to engaging teachers as professionals in leading change.
Criticisms of the DPA policy thus must also be critically considered. Given the context in
which health promotion is valued, while also considering fiscal pressures to minimize spending
and the risks of overly-strict accountability, the current DPA policy appears to have been a
suitable choice to address health in schools. It is likely that the Ministry of Education believed
the public "crisis" of the obesity epidemic was sufficient to persuade educators to action.
Moreover, the introduction of DPA was timely, following on the back of school nutrition
policies, meaning educators might already be attuned to education-based health policies.
However, teachers and principals may still perceive that DPA, while potentially valuable in its
own way, is simply not a priority. Thus, the apparent ineffectiveness of the regulatory approach
to DPA may largely be due to the nature of the teaching profession: multiple demands coupled
with minimal time in which to meet such demands. This merits a closer exploration of the policy
as informed by school contexts.
5.2 DPA POLICY EVALUATION
Weiss (1998) describes the purpose of an evaluation as “a means of contributing to the
improvement of the program or policy” (p. 4). The analysis of this policy suggests that DPA was
a reasonably suitable approach to achieving physical activity-based health goals for children,
given the assumption that a school-based program has been decided-upon. However, the current
study, along with other process evaluations of DPA in Ontario, demonstrates there is room for
improvement to ensure greater quality and consistency of implementation toward reaching policy
goals of improved student fitness, health and academic outcomes.
109
5.2.1 GROUNDED THEORY OF DPA IMPLEMENTATION
Bringing together the context and implementation data for the two case study schools,
one can theorize how differences in DPA implementation may be attributed to differences in
context. Likewise, differences in context where no difference in implementation is evident may
indicate contextual characteristics that are less salient for successful implementation of DPA.
As can be seen in Table 12 (in Chapter 4), there were actually few differences between
the two schools in terms of their progress toward optimal DPA implementation, as measured by
the Ministry of Education framework. Overall, the Northern school fared slightly better in terms
of meeting Ministry expectations, with regards to the scheduling requirement (i.e. minimum of
20 minutes of DPA provided every day of the week) and resources (referring to both physical
and informational resources as well as staff training). Given the vast contextual differences
between these two schools, it may be conjectured that differences in implementation of this
policy are not heavily influenced by school-level physical, economic, policy and socio-cultural
elements, and that other more universal attributes of the education system may be more salient. It
may also speak to the role of educators as agents of change, in that school context may matter
less than the individuals working within a given context.
In particular, it is interesting to note the commonly listed barriers to full implementation
of DPA. In Pascall’s (2010) evaluation of four schools in the Sudbury region, the overriding
barriers to DPA were lack of time (finding time in the school schedule, as well as planning time),
low priority of DPA in the curriculum, lack of expertise (e.g. personal background not related to
physical education, or unawareness of available resources), and lack of space. Similarly, in an
evaluation of Alberta’s DPA policy, Kennedy and colleagues (2010) found that 61.1% of
principals stated there were barriers to increasing physical activity for students during the school
110
day; with the most commonly cited barriers being lack of time in the curriculum, lack of space
and lack of funding. Patton’s (2012a) evaluation found that time constraints related to planning
and displacement of other subject areas was a prevailing barrier for implementation of this
policy. In the current study, lack of time due to other academic priorities was the predominant
barrier (60% and 83% of respondents cited this at the Northern and GTA suburban schools,
respectively). Double the proportion of respondents at the GTA versus the Northern school cited
insufficient facilities as a barrier (60% compared to 30%); close monitoring of other school goals
was a salient barrier at the at the GTA school (27%), and students’ lack of enjoyment of DPA
was identified as influential at the Northern school (20%).
With lack of time as the most commonly-cited obstacle to DPA, it is not surprising that
scheduling was at a less than optimal level at both schools in this case study. Along the same
lines, the lack of a DPA planning and implementation committee at either school is tied to time
constraints, as school staff may not feel they have time to dedicate to committee meetings, or to
organize student leaders to participate in such a committee. Furthermore, quality of daily
physical activities may be affected, as teachers do not have sufficient time to plan DPA.
Partnership development would also be affected by this, due to the additional time required of
establishing these partnership relationships.
Lack of space/facilities was also a frequently-identified impediment. However, as
explored in the discussion of the school as policy critic and school as policy constructor, there
appeared to be a disconnect between teacher perceptions and reality in relation to available
space. The Northern school actually had demonstrably less available space for DPA, yet teachers
at the GTA school were twice as likely to report insufficient facilities as a barrier to DPA.
Considering this, it is possible that space constraints are less of a significant problem than they
111
are believed to be. Better coordination of available space and recognition of potential appropriate
spaces for DPA may be the solution to overcoming this barrier.
The slightly higher ranking of the Northern school in terms of resources is attributable to
the opportunities for professional development and training afforded to teachers at this school.
This appears to be a direct effect of the Student Success Teacher/School Effectiveness Lead here,
who helped develop and is a champion for the revised Ontario Physical Education and Health
Curriculum, of which DPA is a part. The networks and relationships built through this teacher’s
involvement in the curriculum-writing process were then leveraged toward enhancing teacher
capacity for DPA implementation at this school. This example demonstrates the importance of
teacher agency in facilitating positive change at the school level.
In unpacking the reasons why DPA is scheduled somewhat more consistently at the
Northern school compared to the GTA school, there are three items which stand out as possible
explanatory factors. In relation to economic elements, the lower socioeconomic status of the
school community and related health concerns may have contributed to teachers’ belief that
health-focused curricula are of particular importance. This is connected to the policy elements
piece, whereby Northern school teachers were noted to be actively involved in setting the health
policy agenda within their school, by banding together and gathering evidence to convince
administration to make strides toward improving nutritional choices at the school. Furthermore,
in the realm of socio-cultural elements, a significantly higher proportion of teachers indicated
they would continue to implement DPA if it were not mandatory (70% compared to 47% at the
GTA school). All three factors here point to a higher perceived value of DPA by teachers at the
Northern school. Again, the role of teacher agency in policy implementation is implicated.
112
In the studies by both Pascall (2010) and Patton (2012), feelings of support from one’s
principal and school administration were identified as the strongest facilitators for DPA.
However, the GTA school demonstrated much stronger administrative support for DPA, as
outlined in the discussions of the policy and socio-cultural environments of the two schools, yet
did not outperform the Northern school. Thus, teachers’ perceptions of policy importance may
actually be a stronger predictor of policy implementation than administrative support. Teachers
at the Northern school also cited a certain sense of responsibility to their students, being that they
live in an isolated community and lack many of the opportunities of their peers in more southern
parts of the province. As one teacher at this school explained:
A lot of teachers [at this school] continue their higher education through courses and
discussion with teachers in other parts of the province. And so I think it’s a feeling
that just because we’re up here, doesn’t mean we have to be left behind with policy.
So, I think a lot of teachers are educated in that sense and will do the research and
ask the questions. Like, ‘this is what’s supposed to be happening, so why do we have
to be different?’ We’re here to give the same type of education.
Thus, together with addressing limitations imposed by the structure of the education system (e.g.
available time for DPA), it is important to consider the ways in which educators might be
encouraged to value and take action toward achieving policy goals.
5.2.2 IS THE MINISTRY FRAMEWORK MEASURING THE RIGHT THINGS?
Another possible explanation for educators’ seeming inability to consistently succeed in
DPA implementation is that the measures themselves are inappropriate or in need of revision. It
was mentioned in the concluding section of Chapter 4 that many educators have tended to focus
more closely on scheduling rather than quality of DPA implementation. The need for a focus on
quality is salient, but sorely overlooked. As Patton (2012a) found in his outcome evaluation,
students, on average, only attained up to 7 minutes of sustained moderate to vigorous physical
activity in a DPA session of 20 minutes or more. Similarly, Stone and colleagues (2012) found
113
that not a single student obtained any 20-minute bouts of sustained physical activity at any point
during the school days where physical activity was measured. As discussed earlier, children’s
movement is generally characterized by short, quick “bursts” of intense movement compared to
the more steady exercise of youth and adults (Bailey et al, 1995). Additionally, teachers at both
schools cited the difficulties of providing vigorous physical activities within the classroom space
while still being mindful of student safety. This may suggest the need for a shift in focus away
from the call for sustained, moderate to vigorous physical activities, toward other more
achievable goals of reducing sedentary time over the course of instructional time.
Currently, the six-factor Ministry framework lists “quality of daily physical activities” as
a single consideration, broken down into four items: How many students are active for the entire
session? How often are the activities offered inclusive, motivating, learner-centered and success-
oriented? How often do the tasks result in increased breathing and heart rate? How often do
students set their own goals and monitor their own physical activity? However, combining these
four items within a single heading makes it more difficult to focus on each individual item, and
educators may tend to ignore some pieces if they feel they are successfully attending to the other
pieces. Returning to the original DPA mandate, these four pieces also don’t exactly align with
the three identified focus areas of scheduling, intensity and inclusion (MOE, 2005a). Hence, this
section of the framework should be revised to more effectively address all considerations under
quality of DPA. A reintroduction of the policy itself may also be beneficial, to redirect
educators’ focus toward the most relevant aspects and away from an overly-narrow focus on
scheduling (whereby meeting the guidelines is often considered unfeasible, anyway).
114
5.2.3 IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DPA POLICY
The Ministry of Education’s School Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical
Activity (MOE, 2006) outlines six areas of focus for school administrators. In terms of their
content, these six areas can be subdivided into two distinct categories of focus: measures of
implementation and measures of supports for implementation. Schedule and quality of daily
physical activity both fall under the implementation category, as they are direct measures of the
policy in practice within the classroom. Considering that it merits a stronger focus for
implementation efforts moving forward, quality of daily physical activities should be further
broken down into subcategories, such that none are overlooked. Leadership10
, student leadership,
resources and partnership development all fall under the category of supports, as they
theoretically provide the means by which implementation may be optimized. It is therefore
recommended that the Ministry of Education framework be revised, with "implementation" and
"support for implementation" as two overarching categories of focus, and the six current
categories reorganized as sub-headings under these two broader categories (Figure 3).
Improvements and innovations identified in Chapter 4 have also been incorporated.
Considering neither of the school principals interviewed was familiar with the existing
Ministry framework, it is also salient to consider the delivery and format of this framework tool
so that its uptake is high (i.e. it is actually used by administrators to monitor their school's DPA
implementation). The fact that this policy is no longer new, and its priority of place may have
been compromised as newer educational policies have moved to the fore, may warrant an
attention-grabbing reintroduction of a revised DPA mandate which clearly delineates and
emphasizes the expectations for quality of daily physical activities and necessary supports.
10
For a more accurate title, I have renamed this category "Administrative and Staff Leadership" in the revised
framework.
115
Figure continued on next page
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
Implementation Quality of Daily
Physical Activities
Very few students
are fully engaged
during DPA.
Some students are
are fully engaged
during DPA.
All students are
fully engaged
during DPA.
Activities offered
are rarely inclusive,
motivating, learner-
centred, or success
oriented.
Activities offered
are often inclusive,
motivating, learner-
centred, and
success-oriented.
Activities offered
are inclusive,
motivating,
learner-centred, and
success-oriented.
Tasks rarely result
in an increase in
breathing or heart
rate.
Tasks occasionally
result in an increase
in breathing
and heart rates.
Tasks often result
in an increase in
students’ breathing
and heart rates.
Students rarely set
their own goals and
do not monitor their
own physical
activity levels.
Students sometimes
set their own goals
and monitor their
own physical
activity levels.
Students regularly
set their own goals
and monitor their
own physical
activity levels.
Schedule Students are
occasionally
given opportunities
to be physically
active during
the 300 minutes of
instructional time.
Students are often
given opportunities
to be physically
active, for a total of
at least 20 minutes
during the 300
minutes of
instructional time.
Students are always
given opportunities
to be physically
active, for a total of
at least 20 minutes
during the 300
minutes of
instructional time.
Students often
remain seated for
longer than half an
hour at a time
without a
movement break.
Students sometimes
remain seated for
longer than half an
hour at a time
without a
movement break.
Students rarely
remain seated for
longer than half an
hour at a time
without a
movement break.
Supports for
Implementation
Administrative
Leadership
Classroom teachers
are leading daily
physical activities
without any
coordinated support
or direction.
One or more school
leaders (e.g.
principal, physical
education and
health specialist) is
available as a "go-
to" person to
provide assistance
for implementation.
One or more school
leaders (e.g.
principal, physical
education and health
specialist) is
available as a "go-
to" person to
provide assistance
for implementation,
and monitors class-
by-class
implementation.
Committees and/ or
professional
learning commun-
ities addressing
DPA are being
considered and
planned.
Committees and/ or
professional
learning commun-
ities addressing
DPA have been
established.
116
Supports for
Implementation
(continued)
Student
Leadership
Students are not
involved in the
planning or
implementation
of any school
physical activities.
Some students have
taken a leadership
role in planning
and/or
implementation of
school physical
activities.
Students with a
diverse range of
interests and abilities
have taken a
leadership role in
planning and/or
implementation of
school physical
activities.
Student input is not
sought for policy
decisions.
Students' input and
ideas have a limited
impact or no impact
on policy decisions.
Students' input and
ideas are considered
in policy decisions.
Resources Limited physical
resources are
available to assist
staff.
Adequate physical
resources are
available to assist
staff.
Adequate physical
resources are
available to assist
staff.
Available
informational
resources are
minimally relevant
and/or accessible to
all staff.
Available
informational
resources are
relevant and/or
accessible to all
staff.
Available
informational
resources are highly
relevant and easily
accessible to all
staff.
No one on staff has
been trained in the
implementation
of DPA.
Some staff have
attended training on
the implementation
of DPA.
All staff have
attended
training on the
implementation
of DPA.
Partnership
Development
No community
partners have been
established to
provide input and/or
direction for DPA.
Community partners
have been
established;
however, they are
providing a limited
level of input and/or
direction for DPA.
Community partners
have been
established, and
they provide valued
input and/or
direction for DPA.
Other Supports
(Create your own
success criteria)
Notes
Identified Next
Steps
Figure 3: Revised School Implementation Continuum for Daily Physical Activity.
117
As can be seen, the revised school implementation continuum for DPA also includes an
additional row for "other supports" not encompassed by the provincial framework, that may be
relevant and worthy of mention in particular school contexts. A row for notes has also been
added, as suggested by the principal at the GTA school, who felt the framework should allow
more room for explanation of the school's progress. This would be useful for succession planning
purposes, as new administrators at the school can easily refer to the current progress toward
optimal implementation. Furthermore, a row for “Identified Next Steps” has been added, to
encourage the use of this framework as a gap analysis tool, as originally intended by the Ministry
in its 2006 version. Finally, the separation of the existing framework into the broad categories of
implementation and supports for implementation also allows for the framework to be easily used
as a point of reference by classroom teachers (who can choose to focus more closely or solely on
the implementation pieces, for which they are directly responsible). This way, both
administrators and classroom teachers are referring to the same success criteria toward optimal
policy implementation, ideally leading to greater consistency of high quality DPA.
In addition to revising this framework, it would be important to ensure that the mandate
itself is revised to reflect the expectations outlined in the framework. The current approach,
whereby the gap-analysis tool for school administrators (i.e. the Continuum framework; MOE
2006) includes several additional considerations not specified in the policy mandate (MOE,
2005a), is problematic. Although these considerations are outlined in Ministry-provided
resources (MOE 2005c, d, e), the poor observed uptake of written Ministry resources means that
many educators may not be cognizant of these additional expectations. Furthermore, sustained
communication of the policy is imperative to ensure the policy remains on educators’ radar well
beyond its initial (re)introduction.
118
5.3 CONCLUSIONS
This study’s detailed attention to school context at two very different schools, varying
widely on aspects of their physical, economic, policy and socio-cultural environments, revealed
that implementation may not be particularly influenced by school context. DPA implementation
was relatively similar at the two schools. However, implementation was slightly more consistent
at the school at which teachers appeared to value the policy more strongly, despite the
administration at this school having less formal support for the policy. This alludes to the
importance of teacher agency, as they shape provincial policies according to the perceived needs
of their students. It also speaks to the need for school leaders to engage their staff as such agents
of change, and not as passive recipients of top-down policy mandates.
As with any educational policy, there are a wide range of considerations and complexities
associated with Daily Physical Activity. Despite its evidence-based approach and support from a
variety of stakeholders, including many of the teachers in this case study, implementation suffers
from ongoing inconsistency. In some respects, the policy could benefit from changes; most
notably, changes which would redirect the focus away from simply trying to fit in 20 minutes of
physical activity on any given day of the week, toward greater attention to high-quality and
potentially learning-rich experiences for students. Furthermore, a reframing of the policy as a
way to break up sedentary time may be perceived as more achievable, and may be more realistic
given time, space, and student engagement-related constraints of the current mandate.
119
REFERENCES
Active Healthy Kids Canada. (2005). Dropping the Ball: Canada's report Card on Physical
Activity for Children and Youth. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://dvqdas9jty7g6.cloudfront.net/archivedreportcards/2005-active-healthy-kids-canada-
summary-english-report-card.pdf
Active Healthy Kids Canada. (2011). Active Healthy Kids Report Card on Physical Activity for
Children and Youth. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://dvqdas9jty7g6.cloudfront.net/reportcard2011/ahkcreportcard20110429final.pdf
Alberta Education Accountability and Reporting Division. (2008). Daily physical activity survey
report. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from http://education.alberta.ca/teachers/resources/dpa.aspx
Bailey, R.C., Olson, J., Pepper, S.L., Porszasz, J., Barstow, T.J., & Cooper, D.M. (1995). The
level and tempo of children's physical activities: An observational study. Medicine and Science
in Sports and Exercise, 27: 1033-1041.
Ball, G. & McCargar, L. (2003). Childhood obesity in Canada: A review of prevalence
estimates and risk factors for cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes. Canadian Journal of
Applied Physiology, 28(1): 117-140.
Barrett, J.M. (2011). Teacher Candidates’ Perceptions of the Daily Physical Activity Initiative
and their Emerging Self-Efficacy as Daily Physical Activity Instructors. ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses.
Bates, H. (2006). In report written by: Heidi Bates. (Ed.), Daily physical activity for children and
youth: A review and synthesis of the literature. Edmonton, Alta.: Alberta Education, c2006.
Berry, T., Craig, C., Faulkner, G., Latimer, A.E., Rhodes, R., Spence, J. & Tremblay, M. (2012).
Mothers’ Intentions to Support Children’s Physical Activity Related to Attention and Implicit
Agreement with Advertisements. International Journal of Behavioural Medicine. Prepublished
November 16, 2012, DOI: 10.1007/s12529-012-9279-5.
Canadian Society for Exercise Psychology. (n.d.). Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines and
Canadian Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines. Accessed 1 July 2013, from
http://www.csep.ca/english/view.asp?x=804
Cancer Care Ontario & Public Health Ontario. (2012). Taking Action to Prevent Chronic
Disease: Recommendations for a Healthier Ontario. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
https://www.cancercare.on.ca/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=125697
Chorney, D. (2008). Daily physical activity: An Alberta initiative. Physical & Health Education
Journal, 73(4), 26.
120
Clune, W. (1990). Three views of curriculum policy in the school context: The school as policy
mediator, policy critic and policy constructor. In M. McLaughlin, J. Talbert & N. Bascia (Eds.),
The contexts of teaching in secondary schools: Teachers’ realities. New York: Teachers College
Press.
Cohen, D. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3): 327-345.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2000). Questionnaires. In Cohen, L., Manion, L. and
Morrison, K. (Eds) Research methods in education (5th Ed). London and New York: Routledge
Falmer.
Colley, R., Garriguet, D., Janssen, I., Craig, C., Clark, J. & Tremblay, M. (2011). Physical
activity of Canadian children and youth: Accelerometer results from the 2007-2009 Canadian
Health Measures Survey. Health Reports, 22(1): 12-20.
Educational Quality and Accountability Office. (2013). About the EQAO: Mandate. Retrieved 1
July 2013 from http://www.eqao.com/AboutEQAO/Mandate.aspx?Lang=E
Festinger L. Cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1957.
Freund, P.E.S. and McGuire, M.B. (1999). A Sociological Perspective on Health, Illness and the
Body and Who Becomes Sick, Injured or Dies? In Health, Illness and the Social Body: A Critical
Sociology, 3rd edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Government Social Research Unit. (2007). The Magenta Book: guidance notes for policy
evaluation and analysis. HM Treasury: London, UK.
Hargreaves, A. (2003). Chapter 6: Beyond Standardization- professional Learning Communities,
or performance training sects? In Teaching in the Knowledge Society. Maidenhead, UK: Open
University Press.
Heffernan, C. (n.d.). Case Study. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.drcath.net/toolkit/case.html
Hogwood and Gunn (1990). Policy analysis for the real world. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
International Agency for Research on Cancer. (2008). IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention,
Chapter 2.1: The importance of design in the evaluation of tobacco control policies. In Tobacco
Control, Vol. 12: Methods for Evaluating Tobacco Control Policies. Retrieved 1 July 2013
from http://www.iarc.fr/en/publications/pdfs-online/prev/handbook12/Tobacco_vol12_2A.pdf
Jaeger, R.M. (1997). Survey research methods in education. In R.M. Jeager (Ed.)
Complementary methods for research in education , pp. 449-476. Washington, DC: American
Educational Research Association.
121
Janssen, I. & Leblanc, A. (2010) Systematic review of the health benefits of physical activity and
fitness in school-aged children and youth. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and
Physical Activity, 7: 40.
Joint Consortium for School Health. (n.d.). Healthy School Planner. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.healthyschoolplanner.uwaterloo.ca/
Joint Consortium for School Health. (2011). Annual Report 2011. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.jcsh-cces.ca/upload/Annual%20Report%202011%20English%20WebReady.pdf
Keays, J.J., & Allison, K.R. (1995). The effects of regular moderate to vigorous physical activity
on student outcomes: A review. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 86(1): 62-65.
Kennedy, C.D., Cantell, M., & Dewey, D. (2010). Has the Alberta daily physical activity
initiative been successfully implemented in Calgary schools? Paediatrics & Child Health, 15(7),
e19-e24.
Kingdon, J. (2003). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, Second Edition. New York:
Longman.
Langille, J.D. & Rodgers, W. (2010). Exploring the Influence of a Social Ecological Model on
School-Based Physical Activity. Health Education and Behavior, 37(6): 879-894.
Levin, B. (2008). How to Change 5000 Schools: A Practical and Positive Approach for Leading
Change at Every Level. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Liberal Party of Ontario. (2011). Biography: Dalton McGuinty. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.ontarioliberal.ca/Dalton/Biography.aspx
Lobstein T, Baur L, Uauy R. (2004). Obesity in children and young people: a crisis in public
health. Obesity Reviews, 5(Suppl 1):4–104.
Marshall, S. & Ramirez, E. (2011). Reducing Sedentary Behaviour: A New Paradigm in Physical
Activity Promotion. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 5(6): 518-530.
McEwan, E.K. & McEwan, P.J. (2003). Making sense of research: What’s good, what’s not, and
how to tell the difference. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
McKenzie, T.L. (2012). System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time (SOFIT): Generic
Description and Procedures Manual. Retrieved 1 July 1013 from
http://activelivingresearch.com/files/SOFIT_Protocols_09.14.12.pdf
McMillan, J.H. & Wergin, J.F. (2006). Understanding and Evaluating Educational Research (3rd
edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, Merrill Prentice Hall.
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
122
Ministry of Education. (2004). Healthy food in schools means healthier kids: Next step in
McGuinty government plan to make schools healthier places to learn. Retrieved 1 July 2013
from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/nr/04.10/1020.html
Ministry of Education. (2005a). Policy/Program Memorandum No. 138: Daily Physical Activity
in Schools, Grades 1-8. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/extra/eng/ppm/138.html
Ministry of Education. (2005b). Healthy Schools Condition Healthy Minds. Retrieved 1 July
2013 from http://news.ontario.ca/archive/en/2005/10/06/Healthy-Schools-Condition-Healthy-
Minds.html
Ministry of Education. (2005c). Resource Guide for Daily Physical Activity in Schools, Grades
1-3. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teachers/dpa1-3.pdf
Ministry of Education. (2005d). Resource Guide for Daily Physical Activity in Schools, Grades
4-6. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teachers/dpa4-6.pdf
Ministry of Education. (2005e). Resource Guide for Daily Physical Activity in Schools, Grades 7
and 8. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teachers/dpa7-8.pdf
Ministry of Education. (2006). Daily Physical Activity in Schools: Guide for School Principals.
