Access to this full-text is provided by MDPI.
Content available from Children
This content is subject to copyright.
Academic Editor: Paul R. Carney
Received: 25 October 2024
Revised: 17 December 2024
Accepted: 29 December 2024
Published: 7 January 2025
Citation: Raiola, G. Physical Literacy,
According to the World Health
Organization (WHO), in an Italian
Preschool and Education for a Daily
Movement Routine. Children 2025,12,
66. https://doi.org/10.3390/
children12010066
Copyright: © 2025 by the author.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license
(https://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/).
Article
Physical Literacy, According to the World Health Organization
(WHO), in an Italian Preschool and Education for a Daily
Movement Routine
Gaetano Raiola
Physical Education and Exercise Research Center, Pegaso Telematic University, 80143 Napoli, Italy;
gaetano.raiola@unipegaso.it
Abstract: Background and Objectives: The preschool context produces excessive sedentary
behavior in children. The systematic fulfillment of structured physical activities during
school time, namely a daily movement routine (DMR), can contribute to increasing the
quantity of physical activity (PA) and to improving physical literacy (PL), reaching the
WHO’s recommendations. Aim: The present study aims to quantify the sedentary time
spent by 4- and 5-year-old preschool children and to verify the effects that a DMR could have
on sedentary habits in preschool children. Method: An experimental observational study
was carried out. Ad hoc questionnaires were administered to parents, teachers, and children,
and an observation checklist was used to quantify the time spent in sedentary activities at
school. Descriptive statistics and t-tests were applied for data analysis. Results: Thirty-two
children attending Italian preschool participated in this study. The implementation of a
DMR significantly reduced the sedentary time in preschool, decreasing the time spent
sitting by 45.69% and increasing the time spent standing by 185%. Conclusions: This study
confirms the hypothesis that children move for less time than recommended by the WHO
and highlights the importance of making the experiences of the DMR structural, as this
could be an opportunity for educational processes to enhance active lifestyles in promoting
the development of physical literacy.
Keywords: sedentary time; children’s health; fields of experience
1. Introduction
Italian preschool is characterized by the organization of teaching based on “fields of
experience” [
1
], proposing a natural non-prescriptive learning environment, which values
the body and movement as instruments for interaction with the environment and for
approaching knowledge [
2
]. For this reason, the field of experience is the basic thematic
core of educational development defined by Italian schools. The “body in movement” in
preschool is one of the five fields of experience through which a school offers children
educational-didactic paths in which to experiment and satisfy the needs of autonomy,
competence, and relationships typical of childhood. Movement play, in its spontaneous,
deliberate, and organized expression [
3
] and, more generally, experiential teaching and
learning achieved by doing and acting allows the child to reach personal, scholastic, and
social autonomy appropriate to his/her age and to know and perceive his/her own body,
learning to exercise its sensory-perceptive, relational, affective, expressive, and cognitive po-
tentialities from a physical literacy perspective [
4
], as well as for the purposes of developing
his/her own health and wellbeing. The developmental goals to be pursued consist, on the
one hand, of the development of sensory-perceptive capacities and fundamental dynamic
Children 2025,12, 66 https://doi.org/10.3390/children12010066
Children 2025,12, 66 2 of 14
and postural motor milestones (walking, running, jumping, throwing, etc.) to adapt them
to the spatial-temporal parameters in different environments. On the other hand, these
goals are directed toward progressively developing the coordination of movements and
mastery of one’s own behavior in interaction with the environment, which means the ability
to plan and implement the most effective strategy and to realize and anticipate others’
strategies and the dynamics of objects during movement activities. Through experiences
with the body and movement, children develop competence, which at this age is intended
to be achieved in a global and unitary way, and contribute, to this purpose, “informal,
routine and daily life activities, outdoor activities and play
. . .
the use of small tools and
instruments, free or guided movement in dedicated spaces, psychomotor plays” [
1
], while
also becoming an opportunity for health education.
The school, as a formal learning context that contributes, together with the family, to
the global development of the child, has the responsibility of promoting experiences that
maximize the individual educational path, bringing out the full potential of the person
and promoting physical literacy in the peculiar context of the preschool classroom, which,
differently from primary school [
5
], in many cases, has mixed-age classrooms and, therefore,
presents greater problems in adequately guaranteeing the satisfaction of the movement
needs of all children [
6
]. In addition, teachers, principals, or school administrators report
barriers and/or facilitators to implementing mandated school physical activity policies [
7
],
with the most common domains identified being ‘environmental context and resources’
(e.g., availability of equipment, time, or staff), ‘goals’ (e.g., the perceived priority of the
policies in the school), ‘social influences’ (e.g., support from school boards), and ‘skills’
(e.g., teachers’ ability to implement the physical activity policies). In the current context of
life, the role of the school is even more strategic due to the evident lack of environmental
opportunities that are reflected in the possibilities of individual development, particularly
with regard to the physical development of children, which should be adequately monitored
and assessed to identify any movement difficulties early on [8].
Talking about the need for movement is “emerging” more than ever because it is
not only conditioned by the (functional) needs of the body but also by the environmental,
social, and cultural contingencies that characterize our existence and that stimulate less and
less functionality and spontaneous adaptations of natural movements; this has important
repercussions on human skills and the possibilities of interaction with the environment
based on the body and movement functions. The WHO notes that the overall 24-h activity
pattern is key: replacing prolonged screen time with more active play, ensuring that young
children get enough good-quality sleep. Quality sedentary time spent in interactive non-
screen-based activities with a caregiver, such as reading, storytelling, singing and puzzles,
is very important for child development. In particular, they note that children under five
need to spend less time sitting and looking at screens, sleep better and have more time to
play if they are to grow up healthy, all while performing at least three hours of physical
activity daily, of which at least one hour should be of a moderate-to-vigorous intensity and
in which 60 min of a continuous sedentary lifestyle should not be exceeded [9].
