Two pages are the summary part, which just summarize what you read and do not include your personal opinions and thoughts. The other two pages are the critique so write the strengths and weaknesses of the article you read.

Two Page Summary

The article begins by articulating the obesity epidemic that plagues most of America and the developed world. Here the author sides statistics related to childhood obesity and its implications for society and educational system as a whole. According to the article school-aged children have been shown to have higher rates of overweight (17.9%) and obesity (8.0%) than preschool children (15.2% and 6.3%). The authors suggest that children are much prone to becoming overweight during their school years as oppose to their prior preschool years. To combat this growing trend, schools, governments and law makers have engaged in various campaigns designed to mitigate the influence of a sedentary lifestyle on the life of school aged children. These programs are designed to promote a healthy lifestyle while also providing incentives for students to maintain heathy weights.

The research article looks to evaluate the Emmons social ecological model can be used to help influence the physical activity promotion of schools looking to promote healthier lifestyles in students. The authors were interested in this research as traditionally, ecological models have been the basis for health promotion studies and policy decisions. However, as indicated by the statistics above, the results seem to be negatively impacted by use of these models. Therefore, the authors are looking to challenge the superiority of this model as it relates to policy action. The authors look to establish this through interview with various officials, workers and employees. Here, the authors were looking to determine if the complexity of physical education promotion in schools can ultimately be captured using the social ecological model. The primary data point for the study were interviews conducted with various stakeholder groups within the education industry. The authors interviewed high ranking education officials, teachers, principals, school board members and consultants. A total of 14 interviews were conducted in the study. The author looked to interview different people at each level of the social ecological framework. For example, the authors interviewed individuals who were representative of the policy level, the community level, the organizational level, the interpersonal level and finally the intrapersonal level. The authors admitted that certain individuals could occupy two or more levels within the model. However, they did attempt to capture the thoughts of individuals who occupied a single level of the model. After analyzing the data garnered...…to someone who is sweaty and nervous. This could indirectly impact the authors opinion of the merits behind the social ecological model as they may attribute more weight to answers from one individual over the other. Fortunately, the authors attempt to get around this bias through analysis of the transcripts by multiple parties, however, this method only mitigates the biases and doesnt eliminate it.

The strengths of the article are related to how the authors looked to identify each level of the model and attempted to address each one individually through interviews. This is important as it allows the authors to address each level of the model while gaining insights into how each level. Likewise, the diversity of the interviews was a strength of the article. The authors took care to interview individuals both within and without the education industry. They also took care to have a roughly even split between men and women. In addition, the author also noted the limitation of the current available research. Throughout the document, the author was honest in that the available research related to the model was limited and therefore, more research is needed prior to drawing meaningful conclusions. This was a strength as it allows the ready to make a much more accurate assessment as to the validity of…