Research on the capability, opportunity, and motivation of schools to conduct physical activities in China: a cross-group validation

Abstract

Background

Insufficient physical activity among adolescents is a major global public health concern, and schools are considered key venues for promoting physical activity. Teachers play a crucial role in the implementation of policies. This study adapted and validated the COM-PASS scale, based on the COM-B model, to assess its reliability and validity in the Chinese context.

Methods

This study validates the appropriateness of the COM-PASS scale based on the COM-B model, assessing its reliability and validity within the Chinese cultural context. A three-phase design was employed: (1) A Delphi method involving three rounds of surveys with 15 experts to refine the questionnaire's relevance and validity; (2) Cognitive interviews with 10 primary and secondary school teachers to evaluate item comprehensibility; (3) Confirmatory factor analysis of 4,033 questionnaires across China's seven major administrative regions to verify structural validity and internal consistency.

Results

The CFA results showed that the three-factor model fit well (χ² = 3179.436, df = 518, CFI = 0.964, TLI = 0.956, RMSEA = 0.036), with factor loadings for all items exceeding 0.750. The Cronbach's α coefficients for the three dimensions were 0.957, 0.947, and 0.965, respectively. Path coefficient tests indicated strong explanatory power of the latent variables on the observed variables (standardized path coefficients ranged from 0.781 to 0.951). Cross-group validation demonstrated the scale's stability and applicability across different administrative regions in China.

Conclusion

The Chinese version of the COM-PASS scale has shown good reliability and validity among the population of Chinese primary and secondary school teachers, and it can effectively assess main factors affecting the development of school physical education activities. The results provide a targeted scientific basis for optimizing school physical education policies, addressing regional resource differences, and teacher training strategies. The scale demonstrates strong cultural applicability and provides practical guidance for enhancing the 'Double Reduction' policy and advancing school-based physical education activities across China.

Background

Adolescent physical inactivity has become a global public health issue, with mounting impacts on physical and mental health [1,2,3]. Globally, only 27%−33% of adolescents meet the recommended 60 min of daily moderate-to-vigorous activity [4, 5], especially in high-academic-pressure countries [3, 6, 7]. Schools, as primary settings for youth development, can utilize their infrastructure, staff, and external support to facilitate adequate physical activity through curricular and extracurricular programs [8,9,10,11,12,13]. However, despite the implementation of sports policies and interventions at the school level in many countries, the outcomes remain suboptimal, with a common"last-mile"problem in policy execution [14,15,16,17]. Studies indicate that teachers, as the"key implementers"of school sports policies, play a crucial role in policy and program implementation [18, 19]. Teachers'capabilities, opportunities, and motivations directly determine the effectiveness of policy implementation [20, 21]. Therefore, understanding the behavioral determinants of teachers in school-based physical activities is essential for enhancing adolescent physical activity levels and optimizing policy execution.

To gain a comprehensive understanding of teachers'behavioral characteristics in implementing school-based physical activities, this study drew on the COM-B model (Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Behavior model). This model emphasizes that behavior requires three core elements: capability (including physical and psychological capabilities), opportunity (including physical and social opportunities), and motivation (including reflective and automatic motivations), which has been widely applied in physical activity implementation [21,22,23]. Based on this theoretical framework, Verdonschot et al. developed the COM-PASS assessment tool to comprehensively evaluate teachers'behavioral determinants in implementing school sports activities, including physical capability, psychological capability, physical opportunity, social opportunity, reflective motivation, and automatic motivation [24]. Despite demonstrating reliability in Western contexts (Australia, Germany, UK), the COM-PASS scale's non-Western applicability remains unverified. Existing adaptations in Malaysia and India [24, 25] have highlighted how cultural and environmental factors significantly influence teacher behaviors and policy implementation, underscoring the need for localized validation. China's high-pressure education system, marked by regional disparities and recent policy shifts ("Double Reduction","Two-Hour Daily Exercise"), provides an ideal validation context. This study examines the scale's cultural adaptation, addressing gaps between global tools and local implementation challenges under these new reforms.

