Next Article in Journal
Effects of Respiratory Muscle Warm-up on High-Intensity Exercise Performance
Previous Article in Journal
Outcomes following Hip and Quadriceps Strengthening Exercises for Patellofemoral Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sports
Volume 3
Issue 4
10.3390/sports3040302
sports-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

It’s Not Me, It’s You: The Disconnect of Physical Education Teachers to Physical Activity in the Gym

by
Dean Culpepper
1,* and
Lorraine Killion
2
1
Department of Health and Physical Education, Eastern New Mexico University, Portales, NM 88130, USA
2
Department of Health and Kinesiology, Texas A and M University-Kingsville, Kingsville, TX 78363, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sports 2015, 3(4), 302-311; https://doi.org/10.3390/sports3040302
Submission received: 28 August 2015 / Revised: 12 October 2015 / Accepted: 23 October 2015 / Published: 29 October 2015
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
American adults and an increasing number of children, are not meeting the recommended amounts of daily physical activity. Research has documented the effects of low activity on health and increasingly new research has shown that low activity levels now impact academic achievement. Physical education (PE) can play an important role if the children participating are obtaining enough physical activity while in class and the PE program has not been targeted with cutbacks. The purpose of this study was to identify the amount and intensity of activity in PE classes. The results indicate that on average students at all levels are not meeting the activity requirements. In addition, PE teachers’ perceptions of physical activity in their own class does not match actual activity levels. PE teachers must do a better job of increasing activity levels in their classrooms. Mounting research indicates students perform better academically if they are physically active. PE is the only subject where teachers can organize activities that meet both activity and intensity requirements.

