Skip to main content
NCBI home page
HHS Author Manuscripts logoLink to HHS Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Phys Educ Recreat Dance. 2024;95(2):7–16. doi: 10.1080/07303084.2023.2291641

The Role of Physical Education Within the National Physical Activity Plan

Jayne D Greenberg 1, Hans van der Mars 1, Thomas L McKenzie 1, Rebecca A Battista 1, Jamie F Chriqui 1, Kelly Cornett 1, Kim C Graber 1, Ben D Kern 1, Jared A Russell 1, Dianne S Ward 1, Wesley J Wilson 1
PMCID: PMC10922003  NIHMSID: NIHMS1969635  PMID: 38463632

The Education Sector of the National Physical Activity Plan (NPAP) was developed to assist schools, early care and education centers, and colleges and universities to establish policies and provide programmatic opportunities to support students in adopting physically active lifestyles (National Physical Activity Plan Alliance, 2016; Pate, 2014). The Education Sector strategies included in the current NPAP (Physical Activity Alliance [PAA], 2023b) are aimed at (1) providing high-quality, standards-based physical education programs; (2) offering programs for children and youth that encourage after-school, holiday, and vacation activities that ensure participants have access to and opportunities for physical activity (PA); (3) adopting strong policies (i.e., those that include oversight, reporting requirements on policy adherence) that support implementation of the Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program (CSPAP) model; (4) adopting PA standards for childcare and early care and education programs; (5) promoting opportunities and effective incentive programs for college and university students and faculty/staff members to adopt and maintain physically active lifestyles; (6) providing preservice professional training and inservice continuous professional development programs; and (7) encouraging professional and scientific organizations to develop and advocate for strong policies that promote PA equitably among all students.

Successful implementation of these strategies in the Education Sector has the potential to support high-quality program delivery from early childhood through postsecondary education. Specific to school physical education programs, the strategies’ adoption has potential for a broad, lifelong impact, not only for students but also for teachers, administrators, policymakers, health professionals and parents who serve and care for them (PAA, 2023a). In this article, we present an overview of the Education Sector strategies, tactics and objectives specific for K–12 school physical education programming.

About the National Physical Activity Plan

Physical education programs have long been a key access point for children and adolescents to learn to adopt a physically active and healthy lifestyle in the school environment. In addition, other opportunities exist for PA and the learning of motor skills across grade levels. This recognition was brought to the forefront in 2010 with the unveiling of the NPAP (Pate, 2009; Siedentop, 2009). Because physical education professionals may not be intimately familiar with the NPAP’s scope and core purpose, this article introduces the NPAP and focuses specifically on one of its key Societal Sectors: Education.

The NPAP was conceived as an action plan in response to the development of the first-ever federal government–sponsored U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (USDHHS) 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (Pate, 2009). The original NPAP included eight Societal Sectors: Business and Industry; Education; Healthcare; Mass Media; Parks, Recreation, Sports, and Fitness; Public Health; Transportation, Land Use, and Community Design; and Volunteer and Nonprofit (Pate, 2009). It now has evolved into 10 sectors consisting of Business and Industry; Community, Recreation, Fitness, and Parks; Education; Faith-Based Settings; Healthcare; Mass Media; Public Health; Sport; Transportation, Land Use, and Community Design; and, most recently, Military Settings (PAA, 2023a; see Table 1). The NPAP represents a cross-sectional initiative aimed at increasing access to and opportunity for PA (PAA, 2023a). The full National Physical Activity Plan can be found in PAA, (2023b).

Table 1.

Current Sectors in the National Physical Activity Plan

  • Business and industry

  • Community, recreation, fitness, and parks

  • Education

  • Faith-based settings

  • Healthcare

  • Mass media

  • Military settings

  • Public health

  • Sport

  • Transportation, land use and community design
Open in a new tab

Modified from PAA (2023a).

The strategies, objectives and tactics for each sector were developed and written by committees comprising expert representatives with backgrounds from various organizations and institutions. To ensure the timeliness and appropriateness of the strategic recommendations, the NPAP is revised every 10 years, with a mid-course update every five years.

In 2021, the NPAP Alliance formally merged with the National Physical Activity Society and the National Coalition for Promoting Physical Activity to form the PAA. The merger of these three organizations into one alliance provides a more powerful and proactive mission to “… lead efforts to create, support, and advocate policy and system changes that enable all Americans to enjoy physically active lives” (PAA, 2020). Readers are encouraged to review the full NPAP that includes the strategies, tactics and objectives of all other sectors (https://paamovewithus.org; PAA, 2023b)

The National Physical Activity Plan — Education Sector: Mid-Course Strategies

Given its important benefits to overall health, promoting PA in the various educational institutions has received much greater attention. This resulted in the development of the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, second edition (USDHHS, 2018), and the creation of the 2022 United States Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth (PAA, 2022) to show the need to promote PA in educational settings. With 49.4 million students attending public schools (National Center for Education Statistics, 2022c) and 8.1 million students enrolled in private and charter schools (National Center for Education Statistics, 2022a, 2022b), school settings can play a major role in combatting physical inactivity. In the latest report card, schools received a grade of D− for supporting and providing PA for school-age youths (PAA, 2022). This indicates that schools are falling short in helping children and adolescents reach the recommended 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (USDHHS, 2018).