Despite progress in international research on teacher training and intervention strategies, existing studies face several challenges. First, many research tools lack rigorous validation of reliability and validity or systematic design, limiting the scientific rigor and generalizability of the findings [26, 27]. Second, research has predominantly focused on Western countries, with relatively homogeneous subjects and contexts, failing to account for differences in cultural and educational environments [27,28,29]. Studies have shown that national and regional differences in resource allocation, policy enforcement, and cultural values significantly influence teachers'behaviors in physical activities [16, 30, 31]. For example, in regions with abundant resources and strong policy support, teachers may exhibit higher capabilities and motivation [32,33,34]. Conversely, in resource-scarce or policy-weak environments, teachers'motivation and implementation effectiveness may be constrained [35,36,37]. However, research on Asian regions, especially China's education system and cultural context, remains limited. China, with its unique education system, cultural background, and policy environment, faces both common challenges in school sports implementation—such as uneven resource allocation and insufficient teacher training—and significant influences from policy enforcement levels and cultural values [38]. Therefore, whether existing research tools can accurately assess the implementation of physical activities in the Chinese context requires further validation.

Recent Chinese policies like"Double Reduction"and"Two-Hour Daily Physical Activity"mandate increased exercise time to improve youth health. However, significant regional disparities—particularly resource shortages in underdeveloped western schools—hinder effective implementation [39, 40]. On one hand, China's vast territory and significant regional differences in economic development, educational resource investment, and policy enforcement create disparities. For example, eastern coastal regions have relatively abundant educational resources and smoother policy implementation, while central, western, and remote areas face severe resource shortages and implementation difficulties [41]. On the other hand, the Chinese education culture's strong focus on academic achievement objectively reduces the time and resources allocated to physical activities, making it difficult for many regions to meet policy targets [42]. Against this backdrop, teachers'capabilities, opportunities, and motivations in school sports activities are particularly critical, and regional differences need to be quantified through scientific assessment tools. Therefore, this study, based on the COM-B model and using the internationally validated COM-PASS tool [24], focuses on seven representative administrative regions in China (eastern, western, southern, northern, central, and northeastern regions) to conduct empirical research. The original COM-B model comprises six dimensions: physical capability, psychological capability, physical opportunity, social opportunity, reflective motivation, and automatic motivation. In this study, we adapted the model into three core dimensions—capability, opportunity, and motivation—to enhance the scale's cultural appropriateness for the Chinese context. It explores the applicability in the Chinese cultural context and analyzes the differences in behavioral determinants among teachers in different regions and their impact on school sports implementation. The study aims to optimize school sports policies, enhance policy enforcement, and provide scientific evidence and data support for developing region-specific and targeted teacher training and intervention strategies.

Methods

This study is grounded in the COM-B model (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Behavior model) and employs the translated and culturally adapted COM-PASS scale to examine the capabilities, opportunities, and motivations of primary and secondary school teachers in China to implement physical activities in schools. The research was structured into three phases: (1) scale development and content validity assessment using the Delphi method, (2) item revision through teacher interviews, and (3) structural validity verification via Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) [43, 44]. The model fit of the three-factor structure was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), with fit indices including the comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). According to established standards [45], CFI and TLI values above 0.90 indicate good model fit, while an RMSEA below 0.06 is considered acceptable. The expert evaluation commenced in June 2024, and the study received ethical approval from the Academic Ethics Committee of Leshan Normal University in November 2024 (Approval No.: LSNU:1033–24-RO). The survey was then launched, collecting a total of 4,033 valid questionnaires from teachers across various regions and educational levels, providing a broad and robust dataset for analysis.

Research Process and Quality Control

The study adhered to a stringent research protocol, dividing the scale development and validation process into three distinct phases. First, the Delphi method was employed to develop the scale and assess its content validity, ensuring the scientific rigor and cultural relevance of the items. Second, teacher interviews were conducted to refine the semantics of the items, thereby enhancing their comprehensibility for the target population. Finally, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was utilized to evaluate the structural validity and applicability of the scale, ensuring its stability and reliability across diverse regions and groups. The research process is depicted in Fig. 1.

[IMAGE OMITTED: SEE PDF]

Methods

This study was conducted in three phases as follows.

Phase 1: Delphi Study—Scale Development and Content Validity Assessment

This phase aimed to develop the COM-PASS scale and assess its content validity, integrating the policy and practice characteristics of school-based physical activities in China. Using the Delphi method, 15 experts familiar with the Chinese education context were invited to participate. These experts included researchers in physical education, frontline primary and secondary school teachers, and educational administrators, ensuring that the scale aligned with both the theoretical framework and the specific requirements of China's"Double Reduction"policy and physical education curriculum standards. The Delphi method and think-aloud interviews were employed to enhance methodological rigor and validate the scale's cross-cultural applicability and contextual appropriateness. Initially, the research team referenced the scale developed by Keyworth et al. [24] and designed 14 preliminary items tailored to the Chinese school environment. These items covered six dimensions: physical capability, psychological capability, physical opportunity, social opportunity, reflective motivation, and automatic motivation. Experts rated the alignment of each item with the COM-B theoretical model using a 5-point scale (1 = completely mismatched, 5 = completely matched) and provided suggestions for revision [46]. The research team revised the items over three rounds based on feedback until all items achieved an average score of ≥ 4.5. The entire Delphi study spanned five months (June to November 2024), culminating in a scientifically rigorous and culturally appropriate scale.

