2017 ArkAHPERD Journal Vol 52

1
June 2017 Volume 52 – Number 1
Arkansas Association for Health,
Physical Education, Recreation, &
Dance

2
June 2017– Arkansas Journal – Volume 52 – Number 1
CONTENTS
News and Information
ArkAHPERD Award Qualifications . . . . . . .3
Message from the President. . . . . . . 5
ArkAHPERD Board of Directors. . . . . . 6-10
Commentary
USTA Influence Through Community-Based Initiative by
Dr. Britney Finley University of Arkansas at Little Rock . . .
Special Topic
Volunteering in School Athletics Programs: School Asset or Liability? by
Dr. David LaVetter Arkansas State University . . . . . .
Research Articles
Stride Frequencies on Treadmill Versus Over Ground Running
by Jesse Dare & Kaitlin Burgess graduate students Arkansas Tech
& Dr.Sheila Jackson Arkansas Tech faculty . . . . . .
Influence of Policy on Competitive Foods in Public Schools: Results and Implications
by Eric Conrad doctoral student University of Alabama, Dr. Lori Turner University of
Alabama & Dr. Sharon Hunt University of Arkansas
Call for Papers . . . . . . . . . .
2016 JRFH Coordinator of the Year . . . . . . . . .
2016 Teacher of the Year Awards. . . . . . . . . .
Call for Presentations. . . . . . . . . .
Lifetime Achievement Award . . . . . . . .
Higher Educator of the Year. . . . . . . .
ArkAHPERD 2017 State Convention. . . . . . .
Editorial Information, Calendar, Appendix . . . . . . .

3
Lifetime Achievement Award
Candidate must meet the following qualifications:
A. Be at least 30 years of age and have earned a
Master’s degree or its equivalent.
B. Have served the profession for at least five years
prior to the nomination.
C. Be a current member of ArkAHPERD. Former
members who have retired from professional work
may be exempt.
D. Be of high moral character and personal integrity
who by their leadership and industry have made
outstanding and noteworthy contributions to the
advancement of our profession in the state of
Arkansas.
To indicate leadership or meritorious contributions,
the nominator shall present evidence of the nominee’s
successful experiences in any two of the following
categories of service:
1. Service to the association.
2. Advancement of the profession through
leadership of outstanding programs.
3. Advancement of the profession through
presentation, writings, or research.
Any ArkAHPERD member may submit nominations
by sending six (6) copies of the candidate’s qualifications
to Janet Forbess, jforbess@uark.edu.
TEACHER OF THE YEAR
Teacher awards are presented in the areas ofelementary
physical education, middle school physical education,
secondary physical education, dance, andhealth.
A. Have served the profession for at least three
years prior to the nomination.
B. Be a member of AAHPERD & ArkAHPERD.
C. Be of high moral character and personal integrity
who by their leadership and industry have made
outstanding and noteworthy contributions to the
advancement of teaching in the state ofArkansas.
D. Be employed by a public school system in the
state of Arkansas.
E. Have a full time teaching contract, and have a
minimum of 60% of their total teaching
responsibility in the nominated area.
F. Have a minimum of five years teaching
experience in the nominated area.
G. Conduct a quality program.
They must submit three letters of
recommendation and agree to make complete
NASPE application if selected.
Any ArkAHPERD member may submit nominations by
contacting Bennie Prince, bfprince@ualr.edu.
HIGHER EDUCATOR OF THE YEAR
Scholarships
STUDENT
A. Have served the profession for at least three
years prior to the nomination.
B. Be a member of ArkAHPERD
C. Be of high moral character and personal
integrity who by their leadership and industry
have made outstanding and noteworthy
contributions to the advancement of teaching,
research, or service in the state of Arkansas.
D. Be employed by an institution of higher
education in the state of Arkansas.
Any ArkAHPERD member may submit nominations by
sending a copy of the candidate’s qualifications to Agneta
Sibrava, asibrava@astate.edu.
AWARD QUALIFICATIONS

4
ArkAHPERD awards four scholarships annually for
students majoring in HPERD. They include the
Newman McGee, Past President’s, Jeff Farris Jr., and
John Hosinski scholarships. Students must possess a
minimum 2.5 GPA. [See your academic advisor for
details.]
Research Award
Research awards of $100, $50, and $25 are awarded to
undergraduate and graduate students who are membersof
ArkAHPERD. Students must submit an abstract and a
complete paper to Rockie Pederson, rpederson@atu.edu
by October 1. Papers selected for the research awards
must be presented by the student in an oral or poster
format at the November convention.
ArkAHPERD Web Site: http://www.arkahperd.com

5
Message from the President
Greetings and Salutations ArkAHPERD Members,
Thank you for the opportunity to serve as your association president through the fall of 2017.
There are various accomplishments within our organization for which we can be proud; just to
name a few:
 Our membership is strong and continues to grow as we work toward our goals.
 We continue to host district and summer workshops to reach out to those that may
not be able to attend our state convention.
 We are also continuing our collaboration with the American Heart Association
through the Jump and Hoops for Heart programs and Let’s Move to raise funds to
help our Association continue the fight against heart disease.
The platform for my presidency is, Unity begins with yoU. With all of the divisiveness that we
are witnessing in the global nation it is imperative that we unify for the benefit of those whose
voices are not being heard. We as educators are granted the opportunity to create environments in
which everyone feels a sense of belonging, acceptance, support, and value. Creating unified
experiences for students with and without disabilities; and without regard to gender, race,
ethnicity, religion, and socioeconomic status breaks down existing barriers and allows for
authentic learning experiences to encounter.
Join me to continue the conversation. Mark your calendars for November 2-3, for our 2017
convention in Little Rock, AR. It will be one you don’t want to miss! We look forward to seeing
you there.
Warmest Regards,
Valarie

6
ArkAHPERD Directory thru November 3, 2017
President [thru 11/17] Past-President[thru 11/17] President-elect [thru 11/17]
Valarie Hilson Allen Mooneyhan Charles Hervey
PO Box 240 7648 Victory Blvd. 101 Farris Center
State University, AR 72467 New Port, AR72112 Conway, AR. 72035-0001
vhilson@astate.edum amooneyhan@asun.edu chervey@uca.edu
Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Executive Director
Brett Stone Andy Mooneyhan
415 N. College Ave State University, AR 72467
Clarksville, AR 72830
bastone@ozarks.edu amooneyh@astate.edu
[Vice Presidents serve 2 years & Vice President-elects serve 1 year, in their
respective positions. Positions will be staggered with 1/3 elected each year.]
Health
Vice President [thru 11/17] VP-elect [elected 11/16]
Agneta Sibrava Tracy Gist
PO Box 240
State University, AR 72467
ASIBRAVA@astate.edu tracy.gist@pottsvilleschools.org
Physical Education
John Kutko Jody Foust
334 Cr. 3291
Clarksville 72830
john.kutko@csdar.org
Recreation
Brett Stone John Thomasson
415 N. College Ave
Clarksville, AR 72830
bastone@ozarks.edu
Dance
Hollie Huckabee
PO Box 240
hhuckabee@astate.edu
10 DIVISIONS

7
Athletics & Sports
Mark Mosser
MOSSERM@hsu.edu
Exercise Science
JohnThomasson
thomasj@hsu.edu
AthleticTraining
Amanda Wheeler
Sports Management
Claudia Benavides
PO Box 240
cbenavides@astate.edu
Higher Education and Research
Agneta Sibrava PO Box
240
State University, AR 72467 asibrava@astate.edu
Future Professionals
Student Rep [One yearterm2017] Student Rep [One yearterm2017]
Rotation Schedule:
University of Central Arkansas, Conway (2016)
Arkansas Tech University, Russellville (2017)
University of Arkansas at Little Rock (2018)
Henderson State University, Arkadelphia (2019)
University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff (2020)
Southern Arkansas University, Magnolia (2021)
University of Arkansas (2022)
Arkansas State University (2023)