graphic file with name nihms-1969635-f0001.jpg

In May 2023, the PAA updated the 2016 version of the NPAP (PAA, 2023a). The updated Education Sector strategies, tactics and objectives emphasize (1) providing inclusionary educational experiences and programming for all students, (2) expanding the original K–12 educational setting to include the university and college levels, and (3) encouraging expanded policies and standards for childcare and early childhood education programs. They reflect mid-course adjustments from the 2016 NPAP and include objectives to be met by 2025 (PAA, 2023a). Therefore, school-based personnel (i.e., physical education professionals, classroom teachers, school administrators), as well as community-based PA professionals who work with school-age youths, are integral in this national initiative to help reverse the steady decline in recommended PA levels among children and adolescents (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2021b; Guthold et al., 2020). For example, between 2011 and 2019, decreases were reported in the percentage of adolescents who (a) were active for at least 60 minutes on at least one of seven days, (b) were active for at least 60 minutes on five or more days, or (c) were active for at least 60 minutes on all seven days and (d) attended physical education classes on all five weekdays. Conversely, sedentary behavior in the form of playing video or computer games for three hours or more per day increased (CDC, 2020).

The Education Sector strategies also align with several national initiatives to assist schools in implementing programs to further encourage PA in children and youths. These include the Active People, Healthy Nation (CDC, 2022a), the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, 2nd edition (USDHHS, 2018), the Move Your Way campaign (USDHHS, 2021), the National Youth Sports Strategy (USDHHS, 2019) and Project Play: State of Play 2022 (Aspen Institute, 2022). The collective action and impact of these initiatives may increase opportunities for children and youths to reduce their sedentary behaviors while increasing their PA levels.

Each NPAP sector developed general strategies to increase the PA levels of all students attending U.S. schools. The updated, comprehensive strategies for the Education Sector are presented in Table 2. The first two strategies and their accompanying tactics reflect a clear focus on increasing PA opportunities among students (see Strategy 1), with physical education programs continuing to be a core component (see Strategy 2).

Table 2.

NPAP’s Education Sector Strategies

Strategy 1
States and school districts should adopt strong policies that support the implementation of the Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program model.
Strategy 2
Schools should provide high-quality physical education programs.
Strategy 3
Providers of after-school, holiday and vacation programs for children and youths should adopt policies and practices that ensure participants are appropriately physically active throughout the program.
Strategy 4
States should adopt evidence-based standards for childcare and early childhood education programs to ensure children up to age five years are appropriately physically active throughout their time in such programs.
Strategy 5
Colleges and universities should provide students and employees with opportunities and incentives to adopt and maintain physically active lifestyles.
Strategy 6
Educational institutions should provide preservice professional training and inservice continuous professional development programs that prepare educators to deliver effective physical education and activity programs for students of all types.
Strategy 7
Professional and scientific organizations should develop and advocate for strong policies that promote physical activity among all students.
Open in a new tab

As shown in Table 2, the strategies reflect a focus on a range of age groups, including preschool/early childhood, K–12, and postsecondary students (Strategies 3–5). They also include a strategy focused on (1) professional preparation programs for those preparing to be PA professionals and (2) providing continuous professional development for those working with the varying age groups (Strategy 6). And finally, professional and scientific organizations are targeted to engage in sustained and proactive advocacy to establish strong physical education and PA-related policies (Strategy 7).

Each NPAP sector was also charged to develop specific tactics and objectives to help lead its efforts to support the general strategies. This article presents the tactics and objectives only for Education Sector Strategies 1 and 2, because they are specific to school physical education and expanded PA programming (see Tables 3 and 4). These can be found in the full NPAP at in PAA (2023b). The objectives are accompanied by data sources that could be used to track progress toward reaching these objectives. As is the case with most national initiatives, most of the data sources involve national-level surveillance; those marked with an asterisk reflect a current lack of available and credible data sources.

Table 3.

NPAP Education Sector School Physical Education–Specific Tactics and Objectives — Strategy 1

States and school districts should adopt strong policies that support the implementation of the comprehensive school physical activity program model.
Tactics:

  • Support schools in adopting and implementing the CSPAP model.

Objective 1.1: By 2025, the percentage of states that have policies supporting the implementation of CSPAP will increase by 5% (National Cancer Institute, 2021).
Objective 1.2: By 2025, the percentage of school districts in each state that implement at least two CSPAP components in addition to physical education programming in their local wellness policy will increase.*
Objective 1.3: By 2025, the percentage of schools using the School Health Index, or other school-based assessment tool, to assess the school’s policies, activities and programs on physical activity will increase by 50% (CDC, 2022b).
Objective 1.4: By 2025, at least 50% of secondary schools in each state will have a written plan for implementing a CSPAP (CDC, 2022b).

  • Provide professional development on the Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program model at the state, district and school levels.

Objective 1.5: By 2025, at least 25% of states will have established a training cadre that supports the implementation of CSPAP. This cadre is tasked with providing inservice training to school districts to support the implementation of CSPAPs.*
Objective 1.6: By 2025, at least 80% of school districts will provide relevant professional development related to components and processes of implementing a CSPAP.*
Objective 1.7: By 2025, all secondary schools in each state will have at least one physical education teacher or specialist with professional development on physical education.*

  • Disseminate best practices that exemplify effective adoption of the CSPAP model.

