Author(s): ZEILER, C., YEWELL, N., SUEDA, A., SCHUCK, L., WALKER, E., SCHUCK, S., Institution: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE, Country: UNITED STATES, Abstract-ID: 2791

INTRODUCTION:
Physical activity (PA) in middle school-aged children has been shown to improve pro-social skills and attitudes, self-esteem, and cognitive development, and to decrease problem behaviors. Specifically, participation in Riding for Focus (R4F), a school-based cycling program, is associated with increased well-being among youth but has not been assessed specifically with those youth with neurodevelopmental differences. This study evaluates the feasibility, acceptability, and potential impact of implementing the R4F cycling program in the context of a physical education (PE) curriculum in a specialized middle school serving students with neurodevelopmental disorders.
METHODS:
Forty-seven students (47) (94% male, x̄ age = 11) enrolled in a non-public specialized school in California participated in the R4F program from Fall 2024 to Spring 2025. To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of implementation, semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff, midway, and after the R4F program. Students participated in pre- and post-surveys with questions about program reception and well-being measured by the World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5) immediately prior to and upon completion of the R4F program.
RESULTS:
Staff interviews revealed complexities of administering the program with this group, specifically, revealing themes of inadequate quantity of trained staffing, with minor challenges with prosocial behavior, and peer conflict as barriers to feasibility in the setting. Results from students indicate that the R4F program was found acceptable by students, with 75% of students reporting liking the R4F unit more than or the same as other PE curriculum units, and 80% having fun in the program. Incomplete WHO-5 responses for the post survey resulted in a limited pre/post paired data set (n = 20) in which there was no significant change in student-reported psychosocial well-being across the program (p > .05).
CONCLUSION:
When supported by a core group of consistent, enthusiastic staff, R4F was feasibly implemented by trained staff, found acceptable by students with neurodevelopmental disorders in a specialized school setting, and shows promise for improving well-being. Improvements to staff preparation and the survey process will be implemented in future programming to improve the sample size for a properly powered analysis of well-being.