Department of Kinesiology and Health Education, The University of Texas At Austin, 2109 San Jacinto Blvd Stop D3700, Austin, TX, 78712-1415, USA.
The University of Texas at Austin, Latino Research Institute, 210 W. 24th Street, Stop F9200, Austin, TX, 78712, USA.
Prev Sci. 2021 Oct;22(7):950-959. doi: 10.1007/s11121-021-01233-8. Epub 2021 Apr 2.
It is important to assess implementation of active learning interventions to maximize their impact. Implementation quality, or how well one engages program participants, has been less studied than other implementation components (e.g., dose, fidelity). This cross-sectional, exploratory study examined associations between teacher engagement behaviors, quality of teacher engagement (i.e., teacher feedback), and student physical activity outcomes during active classroom lessons. This study used data from the Texas Initiatives for Children's Activity and Nutrition (I-CAN!) randomized controlled trial. Fixed effects regressions investigated the impact of teacher engagement behaviors on student physical activity outcomes. Bivariate correlations examined associations between teacher feedback and student physical activity outcomes. A latent profile analysis explored whether there were subsets of teachers with similar feedback profiles. The final analytic sample included 82 teachers. Teacher-directed changes and teacher participation in physical activity were each associated with higher ratings for how many and how often children were active during lessons. Teacher participation in physical activity was also significantly related to higher ratings for student physical activity intensity (all p < .05). Physical Activity Reinforcement and Technical Instruction feedback were positively associated with activity intensity (r = - .20, p < .05 and r = .34, p < .01, respectively). Technical Instruction feedback was positively associated with how many (r = .25, p < .01) and how often (r = .41, p < .01) students were active during lessons. Negative feedback was negatively associated with how often (r = - .25, p < .05) students were active and activity intensity (r = - .25, p < .05). Game Instruction was negatively related to how often students were active (r = -.23, p < .05). All teachers were represented by high levels of Game Instruction and Classroom Management feedback, moderate levels of Content Reinforcement and Content Instruction feedback, and low levels of Negative, Technical Instruction, and Physical Activity Reinforcement feedback. These data did not indicate the existence of multiple feedback profiles. Findings suggest that teacher engagement and feedback to students during active lessons can promote student physical activity. Teachers are primarily responsible for implementing school-based interventions, so it is critical to develop strategies that increase their ability to implement them successfully. Opportunities to maximize intervention delivery, such as co-designing with teachers, should be utilized when designing school-based, physical activity interventions.
评估积极学习干预措施的实施情况对于最大限度地发挥其影响力非常重要。实施质量(即一个人参与计划参与者的程度)的研究不如其他实施组成部分(例如剂量、保真度)多。这项横断面、探索性研究调查了教师参与行为、教师参与质量(即教师反馈)与积极课堂课程中学生身体活动结果之间的关系。本研究使用了来自德克萨斯州儿童活动和营养倡议(I-CAN!)随机对照试验的数据。固定效应回归调查了教师参与行为对学生身体活动结果的影响。双变量相关分析调查了教师反馈与学生身体活动结果之间的关系。潜在剖面分析探讨了是否存在具有相似反馈特征的教师子集。最终的分析样本包括 82 名教师。教师指导的变化和教师参与体育活动都与课程中学生更频繁、更活跃的评分呈正相关。教师参与体育活动也与学生身体活动强度的更高评分显著相关(所有 p <.05)。体育活动强化和技术指导反馈与活动强度呈正相关(r = -.20,p <.05 和 r =.34,p <.01)。技术指导反馈与学生更频繁地参与活动(r =.25,p <.01)和更频繁地参与活动(r =.41,p <.01)呈正相关。负面反馈与学生更频繁地参与活动(r = -.25,p <.05)和活动强度(r = -.25,p <.05)呈负相关。游戏指导与学生更频繁地参与活动呈负相关(r = -.23,p <.05)。所有教师的游戏指导和课堂管理反馈水平较高,内容强化和内容指导反馈水平中等,负面、技术指导和体育活动强化反馈水平较低。这些数据并没有表明存在多种反馈特征。研究结果表明,在积极的课堂教学中,教师对学生的参与和反馈可以促进学生的身体活动。教师主要负责实施基于学校的干预措施,因此,必须制定策略来提高他们成功实施这些措施的能力。在设计基于学校的身体活动干预措施时,应利用最大限度地提供干预措施的机会,例如与教师共同设计。