Perspectives of primary school teachers on the capacity of schools to support post‐pandemic health needs emerging among school‐age children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on capacity building for health promotion in primary schools from the perspectives of primary school teachers. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted via an anonymous online survey between February and May 2022. Three-quarters (n2460) of all schools in the Republic of Ireland were invited to participate. Demographics such as gender, teaching experience, school type and delivering equality of opportunity in schools (DEIS) designation were collected. Perceived capacity for health promotion was measured on a 10-point Likert scale. Facilitators and barriers related to health promotion and aspects of child health prioritised for health promotion in the 2 years after restrictions eased were explored via closed- and open-ended questions. RESULTS: Of the 595 responses, 493 were eligible for analysis. Participants were based in schools in every county in the Republic of Ireland, with most (85.4%, n421) being female. Almost a third (30.5%, n150) were 11-20 years post-qualification, and a quarter (25.2%, n124) had over 30 years' teaching experience. Mean capacity for school-based health promotion pre-pandemic was moderate, at 6.6 ± 2.2 on a 10-point scale. Mean capacity in spring 2022 decreased significantly (p < 0.001) to 4.1 ± 2.4, indicating poor capacity. Capacity ratings did not significantly differ by school type (p = 0.31), socioeconomic designation (p = 0.27) or years post-qualification (p = 0.08). Capacity decrements were most frequently (49.7%, n245) attributed to organisational factors, while individual and community-level factors were cited by 27.6% (n136) and 21.5% (n106) of respondents, respectively. Healthy eating significantly (p < 0.001) decreased as a priority for health promotion between pre-pandemic times (76.3%, n376) and spring 2022 (23.1%, n114). Mental health significantly (p < 0.01) increased as a priority, being listed by 38.1% (n188) as a priority pre-pandemic and doubling to 72.6% (n358) in spring 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Fostering a holistic approach to health promotion in schools remains a challenge. Further efforts are needed to support schools to implement sustainable and balanced systems of health promotion.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".