However, the scientific literature provides evidence that the movement needs of
children attending preschool [
10
] are not adequately satisfied, not reaching the levels
recommended by the WHO [
11
,
12
] and producing negative effects on their health and
wellbeing, especially considering the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on
people’s movement habits [
13
,
14
] and general health and wellbeing [
15
]. Across Europe,
low compliance with physical activity recommendations in youth between countries was
reported for subjectively and objectively measured physical activity [
16
]. In particular, there
is a prevalence of sedentary behaviors, negatively influencing media availability, motorized
types of commuting to and from schools, as well as inadequate PA behaviors, and European
Children 2025,12, 66 3 of 14
children mostly failed to meet the current recommendation about screen time [
17
]. In Italy,
for example, the time dedicated to active play has decreased, and the time spent watching
TV, playing video games, or using social media for non-educational purposes has increased;
the critical issues that have emerged concern the possible association between the excessive
increase in time spent on watching TV, playing video games, and using social media and
greater sleep irregularities and a reduction in daily physical activity [
18
]. The focus on
children’s lifestyles developed by the national surveillance system “OKkio alla salute” [
19
]
which is part of the European initiative “Childhood Obesity Surveillance Initiative—COSI”,
offers a detailed picture of eating habits, physical activity, sedentary lifestyle, and other
aspects associated with overweight and obesity among Italian children. It emerges that Italy
is one of the countries in the Mediterranean area with the highest values of excess weight
in children and low levels of physical activity. In general, quantitative and qualitative
data showed variability by geographical area, with evident problems in the regions of
southern Italy, where the pandemic may have had more severe effects. In the Campania
region (in southern Italy), there was the highest standard deviation from the national
average: compared to a national average of 29.7% of the population with overweight
problems and obesity (20.4% overweight, 6.9% with obesity, and 2.4% with severe obesity);
in Campania itself, there is an average of 44.2% of the population with overweight problems
and obesity (25.4% overweight, 12.6% with obesity and 6.2% with severe obesity). As far as
the indicators of physical activity and movement are concerned, they have tended to be
stable over the last 15 years (from the first survey carried out in the 2006/2007 school year
to the last survey carried out in the 2022/2023 school year); this indicates that there is still
much to be achieved in terms of promoting healthy lifestyles through physical activity. In
2023, 18.5% of Italian children (in Campania, 23.8%) had no physical activity the day before
the survey, 41.5% still had a TV in their bedroom, and 45.1% of children spent more than
2 h a day in front of the TV/video games/tablet/cell phone. In total, 23.8% of children
were inactive the day before the survey.
The national data on excess weight and insufficient physical activity in the Italian
population [
19
] highlight many problems and concerns, as well as posing several challenges
for society and institutions responsible for building strategies, policies, and interventions
aimed at increasing physical activity in the entire population [
20
], with the help of institu-
tional entities such as schools by promoting and using, for the sake of equity, the spaces and
contexts of life in which it is possible to carry out physical activity, through the availability
of a wide range of concrete opportunities to meet the different individual needs.
Considering that the context of preschool produces an excessively sedentary lifestyle
in children [
21
], it is hypothesized that, by systematically introducing structured physical
activities in the school day [
22
], a daily movement routine can be generated that could
contribute to increase levels of physical activity, thus complying with the WHO recom-
mendations [
9
]. Time management has an important pedagogical value in preschools. The
rhythm of the school day is marked by well-defined moments, called “routines”. Rou-
tines are a series of moments that recur throughout the day in a constant and recurring
manner, characterized by care, wellbeing, understanding, and emotional relationships.
Routines provide the child with safe and constant external reference points and allow them
to progressively memorize temporal concepts [
23
]. In routine activities, children soon
feel capable and responsible and can take on the role of a tutor for peers who need help.
Times dedicated to welcoming, personal hygiene, rest, school break, lunch, and free play
are habitual routines. Creating a movement routine would not only have the benefit of
increasing the amount of physical activity performed by children but would also develop
physical literacy due to the intrinsic characteristic of the routine to harmonize knowledges,
skills, motivations, and feelings connected to physical activity and movement.
Children 2025,12, 66 4 of 14
The present study aimed to determine the levels of the sedentary lifestyle of children
in preschool in the province of Salerno, in the Campania region; it was also proposed to
verify whether the increase in the volume of physical literacy activities generated a daily
habit of movement, in order to reduce sedentary behavior in the preschool context.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
The study was exploratory and was carried out in the context of an Italian preschool
to analyze sedentary behavior in children and to verify the effectiveness of the teaching
strategy of the “daily movement routine” in reducing sedentary habits in children. A
survey addressed to children, parents, and teachers was conducted in order to create an
exploratory study, which included systematic observations for data collection activities
and a didactic-educational intervention in the experimental group to introduce physical
literacy activities for 12 weeks, through the “daily movement routine”.
