| Literature DB >> 27182371 |
Tinker D Murray1, James Eldridge2, Pete Silvius3, Erik Silvius3, William G Squires4.
Abstract
Texas Senate Bill 530 (2007) mandated fitness assessment as part of the annual K-8 Physical Education (PE) curricula, yet no studies have reported interventions designed to improve and quantify individual student passing rates or individual school performance. Students (Total 2008-2010 N=1484; 729 females, 755 males; mean age = 11.85 y; mean BMI = 22.69 or > 90%-tile, overweight) were evaluated on individual FITNESSGRAM® performances in a cross-sectional analysis of 6th graders comparing baseline scores (year 1) with outcomes of a physical activity intervention in years 2 and 3. Students participated in regular PE classes (including campus wellness center activities) with a once a week focus (FITNESSGRAM® Friday) on improving mile run scores and other assessment scores. Students significantly improved FITNESSGRAM® scores following the PE intervention to levels similar to state reported averages. On average, boys improved their pushups by 32.7%, trunk lift by 17.4% and mile run times by 29.5%. Averages for girls improved by 15.4% for pushups, 6.7% for truck lift, and by 38.6% for the mile run. The percentage of boys in our study achieving all six FITNESSGRAM® tests in the HFZ was 3% at baseline and 22% following intervention. The percentage of girls meeting the criteria for the HFZ on all six FITNESSGRAM® tests was 4.5% at baseline and 20% following intervention. This study provides a potential model for fitness success in other middle school PE interventions, in Texas and the nation.Entities:
Keywords: Adolescents; fitness testing; physical education; public health policy
Year: 2012 PMID: 27182371 PMCID: PMC4738980
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Exerc Sci ISSN: 1939-795X
Comparison of Intervention to Baseline Data
| Age (years) | 11.75 | 0.70 | 11.79 | 0.60 | 11.89 | 0.70 | 11.93 | 0.62 |
| Height (m) | 1.53 | 0.08 | 1.54 | 0.07 | 1.55 | 0.09 | 1.55 | 0.09 |
| Weight (kg) | 52.69 | 16.43 | 54.21 | 16.26 | 54.66 | 17.13 | 55.22 | 17.15 |
| BMI (units) | 22.23 | 5.65 | 22.96 | 5.74 | 22.48 | 5.84 | 22.80 | 5.69 |
| Push Ups | 7.28 | 5.74 | 9.44 | 7.07 | 9.05 | 7.03 | 14.55 | 9.77 |
| BS Left | 11.07 | 1.55 | 10.24 | 1.82 | 9.51 | 2.31 | 9.08 | 1.95 |
| BS Right | 11.10 | 1.57 | 10.29 | 1.73 | 9.57 | 2.24 | 9.08 | 1.95 |
| Curl Up | 33.30 | 20.77 | 35.37 | 21.40 | 39.84 | 22.54 | 45.53 | 22.95 |
| Trunk Lift | 10.89 | 1.48 | 11.45 | 1.04 | 10.30 | 2.00 | 11.35 | 1.17 |
| Mile Time (min) | 17.66 | 3.86 | 12.52 | 2.41 | 15.50 | 4.23 | 11.50 | 2.82 |
Significant differences at p<0.05
Comparison of intervention group data.
| Age (years) | 11.80 | 0.58 | 11.78 | 0.62 | 11.99 | 0.64 | 11.88 | 0.60 |
| Height (m) | 1.53 | 0.06 | 1.54 | 0.07 | 60.91 | 3.55 | 61.09 | 3.23 |
| Weight (kg) | 55.51 | 16.47 | 54.62 | 15.90 | 55.26 | 16.72 | 55.84 | 18.02 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.12 | 5.58 | 22.83 | 5.89 | 22.74 | 5.44 | 22.84 | 5.88 |
| Push Ups | 10.18 | 8.12 | 8.80 | 5.97 | 14.35 | 10.77 | 14.72 | 8.90 |
| BS Left | 10.60 | 1.78 | 9.94 | 1.79 | 9.29 | 1.99 | 8.92 | 1.91 |
| BS Right | 10.57 | 1.71 | 10.05 | 1.71 | 9.49 | 1.96 | 8.89 | 1.94 |
| Curl Up | 40.36 | 22.88 | 31.13 | 19.10 | 46.71 | 22.92 | 44.58 | 22.97 |
| Trunk Lift | 11.47 | 0.94 | 11.44 | 1.12 | 11.40 | 1.08 | 11.32 | 1.24 |
| Mile Time (min) | 11.98 | 2.20 | 12.98 | 2.49 | 11.14 | 2.77 | 11.78 | 2.83 |
Significant differences at p<0.05
Figure 1Passing rates of baseline and intervention.
Figure 2Comparison of baseline and intervention percentages for exceeding the upper limit of the healthy zone target scores. (Improvement of the mastery of the FITNESSGRAM® components).
Logistic regression analyses.
| Variable | Beta | Standard Error | χ2 | Sig. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mile Time | −0.482 | 0.029 | 276.94 | 0.000 |
| Trunk Lift | 0.344 | 0.050 | 47.04 | 0.000 |
| BMI | 0.124 | 0.015 | 70.31 | 0.000 |
| Pushup | 0.046 | 0.012 | 13.85 | 0.000 |
| Curlup | −0.018 | 0.004 | 25.71 | 0.000 |
| Constant | 0.977 | 0.710 | 1.92 | 0.163 |