Phase 2: Teacher Interviews—Item Comprehension Assessment and Revision

This phase employed the"Think-Aloud"method to evaluate the comprehensibility and applicability of the scale items among the target population [47]. The research team recruited 10 primary and secondary school teachers (1–2 from each of the seven regions in China: East, West, South, North, Central, Northeast, and Southwest), covering both elementary and secondary education levels. Interviews were conducted online or face-to-face, lasting approximately 20 min. Teachers were asked to read each item aloud, explain its meaning in their own words, and respond to questions such as:"Do you understand the meaning of this item?""Do you think the response options adequately cover your actual situation?""Is there anything missing?"The findings indicated that some items required further clarification. For example, in the dimension of"physical capability", a specific scenario for"demonstrating physical activity movements"was added. Additionally, teachers highlighted the need to address the lack of sports resources in rural schools and the practical challenges of time allocation. Based on this feedback, the research team refined the items and submitted the revised version to the experts from Phase 1 for final review and confirmation.

Phase 3: Structural Validity Verification

This phase validated the structural validity of the scale using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to assess its applicability among Chinese primary and secondary school teachers [48]. The research team employed stratified random sampling via the Wenjuanxing platform, collecting 4,033 valid questionnaires from teachers across seven major regions in China. The sample included teachers from elementary, middle, and high schools, as well as physical education specialists and teachers from other disciplines, ensuring broad representativeness. The sample distribution showed regional variations, with the highest proportions from Northwest (21.650%), Southwest (19.170%), and East China (19.040%), and the lowest from Central China (5.780%). Other regions included North China (16.320%), South China (11.110%), and Northeast China (6.940%). Data analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS AMOS 29.0 software to test the fit of the three-factor model (capability, opportunity, and motivation). Selected for its intuitive interface, analytical power (confirmatory/exploratory), and widespread use in education/psychology research, the software perfectly met our study needs. Fit indices included CFI, TLI, RMSEA [45], and Cronbach's α coefficients for each dimension. To verify the scale's applicability across regions, multi-group CFA was used to assess measurement invariance, including configural, metric, and scalar invariance [49].

Data Processing and Ethical Considerations

Missing values in the questionnaire data were handled using mean substitution, and participants with excessively short or long completion times were excluded to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the analysis [50]. Additionally, the readability of the scale was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease score to ensure its suitability for Chinese primary and secondary school teachers [51]. The study strictly adhered to ethical standards. All participating teachers provided online informed consent, clearly understanding the study's purpose and data usage. All data were anonymized and used solely for academic research. This research protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Academic Committee of Leshan Normal University (Approval number: LSNU: 103,324-RO) in November 2024, and received strong support from the local education authorities.

Results and Analysis

Basic information of demographic variables

A total of 4,168 questionnaires were collected, with 4,033 valid responses retained after excluding non-physical education teachers, ensuring high representativeness (see Table 1). The gender distribution showed 70.470% male and 29.530% female. In terms of age, the 30–39 age group was the largest (32.480%), followed by 20–29 years (27.850%) and 40–49 years (28.660%), with the 50 + age group being the smallest (11.010%). Educational background was predominantly bachelor's degree (83.46%), with 10.34% holding a master's degree or higher and 6.200% with an associate degree or lower. Teaching experience was evenly distributed, with 27.720% having 5 years or less and 27.670% having over 21 years. The sample included 47.410% elementary school teachers, 35.160% middle school teachers, and 15.100% high school teachers, with vocational/technical school teachers accounting for 2.330%. Regionally, the Northwest, Southwest, and East China regions had the highest representation (21.650%, 19.170%, and 19.040%, respectively), while the Central China region had the fewest samples (5.780%).

[IMAGE OMITTED: SEE PDF]

Trends and Characteristics of the Observed Indicators

Data from Table S1 show that the mean values of the observed variables are concentrated between 3.7 and 4.1, with a standard deviation of approximately 1.1. This indicates a certain degree of central tendency and moderate dispersion in the data distribution. The variables related to attitudes toward physical education (A1-A4) have mean values ranging from 3.956 to 4.061, with a coefficient of variation (CV) of about 28%. The skewness values are all negative (−1.334 to −1.269), indicating that the data are left-skewed and concentrated in the higher score range.

