1. education

MASARYK UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
Activities for Teaching English to Children
With Special Needs
Diploma Thesis
Brno 2009
Supervisor
Dr. Rita Chalmers Collins
Written by
Kamila Roszak, lic.
I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only sources listed
in the bibliography.
I agree with the diploma thesis being deposited in the Library at the Faculty of
Education at the Masaryk University and with its being made available for
academic purposes.
…......…...........................
Kamila Roszak
Acknowledgment:
I would like to thank Ms. Collins for her helpful guidance through this lengthy
process. Her advice has been invaluable.
I would also like to thank Mr. Vogel and Ms. Goswami, who were willing to
cooperate and advise me during the process of writing.
My thanks also go to my colleague teacher, Ms. Podstavková, who cooperated
with me during the whole research and whose friendship and guidance have led me
through my whole teaching practice.
Last but not least I would like to thank my students, who made the time of research
enjoyable and fruitful, and without whose cooperation this thesis would have never
been completed.
To Porta
Content:
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 8
THEORETICAL PART
1
Learning disabilities................................................................................................................................. 10
1.1
Specific learning disabilities and their causes ...............................................................................................10
1.2
Cognition & Learning Difficulties and Dyslexia..............................................................................................11
1.3
Behavioural, Emotional and Social Difficulties, Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) ...............................................................................................................................12
1.4
2
3
Learning disabilities and the teachers’ role ..................................................................................................13
Neuroscience – common knowledge........................................................................................................ 16
2.1
Neuroscience in education............................................................................................................................16
2.2
Brain laterality ...............................................................................................................................................17
2.3
Global and analytical division........................................................................................................................19
2.4
Neuroscience and dyslexia ............................................................................................................................19
2.5
Science vs. alternative medicine in education ..............................................................................................20
Methods and approaches used with learning difficulties .......................................................................... 22
3.1
Learning Style model .....................................................................................................................................22
3.1.1
Learning Style according to the founders ............................................................................................23
The Founders ................................................................................................................................................23
Learning style definition................................................................................................................................23
The idea and claims concerning Learning Style model .................................................................................23
Determination and identification of learning style preferences ...................................................................24
Types of sensory channels ............................................................................................................................25
Kinaesthetic learning style ............................................................................................................................26
Kinaesthetic learning style and SLD students................................................................................................27
3.1.2
Drawbacks of learning styles ...............................................................................................................27
Misunderstanding and oversimplification ....................................................................................................27
Matching .......................................................................................................................................................28
Learning style questionnaires .......................................................................................................................29
Brain and genes .............................................................................................................................................29
Validity and reliability floats..........................................................................................................................30
Questionable statements ..............................................................................................................................30
3.2
Brain Gym......................................................................................................................................................32
3.2.1
Brain Gym according to the founders..................................................................................................32
The basic claims ............................................................................................................................................33
The idea of Three Dimensions.......................................................................................................................33
Homolateral vs. Lateral .................................................................................................................................34
Examples of Brain Gym exercises (Dennison) ...............................................................................................36
3.2.2
Brain Gym practices, ideas and claims rejected by science .................................................................37
Science and Brain Gym ..................................................................................................................................37
Neuroscience and Brain Gym ........................................................................................................................38
3.3
Total Physical Response (Natural Approach) ................................................................................................41
3.3.1
TPR according to the founders ............................................................................................................41
The founder...................................................................................................................................................41
The idea and basic claims ..............................................................................................................................41
Stress, or an affective filter, in learning process and its reduction ...............................................................45
TPR teaching..................................................................................................................................................45
3.3.2
TPR and Krashen’s critics .....................................................................................................................46
Krashen’s Hypothesis ....................................................................................................................................47
PRACTICAL PART
4
5
Basic information .................................................................................................................................... 50
4.1
Overview .......................................................................................................................................................50
4.2
Hypothesis and general characteristics.........................................................................................................51
4.2.1
Hypothesis ...........................................................................................................................................51
4.2.2
The general characteristics of the school, students and the English teachers ....................................52
Active Research ....................................................................................................................................... 54
5.1
Research groups ............................................................................................................................................54
5.1.1
Characteristics of SLD students ...........................................................................................................55
John ...............................................................................................................................................................55
Daniel ............................................................................................................................................................56
Kate ...............................................................................................................................................................57
Amanda .........................................................................................................................................................58
Aaron .............................................................................................................................................................59
5.2
Activities with elements of movements........................................................................................................61
5.2.1
Activities internalizing vocabulary items .............................................................................................61
Procedure – the first lesson ..........................................................................................................................62
Procedure – the second lesson .....................................................................................................................63
Procedure – the third lesson .........................................................................................................................64
Conclusion .....................................................................................................................................................64
The test results ..............................................................................................................................................65
5.2.2
Activities internalizing grammar structures .........................................................................................67
Procedure – the first lesson...........................................................................................................................67
Procedure – the second lesson .....................................................................................................................68
Procedure – the third and fourth lesson .......................................................................................................69
Conclusion .....................................................................................................................................................69
The test results ..............................................................................................................................................70
5.2.3
Movement as scaffolding for comprehension .....................................................................................71
A silent film Procedure – the first lesson.......................................................................................................71
A silent film Procedure – the second lesson .................................................................................................73
A silent film Procedure the third lesson ........................................................................................................73
Conclusion .....................................................................................................................................................74
A song Procedure – the first lesson ...............................................................................................................74
A song Procedure – the second lesson ..........................................................................................................76
A song procedure – the third lesson .............................................................................................................76
A silent film and a song – the test results .....................................................................................................78
FINAL CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................ 81
BIBLIOGRAPHY: .................................................................................................................................. 84
ANNOTATION ....................................................................................................................................... 91
ANOTACE ............................................................................................................................................... 92
Introduction
One of the most important subjects in the pedagogical studies is methodology of teaching.
Teachers should be accustomed with various methods of teaching in order to deal with diversity
in the classroom. Diversity is a typical characteristic of a classroom, which is caused by
differences in students‟ levels, interests, gender, abilities, cultural and family background, all
kinds of difficulties and learning disabilities. The last mentioned draw a lot of attention.
Learning disabilities have been discussed by many authorities. In order to understand the issue it
is also necessary to have some basic knowledge of brain functioning. The reason is that learning
disabilities are said to be caused by some kind of brain anomalies, injuries, perception disorders,
which can result in difficulties in learning, processing information and remembering. As a result
students with learning disabilities may experience failures in a learning process. Consequently,
they often face side effects, like low marks, stress, tiredness due to extra hours spent on studying,
lack of self confidence and independence, social difficulties with classmates, teachers, parents,
misbehaviour, bad psychical condition, even depression. Though, it is not possible, and even not
right, to solve one‟s all problems and struggles, nevertheless, parents and teachers often tries to
find the way to help their children and students, support them, ease stress, encourage them to
make progress and lead them towards success.
There has been a lot of discussion around the topic of teaching students with learning disabilities.
A great number of pedagogical sources try to build their solutions on scientific, neurological
findings. Research tries to find and show the educators, teachers, parents and the children with
learning difficulties various ways to success in the teaching/learning process. Some of the studies
even claim they have found treatment for various brain disorders.
In my thesis I want to discuss how movement in English classes works with both regular
students and students with learning disabilities. The role of movement was discussed by a great
number of methodologies. I have chosen three approaches: Learning Style model, Total Physical
Response (TPR) and Brain Gym. All three find movement as a very important element in
teaching/learning process and support their ideas with scientific/neurological claims.
8
In order to show pros and cons of movement involvement in the teaching process I will introduce
in the theoretical part some basic facts connected with brain functioning and learning disabilities.
I will also discuss how Learning Style model, Brain Gym and TPR perceive the issue of disabled
students
learning
and
how
they
support
the
significance
of
movement
using
scientific/neurological facts. Finally, I will show the scientists‟ and neurologists‟ point of view in
this issue and draw conclusions out of the arguments and discussion. The theoretical part is to
show the importance of proper understanding of scientific/neurological studies concerning
learning, the part they play in education, especially education interested in students with learning
disabilities.
In the practical part I want to show, via active research, how, why and into what extent can
movement be involved in the teaching and whether it enhances progress of learners with learning
disabilities or not. I also want to show how the movement element influences regular students.
There will follow a comparison between the progress of students with and without movement
element in the lessons. I am to discover some of the positive and negative points the teaching
with movement have on students and their results: Yet my aim is to prove that thanks to the
element of movement a teacher is able to catch students‟ attention in a rather easy and attractive
way, build a positive attitude toward the subject and enhance their results.
9
Theoretical Part
1 Learning disabilities
The following chapter shows an overview of the subject matter by using a wide range of sources
available in pedagogical, psychological and neurological fields. It shortly defines learning
disabilities, explains their possible causes and points out the role of educators in a process of
learning.