Retrieved 1 July 2013 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teachers/dpa_principals.pdf
Ministry of Education. (2009). Healthy Schools. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/teachers/healthyschools.html
Ministry of Education. (2012). Healthy Schools: Recognition Program. Retrieved 1 July 2013
from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/healthyschools/challenge.html
Ministry of Education (2013). School Information Finder. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/sift/
Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. (2004). 2004 Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health
Report: Healthy Weights, Healthy Lives. Toronto: Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care.
Ontario Public Health Association. (2011). Ontario Healthy Schools Coalition. Retrieved 1 July
2013 from http://ontariohealthyschools.com/
Osborn, M. & McNess, E. (2005). The cultural context of teachers' work: Policy, practice and
performance. In Bascia, N., Cumming, A., Datnow, A., Leithwood, K. & Livingstone, D. (Eds.)
International Handbook of Educational Policy, Part Two, Volume 13, p.507-526. Cornwall:
Springer.
123
Pascall, C. (2010). Examining the implementation of daily physical activity in Sudbury
elementary schools. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Patton, I. (2012a). School-based physical activity in children: An evaluation of the
Daily Physical Activity program in Ontario elementary schools. ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses.
Patton, I. (2012b). Teachers’ Perspectives of the Daily Physical Activity program in Ontario.
Physical and Health Education Journal, 78(1): 14-21.
Portelli, J., Shields, C., &Vibert, A. (2007). Toward an Equitable Education: Poverty, Diversity,
and Students at Risk. National Report: First Edition.
Ranson, S. (2003). Public accountability in the age of neo-liberal governance. Journal of
Education Policy, 18(5): 459-480.
Robertson-Wilson, J. E., & Lévesque, L. (2009). Ontario's daily physical activity policy for
elementary schools: Is everything in place for success? Canadian Journal of Public Health,
100(2): 125-129.
Robinson, D.B., & Melnychuk, N.E. (2008). Discourse, teacher identity, and the implementation
of daily physical activity. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 54(3), 245-257.
Sheila Basrur Centre. (n.d.) Dr. Sheela Basrur- Her life and legacy. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.sheelabasrurcentre.ca/about-drsheelabasrur.html
Shephard, R. (1997). Curricular Physical Activity and Academic Performance. Pediatric
Exercise Science, 9: 113-125.
Stone, M., Faulkner, G., Zeglen-Hunt, L. & Cowie-Bonne, J. (2012). The Daily Physical Activity
(DPA) Policy in Ontario: Is It Working? An Examination Using Accelerometry-measured
Physical Activity Data. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 103(3): 170-174.
Smith, M.L. & Kleine, P.L. (1986). Qualitative research and evaluation: Triangulation and
multimethods reconsidered. In D.D. Williams (Ed.), Naturalistic evaluation (New Directions for
Program Evaluation, No. 30). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Statistics Canada. (2013). Census Profile. Retrieved 1 July from
http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E
Thompson, A. (2008). Implementing daily physical activity in a junior high school: A case study.
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Tremblay, M.S. & Willms, J.D. (2000). Secular trends in the body mass index of Canadian
children. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 163(11): 1429-1433.
124
Vedung, E. (1998). Policy Instruments: Typologies and Theories. In Behelmens-Videc, M., Rist,
R. & Vedung, E. (Eds.), Carrots, Sticks and Sermons: Policy Instruments and Their Evaluation.
New Brunswick, USA and London, UK: Transaction Publishers.
Veugelers, P. & Fitzgerald, A. (2005). Effectiveness of school programs in preventing childhood
obesity: A multilevel comparison. American Journal of Public Health, 95(3): 432-435.
Weiss, C. (1998). Evaluation (2nd
edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
World Health Organization. (2002). Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life. Retrieved 1 July
2013 from http://www.who.int/whr/2002/en/whr02_en.pdf
World Health Organization. (2012). Prioritizing areas for action in the field of population-
based prevention of childhood obesity: A set of tools for Member States to determine and identify
priority areas for action. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/childhood/Childhood_obesity_modified_4june_web.pdf
World Health Organization. (2013). Global school health initiative. Retrieved 1 July 2013 from
http://www.who.int/school_youth_health/gshi/en/
Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and Methods (3rd
edition). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications Inc.
Yin, R. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4th
Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications Inc.
Young, J., Levin, B., & Wallin, D. (2007). Understanding Canadian Schools: An Introduction to
Educational Administration (4th
edition). Scarborough, ON: Nelson Publishing.
125
APPENDICES
126
APPENDIX 1: PARTICIPANT INFORMATION PACKAGE
Ontario’s Daily Physical Activity Policy:
A comparative case study of implementation in
geographically and culturally diverse schools
An Invitation to Participate in Research
Researcher: Laura Zeglen, Master of Arts Candidate
Supervisor: Dr. Carol Campbell
127
Who is this person who wants to come do research at my
school?
My name is Laura Zeglen, and I am a Master of Arts
candidate in Education Administration at the Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education (OISE) at the University of Toronto. My degree is
part of a collaborative program in public health policy, funded by
the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). As a former
teacher, I am keenly interested in the role of teachers in promoting
health to students, and in how they interpret and approach education-based health
policies. I have chosen to focus on implementation of Daily Physical Activity (DPA) for
the purpose keeping my thesis manageable, but am also interested in broader health-
promoting practices taking place at the school level.
Study Purposes:
Ontario’s Daily Physical Activity (DPA) policy was introduced in October of 2005, as part
of the province’s Healthy Schools Program. It prescribes, “a minimum of twenty minutes
of sustained moderate to vigorous physical activity each school day during instructional
time” for all elementary school children in Ontario, and came about as part of a
response to rising levels of childhood obesity and chronic diseases associated with
sedentary lifestyles.
Research evaluating DPA in Ontario shows great inconsistency in the implementation of
this policy across schools and even between classes. Common barriers cited include
lack of space, time, and other resources; however, it remains unclear whether investing
money into addressing these particular issues is the solution. Additionally, the focus of
previous studies has been relatively narrow, often looking specifically at implementation
of DPA as prescribed and failing to take into account the broader reality of life at
individual schools. Thus, this study will explore how the policy is being enacted in two
geographically and culturally diverse schools, investigate the complex reasons why
implementation may differ between and within schools, and discuss the implications of
these results for this and other school-based health policies.
128
Role of Participants:
Your school has been specifically selected for participation in this case study of two
schools: one representing a northern, remote community school, and another
representing a suburban school in the Greater Toronto Area. The primary participants at
your school will be teachers.
Your role (Principal)
Should you agree that your school will participate in this project, your first task will be to
select an outstanding candidate at your school to act as the Project Liaison (see
description below). You, or a vice principal, will be asked to comment on your school’s
implementation of DPA in an interview, and to complete a survey about your school’s
“health environment”. You may also be contacted for access to documents related to
DPA implementation within your school.
Project Liaison
This individual, as selected by you, will act as the communication link between the
researcher and school staff. This might be someone with a dedicated interest and
commitment to physical activity or healthy living in your school. You may also elect to
take on this position yourself. An important part of the Project Liaison’s role will be to
inform teachers of this research at your school, and to drum up enthusiasm for
participation. They will be my primary point of contact for questions about your school.
Teachers
All teachers will be invited to complete an anonymous online survey (15 multiple choice
questions) with general questions regarding their own implementation of the DPA policy
within their class. All teachers will also be requested to submit their class timetables for
the current term, so that I can see where opportunities for physical activity are
scheduled across the school week in each class.
3 teachers representing the three grade divisions (1 primary, 1 junior, 1 intermediate) will
be selected for a classroom observation, based on their interest in taking part. I will
spend 2 full school days in each classroom (6 days total at the school) as a participant
observer, observing but also taking part as requested by the teacher. (I envision this
being similar to the role of a student teacher who is learning the norms of the classroom,
and making notes on any form of daily physical activity observed.) These teachers will
also be asked to participate in an interview, in which their experience with the DPA
policy is discussed. This interview will be approximately 30-40 minutes in length, and will
be scheduled at a time that is convenient for the teacher.
129
Benefits and Risks of Participation
Participants will benefit from the research in that it will offer a point of reflection for their
teaching practice. A summary report of the findings across schools will be provided to
your school, thus benefiting all staff.
Schools across the province can benefit greatly from this research. Findings may
indicate ways in which certain teachers or schools have been able to excel in their
provision of daily physical activity, which can thus be shared with schools or teachers
who may be struggling in this regard. If implementation of this health-promoting policy
can be improved across the province, students may also benefit in a variety of ways,
including health- and academic-related outcomes.
There are no anticipated risks of participation in this study.
Potential Dates for Data Collection
I would like to spend 6 consecutive school days in your school in the month of February
or early March. The exact dates will be decided based upon the availability of both
participant schools, and I will confirm the dates with you at least two weeks in advance.
As a former teacher, I am acutely aware of the time pressures associated with
teaching. I will do my very best to minimize disruption of your work and the work of
teachers while I am at your school.
Contact Information
If you are interested in having your school take part in this research, or if you have
questions about the research, please contact me at:
Phone: 1-647-996-8091
Email: [email protected].
Alternatively, you may contact my thesis supervisor, Dr. Carol Campbell, at:
Email: [email protected].
Either one of us will be more than happy to answer any questions you might have, and
to provide additional information you may wish to know.
130
APPENDIX 2A: HEALTHY SCHOOL PLANNER SURVEY TOOL- FOUNDATIONAL MODULE
STEP 1
Team
Planning for healthy school communities works well if the workload is shared and all key groups are involved. It is
essential that students participate and that their ideas are respected.
QUESTION 1
Who is involved in completing the Healthy School Planner for your school? (Select the number of
participants for each group)
# of participants
a. Students 0 1 2 3+
b. Teaching staff member(s) 0 1 2 3+
c. Other staff member(s) (e.g., educational assistant, custodian, administrative assistant, etc.) 0 1 2 3+
d. Principal / Vice Principal 0 1 2 3+
e. School / parent council representative 0 1 2 3+
f. Parents / families / guardians 0 1 2 3+
g. Health services professionals 0 1 2 3+
h. Community organization / non-profit organization representative 0 1 2 3+
i. School district / division / board representative 0 1 2 3+
j. Other 0 1 2 3+
QUESTION 2
Does your school community have a leader for healthy school initiatives?
Yes
No
Don't know
STEP 2
131
Planning
Planning for a healthy school community involves using data from various sources to assist in identifying goals to
work towards planning actions in each of the pillars of comprehensive school health in order to improve health and
learning outcomes.
QUESTION 3
Has your school used data (e.g., surveys, attendance records, policy review) from the following to inform your
action plan for creating a healthy school community?
Yes No Don't Know
a. Students
b. Teachers
c. Parents / families / guardians
d. Formal review of policy or practice
QUESTION 4
Does your school develop goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and time limited within an
action plan to create a healthier school community?
Yes, we develop goals with all above criteria
Yes, we develop goals without meeting all criteria
No
Don't know
Our school does not have an action plan
QUESTION 5
Does your school community communicate that ?healthier students are better learners? with the following
groups at least once a year?
Yes No Don't know
a. Students
132
Yes No Don't know
b. Teachers
c. Parents / families / guardians
d. Groups outside the school (e.g., neighbourhood association, local businesses)
QUESTION 6
Does your action plan for a healthy school community include ways to:
Not at
all Minimally Somewhat Fully
a. Support students in improving their well-being through teaching and
learning (i.e., across the curriculum and inside & outside the classroom)
b. Foster a social environment at the school to enhance the well-being of the
school community
c. Use the physical environment at the school to enhance the well-being of the
school community
d. Develop or implement healthy school policies
e. Involve the broader school community to leverage community partnerships
and services
STEP 3
Implementation across the 4 pillars of comprehensive school health
Teaching and Learning - Resources, activities and provincial/territorial curriculum where students gain age-
appropriate knowledge and experiences, helping to build the skills to improve their health and wellbeing. Through
formal and informal curriculum and associated activities, students gain knowledge, understanding and skills to
improve their health and well-being and enhance their learning outcomes.
QUESTION 7
Beyond health and physical education classes, does your school encourage integration of health and well-
being... (Select all that apply)
during instructional time (e.g., across curriculum)?
133
during non-instructional time (e.g., extra-curricular activities)?
QUESTION 8
Do students with a range of skills and characteristics (e.g., age, gender, ability, culture) play a leadership role
in the organization of school activities?
In no activities (0-10%)
In some activities (11-50%)
In most activities (51-80%)
In all activities (81-100%)
STEP 3
Implementation across the 4 pillars of comprehensive school health
Physical Environment -
The physical environment is safe and accessible and supports healthy choices for all members of the school
community.
The physical environment includes:
The buildings, grounds, play space, and equipment in and surrounding the school.
Basic amenities such as sanitation and air cleanliness.
QUESTION 9
How well do the following physical environments promote safety and / or injury prevention:
Not at
all Minimally Somewhat Fully
a. Outdoor spaces (e.g., adequate lighting, car-free zones, shade to promote
sun safety)
b. Indoor spaces (e.g., facilities, equipment)
c. Air quality (e.g., temperature, free from mold)
d. Water quality (e.g., free from bacteria, taste, colour)
134
QUESTION 10
Do all members of your school community have equal and inclusive access during school hours to the
following spaces?
None Some Most All
a. Outdoor spaces
b. Indoor spaces (e.g., toilets, change rooms, desks, classrooms)
STEP 3
Implementation across the 4 pillars of comprehensive school health
Social Environment -
The social environment is:
The quality of the relationships among and between staff and students in the school.
The emotional well-being of students.
Influenced by relationships with families and the wider community.
The school's social environment supports the school community in making healthy choices by building competence,
autonomy, and connectedness.
Competency refers to our need for recognizing and using our personal gifts and strengths in achieving personal
goals. Fulfilment of this need provides individuals with a sense of personal achievement and accomplishment.
Autonomy refers to our need for personal freedom to make choices or decisions that affect our lives. When this
need is satisfied in conjunction with other need areas, freedom and choice are expressed in ways in which respect is
demonstrated for self and others.
Connectedness refers to the extent to which students perceive they are accepted, respected, included and supported
by others in the educational environment.
QUESTION 11
Does your school community foster a safe and supportive environment for everyone?
Not at all
Minimally
Somewhat
Fully
135
QUESTION 12
Does your school community foster a respectful environment?
Not at all
Minimally
Somewhat
Fully
QUESTION 13
Does your school community foster a sense of connectedness:
Not at all Minimally Somewhat Fully
a. within the school?
b. with the broader community?
QUESTION 14
Are staff supported to maintain and improve their personal health and well-being?
Not at all
Minimally
Somewhat
Fully
STEP 3
Implementation across the 4 pillars of comprehensive school health
Partnerships & Services -
136
The school collaborates with partners in the school community (e.g., families, community groups, businesses, non-
governmental organizations, schools & school districts/divisions/boards, provincial/local/municipal governments,
regional/local health authorities) to create & sustain a healthy school environment.
Partnerships are:
The connections between the school and students? families.
Supportive working relationships within schools (staff and students), between schools, and between schools
and other community organizations and representative groups.
Health, education and other sectors working together to advance school health.
Services are:
Community and school based services that support and promote student and staff health and wellbeing.
QUESTION 15
Does your school have at least one effective partnership with the following individuals or groups to promote
and sustain a healthy school environment?
Yes No
a. Individuals / organizations within the school community (e.g., families, volunteers, parent council)
b. Other Schools
c. Community group(s) or non-governmental organization(s)
d. Business(es)
e. Government at any level
f. Health authority/health region
g. Other
QUESTION 16
Thinking of the ‘effective partnerships’ identified in the previous question, which of the following supports
have your partnerships provided in the last 12 months? (Select all that apply)
Funding
Services (e.g., health services, volunteer activities, training opportunities, professional development)
Material resources (e.g., handouts, signage, computers, equipment)
137
None of the above
Other
QUESTION 17
How many of your school community members (staff, students) are engaged in community service through
your school (e.g., promoting community events, promoting or coordinating food drives, hosting blood
donation clinics, raising money for charities)?
None (0-10%)
Some (11-50%)
Most (51-80%)
All (81-100%)
QUESTION 18
In a typical week, how often do community members (including parents) volunteer in your school? Volunteer
activities do not have to be specific to health and well-being (think about all volunteers in your school).
Rarely
1 or 2 days per week
Most days
Every day
STEP 3
Implementation across the 4 pillars of comprehensive school health
Healthy School Policy - Management practices, decision-making processes, rules, procedures and policies at all
levels that promote health and wellbeing, and shape a respectful, welcoming and caring school environment.
All school policies/guidelines and practices support learning outcomes while concurrently addressing healthy school
initiatives in a planned, multi-faceted and integrative manner.
QUESTION 19
138
How frequently does your school engage the school community to review and update implementation of
healthy school policies and practices (e.g., healthy eating policies, bullying policies)?
Never
Less than once a year
At least once per year
Don?t know
QUESTION 20
Does your school use existing information or gather evidence to update implementation of policies and
practices to create a healthy school community (e.g., district level reports, school satisfaction surveys, school
accountability surveys)?
Not at all
Minimally
Somewhat
Fully
STEP 4
Celebrate!
Celebration of healthy school initiatives is an important part of instilling the concept and importance of health
promoting schools in the minds of school students and staff, parents, the local community and senior officials.
QUESTION 21
How often does your school celebrate successful healthy school initiatives:
Less than 1
time/year
1-2 time /
year
More than 2
times/year
a. Within the school (students and staff)?
b. With the broader community (families, other
groups)?
139
QUESTION 22
Does your school community recognize, acknowledge and celebrate contributions of volunteers?
Not at all
Minimally
Somewhat
Fully
STEP 5
Sustaining your healthy school community
A successful health promoting school takes steps to sustain its efforts and achievements into the medium- and long-
term.
QUESTION 23
How many school staff participated in learning opportunities (e.g., professional development, staff meetings,
expert consultations) related to creating a healthy school community in the last 12 months?
None (0-10%)
Some (11-50%)
Most (51-80%)
All (81-100%)
QUESTION 24
How well has your school community prepared a succession plan (formal or informal) if your leader for
healthy school initiatives was to leave (e.g., having shared leadership, vice-chair, mentorship for new leader
candidates)?
Not at all
Minimally
Somewhat
Fully
140
Our school does not have a leader for healthy school initiatives
QUESTION 25
How many of your healthy school initiatives are implemented school wide?
None (0-10%)
Some (11-50%)
Most (51-80%)
All (81-100%)
QUESTION 26
Are your healthy school initiatives embedded within your school's action plan?
Yes
No
Don't know
Our school does not have an action plan
STEP 6
Monitoring & Evaluation
A successful health promoting school seeks continuous improvement to its planning and implementation of policies
and practices reflecting a comprehensive school health approach through ongoing monitoring and evaluation.
QUESTION 27
How often does your school formally assess its progress on creating a healthy school community?
Less than one time per year
One time per year
More than one time per year
141
Conducted a school assessment but did not use results to plan or monitor progress
Consent
Do you grant access to the data from this module of the Healthy School Planner so that aggregate results and
secondary research and analysis can occur in support of policy and program planning?
Yes, I grant access for the use of data from this module. (Note: The Pan-Canadian Joint Consortium for School
Health and the University of Waterloo will ensure that findings cannot be linked to you or your school. Your
school's data will be combined with data from other schools that have used the Planner, making your school's data
indistinguishable from the others, and ensuring confidentiality.)
No, I do not grant access.
142
APPENDIX 2B: HEALTHY SCHOOL PLANNER SURVEY TOOL- PHYSICAL ACTIVITY MODULE
Teaching and Learning
Teaching and Learning - Resources, activities and provincial/territorial curriculum where students gain age-
appropriate knowledge and experiences, helping to build the skills to improve their health and wellbeing. Through
formal and informal curriculum and associated activities, students gain knowledge, understanding and skills to
improve their health and well-being and enhance their learning outcomes.
QUESTION 1
Are instructional strategies for physical activity and physical education adapted (e.g., skills, equipment, level
of engagement) to meet the needs of all students, including reluctant learners and special needs students?
Fully
Somewhat
Minimally
Not at all
QUESTION 2
What portion of students at your school choose to take an additional credit that involves physical activity,
over and above the mandatory physical education credit(s) required to graduate (e.g., additional physical
education course, dance course, outdoors course)?
None (0-10%)
Some (11-50%)
Most (51-80%)
All (81-100%)
Social and Physical Environment
Physical Environment -
The physical environment is safe and accessible and supports healthy choices for all members of the school
community.
The physical environment includes:
143
The buildings, grounds, play space, and equipment in and surrounding the school.
Basic amenities such as sanitation and air cleanliness.
Social Environment -
The social environment is:
The quality of the relationships among and between staff and students in the school.
The emotional well-being of students.
Influenced by relationships with families and the wider community.
QUESTION 3
Rate the quality of the following facilities and/or equipment at your school.
Excellent Good Adequate Poor Not
Available
a. Gymnasium
b. Other large room suitable for physical activity (e.g., auditorium,
cafeteria, dance studio)
c. Running track / trails
d. Outdoor field / outdoor play area
e. Fitness room for aerobic and/or strength training
f. Secure change rooms
g. Privacy curtains for changing and / or showering
h. Paved area with lines to mark active game areas (e.g., basketball
court, hopscotch)
i. Playground equipment
j. Equipment for team or group sports (e.g., soccer balls)
k. Equipment for individual physical activity (e.g., snowshoes)
QUESTION 4
Do students have access to the following for physical activity outside of curriculum time?
144
Often Sometimes Rarely Never N/A
a. Gymnasium
b. Other large room suitable for physical activity (e.g., auditorium, cafeteria,
dance studio)
c. Outdoor facilities (e.g., playing fields, paved activity areas)
d. Equipment (e.g., balls, skipping ropes, snowshoes)
QUESTION 5
How often do students have opportunity to use indoor space for physical activity when they remain indoors
due to poor weather outside of curriculum time?
Often
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
QUESTION 6
What percentage of students at your school travel to school by?
0-39% 40-59% 60-79% 80-100%
a. School bus
b. Other passive transportation (e.g., public transit, by car)
c. Active transportation (e.g., walking, biking, rollerblading)
QUESTION 7
Does your school promote active transportation to and from school in any of the following ways?
Yes No Don't
know
a. Identify and promote safe routes to use for walking and cycling to and from school (e.g., with
signs, in newsletters, electronic message board, through media)
145
Yes No Don't
know
b. Provide secure areas to lock up bicycles or small-wheeled vehicles
c. Encourage use of helmets and safety gear for those who use bicycles and small wheeled
vehicles to get to school
d. Organize occasional ?walk to school days? or walking clubs
e.
Organize a regular walking/cycling-to-school program (e.g., ?walking school bus? where
parents or older students walk around the neighbourhood and pick up walkers at designated
points)
f. Ensure crossing guardsare available where needed
QUESTION 8
On average, how many days per school week would a student have the option to participate in structured
physical activity (student, staff or volunteer-led) outside of curriculum time?
5 days
4 days
3 days
2 days
1 day
None
QUESTION 9
During the past 12 months, were a variety of well-organized intramurals/club programs that involve physical
activity available to students at your school?
Wide variety
Some variety
Minimal variety
Our school does not offer intramurals / club programs that involve physical activity
146
QUESTION 10
During the past 12 months, were organized physical activities available equally to?
Often Sometimes Rarely Never
a. each gender
b. each grade
c. all abilities
d. all students regardless of ability to pay (as needed)
QUESTION 11
On a typical day, what portion of students at your school engage in the planning of physical activities that
occur outside of curriculum time (e.g., recess, lunch, breaks)?
All
Most
Some
None
Don't know
QUESTION 12
How often does your school use the following measures to encourage physical activity:
Often Sometimes Rarely Never
a. Use physical activity as a reward?
b. Promote physical activity during or as part of special events (e.g., Terry Fox
Run)?
c. Integrate physical activity into other curriculum areas?
QUESTION 13
How often does your school use the following measures that limit access to physical activity:
147
Often Sometimes Rarely Never
a. Cancel scheduled physical education class or other scheduled physical activity
as disciplinary measure?
b. Cancel other opportunities for physical activity (e.g., activity breaks / recess /
lunch) as a disciplinary measure?
c. Administer physical activity (e.g., laps, push-ups) as a disciplinary measure?
d. Remove student from physical education class or other scheduled physical
activity to catch up in other subject areas?
Healthy School Policy
Healthy School Policy - Management practices, decision-making processes, rules, procedures and policies at all
levels that promote health and wellbeing, and shape a respectful, welcoming and caring school environment.