2.2. Participants
A convenience sampling method was used. The participants ware included due to
their geographical location and availability to take part in the study. Thirty-two children
attending two different classes (mixed-age) at the preschool in the province of Salerno in
Campania Region (Italy), with their four teachers (two for each class), participated in the
study. The participants were divided into two groups: an experimental and a control group,
composed of 16 children aged 4 and 5 years each. The teachers had more than 10 years
of experience, in an age range between 45 and 55, with a teaching diploma qualification.
The limited size of the sample is linked to the exploratory nature of the study and was
deemed sufficient to achieve the objectives of this investigation, which was experimental
and action research and required the real composition of the classes, which in Italy has
a legally binding numerical dimension; therefore, the sample was necessarily equivalent
to the compositions of the two classes, and it was not possible to increase it. Before the
observation and surveys began, parental consent was obtained. According to art. 9 of
Regulation (EU) 679/2016, better known as GPDR (General Data Protection Regulation),
ethical review and approval were waived because this was an educational research study
that did not involve clinical treatment. No sensitive data were collected, meaning sensitive
data “which reveal racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical
beliefs or trade union membership, as well as process genetic data, biometric data intended
to uniquely identify a natural person, data relating to a natural person’s health or sexual
life or sexual orientation”. An observational exploratory study was carried out, through
systematic observation for data collection and a didactic-educational intervention aimed at
introducing physical literacy activities, with the teaching strategy of the “daily movement
routine”, within the already planned teaching activities.
2.3. Instruments
Specific assessment tools were created and used for the study purposes: an observation
checklist to determine the time spent by children in sedentary activities during the school
day and three “ad hoc” questionnaires to be administered to the teachers of the two classes
involved, to the children, and to the children’s parents. The questionnaires were developed
ad hoc due to the specific aims and type of study. Specifically, a few questions were
formulated for parents to have a broader picture of children’s physical activity levels
outside of school and to actively involve them in the research process. For teachers and
children the questions were developed as follows:
Children 2025,12, 66 5 of 14
1.
The questionnaire administered to the parents consisted of 4 closed-ended questions
with different answer options and aimed at knowing
-
Whether or not the child had performed physical activity during the seven days
preceding the compiling of the questionnaire (choosing between 2 answer options:
yes/no),
-
In the case of an affirmative answer to the first question, what the intensity of
the physical activity performed was (choosing between 3 answer options: light,
moderate, vigorous),
-
How much time their child had dedicated to activities of different intensity
(choosing between 5 different options that quantified the time of activity),
-
How much time their child had spent in sedentary activities (choosing between
4 options that quantified the time of sedentary activity);
2.
The ad hoc questionnaire for children, presented as a “physical activity pyramid game”
was administered individually by teachers on a tablet through the tool “Learning app”
and consisted of placing an image representing a specific physical activity (walking to
school, doing organized physical activity, tidying up toys, playing outdoors, playing
with the bike, going on trips/excursions, helping with household chores) or sedentary
behavior (using electronic devices, TV) on an empty pyramid scheme (inspired to
the pyramid image) of physical activities whose base corresponded to a minimum
frequency of once a week, which increasingly intensified to the apex that corresponded
to a daily frequency of at least one hour a day. This questionnaire investigated the
type and quantity of physical activity of children outside of school time, and it took
about 15 min to complete;
3.
The ad hoc questionnaire for teachers consisted of 14 closed-ended questions with
different answer options, to investigate the students’ physical activity habits during
school hours as well as the teachers’ perceptions of the importance of physical activity
and of their own skills in promoting children’s physical literacy;
4.
An observation checklist of the time, recorded in minutes, that children spend in
movement or sitting activities during the school day, in particular during the welcome,
the break, the free play, and the structured teaching activities, to be filled in by the
teachers, excluding the activities carried out in the afternoon hours, when children
played open and independent activities or rested.
2.4. Procedure
The study lasted four months. It was carried out during the 2023–2024 school year
and was structured in three phases.
1.
In the pre-test phase, which lasted two weeks, questionnaires were administered to
24 parents, 4 teachers, and 32 children; then, observations of all the children (experi-
mental and control group) were carried out by the teachers, specifically trained for
this duty, during the school day, through five non-consecutive days within two weeks,
recording on the observation checklist the time spent in dynamic or sitting activities
during the school day.
2.
In the test phase, which lasted three months, a movement routine was designed
together with the preschool teachers. The movement routine was introduced in
the experimental group and conducted daily by the teachers for 12 weeks, focusing
on play related to the development of gross motor skills, with the aim of not only
improving the development of these skills but above all reducing the time spent by
children in sedentary behavior and building the motivation, confidence, physical
competence, knowledge, and understanding to value and take responsibility for
Children 2025,12, 66 6 of 14
engagement in physical activities for life, which is the definition of physical literacy
according to the International Physical Literacy Association (May 2014).
The activities proposed daily at least for 30 min in the routine dealt with manual
dexterity, aiming and catching (i.e., throwing and/or catching the ball to a peer), and
balance (walking on heels and toes, hopping on one foot, walking on bricks, maintaining
the balance position). The control group, on the other hand, continued to carry out its
usual activities.
3.
Finally, in the post-test phase, the children were observed again by teachers during
the school day, through five non-consecutive days within two weeks, recording on the
observation checklist the time spent in dynamic or sitting activities during school day.