1.1 Specific learning disabilities and their causes
The term “specific learning disabilities” (SLD) is used in American publications. In British
publications the equivalent is “specific learning difficulties” (Titlová 5). I would like to stick to
the American terminology. “Learning difficulties” are generally difficulties with reading,
spelling, writing or arithmetic. Some of the learning difficulties can be caused by learning
disabilities (“Learning Connection” 3). “Learning disabilities” are of bioneurological origin and
are mostly connected with some kind of disorders in perceiving, thinking, remembering,
learning, acquisition, short-term memory or organization (Bartoňová 6-17, 107). In short, the
term “disorders” is more often used when brain or genes are taken into account, while the term
“difficulties” is more general, often used with all kinds of learning difficulties students struggle
with, not necessary of brain or gene nature. Cognition and Learning Difficulties include dyslexia,
dyscalculia, dyspraxia, and dysgraphia, while Behavioural, Emotional and Social Difficulties
affect social interaction, concentration and temper (Marsh 14). Learning disabilities, though
different in severity, can have negative influence on children‟s learning process, their psycho,
emotions, general performance and life in a society (“Learning Connections” 3; Walcot-Gayda
par. 1; Hanušová, “Výuka cizích jazyků” 2; Bartoňová 6).
Learning disabilities are of neurological or genetic origin. Also brain injury, neurological
dysfunction, environmental, psychological and social causes can be responsible for learning
disabilities and their severity (Walcot-Gayda pars. 1-4; Bartoňová 9).
10
Moreover, disturbance in sensory integration can cause various learning, behaviour or
development difficulties. Sensory motor integration plays an important role in school readiness
as it is a brain organization process of interpreting all body and sense stimuli (“Learning
Connections” 11).
Finally, there are some studies and research, which claim that there is a strong relationship
between movement and the proper functioning of two brain hemispheres. It is said that the
proper development of brain requires movement, because physical activities enhance the two
hemispheres of the brain to work properly (“Learning Connections” 2; Novella, “Psychomotor
Patterning” pars. 1-5; Barrett, “Mental Help” par. 2). “Brain research suggests that one of the
most effective tools to maximize student learning is the incorporation of movement into
lessons.” (Cave et al. 3) a possible connection between movement and hemispheric
specialization (left/right), which should be completed around the age of seven, is also
considered, for, according to some studies, a not completed hemispheric specialization can result
in learning disabilities (“Learning Connections” 12-13; Novella “Psychomotor Patterning” 1-5;
Barrett, “Mental Help” par. 2; Orton cited in Bartoňová 20). A lot of these claims and theories
are very controversial, for there seems to be a certain dichotomy between methodologists who
using scientific arguments and scientists. Chapter 2 discusses the issue in detail so that it
becomes possible for a reader to decide to what extent they are right and therefore
significant/relevant for a teacher.
1.2 Cognition & Learning Difficulties and Dyslexia
The term dyslexia is derived from Latin, where dys means “hard” and lexis “word”. It affects
reading speed, accuracy, style (e.g. double reading) and, consequently, comprehension (Titlová
9-11; Bartoňová 10). Dyslexia is profoundly defined by Smythe, and Siegel.
Dyslexia is a difficulty in the acquisition of literacy skills that is neurological in origin. It is
evident when accurate and fluent word reading, spelling and writing develops very
incompletely or with great difficulty. It may be caused by a combination of phonological,
auditory, visual and working memory processing deficits. Word retrieval, speed, morphological
and syntactic processing difficulties may also be present. This does not negate the existence of
comorbid1 difficulties, including receptive and expressive oral language deficits,
1 comorbid - in medicine and in psychiatry; pertaining to a decease or other pathological process that occurs
simultaneously with another (Medical Dictionary).
11
developmental coordination difficulties and dyscalculia. The manifestation of dyslexia in any
individual will depend upon not only individual cognitive differences, but also the language
used. (Smythe, and Siegel. qtd. in Marsh 61)
Most of the claims are also supported in Schneider‟s definition (cited in Titlová 8). Schneider
mentions that it is characteristic for a dyslectic child to have difficulties in recognizing language
patterns presented orally and, as a result, difficulties in recognizing grammatical as well as
lexical patterns. He adds that due to coordination difficulties some children can also have poor
handwriting. All the problems subsequently result in limited vocabulary and lower level of
general knowledge of language (Hanušová, “Výuka cizích jazyků” 2).
Dyslexia is directly connected with brain functioning. Empirical studies on the neurological field
show that the left hemisphere, including the posterior superior temporal cortex, plays the main
part in the process of separating words into sound-based components. This skill is needed for
reading ability (Howard-Jones et al. 12).
Children with developmental dyslexia display reduced activation in this and other typical left
hemisphere sites for reading, and also show atypical engagement of right hemisphere sites. ...
As our understanding improves and techniques are further developed, it may be possible to
identify children at risk from dyslexia well before they begin school, allowing the earliest
possible intervention. (Howard-Jones et al. 12)
SLD may be often accompanied by Attention Deficit Disorders (ADD) or Attention Deficit
Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD), which are problems with concentration, behaviour, (Zelinková
cited in Titlová 20-24). ADD and ADHD should not be understood as one of the SLD
syndromes, but as the two diagnoses often co occurs it is useful to mention it here as well.
1.3
Behavioural, Emotional and Social Difficulties, Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Both ADD and ADHD children are marked with hyperactivity, inattentiveness, are characteristic
of short concentration span, short-term memory disorders, and higher impulsiveness (Marsh 21).
The children start to speak later, have language skill deficit including problems with
pronunciation, creating a sentence, stuttering, reading or/and problems with expressing thoughts
12
in a written work (use simple sentences and “safe writing”). Moreover, the children have poor
organization skills; they forget things, cannot find them, can get lost and then come late for
a class. When writing a test the child wants to answer as quickly as possible, does not read the
instructions properly, gets frustrated and often comes up with wrong or no answer at all. That is
why they need fixed rules, timetable, breaks, and well organized day (Serfontein; Cave et al. 3).
Short-term memory plays a profound role in the learning process. It keeps new information for
some time (an hour, a day, a week) so that the information is then ready to be used, restored and
expanded before being moved into long-term memory. Thus, a lot of repetition becomes
necessary scaffolding for ADD and ADHD children (Serfontein).
Neuroscientists are still not clear about the origin of ADHD, yet study results they have obtained
hitherto shows that the ADHD children suffer from neurological differences in certain brain
areas. Their treatment very often involves psychoactive drugs ant if it is so, teachers‟ and the
doctors‟ communication and cooperation (Howard-Jones et al. 14).
For a common teacher it is rather difficult to find enough evidence for one claim or another or to
distinguish between real research, sound evidence, personal opinion or pseudoscience. For
example, Vanderwolf says there is not enough scientific evidence to claim that child-cantered,
activity-based education and whole language method strengthen children‟s literacy skills. He is
one of those, who only want to encourage teachers to be more critical towards various tendencies
in education and to ask questions as well as look for evidence before taking things for granted
(Vanderwolf; Sharp et al. 95). That is why it is necessary for a teacher to look for all kinds of
sources available in order to stay as objective as possible.
1.4 Learning disabilities and the teachers’ role
Teachers are among those responsible for educating children, including children with learning
disabilities. Yet, it is never an easy task to provide them with help or to distinguish between their
needs. Crombie even questions the benefits of teaching foreign languages to students who has
not yet mastered basic knowledge in their own native language, especially those students with
learning disabilities. Still, however, she admits that getting acquainted with another language can
13
in fact result in helping the students understand the structure of their own language better
(Crombie par. 1).
Obviously, learning disabled student need a support. Teachers‟ encouragement and professional
help, appropriate curriculum, organization, syllabus, evaluation system, cooperation among
teachers, administrators and parents, positive school atmosphere-these are just some of the ways
to success (Ortiz; Bartoňová 58). All children can learn to an extent. The same counts for SLD
students, who can in fact be very successful in a learning process. As far as the foreign language
is concerned, the success may depend on the complexity of the language, grammar, spelling,
phonology, etc. On the other hand, the success does not depend entirely on school and teachers.
Marsh stresses that learning a foreign language is:
... a lifelong endeavour, and in formal basic education there is an imperative need to lay the
foundations – at least a key to the door, if not rooms in the house of language itself. The
prerequisite factor is “what works for this learner at this given time and place”. This then leads
us to address the time and place, and the social and professional variables which are influencing
decision-making according to principles of quality foreign language learning such as relevance,
transparency and reliability. (3)
Though all students are of different abilities and needs, Hanušová says that what is good for
a learning disabled student can perfectly work with other students as well (Hanušová, “Výuka
cizích jazyků” 3). Educators usually gain from a wide range of approaches, methods and
techniques, which are suggested to be successful in practice. As for language teaching,
communicative approach and learner-centred approach are regarded as most useful.
