CHILD

Following the movement programme, the biggest difference I noticed was in the improved co-ordination. The improvement in some areas, such as skipping, was remarkable. Boys especially, who were completely unable to skip in September, are now accomplished skippers, both on their own and in twos or threes.

An improvement in general hand/eye co-ordination has also been noticed. The ability to pass/catch a ball and catch while jumping from a box has improved.

For most of the children in the class, an improvement in concentration in the class has occurred, especially in the areas of sustained reading and longer pieces of written work.
Overall, a worthwhile exercise, with positive benefits for all the children taking part.

There appeared to be striking empirical evidence of initial difficulty with the demands of the programme in those children (particularly boys) who I would characterise as underachieving owing to behavioural problems which I (and most colleagues) agree are related to short attention span and peer group pressure. Members of the group outlined above certainly appear to have improved their motor skills beyond normal expectations.
The following is problematic because of the closeness to the pupils of the teacher and the extended time over which the programme was conducted:

• I have seen a general improvement in attention and behaviour within my class. The perennially (in its horticultural sense of "year upon year") troublesome group of boys now appears to be less subject to both formal and informal disciplinary action and appears to have more concentration and willingness to work. Sceptics would ascribe this to simple maturity but there have been no signs of this in previous years
   
• Progress in our maths group has been good this year. While the standard of teaching is undoubtedly excellent, the results in respect of the programme appear to be inconclusive. Those participating in the programme improved by an average of 1.219 NC sub levels compared to 1.183 for those who did not (a difference of 3.04 per cent). However, by blind luck, all of those whom we would characterise as underachieving owing to behavioural problems, which we would ascribe to short attention span and peer group pressure, were on the programme, and it could be argued that they could have done substantially less well. Of these I would say that (without exception) their ability to reason and problem solve has improved markedly
   
• Interestingly, those on the programme constitute 70 per cent of the maths group, whereas one would normally expect them to constitute 60 per cent in an even split between five classes. If it could be proved that these classes have a Set 5 membership which is at 60 per cent or above, then it would be fair to say that the control group is in fact more able and therefore the children on the programme performed above expectations. When one considers that Set 5 has the SEN children from 6WG5 and some members of my class, then this may well be the case

There can be many arguments for and against the above and it would be wise to talk any facts and figures through before using any of them, but my overall feeling is that there is a pronounced change in attitude and ability to reason in many pupils. The ultimate test will be more objective measurements such as digit span.

I think that the programme is worthy of a larger study and I would like to see such a study include quantitative measurements with an element of non-verbal reasoning included so that the bilateral (problem solving) benefits could be objectively assessed.

The movement programme is fun and helps me to concentrate. I wasn't good at times table but because of the crawling we kept on practising times tables and now I know my tables more than I used to. With the help of the movement programme now I can jump higher than before. When we started doing the programme, I realised how neat and beautiful my handwriting is.