Objective 1.8: By 2025, at least 75% of secondary school students will participate in at least 60 minutes of physical activity on at least one day of the week (in any kind of physical activity that increased their heart rate and made them breathe hard some of the time [CDC, 2022b]).
Objective 1.9: By 2025, state health and physical education associations will have the web-based ability to disseminate exemplary CSPAP practices.*
Objective 1.10: By 2025, professional organizations in the education sector will create an online template for CSPAP success stories that schools can complete and submit.*

  • Support adoption of school-design strategies to support active transportation to and from the school campus and increased student physical activity throughout the school day, beyond participation in physical education.

Objective 1.11: By 2025, at least 60% of school districts will provide supports for active transportation to and from schools (i.e., walk- and/or bike-to-school programs).*
Objective 1.12: By 2025, the number of states with laws that require at least 20 minutes of daily recess will increase by 50% (National Cancer Institute, 2021).
Objective 1.13: By 2025, at least 45% of schools in each state will have students participating in physical activity breaks in classrooms or outdoors during the school day.*
Objective 1.14: By 2025, at least 40% of secondary schools in each state will provide opportunities for students to participate in recreational physical activity before the school day through organized activities or access to facilities and equipment.*
Objective 1.15: By 2025, at least 70% of secondary schools in each state will offer intramural sports programs or physical activity clubs (CDC, 2022b).
Objective 1.16: By 2025, at least 90% of secondary schools in each state will offer interscholastic sports while maintaining compliance with Title IX stipulations (CDC, 2022b).
Objective 1.17: By 2025, the percentage of schools providing school staff with professional development on how to facilitate physical activity programming, beyond physical education, that is safe, developmentally and culturally appropriate, and inclusive for all students will increase by 5% (CDC, 2022b).

  • Encourage schools to adopt reciprocal shared-use agreements that enhance student access to school and community-based physical activity facilities.

Objective 1.18: By 2025, the percentage of state laws that require schools to allow community or organization access to school recreational facilities outside of school hours will increase by 5% (National Cancer Institute, 2021).
Open in a new tab
*

Indicates current lack of data-collection mechanism to track progress toward meeting objective.

Table 4.

NPAP Education Sector School Physical Education–Specific Tactics and Objectives — Strategy 2

Schools should provide high-quality physical education programs.
Tactics:

  • Ensure that schools comply with the Every Student Success Act, which requires physical education to be delivered as part of a “well-rounded” education.

Objective 2.1: By 2025, the percentage of schools requiring that a physical education course be taught to all students in each grade level will increase.*

  • Provide daily physical education for students in Grades K–12, with instructional periods totaling at least 150 minutes per week in elementary schools and 225 minutes per week in middle and high schools.

Objective 2.2: By 2025, increase the percentage of schools requiring (or students taking) physical education for at least 150 minutes per week in elementary and 225 minutes per week in middle and high school in specific grade levels.*
Objective 2.3: By 2025, increase the percentage of states with laws requiring 150 minutes per week of physical education in elementary and 225 minutes per week in middle and high school in each grade level (National Cancer Institute, 2021).
Objective 2.4: By 2025, increase the percentage of school districts requiring 150 minutes per week of physical education in elementary and 225 minutes per week in middle and high school in each grade level.*

  • Ensure that ALL students are engaged in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity for at least 50% of physical education class time.

Objective 2.5: By 2025, the percentage of states with laws that require that students be engaged in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity at least 50% of physical education class time will increase by 5% (National Cancer Institute, 2021).
Objective 2.6: By 2025, the percentage of schools having teachers that allocate at least 50% of physical education class time for students to be physically active will increase.*

  • Provide students with opportunities to engage in the types of physical activity recommended in the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, 2nd edition (USDHHS, 2018).

Objective 2.7: By 2025, 75% of schools will have appropriate and sufficient equipment available that is dedicated to providing a minimum of 10 different types of recreational physical activity choices beyond the delivery of physical education.*

  • Ensure that physical education class sizes and teacher/student ratios are comparable to those for other subject areas.

Objective 2.8: By 2025, the percentage of schools having a maximum student-to-teacher ratio allowed for physical education comparable to other subject areas will increase.*

  • Adopt district-level policies that preclude the use or withholding of physical activity as punishment.

Objective 2.9: By 2025, the percentage of states that have state laws prohibiting the use of physical activity as punishment for inappropriate behavior (e.g., laps or push-ups) will increase.*
Objective 2.10: By 2025, the percentage of schools prohibiting staff from withholding physical education and other activity programs to punish students for inappropriate behavior will increase.*

  • Eliminate waivers and substitutions for physical education.

Objective 2.11: By 2025, the percentage of states with laws prohibiting the use of program substitutions or waivers (e.g., Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps, marching band, athletics) for satisfying physical education requirements for students will increase to at least 50% (National Cancer Institute, 2021).
Objective 2.12: By 2025, the percentage of schools prohibiting exemptions or waivers from physical education requirements for one grading period or longer will increase by at least 5% (Bianco & Cornett, 2021).

  • Adopt physical education curricula for Grades K–12 that specify grade-level student outcomes that meet national and/or state standards.

Objective 2.13: By 2025, the percentage of states with laws that meet national, state or related physical education standards will increase by at least 5% (National Cancer Institute, 2021).
Objective 2.14: By 2025, all states will adopt policies requiring schools to complete a physical education program evaluation.*

  • Employ instructional practices that are consistent with the school’s and/or district’s physical education curriculum.

Objective 2.15: By 2025, the percentage of schools providing those who teach physical education or physical education teachers with goals, objectives and expected outcomes for physical education; a chart describing the annual scope and sequence for physical education instruction; and a written physical education–specific yearly block plan based on a set curriculum will increase by at least 5%.*

  • Employ student assessment procedures that are consistent with national and/or state standards.