Communicative approaches such as Krashen‟s Natural Approach and Asher‟s TPR are reported
to work well with learning disabilities students (Bartoňová 106) for they are said to exhibit
greater results than grammar based approaches (Werstler 12). Students‟ autonomy is stressed
here, as well as their learning strategies and styles. For some a combination of communicative
and learner-cantered approaches is then considered to be the right choice (Hanušová, “Výuka
cizích jazyků” 6-7). Additionally, multi-sensory techniques accompanied with interventionist
strategies like kinetic and mnemonic techniques are quite often mentioned as being successful
with learning disabilities. I agree with an opinion that the point is to make language patterns
explicit, to over-learn, slow the pace of presentation and to “engage students by activating their
personal strengths and interests and by giving them individual space” (Marsh 21; Hanušová,
“Výuka cizích jazyků” 3-5; Bartoňová 104-107)
14
The following chapter introduces the theories based on various researches and studies and shows
how and in what extend they can be put into practice. It is vital for every teacher to find their
own way in the vast field of theories and methods, to decide what to accept and what to avoid so
that the their teaching would be build on the most sensible and practical foundations.
15
2 Neuroscience – common knowledge
Before I discuss three different ways of using movement in teaching, especially teaching
students with SLD I would like to start with discussing certain features the three methods have in
common. Namely, all three treat movement as a useful alternative in teaching/learning process,
all three use science, especially neurology, to prove their claims, e.g. connected with SLD issue,
and some of their ideas come from alternative medicine. Although, there is no need for a teacher
to be highly knowledgeable of scientific matters, it proves to be useful to get acquainted with
a few terms and basic facts. These terms and facts are often used and discussed in all kinds of
literature connected with teaching methods. The following chapter shows, how the facts and
terms can be wrongly interpreted, misused or simplified. As there is a vast range of literature
discussing the issue I tried to use only those, which seem to be relevant for teachers and/or
parents and have real scientific basis.
2.1 Neuroscience in education
Cognitive neuroscience studies the brain structures and how they support mental functions, how
the mind and the brain work together. Yet, it is a very new science and too little is still known
about such processes like learning, thinking, remembering within the human brain (Bruer 1).
Researchers working in the field stress that the knowledge about neuroscience applied in the
classroom is often of a mixed quality, based on assumptions, bold simplified claims and/or
wrong interpretations (Howard-Jones et al. 2). Unfortunately, Brain Gym, Learning Style and
TPR support some of their claims with neuromyths and over generalised statements, which
should be recognized as well as understood by teachers who want to apply these methods in their
teaching practice without some misleading, simplistic or even wrong claims.
The brain-based education like Brain Gym, Learning Styles or some of the TPR, mixes facts
with hasty assumptions and speculations which, although quoting scientific research and using
scientific terminology, are not rooted in real science or scientific research. (Bruer 2; HowardJones et al. 4; Goswami 2-7). Nonetheless, the methods sound very attractive and promise
16
an easy way to success. “Like many other educators, brain-based educators favour
a constructivist, active learning model. Students should be actively engaged in learning and in
guiding their own instruction ... teachers should create learning environments that are low in
threat and high in challenge, and students should be actively engaged and immersed in complex
experiences.” (Bruer 1)
These ideas sound rather familiar to a teacher and are not new to educators. They come from
psychological research, not from brain based research, “from our scientific understanding of the
mind, not from our scientific understanding of the brain” (Bruer 1). Let us now look closer at
some of the problematic assumptions.
2.2 Brain laterality
A very common problematic assumption, often referred to as a neuromyth, is brain laterality, or
in other words left brain vs. right brain. The idea behind the neuromyth is that two brain
hemispheres are responsible for different processes. It comes from a true fact that a human brain
is divided into two hemispheres, left and right connected by corpus callosum, a thick layer of
cells. Each hemisphere is then divided into four lobes: the frontal, parietal, occipital and
temporal. Each of them is responsible for different cognitive functions:
Occipital Lobe – visual processing,
Parietal Lobe – information processing, calculation,
Temporal Lobe – sound and speech processing, auditory skills, aspects of memory
Frontal Lobe – reasoning, thinking, conceptualization, planning, movement.
Illustration 1: Howard-Jones et al. 7
17
P. Broca‟s studies (1861), revealed some facts about language functions being mostly
concentrated in the left hemisphere. Other scientific works done in the area showed that there
really exists certain specialization of the brain hemispheres (Moris pars. 2-3). However, the
specialization concerns only some tasks, like speech production, not all aspects of language
(Marinova-Todd et al. 11). All these studies can be easily simplified and consequently
misinterpreted when taken too literally. It is vital to remember that every single task involves
a complex communication of neural networks in the whole brain. It is therefore not right to
assume that the cognitive functions are exclusively connected to the particular lobe (HowardJones et al. 7). The following examples will show the complexity of brain processes.
A simple spatial task of deciding whether one object is above or below the other, and then
deciding how far the object is from the other, can be wrongly assumed to be right hemisphere
tasks. Scientific research shows that the first task is of a categorical spatial reasoning (left
hemisphere) while the second of coordinate spatial reasoning (right hemisphere) (Bruer 3).
Another simple mathematical question: “What is smaller, five or seven? What is smaller, 5 or 7”
cannot be simply classified as a left hemisphere task (Bruer 3).
... we identify number words using a system in the brain‟s left hemisphere, but we identify
Arabic numerals using brain areas in both the right and left hemispheres ... Even for such
a simple number task as comparison, both hemispheres are involved. Thus it makes no
neuroscientific sense to claim that the left hemisphere recognizes numbers. (Bruer 4)
Likewise, visual imagery is thought to be a right hemisphere function. This cannot be true as
a complex operation of generating and using visual imagery involves more than one mental
operation. In a visual imagery one must “transfer long-term visual memories into a temporary
visual memory store; ... zoom in and identify details of the image; ... add a new element to
previously generated image; ... rotate..., draw the image, [and finally] scan the visual image with
[once] mind‟s eye” (Bruer 3). Science shows that this complex task is not processed by the right
hemisphere only (Bruer 3-4).
And finally, when analysing speech and reading skills a research can prove that they are not
simply left hemisphere tasks. These skills involve among the others recognizing speech sounds,
decoding written words, finding the meanings of words or getting the gist of a text (Bruer 4).
There is no doubt that the whole brain is involved in the task.
18
2.3 Global and analytical division
Another quite common assumption is that left hemisphere processes parts, is more logical,
analytical, problem solving, rational and plays the main part in speaking, reading, writing or
arithmetic. Females are told to be more left hemisphere dominant. The right hemisphere
processes wholes, is intuitive, creative, global and visual, plays the main part in drawing,
painting, algebra or geometry. Males are told to be more right hemisphere dominant (Bricheno,
and Younger 2; Coffield et al. 14, 25, 85).
Those students whose dominance is recognized to be right-brain oriented are neglected or
disadvantaged (Coffield et al. 26-7). Based on these assumptions teacher are advised to make
sure their teaching meets the need of their students and engages both left and right brain
preferences (Goswami 2-7). After the above discussion it should already be rejected, especially
that both research and science are far from such a simplistic, hypothetical picture of our brain
and there has been no independent research to support the claims (Bruer 3; Goswami 2-7; Snook
2; Bricheno, and Younger 7; McCrone; Coffield et al. 26, 88).
2.4 Neuroscience and dyslexia
As for children with dyslexia, the scientific brain imaging studies found out that the children
show some atypical activation in the right cortex and, at the same time, less activation in the left
hemisphere. The studies also show that the situation may come to normal after intensified
teaching in phonological skills and letter-sound conversion. The studies, however, are yet not
deep enough to come up with any vital instructions for a teacher (Goswami 2-7)
There is an evident need for educators and neuroscientists to communicate and cooperate.
Teachers and parents should be interested in first-hand information given by scientists
themselves if they want to involve any scientific reasons in their practices. Such issues like
literacy, numeracy, IQ, learning, social cognition and ADHD have already been discussed.
Teachers are often perplexed by the new facts for they show how wrong brain-based programs
could be. Moreover, scientists are not especially willing to provide the educators with quick
19
solutions for teaching programs, as such solutions may seem to work well, yet often due to short
term placebo effects (Goswami 2-7).
2.5 Science vs. alternative medicine in education
Alternative medicine ideas and philosophy often appear in education, including Brain Gym. In
order to understand the philosophy behind the methods the following alternative medicine terms
need to be explained. The term also appears in the following chapters.