2.5. Data Analysis
The answers provided by the teachers, parents, and children through the question-
naires administered in the pre-test phase were described in terms of the frequency and
percentages. The quantitative data resulting from the observation carried out during pre-
and post-test phases and relating to the time spent in movement or sitting activities were
summarized in terms of the mean and standard deviation. A t-test for dependent samples
paired for means and a t-test for independent samples were performed on these data,
in order to verify the pre- and post-test differences within each group and between the
two groups. To assess the reliability, the internal consistency of the questionnaires was
assessed through Cronbach’s
α
(a value of 1 indicated perfect reliability, with a cut-off of
0.70 indicating an acceptable internal consistency).
3. Results
Twenty-four responses were obtained from the questionnaire administered to parents.
The answers showed that only 29.8% of children had performed physical activity during the
previous 7 days and that the type of physical activity performed mainly and for the longest
time was of moderate intensity. As regards the time dedicated to sedentary activities, the
majority of parents, 79.2%, perceived and reported that their child did not spend excessive
time sitting, not exceeding 60 min per day (Figure 1).
Children 2025, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 17
Figure 1. Parents’ perceptions about their child’s time spent sitting.
The internal consistency of the questionnaires for teachers and children was
acceptable in both cases (Cronbach’s α coefficient: 0.70; p < 0.05). The data col-
lected through the questionnaire administered to the four teachers of the two
classes involved in the study showed their perceptions relating to the movement
of children during the school day, which was divided into four phases: 1. the
welcome; 2. the morning teaching activity; 3. the break; 4. the afternoon activity.
Despite the small number of responses by the teachers, a heterogeneity of per-
ceptions was found (almost all the answer options were selected) with reference
to the moment in which the students are most active, the planning of structured
physical activities and spontaneous play in the various phases of the school day,
the time spent sitting or moving during the welcome and in the afternoon, and
the time spent moving during the morning teaching activity. The data on which
all four teachers agreed were: (a) the time spent moving and sitting during
school break and (b) the time spent sitting during teaching activities, the latter
being of particular interest for the purposes of this study. In the teachers’ per-
ception, children spent 30 to 60 consecutive minutes sitting during the morning
teaching activities. The teachers also believed that movement activity was very
important for children in preschool and perceived that they were adequately
trained to conduct experiences in the field of experience of body and movement.
The answers provided by children to the “pyramid of motor activities”
(Figures 2 and 3) showed that the activity that children carried out most fre-
quently was sedentary (playing with computers and video games), while the ac-
tivities carried out less frequently were trips/excursions and outdoor activities.
Figure 1. Parents’ perceptions about their child’s time spent sitting.
Children 2025,12, 66 7 of 14
The internal consistency of the questionnaires for teachers and children was acceptable
in both cases (Cronbach’s
α
coefficient: 0.70; p< 0.05). The data collected through the
questionnaire administered to the four teachers of the two classes involved in the study
showed their perceptions relating to the movement of children during the school day, which
was divided into four phases: 1. the welcome; 2. the morning teaching activity; 3. the
break; 4. the afternoon activity. Despite the small number of responses by the teachers, a
heterogeneity of perceptions was found (almost all the answer options were selected) with
reference to the moment in which the students are most active, the planning of structured
physical activities and spontaneous play in the various phases of the school day, the time
spent sitting or moving during the welcome and in the afternoon, and the time spent
moving during the morning teaching activity. The data on which all four teachers agreed
were: (a) the time spent moving and sitting during school break and (b) the time spent
sitting during teaching activities, the latter being of particular interest for the purposes of
this study. In the teachers’ perception, children spent 30 to 60 consecutive minutes sitting
during the morning teaching activities. The teachers also believed that movement activity
was very important for children in preschool and perceived that they were adequately
trained to conduct experiences in the field of experience of body and movement.
The answers provided by children to the “pyramid of motor activities” (
Figures 2and 3
)
showed that the activity that children carried out most frequently was sedentary (playing
with computers and video games), while the activities carried out less frequently were
trips/excursions and outdoor activities.
Children 2025, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17
Figure 2. Type and frequency of physical and sedentary activities declared by children (experi-
mental group).
Figure 3. Type and frequency of physical and sedentary activities declared by children (control
group).
On the basis of the initial observations carried out during the pre-test phase,
both groups showed high levels of sedentary time; on average, based on five ob-
servations, the experimental group was involved in sedentary activities for 215
min per day (almost 4 h), while the control group performed sedentary activities
for 205 min per day (more than 3 and a half hours). From the final observations,
carried out during the post-test phase, an improvement in physical activity lev-
els and a reduction in time spent in sedentary activities were found in both
groups (Figures 4 and 5).
Figure 2. Type and frequency of physical and sedentary activities declared by children (experimental
group).
On the basis of the initial observations carried out during the pre-test phase, both
groups showed high levels of sedentary time; on average, based on five observations, the
experimental group was involved in sedentary activities for 215 min per day (almost 4 h),
while the control group performed sedentary activities for 205 min per day (more than 3
and a half hours). From the final observations, carried out during the post-test phase, an
improvement in physical activity levels and a reduction in time spent in sedentary activities
were found in both groups (Figures 4and 5).
Children 2025,12, 66 8 of 14
Children 2025, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17
Figure 2. Type and frequency of physical and sedentary activities declared by children (experi-
mental group).
Figure 3. Type and frequency of physical and sedentary activities declared by children (control
group).
On the basis of the initial observations carried out during the pre-test phase,
both groups showed high levels of sedentary time; on average, based on five ob-
servations, the experimental group was involved in sedentary activities for 215
min per day (almost 4 h), while the control group performed sedentary activities
for 205 min per day (more than 3 and a half hours). From the final observations,
carried out during the post-test phase, an improvement in physical activity lev-
els and a reduction in time spent in sedentary activities were found in both
groups (Figures 4 and 5).
