An Analysis of Physical Activity Levels of Children Following the Balanced School Day Schedule
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Physical activity is a key determinant of children’s health. However, increasingly children are not attaining adequate amounts of physical activity. Children spend a considerable amount of time at school and school-based physical activity can significantly contribute to total daily physical activity achieved by children. Specifically, recess time can significantly contribute to a child’s daily opportunity to attain the recommended 60 minutes of physical activity per day. In this thesis, I assessed the impact of block scheduling on physical activity levels during recess for children in grades 3 and 6. More specifically, I examined the impact of time of day (am vs. pm) and season (fall vs. winter) on levels of recess-based physical activity among children using the “Balanced School Day” schedule. Methods: Data were collected at a school using the Balanced School Day schedule over five consecutive days during fall and winter in a school from a community in northern Ontario. Children wore the Yamax SW-200 pedometer and a segmented data collection approach to assess step counts during ‘class-time’ and ‘recess-time’ was used. Results: Seventy-eight students participated in this study. Average daily steps were higher in the fall compared to the winter. There were no meaningful differences in the number of steps taken when considering time of day. Boys accumulated significantly more steps than girls for total recess steps regardless of season. Grade 3 students experienced the greatest decrease in steps seasonally. Conclusions: As a result of this study, we have reaffirmed that children are not maximizing opportunities for physical activity during the school day. In general, lower step counts are noted among girls and grade 6 students. We can also conclude that the recess schedule (i.e. morning vs. iv afternoon) does not affect physical activity during recess in children using the BSD; however, there is a seasonal influence. All children were less active in the winter recess when compared to the fall and this was particularly accentuated among the younger participants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".