A 20-Year Systematic Review of Before- and After-School Physical Activity Research (2000–2020)

Click name to view affiliation

Risto Marttinen George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

Search for other papers by Risto Marttinen in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3807-5684 *
,
Alba Rodrigues George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

Search for other papers by Alba Rodrigues in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1903-8482
,
Oscar Nuñez-Enriquez Autonomous University of Chihuahua, Chihuahua, Mexico

Search for other papers by Oscar Nuñez-Enriquez in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6573-6762
,
Erin Centeio University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA

Search for other papers by Erin Centeio in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5465-4243
, and
Dominique Banville George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

Search for other papers by Dominique Banville in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4099-3740
Free access

Purpose: This systematic review aimed at identifying, categorizing, and analyzing peer-reviewed literature on organized before- and after-school (B&ASP) physical activity programs from 2000 to 2020. Methods: We analyzed 291 articles that fit the inclusion criteria from five databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Guidelines were followed. Results: Research on B&ASPs has increased and been published in 157 journals across 26 countries. Most studies were quantitative. Most studies used a theoretical or conceptual framework and reported reliability, validity, and trustworthiness. Varied additional foci of impact were reported through different physical activities. However, physical activity was usually not measured. Interventions were 1–520 weeks long and conducted in different study contexts. Many studies targeted marginalized groups but did not utilize critical theory. Conclusion: Further studies should aim to better understand the nuances of B&ASPs, and critical theories could be useful. The lack of journals for B&ASP research limits scholars’ ability to move the field forward.

Historically, before- and after-school programs (B&ASPs) in the United States emerged during the latter nineteenth century as the desire and need for children to participate in the labor force decreased (Garn et al., 2014; Mahoney et al., 2009). As youth were no longer needed in the labor force, educational expectations grew for them. This increased educational focus, partnered with the compulsory education laws of the late 1800s and a change in the labor force, led to extended discretionary time during the after-school hours (Mahoney et al., 2009). Thus, ASPs were created to support working families and build social and academic skills in children. For the purposes of this review, we define B&ASPs as key transitional times wherein students can find regular structured programming before or after normal school hours that focuses on physical activity (PA) and/or sports; these programs are inclusive of weekend programs but exclusive of sleep-away camps.

For the most part, the goals of ASPs have remained consistent over time as most programs still have a focus on supporting working families by providing child care before parents are off work, and after-school time is still largely used to build social and academic skills. As ASPs grew to serve more and more students, programs that began as academic enrichment and after-school care to support families often took a deficit model approach of “keeping kids off the streets.” Eventually, a strengths-based approach through theories like positive youth development (PYD) was adopted in many programs, which led to viewing students as resources to be developed rather than problems to be solved (Lerner et al., 2005). A move toward the use of PYD in ASPs has led to a growing interest in promoting engagement through PA as many assume that sports can be an ideal vehicle to build life skills and character (Agbuba et al., 2010; Beets et al., 2009; Garn et al., 2014; Maljak et al., 2014).

Up until recently, there was a lack of research that “focused on how sports could be designed to create among young people critical awareness and action strategies linking them to efforts to foster equality, social justice, and other external assets of a progressive nature” (Coakley, 2016, p. 26). This can also be said for organized B&ASPs that focus on PA. These types of programs have largely been underutilized as they have emerged from being a place to keep students occupied and cared for before their parents come to pick them up after work to a space where they can continue to learn. B&ASPs that focus on PA have tremendous potential to not only engage youth through PA but also harness their abilities and strengths to develop social and life skills necessary for their development. In addition, recent research has tied the decline in independent activity in children to a decline in mental health and well-being (Gray et al., 2023). Considering the flexible characteristics of B&ASPs, such programs may be a fruitful setting to address this crisis by providing access to more PA and play, which are often associated with positive mental health. Research has shown that understanding the approach and goals implemented in ASPs is an important aspect to consider when delivering ASPs (Marttinen & Fredrick, 2017; Marttinen, Fredrick, et al., 2020; Simon et al., 2021).

Although B&ASPs focused on PA are not considered physical education (PE) specifically, nor are they always focused on “sport,” the majority of the articles in B&ASPs focused on PA, as we note later in the findings section, were published in PE journals. Furthermore, often B&ASPs focused on PA are organized by, or associated with, PE programs, which makes them a crucial space for physical educators to understand and leverage (Post & Palacios, 2019). B&ASPs typically have more flexibility and can be a place to further address PE standards and goals that are often left unmet due to the time constraints of traditional PE programs (Marttinen, Fredrick, et al., 2020).

PYD has been studied extensively in PA and in ASPs, although PYD was not initially developed to be used in sport and PA programs. Notably, Holt et al. (2017) used a meta-method analysis to examine 63 research articles using PYD in sport settings. Holt and his colleagues developed a model of PYD through sport using a grounded research approach. The model proposed by Holt et al. focuses on relationships, life skills, and personal and social outcomes. The PYD climate describes healthy and positive interactions between peers, adults, and parents. The focus on life skills (defined as “internal assets as learned skills important for successfully coping with situations in multiple contexts” [Weiss, 2016, p. 13]) embedded in the program ensures that the students engage in life skill-building activities that transfer outside of sport. The PYD outcomes are in the domains of personal, social, and physical.

Another term that is often used, sometimes incorrectly interchangeably, with PYD is sport-based youth development (SBYD), which consists of programs that occur out of school and use a specific sport to facilitate life skills development similar to that of PYD (Perkins & Noam, 2007). However, SBYD programs usually focus on a single sport and often contain an emphasis on competition, although it is not always the primary focus. An example of an SBYD program would be a basketball program like Beyond the Ball that meets after school to practice but has a distinct focus on teaching personal and social responsibility, yet they also compete in tournaments and matches on the weekends (Jacobs et al., 2016). A PYD program that is not an SBYD program would be a twice-a-week ASP that teaches life skills and literacy through multiple sports but does not spend time in direct competition outside of the program (e.g., Fredrick et al., 2020).