Figure 3. Type and frequency of physical and sedentary activities declared by children (control
group).
Children 2025, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17
Figure 4. Children’s time spent standing.
Figure 5. Children’s time spent sitting.
The percentage of the variation between pre and post intervention was
greater in the experimental group, highlighting the benefits of the movement
routine. In the comparison between the groups, there were differences both in
the amount of time spent standing, which increased (Figure 4), and in the time
spent sitting, which decreased (Figure 5). The average percentage of the varia-
tion in the time spent standing and sitting between the pre- and post-tests was
Figure 4. Children’s time spent standing.
The percentage of the variation between pre and post intervention was greater in the
experimental group, highlighting the benefits of the movement routine. In the comparison
between the groups, there were differences both in the amount of time spent standing,
which increased (Figure 4), and in the time spent sitting, which decreased (Figure 5). The
average percentage of the variation in the time spent standing and sitting between the pre-
and post-tests was greater in the experimental group (Table 1), confirming the validity of
the movement routine implemented for the purpose of increasing the mobility of children.
Children 2025,12, 66 9 of 14
Children 2025, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17
Figure 4. Children’s time spent standing.
Figure 5. Children’s time spent sitting.
The percentage of the variation between pre and post intervention was
greater in the experimental group, highlighting the benefits of the movement
routine. In the comparison between the groups, there were differences both in
the amount of time spent standing, which increased (Figure 4), and in the time
spent sitting, which decreased (Figure 5). The average percentage of the varia-
tion in the time spent standing and sitting between the pre- and post-tests was
Figure 5. Children’s time spent sitting.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics.
Descriptive Statistics
Time Group N Mean SD Std
Error Mean
Standing time
PRE EXP 16 50.7604 13.3535 3.33840
CON 16 72.3802 18.5856 4.64642
POST EXP 16 144.750 11.1754 2.79387
CON 16 98.1510 22.5509 5.63773
Sitting time
PRE EXP 16 220.932 18.8001 4.70004
CON 16 205.833 18.5296 4.63242
POST EXP 16 119.984 18.6479 4.66198
CON 16 167.677 23.7467 5.93670
The percentage of variation in the time spent standing in the experimental group
was 185%, which was very high especially when compared to the 36% increase registered
in the control group. The time spent sitting decreased in both groups, but in the experi-
mental group, the percentage of variation was
−
45.69%, unlike the control group, which
corresponded to −18% (Table 2).
Table 2. Percentage of variation in each group.
PRE POST % of Variation
Standing EXP 50.7604 144.75 185%
Standing CON 72.3802 98.151 36%
Sitting EXP 220.932 119.984 −45.69%
Sitting CON 205.833 167.677 −18%
Children 2025,12, 66 10 of 14
The ttest showed statistically significant differences between the two groups both for
the time spent standing and for the time spent sitting (Table 3).
Table 3. t-test for the sitting and standing times.
t-Test for Independent Samples
tgl Sig.
Difference
in Mean
Difference in
Std Error
CI 95%
Group Time Lower Upper
Standing
EXP-CON
Pre −3.779 30 0.001 −21.61979 5.72137 −33.3043 −9.93519
Post 7.406 30 0.000 46.59896 6.29204 33.7489 59.44902
Sitting
EXP-CON
Pre 2.288 30 0.029 15.09896 6.59922 1.62156 28.57636
Post −6.318 30 0.000 −47.69271 7.54841 −63.1086 −32.27680
4. Discussion
The survey carried out through questionnaires administered to teachers, parents, and
children defined a framework of school and life contexts in which children do not fulfil
a sufficient amount of physical activity, committing instead to sedentary tasks for a lot of
time, especially sedentary screen time, and little time was spent in physical activity tasks,
especially in outdoor contexts.
The data emerging from this study are aligned with the damaging trends highlighted
by the national surveillance system Okkio alla Salute [
19
] and confirm the undesirable
primacy of the Campania region, which presents percentage values very far (excess or
defect) from the Italian average in all the reference indicators. Particularly alarming is the
confirmation, also in this study, of the high exposure of children to more than 2 h a day of
TV or video games/tablet/cell phone, which turns out to be more frequent among males
(64.6% vs. 55.4%) and decreases with the increase in the mother’s level of education.
It is interesting to note that the largest percentage of inactive children (33.5%) live
in metropolitan/perimetropolitan areas, such as the one considered in the present study,
where it is often difficult to access outdoor playground and equipment, which instead could
become a crucial factor to promote physical literacy, as outdoor movement activities offer
additional opportunities to promote the development of children from 3 to 6 years [
24
].
Furthermore, the practice of physical activities in an outdoor environment increases the
perception of safety in carrying out physical activity; therefore, with adequate ongoing
training on children’s movement and learning during spontaneous outdoor play and
including more natural elements in the design of outdoor play areas [
14
], teachers could
be encouraged to carry out more outdoor movement education by improving children’s
awareness of the body and movement [
25
–
27
]. An interesting fact that emerges from the
parents’ responses is that although only 29.8% of children had performed physical activity
in the previous 7 days, 79.2% of parents perceived that their child did not spend excessive
time sitting, not exceeding 60 min per day. These data appear contradictory; despite
high levels of physical inactivity, parents consider their children’s levels of sedentary
lifestyle to be “low”; this perception influences the levels of physical activity and sedentary
habits of children [
28
] who, as emerged from this study, do not comply with the WHO
recommendations.