1. Introduction

The report from the Surgeon General recommends that people of all ages perform 30 min of moderate physical activity on most days of the week [1]. This is due to the conclusive research for health benefits that are achieved from moderate levels of physical activity. Yet, many Americans do not receive the benefits of regular moderate physical activity. Healthy People 2010 reported that 85% do not engage in moderate activity on 5 or more days per week for 30 min. and 40% do not participate in any leisure-time physical activity [1]. Thus, in order to impact lifetime physical activity behavior, childhood has been identified as a critical period for nurturing lifetime activity behavior [1,2,3].
Recent studies have been able to identify when children are most active during the day so that interventions can be targeted to have the most effect. These studies have found that lunchtime physical activity (PA) represented the most important source of daily PA (15%–16%) obtained during school hours for both boys and girls, whereas recess accounted for 8%–9% and PE class accounted for 8%–11% of total steps per day [4]. While unstructured play is necessary and needed for growth and development, it is the structured time in physical education where continuous moderate to vigorous physical activity (which is needed for improvements to cardiorespiratory fitness) can be designed and monitored. It is also a time where health-related fitness concepts can be taught and applied [5]. Health-related fitness is the component measured by the PACER test administered by the FITNESSGRAM® (Cooper Institute, Dallas, TX, USA). Although the administration of this test has been in existence for over 30 years, results have shown a decline in students who scored in the Healthy Fitness Zone. This is an area of concern when children are becoming less active and healthy.
The results revealed age-related declines in the percentage of youth who achieved the HFZ standard for cardiovascular fitness (elementary school: 70%; middle school: 46%; high school: 34%). The increase in obesity levels has yielded a response in a number of research studies conducted evaluating the impact of physical activity (PA) on academic achievement. Significant improvement in academic achievement was found when physical activity was increased [6]. Additional studies have reported that increased fitness levels are positively associated with academic achievement [7,8]. The findings in this research are crucial because results indicate a consistent positive relationship between overall fitness and academic achievement. That is, as overall fitness scores improved, mean achievement scores also improved [6]. This is one of the most important findings to impact physical education in recent years because it is the only subject matter in schools where movement is the central theme. Physical education teachers can increase academic test performance by simply increasing movement time in their classes.
It is because of these findings that administrators, teachers, parents, and the government are calling for the increase in the physical education requirement for students [1]. The role of physical education and what schools can do to help increase physical activity among children are paramount. One of the national health objectives [1] is to increase physical activity in children. Researchers have recommended daily physical education to increase the knowledge and application of health-related physical fitness concepts [9,10,11]. Furthermore, it has been recommended that school-age youth should participate daily in 60 min or more of moderate to vigorous physical activity that is developmentally appropriate, enjoyable, and involves a variety of activities during their physical education class [12]. Some researchers recommend certain models or programs (e.g., CATCH, SPARK) to help PE teachers increase activity time in their classes. This has been a good recommendation; however, measuring the amount of activity time can be difficult for the average PE teacher.
Monitoring student activity levels can be accomplished via individual pedometers. Using such a measurement tool has been recommended [13]. According to Scruggs, et al., 2005, “for a practical physical activity measurement tool, pedometry has been found to be valid and objective” (p. 174) [14]. By taking student steps per minute of physical education class, researchers can identify whether classes are meeting the physical activity needs of the students or whether changes must be implemented. Additionally, pedometers are a valid measure of moderate to vigorous physical activity and provide information on intensity [15]. This is of major importance since recent published research notes that physically active and fit children tend to have better academic achievement [16]. Additional research has found students with low levels of fitness also exhibit low academic scores on achievement tests [17,18]. In particular, it has been reported that children with low levels of fitness exhibit low scores for reading and/or math [19,20].
There is a strong correlation between a student's fitness level and his/her academic success [21]. A study conducted by the Cooper Institute in 2009 found that cardiovascular health, as measured by a walking/running test, had a higher correlation to school success than did Body Mass Index (BMI). Researchers investigated children in the third and fifth grades and the different contributions of the FITNESSGRAM® subcomponents. The study examined the individual contributions of aerobic capacity, muscle strength, muscle flexibility, and body composition to performance in reading and mathematics on the Illinois Standardized Achievement Test among a sample of 259 children [16]. The findings of this study were similar to those reported by the California Department of Education indicating a relationship between fitness and achievement performance [22]. When the individual components of the FITNESSGRAM® were broken down, the researchers concluded that only aerobic capacity was related to test performance.
Physical education teachers, regardless of how many days per week they see each student, should design and structure their classes to meet minimum activity requirements no matter what curriculum model the teacher selects. So the question that needs to be addressed now is: do our students currently meet the activity requirements in physical education classes today? There seems to be a misguided assumption that simply walking into a PE class achieves the activity recommendations that experts are calling for [14,23]. If they do, then daily physical education can play a vital role in helping our students to be healthy and improve their academic test performance. If they don’t, then more work is needed in training teachers to monitor the activity levels of their students. PE teachers who believe, no matter what curriculum is being taught, that the students they teach are active may not make the necessary changes needed to improve the student scores on tests such as the FITNESSGRAM®. Simply increasing lunchtime PA is not enough to improve scores on these types of tests.

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to identify the activity time spent in physical education classes and compare the findings to the teachers’ perception of the physical activity levels in their classes. In addition, steps per minute were assessed to identify if the activity intensity during the class was at the recommended level.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

Participants were students enrolled in urban, suburban, and rural school districts in California, Minnesota, and Texas. The total number of schools involved was: 19 elementary, eight middle, and nine high schools. A total of 1111 students (445 elementary, 302 middle school, 364 high school students) were selected to participate in the study.
All classes were taught by physical education specialists with a minimum of five years of teaching experience (range = 5–20 years, mean = 12.3 years). The mean age was thirty-one years (range = 27–48 years). There were twelve elementary teachers (females = 9), eight middle school teachers (females = 3), and eleven high school (females = 8). Content in classes ranged from the: (a) Fitness Model consisting of aerobic/fitness games; (b) Skill Theme Model consisted of activities that developed and promoted fundamental skills and concepts (e.g., throwing to partners, hitting off tees, and progression to modified games); and (c) Game/Sport Model, consisting of team activities (e.g., soccer, basketball, flag-football). The Skill Theme approach is a method where teachers design experiences that encourage students to actively and successfully participate in class. Skill themes are the physical movement skills necessary to successfully participate and enjoy various activities and sports students participate during the school year. These experiences take place within themes such as locomotor skills (e.g., running, jumping, and skipping) dance (e.g., tapping, stomping, and shaking), gymnastics (e.g., rolling, spinning, and tumbling) and sports (e.g., basketball, volleyball, and soccer). Teachers whose classes exhibited this approach were categorized accordingly.