All school policies/guidelines and practices support learning outcomes while concurrently addressing healthy school
initiatives in a planned, multi-faceted and integrative manner.
Note: policy refers to provincial / territorial or school board/ district policies and school-specific policies /
guidelines.
QUESTION 14
Does your school have policies / practices relating to active transportation to and from school addressing the
following topics?
Yes No Don't
know
a. Designating a specific area around the school as a "car-free zone" to provide safe walking
areas around the school
b. Requiring bussed students to be dropped off and picked up a specified distance from the
school
c. Allowing students to bring bicycles on school property
d. Banning students from bringing bicycles on school property
e. Allowing students to bring small wheeled vehicles (e.g., rollerblades, scooters, skateboards)
on school property
f. Banning students from bringing small wheeled vehicles on school property
148
QUESTION 15
Does your school communicate with the following groups about any school policies / practices around
physical activity at least annually?
Yes No Don't know
a. Our school does not have policies / practices around physical activity
b. Students
c. Staff
d. Parents / families / guardians
e. Local community
QUESTION 16
Which of the following methods are used to communicate your school?s policies / practices on physical
activity to the school community? (Select all that apply)
Written in a student agenda or handbook
Written in a school newsletter or local newspaper
Verbally discussed with staff (e.g., staff meetings, professional development days)
Verbally discussed with students (e.g., assemblies, student council)
Verbally discussed with parents (e.g., curriculum nights, parent council)
Verbally discussed with neighbours, nearby businesses
Posted on school website, electronic signage, other signs
Social media and other electronic forms of distribution (e.g., email)
QUESTION 17
How frequently does your school community review the implementation of policies / practices on physical
activity?
At least once per year
Less than once per year
149
Never
Don't know
Our school / Board / District / Province / Territory does not have policies / guidelines on physical activity
QUESTION 18
Are physical activity initiatives embedded within your school's action plan?
Fully
Somewhat
Minimally
Not at all
Don't know
Our school does not have an action plan
Partnerships and Services
Partnerships & Services - The school collaborates with partners in the school community (e.g., families,
community groups, businesses, non-governmental organizations, schools & school districts/divisions/boards,
provincial/local/municipal governments, regional/local health authorities) to create & sustain a healthy school
environment.
Partnerships are:
The connections between the school and students? families.
Supportive working relationships within schools (staff and students), between schools, and between schools
and other community organizations and representative groups.
Health, education and other sectors working together to advance school health.
Services are:
Community and school based services that support and promote student and staff health and wellbeing.
150
QUESTION 19
During the past 12 months, has your school?
Yes No Don't
know
a. Encouraged families to incorporate physical activity into family events
b. Encouraged families to be involved in organizing or planning school events or services related
to physical activity
c. Encouraged school staff to act as role models for physical activity
d. Met with a parents? organization (e.g., school council) to discuss physical activity at school
e. Provided families with information on physical activities at school (e.g., in school newsletter)
f. Held special events to educate the school community about physical activity (e.g., health fair,
guest speaker, Terry Fox Walk, Jump Rope for Heart, Relay for Life)
g. Promoted physical activity during or as part of special events (e.g., assemblies, field trips)
QUESTION 20
Does your school promote partnerships with the community to increase student access to physical activity
(e.g., community amenities, partnerships to raise funds, training or expertise)?
Fully
Somewhat
Minimally
Not at all
QUESTION 21
Outside of the school day, does your school permit community partners? access to your indoor physical
activity facilities for a fee or free?
Yes
No, our school does not permit it
151
No, our District / Board / Division does not permit it
QUESTION 22
During the past 12 months, has your school used input from the following groups about physical activity
initiatives at school?
Yes No Don't know
a. Students
b. Staff
c. Parents / families / guardians
d. Local community
QUESTION 23
Does your school actively engage students in the promotion of physical activity (e.g., Terry Fox Run, contests,
grants, student summits)?
Not at all
Minimally
Somewhat
Fully
Don't know
Consent
Do you grant access to the data from this module of the Healthy School Planner so that aggregate results and
secondary research and analysis can occur in support of policy and program planning?
Yes, I grant access for the use of data from this module. (Note: The Pan-Canadian Joint Consortium for School
Health and the University of Waterloo will ensure that findings cannot be linked to you or your school. Your
school?s data will be combined with data from other schools that have used the Planner, making your school?s data
indistinguishable from the others, and ensuring confidentiality.)
No, I do not grant access.
152
APPENDIX 3: TEACHER SURVEY TOOL
Teacher Survey:
How is Daily Physical Activity implemented at your school?
Thank you for taking the time to fill out this short survey. Your responses will be used to gain an
overall picture of policy implementation at your school. This data is being collected as part of a
Masters level thesis. All survey information is anonymous and confidential; responses will not be
linked back to you.
Please return your completed survey to the envelope in (Name of Project Liaison) mailbox no
later than (Date).
153
Section 1: About You as a Teacher
1. Please indicate the grade level you currently teach (select all that apply):
__Primary (Grade 1-3)
__Junior (Grade 4-6)
__Intermediate (Grade 7-8)
__Kindergarten
If you chose multiple grade levels, please explain why. (Otherwise, please proceed to question 2.)
2. How long have you been teaching in Ontario?
__This is my first year
__2-7 years
__8-15 years
__16 years+
__I am an experienced teacher, but this is my first year teaching in Ontario (e.g. I have experience
teaching overseas or in another province, but have not previously taught in Ontario)
3. Which of the following reflects your specialization in Health and Physical Education? Check all
that apply.
__University degree in physical education, kinesiology or related field
__Additional Qualification (AQ) course in Health and Physical Education
__Professional development at the school specific to the Daily Physical Activity (DPA) policy
__I have a moderate or strong interest in Health and Physical Education, but no specific specialization
__I have little interest in Health and Physical Education and no specialization
4. Are you familiar with the Daily Physical Activity (DPA) policy?
__Yes
__No
__Somewhat
154
Section 2: Daily Physical Activity (DPA) in your Class- How Often and for How Long?
5. How many times per week does your class have Physical Education (PE) scheduled this term?
0 1 2 3 4 5
6. This term, how many days per week have you purposefully scheduled some form of physical
activity during instructional time? This includes PE (but not Health).
0 1 2 3 4 5
7. This term, how many days per week have you scheduled some form of physical activity during
instructional time lasting less than 20 minutes in total length?
0 1 2 3 4 5
8. This term, how many days per week have you scheduled some form of physical activity during
instructional time lasting at least 20 minutes in total length?
0 1 2 3 4 5
9. In comparison to other subject areas, how frequently do physical activities (including PE) get
rescheduled or cancelled?
__Much less often
__Somewhat less often
__About the same
__Somewhat more often
__Much more often
10. This term, how many days per week (on average) do you spontaneously include some form of
physical activity during instructional time (e.g. if there is extra time due to a change in the
schedule)?
0 1 2 3 4 5
Section 3: Daily Physical Activity (DPA) in your Class- What does it look like?
11. Which of the following best describes the type of physical activities usually done in your class
outside of PE class? Please check all that apply.
__ Structured team sports (e.g. soccer)
__ Structured games (e.g. tag)
__ Semi-structured free play (e.g. students choose from a variety of physical activity options provided by
the teacher)
__ Cardiovascular fitness exercises (e.g. running laps, skipping, aerobics, Jump Jam)
__ Strength and conditioning exercises (e.g. stretching, push-ups, yoga)
__ Other (please describe):
155
12. Please indicate how physically challenging you believe the average physical activity session is,
including PE, for a majority of students in your class:
__ Not very challenging (few students, if any, break a sweat and are out of breath)
__ Somewhat challenging (some students break a sweat and are out of breath)
__ Challenging (most students break a sweat and are out of breath)
__Not sure
13. This term, who is responsible for planning and leading physical activities, including PE, in your
class? Please check all that apply.
__Me
__Other teachers (e.g. combining classes for shared activities)
__Health and Physical Education specialist or other designated staff member
__Students (in my class or other classes)
__Volunteers in the community, including parents
__Daily Physical Activity (DPA) is a school-wide activity organized by someone who is not me
__Daily Physical Activity (DPA) is a school-wide activity, and all staff take turns leading it
__Other (please describe):
14. This term, what are the reasons you (or, if applicable, a specialist teacher) provide regular
opportunities for physical activity to students in your class? Please check all that apply.
__ fulfilling curriculum and policy requirements
__ it is beneficial for students’ physical and/or mental health
__ it is beneficial for students’ learning
__ it is monitored closely by the principal or a committee within the school
__ it is part of school-wide planning (e.g. whole school does DPA together)
__ I personally believe in the value of physical activity and want to model it for my students
__ it is the norm at this school to be active as a class on a daily basis
__ the Ministry of Education provides support for DPA
__ my school board provides support for DPA
__my school community provides support for DPA
__ a majority of students in my class enjoy the opportunity to be active every day
__ other (please specify):
156
15. What are the reasons you (or, if applicable, a specialist teacher) do not provide regular
opportunities for physical activity to students in your class? Please check all that apply.
__ not enough time/ other academic priorities
__ not enough time/ students take too long to change, travel to gym, get back on task, etc.
__ insufficient space/ facilities
__ I do not feel comfortable/ do not enjoy leading students in physical activity sessions
__ I don’t fully understand what is expected of teachers with regards to the DPA policy
__ I do not see significant value in daily physical activity for students, compared to other subject areas
__ other school goals are closely monitored and demand too much of my time
__ a majority of students in my class are already sufficiently active during recess and involved in extra-
curricular sports activities
__ a majority of students in my class do not enjoy physical activity
__ I am not aware of any mandate which states I must schedule daily physical activity
__other (please specify):
16. Do you consider yourself to be a physically active role model for students?
__Yes __No __Not sure
17. Do you feel you would make an effort to schedule physical activity or physical education for
your students every day, if it were not required by the Ministry of Education?
__Yes, definitely __Yes, probably __Not sure __Probably not
__Definitely not
Please share any additional comments you may have in the box below.
Thank you for your participation. Have a wonderful day!
157
APPENDIX 4: MINISTRY OF EDUCATION SCHOOL IMPLEMENTATION CONTINUUM FOR DAILY
PHYSICAL ACTIVITY
158
APPENDIX 5: SYSTEM FOR OBSERVING FITNESS INSTRUCTION TIME (SOFIT)
Link to Complete SOFIT Instructions and Forms:
http://activelivingresearch.org/files/SOFIT_Protocols_09.14.12.pdf
159
160
APPENDIX 6A: SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR TEACHERS
a) How long have you been teaching? How long at this school? Where before that?
b) What is the role of sport and physical activity in your life?
1) If someone were to ask you what the DPA policy is, how would you describe it to them?
2) How did you originally learn about the DPA policy?
3) Do you think DPA is an important policy to have in schools?
- What do you think are some of the benefits to students of DPA policy?
- Do you enjoy having DPA time in your class?
- Do you think parents value this policy?
4) How would you describe your approach to DPA, and what does it look like in practice?
- Does this change much according to time of year, other things going on at school, etc?
5) Would you say that the days I observed in your class were “typical” days, in terms of how
DPA is implemented?
6) What are some of the major challenges, for you as a teacher, in providing twenty minutes of
daily physical activity for your students?
7) In light of these barriers, what are some facilitators or supports that enable you to implement
the policy as intended?
8) Did you receive any kind of training to assist with implementation of DPA?
- Prior to any talk of DPA, what has been your education in the area of health promotion and its
benefits to students?
9) How do you think the policy might be improved to maximize benefits for students?
10) Anything else?
161
APPENDIX 6B: SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR PRINCIPALS
1) Can you tell me a bit about the demographics of this school, in terms of the student and staff
population?
2) How long have you been the principal here? What has been your professional background
before you came into this role?
3) What are some of the unique challenges you have at this school?
4) How familiar are you with the DPA policy? How did you first learn about the DPA policy?
5) What did you think of the policy when you first heard of it? How has this changed over the
years?
6) Tell me about implementation of this policy at this school.
7) This implementation continuum (show Appendix 4) is part of the Ministry's DPA Guide for
principals. I’d like to go through each of these six areas:
- Leadership
- Schedule
- Student leadership
- Quality of physical activities
- Resources
- Partnership development
For each of these areas, please:
a) Identify the place on the continuum where you feel your school currently resides;
b) Give some examples to support your answer;
c) Describe any efforts that may have been taken, including those currently underway, toward
reaching Stage 3.
8) In your opinion, what is the usefulness and relevance of this framework for measuring DPA
implementation?
162
APPENDIX 7: ANALYSIS GRID FOR ELEMENTS LINKED TO OBESITY (ANGELO) FRAMEWORK
163
APPENDIX 8: MODIFIED ANGELO FRAMEWORK FOR SCHOOL CONTEXT, COMPILED DATA-
NORTHERN SCHOOL
Physical Activity is
affected by:
Northern School Environment
(School and Community)
Physical Elements (what
facilities are available?) -Students not allowed outside when weather is -25C; at the time of this visit, this community had been experiencing this weather for roughly 3 weeks (1); limited to indoor DPA -Access to gym is an issue for teachers whose classes do not enjoy DPA in the classroom; this is particularly an issue for older grades (indicated by 2 intermediate teachers) (1) -Gym was closed on two occasions (in 5 days visiting the school) for other activities taking place in the gym. (1) - Level 1: Our school has less than adequate facilities for student physical activity. (7) - Level 3- Some, but not all, physical environments are fully safe or provide equal and inclusive access to all members
of the school community.(8) -“My students HATE DPA in the classroom. They act out and make it very difficult. So, whenever weather permits I take them outside to the outdoor basketball court. It is much harder in the winter.”(5) - Concerns about there not being enough space for teachers to run these kinds of activities in their classrooms, and
there isn’t consistent access to the gym (3a)
-30% of survey respondents indicated insufficient facilities were a contributing factor to them not providing DPA as often as they would like (5) -"I know that you guys share this building with the Catholic school and the College, right?" "That’s right. And we share gym time as well, so we only have the gym on certain days. We have the gym on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Fridays, I believe? I think it’s every other Friday. So yeah, sharing the gym too. Our class, as you saw, shares the gym with another class." (2.1a) -“We share a gym with a school’s population that is just one quarter of ours, which doesn’t make any sense.” (2.1b) - Level 2: Our school has adequate equipment. (7) - Level 3: Students sometimes have access to a variety of facilities and equipment outside of curriculum time. (7) - Level 1: Indoor space for physical activities is never available during inclement weather. (7) - "Physically, there’s- as far as the community is concerned- there’s not as many options for the kids here…there’s not as much organized sports so, they tend to play outside a lot." (2.1a) -"It would be nice to have videos too. But it all depends what your class has or what your school has, because I don’t have a laptop or projector or a smart board for my class to play videos on." (2.1a) -“We have sets and sets and sets of skis.”
“For the students to use?”
“Yep, which is amazing for an elementary school. So our teachers are out skiing all the time with their students. And
snowshoeing, all the time, skating, all the time.” (3b) -Principal believes that students with special needs (e.g. boy in one class with crutches) will be accommodated for
DPA (3a)
Economic Elements
(what financial barriers/facilitators exist
for promoting DPA and physical activity?)
- This school, as a school authority (1 school comprises the entire board) gets less funding than other boards (3a)
- There is no physical education specialist per se, although the person currently in the Student Success teacher position is “very much into it” and is in a key position to advise teachers on excellent provision of DPA; this role may
be discontinued next year based on availability of funding, but this teacher will remain at the school (3a)
Policy Elements (what
rules and regulations affect opportunities for
physical activity?)
-The school has a team that plans for a healthy school community with membership covering a variety of
perspectives: Level 1- Our school does not have a team in place. (8) -Our school develops specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-limited goals built on accurate data to create
a healthier school community: Level 3- Our school plans to create a healthier school community to some extent (i.e.,
uses multiple data sources and develops goals meeting some criteria). (8) -Planning to improve the school is conducted using a comprehensive school health approach (i.e. teaching and
learning, healthy physical and social environment, healthy school policy, partnerships and services): Level 3- Our
school’s action plan includes all pillars of comprehensive school health at least somewhat. (8)
- Level 1- Students with a range of skills and characteristics do not play a leadership role in the organization of school
activities. (8)
- Level 3- Our school reviews implementation of healthy school policies and practices at least once a year and uses existing information or gathers evidence to update them to some extent. (8)
- Level 3- Most of our school staff have participated in learning opportunities related to creating a healthy school
community in the last 12 months. (8) - The school has a fully prepared succession plan for its healthy school initiatives: Level 2- Our school has prepared a
succession plan to a minimal extent. (8)
- Level 4- Most of our healthy school initiatives are implemented school-wide and are embedded in our school’s action plan. (8)
- Level 3- Our school formally assesses its progress on creating a healthy school community once per year. (8)
- Level 1: Students do not have the option to participate in structured physical activities outside of curriculum time. (7) (Note: Work-to-rule this year; not indicative of a normal year.) - Level 2: Our school offers a minimal variety of well-organized intramural / club programs that involve physical
164
activity. (7) (Note: Work-to-rule this year; not indicative of a normal year.) - Level 2: Our school communicates its physical activity policies / practices at least annually to one group. (7) - Level 3: Our school communicates our policies / practices on physical activity to the school community through both written and verbal methods. (7) - Level 3: Our school reviews implementation of school policies / practices on physical activity less than once per year. (7) - Level 2: Our school minimally embeds physical activity initiatives within the school action plan. (7) -"January and February are both pretty bitter outside here. So if it’s -25 or lower with the wind chill, they have to stay inside, which is kind of too bad because -25 up here is nothing to the kids. They’ll gladly go play outside. But that’s the Ontario policy. I keep saying we should change it up here." (2.1a) -“It’s not a barrier, but it is- I sort of wonder- there’s not for me as a teacher a lot of accountability around whether
I’m doing DPA every day. I’m going to do it anyway; but sometimes when I hear that other teachers aren’t doing it, I
wonder why am I spending instructional time doing it? But I know the importance of it so I’ll still do it anyway.”
(2.1b) -“[DPA is] not really monitored per se, right?”
“No, it’s not.” (2.1c)
-“Would you say there is a fairly consistent message in terms of healthy role modeling for students?”
“It’s gotten a lot better. There was a big push. There used to be a “snack shack”, and it wasn’t out and out candy, but
just not the right stuff. And they were selling Gatorade, and a Grade 1 could buy a Gatorade and drink it at one recess,
and then have another one at the next recess. The bottles in the juice machine aren’t the correct mL size. They’re still selling the 950mL bottles. But that was a lot of teacher-pushing, that new school health beverage policy.”
“So that was coming from the teachers at this school rather than from the school administrators?”
“A lot of people showed what was going on to convince the administration, yeah.” (2.1b) -“For their recess duty schedule I think they need to actually put someone in the gym, so that if kids want to go there
and run around they can. Because that’s going to be... (makes expression of frustration).” (2.1b)
-“Our school improvement plan has some points in there regarding student health. And when we we’re talking about health, we mean it pretty holistically- the whole person. But that’s written in our school improvement plan and our
teachers are very aware of the cultural issues with diabetes for example, and some of the limitations with diet.” (3b)
-Student leadership: “We don’t have a committee; as far as I’m concerned, that’s not relevant; maybe that makes us in Stage 1.” (3a)
-“I let teachers do what they can with it... I allow teachers to make decisions that provide them with ownership as
well.” (3a)
Socio-cultural Elements
(what are the attitudes,
beliefs, values and cultural norms?)
-The school community communicates that ‘healthier students are better learners’ at least annually. Level 4- Our
school communicates this message to all groups at least annually. (8)
- Level 4- Our school integrates health and wellbeing during instructional and non-instructional time. (8) - Level 1- Students with a range of skills and characteristics do not play a leadership role in the organization of school
activities. (8)
- Level 3- Our school community fosters a safe and supportive environment to some extent. (8) - Level 3- Our school community fosters respect and connectedness to some extent. (8)
- Level 2- Staff members at our school have minimum support to engage in personal health and well-being activities.
(8) -The school has at least one effective partnership that supports and contributes to a healthy school community: Level
2- Our school has some partnerships with minimal supports. (8)
- Level 2- Some of the school community is engaged in community service. (8) - Level 1- Community members rarely volunteer in the school. (8)
- Level 3- Our celebrates successful healthy school initiatives within or beyond the school more than twice per
year.(8) - Level 3- Our school recognizes, acknowledges and celebrates contributions of volunteers to some extent. (8)
- Interest in HPE/DPA? 90% of respondents say they have a moderate to strong interest in HPE, but no specific specialization; 1 respondent said they had little interest and no specialization (5) -Familiarity with DPA policy: 60% of respondents are familiar with the DPA policy; 40% are only somewhat familiar with the policy (5) -Facilitators for implementing DPA (multiple responses allowed): 90%= to fulfill curriculum requirements; 100%= it is beneficial for physical and/or mental health; 50%= teacher personally values physical activity; 40%= students enjoy DPA; 60%= it is beneficial for student learning -One teacher gave the following reasons: students need a mental break to help them refocus; students often don't get outdoor recesses and need to move; I need a break to refocus as well; want to show students that exercising can be fun (5) -Barriers to implementing DPA (multiple responses allowed): 60%= not enough time/other academic priorities; 30%= insufficient space/facilities; 20%= a majority of students in the class do not enjoy DPA; 10%= other school goals are more closely monitored and demand more focus; 10%= not enough time/students take too long to change, travel, get back on task, etc; 20%= no barriers identified -One teacher gave the following explanation: My students love gym/outdoor sports but feel limited in the classroom - both teachers who identified that their students do not enjoy DPA are teaching and intermediate class (5) -Do you consider yourself to be a physically active role model for students? 70%=yes; 10%= no; 20%= not sure (5) -Would you make an effort to schedule daily physical activity for your students if it were not mandatory? 30%= yes definitely; 40%= yes probably; 20%= probably not; 10%= definitely not (5)
165
- “I feel under pressure with EQAO to get through all units/strands before the end of May, in Language and Math, and make those my priority areas” (5) -“ I think DPA is very beneficial for the students but sometimes their poor behaviour and participation doesn't make incorporating DPA worthwhile” (5) -“My students HATE DPA in the classroom. They act out and make it very difficult. So, whenever weather permits I take them outside to the outdoor basketball court. It is much harder in the winter.” (5) - Level 3: Instructional strategies for physical activity and physical education somewhat accommodate different learning styles or preferences. (7) -"The first thing I notice is that there is a lot more oral language. So the way that they learn here is more so through watching than through explaining things." (2.1a) -“I was surprised how tentative a lot of them were, standing at the side. I was thinking that they’re young enough that they wouldn’t be so self-conscious, but they seemed very shy.” “Yeah, we have a lot of kids like that; a lot of kids. And I don’t know if it’s home life or whatever. There’s a lot of anxiety… I think there are usually more boys that are more involved. A lot of the girls tend to be shy.” (2.1a) -“I guess more of an individual student is taken into account, and maybe more of a holistic approach versus just
academics. There’s a network, and everyone’s connected somehow… I think it’s a big amount of staff for the number
of students we have.” (2.1b) -“Our school improvement plan has some points in there regarding student health. And when we we’re talking about
health, we mean it pretty holistically- the whole person. But that’s written in our school improvement plan and our
teachers are very aware of the cultural issues with diabetes for example, and some of the limitations with diet.” (3b)
-Level 2: Equal student access to organized physical activities, regardless of gender, grade, ability and financial resources, is rarely available. (7) - Level 1: None of our students are engaged in the planning of physical activities occurring outside of curriculum time. (7) - Level 3: Our school sometimes encourages physical activity and/or rarely uses it for discipline.(7) - Level 2: Our school community has encouraged physical activity to a minimal extent. (7) - Level 3: Our school promotes partnerships to supplement student access to different forms of physical activity to some extent. (7) - Level 2: Our school uses input about physical activity initiatives from one source. (7) - Level 2: Our school minimally engages students in the promotion of physical activity. (7) -“Often what you’re seeing is the same teachers who decided to go to the phys ed PD in 2009 are the same ones who
are going to the DPA PD in 2011. They’re the people who see the value in it and want to increase their professional
knowledge. So that’s a great point, how do you get the other ones?” (3b)
- Teachers and students feel that it is important; there are physical health and developmental benefits; it helps get the
oxygen flowing to the brain; it helps to wake kids up (3a) -“I think it’s a good policy. Especially with indoor recess teachers may feel the need to give their kids a chance to let
off some steam.”(3a)
- On why they cannot officially do yoga at school: "Religious people feeling that we’re teaching them...tenets of another religion. It’s different up here in that way, right? Very religious." (2.1a) - "I know when I supply taught [in another school board, previous to teaching here], it [DPA] wasn’t really [implemented consistently]...I think it’s taken years, but I think people are more putting it in the schedule now. It was really not taken seriously." (2.1a) - “Do you think DPA is an important policy to have in schools?” "I do think ...I’ve got a lot of thoughts on this! So I do think it’s [DPA] important. I mean, in this community too there’s a high rate of diabetes and at our school we’re indoors a lot with indoor recesses. You can see the kids, mentally, when they’re starting to...they can’t focus as much, they need a bit of a break up. You can see when they need to move. So I can see a lot of the benefits. But at the same time it’s a challenge, because you’re trying to fit in all the academic stuff, and sometimes it’s hard to get them back into what they’re going to do next, the transition." (2.1a) -“Do you think that DPA is an important policy to have in schools?”
