To examine which school sports engage children in more physical activity.
Design.
Observational, cross-sectional study examining differences between intramural (IM) and interscholastic (IS) sports.
Setting.
Athletic facilities at two schools with IM sports and two schools with IS sports in Wake County, North Carolina.
Subjects.
Middle-school children (N = 6735)
Measures.
Percentage of children observed in sedentary, moderate, and vigorous activity assessed by the System for Observation Play and Leisure Among Youth (SOPLAY). Energy expenditure and physical activity intensity were also estimated by using MET values.
Analysis.
T-tests; generalized linear model using cumulative logit link function.
Results.
IM sports had higher MET values than IS sports (t = −3.69, p < .001), and IM sports ranked in four of the top five sports in terms of average MET values. Regression models found a significant interaction between school sport delivery model and gender, with boys significantly less physically active in IS programs than boys in IM programs (B = –.447, p < .001) but more physically active (B = .359, p < .001) than girls in IM sports.
Conclusion.
Regardless of sport type, IM sports generated more physical activity than IS sports among boys but not girls. Soccer, basketball, and track, regardless of school delivery approach, provide the highest physical activity levels. Results suggest that school administrators consider reassessing their programs to more efficiently use diminishing resources to increase students' physical activity levels.
StrongWBMalinaRMBlimkieCJR. Evidence based physical activity for school-age youth. J Pediatr. 2005;146(6):732–737.
2.
HarrisonPANarayanG. Differences in behavior, psychological factors, and environmental factors associated with participation in school sports and other activities in adolescence. J Sch Health. 2003;73(3):113–120.
3.
SteinerHMcQuiveyRWPavelskiR. Adolescents and sports: Risk or benefit?Clin Pediatr. 2000;39(3):161–166.
4.
HallalPCAndersenLBBullFC. Global physical activity levels: Surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet. 2012;380 (9838):247–257.
5.
AllenderSCowburnGFosterC. Understanding participation in sport and physical activity among children and adults: A review of qualitative studies. Health Educ Res.2006;21(6):826–835.
6.
CasperJMBocarroJNKantersMAFloydMF. “Just let me play!”: Understanding constraints that limit adolescent sport participation. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8:S32–S39.
7.
WashingtonRLBernhardtDTGomezJ. Organized sports for children and preadolescents. Pediatrics. 2001;107(6):1459–1462.
8.
MotaJEsculcasC. Leisure-time physical activity behavior: Structured and unstructured choices according to sex, age, and level of physical activity. Int J Behav Med.2002;9(2):111–121.
PateRRTrostSGLevinSDowdaM. Sports participation and health-related behaviors among US youth. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.2000;154(9):904–911.
11.
NelsonTFStovitzSDThomasM. Do youth sports prevent pediatric obesity: A systematic review and commentary. Curr Sports Med Rep.2011;10(6):360–370.
12.
US Department of Health and Human Services. The Surgeon General's Vision for a Healthy and Fit Nation. Rockville, Md: US Department of Health and Human Services: Office of the Surgeon General; 2010.
13.
DzewaltowskiDARosenkranzRRGellerKS. HOP'N after-school project: An obesity prevention randomized controlled trial. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010;7(90):1479.
14.
GutinBYinZJohnsonMBarbeauP. Preliminary findings of the effect of a 3-year after-school physical activity intervention on fitness and body fat: The Medical College of Georgia Fitkid Project. Int J Pediatr Obes.2008;1:3–9.
EdwardsMBBocarroJNKantersMA. Place disparities in supportive environments for extracurricular physical activity in North Carolina middle schools. Youth Soc.2013;45(2):265–285.
18.
ScottD. Tic, toc, the game is locked and nobody else can play!J Leis Res.2000;32(1):133–137.
19.
HynesKSandersF. Diverging experiences during Out-of-School Time: The race gap in exposure to after-school programs. J Negro Educ.2011;80(4):464–476.
20.