Chiropractics
The word is taken from Greek and means “done by hands”. It is based on the principle of selfhealing capability of a human body, provided that skeletal and nervous systems are functioning
properly. It can be achieved by manipulation of the vertebrae with hand or an adjusting tool
(Medical Dictionary). Dennison worked with Richard Tyler, a chiropractor and a proponent of
alternative chiropractic (Carroll, “Brain Gym” par. 3). Chiropractics have been criticized by
many scientific authorities (Jarvis; Ramey; Novella, “Chiropractic”).
Applied Kinesiology (AK)
AK is a controversial method of medical diagnosis. It purportedly gives feedback on the
functional status of the body. Proponents say that when properly applied, the outcome of an AK
test, such as a muscle strength test, will provide for a low risk diagnostic method to help
determine the efficacy of therapy for patients (Medical Dictionary). AK is rejected by scientists,
as it has never been scientifically proved to work (Barrett, “Applied Kinesiology”; Carroll,
“Brain Gym” par. 3).
Neurolinguistic programming (NLP)
Neuro (brain) -linguistic (language) programming is a procedure aimed at more effective
communication by modifying brain, language and body. It is suppose to treat phobias, allergies
and other such problems. There is no scientific evidence that NLP treats the problems (Barrett,
“Mental Help” par. 7).
20
Doman-Dellacato Treatment
It was developed in 1950s and is also called patterning. The treatment is mainly based on
repeated passive movements of the child‟s limbs, which are to increase blood flow to the brain
and influence the development and structure of the brain. The treatment is recommended to
retarded children, children with learning problems or behaviour disorders. However brain
development, which is a matter of genes, is a complex cell growth, migration, organization or
even cell death. There is no scientific proof that any abnormalities in this process can be
influenced by any passive or active body movements (Committee on Children; Carroll, “Brain
Gym” par. 20; Barrett, “Mental Help” par. 2; Novella “Psychomotor Patterning” 1-2).
Behavioural optometry
Also known as “functional optometry” is a practice using a holistic approach in the treatment of
vision and the problems of vision information. The practice of behavioural optometry uses
various vision therapy methods and is an example of complementary alternative medicine
(Medical Dictionary).
Jin shin jitsu
Jin shin jitsu (jin shin jitsōō), is a style of bodywork originating in Japan and is one of the
leading ideas of Brain Gym. Jin shin jitsu is an energetic movement, gentle pressure on multiple
acupressure points. This is considered an inner bodywork modality because the techniques
release emotional and spiritual, as well as physical, energies.
21
3 Methods and approaches used with learning difficulties
This section concentrates on three methods/approaches: Brain Gym, Learning Style and TPR,
their authors, claims, ideas and examples of activities. The aim is to give an overview of each
method/approach in order to show how science, especially neuroscience, is used in each method
as one of the main supports for their claims.
3.1 Learning Style model
“Students possess different kinds of minds and therefore learn, remember, perform, and
understand in different ways.” (qtd. in Ballone, and Czerniak 5)
The above citation mirrors in a simple way the idea of Learning Style model. When studying
differences between individual people, psychologists found and described certain similarities in
people‟s personalities (Ballone, and Czerniak 3). Learning Style model is gives one of the
possible divisions of the personality patterns and they have been discussed by many authorities.
As the following chapter will show the model seems to be very clear and logical. The claims are
supported by scientific studies, research and experience. For a regular teacher the model may
sound very attractive, because it suggests relatively easy way out of numerous obstacles in the
education process, including learning disabilities. However, I would like to go further and unfold
some drawbacks of Learning Style model and claims. The reason is that after a few years of
teaching I have already discovered that there are no quick, simple solutions for everyone. It is,
moreover, interesting that science, especially neuroscience, in which some of the Learning Style
model claims are to be rooted, often criticizes the model. The following chapter draws a picture
of Learning Style model, introduces its founders, gives definitions, and explains the model‟s
general idea and application in teaching/learning process of both regular students and SLD
students. Finally, it discusses in detail some drawbacks of the model in order to help the reader
see it from different perspectives and take one‟s own standpoint.
22
3.1.1 Learning Style according to the founders
The Founders
Professors Rita and Kenneth Dunn have played one of the most important parts in learning styles
studies and research since 1960s. Rita Dunn was the director of the Centre for the Study of
Learning Styles, professor at St John‟s University, New York. She was experienced with
teaching young students and students with difficulties and disabilities. Kenneth Dunn chairs in
the department of educational and community programs, Queens College, City University of
New York. Their studies and research program were especially aimed at students with poor
achievements, learning difficulties and disabilities. The program looked for an improvement of
their learning process by concentrating on learning style preferences. Their model of learning
styles is supported by the US government and respected in many countries all over the world
(Coffield et al. 20). The Centre for the Study of Learning Styles at St John‟s University, New
York publishes empirical studies, provides teachers with various courses and resource materials,
and writes articles for professional journals and magazines2 (Coffield et al. 20).
Learning style definition
Style is defined by various sources as a static way of thinking, perceiving, as a habitual approach
to organizing and representing information (Riding, and Rayner cited in Coffield et al. 40).
These are certain conceptual, behavioural, cognitive, and affective patterns that are displayed
over time and task (Guild cited in Ballone, and Czerniak 3).
Other definitions describe learning style as a way of concentrating, processing, internalizing and
retaining new, difficult academic information (Dunn, and Dunn cited in Rochford, and
Mangino par. 3). Learning style is often believed to be rather fixed, congenital due to genetics,
sensory or perceptual channels, or due to specific functions of the right or left halves of the brain
(Juříčková 32; Coffield et al. 12, 21).
The idea and claims concerning Learning Style model
2
it has its own webside: www.learningstyles.net – after loading to the webside, it is possible to enter
a document library with reference and a bibliography and a long list of books, professional journal, magazine
articles and doctoral as well as master's dissertations.
23
The Learning Style Model is built on an idea that the same way people differ from each other,
their learning preferences also do. These preferences can, as the model suggests, be measured in
a valid and reliable way and the model offers a diagnostic way of evaluating students, which is
said to be more reliable than other ways of evaluating (e.g. informal observation). The model
then shows teachers how to match instructions and environment to the high preferences of their
students, especially when there is a new difficult material to be learned. Learners and their
teachers become more aware of a learning process and of their own strengths as well as
weaknesses in the process. This knowledge should help to improve the quality of learning and to
solve all kinds of difficulties without attributing them to one‟s own inadequacies (Bricheno, and
Younger 21-22; Coffield et al. 119). “Learning style is a „biologically and developmentally
imposed set of characteristics that make the same teaching method wonderful for some and
terrible for others‟.” (Dunn, and Griggs qtd. in Oxford, “Language Learning” 2)
According to the model, the more evident the preferences are, the more important it is to provide
students with suitable instructions to improve their attitude, result and academic achievement
(Dunn, and Bruno, Foriska, Okebukola cited in Ballone, and Czerniak 7; Coffield et al. 30). This
positive approach that everyone can derive from a learning process if their preferences are taken
into account is also true about those students, who did not perform very well. It is not advisable,
though, to divide students into those who perform well and those who do not, but rather to
understand the way they learn and adjust teaching to the learners‟ preferences (Kroonenberg 7579; Coffield et al. 32-33).
Determination and identification of learning style preferences
According to Dunn the factors that affect people‟s learning styles are of physical, psychological,
emotional, social and environmental nature (cited in Kinsella 171). Gregoric adds, supported by
Dunns and their research, that certain behaviour patterns help to identify different ways, styles
people operate and that everybody has certain innate predispositions, from which these styles
emerge (Ballone, and Czerniak 3-4; Coffield et al. 20-27). Factors such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, academic achievement, race, religion, culture and nationality have an important
impact on learning preferences too (EdComs 12). That is why there cannot be a simple Learning
Style model.
24
Also brain hemispheres play a significant part in the learning style topic and preferences
identification. The model believes are grounded in studies, which shows how the brain
hemispheres functions differ (Kinsella 177):
Left hemisphere:
analytical, processing mathematics and musical notation,
logical, syntactical, rational and objective
Right hemisphere/gestalt:
seeks for relations, spacial and visual thinking, linguistic
ambiguity, metaphor, irony, emotions, intuition
These two types, rights /globals/ deductive and lefts/analytics/inductive, are characterized as
having different ways of perceiving as well as different needs when learning (Oxford, “Gender
Differences” 40).
The teachers, who should respect students‟ differences in learning, are encouraged to make some
useful changes in their approach, methods, resources or environment for there is an idea that the
students who prefer right-brain modes are neglected at school (Kinsella 179).
Teachers are advised to identify students‟ preferences by giving them questionnaires on
computer, tape or paper-based questionnaire, after which they receive an assessment and
a feedback from a processing centre at the University of Kansas or online. The feedback informs
the teacher and the learner about his/her preferences and non preferences, which comprise their
learning style. The feedback also informs about the know-how for the future work with the
particular student (support strong preferences and avoid very low preferences). The elements of
the model are said to be mainly based on brain development, physiological studies of
performance and the vast field of modality preferences (Coffield et al. 21-23).
