Abstract
The American Academy of Pediatrics recognizes recess as an essential part of overall child development in schools, impacting children’s cognitive, socioemotional and physical health and development. However, recess is often removed from the school curriculum in exchange for more classroom activities. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and SHAPE America developed Strategies for Recess in Schools to promote high-quality recess through specific actions, yet is not known how these are successfully implemented, particularly, in underserved settings. This formative research study examined the implementation of the CDC strategy in an urban, inner-city charter elementary school to identify barriers and facilitators to successful recess implementation from the perspective of various stakeholders. Thirteen in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with parents, teachers, recess monitors, and school administrators. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded for thematic analysis, supported by group discussion and analytic memos. Results suggested that although stakeholders recognized the importance of recess, the implementation of the CDC strategy was neither uniformly understood nor implemented, suggesting that additional frameworks may be helpful in implementing the CDC strategy in schools in underserved communities.
Keywords
Successfully implemented recess periods are important to the whole school experience, positively contributing to children’s cognitive, social, and physical development (Ramstetter et al., 2010). Recess improves classroom behavior as well as focus and off-task behavior (American Academy of Pediatrics, Council on School Health, 2013). In addition, it is an important source of physical activity, and provides experiences for children to build social relationships, manage conflicts with peers, and build executive function skills like self-regulation and problem solving (Ramstetter et al., 2010).
Although research has supported the importance of recess, it has increasingly been removed from the school curriculum in exchange for more in-class learning time and test preparation over the last decade. A 2007 report by the National Center on Education found that in 5 years, more than 20% of districts had cut recess (McMurrer, 2007). In a survey by SHAPE America (2016), recess was only required by law in 16% of states in elementary schools. The reduction of quality recess in schools is concerning, particularly, with the rise of behavioral difficulties (Barros et al., 2009) and child obesity (Skinner et al., 2018).
To support schools with planning and implementing high-quality recess to increase physical activity and support academic achievement, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] and SHAPE America developed Strategies for Recess in Schools (CDC and SHAPE America—Society of Health and Physical Educators, 2017b). The document outlines five key categories, each with specific actions: make leadership decisions, communication, supportive environments, engaging school communities, and evaluation. However, little is known about how feasible it is for schools to implement these strategies successfully, particularly in underserved communities where children face even higher rates of obesity, behavioral challenges, and academic success (London et al., 2015).
The objective of this study was to explore how Strategies for Recess in Schools (SRS) was implemented in an urban, inner-city elementary school, with a focus on identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation. These results can shape the development of interventions that align with the CDC strategies, and build positive recess environments in urban schools.
Method
As the purpose of this study was to understand and develop interventions appropriate to the local context, we employed a formative research study design, using phenomenology as our guiding methodology. The study took place in a Title I public urban charter elementary school with approximately 750 students, 99% of whom are Black and 87% of whom are eligible for free and reduced lunch. Purposeful sampling with a sample size appropriate for phenomenological studies (Patton, 2002) was used within the school to select knowledgeable stakeholders, including recess monitors (RMs), teachers, and administrators; RMs were part-time contractual employees who received training and were often current or former caregivers. Parents were identified through purposeful snowball sampling techniques to identify participants familiar with recess at the school, and who had children who had attended the school for at least a year. Written adult consent was obtained. All research protocols were approved by the investigators’ institutional review board as well as that of the school district.
Informed by the Recess Planning in Schools document (CDC and SHAPE America—Society of Health and Physical Educators, 2017a), we developed semistructured interview guides to explore stakeholder perceptions of recess. Guiding questions included the following.
Experiences With Recess
How would you describe the overall purpose of recess in school?
What currently happens at recess? Can you walk me through your typical recess? What is your role? What equipment gets used, if any? What games get used, if any? What guidelines are used, if any?
What did you expect recess would be like?
Tell me about any training you received to support recess.
How would you describe your relationship with {stakeholders}?
Barriers and Facilitators to Recess
What do you think works well at recess at [School Name]?
What do you think is difficult about recess?
You mentioned before that you thought that recess was meant to be doing {their response}. Do you feel recess right now is achieving this goal? Please explain.
Way Forward
In your opinion, what does the best recess look like?
How can recess be improved for the future?
What would you like changed about the recess environment?
We conducted in-depth interviews (IDIs) with teachers and administrators, while parents and recess support staff participated in focus group discussions (FGDs) which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. To triangulate these findings, we conducted unstructured observations of lunch hour recess to observe the current physical and social conditions for recess. We completed field notes and analytic memos at the end of each unstructured observation.
We uploaded data into Atlas.ti (Scientific Software, Berlin; Version 8). We used a deductive content analysis approach for the analysis (Stuckey, 2015). Consistent with the peer debriefing strategy (Clark et al., 2003), the initial core set of codes and set of preliminary findings were presented and discussed with members of the entire research team in an effort to verify both the coding structure and the interpretation of the findings across sites. This technique, as well as our methodology used for this study, abides with the RATS (relevancy, appropriateness, transparency, and soundness) guidelines for qualitative research (Morse & Allensworth, 2015). Coding concluded when all data were assigned a code and saturation was achieved (Nastasi & Schensul, 2005). Researchers used quotation reports by subcode to enumerate the themes and review the reports for duplicate quotations, and created matrices with relevant themes and illustrative quotes for each theme and subtheme enumerated by participant type.
Results
Twenty-three individuals participated in this study (see Table 1). Most identified as female and Black.
Demographics
Table 2 outlines the respective themes for each of the categories with selected quotes, while the enumeration of subcodes by stakeholder groups across the SRS categories is found in Table 3.
Illustrative Quotes by Theme and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Strategy in Their Identified Categories
Enumerated Quotes by Stakeholder Group and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Strategies for Recess in Schools
Thematic results by category are discussed next.
Making Leadership Decisions
All participants were generally unaware of written policies regarding recess including those for time, weather, frequency, training, and use of recess as a punishment. Strikingly, both teachers and RMs perceived recess as nonessential, rather as a reward that can be taken away as a punitive measure for poor behavior inside or outside the classroom. Teachers, administrators, and RMs expressed a need for a written policy, as recommended by the SRS. Stakeholders reported that the allocation of recess spaces did not appear to follow clear guidelines: Sometimes, preferred spaces and activities were allocated based on behavior, at other times based on a fixed schedule or weather conditions. Indoor recess was particularly challenging, with no clear guidelines for decisions, space allocation and activity options indoors. All participants reported that, as indicated in the SRS, recruiting and training sufficient RMs to perform adequate supervision is important to ensuring a high-quality recess but it requires improvement in this setting, complicated by high staff turnover and unexpected absences. Parents reported being willing to become RMs but reported not being asked. Teachers, administrators, and RMs agreed that RM training was inadequate, without instruction on structured activities and games, behavior management, and conflict resolution.
Communicate and Enforce Behavioral Safety Expectations
Relative to other stakeholders, RMs focused on discussing behavioral and safety expectations. Notably, parents and administrators did not often comment on behavioral or safety expectations. Both teachers and RMs reported that students experience conflict at recess but lack conflict resolution skills, leading to challenges in the recess environment. Conflict that arose during recess was often handled by classroom teachers afterward during instruction time, while safety expectations were primarily communicated and reinforced by RMs. In comparison to other groups, RMs spoke extensively about the challenges of ensuring student safety during recess, expressing concern over the safety of the recess space and citing specific hazards.
Create an Environment Supportive of Recess
Several stakeholders felt that access to enough physical equipment was essential but had different perceptions of the importance of play equipment. While some stakeholders highlighted that structured play stations and preplanned games helped to prevent conflict and negative interactions between students, recess monitors identified potential challenges surrounding recess equipment and games. RMs perceived not only that the play equipment was insufficient but also that it was not valued by students. In contrast, administrators and parents both felt that access to play equipment was important, particularly, equal access.
Current play structures were seen as insufficient and in need of improvement. Moreover, the process of how children were allocated to various play structures, including the playground, was not consistent. With respect to preplanned activities, all stakeholders except RMs expressed the value of structured activities, while parents additionally wanted free play options. Instead, RMs felt that clear, painted markings for games and playground zones would enhance the recess experience.
Engage the School Community to Support Recess
Parents and school administrators expressed their support for recess and wanted to be further engaged but were unclear how they may be able to play a role in the recess experience beyond providing equipment. Parents believed that one way to improve the recess experience at school was to engage parent volunteers at recess, believing that this would improve interactions with staff and bolster parent engagement at school. RMs, who themselves are often parents or family members of children in the school, perceived that their presence at recess allowed for children to develop positive adult relationships. While parent and RM engagement was perceived as important, no stakeholders commented on the importance of fostering student leadership.
Gather Information
Few stakeholders reported on strategies for evaluating recess. Evaluation appeared informal, and reliant on communication between stakeholders, such as recess monitors to teachers. Limited existing recess evaluation was reactive and focused on staff performance, not recess as a whole.
Discussion
We examined the implementation of the SRS in an inner-city school from the perspective of multiple stakeholders in the school community. We identified some components of the SRS that stakeholders identify as important, but these were not easily implemented, with stakeholders reporting differences in their vision and appreciation for a successful recess. Inclusive and aligned stakeholder engagement is critical for the successful implementation of any school-based programs, including recess.
First, recess was perceived as an optional, reward-based part of a school day, rather than an essential component. Although local school district policies state that recess cannot be used as punishment or reward, these stakeholder perceptions may hinder implementation of resource- and time-intensive strategies to optimize recess for its own sake and to suggest opportunities for professional development on the role of recess in children’s physical and socioemotional development.
Second, our findings support the fact that teachers have a critical role before and after recess, but find that they have limited interaction and understanding of what the experience is like in real time. In our context, involvement at recess was not part of teachers’ contracts, disconnecting them from this part of the school day. Like teachers, administrators are highly influential leaders in setting and implementing policies in schools, yet they were not aware of policies or written guidelines for recess or available tools to help them develop written recess plans. Yet even the development of a written recess plan may not be sufficient, as it can be difficult to implement without resources, such as limited equipment and training as our study identified. As one stakeholder astutely observed, recess is no different than a class lesson: In neither case should one be unprepared.
Third, parents are an important stakeholder, but were often ignored by teachers and administrators in planning or implementing recess. In this study, parents placed great value on the experience of recess, expressing goals aligned with the CDC strategies for improved recess experiences: better equipment, increased structured play, and good supervision. While unrecognized by other stakeholder groups, parents themselves expressed a desire for greater participation and involvement at recess, suggesting that parental engagement and student leadership may be a critical piece missing in our setting.
Our study demonstrates that key stakeholders must perceive recess to be valuable to a child’s whole school experience. Currently, the CDC strategy does not identify the process of creating a shared mental model for recess as a key step to successful implementation, suggesting that more research needs to be done to understand why stakeholders perceive recess so differently and identify ways to bring disparate views together (CDC and SHAPE America—Society of Health and Physical Educators, 2017a). More education about the role of recess in a child’s whole school development may be required for all stakeholders in schools, including those who are frontline staff for recess, like recess monitors and teachers.
Limitations
There are several limitations for this study. Overall, the sample size was small and only a select group of administrators and parents were willing to participate. Due to school district regulations, students were not included in data collection activities. Data collection occurred at the end of the school year and there may be seasonal variation in stakeholders’ opinions of recess based on the time of year or recent weather conditions.
Conclusions and Implications for Practice
Successful implementation of the CDC strategy can be challenging for schools in resource-limited settings with multiple stakeholders. As our results show, stakeholders may have divergent views on which strategies are important to implement for a successful recess in their respective setting. Therefore, it is important that all stakeholders—including administrators, teachers, parents, recess support personnel, and students—be involved in recess planning and in developing a shared mental model. Although tools exist to support schools in developing and building their own recess and evaluation plans, they are difficult to put into practice. Using health behavior change strategies may be helpful in creating interventions to improve uptake and adoption of these tools.