“Mmm-hmm, yes, very much.” (2.1b) -“And do you think that DPA is an important policy to have in schools?”
“Yes, I think so.” (2.1c)
“And do you think that there are benefits for the kids, such as physical fitness and health, that they get from
DPA?”
“Hmm....so so. There are some students who maybe a little bit bigger and it gets them out of breath, like they’ll be
huffing and puffing, so it’s good for them to get their heart rate up. But overall, is it going to help them to lose weight or anything? I don’t think so. No.” (2.1c)
-“So I would say that’s high on our priorities list, is physical activity. So even though they might not like to do DPA
in their room all the time, they are getting out and doing things like skating or taking them and going snow shoeing or going for walks and things like that.” (3b)
-“Do you think there’s any kind of link to longer-term health benefits, say, the kinds of choices they might
come to make in their daily lives in the future?”
“I think it’s possible if they made those connections; the link is there is if they’re willing to connect that to their own
lives. I don’t know if they would, though… We usually just go into it, but at the beginning of the year we did talk
about what DPA is and why we’re doing it. But not anymore.” (2.1c)
-"It gives them ideas. Sometimes I’ll say, too, “maybe this is something you can do outside at recess.” I’m trying to
166
get them to see that maybe they can do these things at home, too." (2.1a) -“It [DPA] is an energizer for the day. It gets them moving for at least 20 minutes of the 60 or whatever it’s supposed
to be now that kids are supposed to have, because they’re not getting them. It brings discussion.” (2.1b)
-“I guess one of the barriers- I guess not really with the school but with the town- there’s not that many physical activity community events for the students to do… Because we’re on work-to-rule there was some basketball going
on for students and that was cancelled, and the Friendship centre announcement was that they were going to have two
age groups for basketball for 8 weeks. And if I ever hear announcements like that- I went into another teacher’s room and I was like “FINALLY, the community’s doing something!” Because if it’s not the school and if it’s not a church
and if you’re not willing to shell out money for hockey tournaments, you’re not going to have a lot to do. So, that’s a
barrier in the town. So, a DPA benefit is that we’re sort of taking up the load with physical activity.” (2.1b) -“I think it gives them a chance just to let everything out; like when they get really squirrelly after sitting here for an
hour or so, like this morning in math when they just needed to get up and move. So I think it’s important to give them
that chance to move around and have positive interactions with their classmates.” (2.1c)
-"And do you think that parents place value on this kind of a policy?" "Um...some yes and some no. It’s really the ones who are active at home probably, and who are active parents." (2.1a) -“I look at the parents that participate in anything the town offers, and it’s not the greatest show-up or display. So, like
anything, it just relays back to the kids. And then you have parents that participate in what the town offers, if it’s a baseball tournament or a soccer tournament, and then who quickly go out and have a smoke, and that gets relayed
down to the kids.” (2.1b)
-“Do you think that parents of students in this class and this school in general place value on this policy?”
“Probably not…I think the students already go out for recess, so maybe they don’t think that it’s overly necessary. I
don’t really know.” (2.1c)
-"They [the students] like to do interactive things." (2.1a) -"What are some of the biggest challenges in providing 20 minutes of physical activity every day?" "I have a lot of kids who don’t like to do it." "I heard one kid say 'oh no, not DPA!'” "I know! And I try and make it fun for them. I think what works best though is structured stuff...But I still see a lot of kids who are reluctant to participate.” (2.1a) -“It’s fun for me. They like it. Last year the counsellor came in and said “what was your best time of the day?” and 18
out of the 20 students said DPA. They like it.” (2.1b)
-“Maybe being pregnant now? (Laughs) Because I always used to do it with the kids, and they have picked up on it,
like “you’re not doing it!”.” (2.1b) -“And do you enjoy having DPA time in your class?”
“Some days. Sometimes I find it hard, and I find there’s a lot of behaviour issues that can come out of it because they
get really excited, and sometimes I find it difficult… I find as you get older they don’t want to do it as much. Last year my grade 7/8 class, they really didn’t have any interest in DPA.” (2.1c)
-"Music I think is a great thing- they all have their favourite songs...I think the music is definitely a motivator for them." (2.1a) -"I think everybody knows about it now; I think everyone is well aware that that’s supposed to be part of the daily schedule. Actually, we do have quite a few teachers who do participate in it, for sure." (2.1a) -“It’s like the right hand’s not speaking with the left hand. It’s great that teachers are wanting to do it [professional
development for DPA], and then just in light of everything that’s happened with the school year this year, it’s like, the
teacher’s want to do it, they put extra effort into it...We need supports I guess, healthy role models in the school are important. I know the DPA side, but it goes hand in hand with what the school’s serving in terms of food and what
they encourage and what they discourage.”(2.1b)
-“A lot of teachers [at this school] continue their higher education through courses and discussion with teachers in
other parts of the province. And so I think it’s a feeling that just because we’re up here, doesn’t mean we have to be
left behind with policy. So, I think a lot of teachers are educated in that sense and will do the research and ask the questions. Like, “this is what’s supposed to be happening, so why do we have to be different?” We’re here to give the
same type of education.” (2.1b)
-“I think with the effectiveness of the policy it’s all about how you internalize it, and it would be great to see the
community taking action around that. Because DPA is not just something in a context, it’s about a concept; it’s about
uptaking it other places outside of the classroom.” (2.1b)
-“And do teachers tend to talk about DPA, compared to other curriculum areas?”
“No, not DPA.” (2.1c)
-“So considering it’s not really monitored, what’s your motivation to make sure that you actually do it as much
as you can?”
“I think it is good for the kids. So, by the end of math class, trying to get them to sit there quietly for another 20
minutes- there’s no point in fighting it. I think it’s good to get them up and moving around, and it is fun for them. I
like to keep doing it because it’s a good thing to do in that last little bit when they get squirrelly.” (2.1c)
-“I’ve always been really physically active, so I tell that to the kids and I try to explain it as well. I think it’s important
because you get so many good friends…I coach soccer here, and I had a few of these students here on my team last year. It’s really nice, and I try to encourage the kids to get involved.” (2.1c)
-“We do have a number of teachers who are very active in their personal lives and that comes into their classroom
practice.” (3a)
- “Teachers already feel they don’t have enough time to cover the curriculum expectations and now they’re thinking
“oh my god, now I’ve got to take 20 minutes out of my instructional time to let the kids jump around and be silly” so
167
1= Classroom Observations 2= Teacher Interviews 3= Principal Interview/Key informant Interview
4= Document Analysis of DPA implementation records 5= Teacher surveys
6= Teacher class schedules 7= Healthy School Planner PA Survey 8=Healthy School Planner Foundational Module
For Classroom Observations and Teacher Interviews:
a= Primary Class b= Junior Class c=Intermediate Class
For Principal Interview/ Key Informant Interview:
a= Principal b= Key Informant
they don’t see the value in it because of that.” (3b)
168
APPENDIX 9: MODIFIED ANGELO FRAMEWORK FOR SCHOOL CONTEXT, COMPILED DATA-
GTA SUBURBAN SCHOOL
Physical Activity is
affected by:
GTA Suburban School Environment
(School and Community)
Physical Elements (what
facilities are available?)
-Level 4:The physical environment is safe and all members of the school community have equal and inclusive access.
(8)
-Level 2: Our school has adequate facilities for student physical activity. (7) -“(In addition to a big field), we’ve got a baseball diamond we can access, we’ve got all sorts of- soccer...we had a few classes out there playing soccer at one point in time. We’re lucky.” (2.2b) -Referring to Ministry resource of DPA ideas: “The only dilemma is- look at this, 10 wall push-ups, 10 tucks jumps and so on in the corner- there’s very little wall space here. I don’t know how I would do 10 wall push-ups. Maybe there’s room for 5 along the whiteboard. So I don’t know, that one would be tricky. We need the space for math equipment, our sacred space, etc. I tried going around the desks, but we had trouble, because there’s so much equipment.” (2.2b) -“I am lucky, because my room is much larger than most. My room facilitates that much better than most at this
school; I would guess that most people would say space is a barrier.” (2.2c)
-“Another thing is that we can use the hallway for space; that group is going to take their routine into the hallway.” (2.2c)
- Level 2: Our school has adequate equipment. (7) -“When I was speaking to the junior teacher, she said that a couple of years ago the principal bought DPA supplies for each class. Was that just for the older grades, or did everybody get that? Yeah, we have that. And definitely in the spring I pull out the jump ropes and the ball. And that’s worked, but of course over the years the items tend to evaporate, which is no big deal, but I’ll have to look and see what I need to replace this spring.” (2.2a) -“They gave us a DVD that we could play- the problem with that is that we don’t all have TVs accessible in the classroom. So, to have to book the TV just for the DPA is impossible. We only have 1 TV per floor. So 1 TV, we have to share it- all of the grade 4-8 classes, and then there’s 1 TV for the JK-grade 3 classes. So to be able to get the TV and have it available for everybody- it’s not going to work.” (2.2b) -“The only other thing we picked up that was important was that equipment. We went out and we bought bubbles and skipping ropes and balls, so that our DPA is so much easier during the spring and summer.”(2.2b) -“We have a CD player in every class. So that’s important… without the music I don’t think it would be very much fun.” (2.2b) -“I’d like to have more in-classroom equipment for DPA.” (2.2c) - Level 3: Students sometimes have access to a variety of facilities and equipment outside of curriculum time. (7) -Outdoor field space at recess: vice principal and child and youth worker work to referee competitive games at recess,
such as soccer (students can participate on a drop-in basis; referees help keep the space fun and safe for all who want
to participate) (3) - Principal likes to reward good behaviour of “behavioural” students with time in the gym at recess (3)
- Games room: introduced this a couple of years ago in response to a “big behaviour cohort” coming through (cluster
of students around the same age with behavioural issues; not specified); there was a foosball table, and other board games; less physical-activity focused, more about providing a reward and a place where good
sportsmanship/behaviour was modelled by teachers to these students; this concept has evolved into the concept of
intramurals (3) - Level 4: Indoor space for physical activities is often available during inclement weather. (7)
Economic Elements
(what financial barriers/facilitators exist
for promoting DPA and
physical activity?)
-Would you say that here that most of the kids are from more middle-upper class families? “Yes, this area is affluent.” (2.2b) -“And they’re performing well actually...my class grades are fantastic. I have two kids in the class- three kids- that have 3 or 4 Cs on their report cards. The rest are all As and Bs. Good, solid students.” (2.2b) -"I would say upper-middle class." (2.2c)
- Student demographic is middle to upper class, and a “huge” ethnic mix (3) -Data from School Information Finder
-“I would say at least 2/3 are active. And I find with the whole school population, it’s an extremely active, team-sport oriented group.” (2.2a)
Policy Elements (what
rules and regulations affect opportunities for
physical activity?)
-The school has a team that plans for a healthy school community with membership covering a variety of
perspectives: Level 2-Our team consists of two members or just one perspective. (8) -The school has student representation on the healthy school community planning team: Level 1- Our school does not
have a student representative. (8)
-Our school develops specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-limited goals built on accurate data to create a healthier school community: Level 4- Our school uses data from all groups or sources, and develops goals meeting
all criteria to plan a healthier school community (8)
-Planning to improve the school is conducted using a comprehensive school health approach (i.e. teaching and learning, healthy physical and social environment, healthy school policy, partnerships and services): Level 3- Our
school’s action plan includes all pillars of comprehensive school health at least somewhat. (8)
- Level 3- Students with a range of skills and characteristics play a leadership role in the organization of most school activities. (8)
169
- Level 4- Our school reviews implementation of healthy school policies and practices at least once a year and uses
existing information or gathers evidence to update them to the full extent. (8) - Level 4- All of our school staff have participated in learning opportunities related to creating a healthy school
community in the last 12 months. (8)
- The school has a fully prepared succession plan for its healthy school initiatives: level 3- Our school has prepared a succession plan to some extent. (8)
-All healthy school initiatives are implemented school-wide and embedded within the school’s action plan: Level 4-
Most of our healthy school initiatives are implemented school-wide and are embedded in our school’s action plan. (8) - Level 4- Our school formally assesses its progress on creating a healthy school community more than once per year.
(8)
- Level 4: Students have the option to participate in structured physical activities outside of curriculum time at least three days per week. (7) - Level 4: Our school offers a wide variety of well-organized intramural / club programs that involve physical activity. (7) - Level 4: Our school communicates its physical activity policies / practices at least annually to three or four groups, including students. (7) - Level 4: Our school communicates our policies / practices on physical activity to the school community through multiple methods, both written and verbal methods. (7) - Level 4: Our school reviews implementation of school policies / practices on physical activity at least once per year. (7) - Level 3: Our school has somewhat embedded physical activity initiatives within the school action plan. (7) - “Positive play” DPA activities (cooperative games) align with Safe Schools goals (3) -“The principal was talking about this before- that it would be nice to do something as a school that is planned and would be at least a couple of time a week where the whole school is doing DPA together and it’s done through the PA system.” (2.2a) -Phys ed teacher for primary students is a teacher-librarian on a long-term occasional contract, who takes these classes so teachers get planning time; not a physical education specialist, but coaches several teams: “I think the phys ed teaching decisions are made by admin, depending on the scheduling needs of each teacher and making sure everyone gets their planning time.” (2.2a) -“One of the big things that we’re doing right now is cross-grade learning. So for example, in one of our meetings, in
our discussion groups, we’re not just having discussions with our own grade division that we teach; we’re actually putting one primary, one junior, one intermediate and one resource teacher in each group, so we can bring all of our
personal strengths into it and exchange ideas. Some of my best ideas for teaching have come from primary.
And you were saying something about an idea you got from a kindergarten class?”
“Yes, that was from going to do reading buddies, and watching them doing their reading in the hallway, and I saw this
book sitting on the teacher’s desk. And I said, “gee, this is really cool” and she said “well you realize today is the
100th day of school?” and went “wow, look at all these repeating lines...ooh, stand up, sit down...DPA!” Excellent!” (2.2c)
-“I can’t foresee [DPA implementation] getting any better just because the day seems so tight, to be perfectly honest. So that’s the challenge.” (2.2a) -“I don’t know how to integrate it with the amount of curriculum we’re expected to cover. I think that’s where the dilemma occurs… I would normally stop and do a silly song sometime throughout the day, and that would take about 2-3 minutes. That’s normally done. But for me to take a chunk of 20 minutes and follow through with that for DPA, it takes a really big chunk out of math.”” (2.2b) -“There are so many initiatives- it’s one of the many. But I don’t think that it’s a priority. I’m sorry to say that. Right now EcoSchools is a priority. That’s just started here this year, as opposed to DPA. DPA came out a while ago.” (2.2b) - When DPA first came out, it was implemented at his school for the first 15 minutes at the beginning of the day, over
the PA system, as a whole school; With the introduction of mandatory literacy and numeracy blocks in the morning,
this changed to the afternoon (right after lunch); at this school now, there is literally not enough time in a day to
schedule it in 5 times per week (other Ministry mandates include 2 hours for literacy and 1 hour for math, both in the AM; French, art and other subjects are mandated to be a certain number of hours per week, as well) (3) -“It’s almost as if you have to reintroduce [the DPA policy]. I don’t know- people have to want to know, they have to realize that it’s part of healthy schools. Obviously it’s not working the way they planned for it to; it was the first year, but I don’t think after that... Things are reintroduced, they may be the same thing that’s reintroduced to remind people. But health shouldn’t be one of those things that should be exiting. Healthy bodies and healthy minds, you know? There’s something not right with the original introduction of the program, I guess, for it to be lost in that way.” (2.2b) -“I think a large part [of why DPA has been lost] is the amount of curriculum they are expecting us to cover, and I think people feel under pressure. And if you’ve got 2 grades to cover, that’s extra work, too.” (2.2b) -Pressure of EQAO testing years: “There’s pressure to complete everything by a certain date- therefore, taking 20 minutes a day is going to eat away at that ever-dwindling time. It’s terrible! And it’s not good for the kids. I was still taking them out, but I think I reduced the amount of time. But they could get up and walk around the classroom. But there was so much to cover, it is stressful.” (2.2b) What are some of the major focus areas/priorities at this school?
- Math curriculum and results (previously was a focus on literacy)
- Faith (Catholic) and Safe Schools (creating a positive environment; anti-bullying and a focus on mental health)
- Eco Schools (new this year)- environmental focus with aim to become a certified “Eco School”
170
- Intramural sports: new this year for grades 3-8 (other extracurricular, non-competitive sports opportunities have
existing in the past; this is the first year an organized league is being introduced) (3)
- PALS (Playground Activity Leaders in Schools): Older students (generally grades 4-7) are trained by a child and youth worker (rigorous training) to be “certified” to lead sports and other games at recess for students in grades 1-4;
they are encouraged to target/include students who are lonely/not participating in other games at recess, although all
young students are welcome to join in the activities
- Most schools (estimates around 60%) have PALS; his old school had it as well
- 80% of the time PALS is happening at recess; any young kids who want to play can join in (3)
-"The one thing I would have liked to see at this school, which has never been done, I would like to have a school-
wide kind of thing put on the sound system where we all do it at the beginning of the day or the middle of the day or whatever. But the literacy block expectations from the Ministry are so strict in terms of the number of minutes, and
you’ve got people who have French at different times, that you really can’t do that in this particular environment."
(2.2c)
Socio-cultural Elements
(what are the attitudes,
beliefs, values and cultural
norms?)
-“Supply teachers, for example, will very rarely do DPA. They just aren’t comfortable with it. They don’t know the kids, and they don’t know “where does the silliness line start?” Anything physical where someone could get pushed
or get hurt is just too risky. It’s sad, but because of that, very often I won’t include DPA in my supply plans, which is
something I believe needs to be touched upon. I think supply teachers need to know this is a part of the curriculum. Because 99% of the time when I put it in, it’s not done. The supply teacher will write in that they didn’t do it, or I’ll
come back and the kids will say “we missed DPA yesterday”. So, that’s something that I think needs to be addressed,
in terms of, how do you make sure that everyone is comfortable with it? And maybe they need a booklet of activities for DPA.” (2.2c)
-The school community communicates that ‘healthier students are better learners’ at least annually. Level 4- Our
school communicates this message to all groups at least annually. (8) - Level 3- Our school integrates health and well-being during non-instructional time but not during instructional time.
(8)
- Level 3- Students with a range of skills and characteristics play a leadership role in the organization of most school activities. (8)
- Level 4- Our school fosters a safe and supportive environment to the full extent. (8)
-Level 4- Our school community fosters respect and connectedness to the full extent. (8) - Level 2- Staff members at our school have minimum support to engage in personal health and well-being activities.
(8)
-The school has at least one effective partnership that supports and contributes to a healthy school community: Level 2- Our school has some partnerships with minimal supports. (8)
-Level 4- The entire school community is engaged in community service. (8) - Level 3- Community members volunteer in the school most days. (8)
-Level 4- Our school celebrates successful healthy school initiatives within and beyond the school more than twice
per year. (8)
- Level 4- Our school recognizes, acknowledges and celebrates contributions of volunteers to the full extent. (8)
- Level 4: Instructional strategies for physical activity and physical education fully accommodate different learning styles or preferences. (7) -Level 4: Equal student access to organized physical activities, regardless of gender, grade, ability and financial resources, is often available. (7) - Level 3: Most of our students engaged in the planning of physical activity occurring outside of curriculum time. (7) - Level 3: Our school sometimes encourages physical activity and/or rarely uses it for discipline.(7) - Level 3: Our school community has encouraged physical activity to some extent. (7) - Level 4: Our school promotes partnerships to supplement student access to different forms of physical activity to the full extent. (7) - Level 4: Our school uses input about physical activity initiatives from three or four sources. (7) - Level 4: Our school fully engages students in the promotion of physical activity. (7) - Interest in HPE/DPA? 1 of 15 survey respondents has a specialist degree in HPE; 73% have a moderate to strong interest w/o specialization; 20% received PD a school; 1 of 15 has little to no interest (5) -Familiarity with DPA policy: 80% of respondents are familiar with the DPA policy; 20% are only somewhat familiar with the policy (5) -Facilitators for implementing DPA (multiple responses allowed): 87%=curriculum requirements; 93%=beneficial for physical and/or mental health; 67%=teacher personally values; 60%= students enjoy DPA; 73%= beneficial for student learning; 13%=school board provides support for DPA; 7%=MOE support for DPA; 7%= school norm of DPA (5) What are some of the facilitators or supports that enable you to implement DPA as often as you do? “Definitely seeing it in my day plan, and writing it on the board for the students to see. And they’re excited about having it.” (2.2a) -“Well, I can see how they respond, is one. If school isn’t fun they’re not going to want to come back. I don’t want to lose them. It’s one way that I can maintain their attention, and I think it’s important because it will help them to think better when they sit down. They can focus better.” (2.2b) -“ Flexibility with scheduling, especially in the afternoon. I do have a schedule, but I have no problem putting it into a
science unit, or art, or whatever. So it’s not seen as a road block to anything. It’s an add-on.” (2.2c)
-Barriers to implementing DPA (multiple responses allowed): 83%= time-other academic priorities; 60%= insufficient facilities; 27%= other school goals more closely monitored; 13%= time- students take too long; 7%=students are already sufficiently active; 7%= no barriers identified (5)
171
And what are some of the biggest challenges for you in providing 20 minutes of DPA for your students? “I guess the length of time, to extend it to the full 20 minutes… The afternoon often gets negated, we can’t find time.”(2.2a) -“Space constraints, large physical bodies...I had the grade sixes, 25-26 of them, and it would get very warm in here and very...fragrant. It was difficult, even last year, because the bodies were larger and there were 25 kids.” (2.2b) -“Curriculum. I would normally stop and do a silly song sometime throughout the day, and that would take about 2-3 minutes. That’s normally done. But for me to take a chunk of 20 minutes and follow through with that for DPA, it takes a really big chunk out of math.” (2.2b) -“Yes [students enjoy DPA]. They love to dance. Now, tomorrow you’ll see a different type of DPA where they’ll be going up and down the stairs. And they don’t like that one; they complain about that one…Some of the kids do enjoy it though. I think it’s- well, it’s tiring to go up and down the stairs… But you saw them in the gym this morning, they were running from one end of the gym to the other. No trouble with that!” (2.2b) -Do you consider yourself to be a physically active role model for students? 73%=yes; 7%= no; 20%= not sure (5) -Would you make an effort to schedule daily physical activity for your students if it were not mandatory? 20%= yes definitely; 27%= yes probably; 7%= probably not; 47%= not sure (5) -“But luckily I like to sing and we move around and this and that, and I kind of bring stuff to the classroom that combine songs with physical activity.” (2.2a) -“Within the school where I taught prior to this, we did it as a division. So we often fit in the two DPAs and did it together in the hallways, or in the gym, or in each other’s classrooms. So it was kind of a co-planning activity. And that way we kind of made sure that it became part of our day. And now it seems to be something that we have to squeeze in. I do have it in my day plan, but things happen like the assembly today and we have to finish snack, so DPA kind of gets moved into another part of the day.” (2.2a) Do you think that DPA is an important policy to have in schools? -“It definitely is.” (2.2a) -“Yes, I do… I don’t want to take it away, I think it’s very important.”(2.2b) -"Oh, absolutely! Especially now that the nature of our society is moving into couch potatoes, and media is being blamed a lot for that. I think for the younger generation, that’s true; I’m hoping that it’s not going to be consistent.
But it’s important because for some of these kids, that’s where you get their lifelong love of movement, that they
don’t have that exposure at home. It’s just sad that a lot of that responsibility has shifted from the home, in terms of PA, to the school.