2.2. Data Collection

Teachers were contacted before the school year to volunteer their classes for the study. At this time each teacher was asked whether in general students obtain enough physical activity in physical education classes in their state. They were then asked if the children in their own classes obtained enough physical activity.
At the beginning of each class, investigators provided instruction on the correct placement for the pedometer. Correct placement for the pedometer is: (a) held firmly to the body; (b) clipped onto the belt or waistband; (c) in line with the knee; (d) worn so that it remains upright and not tilted forward or backward, and (e) worn so that it is level and not tilted to either side [24]. Students were reminded not to open the pedometers until the end of the class period. Class time is the “on paper” time assigned to the class, while activity time is the time spent in lesson, not transitioning between classes and changing.
The physical education teachers conducted their lessons as planned and the investigators moved around the perimeter of the gym and repositioned the pedometers as needed. The investigators documented the model and activity in which the students were engaged to be later analyzed for congruency. At the end of the class period, the investigators collected the pedometers and recorded the total number of steps accrued by each student.

2.3. Intervening Variables

Since gender might have an impact on the number of steps taken, it was used as a variable to explain potential differences [1]. Class time and grade level might also cause an effect since most elementary schools have 30-min classes and secondary schools have either a 50- or 90-min class period. The class time and grade level data were recorded and included in the analyses.

3. Results

Frequency data is presented in Table 1 regarding teacher perceptions of children physical activity. Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 2 for grade level, gender, curriculum model, total steps for the students controlled by class time, and the corresponding partial eta score. Steps per minute (SPM) were determined by dividing the total number of steps by class time [14]. Table 3 provides data for class time and SPM for grade level. Data on SPM for grade level by model are also presented. Significance exists (p < 0.001) across grades and models except for the Skill Theme Model between middle and high school (p = 0.422).
Table
Table 1. Frequency statistics for teacher perceptions of physical activity time.
Table 1. Frequency statistics for teacher perceptions of physical activity time.
Grade LevelDoes PE Provide Enough PADoes Your Class Provide Enough PA
YesNoYesNo
Elementary School15.8%84.2%89.5%10.5%
Middle School6.3%93.7%74.6%25.4%
High School11.2%88.8%72.1%27.9%
Table
Table 2. Descriptive statistics for data controlled by class time.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics for data controlled by class time.
GroupsNSteps M/SDhp2
Elementary School4451535.74/626.87 *0.061
Middle School3021995.35/857.01 *-
High School3642454.04/715.55 *-
Class time*Grade--0.315
Males5762302.88/837.89 *0.135
Females5351820.750.01 *-
Class time*Gender--0.446
Game/Sport132416.27/969.84 *-
Fitness141967.03/682.51 *-
Skill Themes091480.42/438.66 *-
Class time*Model--0.336
Note: * p < 0.001.
A hierarchical multiple regression analysis (Table 4) was conducted to determine the influence of gender, the curriculum model, and grade level on total number of steps. Input for class time was entered using the “enter” function in block one first (as a covariate) followed by the remaining variables as a “stepwise” comparison in block two. The combination of variables was significantly related to total number of steps, (F(5, 1106) = 202.51, p < 0.001). Table 3 presents the regression data for the covariate of class time with curriculum, grade level, and gender. The regression model with only Class Time accounts for approximately 41% of the variance explained while the total model accounts for an estimated 50%.
Table
Table 3. Class time, and SPM for grade level and model.
Table 3. Class time, and SPM for grade level and model.
Grade LevelClass Time MinSteps/Min
M/SDM/SD
Elementary School27.67/2.54 *51.19/20.89 *
Fitness-53.93/20.16 *
Game/Sport-57.64/15.02 *
Skill Themes-34.83/5.82 *
Middle School71.46/24.42 *27.84/10.92 *
Fitness-23.08/2.36 *
Game/Sport-32.36/8.30 *
Skill Themes-39.95/7.60a *
High School81.18/18.15 *31.24/8.99 *
Fitness-26.87/2.36 *
Game/Sport-32.36/8.30 *
Skill Themes-39.95/7.60a *
Notes: a No significant difference between middle and high school for the Skill Theme model; * p < 0.001
Table
Table 4. Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting steps.
Table 4. Summary of hierarchical regression analysis for variables predicting steps.
VariableBSE Bβ
Step 1 (Enter)---
Class Time−31.356.63−1.05
Activity Time85.7610.70 1.86
Step 2 (Stepwise)---
Gender−461.8740.80−0.28
Curr. Model−189.5128.520.17
Grade Level523.4925.430.52
Notes: Class and activity time were controlled for in the regression analysis. R = 0.663 for Step 1; R = 0.730 for Step 2.

