Implemented to last? Schools’ strategies for promoting the sustainability of the ‘60 minutes a day of physical activity’ initiative in Quebec primary schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many studies have investigated the adoption and implementation of school-based physical activity interventions, but only a few have reported on their sustainability. Understanding the factors contributing to school-based physical activity interventions being maintained or abandoned is necessary to ensure that resource investments are effective. OBJECTIVE: initiative in ensuring that the tailored interventions they had developed over the three-year degressive funding were maintained. METHODS: Target population was the 415 schools that reached the end of the three-year funding period in 2020. An online survey consisting of 27 multiple choice questions, each followed by open-ended questions in which respondents explained or justified their choice, was sent to all participating schools. RESULTS: A total of 397 of the 415 schools responded to the survey. The analysis showed that the school teams have integrated actions to foster sustainability during initial project planning and adoption. Eight main strategies were deployed to sustain the interventions: maintenance of the most popular physical activities, inclusion of the 60-min daily physical activity (DPA) initiative in the school Educational Project, student involvement in implementing DPA, maintaining a person in charge of DPA implementation, maintaining the committee in charge of DPA implementation, training new staff, researching new sources of funding, maintaining developed collaborations. CONCLUSION: The initiative's bottom-up approach has favored school teams developing various sustainability strategies, whether at the institutional, organizational or community level. Given the acceleration of contemporary changes, it is inevitable that DPA interventions will need to be adapted and transformed. Therefore, what should be sustained is the schools' capacity building and innovativeness that has been generated by the new program implementation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".