Objective 2.16: By 2025, the percentage of schools providing physical education teachers with subject-specific professional development training and plans on how to assess student performance in physical education will increase by at least 5%.*
Objective 2.17: By 2025, the percentage of schools providing physical education teachers with resources for validated fitness testing (i.e., FitnessGram or other validated fitness assessment tools) will increase by at least 5%.*

  • Implement adaptations to ensure that students with disabilities are provided with quality physical education.

Objective 2.18: By 2025, the percentage of states with laws that require adapted physical education and provide funding for and offer subject-specific professional development to those teaching physical education to students with short- or long-term physical, medical, visual, hearing or cognitive disabilities will increase by at least 5%.*
Objective 2.19: By 2025, the percentage of states with laws that require adapted physical education be made available to every child who needs it, without providing a benchmark for qualification, will increase by at least 5% (National Cancer Institute, 2021).
Open in a new tab
*

Indicates current lack of data-collection mechanism to track progress toward meeting objective.

Strategy 1 Tactics and Objectives

Strategies 1 and 2 together reflect the prominence of physical education within the Education Sector. Physical education is the cornerstone of CSPAPs (Dauenhauer & Stoepker, 2022). As shown in Table 3, Strategy 1 calls for states and school districts to adopt strong policies that support the implementation of CSPAPs. Strategy 1 tactics and objectives reflect an explicit call for widespread implementation, dissemination and professional development support for K–12 physical educators to develop CSPAPs, thus ensuring that all students are offered maximum PA access and opportunities throughout the school day (Objectives 1.1, 1.5, 1.6 and 1.17). Objectives specific to CSPAP implementation are modest, because they emphasize schools implementing at least some of the CSPAP components including before-, during- and after-school PA programming. Moreover, PAA recommends that national and state associations increase efforts to support and promote CSPAP implementation and professional development for physical educators (see Objectives 1.9 and 1.10). The recent attention given to ensuring that daily recess is required across all schools serves as a good springboard to move forward on that Education Sector objective (see Objective 1.12).

Slater et al. (2012) and An et al. (2021) reported that schools were significantly more likely to provide the required number of minutes of physical education and 20 minutes of recess if state-level policies were enacted requiring 150 minutes of physical education and 20 minutes of recess in elementary schools. They also noted that elementary schools were more likely to substitute recess for physical education and vice versa, as opposed to delivering both for specified amounts of time. Conversely, school district–level policies did not improve the likelihood of schools providing more recess. Thus, these objectives suggest that state-level policies would optimize access to and opportunities for physical education and expanded PA.

In the early 2000s, there was a steady decline in physical education attendance and participation in high schools (Grades 9–12). Between 2019 and 2021, the percentage of students who attended physical education classes on all five days decreased to just under 26% (Michael et al., 2023). Moreover, there is evidence that CSPAP has been implemented in few high schools (CDC, 2022b). Therefore, the Strategy 1 objectives recommend that secondary students have PA opportunities and access to facilities and equipment during before- and after-school hours (see Objectives 1.14 and 1.15). Finally, Objective 1.18 recommends that schools and school districts find ways to collaborate with public community organizations — and establish reciprocal shared-use agreements to maximize schools’ PA facility use and program offerings — by recruiting community-based PA professionals with content expertise (e.g., yoga, golf or tennis instructors).

Strategy 2 Tactics and Objectives

Strategy 2 (along with its corresponding tactics and objectives) focuses specifically on K–12 physical education programming: Schools should provide high-quality physical education programs (see Table 4). Over the past four decades, physical education programming has become increasingly limited in terms of time allocation and graduation requirements (CDC, 2022b; SHAPE America – Society of Health and Physical Educators & the American Heart Association [AHA], 2016). Moreover, the absence of strong (i.e., enforced) state-level policies that require physical education (and expanded PA opportunities) contributes to less access to learn motor and movement skills and less active time. Additionally, most states do not have policies that limit class size specific to physical education (SHAPE America & AHA, 2016; see Objective 2.8), which are common for other school subjects. The practice of using PA as punishment during physical education or withholding participation in physical education as punishment for inappropriate conduct or failure to complete classroom assignments also remains an unfortunate part of the U.S. physical education landscape (SHAPE America & AHA, 2016; see Objectives 2.9 and 2.10). SHAPE America and AHA (2016) have further noted that physical education delivery is compromised as well by (1) allowing students to fulfill high school physical education requirements through participation in other subjects (e.g., marching band, Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps, interscholastic athletics) and (2) providing waivers, substitutions and exemptions because of religious beliefs, disability or other reasons (see Objectives 2.11 and 2.12). These practices further limit high school students’ access and opportunity to participate in quality physical education. Strategy 2’s tactics and objectives reflect efforts to counter these trends and to increase students’ PA levels.

The roadblocks to deliver quality physical education become even clearer when one considers the evidence in support of strong state-level physical education policies. Students in states with strong physical education–supportive laws had higher class attendance as well as higher frequency and duration of PA during both physical education classes and throughout the school day (An et al., 2021; Slater et al., 2012).

