Given the current focus on high-stakes accountability in America's public schools, this study examined teacher evaluation specific to physical education. This study revealed current teacher evaluation practices used in physical education, perceptions of school administrators related to the value of the physical education evaluation process, and the perceptions of the physical education teachers related to the value of the evaluation process. The first phase of this study was an interpretive document analysis study conducted on four separate teacher evaluation systems commonly used within the public school system to evaluate physical education teachers. Those four systems were: Marzanos teacher evaluation model, Danielson framework for teaching (FFT), Rewarding Excellence in Instruction and Leadership (REIL), and Teacher Advancement Program (TAP). A separate evaluation instrument specific to physical education created by the National Association of Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) was used as a comparative evaluation tool. Evidence suggests that two of the four teacher evaluation systems had a high percentage of alignment with the NASPE instrument (TAP 87.5%, FFT 82.5%). The Marzano teacher evaluation model had the least amount of alignment with the NASPE instrument (62.5%). The second phase of this study was a phenomenological approach to understanding administrators' and physical education teachers' perceptions to teacher evaluation specific to physical education. The participants in this study were administrators and physical education teachers from an urban school district. An informal survey and formal semi-structured interviews were used to reveal perceptions of teacher evaluation specific to physical education. Evidence from the administrator's informal survey and formal semi-structured interviews revealed four common themes: (1) "I value PE, but I live in reality" (administrators value physical education, but practice in reality); (2) "good teaching is good teaching"; (3) "I know my limitations, and I want
eed help" (relative to teacher evaluation in PE); and (4) where's the training beef? Evidence from the physical education teacher's informal survey and formal semi-structured interviews revealed three common themes: (a) physical education is valued, but not prioritized; (b) teacher evaluation in physical education is "greatly needed, yet not transparent; (c) physical educators are not confident in their evaluator.

Background: Limited physical activity (PA) is a key factor contributing to obesity and independently protects from diseases in youth and later in life. Students spend most of their time in schools sedentary and have limited opportunities to engage in PA. By making changes to the school environment and developing a school culture that actively supports and reinforces PA behavior, Comprehensive School Physical Activity Programs are designed to make PA engagement throughout each school day the accepted social norm. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of environmental and behavioral modifications to school-level PA participation for girls and boys.

Methods: This study used a hybrid reversal design by alternating baseline phases with two intervention phases that provided increased access and opportunity to PA, and behavioral prompting and reinforcing plus access and opportunity, for all students to engage in PA during lunch. Physical activity and contextual data were collected using a previously validated instrument (System for Observing Play and Leisure Activity in Youth; SOPLAY). Behavioral data were collected using a novel instrument (System for Observing Behavioral Ecology for Youth in Schools; SOBEYS) developed to measure prompting and reinforcement contingencies of PA participation consistent with the Behavioral Ecological Model.

Data Analysis: The number of students engaged in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and the proportion of students in MVPA were analyzed using visual analysis of graphic data and general linear statistical models, with environmental and behavioral variables as predictors.

Results: Increases in the number of girls and boys in MVPA were seen visually and statistically during the environmental and the environmental plus behavioral intervention phases compared to baseline. No differences were seen visually or statistically between intervention phases. Intervention effects were larger for boys than girls. The SOBEYS instrument was able to produce valid and reliable data regarding prompting and reinforcement of PA. However, environmental factors appear to have a greater influence on PA than behavioral factors.

Conclusion: Modifying the school environment to increase access and opportunity for PA during lunch can lead to positive changes in MVPA during the school day, with special consideration needed to engage more girls.