Many B&ASPs that focus on PA claim myriad benefits for participants. A few notable reviews have examined the effects of sport and PA participation within and outside of the PYD theoretical framework. In one of these notable studies, Eime et al. (2013) conducted a systematic review of the psychological and social benefits of sport participation. This review identified 30 articles and suggested that sport participation can improve self-esteem, increase social interaction, and result in fewer depressive symptoms. More specifically, the authors suggested that sport may be associated with better psychosocial health than participation in PA alone. The authors, however, critiqued the published work in the field as the majority of the studies were cross-sectional, so direct causal links were difficult to determine.

Whitley et al. (2019) conducted a systematic review of SBYD interventions in the United States. This review of 56 studies largely found that the quality of methods and evidence was weak and suggested that, although there was some promising research, the evidence collected to date in the field of SBYD did not yet warrant wide-scale implementation to achieve public health goals.

Building on the reviews by Eime et al. (2013), Holt et al. (2017), and Whitley et al. (2019), Bruner et al. (2021) examined the effect of SBYD interventions on PYD through a systematic review and meta-analysis. This review of 35 studies found small to medium effect sizes of PYD interventions on competence, confidence, and life skills outcomes but no significant effects on outcomes related to character, connection, PYD climate, and health.

Although these reviews and the research underlying them provide us with a strong understanding of SBYD programs and sport participation, not all B&ASPs are based on organized sport. In the United States alone, before the pandemic, 10.2 million youth participated in after-school care annually, and more than 10 million kids were waiting to get in (Afterschool Alliance 2019). Many of these programs have some aspect of PA but may not be through organized sport. Some do not utilize PYD or take an SBYD approach and, thus, were excluded from the aforementioned reviews . Yet, these programs are serving youth in communities and providing access to PA. Therefore, it is crucial for us to understand what type of research has been conducted, what theories have been utilized, and how (or whether) PA levels have been measured. Once researchers understand the type of research that has been conducted, they are better able to shape future studies and work to uncover new methods and answers to persistent research questions. To our knowledge, no study has looked inclusively across all B&ASPs that focus on PA at the scale this present study has. Therefore, it is the purpose of this review to identify, categorize, and analyze the peer-reviewed literature on organized B&ASPs that focus on PA and/or sport from 2000 to 2020.

Methods

The range of our review was from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2020. We used the following inclusion criteria: peer-reviewed empirical research, K–12 students, B&ASPs regardless of location, and Saturday and Sunday daytime programming unless they were sleep-away camps. Articles were excluded if they met the following criteria: not written in English, literature reviews and meta-analyses, opinion or editorial articles, conference proceedings, books, book chapters, interscholastic or competitive teams that restrict participation based on skills, and summer and holiday camps. Although PA was a focus in all of the articles included in this review by design, not all B&ASPs measured PA in the study, as we will note later. The decision to narrow down the search criteria to what we listed earlier was to understand B&ASPs that children can participate in regardless of their ability to pay for access to a competitive sports team. We specifically excluded competitive teams (e.g., a high school basketball team) as these often limit participation based on previously acquired skills and are focused on competition.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Reviews

Systematic reviews are important to understand the scholarship conducted in a specific field. More specifically, it is useful for scholars to understand what type of research has been conducted in the past to move the field forward. For this systematic review, we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Page et al., 2021). These guidelines help researchers transparently report “why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found” (p. 1). To ensure that a systematic review is valuable to the users, the authors should present “a transparent, complete, and accurate account of why the review was done, how studies were identified and selected, and what was found” (Page et al., 2021, p. 1). Although the PRISMA guidelines were designed for health intervention studies, the checklist is also applicable to other areas, such as education and, we argue, to before- and after-school PE research. PRISMA suggests citing each independent study included and to present their characteristics; however, the vast number of studies included in the analysis (N = 291) makes this unfeasible in a journal article. The full list of articles can be obtained by emailing the first author.

Search

Authors 2 and 3 conducted an exhaustive search of five databases (Web of Science, ERIC, Educ Research Complete, APA Psych Info, and SportDiscus). The following search terms were employed: [“after school” OR “before school” AND “physical *activit*” OR sport*]. The initial search produced 2,571 articles. After duplicates were deleted, 1,758 abstracts of articles were reviewed. Based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 1,429 of the abstracts were removed as they did not meet the stated criteria, and thus, the full texts for 329 articles were downloaded and allocated for review. In a supplemental review by the first author, another nine articles were removed and deemed as not meeting the inclusion criteria, leaving 320 articles to be coded by Authors 1 and 2.

Coding

Several coding categories were created (see Table 1) to ensure robust categorization and analysis of the included research. The coding sheet and Qualtrics (SAP) form used to enter the codes were pilot tested by two noncoders (Authors 3 and 5) using the Qualtrics survey and one randomly selected article. The feedback provided was used to improve the coding sheet and Qualtrics survey. To obtain adequate interobserver agreement (IOA), three articles (1%) were randomly selected, and the two coders (Authors 1 and 2) independently coded them using the coding sheet. Reliability was established by calculating IOA = (agreements/agreements + disagreements). A satisfactory IOA of 87% was achieved. An additional 10 articles (3%) were then randomly selected and coded independently by the two coders. Although close, the IOA failed to achieve 85% agreement, and a meeting between the two coders was held to revisit the coding sheet and definitions. During a third round of coding, Authors 1 and 2 each coded five articles and achieved a 91% IOA. A subsequent five more articles were coded, and an IOA of 92% was achieved. At this point, with a consistent IOA of over 85% achieved, articles were split evenly between the two coders, who independently coded their assigned articles in the categories found in Table 1. To ensure IOA throughout the final coding process, a random selection of articles (N = 30; 9.4%) were selected and coded by each coder, and an IOA of above 85% was maintained. An additional 38 articles were removed for failing to meet the inclusion criteria during coding (see Figure 1), leaving 291 full-text articles that were included in the analysis. After each round of coding to attain adequate IOA, the coders met to reconcile all disagreements.