Dunns‟ model concentrates on students‟ preferences, not weaknesses, which are perceived as
very positive. Although learning style can change in the adolescence and adulthood, the teacher
should know and match their instruction, environmental and social factors to the individual
preferences, especially when it comes to SLD students (Juříčková 32). Low achievement and
lack of motivation may, according to the model, be a result of not taking the students‟
preferences into account (Ballone, and Czerniak 3; Coffield et al. 21).
Types of sensory channels
25
Guild and Garger stressed that when receiving or giving messages children use their modality
strength or sensory channels – visual, auditory and/or kinaesthetic (cited in Ballone, and
Czerniak 4; Kinsella 173). The teachers are required to appeal to more than one sensory channel.
The importance of the visual, auditory, tactile and kinaesthetic channels is also pointed out in
Orton and Gilingham Multisensory structured method, which teaches learners with visual,
auditory and kinaesthetic-tactile preferences simultaneously.
In 1980s MacMurren, Pizzo and Cafferty reported, that according to their studies matching
students with their learning styles preferences improved their achievements. “Advice is related
directly to different types of learner; for example, the idea that underachievers, „at risk‟ and
dropout students are almost exclusively tactual/kinaesthetic learners.” (Dunn qtd. in Coffield
et al. 31) Despise the facts, those who are devoted to learning style topic worn teachers against
labelling students with one or two learning styles. Rather it is recommended to develop other
learning styles too. This fact is worth remembering (Kroonenberg 80; Peck 133).
Kinaesthetic learning style
The term kinaesthetic/kinaesthetic means perceiving through an awareness of body movements.
It is often interrelated with the terms hands-on, haptic or tactile style perceiving through the
sense of touch, style. The kinaesthetic learning style stresses the need for touch, handling
objects, movement or manipulation (Oxford, “Gender Differences” 35). It is discussed by Dunn,
and Dunn, Gardner‟s Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Neuro-Linguistic Programming or by
VAK (Visual–Auditory–Kinaesthetic) (Sharp et al. 90).
Winebrenner explains how important it is for tactile-kinaesthetic students to move while
learning. She argues that sometimes teachers misjudge tactile-kinaesthetic students for
hyperactive ones. In order to avoid their being stressed and unfocused the teacher should allowed
these students to follow their learning style (Winebrenner cited in Titlová, 37).
When talking about kinaesthetic learning style Rita Dunn referred in her studies to the right/left
hemisphere dominances (these are to be e.g. children with developmental dyslexia; see Chapter
1), namely by claiming that the students with the right hemispheric dominance enjoy moving and
26
touching things, thus exhibit the tactile-kinaesthetic learning style (Dunn cited in Coffield et al.
26).
Kinaesthetic learning style and SLD students
With SLD students it is advised to use the dominant sensory motor channel first, before
developing the less dominant (Hanušová, “Developing Communicative Competence” par. 2).
Dyslexic students sensory learning channels are claimed to be mostly of tactile-kinaesthetic
preferences (touch or muscle memory), which involves whole body movements, gestures,
touching, mimics but also vocal apparatus. Teaching supported by kinaesthetic-tactile activities
catch dyslectic and ADD students‟ attention, interest and make the information more likely to be
remembered. Movement supports remembering. Moreover, whole range of such activities work
well with younger students when over learning new material (Schneider, and Crombie 48-50;
Hanušová, “Developing Communicative Competence” par. 3; Bartoňová 103-107). TPR and
drama techniques are one of those methods often used with kinaesthetic learners (Juříčková 32).
Yet, in order not to neglect the warning of labelling problem, Zelinková emphasizes the need for
activities and tasks, which would involve all visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learning styles, e.g.
tasks with the elements of dramatization, manipulation (87-90).
3.1.2 Drawbacks of learning styles
Misunderstanding and oversimplification
As learning styles have been studied by many authorities, on various levels of reliability and
validity, the language of learning styles, various divisions, overlapping categories and hasty
claims have made a lot of confusion. As teachers, engaged in the learning process, do not have
the possibility to check and study the vast research done in the field they often accept them
willingly. They may forget that “learning is so complex that it is unlikely to be captured by any
set of learning style dichotomies” (Coffield et al. 121).
Teachers often relate Learning Style model with VAK model (visual, auditory, kinaesthetic).
They are often not acquainted with the origins of the VAK idea or VAK questionnaire they use,
27
and so it happens that those ideas or questionnaires are based on second-hand information not
necessary rooted in the learning styles theories discussed on the high academic level (Sharp et al.
89). Even more alarming is the fact that VAK is often associated with accelerated learning (or
brain-based learning, Brain Gym).
Surprisingly, learning styles and some of the simplistic idea of labelling and matching students
as visual, audio or kinaesthetic is often accepted uncritically by school authorities (Coffield et al.
33; Hastings par. 7). It is possible to speak here about a so called Forer effect, when people
accept vague and general personality descriptions as uniquely applicable to themselves without
realizing that the same description could be applied to just about anyone(Carroll, “Forer Effect”).
The matter should also be striking due to an interesting fact discussed by Snook:
There is a strong drive from administrators and governments to deflect concern about
educational failure from social causes to schools. It is established beyond any doubt that
educational success and failure is due largely to social background. Children come to school
privileged or deprived and this has a lasting effect on their progress. So called “good” schools
are attended by privileged: “bad” schools are attended by the deprived. In order to avoid the
implications of this it is suggested teachers can fix it all up. Social class, ethnicity, and home
background are pushed aside and the focus is on the learner as a depoliticized, non social entity.
(7)
Matching
The Learning Style model often supports the idea of matching, especially when a new or difficult
material is to be taught. However, it is hardly to be true about all topics, subject or levels.
Matching instructions to content-appropriate forms regardless the individual preferences can be
in fact more beneficial (Snook 2; Howard-Jones et al. 16; Constantiniduo, and Baker cited in
Coffield et al. 12-13). Moreover, the model does not hold any further discussion about
developing ones preferences afterwards. The process of developing teachers‟ and students‟
subject knowledge often gives its way to a time consuming process of matching learning and
teaching styles (Coffield et al. 33).
As for the various types of learning difficulties there is an evidence of strengths and weaknesses
in visual, auditory or kinaesthetic processing. Yet their existence does not automatically mean
that matching instruction to one‟s sensory or perceptual strengths is more beneficial. “Students
will inevitably be called upon to deal with problems and challenges that require the use of their
28
less preferred modes, and so should regularly be given practice in the use of those modes (Hunt
1971, Friedman, and Alley 1984, Cox 1988).” (qtd. in Felder, and Henriques 21-31)
Learning style questionnaires
The matching problem is also connected with the problem of learning style questionnaires.
Instruments or questionnaires like Learning Style Inventory of Dunn et al. are a self-report on
which basis a teacher is to decide on visual, auditory or kinaesthetic learning style. Yet, a child
self-assessed responses to such statements like: “When I read instructions, I remember them
better” [V], “I learn better in class when the teacher gives a lecture” [A], or “I prefer to learn by
doing something in class” [K] (Reid 203) do not give us any profound diagnostic facts about
a child (Sharp et al. 91; Snook 5; Hastings par. 5). It is disputable whether self-report measures
are really objective. Learners have a rather limited ability to objectively self-assess their
behaviour and attitudes in an educational process (Coffield et al. 33).
Any student cannot be taken as a tabula raza, a white paper, cannot be labelled and diagnosed by
any school authority. There is no such a possibility to clean the student‟s mind out of their life
experiences, family and social background, their character. Though I agree that the teacher can
do a lot for his/her pupils, I have to disagree with the idea that the model of learning style is the
only and the best way to do it, especially when a closer look is taken at the theoretical basis of
the model.
Brain and genes ... it [is] probably unwise to make too much of a causal link between biology and
learning styles as it can lead to polarized ideas that we are either a left-brained or right-brained
thinker. In reality we show a mix of different styles influenced as much by past experience as
by biology. The theory gives us just one dimension to describe the vast range of difference in
peoples‟ thinking. (Moris par. 9)
For a detached observer understanding a great deal of neuroscience resembles trying to
understand a computer by mapping the location of its components‟ (Coffield et al. 13). For that
reason a teacher should be alarmed by hasty claims and quick conclusions. Over-simplification
of the research may lead to a conclusion that “left hemisphere is analytic and the right holistic is
wrong./yet/ Brain functions are bilateral, i.e. they involve both hemispheres. Students‟ left and
right hemispheres do not operate separately” (Geake par. 2). So far neuroscience has proved that
29
both hemispheres are involved even in a simple task, not to mention a complex one, like
communication or learning. The studies made by Gevins, Smith, Wittling or Burnand do show
some functional differences between the two hemispheres. Nonetheless, their studies do not call
for any prompt assumptions or conclusions concerning hemisphere-based individual differences,
interaction of those functions or their integration (Coffield et al. 13-14, 26).
