[19]. La asociación entre la actividad física en las escuelas, incluida la educación física, y el rendimiento académico una revisión sistemática de la literatura.pdf

Description
Preventive Medicine 52 (2011) S10–S20 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Preventive Medicine j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / y p m e d Review The association between school-based physical activity, including physical education, and academic performance: A systematic review of the literature☆,☆☆ Catherine N. Rasberry a,⁎, Sarah M. Lee a, Leah Robin a, B.A. Laris b, Lisa A. Russell b, Karin K. Coyle b, Allison J. Nihiser a a b Centers for Di

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 11
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information
Category:

Documents

Publish on:

Views: 39 | Pages: 11

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Tags
Transcript
  Review The association between school-based physical activity, including physical education,and academic performance: A systematic review of the literature ☆ , ☆☆ Catherine N. R asberry a, ⁎ , Sarah M. Lee a , Leah Robin a , B.A. Laris b , Lisa A. Russell b ,Karin K. Coyle b , Allison J. Nihiser a a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, NE MS: K-33, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA b ETR Associates, 4 Carbonero Way, Scotts Valley, CA 95066, USA a b s t r a c ta r t i c l e i n f o Available online 1 February 2011 Keywords: Physical activityPhysical educationRecessAcademic achievement Objective.  The purpose of this review is to synthesize the scienti 󿬁 c literature that has examined theassociationbetweenschool-basedphysicalactivity(includingphysicaleducation)andacademicperformance(including indicators of cognitive skills and attitudes, academic behaviors, and academic achievement). Method.  Relevant research was identi 󿬁 ed through a search of nine electronic databases using bothphysical activity and academic-related search terms. Forty-three articles (reporting a total of 50 uniquestudies) met the inclusion criteria and were read, abstracted, and coded for this synthesis. Findings of the 50studies were then summarized. Results.  Across all the studies, there were a total of 251 associations between physical activity andacademic performance, representing measures of academic achievement, academic behavior, and cognitiveskills and attitudes. Slightly more than half (50.5%) of all associations examined were positive, 48% were notsigni 󿬁 cant, and 1.5% were negative. Examination of the  󿬁 ndings by each physical activity context providesinsights regarding speci 󿬁 c relationships. Conclusion.  Results suggest physical activity is either positively related to academic performance or thatthere is not a demonstrated relationship between physical activity and academic performance. Results haveimportant implications for both policy and schools.© 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S11Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S11Conceptual de 󿬁 nitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S11Inclusion criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S11Identi 󿬁 cation of studies that met the inclusion criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S12Classi 󿬁 cation of studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S12Study coding process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S12Data analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S13Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S13School-based physical education studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S13Intervention studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S13Nonintervention studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S14Strengths and limitations of methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S15Recess studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S15Intervention studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S15Nonintervention studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S15Strengths and limitations of methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S16 Preventive Medicine 52 (2011) S10 – S20 ☆  This is an abridged version of larger report srcinally published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in April 2010. The full document can be downloadedfrom the CDC Web site (http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/health_and_academics/pdf/pa-pe_paper.pdf ) or requested from the corresponding author. ☆☆  The  󿬁 ndings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the of  󿬁 cial position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ⁎  Corresponding author. Fax: +1 770 488 6156. E-mail address:  CRasberry@cdc.gov (C.N. Rasberry).0091-7435/$  –  see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.01.027 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Preventive Medicine  journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ypmed  