Inclusive Interventions for Learning Differences In the Early Years and Primary Sectors: A Floor-BasedMovement Approach

Mary Mountstephen MA (SEN)

The early years in school are a critical period for the establishment of firm foundations for learning and it would seem that an increasing number of children entering school are causing concern in terms of learning readiness and classroom behaviour. What might be the reasons that these children have difficulty with focus, expressive and receptive language, fine motor skills and self-help skills? Can it all be ‘blamed’ on modern life styles, busy parents and over-reliance on technology, or are there also less obvious contributory factors? Regardless of the causes, there are implications for the classroom teacher andoptions to consider that are both time and cost effective and measurable in terms of impact. O’Connor and Daly’s new book (2016) provide a useful guide to different aspects of physical development and they highlight the significance of early ‘physical literacy’ in providing firm foundations for classroom performance.

In this article I will describe how one programme is producing positive results in schools internationally, through practising early movement activities in a structured, systematic and sequential process carried out on a daily basis as a whole class activity. This approach revisits the physical experiences that infants engage in on a daily basis under normal circumstances and that contribute to overall physical and cognitive development.

Why Isn’t Finn Doing Better?

By the age of 7, Finn is struggling to concentrate in class activities, producing poorly organized and presented written work, with an awkward pencil grip and growing increasingly frustrated and emotional both at home and in class. His teacher has provided a pencil grip to help him produce neater writing and a guide to help him keep his place when reading, but progress remains slow. Finn presents as a child of average ability whose performance is not in line with perceptions of his potential. He is well supported at home by busy working parents and has a younger sister who is performing to expectations. There are no obvious reasons for his difficulties. His eyesight has been tested in case this is causing his reading delays and there are no concerns about his hearing.

Looking at Finn’s profile from a developmental perspective, it is possible that his difficulties may be partly related to early experiences that have let him underprepared for the classroom. Finn may be a child whose early physical development was compromised by birth trauma and/or early movement experiences that are contributing to immature fine motor skills and poor visual performance. Although Finn’s eyesight has been judged as no cause for concern, it is possible that his eyes are not working well together as a team and that tracking and convergence issues are present.

An excellent new book by Archer and Siras summarizes the influence of movement on a child’s neurological system, learning and development and they explain in simple terms how early movement experiences such as crawling, rolling and tummy time contribute significantlyto learning readiness. These deceptively simple movement patterns contribute to thematuration of skills such as visual tracking, motor control, postural development and efficient coordination. When parents avoid tummy time because the child cries (it is very hard work…) and put their infant into a baby walker to provide stimulation, they do so with the best of intentions, but are potentially undermining the child’s need to develop floor-based competence. So if Finn has, for whatever reason, missed out on regularfloor time activities and did not pass through a crawling stage, these aspects of his profile may remain immature and compromise his potential. However, these movement patterns can be revisited as part of a school intervention programme, and, as a result, children like Finn often become more able to meet expectations, are less frustrated and more emotionally resilient as frustrations decrease. Thus the movements provide a second window of opportunity to develop postural stability and control.

‘Young children’s future achievements are dependent on their movement experiences from the time they are born…The brain’s structure is connected to young children’s inner body mechanisms, driving movements that ultimately restructure the architecture of the brain’. (Archer and Siras).

If children miss out on aspects of this process for whatever reason, is this window of opportunity closed forever?

My interest is in researching how targeted physical programmesmay contribute to improvements in classroom performance for children in the early years and primary age with learning differences/delays such as weaknesses in acquiring reading skills, poor concentration, and weak fine and gross motor skills.

Is it possible that some physical programmes can exert measurable impact on classroom performance and the extent to which somepupils canimprove functioning in specific areas? Can some of them acquire the skills to cope with more complex processes without the need for extra resources?

Is it possible thatdaily sessions devoted to physical aspects of development can reap later rewards in terms of improving the pupil’s cognitive motor development, thus minimizing potential reliance on external accommodations?Through this type of approach, that is inclusive, can they learn to focus inwards on the quality and speed of their movement and become more aware of posture and balance and body awareness? Will this then transfer to improved classroom performance?

Signs that may indicate difficulties of this type are:

  • Difficulties catching a ball
  • Difficulties with balance and the control of slow, precise gross motor skills
  • Poor pencil control and letter formation
  • Difficulty tracking text when reading
  • Difficulties sitting still/ attention
  • Academic underachievement

The Ten Gems for the Brain movements developed by the Australian company Move to Learn have been in use in schools internationally for over 20 years. They ‘begin at the beginning’, replicating the movements of an infant in the first year of life and were devised and developed by a specialist teacher and occupational therapist. The programmed is intended to be a low cost, whole class approach that is integrated into the school’s daily routines.

It is important that teachers have access to knowledge and resources that enable them to pinpoint potential difficulties in young children so that the child’s confidence is not eroded and their strengths are recognized. Whereas we are not necessarily able to ‘solve’ all Finn’s problems, there are some actions that do lie within our control and that may be addressed through the use of exercises to develop more mature vestibular and sensory functioning.

The rationale for addressing identified weaknesses through a physical intervention

Reading and writing are executive functions that are dependent on developmentally mature sensory systems. Movement programmes apply ‘spiraling’ principles similar to classroom overlearning practices that are repetitive and build fluidity, awareness of tempo and rhythm.

They employ a spatiotemporal frame of reference that develops an awareness of space and timing:

‘Skilled movements are acquired through developmental and purposeful sequences...... adapting posture and movement strategies to developmental sequences……new behaviours are higher level modifications of older, lower level behaviours’( Gilfoyle).

Physical interventions therefore can provide the means to build or rebuild the child’s perception of spatial awareness and timing that are necessary to access learning more effectively.They help the child to develop greater awareness of proprioception: the reception of information received from the body and positional feedback.

The Move to Learn programme maps its exercises to the hierarchical development of primitive reflex integration. Each floor based exercise addresses specific reflexes and builds a foundation for more effective functioning. Children from a very early age can engage in activities such as rolling, creeping and crawling to provide the brain with additional opportunities to revisit these fundamental learning processes that may have been missed for a number of reasons.

The daily Move to Learn programme works over a one-year period, but can be integrated as part of an on-going whole school inclusive intervention. I have seen its use in Poland, Cyprus, U.K., Malaysia, Singapore and Japan and have implemented it in schools in the U.K. and internationally. It goes back to the very

Each day follows a similar pattern:

A short body awareness section using slow, controlled movements

The classroom dilemma: address the causes or symptoms?

The dilemma is whether to provide short-term solutions using technology and occupational therapy approaches such as slanted boards, software and wobble cushions to address the symptoms or to adopt a physical approach in the first instance, alongside these accommodations.

If the 2nd approach is adopted, Finn’s classroom performance is being supported whilst at the same time his physical systems are being retrained. However, can teachers justify this as a whole class activity if it is primarily intended for pupils like Finn? The short answer is that there is evidence to suggest that the programme can identify pupils whose performance is not necessarily a cause for concern, but whose physical performance with the movements is unexpectedly below expectations.

Current Small Research Project

Treehouse School in England is a small independent primary school that charges no fees and focuses on providing an education that focuses on ‘nature, nurture and nourishment ‘. I am currently working with the school to determine whether the daily implementation of the Move to Learn(Ten Gems for the Brain) programme can assist in terms of improving aspects of development, matched against performance.

All 15 children in the school have been assessed:

  • DEST-2 (Nicolson and Fawcett, 2004)
  • Move to Learn Baseline Tests
  • Visual-Perceptual Test
  • Draw A Person Test (adapted Goodenough Test)

The school is being supported in the delivery of the daily programme as I visit on at least a weekly basis. Parents have been invited to a presentation and will attend a practical session where they will have experience of the movements and opportunities to provide feedback on their perceptions.

At the end of each term (December 2016, March 2017, June 2017) pupils will be re-assessed and the results evaluated.

How Is It Managed?

Every morning the children meet at a hall directly next to the school. The routine is always the same:

Shoes and socks off in cloakroom with outer clothes and bags

Find your designated space in the hall

Follow the teacher’s movements: The 2 teachers in the school have attended a Move to Learn training day.

Typical Session: 15 minutes

Warm up with visual focus and breathing activities: standing, seated and on their backs (varies from day to day).

Rolling exercises with control and fluidity

Paired floor-based activities

Note: activities change as competence is observed

The Sequences

Over the year, the children will move through the exercises such as commando crawling, crawling, gliding etc. Each session is part of a structured programme, encouraging perception of movement quality, rhythmical control and a combination of inward and outward focus.

What would progress look like?

Progress will be evaluated against the following criteria:

  • DEST-2 scores: changes in performance
  • Scores on Move to Learn screening tests
  • Independent scoring of pre/post testing of drawing and visual-perceptual tests
  • Teacher and parent questionnaires relating to perceptions of performance academically, physically and general performance

Research Goals

I would like to raise the awareness of the potential significance of the physical dimensions to academic performance. Are we in danger, as educators, of focusing too exclusively on the cognitive systems without recognizing the subtle but powerful influence that our bodies exert on every aspect of functioning? The concept of embodied cognition points to the significance of the development of physical skills as a precursor to and enabler of enhanced academic attainment. Recent research points to this as a fascinating development in terms of implications for the learning process. The brain, according to the embodied cognition theory, is part of a broader system that critically involves perception and action rather than functioning as a means to output commands based on knowledge of the world. Higher-level learning is seen as grounded in sensory awareness, which needs to be trained as a foundation for higher-level learning.

This is a fascinating area of research that holds out much potential promise to the busy classroom teacher. Whilst we must continue to provide rigorous phonological programmes, I argue that current research urges us not to underestimate the importance of ‘lower level’ non-cognitive functioning.

Practical Implications

There are a number of movement programmes that have been promoted over the years, and it is difficult for schools to make informed choices. For children like Finn it is important that interventions are effective and a programme that is inclusive not only benefits him, but also provides the teacher with a tool to identify other pupils whose full potential might not be developed due to developmental immaturities. Move to Learn was developed to address those with learning differences; however its use as a more general screening and intervention programme is, I believe, a potentially powerful tool for the classroom teacher.

This type of intervention is not intended to replace more conventional approaches for learning differences; rather it acts as an additional tool in the teacher’s toolbox. Move to Learn provides one-day training courses for teachers, other professionals and parents. The course outlines the theory and history behind the approach and a manual that details the structure of the exercises.

O’Connor and Daly’s book provides many useful activities that would also be a good starting point for many teachers and they provide a clear rationale for their daily inclusion in classrooms.

References

Archer, C. Siraj, I. (2015) Encouraging physical development through movement-play.London, Sage

Gilfoyle, E.et al (1990) Children Adapt (2nd Edition) .New York, Slack Incorporated

Haywood, K. (2014) Life span motor development: 6th edition. Champaign, Illinois, USA. Human Kinetics

Move to Learn: content/research

Nicolson, R.I and Fawcett, A. (2004) Dyslexia early screening test – 2nd e3dition. DEST-2

O’Connor, A. and Daly, A. (2016) Understanding physical development in the early years: linking bodies and minds. London, Routledge.

INFORMATION

Mary Mountstephen MA (SEN) is the Move to Learn representative for the U.K. She is a former primary headteacher, SENCo and specialist dyslexia teacher. She has written several books and articles about learning differences.

She runs 1-day training courses for Move to Learn and details are available on her web site. Courses can be run for schools, cluster groups and pre-school settings.