8
[Vice Presidents serve 2 years & Vice President-elects serve 1 year, in their
respective positions. Positions will be staggered with 1/3 elected each year.]
District I District II
Senator[thru11/17] Senator[thru11/17]
Jeremy Mabry Shelia Jackson
Butterfield Elementary OR Arkansas Tech University
Susan Parker
Batesville-Eagle Mountain
District III District IV
Senator [thru 11/18] Senator [thru 11/18]
Kelly Spencer Amanda Turner
Cabot School District Jonesboro
District V District VI
Senator [thru 11/16] Senator [thru 11/16]
Pete Kelly Vacant
Executive Committee Student Awards
Allen Mooneyhan Rockie Pederson
Leah Queen Dept. of Health & P E
Bennie Prince 1306 North El Paso
AndyMooneyhan Russellville, AR 72801-2222
rpederson@atu.edu
Publications Teacher Awards
Bennie Prince [Editor/Reviewer] Bennie Prince [TOY]
Bennie Prince [Necrology] District Senators
Janea Snyer [Reviewer]
Tan Zhang [Reviewer]
Constitution Membership
Andy Mooneyhan Andy Mooneyhan
Brett Stone Brett Stone
Leah Queen Leah Queen
Bennie Prince Bennie Prince
District Organization Lifetime Achievement Award
OPEN Janet Forbess
1 University of Arkansas
HP 308-y, Fayetteville, AR 72701
jforbess@uark.edu
6 DISTRICTS
STANDING COMMITTEE MEMBERS

9
Journal Editor/Newsletter Editor WEB Master
Bennie Prince [Co-Editor] Charles Hervey
105 Fairway Court 101 Farris Center
Hot Springs, AR 71913 University of Central Arkansas
bfprince@ualr.edu Conway, AR.
72035-0001
chervey@uca.edu
Shelli Henehan [Co-Editor]
Bennie Prince [Co-Editor] Program
Coordinator
Janet Forbess
Advocacy Coordinator 1 University of
Arkansas
Krystal Fluker HP 308
Fayetteville, AR 72701
jforbess@uark.edu
JRFH/HFH Coordinator JRFH/HFH Coordinator
Cathryn Bass Leah Queen
317 Heather Lane Rt 1 Box 387
Russellville, AR 72802 Westville, OK 74965
cathryn.bass@russellvilleschools.net lqueenb@gentrypioneers.com
ADDITIONAL BOARD MEMBERS

11
Commentary
USTA Influence Through Community-Based Initiative
by
Dr. Britney Finley University of Arkansas at Little Rock
Introduction
This commentary was based on qualitative research done in the form of a personal interview with
the founder and director of the Searcy Junior Tennis Team (JTT), Kerri Behel. She and I discussed the
creation, implementation, growth, development and the future of the Searcy JTT. Open-ended questions
were asked to gain as much information as possible in order to empower other physical educators, coaches,
and parents to learn how to start and maintain a United States Tennis Association (USTA) JTT in their local
community.
How does a town of 24,000 people have the fastest growing Junior Tennis Team (JTT) in Arkansas
in 2015? It’s the combination of a Mother-Daughter team, excellent community, parental involvement, and
the support of their local university. Over the last two years, Gwen Wiggins of North Little Rock and Kerri
Behel of Searcy, have started and developed Searcy’s Jr. Tennis Team. Within their first year, they had the
fasting growing league in the state with over 200 players. Currently, Searcy is the 3rd
largest league in the
state, with 167 players, behind the Central Arkansas League and the Fort Smith League (W. Ewersmann,
personal communication, April 19, 2017) .
Gwen wanted a place for her three grandkids to have the opportunity to learn and excel in tennis.
She is an avid tennis player and knew that Kerri driving her kids 45 minutes to the Central Arkansas league
multiple times a week was not the answer. Gwen contacted the Arkansas chapter of the USTA, the Harding
University Head Tennis Coach and several other people in the community interested in the game of tennis.
They thought having a league of about 50 kids would be perfect for their kids and the community (K. Behel,
personal communication, April 13, 2017).

12
QuickTennis – USTA resources
Gwen and Kerri began using the resources that the USTA JTT provides. Arkansas Tennis
Association oversees programs in the state and provides two Local League Coordinator trainings a year for
networking purposes and to inform coordinators of new updates, rule discussions, etc. They provide
equipment and/or financial assistance where needed. Within USTA, there are many grant opportunities and
Searcy has been taken full advantage of those offerings. The USTA sent Gwen to a Southern USTA training
in Atlanta, GA to learn from State/Local Coordinators in the Southern section (W. Ewersmann, personal
communication, April 19, 2017).
The Searcy JTT uses the USTA Quickstart tennis guide. The guide is a set of modifications to the
game of tennis to better fit little hands and feet. It provides an appropriate pattern for skill and equipment
progression, thus, giving every child an appropriate set of rules to follow based on their level of play.
Modifications include court dimensions, net size, scoring, size of balls and rackets. The adjustments make
tennis fun, enjoyable and successful for children (Junior team tennis Arkansas, 2017). At the end of the
season, the tournament breeds excitement as children can show off their life-long skills, that have been
learned in an appropriate setting. The Arkansas Tennis Association provides each league with: Kids’ Tennis
Club Playbook (organizer’s edition), 25 Kids’ Tennis Club Pocket Playbooks – featuring tennis and life
skills, 25 Youth Achievement Awards, Sportsmanship Poster, Recognition Letter and Certificate for
Offering Tennis (Junior team tennis Arkansas, 2017). The USTA resources gave the Searcy League a great
starting path but they would need much community support, interest and involvement to make this dream
happen.
Community Involvement
For the first year, they had sponsors to help with initial equipment and needs. Harding University
provides their courts for the clinics and tournaments. The university has even permanently lined their back
six courts with ten and under lines. Harding University tennis players coach the clinics for a small fee.

13
Searcy Parks and Recreation have lined the Berryhill courts with ten and under lines and have bought seven
red nets. Practices and matches are at Berryhill park for the 14 and under age groups. The 18 and under
teams practice and play on the Searcy High School courts (K. Behel, personal communication, April 13,
2017). The local university, local high school and the city of Searcy have worked together to help encourage
this life-long sport to be taught and played by their children.
Structure
The Searcy tennis club charges $75 for one season. The fee includes: three one-hour tennis clinics,
six-weeks of tennis matches including practices with a Parent-Coach, and a tournament with trophies. If the
child wants to play for the entire year, the cost is $125. The league provides all the balls, modified nets, a
ball-hopper full of balls for each coach, and cans of new tennis balls for matches (K. Behel, personal
communication, April 13, 2017).
How is the Searcy League Different than the other leagues?
The USTA recommends that those interested in playing form their own team and then sign-up with
JTT. However, Kerri knew that was not consistent with other league play and knew that put more
responsibility on the parents. Kerri’s children are involved in multiple league youth sports in Searcy so she
was familiar with the City Leagues, the barriers that leagues face, parental issues, and the busyness that
comes along with being a young family with multiple children. For the convenience of the parents, Kerri
and Gwen decided to have tennis sign-ups at the same time and the same structure as the other sport teams.
This meant to have an allotted timeframe for sign-ups and then have the kids divided up into teams with a
draft just like the other city leagues. Parents are the coaches but they do not have to recruit their own
players. Gwen and Kerri knew that this method of dividing up teams would prevent their from being an All-
Star team playing against an all-beginner team. Therefore, one team will not be dominating all of the
matches. Even though some friends with like-ability want to play on the same team, for the growth and
development of the skills these further developed players need to play matches against each other. Some
teams do practice with other teams allowing for best competition in practice and in the game setting (K.

14
Behel, personal communication, April 13, 2017). The method the Searcy League uses actually reinforces
the goals of the USTA in promoting fun, fitness and life-long skills for all skill-levels (Junior team tennis
Arkansas, 2017). Using this method of sign-up enabled the Searcy community to simply add tennis to their
options of sports to play with no extra pressure, confusion, or uncertainty of what would be expected. There
are many choices of sports for kids to play, if sign-up is not easy, parents will simply chose another sport.
The USTA would like for the parents to go directly to their tennis league website and sign-up. However the
sign-up is very confusing and complicated. Therefore, Gwen and Kerri elect to have parents go to
myonlinecamps.com to sign-up their children. The site is easy to navigate, user-friendly and very easy for
the league to set up. The myonlinecamps.com sets up everything for the league including: sibling discount,
t-shirt sale and/or discount, media release. The parent pays a small online fee in order for the league to use
this service. If the parents want to avoid the fee, they have in-person sign-ups one night at the same time as
the other league sign-ups. Once the sign-up deadline is passed, Kerri and Gwen enter all players into the
USTA online site.
Another change that Gwen and Kerri have done differently than the USTA guidelines, is that they
do not use the green ball. The green ball is a modified ball that is in between the orange modified ball and
standard yellow ball. Searcy has taken this ball out because they combine their 11-14 year olds on a team
and have them play their ability level instead of age. This is because they have 10 year olds who have the
same or higher skill ability as the 13 year olds (K. Behel, personal communication, April 13, 2017). In the
USTA tournaments, these kids have had to play up and it has helped them to develop their skills as they are
playing better competition. Combining these age groups is another way of enforcing the USTA goals of
skill development and playing appropriate modifications for skill levels, no matter the age.
Adult Interest in Tennis
As Searcy children have become more interested in tennis, Searcy parents have also began to want
to learn to play the game. The USTA has a Tennis Apprentice program for adults. Harding University
tennis players have began having a six-week practice and matches for adults. After that session, adults can