Though there really is strong evidence that perceptual speed, personality and cognitive abilities
(verbal and spatial) are influenced by genes, yet there have not been any empirical studies, which
would have proved biological basis for learning styles. Cognitive characteristics and personal
qualities are not that fixed by genes so as if they could not be modified (Coffield et al. 12).
There is also not enough evidence to prove the relationship between learning styles and the brain
functions (Coffield et al. 26).
Validity and reliability floats
Apart from above mentioned critics there are also discussions about learning style researches and
their floes in validity and reliability (Coffield et al. 28-30; Bricheno, and Younger 30). For
example, Dunns‟ claims for validity and reliability are not supported by independent evaluation.
This unfavourable fact was, probably unwillingly, confirmed by Rita Dunn herself as she boldly
expressed an idea that the evaluators should be certified and trained in the model (Coffield et al.
28). However, in order of a research to be reliable and valid it is quite obvious that external,
independent researcher evaluations are needed. Only after that it becomes clear there is no
interest in promoting a given method (Coffield et al. 33). For example, in Bricheno, and Younger
studies show that:
A large proportion of boys and girls prefer kinaesthetic activity, and that this increased over the
time of the project, particularly for girls. We must ask whether the use of kinaesthetic activities
facilitate learning or are they simply enjoyable experiences. Do these activities have the same
effect on girls and boys? If ... girls use the kinaesthetic activities to help with their work but
boys use them to take a break from work, then increased kinaesthetic activity might help to
raise achievement for girls, but not for boys. (21)
Questionable statements
30
A suggestion that “it is not the content that determines whether students master the curriculum;
rather, it is how that content is taught” (Dunn qtd. in Coffield et al. 34) is certainly too frank and
over generalised. The way of teaching is only one factor out of many which has an influence on
the teaching/learning process. Questionable are also statements like:
It is immoral and it should be illegal for certified teachers to negatively classify children who
learn differently, instead of teaching them the way they learn.... [It is] inconceivable… that
communities, parents and the judiciary would permit schools to function conventionally and
continue to damage global, tactual, kinaesthetic children who need Mobility (sic) and informal
classroom environments to function effectively. (Dunn qtd. in Coffield et al. 34)
Objectivity and credibility of Learning Style model becomes seriously violated by such Though
the model itself is used, studied, discussed and taught at universities, its claims, validity and
reliability should probably be viewed and treated more sensibly. A success in learning is a result
of many factors and I, as a teacher, would allow myself to claim that learning style issue is not
the most vital one in teaching/learning process. A student cannot be taken as a tabula raza,
a white paper, cannot be labelled and diagnosed by any school authority. There is no such
a possibility to clean the student‟s mind out of their life experiences, family and social
background, their character. Though I agree that the teacher can do a lot to for his/her pupils, I
have to disagree with the idea that the model of learning style is the only and the best way to do
that.
31
3.2 Brain Gym
Brain Gym is a quite well known method of teaching, especially with younger students. The
basic idea is that brain and body movement is interrelated and that the brain will function well if
it is provided with certain movement patters. Brain Gym founders also claim that their method is
especially aimed at SLD students and people with all range of difficulties. Although teachers
report that Brain Gym really helps their students, scientists suggest it is mainly due to the fact
that any physical exercise increase blood flow to all parts of human body. This is why exercising
before classes were on regular bases in the past. Yet, science and neuroscience have been
interested in Brain Gym claims and they have stated many times and quite safely that it is not
true that particular physical exercises stimulate certain parts of human brain (Geake par. 4). In
this section I would like to introduce the main ideas of Brain Gym, explain the problematic
aspects of the method and finally draw some practical conclusions.
3.2.1 Brain Gym according to the founders
In 1970‟s Paul Dennison, an educator, together and his wife, Gail E. Dennison, a movement
specialist, created a new way of teaching, called Brain Gym. Brain Gym is a learning program
that involves exercises and body movements which are to enhance both interpersonal and brain
development so as to help both children and adults in their learning process. The activities are
especially aimed at the children with learning difficulties. Dennisons‟ work is also called
Educational Kinesiology. In their work Dennisons refer to the research done in the behavioural
optometry and sensory-motor training (Dennison). P. Dennison draws from his own experience,
from his work at the University of South California and the Valley Remedial Group, Learning
Centres of South California, where he worked with children and adults struggling with their
learning difficulties. He uses his knowledge of marathon training, his studies of vision training,
Applied Kinesiology and Jin Shin Jitsu. He also follows the researches done in education, brain
function and psychology focused on movement, perception and their influence on learning
process (“Brain Gym” 3).
Till now many other specialists like educational theorists, developmental (behavioural)
optometrists and occupational therapists have been involved in the program. In 1987 in Venture,
California, the Educational Kinesiology Foundation, a non-profit organization and the owner of
32
the Brain Gym International, was established and more research concerning both adults and
children has been done by the foundation.
Dennisons‟ studies have already been known and adopted in many countries (Czech Republic
being one of them) and their work has been translated into other languages, including Slovak,
Polish and Czech.
The basic claims
The movements suggested by Brain Gym are to imitate movements, characteristic for one to
three years old children. Dennison studied Kinesiology, which, according to Brain Development
Centres, is “a science of body movement and the relationship of muscles and posture to brain
function” (Hocking). Dennison follows the idea, that developmental body movements performed
by the young children are necessary for brain development. The movements enhance brain
integration and balance between a human body and brain. The movements are to support
concentration, memory, learning skills, such as writing, reading, listening and speaking, support
physical performance and help people to gain psychical comfort (Dennison 1). The Brain Gym is
supposed to have a positive impact on people with ADD/ADHD, learning disabilities or people
who have problems with drugs or alcohol (Maguire 10).
The idea of Three Dimensions
The exercises are divided into three types: stimulating, releasing and relaxing, and they stimulate
three different dimensions: Laterality Dimension, Focus Dimension and Centering Dimension
(Dennison 1). According to Brian Gym and Kinesiology, each of the exercises has different
effect on a human brain and support different kinds of learning processes.
The origin of the idea that brain and body are three dimensional can be found in alternative
medicine. According to it the three dimensions have to be synchronized so that a man becomes
integrated, uses fully his/her potential thanks to body-brain cooperation (Chi Machine 1).
33
The dimensions contain:
Laterality dimension – left/right body and brain hemisphere;
Centering dimension – top and bottom and brain
Back/front dimension (in Brain Gym “focusing”) – back body and brain to front body and
frontal lobes.
Each of these three dimensions has some function in a person‟s life, and, as a result, also in the
learning process. According to the same studies right and left hemispheres of a human brain are
two opposite energies of the brain and body. In order to connect the right and left hemisphere it
is necessary to cross the midline (Maguire 9). The same is claimed by Dennison:
Within laterality, or sidedness, exists the potential for bilateral integration, the ability to cross
the central midline of the body and to work in the midfield. When the skill is mastered, one can
process a linear, symbolic, written code, left to right or right to left, and ability fundamental to
academic success. The inability to cross the midline results in such identifications as „learning
disabled‟ or „dyslexic‟. (2)
Homolateral vs. Lateral
The human brain comprises of two hemispheres connected by corpus callosum: “the central area
of the brain between and interconnecting the two cerebral hemispheres; an extensive bundle of
axon pathways that carry information between the two hemispheres” (Allen).
Ilustration 1:Allen
34
Ilustration 2:Allen
People‟s left body parts are controlled by right brain hemisphere and right body parts by the right
hemisphere (Moris par. 2). It is claimed, that the two hemispheres can either cooperate or one of
the hemisphere can “switch off” when it is not in the control of a certain action (Dennison, and
Dennison, Zapni si Mozog 51). “Improper crossing and dominance patterns cause innumerable
problems. Children may tend to be slow learners, have reading disabilities, be hyperkinetic,
clumsy, or have major health problems. This limited, „one-sided‟ thinking is referred to as
„homolateral dominance‟.” (Brain Gym)
The right hemisphere is said to be mostly receptive, passive, and responsible for perceiving the
world as a whole, orientating in space and the left hemisphere to be expressive, responsible for
recognizing details, understanding language and speaking (Allen). “People who suffer from
homolateral dominance have access to only one side of the brain at once, and must „switch-off‟
one side each time they want to use the other side.” (Brain Gym) Homolateral (one-side) person
can experience coordination difficulties, confusion and learning disabilities when using either
receptive or expressive hemisphere (Chi Machine 3). Brain Gym agrees with it and adds that this
homolateral state has a negative effect on cerebrospinal fluid, which “flows through and protects
the four ventricles of the brain” (Medical Dictionary). Homolateral person‟s movement is more
blocked controlled and “without breathing”, which makes it difficult for the integration process
to progress and learning to take place (Brain Gym). Brain Gym provides an explanation of this
state, which is luck of initial crawling stage when a child starts to walk and skip the initial
crawling stage; parents insisting on holding things in a right hand with a left-handed child and
the confusion of the child that follows; disturbance of crossing in adulthood or an injury or
illness, when the dominant part of brain cannot work well (Brain Gym). A desired state for
a homolateral person then is to reach the lateral integrated state.