Objectives 2.13 and 2.14 seek to ensure that physical educators (1) employ quality instructional practices and assessments to track student progress toward meeting national or state content standards, (2) align their instructional practices with their state’s or school district’s curriculum, and (3) conduct regular program evaluations. Together these objectives can help improve the quality of instruction and student learning experiences.

graphic file with name nihms-1969635-f0002.jpg

Formal assessment of physical education learning outcomes, aligned with national/state content standards, is perhaps one of the most neglected teaching functions in physical education (Association Internationale des Écoles Supérieures d’Éducation Physique, 2020; van der Mars et al., 2018). There is evidence, however, that sustained professional development can improve formal assessment practices of secondary school physical educators that target substantive learning outcomes (van der Mars et al., 2018). The tactics and Objectives 2.16 and 2.17 suggest the need (1) for physical educators to implement quality assessments and (2) to support educators through quality professional development. Finally, improving access to and opportunities for meaningful physical education and PA experiences for students with disabilities, by tracking state-level legislative requirements, is showcased in Objectives 2.18 and 2.19. These objectives also emphasize the importance of quality professional development for all physical educators.

NPAP’s Implications for School-Based Physical Education Programs

The scope of the NPAP provides strategies to address the complexity of the public health problems associated with school-age youths in the United States who engage in too little PA. Students’ mental health remains a significant problem, and PA is a powerful antidote to stress, depression and anxiety (Mikkelsen et al., 2017). The decline in the delivery of school physical education may contribute to chronic conditions such as overweight/obesity and diabetes.

The NPAP provides possible solutions through strategic planning and policy development and implementation. Therefore, it is important that physical education professionals (1) recognize the implications of the NPAP, (2) become aware of how other sectors contribute, and (3) seek ways to engage with and/or support other sectors (as other sectors would be expected to support school physical education). The most essential implications are identified below.

The development of the NPAP signifies an important step forward. The NPAP is a blueprint to break down the silos of the 10 Societal Sectors in an effort to increase the PA levels of all citizens, especially school-age youths in the Education Sector. This effort has four key implications for school physical education programs:

  • Implication 1: The Central Role of School Physical Education Programs. Physical educators may perceive their subject as not highly valued (Laureano et al., 2014). There is evidence that during the past five decades, access to physical education has become more restricted in U.S. schools (Kern et al., 2021; van der Mars, 2018; van der Mars et al., 2021). However, the subject remains a prime evidence-based opportunity for promoting PA among school-age youths and is the cornerstone of CSPAP (CDC, 2013; Pate et al., 2006; Task Force on Community Preventive Services, 2001). As shown in Tables 3 and 4, the Education Sector objectives reflect a whole-of-school approach aimed at moving schools toward being a fully inclusive and accessible hub for PA for all students throughout the school day. Moreover, it aligns with the Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child model (CDC, 2021) and the CSPAP model (CDC, 2013). Thus, physical education programs are a core mechanism for helping children and youths reach their daily recommended PA levels.

    Strategy 1 in the Education Sector’s objective focuses on the development of CSPAPs. Physical educators are uniquely positioned to encourage school administrators to support and invest in expanded PA programming through developing sustained CSPAPs.

  • Implication 2: We Are Not Alone. Many other programs and organizations have goals similar to those of physical education (e.g., community-based recreation, sport, fitness and dance). This is reflected in some of the other NPAP Societal Sectors as well (see Table 1). Thus, it may be beneficial for physical educators to join forces with representatives from other NPAP sectors to collaborate and reverse the trend of physical inactivity. For example, consider how urban planning can help improve the walkability and bikeability of neighborhoods, thereby allowing students to engage in active transportation to and from school safely and consistently. Students are educated physically not only in physical education classes but also in school- and community-based programs such as sports teams, fitness clubs, dance programs, and parks and recreation programs. Other sectors have as much interest in, and as much to gain by, helping create PA-supportive environments for all children and adolescents.

    Disseminating NPAP strategies, tactics and objectives to physical educators, faculty and students in physical education teacher education programs and to physical education professional organizations might help increase knowledge and awareness of the NPAP and also help build true collaborations among professionals within education and with other sectors.

  • Implication 3: A More Focused and Unified Mission. Of all school subjects, physical education has suffered perhaps the longest running and entrenched identity crisis (Siedentop & van der Mars, 2023). From its earliest days in the early 20th century, physical education has been hampered by claims that the subject could accomplish a wide array of objectives (e.g., motor, physical, social and mental development). Regrettably, the problem continues to be one of trying to be “all things to all people,” perpetuating a muddled mission and misunderstood goals (Corbin, 2002; McCloy, 1938; McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2013; Pate & Hohn, 1994; Siedentop & van der Mars, 2023). Because of this, physical education’s core goals and objectives — learning of motor skills and engaging in health-enhancing PA (which are showcased in the NPAP’s Education Sector) — have not been fully attained (McKenzie & Lounsbery, 2013).

    Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the already high levels of depression and stress among school-age youths (Mikkelsen et al., 2017; Racine et al., 2021), and students who show signs of stress and depression may experience disruptions in academics (Panagouli et al., 2021). The spike in mental health problems during COVID-19 immediately prompted physical education to include a significant focus on student social–emotional learning (SEL), further complicating its core mission (SHAPE America, 2021; Wright & Richards, 2022). However, physical education can no longer continue to claim that it can be everything to everyone and then fail to accomplish anything (Lund & van der Mars, 2022). Though social and emotional skill outcomes are important, they are in no way unique to the physical education sphere. For example, an SEL strand is woven throughout the content standards in art education (National Coalition for Core Arts Standards, 2015). Support of SEL should not only be reflected in a school’s mission; it requires close collaboration among teachers, school administrators and support personnel within the school. Conversely, developing PA habits — along with the knowledge and skills to become lifelong PA participants and to develop lifetime motor skills — is unique to physical education, and they can be the core focus for all physical education programs.