-“It’s important” (3) -“But definitely, it seems like the kids in my class are not as sedentary as- in the past I’ve had groups of students who are less active.” (2.2a) -“Of course the length of activity and type of activity does definitely matter. It helps with their growth and development, and their health as well.”(2.2a) -“If we as a school and as teachers can make sure that that’s part of our day, then at least there’s a minimum amount of time spent being active.”(2.2a) Do you enjoy having DPA time in your class? -“I do. Particularly the aerobics, I think that’s fun for the kids and most kids love to dance. I do find it challenging- you know, you can sort of spot the students who are the same ones either sitting on a desk or sort of doing their own thing... the majority of kids really respond to being active and just participating, whether it’s the exercises and activities” (2.2a) -"I do. I’m not as happy this year that I’ve got physical restrictions, because some of the most fun things I can’t participate in. And I also don’t like the fact that it’s “do as I say and not as I do”, I don’t like that philosophy where I
have to bow out. Now I’m quite honest with the children in terms of, “I can’t do this”-" (2.2c)
Observation- Teacher comments that it is beautiful outside, and that she would join me for a walk outside at lunch if she didn’t have yard duty. (1.2c)
From interviews: All teachers talked about an active lifestyle being an important part of their sense of self. (2.2a,b,c)
-“I remember following the DVD and doing these silly exercises, but as I said, that only worked for a short period of time. I didn’t have fun doing it. So they must not have fun.” (2.2b) Do you think that parents at this school value this policy? -“I’m not sure... I don’t think parents necessarily know about those two periods of the day.”(2.2a) -“There will be some parents who will say “why didn’t you have DPA?” So yes, they remind us. So that means that they must value it. I think if the kids care then the parents care.” (2.2b) -"I don’t think they know about DPA... It’s not something that’s generally talked about or celebrated." (2.2c)
-For the kids in this class, would you say that a lot of them are involved in sports activities outside of school, like figure skating or gymnastics or anything like that? “I would say at least 2/3 are active. And I find with the whole school population, it’s an extremely active, team-sport oriented group.” (2.2a) -“There’s the hockey teams, soccer, volleyball and basketball and I know there’s some intramurals as well. So the kids do seem to be active…You can’t see it right now because it’s winter, but they’re usually on that field playing soccer, and there’s another field that’s being created, and there’s basketball... It’s pretty intense sort of exercise and movement and involvement.” (2.2a) -“I find for the most part, and not totally, but [kids being active] does keep the degree of behaviour issues to a minimum.” (2.2a) -“The kids have to remain active. If I find that they can’t sit very much, then I stop and we go play a game and move around for a bit, and then we go back and sit down.” (2.2b)
172
1= Classroom Observations 2= Teacher Interviews 3= Principal Interview/Key informant Interview
4= Document Analysis of DPA implementation records 5= Teacher surveys
6= Teacher class schedules 7= Healthy School Planner PA Survey 8=Healthy School Planner Foundational Module
For Classroom Observations and Teacher Interviews:
a= Primary Class b= Junior Class c=Intermediate Class
-For behavioural students, getting them up and moving is useful (3) Why did you decide to focus on introduced intramurals this year? Was it predominantly targeted as a
behavioural management strategy?
- Yes and no; also want to maximize participation of students at this school in extracurricular activities in general
(sports or otherwise)
- Principal also just likes the idea of sports and games for students in general: “it’s just good fun” (3)
-“I just read about it [structured approach having DPA activity cards that children choose]. So I thought ‘that’s good, I need another approach, something that will help them grow into the next grade as well’.” (2.2a) -“At 2 o’clock- when it’s not winter- you’d see a lot of different classes out there doing various things. So everyone’s out there at that time… we had a few classes out there playing soccer at one point in time.” (2.2b) -“Our principal actually has gone out and purchased skipping ropes and equipment for the kids so he does believe in it. And that’s how he supports us, and to remind us that it’s important to include DPA. But beyond that…”(2.2b) -“You know what would be really nice, too? This is way off- to have yoga classes or something for teachers. That would create healthier minds. And the frustration levels that can be reached- because the kids are challenging these days, and sometimes parents are challenging too…That would be a great support system to have. I think if teachers are supported in this and then they’re going to realize the benefits, and then they’re going to transfer that to the kids.” (2.2b) -“I don’t really find it difficult to put in. I get busy teaching, but I always have someone remind me about DPA. I
have a couple kids who have ADHD, and believe me, I know when it’s time for us to get up and move. I actually let
those kids tell me when it’s time. I try to get it set into a time in between a very quiet activity and then a moving activity. And the other thing is sometimes you can see they’re tired, and they need to wake up.” (2.2c)
- With regards to Ministry DPA framework: “I think for teachers, seeing the scheduling piece and for them seeing that
they are supposed to put in more time would be very frustrating for them” (3)
173
APPENDIX 10: DPA POLICY IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK, COMPILED DATA- NORTHERN
SCHOOL
Northern School: Context data Stage of Implementation*
Leadership
Who is leading DPA,
and what is the level of
coordinated support for
teachers?
Focus on physical activity as a priority at this school: -The school has a team that plans for a healthy school community with membership covering
a variety of perspectives: Level 1-Our school does not have a team in place. (8)
-Our school develops specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-limited goals built on accurate data to create a healthier school community: Level 3- Our school plans to create a
healthier school community to some extent (i.e., uses multiple data sources and develops
goals meeting some criteria). (8)
- Level 3: Our school reviews implementation of school policies / practices on physical activity less than once per year. (7) - Level 2: Our school minimally embeds physical activity initiatives within the school action plan. (7) -"We have professional learning communities, so we’re supposed to meet every month. It hasn’t been going on just because of the politics this year and we can’t do anything extracurricular. But normally it’s once a month and it’s usually- well, it’s based on our student improvement plan...That’s what the Ministry highlighted as what’s important- and the arts and physical activity gets kind of pushed back. So, unless it’s going to be a priority, it’s hard when the Ministry says “no, you have to talk about that”." (2.1a) And would you say that health is or has recently been a focus of the school?
Yeah actually, definitely, and it goes back to physical, emotional and mental health (and
mental health is also a big focus in the curriculum, the re-written curriculum document). Our school improvement plan has some points in there regarding student health. And when we
we’re talking about health, we mean it pretty holistically- the whole person. But that’s written
in our school improvement plan and our teachers are very aware of the cultural issues with diabetes for example…the staff is very aware of that and are constantly trying to get people
out and active.” (3a) Who plans DPA:
-Who plans DPA? (Multiple responses allowed): 100%= themselves; 50%= other teachers; 10%= students (5) From observations: Teachers plans their own non-PE DPA; many teachers share gym time and thus share the planning of physical education (1.1a,b,c) Administrative approach to leading DPA: - “I let teachers do what they can with it…I allow teachers to make decisions that provide
them with ownership as well.”(3)
-The majority of teachers use instructional videos; “I don’t think anyone actually leads it on their own”; the school ordered videos for teachers to use (3)
-Note: It was observed that this was not the case. This speaks to the fact that DPA is not
monitored. (1) -“There’s not, for me as a teacher, a lot of accountability around whether I’m doing DPA
every day.” (2.1b)
“[DPA is] not really monitored per se, right?” “No, it’s not.” (2.1c) -“I’ve talked to a few teachers just to see what they do for DPA, but administration never
really talks about it.” (2.1c)
-“I just think the administration or someone needs to be able to tell us more about what we can do, or make it more available or make it more clear as to what we should be doing,
because right now, I don’t know if it’s just in our school or if it’s everywhere, but I feel like
it’s very “loosy goosy”.” (2.1c) -“I think the biggest thing is just knowing what I should be doing, or ideas about what I could
be doing, That’s the biggest thing.” (2.1c)
Administrative support for DPA:
- With regards to DPA, the Ministry “hasn’t really told me anything” (3)
- A majority if not all of teachers have implemented DPA in their classrooms; this judgment is based on walking around the school and seeing it, hearing kids talk about it, being invited
into classrooms to participate; the vice principal also has a similar judgment about the
school’s implementation of DPA (3) -“Technically speaking, in the Student Success role, that is something I can do. So…[if] a
teacher says “I really need help with DPA. My kids just don’t listen or they’re not motivated,
lots of my resources are from the 80s and the kids just make fun of them”; technically speaking, that could fall under my new position umbrella. I never really thought of that, but
it’s good to know.” (3b)
-“In 2007 when they first started doing the review of the phys ed curriculum, they sent me to the Ministry meetings in Sudbury so we started revising the phys ed curriculum…then we all
went back again, in 2009, and got information on how to roll it out in the schools… DPA was
a huge question then because that’s the first time it actually got put as a curriculum
As indicated by Principal:
1
As indicated by School Effectiveness Lead/Student
Success Teacher: 1
According to the School-
wide data: 1
Key themes identified:
-There is recognition by
administration that health initiatives are important,
particularly given public
health concerns of this community in general, and
this is communicated to the
school community; however, physical activity
initiatives and DPA in
particular are not specifically addressed
within this.
-Teachers largely lead their own DPA; physical
education planning is often
shared with other teachers who share gym time.
-The administration at this
school gives teachers freedom to implement
DPA as best suits them,
and does not formally monitor DPA. One teacher
specifically commented
that this lack of direction is problematic in ensuring
quality DPA.
-There is currently no coordinated support for
school staff around student
health and implementation of DPA. The Student
Success/School
Effectiveness Lead at this school is a champion for
physical education, health and DPA, and has the
potential to coordinate this
support if her role is continued.
174
expectation. So a lot of the PD we were giving teachers was around how to provide DPA.
Because it’s a huge challenge. You’ve got desks in there, there are safety issues; you’ve got kids who are not even listening in the most basic of tasks and now you’re asking them to
jump around. It’s very difficult for teachers to implement at any grade.” (3.b)
-“It’s like the right hand’s not speaking with the left hand…We need supports I guess, healthy
role models in the school are important. I know the DPA side, but it goes hand in hand with
what the school’s serving in terms of food and what they encourage and what they
discourage.”(2.1b) - There is no physical education specialist per se, although the person currently in the Student
Success teacher position is “very much into it”; this role may be discontinued next year based on availability of funding, but this teacher will remain at the school in some form or another
(3)
Schedule
How often are students
given the opportunity to
be physically active
during the 300 minutes
of instructional time?
How many days per week, on average? - PE: How often? A majority of respondents have PE scheduled twice per week (5) - DPA (PE and other): How often? 60% of respondents say they have some form of DPA scheduled every day of the week; 20% indicate it is scheduled only twice per week, and 20% indicate 4 or between 4 and 5 days per week (5) (Average= 4 days/week) -PE: How often? 10 of 12 classes have PE scheduled twice per week; 2 classes have it once per week (6) - Non-PE DPA: How often? 4 classes have no separate DPA period scheduled during the week; 4 classes have DPA scheduled 3 days per week, and 4 classes have DPA scheduled 5 days per week (6) -DPA (PE and other): How often? 2/3 of classes have DPA and/or phys ed scheduled 5 times per week; this includes teachers who have scheduled DPA more than once per day on some days (6) -Trends in scheduling by grade? There are no trends in scheduling by grade division (6) -“Do all the classes always share the gym?
Yes. There is one exception, with a teacher who doesn’t like to share, so her class goes once a
week and the other [that would otherwise share with her] class goes once a week as well.” (2.1c)
How long, on average? - 20 mins: How many days per week? Only 1 respondent indicated they schedule 20 mins of DPA every day of the week; 60% schedule at least 20 mins twice per week (during Phys Ed), 10% schedule 20 min blocks 3 days a week, and 10% schedule a 20 min block only once per week (5) (Average= 2 days/week) -“We complete 15ish minutes of 2 videos each morning before math.” (5) Day 1 observation: Phys Ed, scheduled for 40 mins; actual: 33 mins -Day 1 observation: DPA not scheduled, but still included spontaneously (8 minutes) in afternoon when students were acting restless at the end of a seated math activity -Day 1 observation: Although not scheduled or acknowledged as DPA by the teacher, DPA-like activities were observed during math (8 minutes), language work (1 minute) and spelling (8 minutes) -Day 2 observation: Not scheduled as DPA, but Aboriginal Focus Group activity was physical activity for 35 minutes; no other organized physical activity observed on this day (1.1a) -Day 1 observation: DPA is scheduled for 15 minute block in with morning announcements, etc; hence, it would likely not ever be 15 full minutes; on this day, DPA happened in the afternoon, directly after lunch (for 12 minutes) -Day 2 observation: DPA is scheduled for 15 minute block in with morning announcements, etc; actually took place for 6 minutes after this 15 minute block is over but before the next block’s activities had begun (1.1b) -Day 1 observation: Phys Ed (scheduled for a 40 minute block on this day) is cancelled due to another activity taking place in the gym all day; DPA is inserted towards the end of math block when students are losing focus and getting restless (not in the schedule, but added due to Phys Ed being cancelled); 12 minutes total length (1.1c) - 20 mins: How many days per week? Only 1 teacher has at least 20 minutes scheduled every day of the week; on average, Monday, Wednesday and Friday has 7 mins of scheduled DPA, and Tuesday and Thursday have 40 and 38 minutes of scheduled DPA (6) -“I don’t think I get a solid 20 minutes each day… It’s probably like 12 minutes.” (2.1b)
-"I think it says 20 minutes of continuous activity, but I think most teachers consider that if they break it up into 10 and 10 it’s fine too. It’s kind of, even though that’s not what it says, people are flexible with it." (2.1a) What priority of place does DPA have in the daily schedule?
- In comparison to other subject areas, how frequently do physical activities (including PE) get rescheduled or cancelled? 20%= much more often; 20%=somewhat more often; 30%=about the same; 20%= somewhat less often; 10%= much less often (5) -Observations: Gym closed on two of four days spent observing at the school (for special events). (1)
As indicated by Principal:3
As indicated by School
Effectiveness Lead/Student
Success Teacher: 2
According to the School-
wide data: 2
Key themes identified:
- A majority of teachers at this school indicate that
they have two 40-minute
PE periods per week, and around 2/3 of classes have
some form of DPA
scheduled every day of the week.
-The average DPA session
(not including PE) is well below the 20 minute mark;
however, organized activities such as skiing,
snowshoeing or skating
would tend to be longer,
and the key informant
indicates that such
activities are common. -40% of teachers indicate
DPA gets rescheduled or
cancelled more often than other subject areas. In the
case of PE, this often
happens when the gym is closed for other activities,
which was observed on
two of four days spent at this school. There are also
teachers who do not see the
importance of providing DPA, and thus they don’t
always do it.
-100% of respondents indicated that DPA is
spontaneously added into
the schedule at least once per week; observations
also corroborated that
schedules are relatively fluid, and DPA scheduling
did not often match the
timetable.
175
-Observation, Intermediate class: Teacher inserts DPA due to Phys Ed being cancelled. (1.1c) -"I think it’s taken years, but I think people are more putting it in the schedule now."(2.1a) -“I try to get them moving as much as I can, but some days it just doesn’t happen.” (2.1c)
- “The downside is that it’s so easy because it’s not a scheduled-in period, it’s so easy to overlook it. “Oh, they’re working really quietly, and they’re working really great, let’s just
keep it going. We don’t want to disturb it, let’s just keep it going.” So that happens too.” (3b)
- “Teachers already feel they don’t have enough time to cover the curriculum expectations and now they’re thinking “oh my god, now I’ve got to take 20 minutes out of my
instructional time to let the kids jump around and be silly” so they don’t see the value in it
because of that.” (3b) -“Sometimes when I hear that other teachers aren’t doing it, I wonder why am I spending
instructional time doing it? But I know the importance of it so I’ll still do it anyway.” (2.1b)
In what ways is DPA provided outside of what is formally scheduled? -Unplanned DPA: How often? 100% of respondents indicated that DPA is spontaneously added into the schedule at least once per week (50%= about once per week; 40%= about twice per week; 10%= about 3 times per week) (5) “So even though they might not like to do DPA in their room all the time, they are getting out
and doing things like skating or taking them and going snow shoeing or going for walks and things like that.” (3b)
Student Leadership
How are students from
across the school
involved in planning
and implementation of
DPA?
- Level 1- Students with a range of skills and characteristics do not play a leadership role in
the organization of school activities. (8) -Who plans DPA? (Multiple responses allowed): 100%= themselves; 50%= other teachers; 10%= students (5) -"I let them sometimes too make up their own moves. So when we’re doing aerobics- “oh let’s do this one” or “I have this one” so I try to remember those moves, and they like that." (2.1a) -“The one idea I did have and we’ll see if I get around to it this year, is that they get together
with a partner or three and they do a DPA video like the one those kids were doing, and that could be put onto a DVD and be given to other classrooms… students and teachers could see
“that’s what other classes are doing for DPA”…So that could be kind of a cool project. And
in terms of the policy, that could bring in more choice for students, and more initiative on their part. And that basically goes with the health curriculum, because their health curriculum
is more about making lifestyles choices…Because you could say one thing in the classroom,
but then what goes on at home is totally different. So maybe more initiative on the kids’ side and then they might internalize it more.”(2.1b)
-“I know another class where the kids did a project on DPA and the kids did the activities and
led them, and they had DPA leaders.” (2.1b)
-“Right now [in Phys Ed] we’ve been working in circles and each student picks one thing
they’re going to do for a warm up. So maybe they’ll say “I want to do 10 push ups”, so I’m there doing 10 push-ups. It’s really fun, I really enjoy it. It’s a good motivator for them too.”
(2.1c)
- “We don’t have a [physical activity] committee; as far as I’m concerned, that’s not relevant; maybe that makes us in Stage 1.” (3) -“Student leadership is something that we are really hoping to work towards- we haven’t had
a student council in years- and looking to, again, a Ministry initiative with having co-created success criteria in the classroom. That’s something that we’re hoping, especially in this role
as Student Success teacher, to push towards. So Stage 1, but in 6 months, we’ll be Stage 2.”
(3b) -“And I think it’s important, going back to student leadership with the students, “ok guys,
here’s a report I just did and we scored a level 1, so let’s talk about getting some solutions”
and going back to building on success criteria with kids, getting them to buy in and getting them involved: “What do you guys want to do? Well why is it that you’re not motivated?
How can we help you to control behaviour during DPA?” Those kinds of conversations are
doable from Grade 1 up. Those are the kinds of conversations that you can be having with students.” (3b)
As indicated by Principal:1
As indicated by School Effectiveness Lead/Student
Success Teacher: 1
According to the School-
wide data: 1
Key themes identified:
- Students at this school are not currently engaged as
leaders in any capacity;
however, this is an identified area of focus for
the school which also
aligns with the revised physical education
curriculum, and could be
addressed through DPA. -Students at this school are
sometimes given
opportunities to contribute to leading sections of
physical education classes
or have a say in what they do for DPA.
Quality of DPA
How many students are
active for the entire
session?
How often are the
activities offered
inclusive, motivating,
learner-centred and
success-oriented?
How often do the tasks
result in increased
How many students are active for the entire session? Primary
-“I have quite a few kids who are reluctant to participate. And the more you push, the worse it is.”(2.1a) -Day 1 Observation, Physical Education: This session was 33 minutes from start to finish;
during this time, those students who participated fully were active for approximately 2.5 minutes during the warm-up, and a cumulative 4-7 minutes of activity (depending on size of
group and amount of time spent waiting) in short bursts, interspersed with waiting. Overall,
engagement of class is moderate to low. 9:03
- In gym (directly next door to class); shared with other Grade 1 class
- Students first sit in “squads” on the floor while things get organized; ADHD student
helps me to set up while the class begins a warm up
As indicated by Principal:
3
As indicated by School Effectiveness Lead/Student
Success Teacher: 2
According to the School-
wide data: 2
How many students are
active for the entire
session?
176
breathing and heart
rate?
How often do students
set their own goals and
monitor their own
physical activity?
9:05
- Warm up: slow walking, then walking, then skipping, hopping, etc in circle around the
gym
- At start, children are very engaged; one girl in particular refusing to walk (this is
“normal” for her, according to her teacher); as the warm-up progresses, some students
are stopping and wandering off (maybe about 5 wander off and are not paying attention)
- One student came up to me at the end and said “my heart is beating like this!” (pounding his chest, out of breath)
9:08-9:13
- One teacher (and me) setting up stations; the other teacher explains; students sitting
back in their squads during this explanation 9:13- 9:18
- Students moving into their stations; 1 EA, 2 teachers and me (would normally be
another EA) man each of the four stations
9:18-9:36
- Students rotate through 2 stations; groups range in size from 4 to 12 or so
- Students wait in line in turn; about 10 seconds of short burst of activity, followed by
walking back to the back of the line and waiting for next turn (groups with less students
more active)
- A couple of students hang back and refuse to participate (same girl from warm up)
9:36- Line up and back to class
-Day 1 Observation, DPA incorporated into math lesson: 9:45-9:53: “Stand up behind
your desk” for practicing counting; march on the spot as they count (about half of kids actually marching); next, clapping while standing in place. (8 minutes of light activity for
those who are participating.)
-Day 1 Observation, DPA incorporated into language lesson: Some students were very restless and tired at this point in the day; one student asked to go home. 11:40-11:41:
Students stood up to read out the poem they had been working on, and integrate in actions
they had made up the day before. About 2/3 of class are fully participating in this. (1 minute of light activity.)
-Day 1 Observation, Spontaneous DPA: 1:22-1:30: Class getting restless toward end of
math lesson; teacher decides to do DPA to get them refocused. Dancing to cd (kids know the dance). One kid says “oh no, not DPA!” A couple of kids ask to do free dance. About 4 kids
did not participate at all; there is mixed participation in dancing- many seemed quite shy
(though a couple of kids were break dancing). Teacher is dancing along with the students, and even tries (unsuccessfully) to pull some shy students in to be her dancing partner
-Day 1 Observation, DPA incorporated into Spelling lesson: 2:00-2:08: Standing up in
partners for partner clapping-spelling activity. Excellent participation; light physical activity.
-Day 2 Observation, Special Event DPA: Today is "Aboriginal Focus Group" day; all
classes are participating in a variety of Aboriginal cultural activities led by volunteers from the local Cree community (e.g. making bannock, step dancing, beading, oral storytelling); this
has been announced very last-minute, and appears to be somewhat poorly
organized/coordinated; teachers are not sure what is happening- forced to “go with the flow”
9:00- 9:35- Aboriginal Focus Group- Step Dancing (in gym)
Guest leader from the local Cree community; Teacher participates in all of the dancing
activities. 9:00- Line up at door; walk to gym (next door; 30 second walk to benches); sitting on floor
waiting for audio equipment to be set up
9:05- 9:14- Sitting on floor, while leader plays her guitar and sings songs; she encourages the children to join in, but their participation in the singing is minimal
9:15-9:20- Step practice, standing in a line; low intensity; good participation, several students
did not quite grasp the steps, but they were trying; some students off task within first couple of minutes; one girl standing beside me did not participate at all, and eventually went and sat
down against the wall, looking disinterested
9:20-9:23- More advanced steps; slightly higher intensity, still low; waning on-task participation, but most kids still moving in some way; 2 more students join the girl who is
sitting against the wall (2 girls)
9:23-9:26- New song; sitting, standing, walking and running on the spot (actions go along with Cree musical instructions); moderate to vigorous intensity; most students participating,
enjoying the activity
9:26-9:32- Circle dance with shuffle step; at one point, we take turns going into the centre of the circle with a partner and dancing for a few seconds, while the rest of the class claps;
majority of students very shy to do this; moderate to vigorous intensity; good participation
overall (still without 3 girls who stepped out earlier) 9:32-9:34- Standing, stretching in circle (led by guest leader); teacher tells students to feel
their heart, and reminds students that their heart beating hard like that is good for their heart
9:35- Students walk back to class. (1.1a) Overall, participation in this activity was moderate to good. It was noted that one particular
student always chose to sit out (in all non-lesson- based DPA sessions), and often the same
students chose to eventually join her. A core group of about 6 (of the 11-13 students present;
-Student participation and
engagement varied widely across classes. In primary
class, very few students
were consistently engaged (many too hesitant/shy); in
junior class, almost all
students were engaged; in intermediate class, students
were engaged but did not
appear to be taking the activity seriously. The least
sustained physical activity
was in the physical education class that was
observed, where activity
was frequently broken up by instruction time and
waiting. Participation was
noted to ebb as the activity progressed, due to loss of
interest or getting tired.
How often are the
activities offered inclusive,
motivating, learner-
centred and success-
oriented?
-There was no evidence of activities being designed to
take different levels of
fitness/ability into account; the main focus was on
maximizing participation at
a level that was appropriate to the majority of the class.
-Only one teacher
mentioned motivation in her description of DPA,
mentioning that the use of
music helps motivate students during DPA.