In lateral integrated state both hemispheres are used simultaneously. As a result the learning
disability begins to cease (Maguire 10). “No performance, be it reading comprehension, painting,
dancing, or other can belong to the performer until this level of integration is achieved.” (Chi
Machine 4)
Both Brain Gym and Chi movements claim to gain the desired state of an integrated human body
via integrating energy centres in the body and organs (Dennison 2; Chi Machine 5). Pytel adds:
“In order to accept Brain Gym individuals need to be open to the theory that our body contains
energy that flows within a meridinan system.” (par. 2)
35
Examples of Brain Gym exercises (Dennison)
The Midline Movement
According to the Dennisons our left brain hemisphere is active when the right side of body is
active and vice versa. The aim of Midline Movements is to activate both sides of brain. The
movements help to expand upper-lower body coordination, large-motor as well as fine-motor
skill and they integrate binocular vision and hearing, left and right sides of both brain and body
(Dennison 3, 6). The movements are adopted from behavioural optometry, sport, and dance or
were introduced by Dennison himself. Some of The Middle Movements are Cross Crawl, Lazy
8s, Alphabet 8s, The Elephant, The Rocker, Double Doodle or Belly Breathing. In the following
section some of them are described.
Cross Crawl
The movement origins from Doman and Dalacota‟s (1960s) method known as pattering, a new
idea of mental retardation, brain injury and learning disabilities treatment (Novella
“Psychomotor Patterning” 1). The movement involves exercises similar to walking in place
when one hand and the opposite leg are involved. Cross Crawl activates both hemispheres at the
same time and is therefore suggested as a warm-up for any activities that requires lateral midline.
Lazy 8s and Alphabet 8s
The idea of infinity symbol Lazy 8s has already been mentioned in Homolateral vs. Lateral part,
pg 5. The student can draw the symbol in the air starting on the midline and continues counter
clockwise up, over and around. It can be done with eyes closed, with right hand first, then left
and finally with both hands, the teacher can tell the instructions while the student is drawing the
Lazy 8 or the student can make a humming sound which should relax him. The movement is to
be helpful to children with incapability of crossing the visual midline due to neurological
unreadiness. The Lazy 8s should eliminate reading and writing difficulties as it increase
binocular and peripheral vision.
Alphabet 8s is another variation of lazy 8s which should also help students with dyslexia and
dysgraphia. The letters from a through t from Arabic system written in the lower case are divided
into two halves of Lazy 8 depending on the way they are written. Letters like a, c or s are written
in the left half of Lazy 8, left visual field; when writing them we start on the midline or in the
36
curve and move up to the left. Letters like b, h or t are written in the right half of Lazy 8 right
visual field, when writing them we start on the midline or move down and continue to the right.
“Formation of these letters enables the writer to cross the visual midline without confusion.”
(Dennison 7)
Double Doodle
Double Doodle is an activity during which a child draws pictures with both hands at a time. It
relax arms and eyes, improves vision and, according to Dennison, academic performance also
improves.
3.2.2 Brain Gym practices, ideas and claims rejected by science
As I have already mentioned, scientists and neurologists in particular, studied Brain Gym in
great detail as it had become very popular in education. Brain Gym activities and exercises can
be nicely used within any lesson, relax the atmosphere and bring some elements of fun in
a lesson. Yet the claims that go together with the method are in a serious dichotomy with
science. Though the exercises themselves are not by any means rejected the question is,
however, why to use neuroscientific jargon and explain brain structure and functions, if the
teachers are not well acknowledged in the field. They may not be able to judge, whether the
statements are scientific facts or not or whether the terms are used correctly or whether they are
misused as it is to be shown in the following sections. The fact that Brain Gym claims are very
often taught along with its exercises is very alarming.
Science and Brain Gym
Brain Gym is widely based on studies that has not been scientifically proved, or of which
scientific research has not found a proof (Carroll, “Brain Gym” pars. 21-27). Research on Brain
Gym has been widely criticized for being inadequate, not giving credible research support,
having methodological flaws and not giving crucial information. The studies were not published
in independent journals, and there were too few of them in general (Carroll, “Brain Gym” par.
9). The negative studies were not published at all, while other was publishing only in Brain Gym
37
journal, recommending the ideas without any trustworthy research support (Carroll, “Brain
Gym” par. 10). As it has already been stated with Learning Style Method, it is necessary for
research to be led by independent evaluators. Moreover, the authors of studies show no
competency for stating anything about the influence of the exercises on students‟ brains (Carroll,
“Brain Gym” par. 11). When, for example, we consider the picture of a human brain drawn by
Dennisons it is obvious that the picture is too simplistic. Parts of brain must communicate with
each other for proper brain function and the process is a highly complex one. That is why
Dennisons picture of a human brain cannot be taken as a basis for developing exercises and
activities improving brain function (Carroll, “Brain Gym” par. 17).
Neuroscience and Brain Gym
Brain Gym neuroscientific support for its numerous claims drew scientists‟ attention.
“Pseudoscientific jargon used to make the exercises seem like they were based on scientific
evidence. Despite five years of criticizing Brain Gym ... the program keeps on finding advocates
even if it has been around for thirty years without providing sound scientific evidence for its
claims.” (Carroll, “Brain Gym” par. 39)
Using all kinds of technical terms and their wrong interpretation or explanation put Brain Gym in
a very bad light. Here are some of the examples.
The word oxidation used in the chapter about the Energy Yawn (Dennison 9) means a process
causing rusting, while the authors probably wanted to use the term oxygenation which means
providing with oxygen (Medical Dictionary). Mixing these two terms is highly unprofessional,
especially that the authors wanted to sound scientific.
A very often criticized and a rather surprising statement is that “All liquids [other than water] are
processed in the body as food, and do not serve the body‟s water needs … Processed foods do
not contain water.” (Dennison 24) However, Ian Robinson, neuroscientist explains that it is not
the case. Other liquids “are absorbed through the stomach and intestines by exactly the same
mechanism as a glass of water. Processed foods usually contain a large amount of water” (Swain,
and Evans par. 2; Goldacre; Randerson).
38
There are a lot of Brain Gym claims concerning brain structure and function. For example, the
back of human brain stores knowledge whiles the front process information (Dennison 16). Dr
Stan Lazis, neurobiologist, argues that “This is not how the brain works; information is
processed throughout the whole brain, and knowledge is distributed as well.” (Swain, and Evans
par. 2)
Brain Gym also speaks about a situation when neurological and physiological signals are
switched off, jammed, blocked (Dennison 23, 31). Again, Dr Stan Lazis disagrees, explaining
that “in reality the only time a neurological signal would become „jammed‟, „blocked‟ or
„switched off‟ is during a pathological event such as a seizure, stroke, head trauma, or perhaps
due to a neurodegenerative disorder.” (Swain, and Evans par. 2)
Moreover, the so called midbrain is, according to Dunns, responsible for emotions. There is also
the idea of cooperation between body movement and brain function. For example lower and
upper body is said to correspond with upper and lower brain function (Dennison). Dr Spencer
LaVere Smith, neuroscientist, says that both the ides do not hold true. “The top of the body
doesn‟t match up with the top of the brain, and so on. Also, the midbrain isn‟t the seat of
emotional content. Emotional content is processed all over the brain, including the cerebrum and
the amygdala.” (Swain, and Evans par. 2)
Another Brain Gym suggestion concerning body and brain cooperation is that the neck muscles
have some influence of neurological brain and body circuitry (Dennison). Dr Alanna Watt,
neuroscientist, disagrees with that claim as “The neural circuitry that connects the brain and the
body is the spinal cord, which is located in and protected by the spinal column. While the brain
communicates with all muscles of the body including the neck muscles, the strength of these
muscles does not affect the performance of the spinal cord.” (Swain, and Evans par. 2)
As for the exercises, let me mention two as an example of certain misinterpretation. Exercise
called Brain Buttons are said to stimulate the carotid artery for increased blood supply to the
brain by pressing two points at your top part of your chest(Dennison 25) This is rather
impossible for carotid arteries are situated under a human ribcage so it is impossible to stimulate
them (Goldacre). Another similar exercise is touching so called Positive Points (above each eye).