Furthermore, in contrast to previous studies on the perception of the adequacy of
their training [
26
,
27
], the teachers involved in this study declared that they were more than
adequately trained to conduct experiences in the field of experience of body and movement.
The perception of their (teachers) training adequacy should also correspond to the percep-
tion of physical literacy of the teachers themselves. Teachers’ physical literacy appears to
Children 2025,12, 66 11 of 14
be moderately associated with self-efficacy and professional competence when carrying
out physical activities [
29
,
30
]. In particular, the ability to self-express and communicate
and knowledge and understanding are significant predictors of teachers’ self-efficacy in
classroom management and teaching strategies, as well as their professional knowledge
and attitudes. Therefore, teacher training should consider these aspects of physical literacy
to increase their self-efficacy and perceived competence for carrying out physical activities
in school contexts and thus promote children’s physical literacy even at the preschool
age [31].
Finally, from the observations carried out before and after the introduction of physical
literacy activities with the teaching tool of the daily routine, it emerged that the protocol
implemented in the experimental group had a positive impact on the time spent standing
and sitting by children in preschool. These results suggest that an intervention aimed
at promoting the physical activity and motor development of children in preschool can
be effective in improving the quality of movement and promoting the development of
motor skills, since the first years of childhood development are a significant period for
the acquisition and application of skills that promote physical development, cognitive
understanding, and social wellbeing. Implementing a daily movement routine on a per-
manent basis is easily applicable in Italian preschools because the school organization
is autonomous and, therefore, flexible. Associating movement with a routine, like other
activities that characterize the school day (such as welcoming, resting, and lunch), offers
a cognitive and emotional connection to movement activities [
32
,
33
], strengthening the
experience and awareness of the importance movement has in children’s lives [
34
]. There-
fore, it is important to continue to promote educational interventions that nurture physical
development from early childhood, in order to promote an active and healthy lifestyle in
children and counteract increasingly early sedentary habits. It is necessary, however, to
raise awareness of this problem among both parents and teachers, especially in the early
years of childhood [
35
]. The involvement of significant adults such as parents and teachers
in the study is fundamental because these figures can represent opportunities or obstacles
to the dissemination of active lifestyles among children. Sensitizing adults about the risks
that a sedentary lifestyle can entail helps to create a facilitating environment in which
children will have greater opportunities for healthy lifestyles. To reach awareness about the
problems that inactivity produces, it is necessary to start from the perceptions of the people
involved to offer appropriate knowledge of the phenomenon and develop awareness with
ad hoc training courses designed for adults. This training is relatively feasible with teachers
who are required to do in-service training [
29
], while it is more problematic to involve
parents who are not always available to discuss issues that they may perceive as personal
or school-specific.
Limitations and Future Directions
This study has some intrinsic limitations in selecting a low sample size, which is due
to its exploratory nature, and in the use of ad hoc instruments that are related to the specific
aims of the study. In particular, for this study and according to the school and teaching
organization, the use of ad hoc questionnaires was the most suitable choice in terms of
the time and cost-effectiveness. However, the investigation can be connected to the action
research in educational contexts and classrooms, involving distinct participants: students,
teachers, and other educational stakeholders, such as parents, within the system. All of
these participants were engaged in activities that benefited the students, because of their
role in supporting the physical literacy of children; hence, the practical applications of
this study, while not generalizable, can inspire the design and implementation of daily
movement routines in preschools. Future directions can consider realizing a pilot study
Children 2025,12, 66 12 of 14
to verify the effectiveness of the study design, instruments, and procedures used in this
exploratory study, establishing their feasibility with a representative sample.
5. Conclusions
The aim of this study was to verify the levels of sedentary lifestyle during school
time of children attending Italian preschools, providing evidence to support the benefits
deriving from the implementation of a daily movement routine.
The preschool children considered in this study lived a very sedentary lifestyle ac-
cording to the initial observations; however, the design and implementation of structured
physical activities daily produced a double effect:
-
On the one hand, they significantly reduced sedentary habits in the context of the
preschool; the time spent sitting decreased by 45.69% in the experimental group
compared to a reduction of 18% in the control group.
-
On the other hand, they stimulated an active school time, offering greater opportuni-
ties for environmental interactions that predispose to a greater number of experiences
to be lived in different fields, improving physical literacy; the time spent standing
increased by 185% in the experimental group and by 36% in the control group.
This study highlights the importance of making the experiences in the field of body
and movement structurally accepted into preschool organization in order to stimulate
active lifestyles that contribute to the development of motor skills and physical literacy.
Physical activity promotion for preschool children should consider their natural activ-
ity patterns, which are typically spontaneous, focusing on general sensorimotor play and
locomotor activities that children enjoy with fun; finally, when possible, preschool children
should have access to outdoor play spaces and equipment.
Despite much scientific literature describing the determinants or correlates of physical
activity among preschool children [
36
], there are still few studies supporting the hypothesis
that improving physical activity levels among preschool children significantly improves
their health [
37
]. In this sense, research in the exercise sciences and physical education
can provide the knowledge and tools to support policy makers, governments, and local–
national stakeholders in increasing physical activity levels among young people and
children across Europe [
38
,
39
], counteracting the dangerous trends that are spreading [
40
]
and verifying the correlation between physical activity levels of preschool children and
their health. Sedentary behaviors should be considered alarming, especially when they are
developed in the school context. The methodology explored in this study aims not simply
to increase the volume of physical activities during school hours but above all to generate a
daily habit of movement that develops the skills, the confidence, and the love of movement
to be physically active for a lifetime.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The manuscript refers to an educational research study
that did not involve clinical treatment. According to Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 679/2016, better
known as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), ethical approval is not necessary because
no sensitive data were collected in this type of study. Sensitive data are defined as those “which
reveal racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union
membership, as well as genetic data, biometric data intended to uniquely identify a natural person,
and data relating to a natural person’s health, sexual life, or sexual orientation”. This study was
conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical review and approval were waived
for this study because it was an educational research study that did not involve clinical treatment.