4. Discussion

The data represent some good news and some bad news and indicate some rather worrisome trends in physical education. High school students in this sample were not active in their classes (steps/min = 31.24). Scruggs, Mungen, and Oh [23] recommended 81.97 steps/min (traditional schedule = 82–88 steps/min; block schedule = 84.04–90.05 steps/min) and the current sample was not on track to meet this requirement. This is a discouraging finding since the high school years are when a traditional decline in overall physical activity is seen [2,3]. High school physical education (PE) teachers must be aware that their classes did not meet the minimum steps per minute to be considered as moderate intensity for the class period [23]. High school PE classes must redesign their classes so that they increase the amount of activity.
The middle school students only achieved approximately 27 steps per minute (SPM), and the elementary students had 51 SPM which is below the recommendation that Scruggs, et al., [23] have published. The biggest concern raised is with the elementary students as the recommended SPM is approximately 60 SPM for elementary students and this sample had a mean of 51 SPM. This finding was surprising to the researchers as none of the elementary curriculum models achieved the level needed. The Fitness and Game/Sport Model were close, but were still short on activity levels.
A concerning trend that was found is that physical education teachers know that students are not obtaining enough physical activity in physical education; but only in other classes. A disconnect does seem to be occurring in teachers who believe they are doing an acceptable job in their classes when, in fact, the data does not support this conclusion.
The benefits of exercise on the body both psychologically [25] and physiologically [26,27,28] are well documented. Physical activity in PE classes has had a long history on what role it should play, from a strictly fitness standpoint to a motor development sport technique ideology. While this debate will most likely continue, mounting research on the benefits of physical activity on academic performance cannot be ignored. It is evident that PE teachers must use their classroom time to increase the activity levels of their students.
This study illustrated what many have thought, but have failed to publish: some classes are good at getting students moving, but most do not get their students’ activity levels high enough. The demands placed on PE teachers are great and the stresses are increasing as PE is routinely being reduced or cut from schools’ curricula. Teachers need an easy and efficient way to document the amount of activity students obtain. Unlike FITNESSGRAM®, where teachers measure HFZ once a year, pedometers and SPM offer the most valuable real-time data to increase physical activity. It is easy and teachers can use spot testing on two or three students to check SPM during a class, whereas, FITNESSGRAM® usually takes a week or more to conduct and can be difficult to administer to 60–100 students in a gym setting.
Increased physical activity can and should be accumulated throughout the school day. While it may seem that longer breaks (longer recess or lunch time) are the key, research consistently shows that the intensity of that PA is not enough. PE offers the structure needed to plan longer bouts of increased activity in various curriculum models [29].
A limitation for the study is the use of pedometers. Although, pedometers are a simple and inexpensive means for determining activity levels, these body-worn motion sensors have been used by teachers and researchers to assess and motivate physical activity behaviors. For healthy adults, 10,000 steps/day is a reasonable estimate of daily activity; however, recent evidence suggests that a goal of 10,000 steps/day is probably too low for children, particularly if the goal is to target the war against obesity. Recommendations have been made for Americans to accumulate a minimum of 150 min per week of moderate level intensity of physical activity. Studies support the use of pedometry steps per minute values as an accurate indicator of MVPA. Pedometry demonstrates a viable large-scale surveillance instrument for measuring MVPA in physical education [15]. The misconception that pedometers don’t measure intensity is not generalizable. However, as new technology becomes available, devices such as Fitbit, Jawbone UP2, Moov, and Garmin Vivofit demonstrate the demand for interpreting physical activity more efficiently for teachers. These physical activity trackers measure more than just steps taken (as seen in pedometers), they offer the ability to measure distance, heart rate, and much more than just steps taken. Perhaps PA trackers could better increase school and public awareness of the health impacts of physical activity and interventions.
Research demonstrates students who perceive a supportive environment exhibit greater levels of competence and have higher levels of self-determination. Students should be motivated positively in PE [30]. Although P.E. teachers believe they are motivating their students to be actively engaged in their physical education setting, actual steps per minute counts demonstrate they fall short of that goal. PE teachers must do a better job of increasing activity levels in their classrooms. PE teachers should make a concerted effort to not only motivate their students to be physically active in gym class, but use measures such as pedometers for assessing the activities they plan as well as the activity levels achieved.
PE teachers must do a better job of increasing activity levels in their gyms and classrooms. Current research is mounting that indicates students perform better academically if they are physically active. PE is the only subject where teachers can organize activities that meet the SPM requirement. While recess/play time is important, it cannot be adjusted to meet the demands of individual students. As physical educators, we now stand at a crucial crossroad with vital decisions to be angry. The role of the schools is to produce healthy productive citizens. As obesity levels rise and physical activity levels decline, we must do a better job at keeping children active in our gyms/classrooms. PE can encourage (force) those students who lack motivation to move to start moving!