The variables related to physical education knowledge (B1-B6) have mean values ranging from 3.719 to 4.010, with coefficients of variation between 27.818% and 33.078%. Among these, B2 shows the highest dispersion (33.078%). The skewness and kurtosis values suggest that some indicators have a relatively even distribution.

The variables related to physical activity skills (C1-C4) have mean values ranging from 3.974 to 4.082, with the lowest coefficients of variation (26.320% to 27.557%). The skewness (−1.245 to −1.480) and kurtosis (1.008 to 1.749) values indicate that the data are left-skewed and concentrated in the higher score range, especially for C4, which shows a highly concentrated distribution.

Overall, the distributions of attitudes toward physical education and physical activity skills are stable and concentrated in the higher score range. In contrast, the physical education knowledge variables show slightly higher dispersion, with some indicators having a more even distribution.

Reliability and Validity Testing of the Scales

The reliability test results shown in Table S2 indicate that the Cronbach's α coefficients for all observed variables exceeded 0.9, demonstrating high reliability of the overall scale. Specifically, the Cronbach's α coefficients for Attitude toward Physical Education, Physical Education Knowledge, and Physical Activity Skills were 0.957, 0.947, and 0.965, respectively, indicating strong internal consistency within each dimension. The Corrected Item-Total Correlation (CITC) values for all items exceeded 0.750, suggesting a robust correlation between each item and its corresponding dimension. Table S2 presents comprehensive validity measures including CFA, Cronbach's α, and CITC, demonstrating the scale's robustness and reliability while confirming result credibility.

In Table S3 and Fig. 2 (Scree Plot), the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) value was 0.962, and the Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant (p < 0.001), confirming that the data were suitable for factor analysis. The rotated cumulative variance explained was 85.971%, with Factor 1, Factor 2, and Factor 3 explaining 32.024%, 28.410%, and 25.537% of the variance, respectively. This indicates that the three-factor model effectively explains the total variance of the observed variables. All factor loadings exceeded 0.5, with items loading highly on their respective factors (e.g., Attitude toward Physical Education items loaded on Factor 2, Physical Activity Skills items on Factor 1, and Physical Education Knowledge items on Factor 3). This demonstrates good convergent validity of the items and supports the theoretical structure of the three-factor model.

[IMAGE OMITTED: SEE PDF]

Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Cross-Group Validation

The path coefficient analysis results shown in Table 2 indicate that the unstandardized path coefficients between the three latent variables (Physical Education Knowledge, Attitude toward Physical Education, and Physical Activity Skills) and their respective observed variables are all significant (p < 0.001). The standardized path coefficients range from 0.781 to 0.951, demonstrating the strong explanatory power of the latent variables on the observed variables. Specifically, the standardized path coefficients for the Physical Education Knowledge dimension (A1-A4) are relatively high (0.905 to 0.936), those for the Attitude toward Physical Education dimension (B1-B6) range from 0.781 to 0.932, and those for the Physical Activity Skills dimension (C1-C4) are the highest (0.921 to 0.951).

[IMAGE OMITTED: SEE PDF]

Cross-group validation was conducted to assess the stability and fit of the model from different perspectives (see Fig. 3 and Table S4). The baseline model (Model A) showed excellent fit indices, with CFI = 0.964, TLI = 0.956, RMSEA = 0.036, and SRMR = 0.027, indicating that the three-factor model fits the overall data well. The measurement weights model (Model B) and the structural covariances model (Model C) also demonstrated stable fit indices (CFI = 0.964, TLI ≥ 0.961, RMSEA ≤ 0.034), suggesting that the model maintained good fit even with constraints on measurement weights and covariances. Cross-group analyses revealed significant differences across demographics and regions, demonstrating the scale's cultural universality and educational appropriateness in the Chinese context. The measurement residuals model (Model D) showed a slight decrease in fit (CFI = 0.959, TLI = 0.963), but the fit remained within acceptable limits. Chi-square difference tests revealed significant differences in fit between Models B, C, and D compared to Model A (p < 0.001), indicating some changes in model structure under different constraints. However, the overall fit remained at a high level. Models B (measurement weights), C (structural covariances), and D (measurement residuals) clearly demonstrated the structural relationships under different constraints, further validating the stability and consistency of the model.

