Background: Previous research has suggested that school-based physical activity (PA) interventions may have a positive impact on academic performance. However, existing literature on school-based interventions encompasses various forms of PA, spanning from vigorous intensity PA outside the academic classes to light intensity PA and movement integrated into academic learning tasks, and results on academic performance are inconclusive. ACTIVE SCHOOL will implement two different PA interventions for one school year and assess the effects on the pupils’ academic performance, with math performance as the primary outcome.Methods/design: The ACTIVE SCHOOL project consists of two phases: 1) Development phase and 2) Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). In phase one, two interventions were developed in collaboration with school staff. The two interventions were tested in an 8-weeks feasibility study. In phase two, a RCT-study with three arms will be conducted in 9-10-year-old children for one school year. The RCT-study will be carried out in two intervention rounds during the school years 2023/2024 and 2024/2025. Schools will be randomized to one of two interventions or control;1)Run, Jump & Fun intervention(4 × 30 min/week of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; 2)Move & Learn intervention(4 × 30 min/week focusing on embodied learning in math and Danish lessons); or 3) a control condition, consisting of normal teaching practices. Outcome measures include academic performance, PA level, cognitive functions, cardiorespiratory fitness, anthropometry, well-being and school motivation (collected before, during and after the intervention period). A process evaluation will be conducted to assess implementation.Discussion: The ACTIVE SCHOOL study will expand knowledge regarding the impact of PA on academic performance. The study will have the potential to significantly contribute to future research, as well as the scientific and educational debate on the best way to implement PA to support education and learning.Trial registration: The study was registered on the 25th of October 2022 in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05602948.

Physical activity (PA) should be an essential part of all children’s lives, as it can promote physical and mental health, enhance general well-being, and positively impact learning outcomes. Schools offer an ideal setting to encourage physical activity during the school day, as nearly all children attend school. However, schools present a complex environment for implementing PA, and sedentary behavior is common in classroom teaching. This study explores the feasibility of two types of school-based physical activity interventions: one based on research in exercise and cognition (Run, Jump & Fun) and another grounded in embodied learning (Move & Learn). Run, Jump & Fun can be conceptualized as extra non-curricular physical activity implemented into the school day while Move & Learn is integrated into curricular time. The 8-week study involved third-grade students and their teachers from seven schools, with educational strategies applied to support adoption. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected before, during, and after the 8-week period. The results indicated that both interventions were feasible to implement, leading to a series of recommendations for further refinement. These recommendations can guide the development of future school-based PA interventions and inspire other researchers to assess and improve their implementation strategies.

Nterventions’ design processes, although this knowledge is important to replicate the intervention. Purpose This article aims to provide insights into the collaborative design process of the two PA interventions for third-grade pupils of the ACTIVE SCHOOL project. The evidence-based interventions focus on PA integrated into academic content (Move & Learn intervention) as embodied learning or PA as moderate to vigorous activity performed during the school day (Run, Jump & Fun intervention). The study’s objective was to engage teachers and pedagogues early in the design process to ensure the design was tailored to practice. Methods A team consisting of researchers, school staff, and experts were involved in the design process. The process lasted one school year and comprised three phases: exploration and analysis, construction and design, and reflection and evaluation. Multiple methods were used, including focus group interviews, a design workshop, and observations of iterative in-school testing. Results The result of the analysis and exploration phase was a set of learning points based on information about school culture, school staff competences, and needs. The design and construction phase produced a set of intervention skeletons, which were the actual elements of the interventions. The evaluation and reflection phase created the main results, which are specific principles and multifaceted implementation strategies for Move & Learn and Run, Jump & Fun, respectively. Finally, dose and timing of the interventions were specified. Conclusion Collaboration with schools and an iterative approach were determinants for designing interventions appropriate to the Danish school context and school staff practice....