Table 1

Coding Categories and Subcategories

Number of authorsCountry of originYearJournalTheory used

 Positive youth development, theory of planned behavior, self-determination theory, self-efficacy, motivation, ecological, social–emotional learning, social cognitive, goal theory, critical (feminist, racial, generic critical theory, queer)Conceptual framework used

 CSPAP, didactics (Amade-Escot), pedagogical model, value orientation, quality PE (SHAPE), standards from an organization (SHAPE, Aspen, and so forth)Methodology used

 Qualitative

  Generic, phenomenological, ethnographic, grounded theory active research? (Participatory action research, activist, traditional) Case study?

 Quantitative

  Descriptive, correlational/predictive, quasi-experimental, experimental mixedValidity, reliability used (quantitative)? Trustworthiness, credibility used

 Triangulation, peer debriefing, member check, negative case check, positionality statement, reflexivity, prolonged engagement, multiple codersQualitative analysis

 Constant comparison, thematic analysis, qualitative coding, analytic memos, discourse analysis (include critical), emic coding (ethnographic)Quantitative analysis

 Descriptive, correlational, predictive, modeling, testing of meansFocus outside of PA
Ways data were collected

 Accelerometer/pedometer/HR monitor, questionnaire/instrument, observation, systematic observation, interview, focus groups, journal, GPS, test (knowledge/skill), stimulated recall photovoice, material collection (artifacts), anthropometric measurementsWays physical activity was measured

 NOT measured, accelerometer, pedometer, systematic observation (SOFIT/or similar), self-report, GPS, HR monitorPopulation

 Youth, teacher, parent, PETE, staff, administrator

 Number of youth, number of adultsPrimary contact with the population

 Parent, teacher, volunteer (not parent), paid employee/staff/coach, researcher, preservice teacher, student (K–12)Program occurred

 After school, before school, combination of before and after school, extracurricular not specifiedLength (in weeks)

Environment

 Urban, suburban, rural, not specifiedSchool level and average age

 Not specified, elementary/primary school (K–5/6), middle school (6–8), high school (9–12), elementary and middle (include K–8), middle and high (6–12)Service learning used?Focus on obesityGender separation

 Girls, boys, no focusFocus on equity

Note. CSPAP = Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program; PA = physical activity; PE = physical education; HR = heart rate; GPS = global positioning satellite; SOFIT = system for observing fitness instruction time; PETE = physical education teacher education; SHAPE = Society for Health and Physical Educators.

Figure 1
Figure 1

—Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flowchart. ASP = after-school program.

Citation: Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 44, 1; 10.1123/jtpe.2023-0062

Results

The results highlight a growing field of research that focuses on B&ASPs. In the following section, we present results from the analysis of the coding.

Overview of Articles: Source and Author Details

The mean number of published B&ASP articles per year was 14.5 (SD = 11.33), with the most articles published in 2020 (n = 42). In general, articles increased in number from 2000 to 2020 (see Figure 2). In fact, the correlation between year and published articles was .88 (p < .001), indicating a significant trend of increasing articles in each subsequent year. The articles were published in 157 different journals, with the most published in the Journal of Physical Activity and Health (n = 13, 4.5%), BMC Public Health (n = 8, 2.7%), Evaluation and Program Planning (n = 7, 2.4%), Journal of School Health (n = 7, 2.4%), Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy (n = 7, 2.4%), Journal of Teaching Physical Education (n = 6, 2.1%), and The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (n = 6, 2.1%). There were eight journals that had five articles each, and 99 journals that published only one article related to B&ASPs.

Figure 2
Figure 2

—Number of articles published each year.

Citation: Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 44, 1; 10.1123/jtpe.2023-0062

Research was conducted across 26 countries, with the most studies being conducted within the United States (n = 211), followed by the United Kingdom (n = 16), Canada (n = 13), China (n = 9), Australia (n = 7), Spain (n = 5), South Korea (n = 4), Chile and Sweden (n = 3), and Iran, Norway, and Poland (n = 2 each); 14 other countries had one article published. The number of authors per paper ranged from one to 15 (M = 5.13; SD = 2.96). Most papers had between two and six authors (n = 196).

Characteristics of Research

A majority of the papers were quantitative (n = 199; 68.4%), followed by qualitative (n = 56; 19.2%), and then mixed methods (n = 36; 12.4%). Among the quantitative manuscripts, the majority (n = 188; 80%) were categorized as quasi-experimental or experimental in nature, whereas 26 (11%) were descriptive and 21 (9%) were correlational and/or predictive in nature. The qualitative manuscripts included in the review were in the majority “generic,” meaning that the authors did not specify a particular qualitative methodology (n = 76; 82.6%). However, six (6.5%) were categorized as ethnographic, five (5%) were phenomenological, and two (2%) were grounded theory. There were a total of 18 manuscripts that self-identified as case studies (6.2%) and 11 manuscripts that were categorized as action research, which represented 3.8% of the articles included in this study.

In addition to focusing on increasing PA in B&ASPs, most studies had one or more additional foci of impact (73.2%). For example, 27.1% (n = 79) of studies reported focusing on nutrition and healthy eating, whereas 17.2% (n = 50) reported psychological aspects, and 8.2% reported additionally focusing on overall health as well as academic skills (n = 24). Finally, social and emotional learning was also deemed as a secondary outcome in 20 of the studies (6.9%). Some of the studies included multiple variables, some with more than five additional foci outside of PA. Surprisingly, although the major focus was deemed as being PA, over 49% of studies did not measure PA. When PA was measured, 23.7% used accelerometers, 10.7% utilized self-report, 5.2% used heart rate monitors and pedometers, respectively, and 4.8% used systematic observation. In some studies, 7% reported using more than one way of measuring PA, with GPS being the only additional source used.

The type of activity offered in the B&ASP was also coded within the analysis. The majority of studies (66%) offered various/multiple PA experiences through the programming. However, there were also specialized opportunities that were reported, including 4.5% focused on running, 3.8% on dance, 2.1% on soccer, 1.7% on basketball, and 1% on weightlifting.

A majority of articles did not report using a theory (57.4%; n = 167). Of the 57.4% of studies not utilizing a theory, there were 46 studies that reported using some type of conceptual framework (i.e., Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program). Therefore, there were a total of 73.2% of the studies that used either a theoretical or conceptual framework. Of those studies that reported a theoretical framework, social determination theory (specifically Deci and Ryan) was the most cited primary theory used (24%; n = 30). This was followed by social cognitive theory (24%; n = 29), PYD (specifically, Holt) (17.7%; n = 22), ecological systems theory (8%; n = 10), self-efficacy theory (7.2%; n = 9, specifically Bandura), and critical theory (4.8%; n = 6). Other theories reported being used, but in under 1% of the studies, included goal theory, theory of planned behavior, PYD (specifically Lerner), social–emotional learning, and social learning theory. Of the secondary theories reported being used, social cognitive was the most cited (13.7%; n = 17), followed by social determination theory (specifically Deci and Ryan; 7.2%; n = 9), PYD (specifically Holt; n = 1), and finally, self-efficacy (Bandura; n = 1).

A variety of methods were used to document reliability, validity, trustworthiness, and credibility. Among the quantitative studies (199), 91.9% of the studies were coded as properly addressing validity and reliability. For qualitative research (n = 56), 79% of the studies reported using trustworthiness. The methods cited as primary forms of trustworthiness included triangulation (45%; n = 33), followed by peer debriefing (33%; n = 24), and multiple coders (13.6%; n = 10). Member checks, prolonged engagement, negative case checks, and reflexivity were reported in one or two studies. Secondary forms of trustworthiness were peer debriefing (30%; n = 22), multiple coders (19%; n = 14), and member checking (15%; n = 11). Some studies listed up to seven different ways in which trustworthiness was established.

Data were coded for specific programs to determine whether they were overrepresented in the literature. A total of 78.7% of studies reported affiliation with a specific program. The “Youth Fit for Life” (n = 12; 4.1%) and the “FitKid Project” had the most studies (n = 9; 3.1%) included in the review, with 15 other programs having 3–5 (1–1.7%) published articles included.

Participant Characteristics and Demographics

Of the studies that were analyzed, they ranged in weeks of intervention from 1 to 520 weeks, with a mean of 29 weeks. Participants included either children/youth or adults. The range of children/youth participants was large, from 1 to 32,482 (M = 386; SD = 1966), and the ages greatly varied. There were 14 studies that did not include youth at all. Seventy percent of studies reported an average age of youth, whereas 30% did not include age. Ages ranged from 6 to 18 (M = 10.9; SD = 2.2). Finally, 288 studies included adult participants in some capacity. These participants included teachers, administrators, parents, other school staff, and higher education teacher preparation faculty. Among the adults, participation ranged from 1 to 755 participants (M = 10.40; SD = 50.99). Whereas 80.4% of the studies were coed in nature, 14.8% specifically reported gender separation of girls only, and 4.5% reported activities for only boys.

Of the 291 studies, 31.3% reported occurring in urban environments, 3.8% in rural, and 1.7% in suburban. There were 63.2% of studies that did not report the type of environment in which data were collected. In addition, 57.7% of studies reported focusing on marginalized groups. The targeted marginalized groups included low socioeconomic status (29.2%), gender (15.1%), race/ethnicity (9.3%), and students with disabilities (4.1%).

Discussion

The purpose of this review was to identify, categorize, and analyze the peer-reviewed literature on organized B&ASPs that focus on PA and/or sport from 2000 to 2020. No study to date has looked inclusively across all B&ASPs at the scale that this present study has. The review uncovered some important traits about the field of B&ASP research. Results showed that the top journal publishing this type of research only contained 4% of all the articles in the review. This suggests that, perhaps, there is a need for either a stand-alone journal in this area or a series of special issues on B&ASP PA programs. It also suggests that B&ASP research does not have a “home” in one specific field, and instead, research in this area is published in PE, health, medical, and nursing journals. Considering the tremendous growth of the field (from one article published in 2000 to 42 articles in 2020), this presents a potential problem of not having a cohesive body of literature, which limits the ability of scholars to build on each other’s research. Many fields have dedicated journals that scholars regularly access to stay up to date with research published in their field. In the case of B&ASP research, no such journal exists, and instead, publications are spread across 157 journals, posing a potential issue of sustained growth and development in a burgeoning field.

The review also highlighted the overwhelming proportion (92%) of all research focusing exclusively on ASPs, leaving BSPs a very underresearched area. Although ASPs have a longer history than BSPs, BSPs can actually be a great opportunity to be physically active, especially in warm climates (such as the southern United States), where many schools do not have a gym and temperatures in the late and early summer make vigorous PA outside prohibitive and dangerous. With the increase in work-from-home culture and flexible schedules in many societies, some caretakers may need an earlier drop-off of their child and may not need after-school care. Considering that a main reason for ASPs is childcare (Mahoney et al., 2009), with an ever-changing workforce and more nontraditional hours, BSPs may be a viable option for caretakers to drop their children off while engaging them in PA that primes them for learning (Hillman et al., 2009).

The majority (57.7%) of research in this review focused on marginalized groups. A variety of approaches that focus on inclusive practices, such as PYD, social and emotional learning, and social cognitive theory, were found in our analysis. However, only six articles approached the B&ASP setting through a critical theory lens. Critical theories have been found to be a promising venue to research equity (Luguetti et al., 2019; Oliver & Kirk, 2015). Critical theory is an ideal lens to disrupt inequitable structures often present in academia. Social justice permeates everything we do, regardless of whether we acknowledge it or not. Critical theory should, thus, be considered to better understand the B&ASP space through a different lens to make a difference in this setting by working with and for the community. To do so, scholars should consider the impact of their work by anticipating, addressing, reducing, and questioning how their research often associates with consumerism and capitalism to be able to promote more ecological practices (e.g., question the role and emerging extensions of their research, consider whether the study is needed, recycle knowledge, and so forth; Koro et al., 2023).