-A common theme in the
types of activities offered by some teachers is that
they are “fun” and based
on what students enjoy. Other teachers specifically
mentioned continuity of
specific activities through which students can gain
skills and progress over the course of the year.
-Both the primary and
intermediate teachers acknowledged the
importance of structuring
learning in DPA such that students can understand the
importance of it beyond the
activity at hand. In the junior class, students were
observed completing a
journal about their DPA activity.
-There are a variety of
types of activities; cardiovascular fitness,
including dance, and
strength and conditioning
177
there are 18 in the class, but absenteeism is high) were consistently enthusiastic (3 girls and
3 boys) across all activities. Junior
Day 1 Observation, DPA:
1:06- Teacher tells students to find their space in the classroom. Students spread out around the room to find their individual space where they will not bump into anything/anyone else.
1:07- Teacher starts video (Diabetes Association DPA DVD); dance moves set to a song
about healthy eating; excellent engagement from students; moderate intensity; students seem to know this routine, and they know the song. Teacher is doing the dance too.
1:10- Second dance begins. Students appear to be tiring, as some are slowing down or taking
breaks in the routine. Most continue to maintain their intensity, though with less energy than in the first song. Teacher is doing the dance here, as well. Lighter intensity dance than the
first song, but with vigorous sections (e.g. jumping jacks).
Overall Engagement: Excellent.(1.1b)
-Day 2 Observation, DPA:
9:04- Teacher says “take your chair and find a personal space”; students quickly do this (they
are familiar with this routine). 9:05- Teacher turns on music and calls out instructions for a fitness routine of various
strength exercises.
- Leg raises/steps onto chair, while standing (12 steps per leg)
- 12 squats (4 girls not really participating properly; poor engagement)
- Tricep dips in front of chair (12)
- Lifting self off chair using hands, with legs raised off the ground (hold for 12 seconds)
- 12 push-ups on chairs (girls all having trouble with this and not really doing it; acting
very silly)
- 12 sit-ups on the floor, with a partner holding the feet (again, most girls being silly and
having trouble with the exercise)
- Students take their chairs and return to their desks
Engagement: Average (particularly compared to the previous day’s DPA in this class); many
students exhibiting improper form during the exercises, or only doing part of the entire set of
reps Intermediate
-Day 1 Observation, DPA:
(Note: This is being inserted because phys ed has been cancelled)
10:03- Teacher introduces game which is a variation of something they have done in gym
class, but incorporates a math theme (e.g. if she calls out “hexagon”, students must get into
groups of 6); teacher reminds students to “make sure your shoes are on your feet”; students
push their desks to the side of the room and out of the way for the game, which creates a lot
of noise
10:05- Game begins. Students are meant to walk quickly around the room in between actions being called. Most kids are walking slowly around the room; 2 girls are sitting off to the side
not participating; 2 boys are getting very hyper and acting silly; one boy hits his head on a
desk as he goes down into one of the positions called. 10:07- DPA interrupted for announcements. Students standing still or sitting on desks as they
wait for announcements to finish.
10:10- Game resumes. Kids continuing to walk, but moving faster and running into their groups when called. The room is very loud, with some kids yelling/screaming with
excitement. All girls in the class are the first to be eliminated, and they stand off to the side
talking while they wait for the game to finish. 10:11- New game starts and the girls smile and join back in. Kids are hyper and pushing each
other as the groupings are called, and most are hovering in groups rather than spreading out around the room. Most students appear to be excited/are smiling during the game. One boy
punches a desk and stomps off as he is eliminated. One girl shouts out “you stepped on my
hair!” Teacher is smiling as she facilitates the activity. 10:13- Teacher says “one more game” and begins a final round. Kids are now standing still in
between groupings being called, and rush straight into their positions when called. At the end
of this round, it is now all girls left. Kids are laughing very hard, and several of the girls are screaming excitedly.
10:15- Recess bell rings, and the game is over. The students appear to be very wound
up/excited by the game. One student says “I’m pretty tired”, and another girl (slightly heavier) takes a drink from her water bottle and is out of breath. Students get ready for recess
and head outside.
Overall: Engagement: Good to moderate- students are mostly taking part, but not necessarily taking it seriously. (1.1c)
How often are the activities offered inclusive, motivating, learner-centred and success-
oriented?
Inclusiveness -Level 3: Instructional strategies for physical activity and physical education somewhat accommodate different learning styles or preferences. (7) - Teachers make accommodations for students with special needs (3)
activities are the most
common. Intermediate classes were the most
likely to partake in more
game-based forms of DPA compared to the younger
age divisions.
How often do the tasks
result in increased
breathing and heart rate? -80% of teachers indicated
that the average DPA
session is moderate or vigorous intensity; 20%
report it is only light
activity (survey data); a mix of intensity levels,
primarily moderate, was
observed in practice.
How often do students set
their own goals and
monitor their own
physical activity? -Evidence of student goal-setting was not observed;
however, some
observations demonstrated helping students recognize
their own success criteria
for DPA (i.e. monitoring their own exertion).
178
-Observation: A majority of students in the class appear hesitant/shy about participating in physical activities of any kind. A core group of about 6 students (3 girls/3 boys) consistently participated. Teacher attempted to involve/encourage all students, but often without success. (1.1a) -“I have quite a few kids who are reluctant to participate. And the more you push, the worse it is. I try now just to partner them up, or get another kid to ask them, and sometimes that works.” (2.1a) Motivational Activities -“You can see the kids, mentally, when they’re starting to...they can’t focus as much, they need a bit of a break up. You can see when they need to move.” (2.1a) -“Music I think is a great thing- they all have their favourite songs. I think the music is definitely a motivator for them.” (2.1a) -Day 1 Observation, Spontaneous DPA: 1:22-1:30: Class getting restless toward end of math lesson; teacher decides to do DPA to get them refocused. Dancing to cd (kids know the
dance). One kid says “oh no, not DPA!” A couple of kids ask to do free dance. About 4 kids
did not participate at all; there is mixed participation in dancing- many seemed quite shy (though a couple of kids were break dancing). Teacher is dancing along with the students, and
even tries (unsuccessfully) to pull some shy students in to be her dancing partner
Learner-Centred Activities and Orientation toward Success -“We complete 15ish minutes of 2 videos each morning before math. We use Shawn T's Fit
Kids and Billy Blanks Tae Bo for Kids. Variety would be great but there are few great videos out there. The video allows us to have a seamless routine that you can assess growth and
ability that may not be available in games each day.” (5)
-“I try and make it fun for them. I think what works best though is structured stuff. Usually just on Fridays I do Free Dance Fridays and I put on music and we dance and move around. But if it’s more structured it’s better for them, and more tend to participate and I think maybe because they don’t know what to do when it’s time to dance and they don’t want to be singled out either.” (2.1a) -“I think it is just a matter of getting in the routine of including a warm up, vigorous exercise, and cool down instead of rushing back to work before allowing students to gradually slow down their hearts (and minds). This practice would allow for better transition.” (1.2a) (Note: teacher said this wasn’t currently happening, but acknowledges that this would be ideal.) -“This year I try to find things they enjoy like tag, or the game we did this morning, because
then they actually do it. That’s what I choose.” (2.1c)
-“In language, if we’re learning about types of verbs or adjectives, I’ll put the word “verb” on
the back wall and “noun” on this wall, and I’ll put a sentence on the board, and then I’ll
underline a word. They’ll have to tell me if it’s a verb or whatever, and then they’ll all hop to
the back. I try to incorporate it into what we’re learning. I try to get them moving as much as I can… sometimes I [incorporate it into the lesson itself]. It just depends how ambitious I
feel.” (2.1c)
-“When it gets nice out we’ll take them out maybe 5 minutes early or we’ll take them out for 20 minutes and go play something on the field. They really like Capture the Flag.” (2.1c)
-Observation, Intermediate class: Game observed in DPA resulted in poor behaviour, what appeared to be an unsafe environment (e.g. girl having her hair stepped on, boy hitting desk);
no learning goals related to physical activity and health
Encouraging personal growth through DPA -"Children are required to do 20 minutes of activity each day, and it’s just kind of to teach them the importance of physical activity and that it’s just like anything else, you need to take care of your body just like you do your brain, kind of thing." (2.1a) -“It gives them ideas. Sometimes I’ll say, too, “maybe this is something you can do outside at recess.” I’m trying to get them to see that maybe they can do these things at home, too." (2.1a) -“ To make sure that the students are active every day and to show them how easy it is to
incorporate it into their lives.” (2.1c)
-Day 1 Observation, DPA: Immediately following a DPA session, the teacher explains to the students that they must evaluate themselves (their level of exertion) for their DPA
participation; they have done this before. Students sit at their desks and work on this for a few
minutes. (1.1b)
Range of Activities -Observation, Primary class: standing songs with actions during lessons; skill-based instruction and practice (gymnastics, in physical education); structured, semi-structured and free dancing (1.1a) -Observation, Junior Class: DVD dancing activity; teacher-led strength training routine (1.1b) -Observation, Intermediate Class: structured game (1.1c) - Types of activities (multiple responses allowed): 50%=cardio; 70%= strength and conditioning; 30%= structured games; 20%= semi-structured free play; 10%= structured team
sports
179
-all structured games, sports and free play are in intermediate classes (5)
-“Is that what an average day in the classroom is like, where you try to get them interactive and moving around as they’re doing stuff?” “Yes.” (2.1a) -“We do different activities with the kids. Some of them are more structured, like aerobics or we’ll do some different ‘animal poses’. Or, it could be something less structured, like ‘free dance Fridays.” (2.1a) -“That video (video with dances, produced by Diabetes Association) is an easy way to
plan/do DPA. I do that for one week. Then I have different things that we do, we cycle the
weeks… I also have arm bands with handles, and with those they do bicep curls, shoulder presses, they do different things with it.” (2.1b)
-“Different challenges, like the “30 challenge”, which is 30 jumping jacks, 30 push-ups (15 or
30), wall squats for 30 seconds, arm circles for 30 seconds, that ends up being the challenge- that’s one day. One day is chair exercises, sort of tricep dips, put two chairs together and they
do push-ups, just different things there. And then one day for that week is, one person goes
out of the room, and there’s a leader in here and everyone’s doing what that person is doing (kind of like Simon Says) and then the person who was in the hallway has to guess who the
leader is. The other week I bring in the Plyometrics P98 video, and they just do 10-minute
segments… [they don’t like] that one as much, because it really does work you. But we do kind of do that in cycles. I do have a whole book of stuff. I would probably leave that kind of
stuff for a supply teacher, because then they can read the instructions and it’s all explained for
them there.” (2.1b)
-“This year I try to find things they enjoy like tag, or the game we did this morning, because
then they actually do it. That’s what I choose.” (2.1c) -“In language, if we’re learning about types of verbs or adjectives, I’ll put the word “verb” on
the back wall and “noun” on this wall, and I’ll put a sentence on the board, and then I’ll
underline a word. They’ll have to tell me if it’s a verb or whatever, and then they’ll all hop to the back. I try to incorporate it into what we’re learning. I try to get them moving as much as
I can… sometimes I [incorporate it into the lesson itself]. It just depends how ambitious I
feel.” (2.1c) -“When it gets nice out we’ll take them out maybe 5 minutes early or we’ll take them out for
20 minutes and go play something on the field. They really like Capture the Flag.” (2.1c)
How often do the tasks result in increased breathing and heart rate? -Intensity of average DPA session: 50%=moderate; 30%= vigorous; 20%= light; no
correlation with grade level (5)
-“Every day you should be incorporating the kids moving around for at least 20 minutes, probably better to have this all in one block, to get their heart rates up… To make sure that
the students are active every day and to show them how easy it is to incorporate it into their
lives.” (2.1c) -“The other week I bring in the Plyometrics P98 video, and they just do 10-minute
segments… [they don’t like] that one as much, because it really does work you. But we do
kind of do that in cycles.” (2.1b)
-"Yeah, I don’t think we do a lot of vigorous activities.” (2.1a) -Day 1 Observation, Physical Education: Warm up: slow walking, then walking, then
skipping, hopping, etc around the gym. One student came up to me at the end of the warm-up
and said “my heart is beating like this!” (pounding his chest, out of breath). During main activity, students rotate through 2 stations in groups ranging in size from 4 to 12. Students
wait in line in turn; about 10 seconds of short burst of activity, followed by walking back to
the back of the line and waiting for next turn (groups with less students are more active, as there is less waiting).
Overall, low to moderate levels of activity. Poor organization meant not very much time
being active. Warm up was best source of exercise (most continuous). (1.1a) -Day 1 Observation, lesson-based DPA: Light intensity activity. (1.1a)
-Day 1 Observation, Spontaneous DPA: Moderate intensity activity. (1.1a)
-Day 2 Observation, Special Event DPA: Moderate to vigorous intensity. (1.1a) -Day 1 Observation, DPA: Intensity: Moderate, with vigorous sections. Many students
demonstrated less energy as they began to get tired. Most kids do not appear to be out of
breath at the end, although one girl took off her sweater at the end and several took a drink of water from their water bottles. Teacher is a little out of breath- she is pregnant. (1.1b)
-Day 2 Observation, DPA: Intensity: Moderate to vigorous.(1.1b)
-Day 1 Observation, DPA: Intensity: moderate (1.1c) How often do students set their own goals and monitor their own physical activity?
-“Quality of Daily Physical Activities: Stage 2, for the most part. The goal-setting they only
do in the upper grades.” (3b) -Day 1 Observation, Physical Education: One student came up to me at the end of the
warm-up and said “my heart is beating like this!” (pounding his chest, out of breath) (1.1a)
-Day 2 Observation, Special Event DPA (Aboriginal Step dancing): Standing, stretching in circle (led by guest leader) at end of dancing session; teacher tells students to feel their
heart, and reminds students that their heart beating hard like that is good for their heart (1.1a)
-Day 1 Observation, DPA: Immediately following a DPA session, the teacher explains to
180
the students that they must evaluate themselves (their level of exertion) for their DPA
participation; they have done this before. Students sit at their desks and work on this for a few minutes. (1.1b)
Resources
What resources are
available to assist staff?
How many staff have
attended training on
implementation of the
DPA policy?
What resources are available to assist staff?
Availability of resources - Level 2: Our school has adequate equipment. (7) - all junior and intermediate classrooms have flat screen TVs which can be used for DPA
DVDs, and primary classrooms have access to TVs if they want to borrow them (school is
looking into providing these for all classrooms, eventually) (3) -“We have some resources available to staff” (3)
-“When I moved into this classroom, I was going through the stuff and I found it [Diabetes
Association dance DVD] and it was still wrapped up. And I was thinking, “it’s so easy. Why
is this not being used?” (2.1b) -Teacher uses CD player (provided for each class) for DPA (1.1a)
-Teacher uses DVD player/TV for one week’s DPA, and CD player for the following week (1.1b)
-Teacher uses DPA DVD she found in the classroom (from a previous teacher); says she
usually leaves the Ministry idea book for supply teachers, as it lays everything out for them
(1.1b)
-"It would be nice to have videos too. But it all depends what your class has or what your school has, because I don’t have a laptop or projector or a smart board for my class to play videos on." (2.1a) -“I also have arm bands with handles, and with those… they do different things with it. I got
those when I was upstairs with the Grade 7/8, and I asked the new Grade 7 teacher “are you
using them?” because I left them there, and they said “nope” so I took them.” (2.1b) -“I do have a whole book of stuff [DPA activities].” (2.1b)
-“Resources- so if we had some resources like stretching bands, we might change what we
do… I don’t know that there’s anything actually shared that we can go and get and return, but
there are things around I guess if we wanted to take them and bring them here.”(2.1c)
Quality/helpfulness of resources -“Books and handouts are much less helpful then the Ministry believes. The best DPA resources for reaching and motivating these kids are the use of physical objects or fun/interesting videos, not more paperwork.” (5) -“I have one, it was a green book about DPA and physical activity and it tells a lot in there…I
know I have it somewhere; you know, with all these Ministry books that I have. I don’t remember.” (2.1c)
-“What happened with OPHEA- and I think OPHEA is beyond fantastic, I love OPHEA- is
they worked to create all sorts of resources, like ideas for teachers and they had all kinds of information out there. But yeah, it kind of goes back to, if you don’t have one person who’s
going to go around and be the champion of that, to really cheerlead and really get in
everybody’s face, it’s just going to die out. And it’s like you said- the OPHEA binders are probably on a shelf somewhere.” (3.b)
How many staff have attended training on implementation of the DPA policy?
- Level 3- Most of our school staff have participated in learning opportunities related to creating a healthy school community in the last 12 months. (8) -30% of respondents indicate that they received professional development at school specific to the DPA policy (5) -"Did you receive any sort of training, or do you know if other teachers in the schools you were working at received any sort of assistance around how they could properly implement this?" "Um...no, I don’t think so really. I know we had a workshop up here as well, we had a teacher that was involved in doing the new phys ed curriculum, so she was able to give us that PD...She was a teacher at the high school and doing curriculum writing in Toronto in the summer and had done a workshop as well on that which was good. It was on the new curriculum in general, not just DPA, but they gave us examples for what we could do for DPA." (2.1a) -“I guess about 4-5 years ago, they did a sort of in-service PD about different ideas you could
do with DPA. Maybe it was more when the new health curriculum came out. We had people up here that were part of getting that curriculum, and were doing input, so we already had
drafts of what it was going to be. So I guess they just did more in-service about what it
entailed, or different ideas of what you could do.” (2.1b) -“Last year we had people from the Ministry come up and do another in-service on DPA,
with ideas that you could do in the class. It was a voluntary thing after school at 7 o’clock at
night. It [turn out] was good.” (2.1b) -“Last year there was a lady who came to the school; she was working with [our School
Effectiveness Lead]. She did a little workshop with us about things that we could do for DPA
in our classrooms… having that lady come in, she was awesome, she gave us lots of ideas.”
As indicated by Principal:
1
As indicated by School
Effectiveness Lead/Student Success Teacher: 2
According to the School-wide data: 2-3
Key themes identified:
What resources are
available to assist staff?
- Resources are available for DPA, including CD
players in each class and
TVs/DVD players in most. -Written documents about
DPA implementation are
not well-used; hands-on resources such as DVDs
are much better received.
How many staff have
attended training on
implementation of the
DPA policy?
- Many staff have attended some type of training for
DPA and the new Physical
Education curriculum; two voluntary workshops in the
last 4 years which were
attended by 50% or more of staff; however, only 1/3
of teachers indicated they
had received DPA-specific PD (survey data).
- School Effectiveness
Lead/Student Success teacher identified herself as
a “Phys Ed teacher at
heart” and acknowledges the role she can play in
helping teachers with DPA
181
(2.1c)
-“No staff member has attended any kind of training.” (3) - There is no physical education specialist per se, although the person currently in the Student
Success teacher position is “very much into it”; this role may be discontinued next year based
on availability of funding, but this teacher will remain at the school in some form or another (3)
-“In February 2009 when we brought in the curriculum and the phys ed stuff and were
showing people how to do it, we also did a half day and we brought over the phys ed teacher from the other elementary school in the area…he ran PD, not with all of our teachers but
there was probably about 60% of our teachers who came to that…So he was showing them
skills for the gym, everything from classroom management in the gym to different activities you can do in the gym, skill-building and things like that, and then giving them ideas for
DPA.” (3b)
-“In October 2011, we had Myra Stephens up from the Ministry. Myra’s fantastic! She was the person who spearheaded the writing of the phys ed curriculum document, so I got to work
with her when I had gone out…We held a volunteer-only, at-night PD and she took the
teachers through some other DPA stuff, focusing on dance because that’s a hard one for teachers to teach. So dance, and then she did some, like, “what can you do with 20 desks in
your class” kinds of activities. We had about 9 teachers of 15 show up for that.” (3b)
Partnership
Development
What community
partnerships have been
developed, and what
level of support do they
offer for DPA?
Communication with community partners - Level 2: Our school communicates its physical activity policies / practices at least annually to one group. (7) - Level 3: Our school communicates our policies / practices on physical activity to the school community through both written and verbal methods. (7) Existing and potential partnerships
-The school has at least one effective partnership that supports and contributes to a healthy
school community: Level 2- Our school has some partnerships with minimal supports. (8) -Community members volunteer in the school daily: Level 1- Community members rarely
volunteer in our school. (8)
-“Did you hear the announcement this morning about the basketball?...the Friendship centre
announcement was that they were going to have two age groups for basketball for 8 weeks.
And if I ever hear announcements like that- I went into another teacher’s room and I was like “FINALLY, the community’s doing something!” (2.1b)
-“I know the Friendship Centre had announcements about the basketball league. So
how are they connected with the school, and how did that get initiated?”
“Well that’s something new, and I’m wondering if maybe that has been started this year as a
response to the lack of extracurricular activities at the school because of the political climate
this year (teachers on work to rule). The Friendship Centre, the odd time, runs activities like that.”(3b)
-“And otherwise, soccer in the spring. Soccer is through the OPP (Ontario Provincial Police),
and they run it, and it’s joint with the school…So we help put the kids in teams, knowing their strengths and such, and it’s a big deal. The coaches volunteer, so it’s different people
from the community, teachers or nurses or whoever, community members…a lot of kids up
here live for soccer. It’s all indoors. What is the participation? I’d say it’s about 60-75% with students JK to Grade 5, and then Grade 6-8, about 40-50%. So pretty good.” (3b)
- Aboriginal People’s Diabetes (APANO) coordinator does an after-school program 4 days a
week for Junior and Intermediate students; this is done with the Catholic school as well (two schools are attached); this coordinator approached the school about this partnership; it started
in September when she began in her role; At least 20 kids participate regularly; a healthy
snack is provided (3) - Friendship Centre: a community-run group with a board of directors who provide services
to the community; FC is involved with the school in other aspects of the school as well, such
as in the Section 23 class (providing counselling) (3) -“In October 2011, we had Myra Stephens up from the Ministry. Myra’s fantastic! She was
the person who spearheaded the writing of the phys ed curriculum document, so I got to work
with her when I had gone out. She was up here for a separate mission, they moved her up to financial literacy, but I was like “Myra’s here, let’s do something with this because she’s such
a great resource”. So we held a volunteer-only, at-night PD and she took the teachers through
some other DPA stuff.” (3b)
As indicated by Principal:
2
As indicated by School Effectiveness Lead/Student
Success Teacher: 2
According to the School-
wide data: 2
Key themes identified:
- There are some community partners who
use the school facilities to
run physical activity programs (e.g. APANO,
Friendship Centre, OPP
volunteers); these programs are not yet well-
established or consistent,
and are not related to curricular physical activity
- Student Success
Teacher/School Effectiveness Lead has
played a role in helping
develop the new HPE curriculum; she is a vital
link for Ministry and other
partnerships for professional development
around DPA (e.g. OPHEA)
1= Classroom Observations 2= Teacher Interviews 3= Principal Interview/Key informant Interview
4= Document Analysis of DPA implementation records 5= Teacher surveys
6= Teacher class schedules 7= Healthy School Planner PA Survey 8=Healthy School Planner Foundational Module
For Classroom Observations and Teacher Interviews:
182
a= Primary Class b= Junior Class c=Intermediate Class
For Principal Interview/ Key Informant Interview:
a= Principal b= Key Informant
183
APPENDIX 11: DPA POLICY IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK, COMPILED DATA- GTA
SUBURBAN SCHOOL
GTA Suburban School: Context data Stage of Implementation*
Leadership
Who is leading DPA,
and what is the level of
coordinated support for
teachers?
Focus on physical activity as a priority at this school: -The school has a team that plans for a healthy school community with membership
covering a variety of perspectives: Level 2-Our team consists of two members or just
one perspective. (8) -Our school develops specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-limited goals
built on accurate data to create a healthier school community: Level 4- Our school uses
data from all groups or sources, and develops goals meeting all criteria to plan a healthier school community (8)
- Level 4: Our school communicates its physical activity policies / practices at least annually to three or four groups, including students. (7) - Level 3: Our school has somewhat embedded physical activity initiatives within the school action plan. (7) -With the new drop-in program at recess, “we have a full gym at recess”; this is
separate from intramurals (3)
Who plans DPA:
-Who plans DPA? (multiple responses allowed): 80%=me; 27%=other teachers; 20%=students; 13%=other designated staff member (5) -From observations: Teachers plan their own non-phys ed DPA; phys ed is sometimes
planned by the teacher, and sometimes by another teacher (resource or classroom
teacher) (1.2a,b,c) Administrative approach to leading DPA:
“I haven’t made any effort to change DPA at this school since I arrived; my focus has
been on the math curriculum and on student behaviour… I have focused more on extracurricular physical activity opportunities (e.g. PALS, intramurals) because there is
not enough curricular time for DPA” (3)
“Traditionally, at the grade 8 level, it just tends to work out that one person is very very physical, so they’re the phys ed person. And the principal tries to get a balance
between personalities and resource people… it seemed natural that I would step into
the science role, as opposed to stepping into a role that was already taken and being done well. Why reinvent the wheel?”(2.2c)
-“The principal was talking about this before- that it would be nice to do something as a school that is planned and would be at least a couple of time a week where the whole school is doing DPA together and it’s done through the PA system.” (2.2a) Administrative support for DPA:
-" Oh, the school here- most of the schools I’ve been to have been very big on making
sure that teachers know, in terms of what are the regulations and what are the
expectations of the Ministry. So things are put in your mailbox. And at this particular school there was discussion over what it was, at staff meetings, “this is what are the
new outlines or guidelines”. (2.2c) -“Our principal actually has gone out and purchased skipping ropes and equipment for the kids so he does believe in it. And that’s how he supports us, and to remind us that it’s important to include DPA. But beyond that…”(2.2b) -“I’m not sure that everyone’s aware that it’s important to have the kids moving all the
time. I don’t know what percentage of the teachers actually- I mean, they know the kids have trouble sitting still, but I don’t know what % follows through with the DPA.
I think they realize that they lose them and then they go outside and they play a game,
which is great. But I think something needs to be put in place.” (2.2b) -“I guess one of things I think that needs to be put in, more prevalent perhaps in DPA,
is we do get notices and stuff, and the principal does a really good job on things like
safety features and things like that.” (2.2c)
Monitoring of DPA -“I don’t check up on the teachers; I leave it up to their professional judgment to do
what they feel is appropriate in their class” (3)
- If teachers want to try something new (if different from what’s in the curriculum),
they will run it by the principal for safety checks and to check for appropriateness of
the activity for DPA (3)
As indicated by Principal:
2
According to the School-wide data: 1
Key themes identified: - The three stage categories
do not appropriately
encompass the leadership of DPA at this school
-There is recognition by
administration that health and physical activity
initiatives are important,
and this is well-communicated to the
school community;
however, DPA is not specifically addressed
within this.
-Teachers largely lead their own DPA; physical
education is sometimes led
by classroom teachers and sometimes by other staff
-Teachers do not have
coordinated support for curricular DPA, possibly
due to the principal not
feeling it is feasible; however, structured
physical activity
opportunities are in place at the school during
extracurricular time
-Teachers are not monitored in their
provision of DPA
Schedule
How often are students
given the opportunity to
be physically active
during the 300 minutes
of instructional time?
How many days per week, on average? - PE: How often? A majority of respondents have PE scheduled twice per week (5) -PE: How often? All 3 classes have PE scheduled twice per week (6) - DPA (PE and other): How often? 33% of respondents say they have some form of DPA scheduled every day of the week; 20% indicate 4 days per week; 13% indicate it is scheduled 3 times per week; and 33% indicate it is scheduled only twice per week (5) (Average= 3 days/week)
As indicated by Principal:
2
According to the School-
wide data: 1
Key themes identified:
184
- Non-PE DPA: How often? Primary teacher has DPA scheduled 5 days per week; Junior is 4 days per week; Intermediate does not schedule DPA, but inserts it “to fit in as schedule/timing/opportunity allows” (6) -DPA (PE and other): How often? 2/3 of classes have DPA and/or phys ed scheduled 5 times per week; this includes teachers who have scheduled DPA more than once per day on some days (6) -Teachers say they have been doing DPA 2-4 times per week (3)
-“I usually do [DPA] twice per day.”(2.2a) -“And the days we have phys ed, we don’t insert DPA.” (Note: This conflicts with what is in this teacher’s timetable- DPA is scheduled on phys ed days as well.) How long, on average? - 20 mins: How many days per week? This data does not appear to be accurate for this school (e.g. 27% of teachers indicated they schedule 0 days of at least 20 minutes, although their PE periods are 40 mins); not going to use it - 20 mins: How many days per week? All have at least 20 minutes twice per week, on PE days; Primary has 45 mins for PE days, and 5 mins for non-PE days; Junior has 55 mins on PE days, 15 mins twice per week, and 0 mins once per week; Intermediate teacher has 45 mins on PE days only(6) Day 1- 9:32-9:38- DPA
Teacher announces that it is time for DPA (she calls it “mini DPA” because it is just short). (1.2a)
Day 2- 10:18-10:33- DPA ; activity starts at 10:24 (1.2a) Day 2- 12:51-1:26- Physical Education; activity starts at 12:55 and ends at 1:24 (extra time is walking to the gym and instructions) (1.2a) -General observation: This class has lots of “incidental” physical activity, moving
around throughout the day for transition between shorter activities, making actions during lessons, etc. (e.g. walking on the spot as they sing a song after saying grace)
(2.1a)
“I know we’re able to do at least 12, and maybe 15 minutes of activity. We don’t often hit the 20 minute mark though.” (2.2a) - “But we can also have DPA throughout the day, when we play games for 5 minutes at a time. So it’s not necessarily a 20 minute block all at once, although we try to insert that.” (2.2b) -During nice weather, the class goes outside for DPA: “And that’s for 20 minutes, most days.” (2.2b) -“[During the dance unit in gym], they’re teaching each other dances for about 25
minutes a day on a daily basis. We usually start through the recess, which is 15
minutes, and then carry it through after recess for another 10 minutes.” (2.2c) -“I usually have 2 10-minute periods. I wouldn’t do 1 20-minute period with the class,
because I like to use it as transition when they’re starting to get antsy… kids need to
move more than once for 20 minutes a day… If it was 20 minutes it would be a lot less flexible than with the 2 10-minute blocks.” (2.2c)
What priority of place does DPA have in the daily schedule?
How often does PE or DPA get rescheduled compared to other subject areas: 7%= much more often; 33%= somewhat more often; 40%= about the same; 20%=
somewhat less often (5)
-“Within the school where I taught prior to this, we did it as a division. So we often fit in the two DPAs and did it together in the hallways, or in the gym, or in each other’s classrooms. So it was kind of a co-planning activity. And that way we kind of made sure that it became part of our day. And now it seems to be something that we have to squeeze in. I do have it in my day plan, but things happen like the assembly today and we have to finish snack, so DPA kind of gets moved into another part of the day. So you try to squeeze it in, if not both times, then- well, definitely once, but if you’re not able to do it twice.” (2.2a) -“I would say [DPA] definitely gets bumped around more than any other subject area. As I say, in the morning it seems to fit in because it’s a longer sedentary period, and it’s a long time for the kids to be sitting still. So it’s sort of naturally built in between reading workshop and writing workshop, but not too close to snack time. So, it’s a little bit easier. The afternoon, because there’s various sorts of subjects as well as planning time- all of my planning time happens in the afternoon- I do have a teacher who covers my gym periods twice a week, and that’s for 45 minutes each period. So the kids are active for a longer period of time. And that doesn’t get bumped unless the gym is being used for something else.” (2.2a) -Observation Day 1: Afternoon DPA (aerobics planned) is cancelled as students have
just eaten, and it might upset their stomachs. (1.2a) -Observation: Gym closed on three occasions (two afternoons and one full day) of five
days observed (for special events). (1)
- A majority of teachers at
this school indicate that they have two 40-minute
PE periods per week;
however, only 1/3 of participants indicated that
they have some form of
DPA scheduled every day of the week. Some teachers
have DPA more than once
within a day, but do not have DPA 5 days per
week.
-The average DPA session (not including PE) is well
below the 20 minute mark;
however, it appears that this may fluctuate with the
time of year.
-40% of teachers indicate DPA gets rescheduled or
cancelled more often than
other subject areas. In the case of PE, this often
happens when the gym is
closed for other activities, which was observed on
three of five days spent at
this school. Teachers were observed to make DPA fit
with the flow of the day’s
activities rather than adhering strictly to a set
time.
-73% of respondents indicated that DPA is
spontaneously added into
the schedule at least once per week. It is sometimes
used as a transition activity
between lessons or as an energizer when students
are losing focus.
185
-“I know because of the demands of the curriculum, it’s very hard to get it into a set
time every day. Most teachers will tell you that they like routine, so they’ll work it into a particular time, so they’ll work it into the same time every day.” (2.2c)
In what ways is DPA provided outside of what is formally scheduled? -Unplanned DPA: How often? 73% of respondents indicated that DPA is spontaneously added into the schedule at least once per week (40%= about once per week; 27%= about twice per week; 7%= about 3 times per week); 27% say that they never spontaneously insert DPA; one teacher specifically indicated this “spontaneous DPA” is part of transitional movement between lessons (5) Observation- Day 1, DPA
9:24- Teacher says “It looks like you need 100 days; you’ve very sleepy and slouched
over.” (Spontaneous DPA). (1.2c)
- Non-PE DPA: How often? Primary teacher has DPA scheduled 5 days per week; Junior is 4 days per week; Intermediate does not schedule DPA, but inserts it “to fit in as schedule/timing/opportunity allows” (6) “There are days when they need a lot of it; there are days when they need a lot of movement...So, the curriculum, it says to provide them with daily exercise. And I like that it doesn’t say, it says how long, but it doesn’t say it has to be one chunk, it doesn’t say it has to be delivered at a particular time..."(2.2c)
Student Leadership
How are students from
across the school
involved in planning
and implementation of
DPA?
-The school has student representation on the healthy school community planning team: Level 1- Our school does not have a student representative. (8)
-“This is the first time I’ve done an exercise one. The kids specifically asked to do
exercise-based DPA." (2.2c)
Observation- Day 1:
The teacher turns on the Smart Board and there is a slide show presentation called
“Let’s do DPA”. The teacher says “you guys didn’t like dance, and we’ve done enough gross motor” (an activity where students would stand in the classroom and throw
various items around). She then talks about cardio, which the class had previously
indicated they wanted to focus on for DPA. Teacher explains that the heart is a muscle, and it needs to be worked out to stay
strong. The heart pumps blood around the body. A warm-up and cool-down are needed
when you want to get your heart rate up. She lists some of the activities that students had come up with yesterday, such as
jumping jacks and burpees, to link back to what they have already learned. She
instructs them to “make it fun; think of some music you can put with it”. The goal is to gradually build up fitness leading into the spring.
9:30- Students break up into groups and spread around the room to work on the
literacy activity of designing a DPA activity to lead the class with. (This will be the DP for the next several weeks- all student-designed and student-led, with facilitation by
the teacher.) (1.2c) - PALS (Playground Activity Leaders in Schools): Older students (generally grades 4-
7) are trained by a child and youth worker (rigorous training) to be “certified” to lead
sports and other games at recess for students in grades 1-4; they are encouraged to target/include students who are lonely/not participating in other games at recess,
although all young students are welcome to join in the activities
- 80% of the time PALS is happening at recess; any young kids who want to play
can join in (3) -Students with a range of skills and characteristics are provided leadership
opportunities in the organization of school activities: Level 3- Students with a range of
skills and characteristics play a leadership role in the organization of most school activities. (8)
-“I originally started, I would guide the games, and in the end they were off playing their own games and I was walking around to make sure they were all safe. So that is amazing DPA, because they’re on the go.” (2.2b)
As indicated by Principal:
1
According to the School-wide data: 1
Key themes identified: - The three stage categories
do not appropriately
encompass the student leadership of DPA at this
school
-Older students are given formal opportunities to be
leaders in physical activity,
but not in a way specific to DPA.
-In one intermediate class,
it was observed that the teacher had her students
select a focus (aerobics) and then plan their own
DPA; in a junior class, the
teacher indicated that she provides the structure and
allows her students to
create their own activities for outdoor DPA (in the
warm months).
Quality of DPA
How many students are
active for the entire
session?
How often are the
activities offered
inclusive, motivating,
learner-centred and
success-oriented?
How often do the tasks
How many students are active for the entire session?
Primary -“The majority of kids really respond to being active and just participating, whether it’s the exercises and activities...there are a few who will just be sort of standing around.” (2.2a) Day 1 Observation, DPA- Teacher says “Everyone has to participate”. Teacher
introduces a new song for the class. It involves standing, clapping, moving arms up in the air, and some other hand actions. All students are participating, except for 1 girl
who leans her elbows on her desk, and a boy who is initially shy but eventually joins
in. The children take turns adding an action to the song. (1.2a) Day 2 Observation, DPA- engagement very good- best for girls, boys somewhat
uncoordinated and a bit silly. (1.2a)
As indicated by Principal:
2-3
According to the School-
wide data: 2
Key themes identified:
How many students are
active for the entire
session?
- Age appears to have an impact on student
engagement in DPA;
186
result in increased
breathing and heart
rate?
How often do students
set their own goals and
monitor their own
physical activity?
Day 2 Observation, Physical Education- 12:55- “Everybody’s It”. Teacher instructs “everybody run around until I call everybody’s it”. All children are running, most with big smiles on their faces. 12:56- About half of children are sitting down (they’ve been tagged or are resting). Teacher calls everyone back to the circle, and they are mostly all very out of breath as they sit in the circle. The teacher reminds them “you have to be running the whole time” 12:57- Students are running again (sprinting); teacher calls “Everybody’s it!”’ great participation in this game; students are smiling/laughing/squealing as they play. 1:02- Game of Doctor Dodgeball begins. Main activity is alert standing, with some jumping and short bursts of running; throwing the ball; all students are participating. Overall: Engagement- excellent (highly enjoyable for majority of students, if not all
students) (1.2a)
Note: Only included pieces of observation notes with reference to participation
levels.
Junior
And with those sorts of activities (like the DVD), are the kids at the age yet where they feel a bit silly doing it? Or is it just that it’s really not that engaging? “No. I think you can get away with it in grade 5, but when you step into grade 6 it’s a different world. They’ll be different. I always say they’re “hormonally challenged”. And they laugh. But no, I think they’re ok for the DVD.” (2.2b) Day 1 Observation, Physical Education- 9:05- Promptly upon the end of announcements, 2 boys lead the class through a series of stretches. This appears to be
very routine, and students are familiar with these stretches. Entire class is following
along, with their eyes on the boys at the front. 9:09- Teacher instructs students to get into their teams (teams already organized from
previous); students seem very enthusiastic about their teams. Students quickly grab
their equipment and get ready to start. 9:10- Game begins. Entire class is very engaged; all students on the floor are attuned to
the game, others are “cheerleading” on the sidelines (dancing/marching around singing out cheers). Play characterized by short bursts of movement interspersed with lots of
standing and waiting; vast majority of eyes on the play at all times.
9:13- Switch players (takes about 20 seconds to complete the switch over). Second set of students on the floor also very engaged; new cheerleaders are less enthusiastic (3
leave to go get a drink of water); some sitting on bench; some cheering, but not as
loud. (They are probably tired!)
9:18- Switch players back (takes about 20 seconds to complete the switch over). Kids
still very engaged in the game. Teacher notices some scrap paper on the floor (from
their signs) and tells some students to pick it up, to clear the safety hazard of someone slipping. Cheerleading continues, but less enthusiastically (not all students).
9:23- Switch players back. 40-second interlude explaining the dangers of the game,
and that they need to be careful not to hit one another when they are trying to get the ball. Play resumes. Players starting to get a bit “rowdy”, getting “sloppier” in their
plays. Cheerleaders are sitting on benches, some talking and not paying attention to the
game. 9:26- End of game. Some students help put equipment away (running into equipment
room with the gear), and everyone goes t the change rooms to change (separate for
boys and girls). Kids are running around and skipping; they still appear to have lots of energy, and are in a very happy mood. (1.2b)
- Class has two teams (Apples and Bananas); class seems very excited about
this game; they have brought handmade posters/signs made at home and on
their own time; some girls are wearing banana cut-outs in their hair (1.2b)
- Overall, very good engagement. Students played Broomball in an earlier
unit and really enjoy this game. (1.2b)
Day 1 Observation, DPA- Dancing. Excellent engagement. (1.2b)
Day 2 Observation, DPA- Leave the class. Teacher leads class around each of the 4
hallways of the school, going up and down 4 staircases. Pace is brisk, and those who
started off behind have to jog to catch up. Teacher stops once or twice to wait for everyone, but for the most part it is continuous movement. There are no "stragglers";
everyone is participating fully. Although students (according to teacher) normally don't
enjoy this particular DPA activity, the majority are enthusiastic and appear to be enjoying themselves. I am slightly out of breath from participating in this activity, and
I often go for long brisk walks. (1.2b)
Intermediate Day 1 Observation, DPA: The students do not sing along, and they do not appear
enthusiastic, but they all participate and are mostly smiling. (1.2c)
Day 1 Observation, DPA: Overall, about four girls in the class are half-doing the activities; all boys are participating. About 1/3 of the class appears to be highly
engaged and working hard for the duration of the routine.
student participation is
excellent in primary and junior grades, and
markedly less so in the
intermediate class.
How often are the
activities offered inclusive,
motivating, learner-
centred and success-
oriented? -No students were
observed to have physical
disabilities or challenges, and teachers tended to
provide DPA catered to
“middle of the road” abilities. There did not
appear to be much need in
the younger grades for stratified DPA, as student
participation was observed
to be very good. In the intermediate class, where
participation was less
consistent, the teacher did make an effort to
encourage students to
focus on their own fitness/abilities
-Teachers were observed to
use DPA or “transitional” (i.e. between activities)
movement to keep their
students motivated during the day. The intermediate
teacher also described the
role of motivation in getting students to enjoy
certain kinds of activities
(e.g. dance- students are motivated to do this when
there is a competition and
they will have to perform for their peers).
-All teachers recognized
the importance of catering their activities to what their
class enjoyed and needed,
to maximize participation. -Both the primary and
intermediate teachers acknowledged the
importance of structuring
learning in DPA such that students can understand the
importance of it beyond the
activity at hand. -The forms that DPA takes
are highly variable across
classes and according to time of year, and a
majority do not appear to
be from the Ministry. These range from “cardio”
activities such as aerobics
and dancing, and strength and conditioning exercises
such as push-ups, to
structured games, semi-
187
Day 2 Observation, DPA: Student-led DPA. Participation/engagement was low. This
appears to be due to the lack of leadership or discipline on the part of the supply teacher. Students did not take this activity seriously, and saw the opportunity to act
out/”goof off”.
How often are the activities offered inclusive, motivating, learner-centred and
success-oriented?
Inclusiveness - Level 4: Instructional strategies for physical activity and physical education fully accommodate different learning styles or preferences. (7) -"And also, in some respects when I say I’m restricted but I’m still doing it- for
example, one of the kids said “I can’t do a sit up”- so I said “Ok, let’s do what you can
do”. And as we do it more and more, you’ll find that you build upper body strength and you’ll get a few more in, so she did five...You do what you can." (2.2c)
Motivational Activities -“The kids need that particular kind of movement as well just to make the transitions easier.” (2.2a) -“The kids have to remain active. If I find that they can’t sit very much, then I stop and we go play a game and move around for a bit, and then we go back and sit down.” (2.2b) - “Throughout the day we stop and we do other activities. Whether it’s just stand up and jump up and down 20 times, or standing up and doing-“ Standing up and doing “UMCL” (song akin to one round of the chorus of “YMCA”, with actions) “Oh, I forgot about that! Well actually, they came up with that at the beginning of the year, and I didn’t realize that it was related to this plan, but it is.” (2.2b) -“[When they do their dance unit for gym, they do] dance for gym class then DPA is
dance in the hallways, because that’s a whole unit that goes to a grade 8 dance
competition at the end of the year, with costumes and everything…So that happens in gym where they start to create it; but all their practice time is every day for DPA. So,
they’re upstairs, we’ve got every boom box in the entire school in the classrooms and
the hallways, and they’re dancing. And they’re teaching each other dances for about 25 minutes a day on a daily basis.”(2.2c)
Learner-Centred Activities and Orientation toward Success -“I find in my classroom, because the kids are younger, we kind of do a lot of singing and movement. You just saw a segment of that, but you realize the kids need that particular kind of movement as well just to make the transitions easier.” (2.2a) -“Particularly the aerobics, I think that’s fun for the kids and most kids love to dance.” (2.2a) Day 2 Observation, Physical Education- Great participation in this game; students are smiling/laughing/squealing as they play. (1.2a) Day 2 Observation, DPA- This activity was best for girls; boys appeared somewhat uncoordinated and a bit silly. -“We did use [Ministry-provided DVDS] a few times. And they were exercise DVDs, and fun activities and the kids loved them. But after a while that became boring. So it’s not something you can make last throughout the whole year. You need to change it up.” (2.2b) -“They love to dance. Now, tomorrow you’ll see a different type of DPA where they’ll be going up and down the stairs. And they don’t like that one; they complain about that one…Some of the kids do enjoy it though. I think it’s- well, it’s tiring to go up and down the stairs… But you saw them in the gym this morning, they were running from one end of the gym to the other. No trouble with that!” (2.2b) -“I originally started, I would guide the games, and in the end they were off playing their own games and I was walking around to make sure they were all safe. So that is amazing DPA, because they’re on the go.” (2.2b) -“So I picked up this large bubble wand, and they were running around the whole yard getting the bubbles- they love to chase bubbles. It sounds so simplistic, but it’s great fun! I have a rope for tug of war, we have skipping ropes; two years ago I managed to get them to learn double Dutch, and they could skip double Dutch. (This year we were just skipping.) If I take a look at the equipment, we have beans bags- spud- but all of that equipment, we go out every day, and you actually very quickly discover that they create their own games.” (2.2b) -“I think the manner in which it’s delivered has to be flexible enough ... that you can
adapt not only to the type of class that you have year to year, but as they change over the year. Or even day to day." (2.2c)
-"DPA should be fun. It has to be done properly, only because- like at this age level, I
crack jokes during it- but I also have to move. For example, I had to move to the back of the room because people at the back of the room were starting to get silly. And I
structured free play (i.e.
teacher provides choices and students create their
own type of active play)
and structured team sports. The latter occur mainly in
physical education classes
and in outdoor spaces in the warmer months of the
school year. One common
feature across classes is music, either in the form of
a CD or singing, as an
accompaniment in certain forms of DPA.
How often do the tasks
result in increased
breathing and heart rate?
-Almost all teachers surveyed indicated that the
average DPA session is
moderate intensity. Likewise, the majority of
observed/noted physical
activities during DPA are moderate in intensity,
sometimes resulting in
slight increase in breathing and heart rate. PE activities
are more characterized by
intermittent, more vigorous intensity activity with rest
in between.
How often do students set
their own goals and
monitor their own
physical activity?
-Students in the primary
class were observed to understand that the feeling
of their “heart beating
hard” is healthy, and this teacher incorporated
learning about how to
know you are successful in DPA. In the intermediate
class, the students were
engaged in planning for improving their own
personal fitness, and demonstrated some
knowledge of exercise
physiology. Goal-setting and monitoring of personal
physical activity was not
observed in the junior class.
188
don’t mind that they joke around; it’s that when you start getting silly, you might have
an unsafe environment that could evolve. So you want to keep it fun. You want to keep it moving and productive, but because of the nature of this age level, you have to sort
of be on your toes." (2.2c)
-"So in that science unit, that’s when you start to introduce that the heart is a muscle, and I brought that back today again [during DPA}- trying to access prior knowledge."
(2.2c)
-"We have had a whole selection of games in which they can choose. So it’s been “what are we going to do today?” as opposed to a routine that they’re actually sitting
down and creating themselves.” (2.2c)
-"I tried dancing with them last year, and they loved dancing. This year’s group- no. It could be I did not provide enough structure for them in dancing. So maybe I’ll try it again later in the year." (2.2c) Day 1 Observations, DPA- Overall, about four girls in the class are half-doing the activities; all boys are participating. Intensity is moderate (teacher breathing hard); about 1/3 of the class appears to be highly engaged and working hard for the duration of the routine. (1.2c) Encouraging personal growth through DPA -“Of course the length of activity and type of activity does definitely matter. It helps with their growth and development, and their health as well.”(2.2a) -“ I find that with the dance kind of aerobic exercises, the kids love the upbeat tune, and I can kind of spend more time looking at how we’re participating and kind of encouraging kids and giving a shout out.” (2.2a) -“I just read about it [structured approach having DPA activity cards that children choose]. So I thought ‘that’s good, I need another approach, something that will help them grow into the next grade as well’.” (2.2a) Day 2 Observation, DPA- 10:24- Teacher starts cd (warm-up song). Students go up and down on their toes. 10:25- March on the spot. Teacher encourages students to keep their heart pumping. All students are participating. 10:28- New song starts (main workout song). This is higher intensity, with marching, spinning, hopping and jumping; jogging on the spot and jumping jacks; reach left/right/touch your toes. Girls are much more coordinated and engaged in this than the boys. 10:31- New song starts (cool down song). Jogging on the spot; lunges; reaching and stretching; breathe in/breathe out; jumping jacks. (Somewhat lower intensity overall, but still with some high intensity pieces.) (1.2a) Note: Good structure of warm up- main activity- cool down to this session. -And I noticed in the classroom when you were talking about DPA and how they
were going to start their activities, you brought in a lot of the theory as well, like
“why we’re doing it”, it’s not just some random activity, and having them
thinking “well why are we doing this? Why is this important?”