[IMAGE OMITTED: SEE PDF]

Discussion

Key Findings

This study aimed to adapt the COM-PASS tool into Chinese and validate it among primary and secondary school teachers in China. The results demonstrate that the Chinese version of COM-PASS exhibits strong internal consistency and structural validity in assessing teachers'capabilities, opportunities, and motivations to implement school-based physical activity programs and policies. These findings align with previous studies using the original COM-PASS in international contexts [52, 53], further confirming the tool's applicability across different cultural backgrounds. Given the central role of teachers in implementing physical activity interventions in Chinese schools, measuring their capabilities, opportunities, and motivations is particularly important. The validation of this adapted tool provides an effective instrument for assessment, filling the gap in domestic measurement tools targeting teachers'determinants. The study's findings underscore the utility of the COM-PASS scale in designing teacher training programs and refining policy implementation. Projects with low"Opportunity"scores, particularly in resource-constrained schools, necessitate targeted improvements. Conversely, those with high"Capacity"and"Opportunity"scores should focus on enhancing teacher professional development. This provides school administrators and educational authorities with scientifically robust guidance.

The results indicate that the Chinese version of the COM-PASS scale has strong structural validity, with scores fitting a three-factor model [54] that closely aligns with the COM-B theoretical framework [45]. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) revealed that the three latent variables—capability, opportunity, and motivation—effectively explained their respective observed indicators. Additionally, Cronbach's α values exceeded 0.70, confirming the scale's robust internal consistency. Although the COM-B model encompasses six constructs (physical capability, psychological capability, physical opportunity, social opportunity, reflective motivation, and automatic motivation), we adopted a more streamlined three-factor structure. This was primarily due to the work pressure of the target population, with the aim of enhancing the scale's applicability and cultural relevance in the Chinese educational context. Specifically, we considered the heavy workload and high-intensity teaching pressure faced by teachers. This not only meets the cultural adaptation needs during the translation process but also enhances the scale's practical applicability in Chinese schools. The study highlights that questionnaire brevity is crucial for improving teacher engagement, especially in the Chinese educational context where teachers have heavy workloads and the negative correlation between questionnaire length and response rates is particularly pronounced [55, 56].

Moreover, the Chinese version of COM-PASS excels in content validity and teacher endorsement. All items underwent rigorous review by academic experts, achieving scores ≥ 4.50, ensuring a high degree of alignment between the scale items and the COM-B theoretical framework. Additionally, practical testing among Chinese primary and secondary school teachers yielded high praise for the tool's usability and simplicity. Feedback indicated that COM-PASS is not only suitable for assessing key factors in teachers'implementation of school-based physical activities but also has the potential for widespread adoption in the Chinese educational context. The scale's Flesch reading difficulty score was moderate, aligning with the reading level of domestic primary and secondary school teachers and enhancing its practicality.

In summary, the Chinese version of COM-PASS provides an effective and reliable instrument for assessing teachers'capabilities, opportunities, and motivations to implement school-based physical activity programs in China. This tool offers significant support for research on school-based physical activity interventions in China. Its successful application in the Chinese educational context validates its cross-cultural applicability and provides new directions for future research. The COM-PASS scale has been adapted in countries like Malaysia and India to explore how culture and context influence teacher education, addressing challenges such as resource disparities and academic pressure on physical activity participation [24, 25]. In contrast, our study focuses on regional differences within mainland China, examining teachers'opportunities and motivations across administrative districts. This approach highlights the importance of localized policy implementation and fills a gap in the literature. Future studies can further explore the application of the Chinese version of COM-PASS in other domains, such as evaluating the effectiveness of teacher professional development programs or assessing the impact of school-based physical activity promotion. Additionally, researchers should consider the unique characteristics of the Chinese educational environment to further refine the scale items, enhancing their service to the design and implementation of school-based physical activity interventions in China.

Future research directions

As noted in the"Expand, Extend, and Enhance"framework for increasing adolescents'physical activity opportunities, teachers play a crucial role in creating new activity opportunities (Expand), extending existing activity durations (Extend), and optimizing activity resources (Enhance) [57,58,59,60]. This study fills the domestic gap in assessing teachers'capabilities, opportunities, and motivations by adapting and validating the COM-PASS tool. With a broad sample covering 4,033 questionnaires from primary and secondary school teachers across seven major administrative regions in China, representing diverse age groups and career stages, the findings are highly representative. Future research can further utilize the Chinese version of COM-PASS to explore teachers'capabilities, opportunities, and motivations across different regions, cultural backgrounds, and resource conditions. Additionally, researchers are encouraged to validate the scale's test–retest reliability and responsiveness, exploring its applicability in various physical activity policy and program evaluations.