  • Implication 4: Promoting Physical Activity and Teaching Motor Skills Go Hand in Hand. The publication of the Surgeon General’s Report on Physical Activity and Health (USDHHS, 1996) produced a fundamental shift in physical education, from emphasizing skill learning (largely characterized by the teaching of team sport content) to promoting PA (based on a public health perspective) that aligns closely with the NPAP. This gave rise to what is an artificial split within the physical education field between those who favor motor skill learning and those who prefer PA promotion (van der Mars & Lorenz, 2020). This split potentially contributes to the muddled mission previously noted and may fail to recognize that both sides need each other. Physical activity is needed for children and adolescents to learn motor skills. How teachers deliver the sport, dance and/or fitness content remains the key factor. Imposing an adult-based fitness model on school-age youths is unlikely to be a positive and reinforcing experience for most students (Corbin et al., 1994; Siedentop & van der Mars, 2023).

Similarly, sport instruction with a strong emphasis on decontextualized and rote skill drills before informal gameplay is unlikely to attract most students to PA in the long run (Launder & Piltz, 2013; Siedentop et al., 2020). There is an emerging body of “best available knowledge” indicating that it is possible to learn manipulative motor skills and more advanced sport techniques and tactics in game-based approaches, while simultaneously producing acceptable moderate-to-vigorous physical activity levels (Dudley et al., 2011; Harvey, 2006; Harvey et al., 2016; McKenzie et al., 1998; Miller et al., 2016; Sierra-Ríos et al., 2020). Such evidence supports both the skill learning and PA promotion advocates and those wanting to change the counterproductive “either–or” line of thinking.

Summary: Much Work Remains

The main purpose of this article is to build awareness about the importance of getting children and youths to engage in more health-enhancing PA, as recommended through the strategies, tactics and objectives specific to K–12 physical education programs. Promoting PA among K–12 students is a task that seeks active participation by all physical educators, physical education teacher education faculty, and our national and state associations. It is also important for physical education providers to recognize that they are not alone in achieving this goal. The other Societal Sectors are crucial partners in this endeavor.

The two Education Sector strategies highlighted here (Tables 3 and 4) include 37 specific objectives. Of those, 20 currently do not have available or credible tracking mechanisms in place to determine progress (i.e., lack of appropriate data sources). This reflects a gap in the infrastructure to support sustained, school-based PA/PE surveillance activities that include assessment of policy, district, school and student-level outcomes. Much like the Healthy People 2030 initiative (Office of Disease Prevention & Health Promotion, n.d.) in which national health objectives are tracked, assessed and updated every 10 years, the PAA will regularly update its NPAP.

The school environment that has been created includes various factors that suppress PA, such as lack of access to PA on school campuses throughout the school day (Kärmeniemi et al., 2018; Yu et al., 2022). The inclusion of a standards-based physical education curriculum in this national effort would support PA in the schools, including recess, classroom physical activity breaks, and before- and after-school programs. School physical education is an essential contributor to this national initiative and NPAP. Daniel Lieberman, an evolutionary biologist, aptly argued that though humans did not evolve to be physically active from an evolutionary perspective, it is both healthy and can be remarkably rewarding (Lieberman, 2020). The latter is very much determined by how physical educators can help all children and youths develop motor skillfulness and a passion for physically active living.

Acknowledgment

Dianne S. Ward, a long-time valued and respected member of the Education Sector of the National Physical Activity Plan, unexpectedly passed away after this article was submitted for publication. Dianne’s passion and research work in the promotion of physical activity and well-being for young children, especially “Go NAPSACC,” continues to impact the lives of young children in early childhood and child-care settings. Dianne’s legacy will live on through her work on the NPAP, the colleagues she touched so deeply, friends that she made along the way, and her national and international contributions to the profession.

