Chad Fenwick, LAUSD Brett Fuller, MPS

1. PE Coordinators Mini-Conference Policy and Implementation:Fitness Assessments, Transgender Laws, Wellness Policies, and BMI Policy Chad Fenwick, LAUSD Brett Fuller, MPS

2. AAHPERD“Physical Education Coordinators Mini Conference” Developing And Implementing Policies That Make A Difference

3. Importance Of Policy • Guides And Protects Practice • Ensures Funding Opportunities • Focuses Effort • Guidelines For Productivity In States And Districts • Therefore Validates Importance

4. Thoughtful Policies • Reassure Families, Students, And School Staff • Provide Legal Protection For Schools • Support And Direct Individuals Actions Throughout The School System • Improving Schools Quality

5. Education Policy • ..Is Always Political! • And Politically Important!!!!!

6. Policies Are • Statutes • Regulations • Resolutions/Board Policy • Standards • Guidelines

7. Policy Levels • National • State • County • Local School District • Within Each School

8. National Policy of Vital Importance • Guides Educational Decisions • No Child Left Behind (NCLB) • Including Physical Education In Reauthorization Of Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Important Example

9. Support For These Policies • February 2011 Field Poll On Obesity • Respondents Favor Physical Education As Single Most Important Policy For Obesity Prevention. • Across Most Party And Socioeconomic Lines Include Physical Ed In ESEA Reauthorization

10. Additional Support • Overwhelming Support In CA • 89% Support 4 Year High School Physical Education Requirement • 88% Favor School Facilities Open For physical Activity When School Is Not In Session • Support Policies To Make It Easier For Children To Be More Physically Active • Physical Education “Provides The ‘Core’”

11. Policy As Value And Leadership • National Policy Statements and Legislation • States Use As Guidelines For Policy Development • Districts Motivated To Implement • In Local Schools For Children’s Benefit

12. Addressing Federal Policies • No Child Left Behind Act (ESEA) • Unintended Consequences Of NCLB • Being Left Out Had Major Negative Consequences For Our Students • The Reauthorization Of ESEA Is Not A Secret • It Is Also Not A Secret That We Believe, • Language That Would Include Requirements For Physical Education To Be On A ‘Core Subject’ Status With All Of The Expectations And Requirements Would Have Real And Positive Consequences For Our Students • State Legislators Will Follow

13. Policy • Fitness Assessments • BMI Policy • Transgender Laws • Wellness Policy

14. Fitness Assessments • MPS – Fitness Assessments: Fitnessgram • Adopted in July 2012 as part of Textbook/Resource Adoption Process • No written policy in board policy • Part of the physical education curriculum

15. California Statute • State mandate 5, 7, 9 • Student exemption SB 601 • Passing requirement SB 602 • Student exemption

16. BMI • As part of the Carol M. White PEP grant MPS had to create a BMI policy • MPS has chosen to add it to the Student Wellness Policy • Worked with the Medical College of Wisconsin • Researched BMI policy best practices • Implemented Focus Groups with parents & Teachers • Provided recommendations for policy • Policy going to MPS Board in July 2014

17. BMI – ResearchParental Opinion • Most parents are comfortable with and support BMI screening in schools.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 • 78% believed it was important for schools to assess student’s height/weight annually and wanted to receive height, weight, and BMI information yearly.7 • Parents want assurance that student privacy and respect will be maintained during measurement and that BMI results would be provided to parents in a neutral manner.8 From: BMI PEP Presentation 2014 Roohi Kharofa, MD Primary Care Research Fellow Medical College of Wisconsin

18. Transgender Statute • History • Definition of • Implementation • Monitoring • Examples online

19. Student Wellness Policy • MPS – Adopted CDC Coordinated School Health Model • 3 annual goals • Physical Activity • Nutrition • One other CSH goal

20. In 2008 Los Angeles Unified School District passed a board motion that made physical education a priority. The motion was created to ensure quality physical education for all children. The motion was needed due to the absence of monitoring. This sent a message to principals, that physical education education codes were to be followed. Physical Education Is A Priority

21. Why we at LAUSD feel physical education is important. • Physical education teaches the students the skills, knowledge, attitudes and behaviors to be physically active the rest of their lives. • Physically active children are healthier. • Healthy students, learn better, behave better and miss school less.

22. How does this happen? • Quality physical education instruction teaches the students the fundamental motor skills to successfully participate in a variety of physical activities. • If students are successful in their participation they are more likely to enjoy that experience. • Movement skills are not innate, they are learned.

24. Relationship Between Fundamental Movement Skills and Organized Physical Activity Fundamental movement skills are significantly associated with adolescents’ participation in organized physical activity. Okely, A. , Booth, M., and Patterson, J.(2001). Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., 33 (11), 1899-1904.

25. Relationship Between Fundamental Movement Skills and Body Composition Fundamental movement skills (FMS) proficiency is inversely associated with body composition. These findings suggest that mastery of FMS may be an important factor in preventing unhealthy weight gain among children and youth.