All of the studies included in this review by design claimed that they wanted to impact PA; however, only 51% measured PA as an outcome. Therefore, although studies claimed to want to have an impact on PA levels, nearly half did not measure PA in the study. This could be due to the documented issues of collecting valid and reliable PA data in schools and ASPs (Marttinen et al., 2022), the difficulty in measuring PA through pedometers (McCaughtry et al., 2008), the high cost of accelerometers (Pedišić & Bauman, 2015), or potential issues of validity with self-reporting PA levels (Sallis & Saelens, 2000). As psychosocial links to increasing PA are well documented (Babic et al., 2014; Eime et al., 2013; Poitras et al., 2016), perhaps some PA B&ASPs chose not to measure PA under the assumption that if the other factors (e.g., motivation, self-efficacy) increase, then the PA will increase as well. As data-gathering devices like accelerometers and smart watches become more commonplace and less expensive, they could be better utilized to collect data in these types of settings. Alternatively, more innovative designs in programming could help students become coresearchers where they measure their own PA while learning about the importance of a physically active life.

Although the vast majority of studies were coed, 14.8% of the programs were designed exclusively for girls. It is well documented that PE as a space in schools has not served girls very well over the years (Oliver & Kirk, 2015). In some countries, PE is offered in single-sex classes at some grade levels (e.g., Finland, United Kingdom), whereas the United States requires coed PE unless it is in a contact sport. However, if the BSP or ASP is not state funded (in the United States), gender separation is not necessary. This could be a great way to engage girls in PA in a space made for them to thrive (Marttinen, Johnston, et al., 2020; Oliver et al., 2009).

The vast majority of the studies (66%) reported providing multiple sporting and PA opportunities in their B&ASPs. This aligns well with research supporting the idea that youth should not specialize in a specific sport early in their lives (Whitley et al., 2021a, 2021b). Providing multiple activities for the students to participate in seemed to be more popular than individual sports. Programs like “Girls on the Run” contributed to the highest proportion of single-activity programs (4.5%). Popular team sports, such as soccer (2.1%) and basketball (1.7%), remained very low, and although popular across the globe, these types of single-sport programs may have been eliminated from our review as our inclusion criteria did not include competitive sport programs or athletics, even though these types of programs are common in several countries and fill the after-school space.

Limitations

As with any review examining a wide range of research, there are inherent limitations. As we did not conduct a meta-analysis, effect sizes are not reported for studies. A meta-analysis would not have been appropriate for our scope, as we wanted to include both qualitative and quantitative research to fully understand the current and past research in B&ASPs. We also did not differentiate randomized control studies from other experimental and quasi-experimental research but, rather, coded them together. The data were not coded for primary outcomes (PA vs. academic or social skills), as that was not the focus of the present study. We did not conduct an assessment of methodological quality due to the expansive number of articles included in the final analysis. Finally, having English as the only language included in this literature review eliminated any studies published in languages other than English. In what follows, we provide recommendations for future research that will allow for a more thorough understanding of the different types of B&ASP research available.

Future Directions

Although the area of B&ASPs is increasing in research, more research needs to be done to better understand the nuances of these programs. For example, BSPs are prevalent in the United States and a key part of policies like Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program but were underrepresented in our review. Also, it would be interesting and useful to complete a meta-analysis for the quantitative research included in this review or to conduct a review of only the qualitative research in B&ASPs, similar to Holt et al. (2017), to understand the different foci in the research studies.

There is also a lot to be learned about B&ASPs through a critical theory lens. Many articles included in this review worked with marginalized populations, yet only a few used a critical theory lens to examine the data. Another model of research that could be utilized in B&ASPs is the coproduction of research, like Oliver and Kirk’s (2015) activist approach, which has been utilized in ASPs (Marttinen, Fredrick, et al., 2020). Coproduction of research could also be utilized through participatory action research (PAR) or youth PAR. In the research included in this review, only 3.8% of studies utilized action research, much less took on PAR or youth PAR. Moreover, critics discuss the tensions and contradictions of the healthism ideology and the prominence of neoliberalist values in the context of PA and health promotion that leads to inequalities across the population (Malcolm et al., 2023). Future studies around social justice in B&ASPs should focus on providing a more in-depth reflection on how sports and PA are still very prescriptive in defining how individuals should move and what is considered productive. This kind of study may allow readers to see beyond the neoliberal values and social inequities that have permeated past research.

Policy developers should also focus on critical frameworks to understand the limitations and contradictions of the neoliberal ideology in the context of PA and health promotion when aiming to increase the opportunities for youth to participate in PA and sports programs (Malcolm et al., 2023). Future studies should pay careful attention to the social, political, and cultural aspects that influence their research as well as the communities that engage in their studies. Hence, there are still questions to be answered, such as: Should scholars consider social, political, and cultural influences on current research trends? Are youth-centric and youth-led programs a form of social justice that, in many cases, has been neglected? What should academia and researchers do to potentially rethink research in this line of inquiry? By creating awareness and aspiring to change the reasons why research is proposed (trends, power dynamics, funding, and so forth), a more ecological use of methodologies, research resources, and knowledge distribution can be achieved (Koro et al., 2023).

We acknowledge that many clinical studies that used randomized control studies did not root their work in a theory or conceptual framework. This was categorized as “atheoretical,” but painting it as “bad” is misleading, as randomized control studies can provide important evidence for the fidelity of B&ASPs. In fields outside of education (e.g., public health), theoretical frameworks are not always used to analyze and interpret data. Thus, although from an educational perspective, it is surprising that so few studies used theory, it may not be as concerning.

B&ASPs that focus on PA have tremendous potential to help youth build skills (both sports and life skills) and increase their PA as well as potential to become sites within a community where youth feel heard and safe. Historically, these programs have stepped up to meet the needs of children and youth. In the late 1800s to the early 1900s, they were safe places for youth to be when parents were at work and where they further developed their academic skills. Now, countless B&ASPs provide safe and affordable places for youth to be physically active with their friends. We anticipate that B&ASPs will continue to serve youth and meet their needs. In addition, B&ASPs have the advantage of not having to adhere to the school bell schedule, national standards, and other requirements that teachers in PE have. This flexibility allows for play, more free-time activities, and student-centered approaches that can result in positive mental health outcomes.

Future studies in B&ASPs should prioritize student voice, increase opportunities for independent and self-organized play, and focus on social and life skills. To achieve this goal, more studies in B&ASP are needed that use participatory research, such as the activist approach (Luguetti et al., 2019; Oliver et al., 2009), as well as approaches that focus on building life skills, such as PYD through sport (Holt et al., 2017) and teaching personal and social responsibility (Hellison, 2010). Such approaches are student centered: They focus on listening to youth and acting on what they voice, sharing power, and cocreating the space in a way that fits their needs and provides meaningful experiences to participants (Oliver et al., 2009). Moreover, there is a growing push for researchers who work with participatory approaches to reflect on power dynamics in working with youth and share lessons learned as facilitators that can support future research in the field (Luguetti et al., 2023). Such studies should be considered to drive future research in the highly relevant “journey of collective inquiry and activism” (p. 3).

Finally, a few critical questions that are still left unanswered and could be the focus of future research are: (a) What impacts do B&ASPs have on long-term PA behavior? (b) Is there a transfer of learning occurring outside of the B&ASPs? and (c) How can B&ASPs be restructured to be more student centered, prioritize self-directed activities, and promote play?

References

  • Afterschool Alliance. (2019). This is afterschool. http://afterschoolalliance.org//documents/This-is-Afterschool-National-One-Pager.pdf

  • Agbuba, B., Xiang, P., & McBride, R. (2010). Achievement goals and their behavior relations to children’s disruptive behavior in an after-school physical activity program. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 29(3), 278294.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Babic, M.J., Morgan, P.J., Plotnikoff, R.C., Lonsdale, C., White, R.L., & Lubans, D.R. (2014). Physical activity and physical self-concept in youth: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 44(11), 15891601.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Beets, M.W., Beighle, A., Erwing, H.E., & Huberty, J.I. (2009). After-school program, impact on physical activity and fitness: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 36(6), 527537.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bruner, M.W., McLaren, C.D., Sutcliffe, J.T., Gardner, L.A., Lubans, D.R., Smith, J.J., & Vella, S.A. (2021). The effect of sport-based interventions on positive youth development: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16(1), 368395.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Coakley, J. (2016). Positive youth development through sport: Myths, beliefs, and realities. In N.L. Holt (Ed.), Positive youth development through sport (pp. 2133). Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Eime, R.M., Young, J.A., Harvey, J.T., Charity, M.J., & Payne, W.R. (2013). A systematic review of the psychological and social benefits of participation in sport for children and adolescents: Informing development of a conceptual model of health through sport. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 10(1), 9898.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fredrick, R.N., Marttinen, R., & Johnston, K.C. (2020). REACH after-school: Integrating literacy and PA in under-served communities. In R. Marttinen, E. Centeio, & T. Quarmby (Eds.), Before- and after-school physical activity programs (pp. 96107). Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Garn, A.C., McCaughtry, N., Kulik, N.L., Kaseta, M., Maljak, K., Whalen, L., Shen, B., Martin, J.J., & Falhman, M. (2014). Successful after-school physical activity clubs in urban high school: Perspectives of adult leaders and student participants. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 33(1), 112133.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gray, P., Lancy, D.F., & Bjorklund, D.F. (2023). Decline in independent activity as a cause of decline in children’s mental well-being: Summary of the evidence. The Journal of Pediatrics, 260, Article 113352.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hellison, D. (2010). Teaching personal and social responsibility through physical activity. Human Kinetics.

  • Hillman, C.H., Pontifex, M.B., Raine, L.B., Castelli, D.M., Hall, E.E., & Kramer, A. (2009). The effect of acute treadmill walking on cognitive control and academic achievement in preadolescent children. Neuroscience, 159(3), 10441054.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Holt, N.L., Neely, K.C., Slater, L.G., Camiré, M., Côté, J., Fraser-Thomas, J., MacDonald, D., Strachan, L., & Tamminen, K.A. (2017). A grounded theory of positive youth development through sport based on results from a qualitative meta-study. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 10(1), 149.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jacobs, J.M., Castañeda, A., & Castañeda, R. (2016). Sport-based youth and community development: Beyond the ball in Chicago. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 87(5), 1822.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Koro, M., Wolgemuth, J., & Trinh, E. (2023). Reducing methodological footprints in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry. Advance online publication.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lerner, R.M., Brown, J.D., & Kier, C. (2005). Adolescence: Development, diversity, context, and application (Canadian ed.). Pearson.

  • Luguetti, C., Kirk, D., & Oliver, K. (2019). Towards a pedagogy of love: Exploring pre-service teachers’ and youth’s experiences of an activist sport pedagogical model. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 24(6), 629646.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Luguetti, C., Ryan, J., Eckersley, B., Howard, A., Craig, S., & Brown, C. (2023). “Everybody’s talking about doing co-design, but to really truly genuinely authentically do it [...] it’s bloody hard”: Radical openness in youth participatory action research. Action Research. Advance online publication.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mahoney, J.L., Parente, M.E., & Zigler, E.F. (2009). Afterschool programs in America: Origins, growth, popularity, and politics. Journal of Youth Development, 4(3), 2342.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Malcolm, D., Marcén, C., & Pullen, E. (2023). The World Health Organization, physical activity and the contradictions of neoliberal health promotion. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. Advance online publication.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Maljak, K., Garn, A., McCaughtry, N., Kulik, N., Martin, J., Shen, B., Whalen, L., & Falhman, M. (2014). Challenges in offering inner-city after-school physical activity clubs. American Journal of Health Education, 45(5), 297307.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marttinen, R., & Fredrick. R. (2017). R.E.A.C.H: A case for after school physical education. Strategies, 30(1), 814.

  • Marttinen, R., Fredrick, R., Johnston, K., Phillips, S., & Patterson, D. (2020). Implementing the REACH after-school program for youth in urban communities: Challenges and lessons learned. European Physical Education Review, 26(2), 410428.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marttinen, R., Johnston, K., Flory, S.B., & Meza, B. (2020). Enacting a body-focused curriculum with young girls through an activist approach: Leveraging the after-school space. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 25(6), 585599.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marttinen, R., Wilson, K., Fisher, K., Beitzel, M., & Fredrick III, R.N. (2022). Process evaluation and challenges in collecting data from an after-school sports and literacy program in a diverse, low-income community. Evaluation and program planning. Evaluation and Program Planning, 91, Article 102052.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McCaughtry, N., Oliver, K.L., Dillon, S.R., & Martin, J.J. (2008). Teachers’ perspectives on the use of pedometers as instructional technology in physical education: A cautionary tale. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 27(1), 8399.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oliver, K.L., Hamzeh, M., & McCaughtry, N. (2009). Girly girls can play games/las niñas pueden jugar tambien: Co-creating a curriculum of possibilities with fifth-grade girls. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 28(1), 90110.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oliver, K.L., & Kirk, D. (2015). Girls, gender and physical education: An activist approach. Routledge.

  • Page, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., Mulrow, C.D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J.M., Akl, E.A., Brennan, S.E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J.M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M.M., Li, T., Loder, E.W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L.A., Stewart, L.A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A.C., Welch, V.A., Whiting, P., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), Article 89.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pedišić, Ž., & Bauman, A. (2015). Accelerometer-based measures in physical activity surveillance: Current practices and issues. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49(4), 219223.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Perkins, D., & Noam, G. (2007). Characteristics of sports-based youth development programs. New Directions for Youth Development, 2007(115), 1118.

  • Poitras, V.J., Gray, C.E., Borghese, M.M., Carson, V., Chaput, J.-P., Janssen, I., Katzmarzyk, P.T., Pate, R.R., Connor Gorber, S., Kho, M.E., Sampson, M., & Tremblay, M.S. (2016). Systematic review of the relationships between objectively measured physical activity and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 41(6), S197S239.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Post, P., & Palacios, R. (2019). Aggie play: A gender-relevant physical activity program for girls. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 41(4), 194205.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sallis, J.F., & Saelens, B.E. (2000). Assessment of physical activity by self-report: Status, limitations, and future directions. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71(Suppl. 2), 114.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Simon, M., Marttinen, R., & Phillips, S. (2021). Marginalized girls’ gendered experiences within a constructivist afterschool program (REACH). Sport Education and Society, 26(6), 579-591.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Weiss, M.R. (2016). Old wine in a new bottle: Historical reflections on sport as a context for youth development. In N.L. Holt (Ed.), Positive youth development through sport (pp. 720). Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Whitley, M.A., Massey, W.V., Camiré, M., Boutet, M., & Borbee, A. (2019). Sport-based youth development interventions in the United States: A systematic review. BMC Public Health, 19(1), Article 89.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Whitley, M.A., Smith, A.L., Dorsch, T.E., Bowers, M.T., Centeio, E.E., & President’s Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition Science Board. (2021a). Re-envisioning post-pandemic youth sport to meet young people’s mental, emotional, and social needs. Translational Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine, 6(4), 17.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Whitley, M.A., Smith, A.L., Dorsch, T.E., Bowers, M.T., Centeio, E.E., & President’s Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition Science Board. (2021b). Reimagining the youth sport system across the United States: A commentary from the 2020–2021 president’s council an sports, fitness & nutrition science board. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 92(8), 614.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Nuñez-Enriquez is now at the School of Kinesiology and Recreation, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, USA.

Rodrigues https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1903-8482

Nuñez-Enriquez https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6573-6762

Centeio https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5465-4243

Banville https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4099-3740

Marttinen (rmarttin@gmu.edu) is corresponding author, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3807-5684

  • Collapse
  • Expand
  • Figure 1

    —Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flowchart. ASP = after-school program.

  • Figure 2

    —Number of articles published each year.

  • Afterschool Alliance. (2019). This is afterschool. http://afterschoolalliance.org//documents/This-is-Afterschool-National-One-Pager.pdf

  • Agbuba, B., Xiang, P., & McBride, R. (2010). Achievement goals and their behavior relations to children’s disruptive behavior in an after-school physical activity program. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 29(3), 278294.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Babic, M.J., Morgan, P.J., Plotnikoff, R.C., Lonsdale, C., White, R.L., & Lubans, D.R. (2014). Physical activity and physical self-concept in youth: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 44(11), 15891601.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Beets, M.W., Beighle, A., Erwing, H.E., & Huberty, J.I. (2009). After-school program, impact on physical activity and fitness: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 36(6), 527537.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bruner, M.W., McLaren, C.D., Sutcliffe, J.T., Gardner, L.A., Lubans, D.R., Smith, J.J., & Vella, S.A. (2021). The effect of sport-based interventions on positive youth development: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 16(1), 368395.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Coakley, J. (2016). Positive youth development through sport: Myths, beliefs, and realities. In N.L. Holt (Ed.), Positive youth development through sport (pp. 2133). Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Eime, R.M., Young, J.A., Harvey, J.T., Charity, M.J., & Payne, W.R. (2013). A systematic review of the psychological and social benefits of participation in sport for children and adolescents: Informing development of a conceptual model of health through sport. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 10(1), 9898.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fredrick, R.N., Marttinen, R., & Johnston, K.C. (2020). REACH after-school: Integrating literacy and PA in under-served communities. In R. Marttinen, E. Centeio, & T. Quarmby (Eds.), Before- and after-school physical activity programs (pp. 96107). Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Garn, A.C., McCaughtry, N., Kulik, N.L., Kaseta, M., Maljak, K., Whalen, L., Shen, B., Martin, J.J., & Falhman, M. (2014). Successful after-school physical activity clubs in urban high school: Perspectives of adult leaders and student participants. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 33(1), 112133.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gray, P., Lancy, D.F., & Bjorklund, D.F. (2023). Decline in independent activity as a cause of decline in children’s mental well-being: Summary of the evidence. The Journal of Pediatrics, 260, Article 113352.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hellison, D. (2010). Teaching personal and social responsibility through physical activity. Human Kinetics.

  • Hillman, C.H., Pontifex, M.B., Raine, L.B., Castelli, D.M., Hall, E.E., & Kramer, A. (2009). The effect of acute treadmill walking on cognitive control and academic achievement in preadolescent children. Neuroscience, 159(3), 10441054.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Holt, N.L., Neely, K.C., Slater, L.G., Camiré, M., Côté, J., Fraser-Thomas, J., MacDonald, D., Strachan, L., & Tamminen, K.A. (2017). A grounded theory of positive youth development through sport based on results from a qualitative meta-study. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 10(1), 149.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jacobs, J.M., Castañeda, A., & Castañeda, R. (2016). Sport-based youth and community development: Beyond the ball in Chicago. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 87(5), 1822.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Koro, M., Wolgemuth, J., & Trinh, E. (2023). Reducing methodological footprints in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry. Advance online publication.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lerner, R.M., Brown, J.D., & Kier, C. (2005). Adolescence: Development, diversity, context, and application (Canadian ed.). Pearson.

  • Luguetti, C., Kirk, D., & Oliver, K. (2019). Towards a pedagogy of love: Exploring pre-service teachers’ and youth’s experiences of an activist sport pedagogical model. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 24(6), 629646.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Luguetti, C., Ryan, J., Eckersley, B., Howard, A., Craig, S., & Brown, C. (2023). “Everybody’s talking about doing co-design, but to really truly genuinely authentically do it [...] it’s bloody hard”: Radical openness in youth participatory action research. Action Research. Advance online publication.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mahoney, J.L., Parente, M.E., & Zigler, E.F. (2009). Afterschool programs in America: Origins, growth, popularity, and politics. Journal of Youth Development, 4(3), 2342.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Malcolm, D., Marcén, C., & Pullen, E. (2023). The World Health Organization, physical activity and the contradictions of neoliberal health promotion. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics. Advance online publication.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Maljak, K., Garn, A., McCaughtry, N., Kulik, N., Martin, J., Shen, B., Whalen, L., & Falhman, M. (2014). Challenges in offering inner-city after-school physical activity clubs. American Journal of Health Education, 45(5), 297307.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marttinen, R., & Fredrick. R. (2017). R.E.A.C.H: A case for after school physical education. Strategies, 30(1), 814.

  • Marttinen, R., Fredrick, R., Johnston, K., Phillips, S., & Patterson, D. (2020). Implementing the REACH after-school program for youth in urban communities: Challenges and lessons learned. European Physical Education Review, 26(2), 410428.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marttinen, R., Johnston, K., Flory, S.B., & Meza, B. (2020). Enacting a body-focused curriculum with young girls through an activist approach: Leveraging the after-school space. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 25(6), 585599.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marttinen, R., Wilson, K., Fisher, K., Beitzel, M., & Fredrick III, R.N. (2022). Process evaluation and challenges in collecting data from an after-school sports and literacy program in a diverse, low-income community. Evaluation and program planning. Evaluation and Program Planning, 91, Article 102052.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McCaughtry, N., Oliver, K.L., Dillon, S.R., & Martin, J.J. (2008). Teachers’ perspectives on the use of pedometers as instructional technology in physical education: A cautionary tale. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 27(1), 8399.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oliver, K.L., Hamzeh, M., & McCaughtry, N. (2009). Girly girls can play games/las niñas pueden jugar tambien: Co-creating a curriculum of possibilities with fifth-grade girls. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 28(1), 90110.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oliver, K.L., & Kirk, D. (2015). Girls, gender and physical education: An activist approach. Routledge.

  • Page, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., Mulrow, C.D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J.M., Akl, E.A., Brennan, S.E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J.M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M.M., Li, T., Loder, E.W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L.A., Stewart, L.A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A.C., Welch, V.A., Whiting, P., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), Article 89.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pedišić, Ž., & Bauman, A. (2015). Accelerometer-based measures in physical activity surveillance: Current practices and issues. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49(4), 219223.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Perkins, D., & Noam, G. (2007). Characteristics of sports-based youth development programs. New Directions for Youth Development, 2007(115), 1118.

  • Poitras, V.J., Gray, C.E., Borghese, M.M., Carson, V., Chaput, J.-P., Janssen, I., Katzmarzyk, P.T., Pate, R.R., Connor Gorber, S., Kho, M.E., Sampson, M., & Tremblay, M.S. (2016). Systematic review of the relationships between objectively measured physical activity and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 41(6), S197S239.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Post, P., & Palacios, R. (2019). Aggie play: A gender-relevant physical activity program for girls. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 41(4), 194205.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sallis, J.F., & Saelens, B.E. (2000). Assessment of physical activity by self-report: Status, limitations, and future directions. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71(Suppl. 2), 114.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Simon, M., Marttinen, R., & Phillips, S. (2021). Marginalized girls’ gendered experiences within a constructivist afterschool program (REACH). Sport Education and Society, 26(6), 579-591.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Weiss, M.R. (2016). Old wine in a new bottle: Historical reflections on sport as a context for youth development. In N.L. Holt (Ed.), Positive youth development through sport (pp. 720). Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Whitley, M.A., Massey, W.V., Camiré, M., Boutet, M., & Borbee, A. (2019). Sport-based youth development interventions in the United States: A systematic review. BMC Public Health, 19(1), Article 89.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Whitley, M.A., Smith, A.L., Dorsch, T.E., Bowers, M.T., Centeio, E.E., & President’s Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition Science Board. (2021a). Re-envisioning post-pandemic youth sport to meet young people’s mental, emotional, and social needs. Translational Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine, 6(4), 17.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Whitley, M.A., Smith, A.L., Dorsch, T.E., Bowers, M.T., Centeio, E.E., & President’s Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition Science Board. (2021b). Reimagining the youth sport system across the United States: A commentary from the 2020–2021 president’s council an sports, fitness & nutrition science board. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 92(8), 614.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 45076 45076 0
Full Text Views 31881 31881 19460
PDF Downloads 373 373 224