Footnotes

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References

  1. An R, Liu J, & Liu R (2021). State laws governing school physical education in relation to attendance and physical activity among students in the USA: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 10(3), 277–287. 10.1016/j.jshs.2020.09.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Aspen Institute (2022). State of play, 2022. https://www.aspenprojectplay.org/state-of-play-2022-intro
  3. Association Internationale des Écoles Supérieures d’Éducation Physique (International Association of Physical Education in Higher Education - AIESEP) (2020). Position statement on physical education assessment. https://aiesep.org/scientific-meetings/position-statements/
  4. Bianco M, & Cornett K (2021). Reengaging students through physical activity. Policy Update, 28(5), 1–2. https://www.nasbe.org/reengaging-students-through-physical-activity/ [Google Scholar]
  5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013, December). Comprehensive school physical activity programs: A guide for schools. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/physicalactivity/pdf/13_242620-A_CSPAP_SchoolPhysActivityPrograms_Final_508_12192013.pdf
  6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Trends in the prevalence of physical activity and sedentary behaviors National YRBS: 1991–2019. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/factsheets/2019_physical_trend_yrbs.htm
  7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021a). Components of the Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child (WSCC). https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/wscc/components.htm
  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021b). Youth risk behavior survey. www.cdc.gov/YRBSS
  9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022a). Active people healthy nation. https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/activepeoplehealthynation/about-active-people-healthy-nation.html
  10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2022b). School health profiles 2020: Characteristics of health programs among secondary schools. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/profiles/pdf/2020/CDC-Profiles-2020.pdf
  11. Corbin CB (2002). Physical activity for everyone: What every physical educator should know about promoting lifelong physical activity. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 21(2), 128–144. 10.1123/jtpe.21.2.128 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Corbin CB, Pangrazi RP, & Welk GJ (1994, January). Toward an understanding of appropriate physical activity levels for youth. President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports Research Digest, 1, 1–8. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/572a208737013b7a93cf167e/t/57899e6db8a79bbf14d50027/1468636781457/Digest+1994_Toward+an+Understanding+of+Appropriate+Physical+Activity+Levels+for+Youth_Series+1+Number+8+%28December%29.pdf [Google Scholar]
  13. Dauenhauer B, & Stoepker P (2022). Physical education and physical activity within a Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child approach. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 93(2), 12–19. 10.1080/07303084.2022.2020050 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Dudley D, Okely A, Pearson P, & Cotton W (2011). A systematic review of the effectiveness of physical education and school sport interventions targeting physical activity, movement skills and enjoyment of physical activity. European Physical Education Review, 17(3), 353–378. 10.1177/1356336X11416734 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, & Bull FC (2020). Global trends in insufficient physical activity among adolescents: a pooled analysis of 298 population-based surveys with 1.6 million participants. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 4(1), 23–35. https://www.thelancet.com/article/S2352-4642(19)30323-2/fulltext [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Harvey S (2006). Effects of teaching games for understanding on game performance and understanding in middle school physical education (Publishing No. 3236883) [Doctoral dissertation, Oregon State University]. ProQuest Dissertations. [Google Scholar]
  17. Harvey S, Song Y, Baek J, & van der Mars H (2016). Two sides of the same coin: Student physical activity levels during a game-centered soccer unit. European Physical Education Review, 22(4), 411–429. 10.1177/1356336X15614783 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Kärmeniemi M, Lankila T, Ikäheimo T, Koivumaa-Honkanen H, & Korpelainen R (2018). The built environment as a determinant of physical activity: A systematic review of longitudinal studies and natural experiments. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 52(3), 239–251. 10.1093/abm/kax043 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Kern BD, Malinowski P, Hunt K, McIlnay S, Powell B, & Stephenson D (2021). State of a state: Results from the Wyoming Physical Education and Physical Activity Policy survey. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 41(4), 1–6. 10.1123/jtpe.2021-0161 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Launder AG, & Piltz W (2013). Play practice: Engaging and developing skilled players from beginner to elite (2nd ed.). Human Kinetics. [Google Scholar]
  21. Laureano J, Konukman F, Gümüşdağ H, Erdoğan S, Yu J, & Çekin R (2014). Effects of marginalization on school physical education programs: A literature review. Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 64(1), 29–40. 10.2478/pcssr-2014-0029 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Lieberman DE (2020). Exercised: Why something we never evolved to do is healthy and rewarding. Pantheon. [Google Scholar]
  23. Lund J, van der Mars H (2022). Viewpoint: Physical education’s real brass ring…Time to get the field back on track. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 93(1), 5–7. 10.1080/07303084.2022.2006010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. McCloy CH (1938). In quest of skills. The Journal of Health and Physical Education, 9(8), 478–525. 10.1080/23267240.1938.10619870 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. McKenzie TL, Alcaraz J, Sallis JF, & Faucette N (1998). Effects of a physical education program on children’s manipulative skills. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 17(3), 327–341. 10.1123/jtpe.17.3.327 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. McKenzie TL, & Lounsbery MAF (2013). Physical education teacher effectiveness in a public health context. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 84(4), 419–430. 10.1080/02701367.2013.844025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Michael SL, Jones SE, Merlo CL, Sliwa SA, Lee SM, Cornett K, Brener ND, Chen TJ, Ashley CL, & Park S (2023). Dietary and physical activity behaviors in 2021 and changes from 2019 to 2021 among high school students-Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance, United States, 2021. MMWR Supplements, 72(1), 75–83. 10.15585/mmwr.su7201a9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Mikkelsen K, Stojanovska L, Polenakovic M, Bosevski M, & Apostolopoulos V (2017). Exercise and mental health. Maturitas, 106, 48–56. 10.1016/j.maturitas.2017.09.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Miller A, Christensen E, Eather N, Gray S, Sproule J, Keay J, & Lubans D (2016). Can physical education and physical activity outcomes be developed simultaneously using a game-centered approach? European Physical Education Review, 22(1), 113–133. 10.1177/1356336X15594548 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). Implementing strategies to enhance public health surveillance of physical activity in the United States. The National Academies Press. 10.17226/25444 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. National Cancer Institute. (2021). Classification of laws associated with school students. NIH. https://class.cancer.gov [Google Scholar]