15
continue to have lessons within the Step Up program and the Harding University student can privately
charge for each session (K. Behel, personal communication, April 13, 2017). This is an excellent program
for adults who have never played to learn the game as well as for more advance players to have organized
play time and further skill development.
Change of Leadership
As the league has continued to grow over the last two and half years, Gwen and Kerri are a bit
weary in the vast coordination of the league. They are thankful to have a place for their kids to play but
were not expecting the league to grow as quickly as it did. Kerri’s kids are older, playing multiple sports
and one child is no longer active in the tennis league. Therefore, this Spring they asked for help in running
the league. The Searcy High School Head Tennis Coach, Miles Watson, had been coaching his son in the
league for the last year. With the help of his wife, Amanda, they will be taking over the league. Amanda
runs UpWard Basketball for Searcy that has over 600 kids so she is well-prepared for the undertaking of this
league. At their first meeting discussing the change in leadership Amanda expressed that they want this
league to grow. Gwen and Kerri knew they were the perfect fit! As Gwen and Kerri simply wanted a place
for their children to learn and grow in tennis, Coach Miles and Amanda want to see the league thrive and
grow. Ninety-five percent of the kids playing in the league are a part of the Searcy school district. Coach
Watson has seen a tremendous growth in his Searcy High team since the conception of the USTA Searcy
League as he had 45 students out for tennis this year (K. Behel, personal communication, April 13, 2017).
This Mother-Daughter team thoroughly enjoyed creating and developing this Searcy tennis league for young
people to develop life-long fitness skills and are thrilled to know that it will be going into the hands of
people who want to continue to develop it so that all Searcy children can have the opportunity to develop
these skills and have fun with the game of tennis!

16
Reference
Junior team tennis Arkansas. (2017). Retrieved April 19, 2017, from
http://www.arktennis.com/jtt
Special Topics
Volunteering in School Athletics Programs: School Asset or Liability?
by
Dr. David LaVetter Arkansas State University
Most school sport programs annually rely on hiring and retaining volunteers to assist with various
managerial, coaching, or officiating responsibilities to help ensure their programs’ sustainability. The use of
volunteers can serve many purposes for the school, as well as the volunteer. Volunteers may be seeking to
build work experiences, or maybe to provide a service to their community. Most commonly, volunteers help
provide opportunities for schools’ administrators to save valuable money that can be spent on other program
necessities. Due to decreasing state government allocations, school districts are strapped for the resources to
effectively operate; therefore, schools typically turn to volunteers to off-set annual expenses. Volunteering
in sport is not a new concept. Using volunteers however, may not be fully understood from a risk
perspective.
Over 7.8M of the nation’s high school youth participate in high school athletics activities (NFHS,
2016), and just under 3.5M volunteers assisted with coaching, officiating, or otherwise supervising, or
managing youth sport teams. Volunteering in total youth sport programs represents 5.5% of all volunteers,
and the total volunteer rate in the US was 24.9% in 2015 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016). Undoubtedly,
the qualifications and backgrounds of volunteers can vary greatly. Certainly, depended on state legislation,
those volunteer policies and screening will greatly differ as well.

17
Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, an organization can be held liable for the actions of their
volunteers dependent on organizational control of their hired help. Volunteers are held to the same standard
as that of a competent employee. A component of the corporate (i.e. school) entity includes exercising
reasonable care in hiring, supervising and retaining competent employees and volunteers (Cotton, 2013).
The level of control most schools have on their volunteers is typically sufficient to fall under respondeat
superior legal doctrine. Since administrators generally provide a level of training, and supervision of their
volunteers. The level of control can also depend on the volunteers’ responsibilities. Volunteers in a public
school setting are immune from liability if they fall under state immunity statute or the Volunteer Protection
Act of 1997 (VPA, 1997) provided they meet the conditions, yet those statutes do not necessarily protect the
school.
Prior to hiring volunteers to work sport activities, the school should conduct some form of
screening. Not only should be subject to meeting the qualifications of the job, but certainly a quality
screening protocol can protect the school from liability if completed properly. The underlying issue in
negligent hiring is whether the employer acted reasonably prudent in selecting a particular volunteer to fill a
position. The tort of negligent hiring is concerned with the risk created by exposing members of the public
(students) to a potentially dangerous or unfit person (Cotton, 2013). Restatement (Second) of Agency § 213
(1958) provides: “a person conducting an activity through servants or agents is subject to liability for harm
resulting from his conduct if he is negligent or reckless…in the employment of improper persons.”
(Restatement, 1958).
Sexual Abuse of Youth
In a 2016 U.S. Department of Justice Facts and Statistics Report, 35.8% of sexual assaults occur
when the victim is between the ages of 12-17, and 82% of all juvenile victims are female, and 90% of sexual
offenders are familiar with their victims (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016). Given that volunteer sport
coaches can spend a significant amount of time with the youth, close relationships can quickly form. School
administrators clearly acknowledge the potential risks of their volunteers; however, limited resources or lack

18
of law/policy may defer conducting background checks on all their volunteers. School district liability for
coaches' behavior can be gleaned through analysis of jurisprudence stemming from employee misconduct,
including volunteers. Generally, civil suits surrounding teacher/coach sexual misconduct claims usually
center on sexual harassment of students, negligent hiring, negligent supervision, constitutional violation for
denial of civil rights, the right of safety and liberty, and equal protection under the law (Preston, 2006).
Title IX
Individuals may use Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 to seek remedy for sexual
harassment or abuse in an educational institution. There have been numerous news stories of collegiate
athletics programs involved in these types of cases related to sexual assault victims. Under Title IX, the law
requires school officials with authority to intervene to report the abuse and conduct a thorough investigation.
A successful private claim for damages requires that the school officials acted with “deliberate indifference”
or failed to stop it. Thus, a student or school employee who is being harassed by a peer, employee, or
volunteer should report the problem to the appropriate school officials in order to ensure that the school has
been put on notice.
In C.T. v. Liberal School District (2008), the plaintiffs’ claims asserted four different types of Title IX
violations:
1. Deliberate indifference to harassment by the coach
2. Deliberate indifference to student-on-student harassment
3. Retaliation for complaining about sexual harassment and abuse
4. Failing to implement adequate policies and training to protect them from harassment
Under the first claim, deliberate indifference to harassment by the volunteer coach, the court could
not conclude that any school district personnel had actual knowledge that the weights coach posed a
substantial risk of abuse to students. If background searches are properly conducted by schools, this may
decrease their risk of deliberate indifference of negligent hiring. Citing Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent
School District (1998), and Escue v. N. Okla. College, (2006), the court held that a private plaintiff may not

19
recover damages under Title IX for sexual harassment of a student by of the district’s employees unless a
school official had actual notice of and is deliberately indifferent to the misconduct (italics added).
The weights coach was conducting weight lifting and other exercise programs out of his home,
under the approval of the school district. The weights instructor had provided “sex talks” and “massages” to
male students. The weights coach also served as the assistant wrestling coach, and hence conducted nude
weigh-ins at the school. The courts found no negligence related to the nude weigh-ins since they were
properly supervised, and of the commonality of practice of wrestlers prior to competition. In the end, the
school district was held liable for a volunteer coach’s sexual abuse by a volunteer coach under Title IX
under the failing to implement adequate policies and training to protect students from harassment or abuse.
In Kansas, a state statute provides that a governmental entity is generally liable for damages caused
by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any of its employees while acting within the scope of their
employment under circumstances where the governmental entity, if a private person, would be liable under
the laws of the state. Section (d) of that legislation provides definition tracking the common law
understanding of an agent, which can include unpaid volunteers (italics added). Under Kansas law, an
employer is liable for injuries caused by an employee acting within the scope of his or her employment. An
employee is acting within the scope of his or her employment when the employee is performing services for
which he or she has been employed, or when the employee is doing anything which is reasonably incidental
to that employment. The test is not necessarily whether the specific conduct was expressly authorized or
forbidden by the employer, but whether such conduct should have been fairly foreseen from the nature of
the employment and the duties relating to it (italics added) Kan. Stat. Ann. § 75-6103, 2011).
Continuing Problem Facing School Districts
A continuing national problem confronting the safety of students are sexual offenders. This
problem continues to escalate despite many organizations turning to background checks to prevent sexual
abuse. Many states have enacted laws requiring schools to conduct background check of their volunteers.
School boards may adopt policies that are more stringent than their state laws. Most state legislation related