Background: Childhood obesity is one of the most serious public health concerns in the United States and has been associated with low levels of physical activity. Schools are ideal physical activity promotion sites but school physical activity opportunities have decreased due the increased focus on academic performance. Before-school programs provide a good opportunity for children to engage in physical activity as well as improve their readiness to learn. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of a before-school running/walking club on children's physical activity and on-task behavior. Methods: Participants were third and fourth grade children from two schools in the Southwestern United States who participated in a before-school running/walking club that met two times each week. The study employed a two-phase experimental design with an initial baseline phase and an alternating treatments phase. Physical activity was monitored using pedometers and on-task behavior was assessed through systematic observation. Data analysis included visual analysis, descriptive statistics, as well as multilevel modeling. Results: Children accumulated substantial amounts of physical activity within the before-school program (School A: 1731 steps, 10:02 MVPA minutes; School B: 1502 steps, 8:30 MVPA minutes) and, on average, did not compensate by decreasing their physical activity during the rest of the school day. Further, on-task behavior was significantly higher on days the children attended the before-school program than on days they did not (School A=15.78%, pseudo-R2=.34 [strong effect]; School B=14.26%, pseudo-R2=.22 [moderate effect]). Discussion: Results provide evidence for the positive impact of before-school programs on children's physical activity and on-task behavior. Such programs do not take time away from academics and may be an attractive option for schools.

An intervention study was conducted with elementary physical education teachers and their use of a newly developed series of fitness segments called Knowledge in Action (KIA). This study was designed to enable teachers to teach healthy behavior knowledge (HBK) in their classes without sacrificing physical activity levels. This study has two phases. First, the intervention was conducted to determine the effectiveness of the KIA fitness segment intervention. Second, teachers' perceptions of both teaching HBK and the KIA fitness segments were investigated. Ten teacher participants were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. Intervention teachers participated in professional development, provided with all teaching materials, and YouTube videos that modeled the teaching of the KIA fitness segments. Teacher fidelity was measured through observations. Student physical activity patterns were measured in randomly selected teachers' classes (both intervention and control) to determine potential physical activity pattern differences between groups. Teachers were interviewed from one to three times across the project in order to determine perceptions of teaching HBK and the KIA fitness segments. Researchers used constant comparison method to uncover possible common themes. Student knowledge was assessed pre/post using PE Metrics Standard 3 cognitive test to determine HBK changes. Data analysis included General liner models (GLM) at the student level (gender) and Hierarchical linear models (HLM) at the school level (treatment, school). There was a moderate mean teacher fidelity score (77.9%) found among the intervention teachers. HLM results showed students in the intervention group had a 3.4(20%) greater improvement in HBK scores when compared with their control counterparts (p<0.001). Student activity levels were found to be similar in both groups with 871.33 and 822.22 steps in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Although all of the teachers thought it was important to teach HBK they were not spending time on it during classes at pretest. Three common themes were discovered: (a) Effective Teacher Training of the Segments, (b), Teachers Learned a Novel Strategy, and (c) Teachers Recommended Modifications. In summary, the KIA fitness segments received favorable views and gave teachers a way to teach HBK without reducing physical activity time.

Recently, much of the Physical Education literature has focused on confronting the challenges associated with the rising number of overweight children in America's schools. Physical Education programs are often looked to as intervention sites to remedy the current obesity epidemic. Teachers are often also not held accountable for curriculum adherence and student outcomes in Physical Education due to the lack of a common curriculum. Therefore, measuring teacher fidelity to specific Physical Education curricula is imperative to determine student outcomes when teachers follow the model as intended. In response to these issues, it has become increasingly important to measure student physical activity levels in Physical Education programs to determine moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) levels and to learn about teachers' fidelity to curricular models. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate teacher fidelity to the Dynamic Physical Education (DPE) curricular model after having completed DPE methods courses at the university level, when teaching in a DPE supported or non-supported districts. A secondary purpose of this study was to measure students' physical activity (PA) outcomes in classes where the curricular model was used with various levels of district support. Data were collected using mixed methods including an observation instrument, field notes, informal interviews, document analysis, and direct observation of physical activity. Descriptive statistics and t-tests were run to investigate differences between teacher support groups and by teacher fidelity groups. Teachers from both teacher support groups were teaching the curricular model with moderate to high fidelity. Findings suggest that fidelity levels were related to preparation on the DPE curricular model, ongoing professional development, and administrative support. Although the students were often standing (i.e., 40% of the lesson) and 30% of class time was spent in MVPA; teachers were frequently promoting physical activity both within (51%) and outside (50%) of Physical Education and the school day.