  32. National Center for Education Statistics. (2022a). Private school enrollment-condition of education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgc/private-school-enrollment [Google Scholar]
  33. National Center for Education Statistics. (2022b). Public charter school enrollment-condition of education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgb/public-charter-enrollment [Google Scholar]
  34. National Center for Education Statistics. (2022c). Public school enrollment-condition of education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cga/public-school-enrollment [Google Scholar]
  35. National Coalition for Core Arts Standards. (2015). National core arts standards: A conceptual framework for arts learning. https://www.nationalartsstandards.org/sites/default/files/Conceptual%20Framework%2007-21-16.pdf
  36. National Physical Activity Plan Alliance. (2016). National Physical Activity Plan. https://paamovewithus.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/National-PA-Plan.pdf
  37. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (n.d). Health care access and quality. Healthy People 2030. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://health.gov/healthypeople [Google Scholar]
  38. Panagouli E, Stavridou A, Savvidi C, Kourti A, Psaltopoulou T, Sergentanis TN, & Tsitsika A (2021). School performance among children and adolescents during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Children, 8(12), 1134. 10.3390/children8121134 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Pate RR (2009). A national physical activity plan for the United States. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 6(s2), S157–S158. 10.1123/jpah.6.s2.s157 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Pate RR (2014). An inside view of the U.S. National Physical Activity Plan. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 11(3), 461–462. 10.1123/jpah.2014-0072 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Pate RR, Davis MG, Robinson TN, Stone EJ, McKenzie TL, & Young JC (2006). Promoting physical activity in children and youth: A leadership role for schools-A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Physical Activity Committee) in collaboration with the Councils on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young and Cardiovascular Nursing. Circulation, 114(11), 1214–1224. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.177052 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Pate RR, & Hohn RC (1994). Health and fitness through physical education. Human Kinetics. [Google Scholar]
  43. Physical Activity Alliance. (2020). What we do. https://paamovewithus.org/about-paa/
  44. Physical Activity Alliance. (2022). The 2022 United States report card on physical activity for children and youth. https://paamovewithus.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2022-US-Report-Card-on-Physical-Activity-for-Children-and-Youth.pdf
  45. Physical Activity Alliance. (2023a). The national physical activity plan: Education sector. https://paamovewithus.org/for-transfer/education/
  46. Physical Activity Alliance. (2023b). U.S. national physical activity plan. https://paamovewithus.org/national-physical-activity-plan/
  47. Racine N, McArthur BA, Cooke JE, Eirich R, Zhu J, & Madigan S (2021). Global prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents during COVID-19: a meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatrics, 175(11), 1142–1150. 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.2482 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. SHAPE America – Society of Health and Physical Educators. (2021). School reentry considerations: K-12 physical education, health education, and physical activity. https://www.shapeamerica.org/advocacy/reentry/K-12_School_Re-entry_Considerations.aspx
  49. SHAPE America – Society of Health and Physical Educators and the American Heart Association (SHAPE America & AHA). (2016). 2016 Shape of the nation: Status of physical education in the USA. https://www.shapeamerica.org/advocacy/son/
  50. Siedentop D (2009). National plan for physical activity: Education sector. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 6(s2), S168–S180. 10.1123/jpah.6.s2.s168 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Siedentop D, Hastie PA, & van der Mars H (2020). Complete guide to sport education (3rd ed.). Human Kinetics. [Google Scholar]
  52. Siedentop D, & van der Mars H (2023). Introduction to physical education, fitness, and sport (9th ed.). Human Kinetics. [Google Scholar]
  53. Sierra-Ríos JV, Clemente FM, Rey E, & González-Víllora S (2020). Effects of 6 weeks direct instruction and teaching games for understanding programs on physical activity and tactical behaviour in U-12 soccer players. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(14), 5008. 10.3390/ijerph17145008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Slater SJ, Nicholson L, Chriqui J, Turner L, & Chaloupka F (2012). The impact of state laws and district policies on physical education and recess practices in a nationally representative sample of US public elementary schools. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 166(4), 311–316. 10.1001/archpediat-rics.2011.1133 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Task Force on Community Preventive Services. (2001). Increasing physical activity: A report on recommendations of the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Recommendations and Reports, 50(No. RR-18), 1–14. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5018a1.htm [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1996). Physical activity and health: A report of the Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/sgr/pdf/sgrfull.pdf [Google Scholar]
  57. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2008). 2008 Physical activity guidelines for Americans. https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/paguide.pdf
  58. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2018). Physical activity guidelines for Americans (2nd ed.). https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Activity_Guidelines_2nd_edition.pdf [Google Scholar]
  59. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2019). National youth sports strategy. https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/National_Youth_Sports_Strategy.pdf
  60. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2021). Walk. Run. Dance. Play. What’s your move? https://health.gov/moveyourway
  61. van der Mars H (2018). Policy development in physical education… Our last best chance. Quest, 70(2), 169–190. 10.1080/00336297.2018.1439391 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. van der Mars H, Lawson HA, Mitchell MF, & Ward P (2021). Chapter 2: Reversing policy neglect in U.S. physical education: A policy-focused primer. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 40(3), 353–362. 10.1123/jtpe.2020-0240 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. van der Mars H, & Lorenz KA (2020). CSPAPs: History, foundations, possibilities, and barriers. In Carson RL & Webster CA, (Eds.), Comprehensive school physical activity programs: Putting research into evidence-based practice (pp. 3–18, 333–337). Human Kinetics. [Google Scholar]
  64. van der Mars H, McNamee J, & Timken G (2018). Physical education meets teacher evaluation: Supporting secondary school physical educators in formal assessment of student outcomes. The Physical Educator, 75(4), 582–616. 10.18666/TPE-2018-V75-I4-8471 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Wright PM, & Richards KAR (2022). Social and emotional learning as an integrated part of physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 93(2), 3–56. doi: 10.1080/07303084.2022.2020048 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  66. Yu H, Mulhearn SC, van der Mars H, Griffo J, & Kulinna P (2022). Off-hours facility use in public high schools: Physical activity potential vs. reality. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 93(2), 341–351. 10.1080/02701367.2020.1844128 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES