Fewer than one in three primary school children are getting the recommended 30 minutes of physical activity during the school day, according to a new study. Georgina Wort from the Department of Health at the University of Bath discusses the importance of movement and the current inequality between schools.
Parents may choose a primary school for their child based on its location, reputation and performance measures, such as Ofsted reports. But what about other factors, such as how well a school supports children’s health and wellbeing? Are children’s opportunities to be physically active important? Are schools broadly comparable?
When it comes to physical activity during the school day, the answer is a clear no, as shown by our recent research. We compare data from more than 17,000 children across 165 primary schools in England, collected using wearable technologies that give objective measures of physical activity (rather than self-reporting methods, which are often unreliable, for example due to poor memory recall).
These data show stark differences in how active children are. The disparity between pupils at different schools appears to reflect deeper inequalities, rather than small or chance variations.
Fewer than one in three children, on average, achieve the recommended 30 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity during the school day. While this is concerning in itself, the large variation between schools is more alarming. In some schools, children accumulate as little as eight minutes of higher-intensity activity per day, whereas in others pupils exceed 40 minutes. Step counts show a similarly wide range – from around 1,800 steps per day to more than 10,000. In effect, simply attending a different school can mean a child is five times less active than their peers elsewhere.
Why is this important?
These differences matter. Children spend a significant proportion of their waking hours at school. Indeed, schools are often described as appropriate places to address inequalities as children are exposed to broadly similar routines and curricula. Yet when it comes to physical activity, the school environment can either promote or severely limit movement, as highlighted by this research.
Physical activity in childhood is associated with many benefits, including improved mental wellbeing, enhanced academic outcomes, better heart health and efficient use of energy, which reduce the risk of problems like diabetes in later life.
What’s more, early behaviours can shape lifelong engagement in physical activity. Therefore, if some children experience school environments that limit movement, while others attend schools that actively promote it, the consequences may be seen into adulthood.
So, over time, differences may contribute to wider inequalities in physical and mental health, particularly when combined with disparities outside of school. There are gender differences too, both inside and outside of school and across lifespans. While boys are generally more active than girls overall, this was not universal in our study. In a couple of schools, girls were just as active as boys, or in some, more so.
These variations indicate that the gender gaps are not inevitable. Instead, inequalities may be shaped by school-specific norms, opportunities and encouragement. These findings offer an important reminder that schools have the potential to challenge, rather than reproduce gender inequalities.
Similarly, our research aligns with previous studies looking at socioeconomic status and health behaviours in young people. Children attending schools with higher levels of deprivation (as indicated by the proportion eligible for free school meals) are less active during the school day compared with those in more affluent areas.
Pupils in more deprived areas accumulated around 25 fewer minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week at school on average. This is particularly concerning as schools are often one of the few settings where policymakers might expect socioeconomic differences to be reduced rather than reinforced.
What might be causing these differences?
The selling of school fields and playgrounds has been reported in the media as a driver of disparities – led by reasonable concerns around the reduction of sporting opportunities.
But our study finds little evidence that physical infrastructure explains such inequalities. Playground size is not strongly associated with how active children are, nor are traditional markers of school quality, such as Ofsted ratings. This challenges assumptions that improving facilities or providing more space alone will lead to increases in physical activity.
Staff being physically active can make a positive difference. Our research shows that in schools where staff move more, pupils tended to be more active too.
This suggests that school culture and role-modelling can be important in shaping children’s behaviour. Indeed, small decisions might influence children’s activity in school, such as how break times are structured, whether teachers join in on the playground, if movement is encouraged in lessons, or even how they talk about physical activity can matter. These factors were not measured in this study, but schools may benefit from further investigation.
What might be done to close these gaps?
School-level practices and policies are important to promote physical activity. Schools could consider integrating short bursts of movement into classroom teaching, re-thinking the structure and duration of break times, and fostering a whole-school ethos that values physical activity. Supporting staff wellbeing and activity may also indirectly benefit pupils by reinforcing positive norms around movement.
But efforts to increase physical activity need to carefully consider equity. Targeted support and resources – that considers the needs of girls and children from less affluent backgrounds – may be necessary to ensure that no one is left behind and that the disparities we see in levels of physical activity are addressed.
This research raises important questions for educators, parents, carers and policymakers. If schools can differ so considerably in how much physical activity their pupils are achieving, should this be monitored, reported or prioritised alongside academic outcomes?
Policy should ensure that what matters is measured; instead of only focusing on academic outcomes, school metrics aligned to wellbeing should also be reported. At present, parents choosing a school have little to no information about how active children are within schools, despite the important links between movement, wellbeing and learning.
Physical activity should also be seen as a foundation for academic success, not something added only if there’s time. Policymakers should consider compulsory physical literacy and activity education in initial teacher training, as well as mandating physical activity opportunities outside of physical education.
This work invites people to think about what we mean by a ‘good’ school. Schools are important environments that can shape children’s behaviours and opportunities. While academic achievement is important, this should not come at the expense of children’s health and wellbeing.
All articles posted on this blog give the views of the author(s), and not the position of the IPR, nor of the University of Bath.
