Skip to main content

Table 2 Descriptive and independent bivariate analysis of predictors with overall implementation fidelity, school and classroom levels

From: Evaluation of Daily Physical Activity (DPA) policy implementation in Ontario: surveys of elementary school administrators and teachers

Characteristic

Overall % school Administratorsa (n)b

Bivariate Associations at school levelc

Overall % Teachersa (n)b

Bivariate associations at classroom leveld

OR (95 % CI)

p-value

OR (95 % CI)

p-value

Awareness of DPA policy requirements

      

Overall awareness of policy requirements

      

 Aware of more than half

81.1 (163)

2.17 (1.05–4.46)

0.036

62.6 (189)

1.63 (1.00–2.65)

0.048

 Aware of less than half

18.9 (38)

R

R

37.4 (113)

R

R

Scheduling and monitoring activities

      

Scheduling in teachers’ timetables

      

 DPA is scheduled

66.5 (137)

4.39 (2.30–8.39)

<0.0005

67.0 (203)

3.38 (1.99–5.73)

<0.0005

 DPA is not scheduled

29.6 (61)

R

R

33.0 (100)

R

R

 I don’t know

3.9 (8)

--

--

--

--

--

Presence of school DPA monitoring procedure

      

 A procedure exists

25.2 (52)

4.73 (2.09–10.75)

<0.0005

10.5 (32)

4.89 (2.01–11.90)

0.001

 A procedure does not exist

72.3 (149)

R

R

69.9 (214)

R

R

 I don’t know

2.4 (5)

--

--

19.6 (60)

--

--

Organization of DPA delivery

      

Type of DPA participation

      

 Several/all classes participate at the same time

8.9 (18)

3.75 (0.96–14.65)

0.057

10.2 (28)

1.54 (0.64–3.72)

0.332

 Each class participates at separate times

65.8 (133)

1.21 (0.62–2.35)

0.581

48.5 (133)

1.10 (0.65–1.84)

0.724

 Participation varies throughout the year

25.3 (51)

R

R

41.2 (113)

R

R

Individual instructing DPA

      

 Generalist teacher

83.7 (170)

0.46 (0.15–1.48)

0.195

75.9 (208)

0.95 (0.49–1.84)

0.881

 Teacher with HPE specialization

8.4 (17)

R

R

16.8 (46)

R

R

 Other

7.9 (16)

--

--

7.3 (20)

--

--

Perceived self-efficacy in carrying out DPA activities

      

Confidence level in planning DPA

      

 High

65.2 (118)

1.18 (0.62–2.25)

0.613

62.3 (172)

5.36 (3.06–9.37)

<0.0005

 Low-to-moderate

34.8 (63)

R

R

37.7 (104)

R

R

Confidence level in implementing DPA

      

 High

62.8 (113)

1.43 (0.76–2.69)

0.273

60.1 (161)

6.81 (3.87–11.97)

<0.0005

 Low-to-moderate

37.2 (67)

R

R

39.9 (107)

R

R

Use of DPA resources and supports

      

Frequency of using DPA resources

      

 Often or always

11.3 (23)

4.84 (1.54–15.18)

0.007

10.6 (32)

5.39 (2.15–13.48)

<0.0005

 Occasionally

35.0 (71)

3.00 (1.56–5.78)

0.001

32.3 (98)

1.99 (1.18–3.36)

0.010

 Never or rarely

53.7 (109)

R

R

57.1 (173)

R

R

Frequency of using DPA supports

      

Often or always

8.7 (18)

13.54 (1.74–105.50)

0.013

5.3 (16)

6.68 (1.79–24.86)

0.005

 Occasionally

39.1 (81)

1.35 (0.75–2.45)

0.315

25.1 (76)

3.91 (2.17–7.02)

<0.0005

 Never or rarely

52.2 (108)

R

R

69.7 (211)

R

R

Frequency of communicating with public health units regarding DPA

      

 Often or always

6.8 (14)

1.34 (0.43–4.20)

0.616

1.0 (3)

--

--

 Occasionally

23.3 (48)

1.95 (0.95–4.00)

0.070

4.3 (13)

2.39 (0.70–8.14)

0.164

 Never or rarely

69.9 (144)

R

R

94.7 (286)

R

R

Perceptions of DPA policy

      

Clear and easy to understand

      

 Agree/strongly agree

85.6 (178)

1.40 (0.36–5.40)

0.625

82.9 (247)

1.98 (0.62–6.31)

0.245

 Neutral

10.1 (21)

0.73 (0.15–3.49)

0.691

12.4 (37)

1.24 (0.33–4.62)

0.746

 Disagree/strongly disagree

4.3 (9)

R

R

4.7 (14)

R

R

Realistic and achievable

      

 Agree/strongly agree

56.0 (117)

3.29 (1.68–6.44)

0.001

43.0 (129)

8.61 (4.85–15.27)

<0.0005

 Neutral

18.2 (54)

1.89 (0.80–4.43)

0.145

16.0 (48)

2.20 (1.089–4.46)

0.028

 Disagree/strongly disagree

25.8 (38)

R

R

41.0 (123)

R

R

Equally important as other school curriculum requirements

      

 Agree/strongly agree

75.4 (156)

1.99 (0.81–4.89)

0.135

58.4 (175)

3.13 (1.72–5.68)

<0.0005

 Neutral

14.0 (29)

2.28 (0.73–7.10)

0.155

16.7 (50)

1.37 (0.63–2.98)

0.427

 Disagree/strongly disagree

10.6 (22)

R

R

25.0 (75)

R

R

Impact on students’ physical well-being

      

 Somewhat positive/very positive

93.3 (194)

1.22 (0.41–3.67)

0.720

91.8 (279)

1.54 (0.65–3.62)

0.325

 Neither positive nor negative

6.7 (14)

R

R

8.2 (25)

R

R

 Somewhat negative/very negative

0.0 (0)

--

--

0.0 (0)

--

--

Impact on students’ emotional well-being

      

 Somewhat positive/very positive

90.4 (188)

1.08 (0.42–2.77)

0.873

89.1 (269)

1.37 (0.64–2.95)

0.419

 Neither positive nor negative

9.6 (20)

R

R

10.6 (32)

R

R

 Somewhat negative/very negative

0.0 (0)

--

--

0.3 (1)

--

--

Impact on students’ academic outcomes

      

 Somewhat positive/very positive

82.9 (170)

1.32 (0.62–2.77)

0.471

71.6 (220)

1.46 (0.84–2.54)

0.183

 Neither positive nor negative

16.6 (34)

R

R

24.1 (71)

R

R

 Somewhat negative/very negative

0.5 (1)

--

--

1.4 (4)

--

--

Impact on student conduct

      

 Somewhat positive/very positive

87.3 (178)

1.45 (0.61–3.41)

0.401

78.7 (236)

1.15 (0.64–2.09)

0.636

 Neither positive nor negative

11.8 (24)

R

R

19.3 (58)

R

R

 Somewhat negative/very negative

1.0 (2)

--

--

2.0 (6)

--

--

Impact on students’ social well-being

      

 Somewhat positive/very positive

82.4 (168)

2.48 (1.18–5.21)

0.016

75.0 (225)

1.40 (0.81–2.41)

0.231

 Neither positive nor negative

17.2 (35)

R

R

24.3 (73)

R

R

 Somewhat negative/very negative

0.5 (1)

--

--

0.7 (2)

--

--

Impact on the development of physical activity habits

      

 Somewhat positive/very positive

87.1 (175)

1.34 (0.57–3.12)

0.501

80.6 (241)

1.58 (0.86–2.91)

0.142

 Neither positive nor negative

12.4 (25)

R

R

19.4 (58)

R

R

 Somewhat negative/very negative

0.5 (1)

--

--

0.0 (0)

--

--

  1. aPercentage totals may not equal 100 % due to rounding
  2. bCount totals (n) may not equal total sample (n = 209 for school administrators; n = 307 for teachers), and differ between variables, due to missing values
  3. cBivariate analysis at school level conducted using logistic regression
  4. dBivariate analysis at classroom level conducted using generalized linear mixed models to adjust for school-level clustering effects
  5. RReference category
  6. --Categories with low counts (overall frequency ≤ 2.0 %) omitted from bivariate analysis