Teachers’ Perspective on Strategies to Reduce Sedentary Behavior in Educational Institutions
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Survey Instrument
2.3. Procedure
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Suitability of Classrooms and School Furniture
Question: Where do you see the biggest mismatch between school furniture and students?
Teachers’ comments:
» Chairs and desks are too high for the students (unfortunately, manufacturers sell school desks and chairs based on the age of the students, but this [in my opinion] is often not appropriate). Then the furniture is ordered in a hurry and it is not suitable for students. «(Primary School teacher, age 34)
» Every day in my classroom, there are students from the 1st to the 4th grade sitting, and they all use the same desks and chairs. Also, the height of the blackboard is not at the height of the eyes of the children but at the height of the eyes of the adults. «(Primary School teacher, age 27)
» We make every effort (with the support of the principal) to ensure that chairs and desks are the right height for each student. In my opinion, some of the cupboards intended for teachers take up too much space. In other words, the classrooms are too small. «(Primary School teacher, age 42)
» Some students have different motor skills and would need custom-design furniture. «(Primary School teacher, age 42)
» Desks and chairs are the same for students aged 10 to 14 or 15, but during this time, the children grow taller by half a metre or more. «(Primary School teacher, age 30)
3.2. Use of Standing Desks in the Classroom
Question: Why do you not interrupt sitting during lessons with other activities, such as standing?
Teachers’ comments:
» I never really thought about that. Maybe then there would not be enough time to go through the topic. «(Secondary School teacher, age 45)
» Since this is not done habitually, it would lead to confusion in the classroom, pupils would not be able to focus, and the teaching message, the purpose of it, would be misunderstood. «(Secondary School teacher, age 54)
Question: Why do you think that the use of standing desks in the classroom is not feasible?
Teachers’ comments:
» It is not necessary. They sit for 45 min or less and then have a break in which they can move. «(Primary School teacher, age 44)
» Moving around in the middle of the class does not take a moment, but precious minutes. The curriculum is overfilled, not everything is done and then there are various things that interrupt the teaching process. In the end, this is another thing that would disrupt the teaching process. «(Primary School teacher, age 38)
3.3. Performing Physical Activity Breaks during Class
Question: Why do you think that performing physical activity breaks is not feasible during class?
Teachers’ comments:
» I think it would be very difficult to get the students to exercise. We should start in the first grade. «(Secondary School teacher, age 38)
» It seems strange to perform this with adults (students at the faculty)–probably simply because this is not (yet) common practice. «(University Assistant, age 29)
3.4. Body Posture When Sitting in Class
Question: Why do you think it is important how students sit in class?
Teachers’ comments:
» Unfortunately, more and more often students sit in awkward postures, but there is not much we as teachers can do about it, as we can hardly say anything to remind them. «(Primary School teacher, age 58)
» The educational system is a very big factor in our sedentary lifestyle. So many hours spent in a sitting position behind ‘strange’ desks has consequences. And if the students have been sitting for a long time, they should at least sit ‘properly’. «(University Professor, age 45)
» Yes, forced posture reduces creativity. But it is not necessary for them to sit. They can stand, squat, lie... the important thing is that they work. «(Primary School teacher, age 62)
» Because I think the way they sit has a significant impact on the development of their spine and possible deformations, I believe that the students must sit comfortably (with their feet on the floor and their hands at the appropriate height) because only then can they concentrate on their work. Otherwise, sitting itself is an interruption. «(Primary School teacher, age 38)
» Because of physical development, and because it easier to learn to sit properly at younger age. «(Primary School teacher, age 27)
3.5. Teacher Participation in the Purchase of School Furniture
4. Discussion
5. Limitations
6. Conclusions
- reorganization and redesign of the current school environment and school furniture in Slovenia is desired;
- regular anthropometry measurements should be incorporated to ensure that students are using suitable furniture that promotes good posture when sitting;
- standing desks in the classroom could be used for at least 40 min daily, although not for all school subjects;
- the implementation of strategies to reduce SB should begin in the first grade, so that teachers and students accept these interventions as a normal part of the learning process;
- for the implementation of new strategies to enhance the well-being of students in the school environment, support of the principal that is in compliance with standards and school-related restrictions is important;
- additional general strategies and guidelines are needed to support schools and teachers to consistently implement PA breaks at school;
- along with the suggested strategies, budgetary and other constraints that influence decision making by school personnel should be considered; and
- regular seminars related to school ergonomics and SB for teachers should be organized.
