Table 4 Studies investigating the effect of physically active lessons on academic and physical activity outcomes
Paper/ country | Study design | Sample size | Age | Intervention | Duration | Delivery | PA measure | Academic outcome measure | Study quality | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
De Greeff et al., 2016 [32] Netherlands | RCT | Students: n = 499 Schools: n = 12 | Years 2 & 3 Mean age: 8.1 ± 0.7 years | Fit & Academically proficient at school = 30 min physically active (MVPA) math and language lessons Dose: 3 x per week | 22 weeks per year school, with 1-year and 2-year follow up | 1st year - intervention teachers 2nd year –teacher | None | Executive function: Inhibition: Golden Stroop test Working memory: Digit span backward & Visual span backward | Strong | Inhibition: no difference between intervention M = 19.6 (8.1) and control group M = 19.9 (9.5) Digit span backward:no difference between intervention M = 6.0 (2..2) and control group M = 6.2 (1.9) Visual span backward: no difference between intervention M = 6.6 (1.7) and control group M = 6.8 (1.6) |
Riley et al., 2014 [24] Australia | Cluster RCT - pilot study | Students: n = 54 Classes: n = 2 Schools: n = 1 | Age 10 to 12 years Years 5 & 6 | Encouraging Activity to Stimulate Young (EASY) Minds = PA integrated into existing math lessons, 60 mins per lesson Dose: 3 x per week | 6 weeks | Research staff | Active lesson and school day PA: Accelerometer (GT3X) | On-task behaviour: direct observation | Strong | On-task behaviour: Greater during intervention lessons, compared with control (19.9% mean difference) Physical activity: 9.7% increase in MVPA across math timeslot, and 8.7% increase across school day |
Riley et al., 2015 [23] Australia | Cluster RCT | Students: n = 240 Schools: n = 8 | Age 10 to 12 years Years 5 & 6 | EASY Minds = PA integrated into existing math program, 60 mins per lesson Dose: 3 x per week | 6 weeks | Teacher | Active lesson and school day PA: Accelerometer (Walk4Life, LS, 2500) | On task behavior: direct observation Mathematics: Progressive Achievement Test | Strong | On-task behaviour: 13.8% increase in intervention compared with control group Mathematics: no difference between groups Physical activity: 2.6% increase in MVPA during math timeslot, and 1.7% increase across school day |
Donnelly et al., 2009 [45] USA | Cluster RCT (pre-and post-test) | Students: n = 1527 Schools: n = 24 | Years 2 & 3 | Physical Activity Across the Curriculum (PAAC) = MVPA integrated into language, math, science and social studies lessons Dose: 90 min per week, delivered intermittently throughout school day. Approx. 10 mins per session. | 3 years | Teacher | School day, weekend day and weekday PA: ActiGraph accelerometer | Academic achievement: subsample (n = 454) WIAT-II-A standardised test (math, reading, spelling) | Strong | Academic achievement: improvement in reading, math and spelling scores from baseline to 3 years in intervention, compared with control schools Physical activity: greater school day PA (12%), weekend day PA (17%) and weekday PA (8%) in intervention compared, with control group |
Beck et al., 2016 [33] Denmark | Cluster RCT | Students: n = 165 Schools: n = 3 Classes: n = 9 | Year 1 | Group A = gross motor movements integrated into 60 min math lessons, (e.g. skipping, crawling, throwing while solving math problems) Group B = fine motor movements integrated into 60 min math lessons (e.g. manipulating LEGO bricks while solving math problems) Dose: 3 x per week | 6 weeks | Teacher | Physical activity intensity during lessons: Combined heart rate (Polar Team 2 System) and accelerometer (MinimaxX S4) - Subsample (n = 49) | Mathematics: standardized test (name not specified) | Moderate | Mathematics: changes in mean math performance were greater for the gross motor group, compared with fine motor group from baseline to intervention end (1.87 ± 0.71). However this affect was not evident from baseline to 8 week follow up. |
McCrady Spitzer et al., 2015 [47] USA | Quasi-experimental | Students: n = 14 Schools: n = 1 Classes: N = 1 | Age 6 to 7 years Year 1 | 30–40 min math and language lesson using Active Classroom Equipment Dose: daily | 9 months | Teacher | School day PA: Accelerometer | Academic achievement: Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS)-oral reading fluency, whole words read, correct letter sound | Moderate | Correct letter sound: children in intervention group showed greater improvement (Mdiff = 45 ± 34) compared with children in the control group (Mdiff = 15 ± 22) Whole words read: children in intervention group showed greater improvement (Mdiff = 20 ± 14) compared with children in the control group (Mdiff=7 ± 9) Oral reading fluency: no difference between intervention (Mdiff = 27 ± 27) and control groups (Mdiff = 19 ± 16) Physical activity: 46% increase on days used active classroom equipment, compared with days in traditional classroom |
Mullender-Wijnsma et al., 2015a [49] Netherlands | Within subject | Students: n = 86 Schools: n = 4 | Mean age: 8.2 years Years 2 & 3 | Fit & Academically proficient at school = 30 min physically active (MVPA) math and language lessons Dose: 3 x per week | 22 weeks | Intervention teachers | None | On-task behaviour: direct observation | Moderate | On-task behaviour: higher post intervention, compared with post control lessons (ES = 0.41) |
Graham et al., 2014 [46] USA | Non-randomised controlled trial | Students: n = 21 Schools: n = 1 Classes: n = 1 | Age 7–8 years Year 2 | Jump In! = PA integrated into math lesson Dose: one-off lesson | 1 day | Teacher and researcher | None | Mathematics: post session knowledge questionnaire | Weak | Mathematics: no difference between intervention (M = 4.08) and control groups (M = 4.25) |
Mullender-Wijnsma et al., 2015b [48] Netherlands | Quasi-experimental with control group | Students: n = 228 Schools: n = 6 | Mean age: 8.1 years Years 2 & 3 | Fit & Academically proficient at school = 30 min physically active (MVPA) math and language lessons Dose: 3 x per week | 21 weeks | Intervention teachers | None | Mathematics: speed test arithmetic Reading: 1-min test | Weak | Mathematics: - Year 3: intervention group had higher scores, compared with control group (F[1,99] = 11.72, p < 0.05). - Year 2: intervention group had lower scores compared with control group (F[1109] = 12.40, p < 0.05) Reading: - Year 3: intervention group had higher scores, compared with control group (F[1,98] = 6.97, p < 0.05). - Year 2 no difference between groups (F[1109] = 0.72, p = 0.40) |
Norris et al., 2015 [50] UK | Quasi-experimental | Students: n = 85 Schools: n = 2 Classes: n = 4 | Age 9 to 10 years Year 5 | London Olympic theme virtual field trip = 30 mins completing prompted activities (e.g. running 100 m sprint on the spot) Dose: one off lesson | May and June but intervention ran for 1-day in each class | Teacher | Active lesson PA: Accelerometer | Lesson content recall: 10 item content recall quiz | Weak | Content recall quiz: no difference between groups Physical activity: increase in intervention group |
Reed et al., 2010 [51] USA | Cluster RCT; pre-and post-test | Students: n = 155 Schools: n = 1 Classes: n = 6 | Age 9 to 11 years Year 3 | 30 mins PA integrated into language and math and social studies lessons. Dose: 3 x per week | 3 months | Teacher | DIGI- WALKER pedometer SW 200- used in intervention group to record steps during lesson only | Fluid intelligence: Standard Progressive Matrices Academic achievement: Palmetto Achievement Challenge Tests (English, math, science and social studies | Weak | Fluid intelligence: higher scores in intervention, compared with control group (M = 36.66, p = 0.45) Social studies: higher scores in intervention, compared with control group (t = p = 0.004) Mathematics: no difference between groups (t = 1.107, p = 0.09) English: no difference between groups (t = 0.71, p = 0.0478) Science: no difference between groups (t = 1.490, p = 0.140) |
Grieco et al., 2016 [65] USA | Mixed factorial design | Students: n = 320 School districts: n=1 Classes: n = 20 | Age 7 to 12 years | Spelling Relay = 10–15 min PA integrated into spelling lessons delivered at different PA intensities (seated traditional lesson, seated game, LMPA game & MVPA game) | 1 x lesson per condition | Research staff | Physical activity intensity during lessons: accelerometer | On-task behavior: direct observation | Weak | On-task behaviour: significant increase in time on task from pre- to post- LMPA game (ES = 0.43) and MVPA game (ES = 1.22) |
Mullender-Wijnsma et al., 2016 [66] Netherlands | RCT | Students: n = 499 Schools: n = 12 | Years 2 & 3 Mean age: 8.1 ± 0.7 years | Fit & Academically proficient at school = 30 min physically active (MVPA) math and language lessons Dose: 3 x per week | 22 weeks per year school, with 1-year and 2-year follow up | 1st year - intervention teachers 2nd year –teacher | None | Reading: 1 min test Spelling: spelling scores retrieved from a child academic monitoring system Mathematics: speed test arithmetic and general math scores retrieved from a child academic monitoring system | Weak | Mathematics: intervention group showed greater improvement in math speed test (ES = 0.51) and general math scores (ES = 0.42), compared with control group Spelling: intervention group showed greater improvement in spelling scores (ES = 0.45), compared with control group. Reading: no difference between groups (t = 0.00; p = 1.00) |