No sensitive data were collected. Instead, an observational exploratory study was carried out
through systematic observation for data collection and a didactic-educational intervention aimed at
Children 2025,12, 66 13 of 14
introducing physical literacy activities, using the teaching strategy of the “daily movement routine”
within the already planned teaching activities.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was signed and obtained by the parents/tutors of
all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made
available by the author on request.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflicts of interest.
References
1.
Italian Ministry of Education. National Guidelines for the Curriculum for Preprimary School and the First Cycle of Education; Italian
Ministry of Education: Rome, Italy, 2012.
2. D’Isanto, T. Pedagogical value of the body and physical activity in childhood. Sport Sci. 2016,9, 13–18.
3.
Raiola, G.; D’Isanto, T.; Di Domenico, F.; D’Elia, F. Effect of Teaching Methods on Motor Efficiency, Perceptions and Awareness in
Children. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 10287. [CrossRef]
4.
Edwards, L.C.; Bryant, A.S.; Keegan, R.J.; Morgan, K.; Jones, A.M. Definitions, Foundations and Associations of Physical Literacy:
A Systematic Review. Sports Med. 2017,47, 113–126. [CrossRef]
5.
D’Isanto, T. State of art and didactics opportunities of physical education teaching in primary school. J. Phys. Educ. Sport 2019,19,
1759–1762. [CrossRef]
6.
Yang, Q.; Zimmermann, K.; Bartholomew, C.P.; Purtell, K.M.; Ansari, A. Preschool Classroom Age Composition and Physical
Literacy Environment: Influence on Children’s Emergent Literacy Outcomes. Early Educ. Dev. 2023,35, 1483–1500. [CrossRef]
7.
Nathan, N.; Elton, B.; Babic, M.; McCarthy, N.; Sutherland, R.; Presseau, J.; Seward, K.; Hodder, R.; Booth, D.; Yoong, S.L.; et al.
Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of physical activity policies in schools: A systematic review. Prev. Med. Int. J.
Devoted Pract. Theory 2018,107, 45–53. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8.
D’Isanto, T.; Aliberti, S.; Raiola, G.; D’Elia, F. Assessment of motor skills in 5–6 year old Italian children using the MABC-2: A
preliminary study. Phys. Act. Rev. 2024,12, 112–120. [CrossRef]
9.
World Health Organization. Guidelines on Physical Activity, Sedentary Behaviour and Sleep for Children Under 5 Years of Age; World
Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019. Available online: https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/311664 (accessed on 20
October 2024).
10.
Timmons, B.W.; Naylor, P.J.; Pfeiffer, K.A. Physical activity for preschool children—How much and how? Appl. Physiol. Nutr.
Metab. 2007,32, S122–S134. [CrossRef]
11.
Cardon, G.M.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.M. Are preschool children active enough? Objectively measured physical activity levels. Res.
Q. Exerc. Sport 2008,79, 326–332. [CrossRef]
12.
Tucker, P. The physical activity levels of preschool-aged children: A systematic review. Early Child. Res. Q. 2008,23, 547–558.
[CrossRef]
13.
Raiola, G.; Aliberti, S.; Esposito, G.; Altavilla, G.; D’Isanto, T.; D’Elia, F. How has the practice of physical activity changed during
the covid-19 quarantine? A preliminary survey. Phys. Educ. Theory Methodol. 2020,20, 242–247. [CrossRef]
14.
D’isanto, T.; D’elia, F. Body, movement, and outdoor education in pre-school during the COVID-19 pandemic: Perceptions of
teachers. J. Phys. Educ. Sport 2021,21, 709–713.
15.
WHO Regional Office for Europe. Report on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Daily Routine and Behaviours of School-Aged
Children: Results from 17 Member States in the WHO European Region; WHO Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen, Denmark,
2024; Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
16.
Van Hecke, L.; Loyen, A.; Verloigne, M.; van der Ploeg, H.P.; Lakerveld, J.; Brug, J.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.; Ekelund, U.; Donnelly,
A.; Hendriksen, I.; et al. Variation in population levels of physical activity in European children and adolescents according to
cross-European studies: A systematic literature review within DEDIPAC. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2016,13, 70. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
17.
Santaliestra-Pasías, A.M.; Mouratidou, T.; Verbestel, V.; Bammann, K.; Molnar, D.; Sieri, S.; Siani, A.; Veidebaum, T.; Mårild, S.;
Lissner, L.; et al. Physical activity and sedentary behaviour in European children: The IDEFICS study. Public Health Nutr. 2014,17,
2295–2306. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18.
Giustini, M.; Luzi, I.; Spinelli, A.; Andreozzi, S.; Bucciarelli, M.; Buoncristiano, M.; Nardone, P.; Ciardullo, S. Exploring changes in
children’s well-being due to COVID-19 restrictions: The Italian EpaS-ISS study. Ital. J. Pediatr. 2023,49, 118. [CrossRef]
19.
Istituto Superiore di SanitàEpiCentro—Epidemiology for Public Health. Available online: https://www.epicentro.iss.it/
okkioallasalute/indagine-2023-dati (accessed on 20 October 2024).
Children 2025,12, 66 14 of 14
20.
Green, L.; Ashton, K.; Bellis, M.A.; Clemens, T.; Douglas, M. ‘Health in All Policies’—A Key Driver for Health and Well-Being in a
Post-COVID-19 Pandemic World. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18, 9468. [CrossRef]
21.
Altavilla, G.; Aliberti, S.; D’Elia, F. Assessment of Motor Performance and Self-Perceived Psychophysical Well-Being in Relation
to Body Mass Index in Italian Adolescents. Children 2024,11, 1119. [CrossRef]
22.
O’Brien, K.T.; Vanderloo, L.M.; Bruijns, B.A.; Truelove, S.; Tucker, P. Physical activity and sedentary time among preschoolers in
centre-based childcare: A systematic review. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2018,15, 117. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23.
Golubovi´c, Š.; Ðor ¯
devi´c, M.; Ili´c, S.; Nikolaševi´c, Ž. Engagement of Preschool-Aged Children in Daily Routines. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 2022,19, 14741. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
24.
Lahuerta-Contell, S.; Molina-García, J.; Queralt, A.; Martínez-Bello, V.E. The Role of Preschool Hours in Achieving Physical
Activity Recommendations for Preschoolers. Children 2021,8, 82. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25.
Gehris, J.S.; Gooze, R.A.; Whitaker, R.C. Teachers’ perceptions about children’s movement and learning in early childhood
education programmes. Child Care Health Dev. 2014,41, 122–131. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26.
D’Isanto, T. In-service training of primary school generalist teachers on physical and sport education: Perceptions and proposals.
Sport Sci. 2023,16, 106–114.
27.
D’Elia, F. Teachers’ perspectives about contents and learning aim of physical education in Italian primary school. J. Hum. Sport
Exerc. 2020,15, S279–S288. [CrossRef]
28.
Agostini, F.; Minelli, M.; Mandolesi, R. Outdoor Education in Italian Kindergartens: How Teachers Perceive Child Developmental
Trajectories. Front. Psychol. 2018,9, 1911. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29.
Durden-Myers, E.J.; Keegan, S. Physical Literacy and Teacher Professional Development. J. Phys. Educ. Recreat. Danc. 2019,90,
30–35. [CrossRef]
30.
Yin, H.; Omar Dev, R.D.; Soh, K.G.; Li, F.; Lian, M. Assessment and development of physical education teachers’ physical literacy:
A systematic review. PLoS ONE 2024,19, e0307505. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
31.
Leung, Y.W.; Mak TC, T.; Chan DK, C.; Capio, C.M. Early Childhood Educators’ Physical Literacy Predict Their Self-Efficacy and
Perceived Competence to Promote Physical Activity. Early Educ. Dev. 2023,35, 1524–1535. [CrossRef]
32.
Altavilla, G.; Ceruso, R.; Esposito, G.; Raiola, G.; D’elia, F. Physical education teaching in Italian primary school: Theoretical lines
and operational proposals. Pedagog. Phys. Cult. Sports 2022,26, 151–157. [CrossRef]
33.
D’Isanto, T.; Aliberti, S.; Altavilla, G.; Esposito, G.; D’Elia, F. Heuristic Learning as a Method for Improving Students’ Teamwork
Skills in Physical Education. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022,19, 12596. [CrossRef]
34.
Weir, N.; Pringle, A.; Roscoe, C.M.P. Physical Literacy and Physical Activity in Early Years Education: What’s Known, What’s
Done, and What’s Needed? Children 2024,11, 1355. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35.
Alharbi, M.F.; Al-hagoori, S.A.; Alotaibi, H. Parental Perceptions of Physical Activity and Risk of Disease Associated with
Sedentary Behaviours in Infants and Toddlers. Matern. Child Health J. 2024,28, 641–648. [CrossRef]
36.
Hinkley, T.; Crawford, D.; Salmon, J.; Okely, A.D.; Hesketh, K. Preschool Children and Physical Activity: A Review of Correlates.
Am. J. Prev. Med. 2008,34, 435–441.e7. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
37.
Chaput, J.-P.; Willumsen, J.; Bull, F.; Chou, R.; Ekelund, U.; Firth, J.; Jago, R.; Ortega, F.B.; Katzmarzyk, P.T. WHO guidelines on
physical activity and sedentary behaviour for children and adolescents aged 5–17years: Summary of the evidence. Int. J. Behav.
Nutr. Phys. Act. 2020,17, 141. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
38.
Lafave, L.M.Z.; Van Wyk, N. Physical Literacy From the Start! The Need for Formal Physical Literacy Education for Early
Childhood Educators. J. Phys. Educ. Recreat. Danc. 2024,95, 3–5. [CrossRef]
39. Aliberti, S. Physical education in European primary schools: An up-to-date overview. Sport Sci. 2023,16, 30–34.
40.
Steene-Johannessen, J.; Hansen, B.H.; Dalene, K.E.; Kolle, E.; Northstone, K.; Møller, N.C.; Grøntved, A.; Wedderkopp, N.; Kriem-
ler, S.; Page, A.S.; et al. Variations in accelerometry measured physical activity and sedentary time across
Europe—Harmonized
analyses of 47,497 children and adolescents. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2020,17, 38. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