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Mandal, A.C. The seated man (Homo Sedens) the seated work position. Theory and practice. Appl. Ergon. 1981, 12, 19–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tremblay, M.S.; LeBlanc, A.G.; Kho, M.E.; Saunders, T.J.; Larouche, R.; Colley, R.C.; Goldfield, G.; Gorber, S.C. Systematic review of sedentary behaviour and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2011, 8, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Thaler, R.; Sunstein, C. Improving Decisions on Health, Wealth and Happiness; Penguin Books: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Zimring, C.; Joseph, A.; Nicoll, G.L.; Tsepas, S. Influences of building design and site design on physical activity: Research and intervention opportunities. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2005, 28, 186–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrison, F.; Jones, A.P. A framework for understanding school based physical environmental influences on childhood obesity. Health Place 2012, 18, 639–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ucci, M.; Law, S.; Andrews, R.; Fisher, A.; Smith, L.; Sawyer, A.; Marmot, A. Indoor school environments, physical activity, sitting behaviour and pedagogy: A scoping review. Build. Res. Inf. 2015, 43, 566–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clemes, S.A.; Bingham, D.; Ridgers, N.D.; Fletcher, E.; Pearson, N.; Salmon, J.; Dunstan, D.W.; Barber, S.E. Reducing Children’s Classroom Sitting Time Using Sit-to-Stand Desks. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 2015, 47, 833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kidokoro, T.; Shimizu, Y.; Edamoto, K.; Annear, M. Classroom standing desks and time-series variation in sedentary behavior and physical activity among primary school children. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Verswijveren, S.J.J.M.; Salmon, J.; Daly, R.M.; Arundell, L.; Cerin, E.; Dunstan, D.W.; Hesketh, K.D.; Della Gatta, P.A.; Ridgers, N.D. Reallocating sedentary time with total physical activity and physical activity bouts in children: Associations with cardiometabolic biomarkers. J. Sports Sci. 2020, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gába, A.; Pedišić, Ž.; Štefelová, N.; Dygrýn, J.; Hron, K.; Dumuid, D.; Tremblay, M. Sedentary behavior patterns and adiposity in children: A study based on compositional data analysis. BMC Pediatrics 2020, 20, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Reiff, C.; Marlatt, K.; Dengel, D.R. Difference in Caloric Expenditure in Sitting versus Standing Desks. J. Phys. Act. Health 2012, 9, 1009–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benden, M.; Zhao, H.; Jeffrey, C.; Wendel, M.; Blake, J. The Evaluation of the Impact of a Stand-Biased Desk on Energy Expenditure and Physical Activity for Elementary School Students. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 9361–9375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ee, J.; Parry, S.; de Oliveira, B.I.R.; McVeigh, J.A.; Howie, E.; Straker, L. Does a classroom standing desk intervention modify standing and sitting behaviour and musculoskeletal symptoms during school time and physical activity during waking time? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hafner, A.; Hovnik Keršmanc, M. Odraščanje. Available online: http://www.nijz.si/sites/www.nijz.si/files/uploaded/odrascanje_elektronski_vir_2017.pdf (accessed on 7 April 2020).