26. LAUSD Board Motion • A small team of advocates met with two board members that had the same interests in providing a healthier environment for students. • The advocates grew, connecting with United Teachers Los Angeles, City Project LA attorney Robert Garcia, other Community based organizations, parents, and students that to were interested in the health of students. • The heart and sole of this motion was about students learning the skills, knowledge, attitudes and behaviors that they will need to be physically active everyday.

27. Why did we need district policy? • With all the education codes • With all the CA. Code of Regulations • The real question is why did we need a board resolution?

28. The Board Motion Reassured • Credentialed teacher (Ed Code) • Elementary minute requirement (Ed Code) • Secondary minute requirement (Ed Code) • Fitnessgram assessment and reporting (Ed Code) • Gender equity (Ed Code) • Electives in high school (Ed Code) • Additionally class size, MVPA, and monitoring (District Policy)

29. Content Areas • Aquatics • Individual and dual activities • Dance • Team activities • (CCR) • Combatives • Gymnastics and tumbling • Mechanics of movement • Effects of movement on dynamic health

30. State Supporting Policy • The state statutes provided the framework for our local policy. • Some of these laws had been in place since 1914 but they were taken with little regard due to the lack of monitoring and other factors. • If nobody is watching, then weeds will grow. • This silence was deafening the message was clear do what you wish in Los Angeles.

31. CCR/CPM/FPM • State monitoring (CCR, CPM and now FPM) • State law requires that 10% of all schools be monitored to ensure that state and federal laws are being followed. • In 2005 a statute enacted that include physical education into monitoring process. • This had a tremendous positive effect on physical education programs in California.

32. Following the leaders • Before the inclusion of physical education in the state monitoring, physical education was less valued. “I never knew anyone cared about the Fitnessgram scores” and physical education. An LAUSD high school physical education teacher

33. Periodic Assessment • Each LEA is monitored once every four years by knowledgeable state staff. California Education Code Section 64001 permits the State Superintendent of Public Instruction to differentiate monitoring reviews based on student academic achievement, the Academic Performance Index, and on the status of compliance with state and federal categorical programs.

34. Improvement in BMI for Grade 9

35. Improvement in BMI Grade 7

36. Improvement In BMI for 5th Grade Physical education added to the CCR/CPM/FPM

38. We can look to Title IX as a model for inclusive educational policy and monitoring.

39. Federal Policy - Title IX • No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”

40. Myth’s • MYTH: Title IX has done its job and is no longer needed. 

FACT: In the past five years, the gap between male and female athletic participation at the high school level has grown.

41. Good Law • General enough to encompass all states and be educationally sound. • Specific enough to be ethically honest and educationally focused.

43. Why do districts need HR S. 394 & H.R. 2160 ? • We are not there yet, there are many students who still are not getting the quality physical education they need. • We need to provide professional development to continue to move physical education teachers toward quality physical education instruction. • Professional Development is the best use of the money to make this change. • The need to re-tool, curriculum, equipment and supplies and facilities.

44. The Connection • The tasks and pressures at the local district level are extraordinary. • Good policy helps us focus and prioritize our efforts and resources. • Good policy provides consistency among changes in decision makers at the district levels.

45. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME!

46. Thank You! • Brett Fuller – fullerba@milwaukee.k12.wi.us • Chad Fenwick – chad.fenwick@lausd.net

47. REFERENCES • Raczynski, J. M., Thompson, J. W., Phillips, M. M., Ryan, K. W., & Cleveland, H. W. (2009). Arkansas Act 1220 of 2003 to Reduce Childhood Obesity: Its Implementation and Impact on Child and Adolescent Body Mass Index. Journal of Public Health Policy, 30(S1), S124–S140. • Nihiser, A. J., Lee, S. M., Wechsler, H., McKenna, M., Odom, E., Reinold, C., … Grummer-Strawn, L. (2009). BMI Measurement in Schools. PEDIATRICS, 124(Supplement), S89–S97. • Nihiser, Allison J., Lee, S. M., Wechsler, H., McKenna, M., Odom, E., Reinold, C., Grummer-Strawn, L. (2007). Body mass index measurement in schools*. Journal of School Health, 77(10), 651–671. • Johnson, S. B., Pilkington, L. L., Lamp, C., He, J., & Deeb, L. C. (2009). Parent Reactions to a School-Based Body Mass Index Screening Program. Journal of School Health, 79(5), 216–223. • Stalter, A. M., Kaylor, M., Steinke, J. D., & Barker, R. M. (2010). Parental Perceptions of the Rural School’s Role in Addressing Childhood Obesity. The Journal of School Nursing, 27(1), 70–81. • Murphy, M., & Polivka, B. (2007). Parental perceptions of the schools’ role in addressing childhood obesity. The Journal of School Nursing, 23(1), 40–46. • Kubik, Martha Y., Fulkerson, J. A., Story, M., & Rieland, G. (2006). Parents of elementary school students weigh in on height, weight, and body mass index screening at school. Journal of school health, 76(10), 496–501. • Kubik, M. Y., Story, M., & Rieland, G. (2006). Developing School-Based BMI Screening and Parent Notification Programs: Findings From Focus Groups With Parents of Elementary School Students. Health Education & Behavior, 34(4), 622–633.