5. Conclusion

Previous research has confirmed many adolescents between the ages of 12 and 21 years of age do not engage in vigorous activity regularly and that physical activity (PA) declines as children reach adolescence. This is a primary time for promoting an active lifestyle. Concerted efforts should be made by physical educators to promote PA and strive to provide activities that increase the number of steps taken during their PE classes. Pedometers are not only inexpensive and easy to use, but provide a method for PE teachers to assess activity levels while promoting healthy activity. Taking advantage of modern technology by the use of pedometers can assist teachers in the evaluation of the children’s activity levels in the lessons they provide.

Author Contributions

Lorraine Killion contributed to the review of literature, discussion, conclusion, and editing of this manuscript. Dean Culpepper contributed to the results, data anaylsis, and editing of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. United States Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2010: Understanding and Improving Health; Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 2000; pp. 1–1272. [Google Scholar]
  2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidelines for School and Community Programs to Promote Lifelong Physical Activity among Young People; 46(RR-6); U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: Atlanta, GA, USA, 1997; pp. 1–36. [Google Scholar]
  3. United States Department of Health and Human Services. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General; Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1996; pp. 1–265. [Google Scholar]
  4. Kang, M.; Bassett, D.; Barreira, T.; Tudor-Locke, C.; Ainsworth, B.; Reis, J.; Strath, S.; Swartz, A. How many days are enough? A study of 365 days of pedometer monitoring. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 2009, 80, 445–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Kelly, L.E.; Melograno, V.J. Developing the Physical Education Curriculum. An Achievement-Based Approach; Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  6. Sallis, J.F.; Owen, N. Physical Activity and Behavioral Medicine; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  7. Shephard, R.J. Curricular physical activity and academic performance. Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 1997, 9, 113–126. [Google Scholar]
  8. Sibley, B.A.; Etnier, J.L. The relationship between physical activity and cognition in children: A meta analysis. Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 2003, 15, 243–256. [Google Scholar]
  9. McKenzie, T.L.; Sallis, J.F.; Kolody, B.; Faucette, N. Long-term effects of a physical education curriculum and staff development program: SPARK. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 1997, 68, 280–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Simons-Morton, B.G.; Parcel, G.S.; Baranowski, T.; Forthofer, R.; O’Hara, N.M. Promoting physical activity and a healthful diet among children: Results of a school-based intervention study. Am. J. Public Health 1991, 81, 986–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Strong, W.B.; Malina, R.M.; Blimkie, C.R.; Daniels, S.R.; Dishman, R.K.; Gutin, B.; Hergenroeder, A.C.; Must, A.; Nixon, P.A.; Pivarnik, J.M.; et al. Evidence-based physical activity for school-age youth. J. Pediatr. 2005, 146, 732–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Eston, R.G.; Rowlands, A.V.; Ingledew, D.K. Validity of heart rate, pedometry, and accelerometry for predicting the energy cost of children’s activities. J. Appl. Physiol. 1998, 84, 362–371. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  13. Scruggs, P.W.; Beveridge, S.K.; Watson, D.L.; Clocksin, B.D. Quantifying physical activity in first- through fourth-grade physical education via pedometry. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 2005, 76, 166–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Scruggs, P.W.; Beveridge, S.K.; Eisenman, P.A.; Watson, D.L.; Shultz, B.B.; Ransdell, L.B. Quantifying physical activity via pedometry in elementary physical education. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2003, 35, 1065–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Castelli, D.M.; Hillman, C.H.; Buck, S.M.; Erwin, H.E. Physical fitness and academic achievement in third- and fifth-grade students. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 2007, 29, 239–252. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  16. Wittberg, R.A.; Northrup, K.I.; Cottrel, L. Children’s physical fitness and academic achievement. Am. J. Health Educ. 2009, 40, 30–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Coe, D.P.; Pivarnik, J.M.; Womack, C.J.; Reeves, M.J.; Malina, R.M. Effect of physical education and activity levels on academic achievement in children. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2006, 38, 1515–1519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. London, R.A.; Castrechini, S. A longitudinal examination of the link between youth physical fitness and academic achievement. J. Sch. Health 2011, 81, 400–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Van Dusen, D.P.; Kelder, S.H.; Kohl, H.W.; Ranjit, N.; Perry, C.L. Associations of physical fitness and academic performance among schoolchildren. J. Sch. Health 2011, 81, 733–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. The Cooper Institute. Associations between Health-Related Fitness and Academic Achievement: A Report from the Texas Youth Fitness Project; Dallas, Texas, USA, 2014; pp. 1–49. [Google Scholar]
  21. Grissom, J.B. Physical fitness and academic achievement. J. Exerc. Physiol. Online 2005, 8, 11–25. [Google Scholar]
  22. Scruggs, P.W.; Mungen, J.D.; Oh, Y. Physical Activity Measurement Device Agreement: Pedometer Steps/Minute and Physical Activity Time. Meas. Phys. Educ. Exerc. Sci. 2010, 14, 151–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. New Lifestyles. Using Your New Lifestyles Digi-Walker Pedometer [Brochure]. Available online: http://www.new-lifestyles.com/using_your_pedometer.pdf (accessed on 13 September 2014).
  24. Weir, K. The Exercise Effect; American Psychological Association: Washington, USA, 2011; pp. 49–52. [Google Scholar]
  25. Pate, R.R.; Ross, J.G. Factors associated with health-related fitness. J. Phys. Educ. Recreat. Dance 1987, 58, 93–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sallis, J.F.; Patterson, T.L.; Buono, M.J.; Nader, P.R. Relation of cardiovascularfitness and physical activity to cardiovascular disease risk factors in children and adults. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1988, 127, 933–941. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  27. McKenzie, T.L.; Nader, P.R.; Strikmiller, P.; Yang, M.; Stone, E.; Perry, C. School physical education: Effect of the child and adolescent trial for cardiovascular Health. Prev. Med. 1996, 25, 423–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Calfas, K.J.; Taylor, W.C. Effects of physical activity on psychological variables in adolescents. Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 1994, 6, 406–423. [Google Scholar]
  29. Pate, R.R.; Davis, M.G.; Robins, T.N.; Stone, E.J.; McKenzie, T.L.; Young, J.C. Promoting physical activity in children and youth: A leadership role for schools. Circ.: J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2006, 114, 1214–1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Standage, M.; Duda, J.; Ntoumanis, N. Students’ motivational processes and their relationship to teacher ratings in school physical education. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 2006, 77, 100–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Culpepper, D.; Killion, L. It’s Not Me, It’s You: The Disconnect of Physical Education Teachers to Physical Activity in the Gym. Sports 2015, 3, 302-311. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports3040302

AMA Style

Culpepper D, Killion L. It’s Not Me, It’s You: The Disconnect of Physical Education Teachers to Physical Activity in the Gym. Sports. 2015; 3(4):302-311. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports3040302

Chicago/Turabian Style

Culpepper, Dean, and Lorraine Killion. 2015. "It’s Not Me, It’s You: The Disconnect of Physical Education Teachers to Physical Activity in the Gym" Sports 3, no. 4: 302-311. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports3040302

APA Style

Culpepper, D., & Killion, L. (2015). It’s Not Me, It’s You: The Disconnect of Physical Education Teachers to Physical Activity in the Gym. Sports, 3(4), 302-311. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports3040302

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop