The systematic examination of the inherent logic of policy evolution in after-school sports services serves as the theoretical prerequisite for deeply understanding their operational mechanisms and reference value. In the context of China, after-school sports services have been endowed with new connotations and missions. From a comparative education perspective, this study employs the analytical framework of historical institutionalism to systematically explore the theoretical foundations and evolutionary logic of the policy system for after-school sports services (i.e., organized sports activities after the normal school day) in British primary and secondary schools. The research finds that the development of after-school sports services in Britain has undergone four key stages: the Free Development Period (pre-1970s), the Policy Germination Period (1980s-1990s), the System Construction Period (2000s-2010s), and the Quality Optimization Period (post-2010s), exhibiting clear characteristics of path dependency. Britain has formed a multi-actor governance theoretical framework centered on "state guidance - school leadership - societal participation." The government provides institutional guarantees through legislation and special funding (e.g., PE and Sport Premium), schools act as implementing bodies responsible for specific organization, and social sports organizations offer professional support. This governance structure effectively integrates resources from all parties, ensuring the sustainability and professionalism of the services. The study further reveals the dynamic mechanisms driving British policy evolution, including responses to social issues (e.g., youth health), seizing political opportunities (e.g., the Olympics), and updates in educational philosophy. Finally, considering the practical needs under China's "Double Reduction" context, the study proposes recommendations such as strengthening the institutional guarantee for after-school sports services, constructing a multi-actor collaborative supply system, and establishing a scientific evaluation mechanism, providing theoretical reference for the high-quality development of after-school sports services in China.

Xiaoya Han, Xiangtong Liu, Yanjun Ge. Theoretical Framework and Evolutionary Logic of After-School Sports Services in British Primary and Secondary Schools — An Analysis Based on Historical Institutionalism. Frontiers in Sport Research (2026), Vol. 8, Issue 2: 60-65. https://doi.org/10.25236/FSR.2026.080210.

[1] Brooke H L, Corder K, Atkin A J, et al. A systematic literature review with meta-analyses of within-and between-day differences in objectively measured physical activity in school-aged children [J]. Sports medicine, 2014, 44(10): 1427–1438.

[2] Folkard S, Monk T H, Bradbury R, et al. Time of day effects in school children's immediate and delayed recall of meaningful material [J]. British journal of Psychology, 1977, 68(1): 45–50.

[3] Mahoney J L, Larson R W, Eccles J S. Organized activities as contexts of development: Extracurricular activities, after school and community programs [M]. Psychology Press, 2005.

[4] Lee O, Park M, Jang K, et al. Life lessons after classes: investigating the influence of an afterschool sport program on adolescents’ life skills development [J]. International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 2017, 12(1): 1307060.

[5] Melville S. The UK School Games and the competition structure of selected participating sports: a study of policy implementation [D]. Loughborough University, 2012.

[6] Callanan M, Fry A, Plunkett M, et al. The PE and sport premium: an investigation in primary schools [J]. Department for Education: London, UK, 2015.

[7] Steinmo S. Historical institutionalism [J]. Approaches and methodologies in the social sciences: A pluralist perspective, 2008: 118–138.

[8] Pierson P. Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics [J]. American political science review, 2000, 94(2): 251–267.

[9] Steinmo S, Thelen K, Longstreth F. Structuring politics: historical institutionalism in comparative analysis [M]. Cambridge University Press, 1992.

[10] Thelen K. How institutions evolve [J]. Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences, 2004.

[11] Capoccia G, Kelemen R D. The study of critical junctures: Theory, narrative, and counterfactuals in historical institutionalism [J]. World politics, 2007, 59(3): 341–369.

[12] Hall P A. Governing the economy: The politics of state intervention in Britain and France [M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.

[13] Arts W, Gelissen J. Three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art report [J]. Journal of European social policy, 2002, 12(2): 137–158.

[14] Pearce S. The role of British Schools Overseas in promoting and upholding British values: Using transmission context in policy analysis [J]. Journal of Research in International Education, 2021, 20(3): 191–210.

[15] Shearer J C, Abelson J, Kouyaté B, et al. Why do policies change? Institutions, interests, ideas and networks in three cases of policy reform [J]. Health policy and planning, 2016, 31(9): 1200–1211.

[16] Akanni L, Bennett D, Chua Y W, et al. Inequalities in school spending across local authorities in England: A time‐trend analysis [J]. British Educational Research Journal, 2025.

[17] Yusuf M, Yaumi M, Hanafi M S. Elementary Teacher Professionalism and Workload: Case Study at Palopo City Elementary School [J]. International Journal of Asian Education, 2021, 2(4): 581–588.

[18] Jomua P D, Antiquina L M M, Cericos E U, et al. Teachers‘ workload in relation to burnout and work performance [J]. International Journal of Educational Policy Research and Review, 2021, (1): 52-53.