Strengths and Limitations

A significant strength of this study is its large sample size and broad coverage, with 4,033 valid responses from primary and secondary school teachers across seven major regions in China. The sample is well-distributed across different age groups and career stages, ensuring high representativeness of the findings. Moreover, this study integrates the expertise of academic researchers and frontline teachers to develop a culturally adapted tool grounded in the widely recognized COM-B model [45], ensuring the instrument's scientific rigor and practical value. Additionally, the study prioritized brevity and operability in questionnaire design to enhance teacher engagement and ensure data quality, tailored to the characteristics of the Chinese educational environment.

However, limitations remain. First, despite the large sample size, certain regions or specific groups (e.g., teachers in remote areas) may still be underrepresented. Future research should expand the sample coverage in these groups. Second, although the CFA results are promising, future studies should employ longitudinal designs to assess the scale's test–retest reliability and responsiveness at different time points, further validating its stability. Third, this study relies on self-reported data, which may be influenced by government policies and expectations. Lastly, data collection occurred in the post-pandemic period, and factors such as increased teaching pressure and teacher absenteeism may have affected data quality in some regions. Despite these limitations, this study provides robust support for the content validity and structural validity of the Chinese version of COM-PASS.

Conclusion

This study successfully adapted and validated the COM-PASS scale among 4,033 primary and secondary school teachers across seven major administrative regions in China, demonstrating its applicability and reliability in assessing teachers'capabilities, opportunities, and motivations. The results indicate that the Chinese version of the COM-PASS scale has strong structural validity, content validity, and internal consistency, effectively reflecting teachers'crucial roles in school physical activities. This scale provides a practical reference for identifying key areas for intervention, optimizing school resource allocation, and addressing teacher motivation barriers. Specifically, it can be used for policy evaluation by analyzing data to identify the status of school resources and teacher motivations, thereby facilitating policy adjustments. Furthermore, the validated instrument provides empirical support for developing targeted teacher professional development programs, ensuring alignment between training strategies and identified gaps in teachers'competencies, opportunities, and motivational factors. It can also enhance the skills of young teachers and address motivational issues in resource-poor schools, optimizing teacher training. The lower scores in the"Opportunity"dimension reflect deficiencies in school facilities and policy support, while the higher scores in the"Capability"and"Motivation"dimensions suggest that professional training should focus more on young teachers to fully tap their potential. Moreover, the scale can provide valuable data for regional policy adjustments, promoting fair resource allocation and improving the implementation of school physical activities.

Data availability

The data used in this study have been fully anonymized and securely stored. The research team is committed to sharing the data for academic purposes upon reasonable request, in accordance with ethical guidelines and data sharing policies. Requests for access to the data can be made by contacting the corresponding author, Professor Yi Yang, via email at 476,199,[email protected].

Abbreviations

PA:

Physical Activity

PE:

Physical Education

COM-B:

Capability, Opportunity, Motivation Behavior Model

COM-PASS:

Capability, Opportunity, Motivation to deliver Physical Activity in School Scale

CFA:

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

RMSEA:

Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

CFI:

Comparative Fit Index

TLI:

Tucker-Lewis Index

KMO:

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure

SRMR:

Standardized Root Mean Square Residual

CV:

Coefficient of Variation

SD:

Standard Deviation

SPSS:

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

References

Aubert S, Brazo-Sayavera J, González SA, et al. Global prevalence of physical activity for children and adolescents; inconsistencies, research gaps, and recommendations: a narrative review [J]. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021;18(1):81.

Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, et al. Global trends in insufficient physical activity among adolescents: a pooled analysis of 298 population-based surveys with 1·6 million participants [J]. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health. 2020;4(1):23–35.

van Sluijs EMF, Ekelund U, Crochemore-Silva I, et al. Physical activity behaviours in adolescence: current evidence and opportunities for intervention [J]. The Lancet. 2021;398(10):429–42.

Marques A, Henriques-Neto D, Peralta M, et al. Prevalence of Physical Activity among Adolescents from 105 Low, Middle, and High-Income Countries [J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(9):3145.

Chaput JP, Willumsen J, Bull F, et al. 2020 WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour for children and adolescents aged 5–17 years: summary of the evidence [J]. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17(1):141.

Araujo RHO, Werneck AO, Martins CL, et al. Global prevalence and gender inequalities in at least 60 min of self-reported moderate-to-vigorous physical activity 1 or more days per week: An analysis with 707,616 adolescents [J]. J Sport Health Sci. 2024;13(5):709–16.

Aubert S, Barnes JD, Demchenko I, et al. Global matrix 4.0 physical activity report card grades for children and adolescents: results and analyses from 57 countries [J]. Journal of Physical Activity and Health. 2022;19(11):700–28.

Zarrett N, Abraczinskas M, Skiles Cook B, et al. Promoting physical activity within under-resourced after-school programs: A qualitative investigation of staff experiences and motivational strategies for engaging youth [J]. Appl Dev Sci. 2018;22(1):58–73.

Alcántara-Porcuna V, Sánchez-López M, Martínez-Andrés M, et al. Teachers’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators of the school environment for physical activity in schoolchildren: a qualitative study [J]. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health. 2022;14(7):1113–37.

Dobbins M, Husson H, DeCorby K, et al. School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 [J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2(9):1–28.

Jones EM, Blockman L, Bubulka C. A Collective Action Formation to Address Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Health in Schools: The District 87 Wellness Collaborative [J]. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 2024;95(5):12–20.

Malagodi F, Dommett EJ, Findon JL, et al. Physical activity interventions to improve mental health and wellbeing in university students in the UK: A service mapping study [J]. Ment Health Phys Act. 2024;26(3):100563.

Centeio EE, Brusseau TA. The history of physical activity promotion in physical education and suggestions for moving forward [J]. Kinesiology Review. 2024;13(2):218–29.

Lynch T, Soukup GJ Sr. Primary physical education (PE): School leader perceptions about classroom teacher quality implementation [J]. Cogent Education. 2017;4(1):1348925.

Carl J, Bryant AS, Edwards LC, et al. Physical literacy in Europe: The current state of implementation in research, practice, and policy [J]. J Exerc Sci Fit. 2023;21(1):165–76.

Cassar S, Salmon J, Timperio A, et al. Adoption, implementation and sustainability of school-based physical activity and sedentary behaviour interventions in real-world settings: a systematic review [J]. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2019;16(1):120.

Klepac Pogrmilovic B, Ramirez Varela A, Pratt M, et al. National physical activity and sedentary behaviour policies in 76 countries: availability, comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness [J]. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17(1):116.

Lindsey I. Analysing policy change and continuity: physical education and school sport policy in England since 2010 [J]. Sport Educ Soc. 2020;25(1):27–42.

Stylianou M, Hogan A, Enright E. Youth sport policy: the enactment and possibilities of “soft policy” in schools [J]. Sport Educ Soc. 2019;24(2):182–94.

Hutmacher D, Eckelt M, Bund A, et al. Does Motivation in Physical Education Have an Impact on Out-of-School Physical Activity over Time? A Longitudinal Approach [J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(19):7258.

Rosenkranz RR, Ridley K, Guagliano JM, et al. Physical activity capability, opportunity, motivation and behavior in youth settings: theoretical framework to guide physical activity leader interventions [J]. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol. 2023;16(1):529–53.

Quested E, Ntoumanis N, Thøgersen-Ntoumani C, et al. Evaluating quality of implementation in physical activity interventions based on theories of motivation: current challenges and future directions [J]. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol. 2017;10(1):252–69.

Willmott TJ, Pang B, Rundle-Thiele S. Capability, opportunity, and motivation: an across contexts empirical examination of the COM-B model [J]. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):1014.

Verdonschot A, Beauchamp MR, Brusseau TA, et al. Development and evaluation of the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation to deliver Physical Activity in School Scale (COM-PASS)[J]. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2024;21(1):93.

Kuśnierz C, Rogowska AM, Pavlova I. Examining Gender Differences, Personality Traits, Academic Performance, and Motivation in Ukrainian and Polish Students of Physical Education: A Cross-Cultural Study [J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(16):5729.

Mellado-Berenguer J, Monfort-Pañego M. Development, Validation, and Reliability of the System for Observing Teaching Competencies in Physical Education (SOTC-PE)[J]. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci. 2024;109(9):1–20.

Ho WKY, Ahmed MdD, Kukurova K. Development and validation of an instrument to assess quality physical education [J]. Cogent Education. 2021;8(1):1864082.

Papageorgiou E, Krommidas C, Digelidis N, et al. An online PETE course on intercultural education for pre-service physical education teachers: A non-randomized controlled trial [J]. Teach Teach Educ. 2023;121(6):103920.

Alcalá DH, Río JF, Calvo GG, et al. Comparing effects of a TPSR training program on prospective physical education teachers’ social goals, discipline and autonomy strategies in Spain, Chile and Costa Rica [J]. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog. 2019;24(3):220–32.

Usher W, Anderton A. Giving the teacher a voice: Perceptions regarding the barriers and enablers associated with the implementation of Smart Moves (compulsory physical activity) within primary state schools [J]. Cogent Education. 2014;1(1):980383.

Mubanga K. Factors affecting the teaching of physical education in secondary schools: a case of selected secondary schools in Kalulushi and Kitwe districts of Zambia [D]. The University of Zambia; 2017. p. 45–62. (Cited in Chapter 2).

Zhang T. Physical education teacher motivation: A conceptual review and reconceptualisation [J]. Review of Education. 2021;9(3):e3301.

Su J, Pu X, Yadav K, et al. A physical education teacher motivation from the self-evaluation framework [J]. Comput Electr Eng. 2022;98(3):107772.

Casey A, MacPhail A. Adopting a models-based approach to teaching physical education [J]. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy. 2018;23(3):294–310.

Herlitz L, MacIntyre H, Osborn T, et al. The sustainability of public health interventions in schools: a systematic review [J]. Implementation Sci. 2020;15(1):4.

Ntoumanis N, Thørgersen-Ntoumani C, Quested E, et al. Theoretical approaches to physical activity promotion [M], Oxford research encyclopedia of psychology; 2018. p. 112–45. (Cited in Chapter 3).

Olstad DL, Campbell EJ, Raine KD, et al. A multiple case history and systematic review of adoption, diffusion, implementation and impact of provincial daily physical activity policies in Canadian schools [J]. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):385.

Dai J, Menhas R. Sustainable Development Goals, Sports and Physical Activity: The Localization of Health-Related Sustainable Development Goals Through Sports in China: A Narrative Review [J]. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy. 2020;13(4):1419–30.

Liu P, Chen J, Shen Y, et al. The influence of parental awareness of the “Chinese double reduction” policy on junior high school students’ extracurricular physical exercise [J]. Front Psychol. 2023;14(3):1079523.

Wang D, Li H, Zhang X, et al. Changes and relevant factors in depressive and anxiety symptoms among Chinese adolescents after the “Double Reduction” policy: A repeated cross-sectional survey with a nested longitudinal subsample [J]. J Affect Disord. 2024;367(12):88–95.

Peng H, Qi L, Wan G, et al. Child population, economic development and regional inequality of education resources in China [J]. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2020;110(3):104819.

Chen S, Kim Y, Gao Z. The contributing role of physical education in youth’s daily physical activity and sedentary behavior [J]. BMC Public Health. 2014;14(1):110.

Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique [J]. J Adv Nurs. 2000;32(4):1008–15.

Lynn MR. Determination and Quantification of Content Validity [J]. Nurs Res. 1986;35(6):382.

Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives [J]. Struct Equ Modeling. 1999;6(1):1–55.

Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations [J]. Res Nurs Health. 2007;30(4):459–67.

Willis GB, Artino AR Jr. What Do Our Respondents Think We’re Asking? Using Cognitive Interviewing to Improve Medical Education Surveys [J]. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5(3):353–6.

Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling [M]. Guilford Publications; 2023. p. 150–200. (Cited in Chapter 4).

Byrne B M. Choosing structural equation modeling computer software: Snapshots of LISREL, EQS, AMOS, and Mplus [J]. 2012,27(4):307–324

Graham JW. Missing Data Analysis: Making It Work in the Real World [J]. Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60(4):549–76.

Flesch R. A new readability yardstick [J]. J Appl Psychol. 1948;32(3):221–33.

Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research [J]. Implementation Sci. 2012;7(1):37.

Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions [J]. Implementation Sci. 2011;6(1):42.

Schmitt N. Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha [J]. Psychol Assess. 1996;8(4):350–3.

Rolstad S, Adler J, Rydén A. Response Burden and Questionnaire Length: Is Shorter Better? A Review and Meta-analysis [J]. Value in Health. 2011;14(8):1101–8.

Edwards P, Roberts I, Sandercock P, et al. Follow-up by mail in clinical trials: does questionnaire length matter [J]? Control Clin Trials. 2004;25(1):31–52.

Hollis JL, Sutherland R, Williams AJ, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity levels in secondary school physical education lessons [J]. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14(1):52.

Iglesias D, Fernandez-Rio J, Rodriguez-Gonzalez P. Moderate-to-Vigorous physical activity in physical education: a review of reviews [J]. J Teach Phys Educ. 2022;42(4):640–6.

Wong LS, Gibson AM, Farooq A, et al. Interventions to Increase Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity in Elementary School Physical Education Lessons: Systematic Review [J]. J Sch Health. 2021;91(10):836–45.

Webster CA, Russ L, Vazou S, et al. Integrating movement in academic classrooms: understanding, applying and advancing the knowledge base [J]. Obes Rev. 2015;16(8):691–701.