School-based factors associated with physical education amount and physical activity levels of students in Ontario elementary schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKROUND: As very few Canadian children are meeting the recommended physical activity (PA) levels suggested for maximal health benefits, gaining an understanding of the role of the school-environment in PA promotion is critical. While physical education (PE) classes have the potential for increasing PA levels of students both inside and outside school, little is known about why some schools are providing more PE than others. PURPOSE: The purpose of this exploratory study was to 1) determine what school-level factors were associated with the number of PE classes provided to elementary school students and 2) determine how these school factors, including PE amount, were associated with the PA levels of students. METHODS: Multi-level regression techniques were used to explore which school-level and student-level variables were associated with the PE amount provided to students and their PA levels. Administrator (n=30) and student (n=2,447) responses from two separate surveys from the PLAY-ON study were used to answer the study questions. RESULTS: After adjusting for important demographic characteristics, the number of PE classes reported per week was higher in schools that had two PA facilities in addition to a gymnasium (β=1.13, p =0.048) and in schools with greater levels of parental involvement in school-based PA decisions and programs (β=2.06, p =0.001). In contrast, students in schools that provided intramural programs reported fewer PE classes than those in schools without (β=-1.97, p <0.001). Finally, the number of PE classes provided to students in the previous week was associated with greater odds of students being highly active compared to minimally active (OR=1.14, p=0.003). CONCLUSION: The results of this study highlight the inconsistent amount of PE that students in Ontario elementary schools are receiving. The findings also reinforce previous research showing that greater amounts of PE are associated with increased PA levels of students. Schools that have fewer PA facilities and have more difficult communication lines with parents may be at risk of providing students with lower amounts of PE.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".