Classroom physical activity studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S16Strengths and limitations of methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S17Extracurricular physical activity studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S17Interscholastic school sports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S17Other school-related extracurricular physical activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S17Intervention studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S17Nonintervention studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S18Strengths and limitations of methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S18Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S18Relationship between physical activity and academics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S18School-based physical education and academic performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S18Recess and academic performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S18Classroom physical activity and academic performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S18Extracurricular physical activities and academic performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S18Findings by subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S19Strengths and limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S19Implications for policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S19Implications for schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S19Implications for future research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S19Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S19Funding source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S19Con 󿬂 ict of interest statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S20References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S20 Introduction Whenyouthparticipateinatleast60 minofphysicalactivityeveryday, health bene 󿬁 ts accrue, such as healthy bones and muscles,improved muscular strength and endurance, reduced risk fordeveloping chronic disease risk factors, improved self-esteem, andreduced stress and anxiety (Physical Activity Guidelines AdvisoryCommittee, 2008). Most youth, however, are not engaging in therecommended level of physical activity. For example, in 2009, only18.4% of U.S. high school students reported being physically active atleast 60 min per day for the previous 7 days (Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, 2010b).Schoolsprovideauniquevenueforyouthtoparticipateinphysicalactivity, as they serve nearly 56 million youth (National Center forEducation Statistics, 2009). At the same time, schools face increasingchallengesinallocatingtimeforphysicaleducationandotherphysicalactivity opportunities during the school day. Many schools areattempting to increase instructional time for mathematics, English,and science in an effort to improve standards-based test scores(Wilkins et al., 2003). As a result, physical education classes, recess,and other physical activity breaks often are decreased or eliminatedduringtheschoolday.Outsideofschool-dayopportunities,youthmayparticipate in physical activities (e.g., school or community sports),which may be available through schools, communities, and/or after-school programs (Coatsworth and Conroy, 2007).There is a growing body of research focused on the associationbetween school-based physical activity, including physical education,and academic performance among school-aged youth (Castelli et al.,2007; Sibley and Etnier, 2003; Strong et al., 2005; Taras, 2005;Tomporowski et al., 2008; Trost, 2007; Trudeau and Shephard, 2008,2010). This developing literature suggests physical activity may havean impact on academic performance through a variety of direct andindirectphysiological,cognitive,emotional,andlearningmechanisms(Hillmanetal.,2005;Rosenbaumetal.,2001;SibleyandEtnier,2003).To extend the understanding of these connections, this reviewoffers a broad examination of the literature on a range of physicalactivity contexts, including physical education class, recess, class-room-based physical activity breaks outside of physical educationclass and recess, and extracurricular physical activity, therebyproviding a tool to inform program and policy efforts for educationand health professionals. The purpose of this review is to synthesizethe scienti 󿬁 c literature that has examined the association betweenfour school-based physical activity contexts and indicators of academic performance, including cognitive skills and attitudes,academic behaviors, and academic achievement. Methods Conceptual de  󿬁 nitions The research on this topic suggests that physical activity can berelated to many different aspects of academic performance (e.g.,attention,on-taskbehavior,grade-pointaverage(GPA)),andasaresult,theexistingliteratureexaminesawiderangeofvariables.Inthisreview,those variables have been organized into three categories: cognitiveskillsandattitudes,academicbehaviors,andacademicachievement.Thethree categories, as well as other important terms, are de 󿬁 ned in Fig. 1. Inclusion criteria The following criteria were used to identify published studies forinclusion inthis review.Studies had to be publishedbetween1985 andOctober 2008; 1 present srcinal data; be published in English; focus onschool-aged children between 5 and 18 years of age; include clearmeasuresofschool-basedphysicaleducationand/orphysicalactivityorextracurricular physical activities (including school sports); andmeasureacademicperformance(cognitiveskillsandattitudes,academ-icbehaviors,andacademicachievement)usingoneormoreeducationalor behavioral outcomes (e.g., graduation or dropout rates, performanceonstandardizedtests,academicgrades/GPA,yearsofschoolcompleted,time on task, concentration or attentiveness in educational settings,attendance, disciplinary problems, school connectedness 2 ).Studies were excluded for not meeting the above criteria or if theyfocused solely on sedentary lifestyle variables, overweight status, ormedia use rather than physical activity. Studies also were excluded if they focused exclusively on the relationship between academicperformance and  󿬁 tness test scores rather than physical activity 1 Articles published between October 2008 and the publication date that met theinclusion criteria and made a notable contribution to the  󿬁 eld may have been includedin the review based on expert recommendations. 2 School connectedness refers to students' belief   “ that adults and peers in the schoolcare about their learning as well as about them as individuals ”  (Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, 2009).S11 C.N. Rasberry et al. / Preventive Medicine 52 (2011) S10 – S20  itself. Review articles, meta-analyses, and unpublished studies wereexcluded from the coding and analysis portion of this review,although their reference lists were used to identify srcinal researchto be reviewed for inclusion. Identi  󿬁 cation of studies that met the inclusion criteria Studies were identi 󿬁 ed through a search of nine electronicdatabases (ERIC, Expanded Academic Index ASAP, Google Scholar,PsycNET, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Sociological Abstracts, SPORTDiscusand the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature)usingapre-establishedsetofsearchtermsthatincludedbothphysicalactivity and academic-related terms (see Table 1). Additional studieswere located from reference lists of the identi 󿬁 ed articles. Classi  󿬁 cation of studies Thesearchyielded406articles.Two trainedresearchers examinedeach article to determine its match with the inclusion criteria; it wasthen classi 󿬁 ed as  “ included for review ”  or  “ excluded from review. ” When the match was unclear, articles were temporarily classi 󿬁 ed as “ possible inclusion ”  before being reviewed by two additionalresearchers for  󿬁 nal classi 󿬁 cation. Additional details on classi 󿬁 cationare provided in the full report (Centers for Disease Control andPrevention, 2010a).Overall, 43 articles (describing 50 unique studies) met theinclusion criteria and were read, abstracted, and coded for thissynthesis (Fig. 2). Two articles in this review presented  󿬁 ndings frommore than one study that met inclusion criteria; one article describedthree studies (Pellegrini et al., 1995), and the other reported on six(Collingwood et al., 2000). Study coding process The coding method for this report is similar to that of severalprominent literature reviews in the public health  󿬁 eld (Kirby, 2007;Stoneetal.,1998;Welketal.,2000).Ateamofeighttrainedreviewersread and coded the 43 articles using a standard coding protocol. Thefollowing information was abstracted: purpose, research questions,study design, sampling, sample characteristics, setting, theory, Fig. 1.  Conceptual de 󿬁 nitions.S12  C.N. Rasberry et al. / Preventive Medicine 52 (2011) S10 – S20  intervention, methods, analytic strategy, results, limitations, studyfocus, and additional comments. For this review, study designs wereclassi 󿬁 ed as experimental, quasi-experimental, descriptive, or casestudies; data collection methods and time points were noted asdescribed. Studies that lacked details regarding any  󿬁 eld of interestwere coded as  “ information not provided. ” To ensure consistency in coding, approximately 17% of all articlesweredouble-codedby a revieweranda senior coder.A teamof articlereviewers met regularly during the coding process to discuss andresolve issues associated with coding. Senior team members resolvedand veri 󿬁 ed issues as they arose.A brief summary pro 󿬁 le of each study was then created, andsummaries were e-mailed to the studies' corresponding authors forreviewandveri 󿬁 cation.Seventy-twopercentoftheauthors(31of43)reviewed their summaries. Author edits were incorporated whereapplicable. Data analysis Coded data from the articles were used to categorize and organizestudies 󿬁 