"That’s really important for them to be lifelong learners. You can’t instil anything on a
child. If they don’t see value in it, it’s not going to become their own. They’re like anybody else- you want them to buy into it. And if they know why they’re buying into
it, it’s more likely to happen, as opposed to “oh, we’re doing it because it’s part of the
curriculum. Oh well, so what.” (2.2c)
Range of Activities -Types of activities (multiple responses allowed): 73%=cardio; 60%=strength and conditioning; 20%=structured games; 40%=semi-structured free play; 13%=structured team sports; 7%=creative dancing; 7%= fine/gross motor skills (5) -There are also other school-wide activities throughout the year that involve students
from throughout the school in physical activity (e.g. Terry Fox walk; Walk for Sick
Kids; Eco Walk) (3; 2.2a) -What are some of the activities that you do in your class for DPA? “You know what, jumping jacks and wall push-ups...more dance and movement-related involving song and music.” -“[On nice days] I still stay in the classroom. I find time is of the essence, and it takes extra time to get out there. And in the summer, I’ll kind of bring out some balls every once in a while, but for the majority of the time it’s in the classroom.” (2.2a) -“A lot of the songs I learned from [working at, in the past] Parks and Rec, or skits, I do here. So, Father Abraham, where they start by moving one arm and then the other, and then one leg and the other, and by the end they’ve got every portion going. It’s a song. There are 2 or 3 songs similar to that, where you begin with one action. So those similar songs, where’s you’re continually adding one part of the body, and by the end they’re jumping up and down. And that takes about 5 minutes to get through the song.” (2.2b)
189
-“We meditate. We turn off the lights, and I have a book. I follow instructions, and the kids totally relax- and some of them have fallen asleep. They’re very relaxed and they’ve fallen asleep and we let them sleep.” (2.2b) -“The morning is definitely more to music or to motion or action, and in the afternoon it’s more to a CD.”(2.2a) -“At 2 o’clock- when it’s not winter- you’d see a lot of different classes out there doing various things. So everyone’s out there at that time…we had a few classes out there playing soccer at one point in time.” (2.2b) -“What does it look like? Well, it could look like “how many steps to the CN tower?”
so we’re doing the stairs, that many steps. It could look like, throwing things around
the room. The kids love that one. I have a rubber pig and a rubber shark and a rubber chicken and one other. And when you throw it you have to call the person’s name, and
you always have to say a phrase that matches that particular animal; for example,
“when pigs fly”...their gross motor skills are being called on, as well as catching and throwing and being aware of your personal space. And something like that is a lot of
fun. There’s also the sitting up and down- and you saw that, the “100 days”, and I got that off of being in a kindergarten class, we started it on the 100th day of school. So, it
can take the form of a game, it can take the form of exercise.” (2.2c)
-“When it’s nice outside we do a lot of walking. And we have reading buddies, which
are kindergartens, and we take them for walks.” (2.2c)
Day 2 Observation, Physical Education- 12:55- “Everybody’s It”. Teacher instructs “everybody run around until I call everybody’s it”. All children are running, most with big smiles on their faces. 12:56- About half of children are sitting down (they’ve been tagged or are resting). Teacher calls everyone back to the circle, and they are mostly all very out of breath as they sit in the circle. The teacher reminds them “you have to be running the whole time” 12:57- Students are running again (sprinting); teacher calls “Everybody’s it!”’ great participation in this game; students are smiling/laughing/squealing as they play. 1:02- Game of Doctor Dodgeball begins. Main activity is alert standing, with some jumping and short bursts of running; throwing the ball; all students are participating. (1.2a) 1:06- Students are standing in a circle and begin to play “Spud”. One person in the centre throws the ball into the air and calls a number, and everyone else sprints away except the person whose number is called, who gets the ball, calls “Spud!” and everyone freezes (about 5 seconds after they start running). Once the ball is thrown at someone, everyone returns to the circle (walking or skipping) for the next round. They play 10 rounds of this game. 1:13- Students are sitting in the circle. Teacher explains next game (“Snakes on a Rock”). 1:14- Students all run to the back wall (5 seconds of running). One student is crouched on the floor in the centre of the gym. All other students start tip-toeing across the gym, until teacher calls “Snakes on a Rock!” and the crouching person gets up and chases the other students (about 10-15 seconds of running). Students who are caught join the “snake” in the centre for the next rounds. 1:18- Everyone returns to the circle, and sits. Teacher explains final game (Line tag) 1:20- Students up and scattering around the gym. Everyone is participating. Students are told to walk first, but some are running. 1:21- Stop (10 seconds). Next instruction- jumping only. Game resumes, all students participating. 1:22- Stop (10 seconds). Next instruction- skipping only. Game resumes, all students participating. 1:23- Stop (10 seconds). Next instruction- running only. Game resumes, all students participating. Lots of excited screaming; students slow down after initial sprint, then burst back into sprinting. (1.2a) Day 1 Observation, DPA- 2:01- Teacher starts a CD; students dancing in pairs or
threes to a song they learned in the “dance” unit of phys ed. Smiles on all of the
students’ faces, and lots of laughter. Students have to freeze in a position when the music stops. Very few students eliminated (1, then eventually 4 more, mix of boys and
girls). Students dance back to their desks as the song finishes. (1.2b)
Day 2 Observation, DPA- Leave the class. Teacher leads class around each of the 4 hallways of the school, going up and down 4 staircases. Pace is brisk, and those who
started off behind have to jog to catch up. Teacher stops once or twice to wait for
everyone, but for the most part it is continuous movement. There are no "stragglers"; everyone is participating fully. Although students (according to teacher) normally don't
enjoy this particular DPA activity, the majority are enthusiastic and appear to be
enjoying themselves. I am slightly out of breath from participating in this activity, and
190
I often go for long brisk walks. (1.2b)
Day 1, DPA: “Stand up!” Teacher instructs students to make sure they have room around their desk to move around, and then asks who’s going to be brave and sing
along. Teacher begins singing song “we’ve been in school 100 days”, which includes
students standing, sitting, stomping feet and clapping. The students do not sing along, and they do not appear enthusiastic, but they all participate and are mostly smiling.
This activity is light to moderate in intensity. (1.2c)
Day 1, DPA: Routine begins: Start jogging on the spot for 30 seconds; 15 jumping jacks; high knees and butt kicks; “twist”; 15 crunches or sit-ups with a partner(students
choose their preference); cool down jog (30 seconds); breathing exercises
- One girl does not have a partner for the crunches activity, and does not participate; teacher has already partnered with another solo student
-End of day bell rings during breathing exercises; students continue until the exercises
are finished. (1.2c) Day 2, DPA: 9:47- The leader group begins their warm-up exercises: neck rolls and
stretching of shoulders, legs, ankles and wrists. The rest of the class slowly joins in.
Some students are participating, but there is still lots of unrelated talking. 9:48- “We’re starting the workout now”: 30 jumping jacks. 4 girls in the class are
ignoring the routine and talking amongst themselves, while 2 of the group leaders (also
girls) sit down behind the counter at the front of the classroom, not participating. The class is getting very loud and hyper.
9:49- Push-ups (“as many as you can do in 30 seconds”). About 3 girls are doing “girl”
push-ups, but none of the other girls are participating. A majority of boys in the class are doing the push-ups, making loud silly noises as they do so.
9:50- Burpees. One student is throwing his grass skirt around; 2 girls are trying to do
the burpees; 3 girls are just sitting on the ground, while others are standing around talking; boys are mostly laughing and loudly joking around.
9:51- Sit ups/crunches. Similar participation as burpees, but this participation is slowly
dropping off. There is lots of loud talking. Supply teacher is not interfering or moderating the session in any way.
9:52- 15 ski jumps. About 4 students doing this, and supply teacher says “guys, ski
jumps” and about 5 more students join in (still less than half of the class). All girls in the class are standing around not participating, while 2 are sitting down. (2 girl leaders
are still sitting behind counter at front of room.)
9:53- One student leader turns off/on lights to regain class attention. More push-ups. About 4 boys doing the push-ups; rest of class not participating.
9:55- “Shake it off”; about 3 students participating.
9:56- “Deep breathing”; about 3 students participating. (1.2c)
How often do the tasks result in increased breathing and heart rate?
Primary -Intensity of average DPA session: 87%=moderate; 7%=vigorous; 7%=light (5) - “It’s 2 periods of continuous exercise of 20 minutes. And it basically is an opportunity for kids to increase their heart rate to improve their physical health.” (2.2a) Day 1 Observation, DPA- Teacher introduces a new song for the class. It involves standing, clapping, moving arms up in the air, and some other hand actions. All
students are participating, except for 1 girl who leans her elbows on her desk, and a
boy who is initially shy but eventually joins in. The children take turns adding an action to the song. Teacher instructs students to start off in a “little ball”, and stretch up
big. Next, “let’s get the rhythm of the...” and students take turns making up actions,
such as running on the spot. Girl who had been leaning and then sitting joins in for this. Intensity is light to moderate (1.2a)
Day 2 Observation, DPA- New song starts (cool down song). Jogging on the spot; lunges; reaching and stretching; breathe in/breathe out; jumping jacks. (Somewhat lower intensity overall, but still with some high intensity pieces). Teacher asks students to put their hands on their hearts; several students say their heart is beating hard; however, no students appear to be out of breath. Overall: intensity moderate; engagement very good- best for girls, boys somewhat uncoordinated and a bit silly. (1.2a) Day 2 Observation, Physical Education In game of “Everybody’s It”, all children are running, most with big smiles on their faces. One minute into the game, about half of children are sitting down (they’ve been tagged or are resting). Teacher calls everyone back to the circle, and they are mostly all very out of breath as they sit in the circle. Overall: Intensity- intermittent vigorous activity (1.2a)
Junior -Indoor DPA: “Last year I tried to play a game, but it wasn’t very- Silent Ball- they can’t speak but they have to pass the ball. It’s fun, but they’re not very active in the game. It just relaxes them. Most of the others are just the songs with the actions. I think I’ve mentioned the stairs, and the dancing. We’ve used the Beach Boys for the dancing,
191
different types, but all very active.” (2.2b) -“We meditate. We turn off the lights, and I have a book. I follow instructions, and the kids totally relax- and some of them have fallen asleep. They’re very relaxed and they’ve fallen asleep and we let them sleep.” (2.2b) Day 1 Observation, Physical Education- (Activity: Broomball) Switch players (takes about 20 seconds to complete the switch over). Second set of students on the floor also
very engaged; new cheerleaders are less enthusiastic (3 leave to go get a drink of
water); some sitting on bench; some cheering, but not as loud. Students appear tired from their turn playing.
9:18- Switch players back (takes about 20 seconds to complete the switch over). Kids
still very engaged in the game. Cheerleading continues, but less enthusiastically (not all students).
9:23- Switch players back. Players starting to get a bit “rowdy”, getting “sloppier” in
their plays. Cheerleaders are sitting on benches, some talking and not paying attention to the game.
9:26- End of game. Some students help put equipment away (running into equipment
room with the gear), and everyone goes to the change rooms to change (separate for boys and girls). Kids are running around and skipping; they still appear to have lots of
energy, and are in a very happy mood. Overall, moderate to intermittent intense level
of activity. (1.2b) Day 1 Observation, DPA- Teacher starts a CD; students dancing in pairs or threes to a
song they learned in the “dance” unit of phys ed. Smiles on all of the students’ faces,
and lots of laughter. Students have to freeze in a position when the music stops. Very few students eliminated (1, then eventually 4 more, mix of boys and girls). Students
dance back to their desks as the song finishes. Moderate physical activity for this
session. (1.2b) Day 2 Observation, DPA- Teacher leads class around each of the 4 hallways of the
school, going up and down 4 staircases. Pace is brisk, and those who started off behind
have to jog to catch up. Teacher stops once or twice to wait for everyone, but for the most part it is continuous movement. There are no "stragglers"; everyone is
participating fully. Although students (according to teacher) normally don't enjoy this
particular DPA activity, the majority are enthusiastic and appear to be enjoying themselves. Moderate to intense physical activity for this session. (1.2b)
Intermediate Day 1 Observation, DPA: “Stand up!” Teacher instructs students to make sure they
have room around their desk to move around, and then asks who’s going to be brave
and sing along. Teacher begins singing song “we’ve been in school 100 days”, which
includes students standing, sitting, stomping feet and clapping. The students do not
sing along, and they do not appear enthusiastic, but they all participate and are mostly
smiling. This activity is light to moderate in intensity. (1.2c) Day 1 Observation, DPA: Routine begins: Start jogging on the spot for 30 seconds;
15 jumping jacks; high knees and butt kicks; “twist”; 15 crunches or sit-ups with a partner(students choose their preference); cool down jog (30 seconds); breathing
exercises. Intensity is moderate (teacher breathing hard). (1.2c)
Day 2 Observation, DPA: 9:47- The leader group begins their warm-up exercises: neck rolls and stretching of shoulders, legs, ankles and wrists. The rest of the class
slowly joins in. Some students are participating, but there is still lots of unrelated
talking. 9:48- “We’re starting the workout now”: 30 jumping jacks. 4 girls in the class are
ignoring the routine and talking amongst themselves, while 2 of the group leaders (also
girls) sit down behind the counter at the front of the classroom, not participating. The class is getting very loud and hyper.
9:49- Push-ups (“as many as you can do in 30 seconds”). About 3 girls are doing “girl”
push-ups, but none of the other girls are participating. A majority of boys in the class are doing the push-ups, making loud silly noises as they do so.
9:50- Burpees. One student is throwing his grass skirt around; 2 girls are trying to do
the burpees; 3 girls are just sitting on the ground, while others are standing around talking; boys are mostly laughing and loudly joking around.
9:51- Sit ups/crunches. Similar participation as burpees, but this participation is slowly
dropping off. There is lots of loud talking. Supply teacher is not interfering or moderating the session in any way.
9:52- 15 ski jumps. About 4 students doing this, and supply teacher says “guys, ski
jumps” and about 5 more students join in (still less than half of the class). All girls in the class are standing around not participating, while 2 are sitting down. (2 girl leaders
are still sitting behind counter at front of room.)
9:53- One student leader turns off/on lights to regain class attention. More push-ups. About 4 boys doing the push-ups; rest of class not participating.
9:55- “Shake it off”; about 3 students participating.
9:56- “Deep breathing”; about 3 students participating. Overall intensity of this session: moderate. (1.2c)
192
How often do students set their own goals and monitor their own physical activity?
-“We’ve chatted about how- even in science, I think it was the grade 2 unit on simple machines, how it’s created a bit more of a sedentary lifestyle. One kid even mentioned how we spend a lot more time on the couch and we’re taking cars instead of walking, and we’re not as active as we used to be.” (2.2a) -“We often chat about how will they know if they are exercising and doing something that is healthy for their body. We’ll say, if you’re just standing there and watching, will that show you and will it show me that you’re being active?” (2.2a) Day 1 Observation, DPA- End of first song. Teacher asks “how will you know that
you’re successful in DPA?” Students all respond “Join in!” Student chooses “head and
shoulders” song, and leads it with the help of the teacher. (1.2a)
Day 2 Observation, DPA- Teacher asks “How will we know we’re participating properly?” Class: “We’re moving our bodies”. Teacher: “Why don’t we stop and rest in between? Which part of our body do we want to keep working?” Class: “Our heart.” Teacher: “why?” Class: “So we can pump blood.” (1.2a) Day 2 Observation, DPA- March on the spot. Teacher encourages students to keep their heart pumping. All students are participating. At end of activity, teacher asks students to put their hands on their hearts; several students say their heart is beating hard; however, no students appear to be out of breath (1.2a) Day 1, Literacy block-
Teacher explains purpose of students’ self-designed DPA. “The goal is to gradually
build up fitness leading into the spring.” Students break up into groups and spread around the room to work on the literacy activity of designing a DPA activity to lead
the class with.
Teacher poses question to whole class: “What’s the whole purpose of DPA?” Students raise their hands to answer. “To get our bodies moving and to improve our health.”
One student explains that they are going to finish off their routine with breathing
exercises that they learned last year. Teacher asks “what are we really exercising with breathing exercises?” and several students call out “lung capacity!”
The teacher roves around the room interacting with the groups as they work. She
reminds them “remember, we need to incorporate different abilities- some people won’t be as fit, and we don’t want them to feel like they can’t do it.” (1.2c)
Resources
What resources are
available to assist staff?
How many staff have
attended training on
implementation of the
DPA policy?
What resources are available to assist staff?
Availability of resources - Level 2: Our school has adequate equipment. (7) -“I’d like to have more in-classroom equipment for DPA.” (2.2c)
-“We have a CD player in every class. So that’s important… without the music I don’t think it would be very much fun.” (2.2b) -“They gave us a DVD that we could play- the problem with that is that we don’t all have TVs accessible in the classroom. So, to have to book the TV just for the DPA is impossible. We only have 1 TV per floor. So 1 TV, we have to share it- all of the grade 4-8 classes, and then there’s 1 TV for the JK-grade 3 classes. So to be able to get the TV and have it available for everybody- it’s not going to work.” (2.2b) -“We do get activities that are sent our way. I’m not sure where they come from, maybe the Ministry...little inserts...And definitely supplies for the gym- and I’m speaking as a teacher who used to lead gym- definitely the teachers talk about making sure we have the supplies needed to run good phys ed programs.” (2.2a) -“Now we’ve got a lot of games here (Indicates Ministry handout).” (2.2b) - When DPA was first introduced, the Ministry provided materials, including posters (which had one activity each), gym equipment, and books with activity ideas; the
posters eventually ended up in the gym, but these got torn over time from the multiple
people who were using this space; never replaced (3)
Quality/helpfulness of resources -“We do get activities that are sent our way. I’m not sure where they come from, maybe the Ministry...little inserts. The typing’s usually a little bit too small, they try to fit a lot in there. “(2.2a) -“The only other thing we picked up that was important was that equipment. We went out and we bought bubbles and skipping ropes and balls, so that our DPA is so much easier during the spring and summer.” (2.2b) -“We have a CD player in every class. So that’s important… without the music I don’t think it would be very much fun.” (2.2b) -“Now we’ve got a lot of games here (Indicates Ministry handout). We were playing some of the games- we did, we played some of the games and we had cards, and I remember printing off cards. But some of these games, we actually did this in the gym. The mini-soccer, I know they like to play the indoor mini soccer during indoor recesses, but somebody ends up injured all the time. And they’ve set up the baskets, we’ve gotten to the point where they’re now rolling the ball, they’re not allowed to
As indicated by Principal:
2 According to the School-
wide data: 2
Key themes identified:
What resources are
available to assist staff? - Although one teacher
indicated a desire for more
in-class DPA equipment, overall it appears that there
is an adequate variety of
resources available for teachers. However, the low
number of available TVs limits the ability to use
Ministry-provided DVDs
as a tool for DPA. -All three teachers
interviewed felt that
Ministry-provided DPA
resources were inadequate
for inattention to safety,
physical space or exercise intensity (i.e. too
sedentary) concerns.
How many staff have
attended training on
implementation of the
DPA policy?
- Some but not all teachers
have received DPA-specific training, beyond
receiving “inserts” from
193
throw it, and they’ve managed to stay safe that way.”(2.2b) -Referring to Ministry resource of classroom DPA ideas: “Some of the things are not reasonable [appropriate space not available]. I’m trying some of the activities where they were sitting on the chair, and doing the leg lifts and the arms, and those are really boring. I’m sorry, but you do this for a while with the kids, and they look at you, and they don’t think it’s appropriate, it’s not just me! So I realized very quickly that that wasn’t going to work. So some of them were just not fun.” (2.2b) -“Those games really didn’t facilitate anything close to cardio, and those were game
suggestions from the Ministry.” (2.2c)
How many staff have attended training on implementation of the DPA policy?
-All school staff participated in learning opportunities related to creating a healthy school community in the last 12 months: Level 4- All of our school staff have
participated in learning opportunities related to creating a healthy school community in
the last 12 months. (8) - Select teachers would go to training workshops, and then come back and share their
learning with other teachers (primarily within the first 2 years of the policy being introduced) (3)
Do you remember receiving any type of training to assist with implementation of DPA? -“I don’t think so. Just the insert that I got.” (2.2a) -“No, I didn’t. I believe Mark (another teacher) did. But he’s got a phys ed degree,
he’s kind of our “go-to” guy for all things phys ed. And he took over my phys ed when
I got here.” (2.2c)
-“I think that we require better training.”(2.2b) -Do you know if French teachers or anyone else get trained in DPA?
“No, I don’t think so.” (2.2c)
-“Traditionally, at the grade 8 level, it just tends to work out that one person is very
very physical, so they’re the phys ed person. And one person is a little bit more cerebral in terms of sciences and maths. And the principal tries to get a balance
between personalities and resource people… it seemed natural that I would step into
the science role, as opposed to stepping into a role that was already taken and being done well. Why reinvent the wheel?”(2.2c)
-Phys ed teacher for primary students is a teacher-librarian on a long-term occasional contract, who takes these classes so teachers get planning time; not a physical education specialist, but coaches several teams: “I think the phys ed teaching decisions are made by admin, depending on the scheduling needs of each teacher and making sure everyone gets their planning time.” (2.2a)
the Ministry
-Teaching of physical education (but not DPA) is
sometimes delegated to
specific teachers; as such, these teachers have the
potential to become
“specialists” in a sense; however, the resource
teacher who leads physical
education for primary classes did not receive
specific training for DPA
or PE
Partnership
Development
What community
partnerships have been
developed, and what
level of support do they
offer for DPA?
Communication with community partners - Level 4: Our school communicates its physical activity policies / practices at least annually to three or four groups, including students. (7) - Level 4: Our school communicates our policies / practices on physical activity to the school community through multiple methods, both written and verbal methods. (7) Existing and potential partnerships
-The school has at least one effective partnership that supports and contributes to a healthy school community: Level 2- Our school has some partnerships with minimal
supports. (8)
-Community members volunteer in the school daily: Level 3- Community members volunteer in the school most days. (8)
- “I wish community partners would come with corporate sponsorship rather than
coming in with programs but asking for money to provide them” (3)
- Sometimes parents come in and volunteer to help out with teams (e.g. cross country
and hockey teams)” (3) - City approached the school board about a Swim to Survive program for grade 3
students; that is free and provided by the City to all interested schools (3)
- Local public health unit has been “great”; a health nurse comes in with information and resources around healthy eating and nutrition (3)
- “It would be great if we could take kids out to community centres once a month, but
they would need to be funded”; no partnerships with local community centres so far (3)
- “In the past, I organized a free skating event for my school; this was a lot of work to
organize. Because not all kids had access to community skating (lack of funds; no skates), I liaised with the transportation department (school buses), the City and Play it
Again Sports [used sports equipment store] to donate or discount their services to make it possible for the kids at the school to go on a skating trip. Transportation lent 3 school
buses for free (and the school paid for 3); Play it Again donated skates for kids who
didn’t have any to wear; and the City donated the ice time at local arena. There were parent volunteers as well; kids of all ability levels were able to participate. While this
was a huge success story, it was also a lot of work; and time is at a premium.” (3)
As indicated by Principal:
1
According to the School-
wide data: 2
Key themes identified:
- The school makes efforts to communicate its
physical activity policies
and practices to the community.
- Community partners,
including the City, local public health unit and
parent volunteers, exist;
however, the level of coordinated community
support for DPA is not
strong -Principal raised important
point of the time, work and
sometimes money involved in engaging community
partners, and how this can
be a barrier to seeking them.
194
1= Classroom Observations 2= Teacher Interviews 3= Principal Interview/Key informant Interview
4= Document Analysis of DPA implementation records 5= Teacher surveys
6= Teacher class schedules 7= Healthy School Planner PA Survey 8=Healthy School Planner Foundational Module
For Classroom Observations and Teacher Interviews:
a= Primary Class b= Junior Class c=Intermediate Class