20
to background screening for school volunteers center their concerns with sexual abuse of children (Laws for
screening, 2007). Recent news stories have shown that abuse in youth sport unfortunately continues. USA
Swimming and Gymnastics have recently had sexual abuse problems. Additionally, a soft ball coach in San
Antonio was recently arrested for sexually abusing a girl on his team. The victim reported the coach
sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions during the summer of 2015 through December 2015
(Villavicencio, 2016).
In a U.S. Department of Justice Facts and Statistics Report, 35.8% of sexual assaults occur when the
victim is between the ages of 12-17, and 82% of all juvenile victims are female, and sexual offenders are
familiar with their victims (90%) (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016). Given that volunteer sport coaches
can spend a significant amount of time with the youth, close relationships can quickly form. School
administrators clearly acknowledge the potential risks of their volunteers; however, limited resources may
defer conducting background checks on all their volunteers. Additionally, district policies may prohibit
volunteers coaching sport teams without teacher supervision.
Only 12 states have passed legislation for background screening of volunteers. Most states rely on
their districts’ background screening of their hired personnel, including volunteers. Cost range of screening
was found to be $10-$40, with volunteers expected to foot the cost. 42% of volunteer screening legislation
occurred in 2003 (most legislation 75% was passed between 2001-2008). In many states, background checks
were good for 12 months (Villavicencio, 2016).
Arkansas Examples of School Volunteer Screening Procedures
A website content analysis showed the following examples of AR school district volunteer policies:
Little Rock School Districts: Fill out volunteer application and register with the Arkansas Child
Abuse and Neglect Central Registry (Little Rock School District Volunteer Application, 2017).
Mountain Home School District: Complete the Volunteer Application Packet in the volunteer handbook on
an annual basis. The district will complete a background check, and the superintendent or designee will

21
notify the volunteer of their status (Mountain Home, 2017).
Jasper School District: This school has an excellent policy and procedure clearly outlined for their
prospective school volunteers. They clearly outline what they expect from their volunteers. This
district policy could serve a model example for other districts in the state on how they can have a
comprehensive policy. Not only does it describe in detail about how to become a volunteer but also
shows a checklist of what they can and can’t do. The volunteer completes state and nationwide
background screening and pays the associated fees. Of note, is one of the requirements of the Jasper
School District is that volunteer candidates must successfully complete in-service training workshop
regarding volunteering at the school (Jasper, 2017).
Some school districts may seek screening services by online screening services such as
RaptorTrace. Example: SECURITY BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
1. Have you ever been arrested or convicted of an offense other than a minor traffic
violation?
2. Have you ever been found guilty of a criminal offense?
3. Have you ever been confirmed as a child abuser by any agency?
4. Are there criminal charges currently pending against you?
BY MY SIGNATURE, I CERTIFY THAT I KNOW, UNDERSTAND, AND AGREE THAT ANY FALSE
STATEMENT OR OMISSION OF INFORMATION REQUESTED WILL RESULT IN MY TERMINATION AS A
SCHOOL VOLUNTEER. To volunteer (refer to board policy 6.4), you must first complete a background
check through Raptor Trace. The background check is completed online. Please visit the link provided to
complete your background check. Once the background is approved, you will be automatically notified
through e-mail. If a background check is in question, you will receive an e-mail notification stating the
screening is under further review. If your background check is under further review, a School Resource
Officer will be in contact with you. (RaptorTrace, 2017).

22
Arkansas Law
According to Act 390 (1987) of the Arkansas Volunteer Immunity Act, “Volunteers shall not be
civilly liable for personal injury or property damage resulting from any act or omission in carrying out their
volunteer activities.” Please note the exception found in Section (b): “Where the qualified volunteer acts in
bad faith or is guilty of gross negligence.” This would include acts of sexual abuse or harassment on the part
of the volunteer of the school. (Arkansas Act 390, 1987).
Since 2003, State of Arkansas has required school districts to conduct background/fingerprint check
of the employees. Effective February 20, 2017, the Department of Education has a new screening policy for
their school employees, including their licensure and background check. There is live background scan
equipment at currently six school districts that have agreed to pilot the policy change: Bryant,
Jacksonville/N. Pulaski, Little Rock, Mountain Home, N. Little Rock, and Springdale school districts (AR
Department of Education, 2017). Presumably as we strive to minimize risk in our schools, and under
respondeat superior, school districts will most likely become more consistent throughout the state relative to
background screening of their sport volunteers.
Cost
Cost of background checks in Arkansas: Effective October 1, 2016, the fees for an individual applying
online for state and federal background checks are:
• $22.00 (state criminal history record check)
• $13.00 (national criminal history record check) (Arkansas Department of Education, 2017).
These costs have traditionally been incurred by the hiring entities (i.e. school districts); however, a
trend of imposing the fee upon the volunteers appears to be seen throughout the U.S.
Undoubtedly, the qualifications and backgrounds of volunteers can vary greatly, as well as the
policies to screen, hire, train, and retain volunteers can vary district to district. Prior to hiring volunteers for

23
athletics related assistance, the school administrator and/or coach must first ask these questions related to
volunteer hiring:
• “What are the required qualifications for the desired responsibilities to fill?”
• “Does the volunteer fully meet the qualifications necessary to perform the job?”
• “Has sufficient screening occurred (by law or school district policy) on the volunteer?”
Implications
Despite some added cost to administrators’ budgets, the need to properly screen their volunteers of
school sponsored activities is paramount. The legal cases are replete with school districts failing to properly
screen their volunteer coaches, and consequently; children and families have suffered. Additionally, legal
costs, and negative media have resulted in some schools whose perpetrators could have been screened with a
proper background check. Invariable, schools will continue to rely on responsible volunteers to provide the
needed support for their many extra-curricular activity programs. These volunteers are invaluable, yet none
should feel offended when a school district strives to implement a policy requiring annual volunteer forms to
be renewed or completed prior to providing volunteer services. The volunteers usually understand the
necessity to provide safety and protection to the students.
As more states continue to require background screening of school volunteers, the courts will expect
the schools to comply, and attempt to make the environment as safe as possible for the participants. The
courts are inclined to view better child protection through volunteer screening as a reasonable practice in
today’s schools. The issue of foreseeable harm to the students is very evident in the courts, thus safe
practices such as conducting background screening allows the schools to put themselves in a better
defensible position in the event there is an incident with one of their volunteer coaches. Lastly, from the
legal literature, it is strongly suggested to have a volunteer screening, and training policy in place. Once a
policy is instituted and streamlined to online management, the volunteers become accustomed to completing
paperwork, or other training activities as mandated by administration. The safety and protection of our
young participants should be a top priority, and volunteer staff screening is an area in which our youth can

24
be safer.
References
Arkansas Act 390 (1987). Arkansas Volunteer Immunity Act. Retrieved from
ftp://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/bills/1997/HTM/HB1218.pdf.
Arkansas Department of Education (2017). Educator licensure and background check requirements.
Retrieved from http://www.arkansased.gov/divisions/human-resources-educator-effectiveness-and-
licensure/educator-licensure-unit/background-check-requirements.
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2016, February 25). Volunteering in the United States News Release. Retrieved
from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/volun.htm.
C.T. v. Liberal School District (2008). 562 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45848).
Cotton, D.J. (2013). Negligence; and which parties are liable? In Cotton (2013) Law for Recreation and Sport
Managers (6th
). Kendall Hunt: Dubuque, IA.
Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education (1999). 526 U.S. 629, 119 S. Ct. 1661, 143 L. Ed. 2d 839.
Escue v. N. Oka. College (2006). 450 F.3d 1146, 1154 (10th
Cir. 2006).
Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District (1998). 525 U.S. 274, 118 S. Ct. 1989, 141 L.Ed. 2d 277
(1998).
Jasper School District (2017). Volunteer information packet. Retrieved from
http://jasper.k12.ar.us/plugins/show_image.php?id=125.
Kansas Tort Claims Act (KTCA), Kan. Stat. Ann. § 75-6103 (a). (2011).
Laws for screening volunteers (2007). PTO Today. Retrieved from https://www.ptotoday.com/pto-today-
articles/article/235-new-laws-for-screening-volunteers.

25
Little Rock School District Volunteer Application (2017). Procedures for volunteering. Retrieved from
http://arkidsread.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/LRSD-Volunteer- Application.pdf.
Mountain Home School District (2017). Volunteer Handbook. Retrieved from
http://mhbombers.com/volunteers/handbook.pdf.
National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) (2015-2016). High school athletics
participation survey. Retrieved from http://www.nfhs.org/ParticipationStatistics/PDF/2015-
16_Sports_Participation_Survey.pdf.
Preston, B.M. (2006). Sheldon Kennedy and a Canadian Tragedy Revisited: A comparative look at U.S. and
Canadian jurisprudence on youth sports organizations’ civil liability for child sexual exploitation.
Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 39 (4), 1333-1372.
RaptorTrace (2017). Online criminal background screening service. Retrieved from
https://apps.raptorware.com/trace.
Restatement (Second) of Agency (1958). Title 17 U.S. Code. Retrieved from
http://blenderlaw.umlaw.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/restatement-second-of-agency.pdf.
Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972. 20 U.S.C.S. § 1681 et seq.
U.S. Department of Justice (2016). Raising awareness about sexual abuse: Facts and statistics. Retrieved from
https://www.nsopw.gov/en-us/Education/FactsStatistics.
Villavicencio, R. (2016). San Antonio softball coach charged with sexual abuse of 11-year-old girl. Retrieved
from http://usatodayhss.com/author/roma-villavicencio-and-kens5-com-staff.
Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 (June, 1997). Public Law 105-19, 105th
Congress. Retrieved from
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-105publ19/pdf/PLAW-105publ19.pdf.

26
Research Articles
Stride Frequencies on Treadmill Versus Over Ground Running
by
Jesse Dare & Kaitlin Burgess Graduate Students & Dr. Shelia Jackson from Arkansas Tech
University
INTRODUCTION
Running is a popular form of exercise in the United States, having over 13.9 million
participants each year (Lenhart, Thelen, Wille, Chumanov, & Heiderscheit, 2014). Many
researchers conduct their research on running in laboratories using treadmills, assuming the
running kinematics on a treadmill to be comparable to over ground running (Ahn, Brayton, Bhatia,
& Martin, 2014; Chumanov, Wille, Michalski, & Heiderscheit, 2012; Dallam, Wilber, Jadelis,
Fletcher, & Romanov, 2005; Daoud et al., 2012; Elliott & Blanksby, 1976; Hafer, Brown, deMille,
Hillstrom, & Garber, 2015; Hobara et al., 2012; Kulmala, Avela, Pasanen, & Parkkari, 2013;
Milner, Ferber, Pollard, Hamill, & Davis, 2006; Nelson, Dillman, Lagassi, & Bickett, 1972; Nigg,
De Boer, & Fisher, 1995; Noehren et al., 2007; Pohl et al., 2008; Riley et al., 2008; van Gent et al.,
2007; Wellenkotter, Kernozek, Meardon, & Suchomel, 2014).
Stride frequency refers to the number of strides in a minute (Hafer et al., 2015). Previous
research conducted on stride frequency and running performance suggested that an increased stride
frequency in endurance events is associated with an increased performance (Chumanov et al.,
2012; Dallam et al., 2005; Hafer et al., 2015; Hobara et al., 2012). In the stride frequency studies,
treadmills were used to analyze gait; however, they did not consider the differences in kinematics
between over ground running and treadmill running.

27
Studies are inconclusive about the validity of using treadmills to analyze running
kinematics. Some authors found that participants running on a treadmill had smaller vertical
oscillation, shorter flight time, shorter stride length, and greater stride frequency compared to
running over ground (Nelson, et al., 1972; Dal Monte, Fucci, & Manoni, 1973; Elliot & Blanksby,
1976; Riley et al., 2008). Although Riley et al. (2008) found significant differences in stride length
and frequency between over ground and treadmill running, they concluded that if the treadmill
surface is stiff enough and the belt speed is consistent that treadmill running mechanics are
generalizable to over ground running. Chumanov et al. (2012), Dallam et al. (2005), Hafer et al.
(2015), and Hobara et al. (2012) used treadmills to calculate stride frequencies and used those
frequencies to assign a percentage of increase for over ground training.
For this reason, we should reassess the use of stride frequency adjustments based on
treadmill testing. The purpose of this study was to compare the stride frequency of over ground
running versus treadmill running to determine the validity of using treadmills to determine stride
frequency for over ground training. The study also looked at the correlation between the stride
frequency of over ground running and treadmill running. It was hypothesized that there would not
be a significant correlation between the stride frequencies of over ground running and treadmill
running.
Methods
Twenty recreational runners from local running organizations volunteered and 19

28
completed the study (5 females, 14 men, average age of 32). The dropout of one participant was
due to unknown reasons. Participants attended an informational meeting prior to a running club
event that explained the research purpose. Participants consisted of peers, running club members,
and physical education students at the university. The skill level and activity level of all subjects
ranged from recreational runners to competitive runners. The participants ran an average of 3±2
days a week for approximately 60±30 minutes. To be included, participants had to be able to run,
without stopping, 1600 meters. Prior to participation, runners completed a physical activity
readiness questionnaire survey (PAR-Q) and an informed consent form stating their participation
was voluntary, and they could withdraw at any time.
Instrumentation
Participants ran on a 400-meter track for the overground tests and on an instrumented
treadmill at a Division II university’s Human Performance Laboratory for the treadmill tests.
Participants wore a New Lifestyles©
Digi-Walker SW-200 on their right hip to assess stride
frequency in each test. In a study conducted by Jago, Watson, Baranowski, Zakeri, Yoo,
Baranowski, & Conry (2006), the authors found the New Lifestyles©
Digi-Walker SW-200 to be
valid and reliable (r = 0.51-0.91; p < .001). Additional studies found coiled spring pedometers an
effective tool for measuring stride frequency (Hart, Brusseau, Kulinna, McClain, & Tudor-Locke,
2011; Schneider, Crouter, Lukajic, & Bassett, 2003; Schneider, Crouter, & Bassett, 2004).
Procedures

29
The university Institutional Review Board approved the study. All participants completed a
1600-meter over ground run and a treadmill run through a cross-sectional design. Both conditions
used a pedometer to calculate average stride frequency. The participants performed warmup runs
on the track until they felt they were accustomed to the track (Riley et al., 2008). The participants
then ran at a pace that was self-selected for 1600-meters. One week after the over ground run, the
participants completed the treadmill condition. The treadmill testing took place at the university’s
Human Performance Laboratory. The average time calculated from the over ground run from each
participant was determined for the treadmill speed (Riley et al., 2008). The participants performed
warmup runs on the treadmill until they and the researcher felt they were comfortable on the
treadmill. Participants ran on the treadmill for the same amount of time as recorded for the over
ground run. Treadmill running occurred with a 0% grade slope (Nigg, De Boer, & Fisher, 1995).
Statistical Analysis
The study was quasi-experimental with one group performing two conditions, over ground
and treadmill running. The statistical technique used was an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient
(ICC). Statistical significance was set at p < .05.
Results
Using an SPSS program, an ICC assessed the relationship between over ground running
stride frequency and treadmill running stride frequency (see Table 1). There was a significant (p <

30
.001) Intraclass Correlation (r = .95; 95% CI = 0.88, 0.98).
Table 1
Intraclass Correlation Coefficient
Intraclass 95% Confidence Interval F Test with True Value 0
Correlation Lower Upper Value df1 df2 Sig
Single .953 .884 .982 40.057 18 18 .000
Average .976 .938 .991 40.057 18 18 .000
Discussion, Conclusion, and Recommendations
The null hypothesis that there would not be a significant correlation was rejected. This
study supports the use of treadmills to predict over ground stride frequency. The results of this
study are in agreement and support the assumptions of previous researchers that stride frequencies
obtained on a treadmill could be used to determine stride frequencies over ground (Chumanov et
al., 2012; Dallam et al., 2005; Hafer et al., 2015). Riley et al. (2008) concluded that if the treadmill
surface is stiff enough and the belt speed is consistent that treadmill running mechanics are
generalizable to over ground running. Although the results of this research does not support the
findings of Nelson, et al. (1972), Dal Monte, Fucci, & Manoni (1973), or Elliot & Blanksby (1976),
perhaps the treadmills used in the 70s were not of the same caliber as those used in current
research.
Variables not monitored during data collection that could affect results were; time of day,