rstbytheirphysicalactivitycontext(i.e.,school-basedphysicaleducation, recess, classroom-based physical activity breaks outside of physical education class and recess, and extracurricular physicalactivity) and then by outcome, cohort, sampling groups, and datepublished. The individual studies were identi 󿬁 ed (in the instanceswhere articles described more than one study), and treated equally,regardless of study characteristics or design. Results describe the typesof associations or relationships reported in the studies. Positive ornegative associations described in the results, refer to  󿬁 ndings studyauthors reported reached statistical signi 󿬁 cance (  p b 0.05). Within eachstudy, every association tested that was related to one of the fourphysical activity contexts and an academic performance outcome of interest was counted and included in the analysis. Studies included inthis review tested between 1 and 32 different associations. Results This review examines the  󿬁 ndings of 43 articles (re 󿬂 ective of 50studies total) that explored the relationship between four school-based physical activity contexts and academic performance.The results are presented by physical activity context. Within eachcontext, results are described by studyfocus (intervention ornoninter-vention)and by thetype of results. Results with  p  values less than 0.05were considered statistically signi 󿬁 cant in this report. Qualitative anddescriptive studies that did not include signi 󿬁 cance testing aredescribed in the text of this report, but not in outcome counts.Descriptions of study characteristics are provided in Table 2, andoutcome counts are provided in Table 3. Associations are displayed bytype of academic performance outcome measured: cognitive skills andattitudes, academic behavior, or academic achievement.Across all the studies, there were a total of 251 associationsbetween physical activity and academic performance, representingmeasuresofacademicachievement,academicbehavior,andcognitiveskills and attitudes. Slightly more than half (50.5%) of all associationsexamined were positive, 48% were not signi 󿬁 cant, and 1.5% werenegative. School-based physical education studies Fourteen studies (reported in 14 articles) examined the relation-ship between school-based physical education and academic perfor-mance.Most( n =10)describedinterventionstudiesandassessedtheimpact of an intervention on a range of outcomes. The remaining fourwere descriptive and examined relationships between physicaleducation and academic measures. Intervention studies In general, the 10 intervention studies examined how differencesin physical education affected academic performance. Six studies(Bluechardt et al., 1995; Dwyer et al., 1996; Ericsson, 2008;McNaughten and Gabbard, 1993; Pollatschek and O'Hagan, 1989;Raviv and Low, 1990) examined increasing the amount of physicaleducation or level of physical activity intensity in physical educationclass and comparing students' academic performance by interventioncondition. Two studies examined strategies for improving the qualityof physical education (Milosis and Papaioannou, 2007; Sallis et al.,1999).Theremainingtwostudiesexaminedtherelationshipbetweenincreasing the emphasis on different types of activities (i.e., aerobicexercise, coordinative exercise) and aspects of academic performance(Budde et al., 2008; Tuckman and Hinkle, 1986). Collectively, thestudies were conducted across a broad range of grade levels,representing elementary, middle, and high schools. Seven studiesemployed an experimental design, and three reported data from  Table 1 Article search terms and databases searched.Physical activity searchtermsAcademic-related searchtermsDatabases searchedPhysical activity Academic achievement PubMedExercise Academic problems SportDiscusPhysical education Educational status (MESH) The Cumulative Indexto Nursing and AlliedHealth Literature(CINAHL)Fitness Education measurement(MESH)Expanded AcademicIndex ASAPSport Graduation rates PsycNETSport participation [searched inCumulative Index toNursing and AlliedHealth Literature(CINAHL) andSportDiscus only]  Academic grades SociologicalAbstractsEnergy expenditure (searched in CINAHLand SportDiscus only) Grade point average (GPA) ERICStandardized test scores ScienceDirectGrade retention Google ScholarYears of school completedTime on taskAttentivenessConcentration  (searched inCINAHLand SportDiscus only) AttendanceTardinessDisciplineMemoryReading achievementReading performanceMathematics achievementMathematics performanceScience achievementScience performanceEducational indicatorsAchievement scoresEducational testingEducational assessmentDropoutSchool refusalStudent motivationStudent engagementStudent learningInformation retrieval (searched inCINAHL and SportDiscusonly) Cognitive performanceStudent assessmentBrain DevelopmentSchool connectednessS13 C.N. Rasberry et al. / Preventive Medicine 52 (2011) S10 – S20
Related Search
Similar documents
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks