Over 75% children in the United Kingdom fail to achieve recommended levels of physical activity. Successful implementation of ‘The Daily Mile™’, a school-based physical activity intervention, could promote activity. We examined factors instrumental to replication and/or wider implementation of ‘The Daily Mile’ through application of a two phase multi-method process evaluation. Phase one: 75 children (mean age seven years eight months) from one East Midland primary academy trialled the intervention. Data collected were self-report logs, perceived exertion scores and structured observation. Phase two: a sub-sample of 18 stakeholders participated in focus groups which were analysed using framework method. Teachers delivered ‘The Daily Mile’ on 93.6% of school days. An average of 95.2% of students participated, 94.2% completed recommended 15 minutes, 94.3% to a moderate-to-vigorous level. Three themes emerged in focus groups; embedding ‘The Daily Mile’ into practice, creating the right physical environment and building relationships/promoting a supportive climate. With systematic organisation and planning, ‘The Daily Mile’ could emerge as an integrated means of increasing physical activity. A supportive climate and factors that promote resilience are key facilitators. Further research is needed to establish outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
BrandREkkekakisP (2018) Affective–reflective theory of physical inactivity and exercise. German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research48: 48–58.
2.
CardinalBJYanZCardinalMK (2013) Negative experiences in physical education and sport: How much do they affect physical activity participation later in life?Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance84: 49–53.
3.
CraggsCCorderKvan SluijsEMF, et al. (2011) Determinants of change in physical activity in children and adolescents: a systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine40: 645–658.
4.
CraigPDieppePMacintyreS, et al. (2008) Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new medical research council guidance. British Medical Journal2008: 337.
5.
DarbyshirePMacDougallCScillerW (2005) Multiple methods in qualitative research with children: more insight or just more?Qualitative Research5: 417–436.
6.
De SilvaMJBreuerELeeL, et al. (2014) Theory of change: a theory-driven approach to enhance the medical research council’s framework for complex interventions. Trials15: 267.
7.
Department for Education (2017) School, Pupils and Their Characteristics: January 2017. London: Department for Education.
8.
DobbinsMHussonHDeCorbyK, et al. (2013) School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Online): CD007651.
9.
GaleNKHeathGCameronE, et al. (2013) Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology13: 117.
10.
HarrisJMilnesLMountainG (2018) The barriers and facilitators to implementing ‘the daily mile’ in a UK based primary school: a process evaluation protocol. Association of Paediatric Chartered Physiotherapists Journal9: 37–45.
11.
Health Survey for England (2016) Health Survey for England 2015; Physical Activity in Children. Leeds: National Statistics.
12.
Hesse-BiberS (2016) Doing interdisciplinary mixed methods health care research: working the boundaries, tensions, and synergistic potential of team-based research. Qualitative Health Research26: 649–658.
13.
HollisJLWilliamsAJSutherlandR, et al. (2016) A systematic review and meta-analysis of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity levels in elementary school physical education lessons. Preventive Medicine86: 34–54.
14.
IoannouA (2018) Schools, Pupils and Their Characteristics: January 2018. Sheffield: Department for Education.
15.
JagoRRawlinsEKippingRR, et al. (2015) Lessons learned from the AFLY5 RCT process evaluation: implications for the design of physical activity and nutrition interventions in schools. BMC Public Health15: 946.
16.
LaiSKCostiganSAMorganPJ, et al. (2014) Do school-based interventions focusing on physical activity, fitness, or fundamental movement skill competency produce a sustained impact in these outcomes in children and adolescents?A systematic review of follow-up studies. Sports Medicine44: 67–79.
17.
LangfordRBonellCPJonesHE, et al. (2014) The WHO health promoting school framework for improving the health and well-being of students and their academic achievement. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: CD008958. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008958.pub2.
18.
LeePStewartD (2013) Does a socio-ecological school model promote resilience in primary schools?Journal of School Health83: 795–804.
19.
LiamputtongP (2011) Focus group methodology and practical considerations. In: LiamputtongP (ed.), Focus Group Methodology; Principles and practice. London: SAGE, pp. 50–70.
20.
LoveRAdamsJvan SluijsEMF (2018) Are school-based physical activity interventions effective and equitable?A systematic review and meta-analysis of cluster randomised controlled trials. The Lancet392: S53.
21.
McKenzieTSallisFNaderP (1991) SOFIT: system for observing fitness instruction time. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education11: 195–205.
22.
McKenzieTL (2012) SOFIT (System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time); Generic Description and Procedures Manual. San Diego: Active Living Research.
23.
MooreGAudreySBarkerM, et al. (2014) Process Evaluation of Complex Interventions: Medical Research Council Guidance. London: MRC Population Health Science Research Network.
24.
Moran-EllisJAlexanderVCroninA, et al. (2006) Triangulation and integration: processes, claims and implications. Qualitative Research6: 45–59.
25.
MorrisonGMAllenMR (2007) Promoting student resilience in school contexts. Theory into Practice46: 162–169.
26.
NaylorPJNettlefoldLRaceD, et al. (2015) Implementation of school based physical activity interventions: a systematic review. Preventive Medicine72: 95–115.
27.
O’ReillyMParkerN (2013) ‘Unsatisfactory saturation’: a critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qualitative Research13: 190–197.
Public Health England (2015) What Works in Schools and Colleges to Increase Physical Activity? A Briefing for Head Teachers, College Principals, Staff Working in Education Settings, Directors of Public Health and Wider Partners. London: Prepared by Public Health England, the Youth Sport Trust and the Association of Colleges Sport and supported by the Department of Health; the Department for Transport; the Department for Culture, Media & Sport; and the Department for Education.
30.
RacheleJNMcPhailSMWashingtonTL, et al. (2012) Practical physical activity measurement in youth: a review of contemporary approaches. World Journal of Pediatrics8: 207–216.
31.
ReisRSSalvoDOgilvieD, et al. (2016) Scaling up physical activity interventions worldwide: stepping up to larger and smarter approaches to get people moving. The Lancet388(10051): 1337–1348.
32.
RiceKLoprinziPSensoM, et al. (2010) Validity of the OMNI perceived exertion scale in 4 age groups of children. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise42: 812.
33.
RiceKRGammonCPfiefferK, et al. (2015) Age related differences in the validity of the OMNI perceived exertion scale during lifestyle activities. Pediatric Exercise Science27: 95–101.
34.
RidgersNDCarterLMStrattonG, et al. (2011) Examining children’s physical activity and play behaviors during school playtime over time. Health Education Research26: 586–595.
35.
RitchieJSpencerLO’ConnorW (2003) Carrying out qualitative analysis. In: RitchieJLewisJ (eds) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. London: SAGE, pp. 220–263.
36.
RodriguesDPadezCMachado-RodriguesAM (2017) Active parents, active children: the importance of parental organized physical activity in children’s extracurricular sport participation. Journal of Child Health Care22: 159–170.
37.
The Daily MileFoundation (2016) The Daily Mile; children fit for life. Available at: http://thedailymile.co.uk/ (accessed 19 July 2016).
38.
The Daily Mile Foundation (2019) The Daily Mile; children fit for life. Available at: http://thedailymile.co.uk/ (accessed 12 August 2019).
39.
TsunenoriIYuyaURyoN, et al. (2018) Relationship between the intention–behavior gap and self-efficacy for physical activity during childhood. Journal of Child Health Care23: 79–86.
40.
World Health Organization (2010) Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health. Geneva: World Health Organization.
41.
World Health Organization (2018) Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018–2030: More Active People for a Healthier World. Geneva: World Health Organization.
42.
YellingMPenneyD (2003) Physical activity in physical education: pupil activity rating, reason and reality. European Journal of Physical Education8: 119–140.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