- Milanese, S.; Grimmer, K. School furniture and the user population: An anthropometric perspective. Ergonomics 2004, 47, 416–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ramadan, M.Z. Does Saudi school furniture meet ergonomics requirements? Work 2011, 38, 93–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batistão, M.V.; Sentanin, A.C.; Moriguchi, C.S.; Hansson, G.-Å.; Coury, H.J.C.G.; de Oliveira Sato, T. Furniture dimensions and postural overload for schoolchildren’s head, upper back and upper limbs. Work 2012, 41 (Suppl. 1), 4817–4824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- van Niekerk, S.-M.; Louw, Q.A.; Grimmer-Somers, K.; Harvey, J.; Hendry, K.J. The anthropometric match between high school learners of the Cape Metropole area, Western Cape, South Africa and their computer workstation at school. Appl. Ergon. 2013, 44, 366–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reis, P.; Moro, A.R.; Da Silva, J.; Paschoarelli, L.; Nunes Sobrinho, F.; Peres, L. Anthropometric aspects of body seated in school. Work 2012, 41 (Suppl. 1), 907–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Baharampour, S.; Nazari, J.; Dianat, I.; Asgharijafarabadi, M. Student’s Body Dimensions in Relation to Classroom Furniture. Health Promot. Perspect. 2013, 3, 165–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castellucci, H.I.; Catalán, M.; Arezes, P.M.; Molenbroek, J.F.M. Evaluation of the match between anthropometric measures and school furniture dimensions in Chile. Work 2016, 53, 585–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dianat, I.; Karimi, M.A.; Asl Hashemi, A.; Bahrampour, S. Classroom furniture and anthropometric characteristics of Iranian high school students: Proposed dimensions based on anthropometric data. Appl. Ergon. 2013, 44, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agha, S.R. School furniture match to students’ anthropometry in the Gaza Strip. Ergonomics 2010, 53, 344–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cotton, L.M.; O’Connell, D.G.; Palmer, P.P.; Rutland, M.D. Mismatch of school desks and chairs by ethnicity and grade level in middle school. Work 2002, 18, 269–280. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Gouvali, M.K.; Boudolos, K. Match between school furniture dimensions and children’s anthropometry. Appl. Ergon. 2006, 37, 765–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Assiri, A.; Mahfouz, A.; Awadalla, N.; Abouelyazid, A.; Shalaby, M.; Abogamal, A.; Alsabaani, A.; Riaz, F. Classroom Furniture Mismatch and Back Pain Among Adolescent School-Children in Abha City, Southwestern Saudi Arabia. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Carlson, J.A.; Engelberg, J.K.; Cain, K.L.; Conway, T.L.; Mignano, A.M.; Bonilla, E.A.; Geremia, C.; Sallis, J.F. Implementing classroom physical activity breaks: Associations with student physical activity and classroom behavior. Prev. Med. 2015, 81, 67–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mullins, N.M.; Michaliszyn, S.F.; Kelly-Miller, N.; Groll, L. Elementary school classroom physical activity breaks: Student, teacher, and facilitator perspectives. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2019, 43, 140–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sherry, A. The Impact of Standing Desks within the School Classroom on Sedentary Behaviour, Physical Activity, Health and Development. Ph.D Thesis, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, Y.H. Biostatistics104: Correlational Analysis. Singap. Med. J. 2003, 44, 614–619. [Google Scholar]
- Wick, K.; Faude, O.; Manes, S.; Zahner, L.; Donath, L. I Can Stand Learning: A Controlled Pilot Intervention Study on the Effects of Increased Standing Time on Cognitive Function in Primary School Children. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Verloigne, M.; Ridgers, N.D.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.; Cardon, G. Effect and process evaluation of implementing standing desks in primary and secondary schools in Belgium: A cluster-randomised controlled trial. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2018, 15, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parry, S.; IR de Oliveira, B.; McVeigh, J.A.; Ee, J.; Jacques, A.; Straker, L. Standing Desks in a Grade 4 Classroom over the Full School Year. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Silva, D.R.; Minderico, C.S.; Pinto, F.; Collings, P.J.; Cyrino, E.S.; Sardinha, L.B. Impact of a classroom standing desk intervention on daily objectively measured sedentary behavior and physical activity in youth. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2018, 21, 919–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sudholz, B.; Timperio, A.; Ridgers, N.D.; Dunstan, D.W.; Baldock, R.; Holland, B.; Salmon, J. The Impact and Feasibility of Introducing Height-Adjustable Desks on Adolescents’ Sitting in a Secondary School Classroom. AIMS Public Health 2016, 3, 274–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Erwin, H.; Beighle, A.; Routen, A.; Montemayor, B. Perceptions of Using Sit-to-Stand Desks in a Middle School Classroom. Health Promot. Pract. 2018, 19, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aminian, S.; Hinckson, E.A.; Stewart, T. Modifying the classroom environment to increase standing and reduce sitting. Build. Res. Inf. 2015, 43, 631–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erwin, H.E.; Beighle, A.; Morgan, C.F.; Noland, M. Effect of a low-cost, teacher-directed classroom intervention on elementary students’ physical activity. J. Sch. Health 2011, 81, 455–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daly-Smith, A.J.; Zwolinsky, S.; McKenna, J.; Tomporowski, P.D.; Defeyter, M.A.; Manley, A. Systematic review of acute physically active learning and classroom movement breaks on children’s physical activity, cognition, academic performance and classroom behaviour: Understanding critical design features. BMJ Open Sport Exerc. Med. 2018, 4, e000341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turner, L.; Chaloupka, F.J. Reach and Implementation of Physical Activity Breaks and Active Lessons in Elementary School Classrooms. Health Educ. Behav. 2017, 44, 370–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- O’Sullivan, K.; O’Sullivan, P.; O’Sullivan, L.; Dankaerts, W. What do physiotherapists consider to be the best sitting spinal posture? Man. Ther. 2012, 17, 432–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cardon, G.; De Clercq, D.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.; Breithecker, D. Sitting habits in elementary schoolchildren: A traditional versus a “Moving school” . Patient Educ. Couns. 2004, 54, 133–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonçalves, M.A.; Arezes, P.M. Postural assessment of school children: An input for the design of furniture. Work 2012, 41 (Suppl. 1), 876–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Troussier, B. Comparative study of two different kinds of school furniture among children. Ergonomics 1999, 42, 516–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grimes, P.; Legg, S. Musculoskeletal Disorders (MSD) in School Students as a Risk Factor for Adult MSD: A Review of the Multiple Factors Affecting Posture, Comfort and Health in Classroom Environments. J. Hum. Environ. Syst. 2004, 7, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Primary School Teachers (N = 122) | Secondary School Teachers (N = 31) | University Professors (N = 17) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | N | % | |
Females | 111 | 90.98% | 23 | 74.19% | 8 | 52.94% |
Males | 11 | 9.08% | 8 | 25.81% | 9 | 47.06 |
Participants older than 45 years | 77 | 63.11% | 29 | 93.55% | 4 | 23.53 |
Weighted Kappa | 95% Confidence Interval | Spearman’s Rho | p Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Question 1 | 0.36 | 0.11 to 0.60 | 0.78 | 0.02 |
Question 2 | 0.36 | 0.11 to 0.60 | 0.93 | <0.01 |
Question 3 | 0.77 | 0.55 to 0.98 | 0.89 | 0.02 |
Question 4 | 0.76 | 0.41 to 1.00 | 0.41 | 0.30 |
Question 5 | 0.55 | 0.23 to 0.88 | 0.67 | 0.07 |
Question 6 | 0.55 | 0.23 to 0.88 | 0.68 | 0.06 |
Question 7 | 0.92 | 0.77 to 1.00 | 0.84 | 0.01 |
Question 8 | 0.74 | 0.39 to 1.00 | 0.88 | 0.01 |
Question 9 | 0.77 | 0.23 to 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.01 |
Question 10 | 0.74 | 0.44 to 1.00 | 0.91 | 0.01 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Podrekar, N.; Kastelic, K.; Šarabon, N. Teachers’ Perspective on Strategies to Reduce Sedentary Behavior in Educational Institutions. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8407. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228407
Podrekar N, Kastelic K, Šarabon N. Teachers’ Perspective on Strategies to Reduce Sedentary Behavior in Educational Institutions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(22):8407. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228407
Chicago/Turabian StylePodrekar, Nastja, Kaja Kastelic, and Nejc Šarabon. 2020. "Teachers’ Perspective on Strategies to Reduce Sedentary Behavior in Educational Institutions" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 22: 8407. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228407
APA StylePodrekar, N., Kastelic, K., & Šarabon, N. (2020). Teachers’ Perspective on Strategies to Reduce Sedentary Behavior in Educational Institutions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(22), 8407. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228407