WaltersSBarr-AndersonDJWallMNeumark-SztainerD. Does participation in organized sports predict future physical activity for adolescents from diverse economic backgrounds?J Adolesc Health. 2009;44(3):268–274.
21.
LeeSMBurgesonCRFultonJESpainCG. Physical education and physical activity: Results from the school health policies and programs study 2006. J Sch Health. 2007;77(8):435–463.
22.
WickelEEEisenmannJC. Contribution of youth sport to total daily physical activity among 6- to 12-yr-old boys. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(9):1493–1500.
23.
KoplanJPLivermanCTKraakVI. Preventing Childhood Obesity: Health in the Balance. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2005.
24.
National Association for Sport and Physical Education. Comprehensive School Physical Activity Programs [position statement]. Reston, Va: National Association for Sport and Physical Education; 2008. Available at: http://www.aahperd.org/naspe/about/leaders/upload/CSPAP-final-3-28-13.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2013.
25.
BocarroJNKantersMACerinE. School sport policy and school-based physical activity environments and their association with observed physical activity in middle school children. Health Place. 2012;18(1):31–38.
26.
KantersMABocarroJNEdwardsMB. School sport participation under two school sport policies: Comparisons by race/ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status. Ann Behav Med.2013;45(1):113–121.
27.
American Academy of Pediatrics. Active healthy living: Prevention of childhood obesity through increased physical activity. Pediatrics. 2006;117(5):1834–1842.
28.
GuaglianoJMRosenkranzRRKoltGS. Girls' physical activity levels during organized sports in Australia. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2013;45(1):116–122.
29.
SacheckJMNelsonTFickerL. Physical activity during soccer and its contribution to physical activity recommendations in normal weight and overweight children. Pediatr Exerc Sci.2011;23(2):281–292.
30.
FaircloughSJBeighleAErwinHRidgersND. School day segmented physical activity patterns of high and low active children. BMC Public Health. 2012;12:406.
31.
Gomez-FelicianoLMcCrearyLLSadowskyR. Active Living Logan Square joining together to create opportunities for physical activity. Am J Prev Med.2009;37(6):S361–S367.
32.
McKenzieTL. The use of direct observation to assess physical activity. In: WelkG, ed. Physical Activity Assessments for Health-Related Research. Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics; 2002:179–195.
33.
McKenzieTLSallisJFNaderPR. BEACHES: An observational system for assessing children's eating and physical activity behaviors and associated events. J Appl Behav Anal.1991;24(1):141–151.
34.
RowePvan der MarsHSchuldheiszJFoxS. Measuring students' physical activity levels: Validating SOFIT for use with high-school students. J Teach Phys Ed.2004;23(3):235–251.
35.
AinsworthBEHaskellWLLeonAS. Compendium of physical activities: Classification of energy costs of human physical activities. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1993;25(1):71–80.
36.
LandisJRKochGG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–174.
37.
BocarroJNFloydMFMooreR. Developing a reliable measure of physical activity among children in different age groups using the System for Observing Physical Activity and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC). J Phys Act Health. 2009;6(6):699–707.
38.
HoltNLKingsleyBCTinkLNSchererJ. Benefits and challenges associated with sport participation by children and parents from low-income families. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2011;12(5):490–499.
39.
DixonM. Resource allocation in a public high school athletic department. Sport Mgt Rev.2003;6:75–99.
40.
KantersMABocarroJNCasperJMForresterS. Determinants of sport participation in middle school children and the impact of intramural sports. Recreational Sports J.2008;32:134–151.
41.
EdwardsMBKantersMABocarroJN. Opportunities for extracurricular physical activity in North Carolina middle schools. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8:597–605.
42.
FloydMFSpenglerJOMaddockJE. Park-based physical activity in diverse communities of two US cities: An observational study. Am J Prev Med.2008;34(4):299–305.
43.
McKenzieTCohenDSehgalA. System for observing play and recreation in communities (SOPARC): Reliability and feasibility measures. J Phys Act Health. 2006;3:S208–S222.
