Fysioterapeuten nr. 5 - 2016

25 / 52

FYSIOTERAPEUTEN 5/16 25
delig rolleavklaring mellom skolens ledelse
og eksterne veiledere vil også være viktig for
en vellykket implementering.
Referanser
1. Andersen LB RC, Kriemler S, Hills A. Physical activity
and cardiocascular risk factors in children. British Jour-
nal of Sports Medicine. 2011;45: 871-876.
2. Cesa CC, Sbruzzi G, Ribeiro RA, Barbiero SM, de
Oliveira Petkowicz R, Eibel B, et al. Physical activity and
cardiovascular risk factors in children: meta-analysis
of randomized clinical trials. Preventive Medicine.
2014;69:54-62.
3. Biddle SJH, Asare M. Physical activity and mental
health in children and adolescents: a review of reviews.
British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2011;45: 886-895.
4. Blair SN. Physical inactivity: the biggest public health
problem of the 21st century. British Journal of Sports
Medicine. 2009;43(1):1-2.
5. Lubans DR, Morgan PJ, Cliff DP, Barnett LM, Okely
AD. Fundamental Movement Skills in Children and Ado-
lescents. Sports Medicine. 2010;40(12):1019-35.
6. Trudeau F, Laurencelle L, Shephard RJ. Tracking of
physical activity from childhood to adulthood. Med Sci
Sports Exerc. 2004;36(11):1937-43.
7. Chaddock L, Pontifex MB, Hillman CH, Kramer AF. A
Review of the Relation of Aerobic Fitness and Physical
Activity to Brain Structure and Function in Children. J
Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2011;17:975-85.
8. Fedewa A, Ahn S. The Effects of Physical Activity
and Physical Fitness on Children’s Achievement and
Cognitive Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. Research Quar-
terly for Exercise and Sport. 2011;82(3):521-35.
9. Howie EK, Pate RR. Physical activity and academic
achievement in children: A historical perspective. Jour-
nal of Sport and Health Science. 2012;1: 160-169.
10. Singh A, Uijtdewilligen L, Twisk J, van Mechelen
W, Chinapaw M. Physical Activity and Performance at
School A Systematic Review of the Literature Including
a Methodological Quality Assessment. Arch Pediatr
Adolesc Med. 2012;166:49-55.
11. Bartholomew JB, Jowers EM. Physically active
academic lessons in elementary children. Preventive
Medicine. 2011;52:S51-S4.
12. Kibbe DL, Hackett J, Hurley M, McFarland A,
Schubert KG, Schultz A, et al. Ten Years of TAKE 10! ®:
Integrating physical activity with academic concepts
in elementary school classrooms. Preventive Medicine.
2011;52:S43-S50.
13. Norris E, Shelton N, Dunsmuir S, Duke-Williams O,
Stamatakis E. Physically active lessons as physical
activity and educational interventions: A systematic
review of methods and results. Preventive Medicine.
2015;72:116-25.
14. Resaland GK, Andersen LB, Mamen A, Anderssen
SA. Effects of a 2-year school-based daily physical
activity intervention on cardiorespiratory fitness: the
Sogndal school-intervention study. Scand J Med Sci
Sports. 2011;21(2):302-9.
15. Kriemler S, Meyer U, Martin E, van Sluijs EMF,
Andersen LB, Martin BW. Effect of school-based
interventions on physical activity and fitness in
children and adolescents: a review of reviews and
systematic update. British Journal of Sports Medicine.
2011;45(11):923-30.
16. Waters E, de Silva-Sanigorski A, Hall BJ, Brown T,
Campbell KJ, Gao Y, et al. Interventions for preventing
obesity in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
2011;12.
17. Fullan M. The new meaning of educational change.
4th ed. ed. London: Routledge Teachers College Press;
2007.
18. Fixsen DL NS, Blase KA, Friedman RM, Wallace F.
Implementation research : a synthesis of the literature.
Tampa, FL: University of South Florida; Louis de la
Parte Florida Mental Health Institute. The national
Implementation Research Netwoek: University of
South Florida; 2005.
19. Hargreaves A. Lærerarbeid og skolekultur : lærer-
yrkets forandring i en postmoderne tid. Oslo: Ad notam
Gyldendal; 2004.
20. Saunders PR, Evans, M.H, Joshi, P. Developing a
Process-Evaluation Plan for Assessing Health Promo-
tion Program Implementation: A How-To Guide. Health
Promotion Practice. 2005;6(2):134-47.
21. Steckler A, Ethelbah B, Martin CJ, Stewart D, Pardilla
M, Gittelsohn J, et al. Pathways process evaluation
results: a school-based prevention trial to promote
healthful diet and physical activity in American Indian
third, fourth, and fifth grade students. Prev Med.
2003;37(6):S80-S90.
22. Dadaczynski K, de Vries N. Quality based preven-
tion of overweight in the school setting: the HEPS
quality checklist. J Public Health. 2013;21(3):297-305.
23. Naylor P-J, Nettlefold L, Race D, Hoy C, Ashe MC,
Wharf Higgins J, et al. Implementation of school based
physical activity interventions: A systematic review.
Preventive Medicine. 2015;72(0):95-115.
24. Viig NG, Wold B. Facilitating teachers’ participa-
tion in school-based health promotion - A qualitative
study. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research.
2005;49(1):83-109.
25. Han SS, Weiss B. Sustainability of teacher imple-
mentation of school-based mental health programs.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2005;33(6):665-
79.
26. Durlak J, DuPre E. Implementation Matters: A Re-
view of Research on the Influence of Implementation
on Program Outcomes and the Factors Affecting Imple-
mentation. American Journal of Community Psychology.
2008;41(3):327-50.
27. Welk GJ. The Youth Physical Activity Promotion Mo-
del: A Conceptual Bridge Between Theory and Practice.
Quest (00336297). 1999;51(1):5-24.
28. Bandura A. Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J: Prentice Hall; 1977.
29. Larsen T, Samdal O, Tjomsland H. Physical activity
in schools: A qualitative case study of eight Norwegian
schools’ experiences with the implementation of a
national policy. Health Education. 2013;113(1):52-63.
30. Postholm MB. Kvalitativ metode : en innføring med
fokus på fenomenologi, etnografi og kasusstudier. 2.
utg. ed. Oslo: Universitetsforl.; 2010.
31. Malterud K. Kvalitative metoder i medisinsk fors-
kning: en innføring. 2. utg. ed. Oslo: Universitetsforl.;
2003.
Title: The implementation of physically active academic lessons: A case study
Abstract
n Background: Schools are an ideal location to increase children’s physical activity level.
n Aims: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the implementation of physically
active academic lessons and to study the effects of the intervention on teachers and
children.
n Materials and methods: This case study was carried out in one primary school in
Stavanger, Norway. The school introduced three physically active sessions of 45 min
per week in maths, Norwegian and music. These lessons included active games, relays
and quizzes. Interviews of the principal, four teachers and six children were conducted.
Teachers also registered the number and duration of activities for 30 weeks.
n Results: The completion rate for the number of physically active sessions and time
used was 87% and 58%, respectively. Children and teachers expressed positive experi-
ences with the intervention. Barriers for implementation were time, passive leadership,
poor weather and inadequate facilitation of sharing teaching materials. Enablers were
school readiness, teachers’ motivation, perceived external support, children’s positive
response, and scheduled activity.
n Conclusion: Physically active academic lessons contributed to a more diverse, mea-
ningful and physically active school day. Shorter sessions may facilitate implementation
and it seems important that both the teachers and principal take an active part in the
implementation process.
n Keywords: Implementation, physical activity, children, primary school, learning.