31
temperature, physical activity, and diet. A small error could occur due to rounding of calculations.
The original treadmill used in the study broke and an alternative treadmill was required. Another
issue that could result in error in the results was the collection of pedometer readings. Pedometer
data collection occurred immediately after each run; however, not every subject stopped at the
designated area and therefore added steps to the run. By adding more steps after the test is
complete, the results of the data could have had the potential to change; therefore, it is important to
try and stop the subjects at the designated area.
Past research conducted on stride frequency and running performance suggested that an
increased stride frequency in endurance events is associated with increased performance
(Chumanov et al., 2012; Dallam et al., 2005; Hafer et al., 2015; Hobara et al., 2012). The use of
treadmills and pedometers to measure stride frequency could be useful tools in training runners. It
is easier to monitor and provide feedback regarding biomechanical aspects of running form to a
runner on a treadmill versus a track; however, running on a treadmill does not require participants
to learn how to set and maintain their own pace. By decreasing stride length and increasing stride
frequency, runners become more efficient and able to run at a faster pace for a longer amount of
time. Pedometers allow runners to monitor their progress towards this end while running over
ground.
A recommendation for future research is to compare the difference in self-selected pace on
the treadmill versus over ground running.
References

32
Ahn, A., Brayton, C., Bhatia, T., & Martin, P. (2014). Muscle activity and kinematics of forefoot
and rearfoot strike runners. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 3(2), 102-112.
Chumanov, E., Wille, C., Michalski, M., & Heiderscheit, B. (2012). Changes in muscle activation
patterns when running step rate is increased. Gait & Posture, 36(2), 231-235. doi:
10.1016/J.gaitpost.2012.02.023.
Dallam, G., Wilber, R., Jadelis, K., Fletcher, G., Romanov, N. (2005). Effect of a global alteration
of running technique on kinematics and economy. J. of Sports Sci, 23(7), 757-764. doi:
10.1080/02640410400022003.
Dal Monte, A., Fucci, S., & Manoni, A. (1973). The treadmill used as a training and simulator
instrument in middle- and long-distance running. Medicine and Sport, 8, 359-363.
Daoud, A. I., Geissler, G. J., Wang, F., Saretsky, J., Daoud, Y., & Lieberman, D. (2012). Foot
strike and injury rates in endurance runners: a retrospective study. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 44(7), 1325-34.
Elliott, B. C., & Blanksby, B. A. (1976). A cinematographic analysis of overground and treadmill
running by males and females. Med Sci Sports, 8(2), 84-87.
Hafer, J., Brown, A., deMille, P., Hillstrom, H., & Garber, C. (2015). The effect of a cadence
retraining protocol on running biomechanics and efficiency: a pilot study. Journal of Sports
Sciences, 33(7), 724-731. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2014.962573.
Hart, T., Brusseau, T., Kulinna, H., McClain, J., & Tudor-Locke, C. (2011). Evaluation of low-
cost, objective instruments for assessing physical activity in 10–11-year-old
children. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82(4), 600-609.
Hobara, H., Sato, T., Sakaguchi, M., Sato, T., Nakazawa, K. (2012). Step frequency and lower
extremity loading during running. Int. J. Sports Med, 33, 310-313. doi: 10.1055/S-0031-
1291232.
Jago, R., Watson, K., Baranowski, T., Zakeri, I., Yoo, S., Baranowski, J., & Conry, K. (2006).
Pedometer reliability, validity and daily activity targets among 10- to 15-year-old boys.
Journal of Sports Sciences, 24(3), 241-251. doi:10.1080/02640410500141661
Kulmala, J., Avela, J., Pasanen, K., & Parkkari, J. (2013). Forefoot strikers exhibit lower running-
induced knee loading than rearfoot strikers. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 45(12), 2306-13.
Lenhart, R., Thelen, D., Wille, C., Chumanov, E., & Heiderscheit, B. (2014). Increasing running
step rate reduces patellofemoral joint forces. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 46(3), 557-564.
Milner, C., Ferber, R., Pollard, C., Hamill, J., & Davis, I. (2006). Biomechanical factors associated
with tibial stress fracture in female runners. Medicine and Science in Sports and

33
Exercise, 38(2), 323.
Nelson, R., Dillman, C., Lagassi, P., & Bickett, P. (1972). Biomechanics of overground versus
treadmill running. Med. Sci. Sports, 4, 233-240.
Nigg, B., De Boer, R., & Fisher, V. (1995). A kinematic comparison of overground and treadmill
running. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 27(1), 98-105.
Noehren, B., Davis, I., & Hamill, J. (2007). ASB Clinical Biomechanics Award Winner 2006:
Prospective study of the biomechanical factors associated with iliotibial band
syndrome. Clinical Biomechanics, 22(9), 951-956.
Pohl, M., Mullineaux, D., Milner, C., Hamill, J., & Davis, I. (2008). Biomechanical predictors of
retrospective tibial stress fractures in runners. Journal of Biomechanics, 41(6), 1160-1165
Riley, P., Dicharry, J., Franz, J., Croce, U., Wilder, R., & Kerrigan, D. (2008). A kinematics and
kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill running. Medicine and Science in Sports
and Exercise, 40(6), 1093.
Schneider, P., Crouter, S., & Bassett, D. (2004). Pedometer measures of free-living physical
activity: comparison of 13 models. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 36(2),
331-335.
Schneider, P., Crouter, S., Lukajic, O., & Bassett, D. (2003). Accuracy and reliability of 10
pedometers for measuring steps over a 400-m walk. Medicine and Science in Sports and
Exercise, 35(10), 1779-1784.
van Gent, B., Siem, D., van Middelkoop, M., van Os, T., Bierma-Zeinstra, S., & Koes, B. (2007).
Incidence and determinants of lower extremity running injuries in long distance runners: a
systematic review. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 41, 469-480.
doi:10.1136/bjsm.2006.033548.
Wellenkotter, J., Kernozek, T., Meardon, S., Suchomel, T. (2014). The effects of running cadence
manipulation on plantar loading in healthy runners. Int. J. Sports Med, 35(9), 779-784. doi:
10.1055/S-0033-1363236.
Influence of Policy on Competitive Foods in Public Schools: Results and Implications
Introduction
One of the most pressing issues within public schools is improving academic performance.
As health professionals, this emphasis on academic performance provides an opportunity to
improve the quality and quantity of health programs within schools due to the clear link between

34
optimal health and academic performance (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC],
2015). Improving students’ nutritional status within the school environment by providing optimal
food choices is crucial. Throughout the majority of public schools, meals provided by the United
States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School
Breakfast Program (SBP) serve as the primary source of foods consumed by students at school.
However, in addition to foods available from these programs, a majority of schools also sell
competitive food (CF) items.
Competitive foods are termed such because they compete with the USDA meals and are
most commonly found as “a la carte” items, in school vending machines, and in school snack bars
or stores. Competitive foods have the potential to reduce diet quality and/or to contribute to excess
calories above the standard lunch (Fox et al., 2009). This excess calorie consumption may
contribute to childhood obesity. The severity of health issues related to poor nutrition such as
childhood obesity necessitate the analysis of food environments (including the school food
environment) that promote or restrict obesogenic behaviors. Competitive foods’ sales provides
income for the companies selling the products as well as nondiscretionary revenue for school
administrators. This profit motive has historically been a barrier to limiting these foods in schools.
Regulations have been developed to address this health issue. The most recent policy is section
208 of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010.
Purpose
The purpose of this review was to examine the influence of policy on the availability of
competitive foods and the adherence to relevant policies within public schools. Additionally, the
review outlined specific strategies that may facilitate effective implementation of health and

35
nutrition policies.
Methods
Search Strategy
The following databases were utilized to obtain appropriate literature for the review: PsycINFO,
Medline, CINAHL, ERIC, and Google Scholar. Articles were retrieved using a combination of the
following key words: competitive food, policy, law, public schools, children and adolescents.
Inclusion criteria were limited to peer-reviewed research published in the English language to
incorporate timely articles referencing recent CF policy, and explicitly assessed the impact of
policy on CF availability. Included articles also contained specific mention of policy or regulations
that served as the intervention for analysis of change within the articles. In order to narrow the
scope of review, articles that did not include a specific CF element or only addressed beverages
were excluded. Articles were initially assessed through cursory analysis of title and abstract, with
full review of articles occurring in subsequent phases. In an effort for comprehensiveness, a
descendant search of included articles was performed.
Results
The most recent policy aimed at the CF environment is through the Healthy, Hunger-Free
Kids Act of 2010 that, in section 208, requires schools that offer USDA meals to limit CF to those
that meet specific nutrition standards. While the bulk of the policy was released in 2010, section
208 was not finalized until 2013. Schools were provided with a year to implement these policies.
Results from the policy were positive. A majority of schools experienced reduced intakes
and availability of noncompliant foods. These changes were evident through data showing that pre-
change items largely consisted of unhealthy options including chips, candy, cookies, and pastries
whereas post-policy, many of these items were eliminated entirely or modified to meet standards

36
(Hoffman et al., 2015; Phillips et al. 2010).
In order to satisfy implemented policy requirements, many schools in Arkansas modified
vending machine items or entirely removed vending machines to achieve compliance (Phillips et
al., 2010). The most significant changes regarding CF availability were observed for a la carte
items. These CF items achieved compliance through the elimination of certain foods, reduction in
portion sizes, the offering of healthier alternatives, as well as introducing new items (Hoffman et
al., 2015; Long, Hendersen, & Schwartz, 2010). While there were significant changes associated
with the availability of healthy CF, compliance with the policy regulations was not 100% (Long,
Hendersen, & Schwartz, 2010; Hoffman et al., 2015).
When noncompliant foods were unavailable, students consumed less of them. Students
consumed significantly fewer salty snacks such as chips (Cullen & Watson, 2009) They also
consumed significantly fewer total kilocalories and grams of fat and students did not replace
noncompliant foods by bringing them from home (Schwartz, Novak, & Fiore, 2009). Sanchez-
Vaznaugh, Sanchez, Baek, and Crawford (2010) observed a decrease in overweight prevalence in
children in California following the implementation of policy.
In addition to the positive compliance results, loss in revenue associated with policy change
was uncommon. Most schools and districts in Connecticut were able to offset revenue previously
obtained from unhealthy CF sales by greater reimbursement from students participating in NSLP
and BSP programs (Long, Hendersen, & Schwartz, 2010). Additional sources of revenue included
sales of new or reformulated products that met policy standards and were healthier alternatives. Not
all districts were able to offset revenue, specifically schools in highly affluent neighborhoods. The
reasoning behind this disparity is two-fold. First, affluent students do not qualify for no cost or
reduced-price lunches through the NSLP and SBP and were able to purchase non-compliant foods

37
at similar prices to the healthier alternatives. Second, students in affluent districts reported stigma
associated with the NSLP and SBP being a large deterrent or barrier from participating in the
programs (Guthrie, Newman, Ralston, Prell, & Ollinger, 2013). This finding is important because it
illustrates the inability for policy alone to effectively change behavior among all students.
Implications
The results provide valuable insight regarding the potential effect of CF policy on item
availability, compliance with policy, student food item consumption, and administrative concerns
such as revenue and support. A need exists for advocating in policy adoption and implementation,
stakeholder cooperation and collaboration, supplementation of quality health education and
promotion, as well as funding support for compliance and enforcement. Implications and strategies
for health policy adoption and implementation are summarized in Table 1.
[Insert Table 1 here]
Almost ubiquitous throughout the reviewed articles was the continued need for enforcement
of federal policy adherence. While the implementation of the CF regulations, as mandated by
section 208, are recent, it is highly probable based on previous findings that there will be health
related improvements because of the enforcement of these standards. If a policy exists but there is
no structure or process designed to ensure accuracy and compliance, a propensity for
noncompliance will be present. Compliance and enforcement efforts can be designed to offer
avenues to work with health educators and district health coordinators to provide information and
resources that foster easier decision-making and compliance. Additional funding and incentives
may also increase compliance and sustainability over a longer period.
Another important strategy for the adoption of health education policy and implementation

38
is advocating among stakeholders and health educators seeking behavior change. Effective change
can begin at the local level and later become more widely applied. CF policy has evolved from
local to now federally mandated regulations (Kubik et al., 2010). For this change to be applied at
the federal level it required political support and people to advocate for the promotion and adoption
of change on a small scale in order to serve as evidence of the benefits associated with such
change. It is through these examples that support for health policy can grow and eventually reach a
critical mass that results in wide adoption of policy. Additionally, advocacy is needed to sustain
implementation and support. Large-scale policy often requires energy and effort to maintain
support.
For upstream approaches to occur within health education, it is necessary to incorporate and
collaborate with various stakeholders who bring unique and diverse expertise to achieve common
goals. The adoption and implementation of the CF policy is no exception and necessitates
cooperation in order to maximize results. The CF policy not only required information and support
for determining positive food requirements within the school environment, but also required a way
to support this policy logistically and financially. It is then necessary to incorporate expertise from
not only principals and administrators, but also parents, finance representatives, food vendors, and
health educators.
Renewed interests to promote health education efforts that are inclusive of cross-sector
collaboration and shared benefit are becoming more common. This is present in the school
environment with the newly introduced and promoted Whole School, Whole Community, Whole
Child model. Health educators and public health practitioners should have an overt presence within
these collaborative efforts to facilitate and maintain policy of health promotion programs and
initiatives.

39
While policy provides a strong impetus and foundation for change, it alone cannot provide
quality health education and promotion efforts. Policy, combined with health education and health
promotion, reinforces positive change. The strongest cases for this assertion within the CF
environment are examples of the lack of NSLP and SBP within affluent districts and schools. The
primary reason students reported their lack of participation was the associated stigma associated
with the program. In circumstances and populations such as these, policy alone will not change
behaviors, as it is the negative perceptions that are preventing participation in the healthier
alternatives. Without addressing this stigma and false perception, students will still be more likely
to choose food options outside of the nutritionally compliant NSLP and SBP. It is necessary to
provide marketing efforts within populations such as these that not only provide support to the
implemented policy, but also seek to eliminate stigma and false perception that may serve as a
barrier to healthy behavior. Elucidating the rationale behind the implementation of that policy
increases the strength of the promotion effort and ultimately has the capacity to greatly improve
program capacity.
Conclusion
Results of this literature review indicate that CF policy has the capacity to influence the
availability of healthier food items and their consumption. Given time for the establishment of the
policy, student health outcomes can improve. Health educators and public health practitioners can
support policies as advocates, stakeholder collaborators, as well as resources to identify and
interpret policy for those who may lack the required health or policy literacy. Developing and
adopting policy that is adequately structured and supported to make lasting and impactful change to
health behavior and outcomes is a daunting task. However, unlike downstream approaches that
only address specific issues among specific populations, upstream approaches such as policy

40
supplemented with quality health education and promotion has the capacity to promote health
change on a large scale and enable further opportunities to improve health status and quality of life.

41
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2015). Health and Academics. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/health_and_academics/
Cullen, K. W., & Watson, K. B. (2009). The impact of the Texas public school nutrition policy on
student food selection and sales in Texas. American Journal of Public Health, 99(4), 706.
Fox, M. K., Gordon, A., Nogales, R., & Wilson, A. (2009). Availability and consumption of
competitive foods in US public schools. Journal of the American Dietetic Association,
109(2 Supplement), S57-66. doi:10.1016/j.jada.2008.10.063
Guthrie, J. F., Newman, C., Ralston, K., Prell, M., & Ollinger, M. (2013). Nutrition standards for
competitive foods in schools: Implications for foodservice revenues. Economic Research
Service, 114.
Hoffman, J. A., Rosenfeld, L., Schmidt, N., Cohen, J. F., Gorski, M., Chaffee, R., Rimm, E. B.
(2015). Implementation of Competitive Food and Beverage Standards in a Sample of
Massachusetts Schools: The NOURISH Study (Nutrition Opportunities to Understand
Reforms Involving Student Health). Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics,
115(8), 1299-1307 e1292. doi:10.1016/j.jand.2015.04.019
Kubik, M. Y., Davey, C., Nanney, M. S., MacLehose, R. F., Nelson, T. F., & Coombes, B. (2013).
Vending and school store snack and beverage trends: Minnesota secondary schools, 2002-
2010. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 44(6), 583-588.
doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.02.009
Long, M. W., Henderson, K. E., & Schwartz, M. B. (2010). Evaluating the impact of a Connecticut
program to reduce availability of unhealthy competitive food in schools. Journal of School

42
Health, 80(10), 478-486 479p. doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2010.00531.x
Phillips, M. M., Raczynski, J. M., West, D. S., Pulley, L., Bursac, Z., Gauss, C. H., & Walker, J. F.
(2010). Changes in school environments with implementation of Arkansas Act 1220 of
2003. Obesity (Silver Spring), 18(Supplement 1), S54-61. doi:10.1038/oby.2009.432
Sanchez-Vaznaugh, E. V., Sánchez, B. N., Baek, J., & Crawford, P. B. (2010). 'Competitive' food
and beverage policies: are they influencing childhood overweight trends? Health Affairs,
29(3), 436-446 411p. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0745
Schwartz, M. B., Novak, S. A., & Fiore, S. S. (2009). The impact of removing snacks of low
nutritional value from middle schools. Health Education & Behavior, 36(6), 999-1011.
doi:10.1177/1090198108329998

43
Table 1. Strategies for Influencing Policy Regarding Competitive Foods in Schools
Implication Strategies
Federal Policy • Obtain political support
• Clearly define policy
Advocating • Refocus advocacy effort for health behaviors
• Begin at local levels; expand to state and federal
• Identify champions
• Combine efforts of stakeholders and health
educators
• Advocate for implementation, as well as
adoption
Stakeholder Collaboration • Utilize multi-sectorial stakeholders
• Incorporate diverse expertise
• Involve parents, administrators, outside vendors,
financial experts
• Use whole children model
Supplemented Quality Health
Education and Promotion
• Reinforce health education and promotion
policy
• Market to support policy
• Provide information
• Eliminate stigma/misconceptions
• Utilize ecological approaches
Compliance and Enforcement • Monitor system and structures
• Clearly articulate standards
• Disseminate resources for clarity
• Employ health educators as interpreters

44
Call for Papers
The Research Section of ArkAHPERD invites members to present their research
and posters at the 2017 State Convention. Submit a one page abstract with title
and author(s) to Agneta Sibrava, asibrava@astate.edu

46
Have you considered becoming a Jump Rope for Heart Coordinator? Below is
Information that will give you more information on this great fundraiser for our
State.

47
2016 Teacher of the Year Awards
Elementary TOY – Sherry Reding, Cherokee Ele. Highland
Junior High School TOY – Jeremy Moore, MacArthur JH Jonesboro
Health Education TOY – Steve Griffith, Bryant HS
Submit TOY nominations online ArkAHPERD
website or email bfprince@ualr.edu by September
2016.

48
_____________________
Higher Educator of the Year
Rocki Pederson
Arkansas Tech University
_____________________
Lifetime Achievement Award
Sheila Jackson
Arkansas Tech University

49
Calendar of Events
ArkAHPERD State Conference Nov. 2-3 2017 Little Rock, Arkansas
Southern Shape of America & SHAPE of American conferences are both in Nashville, Tenn on
March 20-24 2018
Call for Presentations
For anyone wanting to present at the 2017 State Convention, the
proposal form is on the ArkAHPERD web page or mail to
jforbess@uark.edu

50
Arkansas Journal published by ArkAHPERD
Co Editors
Bennie Prince Shelli Henehan
Editorial Board
Janea Snyder Bennie Prince Tan Zhang
The Arkansas Journal is indexed in the Physical Education Index.
The Arkansas Journal is published annually in Spring/Summer with a subscription cost
of $10.00. To obtain a hard copy contact ArkAHPERD Executive Director Andy
Mooneyhan
The opinions of the contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of
ArkAHPERD or the journal editors. ArkAHPERD does not discriminate in this or
any of its programs on the basis of race, religion, sex, national origin, or disabling
condition
Submission template and guidelines can be found in the Appendix. Deadline for
submission March 31. Anyone interested in becoming on the editorial board submit
vitae to bfprince@ualr.edu

51
ArkAHPERD
Arkansas Journal
New Submission Guidelines for Authors:
Material for publication and editorial correspondence should be emailed to Bennie Prince
at (bfprince@ualr.edu). Deadline for the submission is March 31. Guidelines for materials
submitted are those of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA).
All submissions must be double spaced, 12 font, Times New Roman, and limited to 10 pages for
review and publication in the Arkansas Journal.
Indicate manuscript category: Faculty research, student research, or both. There will
be new categories where researchers and writers can submit their well thought out commentaries
on issues involving, new research, trends, and special topics concerning our profession. Examples
of these type articles can be viewed in Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sports.
The review process is a BLIND REVIEW and is reviewed by at least two (2) reviewers.
The review research is structured as stated below:
The scientific review – The review is focused on the article’s content. The scientific review is
completed by the reviewers, who are specialists in the area of Health and Physical Education, and
associated fields. The Journal editor is responsible for collecting all review questionnaires and
informing author of submission acceptance or rejection.
For manuscripts submission and review submit 3 documents that follow the template below.

52
(Submission Template)
First Submission Attachment-Editor
Title of Manuscript submitted____________________________________
Submission Category___________________________________________
Author or Author(s) Name_______________________________________
Author or Author(s) University, Position, address, phone number, email
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
Scientific review and research follow APA format
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
Total 10 pages for review process and if selected these 10 pages will be in the Arkansas Journal.

53
Second Submission Attachment- For Blind Review
Scientific review would include: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Data Analysis,
Results,
Discussion and Conclusion.
___________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________
_
___________________________________________________________________________
_
Total 10 pages for review process and if selected these 10 pages will be in the Arkansas
Journal.

54
Third Submission Attachment
Complete Manuscript
Author or Author(s) Name_______________________________________
Author or Author(s) University, Position, address, phone number, email
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
Scientific review and research follow APA format
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________

55
ARKAHPERD
ARKANSAS JOURNAL
ARTICLE REVIEW
THE REVIEW PROCESS
The review process is a BLIND REVIEW and is reviewed by at least two (2) reviewers.
The review research is structured as stated below:
The scientific review – The review is focused on the article’s content. The scientific review is
completed by the reviewers, who are specialists in the area of Health and Physical Education,
and associated fields. All reviewers must complete the reviewer form below and may provide
comments to the author. These comments should be constructive and friendly. The comments
can not include any personal remarks to the author.
After completing the review form, the reviewer should send to the Journal editor, who
is responsible for informing the author(s) about the final decision and possible to provide
an opportunity for rewrite.
ARTICLE REVIEW
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
Article No.
Article Type Professional Student Research Non-research
Article Title
Reviewer
Date

56
II. SCIENTIC CRITERIA
REVIEW CRITERIA QUESTIONS SCALE
I. ORIGINALITY • Are the problems discussed in the article new and/or
relevant?
• Does the article describe interesting or unique aspects of
the discipline?
□ poor
□ needs improvements
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
II. SIGNIFICANCE • Does the article have a considerable contribution to the
discipline?
• Does the article stimulate discussion of important issues or
alternative points of view?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
III. RELEVANCE • Does the article present relevant information for its area of
research?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
IV. PRESENTATION • Does the article have a logic structure/sequence?
• Is the article clearly written?
• Does the article present in an appropriate way the
terminology for its area of interest?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
V. CONTENT
5.1. Title • Does the title clearly express content of the article? □ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
5.2 Introduction • Does the introduction highlight the current in the area?
• Does the introduction specify the article goal?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
5.3 Methodology • Are the methods used clearly explained?
• Are the methods used validated / recognized?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
5.4 Results • Are the results clearly presented?
• Is the literature used in support of research?
• Do the results sufficiently avoid misinterpretation?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
5.5 Conclusions • Are the conclusions correctly / logically explained?
• Do the conclusions avoid misinterpretation?
□ poor
□ average

57
• Do the conclusions sufficiently avoid too general or
biased information?
□ good
□ excellent
5.6 References • Do the references reflect the latest work/research in the
considered area?
• Are the references correctly indicated in the article?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
5.7 Tables
[If used]
• Are the tables correctly named and numbered?
• Are the data presented in tables correctly valued and
interpreted in the article?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
5.8 Graphs and figures
[If used]
• Do the graphs and figures properly illustrate the
discussed subject?
• Are the graphs and figures correctly named and
numbered?
□ poor
□ average
□ good
□ excellent
VI. PLAGIARISM • If an article (or parts from an article) is suspected to be a
substantial copy of an earlier work, the article is rejected.
□ Accepted
□ Rejected
III. FINAL DECISION
OVERALL RATING FINAL DECISION
□ Poor □ Rejected
□ Needs improvements □ Rejected [consider rewriting for subsequent journal]
□ Average □ May be Revised and resubmitted [major changes]
□ Good □ Accepted with minor changes
□ Excellent □ Accepted
IV. COMMENTS TO THE AUTHOR

2017 ArkAHPERD Journal Vol 52

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (13)

Similar to 2017 ArkAHPERD Journal Vol 52

Similar to 2017 ArkAHPERD Journal Vol 52 (20)

More from SHAPE Arkansas Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance

More from SHAPE Arkansas Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance (10)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2017 ArkAHPERD Journal Vol 52