This exercise is to “bring blood flow from the hypothalamus to the frontal lobes, where rational
thought occurs” (Dennison 32). Prof David Attwell, neuroscientist, responds, that there is no
39
scientific support for the claim that “touching these points can alter blood flow within the brain”
(Swain, and Evans par. 2).
From the above analysis it should become obvious for any teacher that we should be very careful
when accepting theories and claims based on simple science. From my point of view it as a bit
insulting to use ones lack of knowledge and use arguments most of the common people have no
idea of, or would never check them out. As I have already said, the activities themselves are
relaxing and can be enjoyable for some, but there is no reason to believe that they treat dyslexia
or any other disability.
40
3.3 Total Physical Response (Natural Approach)
Communicating via language is the exclusive capacity of human beings. During the first few
years every healthy child masters the ability to understand and use its native language,
sometimes even several languages if the child is brought up in a multilingual environment
(Werstler 4). Total Physical Response (TPR), which is based on this outstanding phenomenon,
was introduced by James Asher and has a noteworthy influence on second language teaching.
TPR is the third method incorporating movement into learning process, in this case especially in
language learning. The theories behind the method are based on empirical studies and some of
them discuss the theory of right/left brain. The founder often discusses TPR on the brain
laterality idea and there are a lot of articles, document and discussions concerning the issue on
the official online web pages. The following chapter introduces the TPR theory and looks at
some of its incoherence.
3.3.1 TPR according to the founders
The founder
James Asher, a professor of psychology at San Jose State University in California based his
theory on developmental psychology, or “trace theory” of memory, which is based on a notion
that repetition helps memory associations to become stronger and more easily recalled. This can
be gained by the combination of both verbal and motor activities, combination of coordination,
speech and action. These are the basic ideas supporting teaching language via movement
(Richards, and Rodgers 87).
The idea and basic claims
TPR is a method that draws from the natural way children acquire their mother tongue, when
speaking appears spontaneously, voluntarily after a long time of just listening. The method
accentuates the unconscious attention to language input over the conscious (Larsen-Freeman
41
107, 113; Titlová 5). TPR is closely related to the idea of brain movement connections,
recognized by Asher in children‟s language acquisition. Though there are claims that TPR can be
effective at any age (Asher, Total Physical Response) it is mainly used with young learners at
their beginning level, for the language on that level can often be expressed by movements,
gestures or mimics (McGinnis, 69; Richards, and Rodgers 73-79) Yet,
Although TPR downplays the use of rote memorization, learners are directing their attention to
the vocabulary or forms, while the physical movement provides an extra association that seems
to strengthen that piece of memorized information. Thus, although based on child language
acquisition, language-movement pairings can prove beneficial for adult learners of second
language in limited contexts. (McGinnis, 69-70)
In 1970‟s James Asher published his first edition of Learning Another Language Through
Actions largely based on Stephen Krashen‟s Natural Approach theory. The theory stresses the
importance of teaching foreign/second language alike the first language – “through the senses
and through comprehensible input” (Werstler 4). Lowering the affective filter thanks to
kinaesthetic sensory activities helps the input to become comprehensible and acquired (Werstler
4, Peck 129). TPR is directly connected with Krashen‟s theory of acquisition and his 5
hypotheses (Larsen-Freeman 107).
Krashen‟s theory of language acquisition is based on Noam Chomsky‟s Language Acquisition
Device (LAD) Hypothesis, which says that every human being is born with a natural
ability/knowledge – LAD, to acquire any language. Krashen‟s 5 Hypotheses concerning
language acquisition are: Learning acquisition, natural order, monitor theory, sufficient and
natural order input, and the affective filter (Lockhard, and Perez Arraiza 50).
a) Learning and acquisition hypothesis
Krashen explains that the two processes are very different and independent. While learning is
a conscious, rather fast process, acquisition happens unconsciously and takes time. Yet, as the
author of the thesis argues, it is the acquired knowledge of language, not learned, that is not
easily forgotten. Moreover what is acquired is ready to be used, while learned elements are
accessible only with the use of monitor. Krashen also pinpoints, that what has been learned, even
if it was at the very beginning of the learning process, may take a long time to be acquired. This
happens because of natural order (Lockhard, and Perez Arraiza 50). TPR follows this idea and
42
stresses subconscious gaining of language knowledge by imitating the first language acquisition
pattern (Titlová 5).
b) Natural order hypothesis
Due to the hypothesis language structures are acquired in a relatively same order irrespectively
to the order they were learned. For example, the third person -s, though is taught relatively early,
is not going to be acquired before other structures (Lockhard, and Perez Arraiza 50-51).
c) Monitor Hypothesis
Monitor functions as a correcting device. It is used every time a learner wants to apply the
knowledge s/he has learned (before or after producing written or spoken language). In order for
a monitor to be ready to use the learner has to know the rule, focus on form and have time to
think and apply it. On the contrary, the language which the learner produces without the
assistance of the monitor is the language the learner has already acquired (Lockhard, and Perez
Arraiza 51).
d) Input Hypothesis
According to this hypothesis what is required for the acquisition to take place is
a comprehensible input. “Any sufficient quantity of input, which is comprehensible, will
automatically contain structures of those next in line (natural order) to be acquired.” (qtd. in
Lockhard, and Perez Arraiza 51) Comprehensible input is often represented by i + 1 rule, where
i stands for the acquired current level and + 1 for the following level of structures to be acquired
(Lockhard, and Perez Arraiza 51).).Thanks to movements the message in TPR activities becomes
explicit and comprehensible.
e) Affective filter Hypothesis
However, not every comprehensible input is automatically intake. There are certain
psychological factors like motivation, anxiety, or degree of self confidence that restrain the input
to reach LAD. These factors form affective filter. There is also an output filter which effects
production of acquired knowledge (e.g. subconscious ethnocentrism) (Lockhard, and Perez
Arraiza 52). TPR use a lot of movements, which are often associated with games accompanied
with the element of fun. Thus the stress is reduced, which is one of the main TPR goals, for the
affective filter is lowered (Richards, and Rodgers 91; Larsen-Freeman 113)
43
Following the 5 hypothesis of Affective filter TPR method endeavours to lower the anxiety level
in the language classroom (McGinnis, 69) for it is “and instructional strategy that purports to
make learning second language not only do-able but enjoyable” (Werstler 16). The element of
enjoyment and the feeling of success help the affective filter to be lowered (Larsen-Freeman
114).
Asher gives the bases for his approach in three learning hypotheses:
Innate bio-program for language learning
Second language learning and teaching should follow the natural processes of language learning,
namely, listening before speaking competence; children‟s physical response to their parents‟
commands assert comprehension acquisition; speech only after listening comprehension. This
pattern should be followed in second language learning when the learner acquires “cognitive
map” via listening accompanied by movement before s/he starts to speak (Richards, and Rodgers
90). Asher‟s studies show that before a child starts to speak s/he is first exposed to a lot of
listening and that a child understands the language first before they start to speak (Asher,
“Language by Command” 2-3). Silent period, during which understanding of a spoken language
via movement developed, is a natural thing for first language acquisition. That is why it should
be fully respected when it comes to teaching languages inside the classroom (Werstler 13).
Listening skill and understanding should be developed before speaking, the same way it
naturally develops with small children. Asher sees a strong connection between language and
body for child first responses are not spoken but motional (Asher, “Language by Command” 23). Kinaesthetic learning is therefore strongly recommended by Asher.
Lateralization and different learning functions in the left, right-brain hemispheres
Asher refers to the differences in function of right and left brain hypothesis, which were, among
the others, proposed by Robert Sperry (Nobel Prize 1960‟s). In Asher‟s opinion second language
acquisition is directly connected with the right brain, because acquisition is not memorization,
credited to be a left brain activity (Werstler 18; Dzięgło 8; Asher, Total Physical Response).
TPR focuses on the learning processes of right-brain, as oppose to the majority of second
language teaching favouring left-brain learning. According to Jean Piaget studies children
acquire language through motor movements, being the dominant activity of the right hemisphere.
44
Language production, represented by the left hemisphere, is to follow naturally after sufficient
right hemisphere learning accomplishment (Richards, and Rodgers 91).
... Asher thinks that the child language learner acquires language through physical movement,
which is a right-hemisphere activity, and right-hemisphere activities must occur before the left
hemisphere can process language for production. The left hemisphere will be triggered to
produce language when a sufficient amount of right hemisphered learning has taken place.
(Richards, and Rodgers qtd. in Juříčková 38)
Stress, or an affective filter, in learning process and its reduction
The difference between first and second language acquisition is the stress factor. Relaxed, stressfree environment can be gained when movement is involved in learning as being “liberated from
self-conscious and stressful situations and is able to devote full energy to learning” (Richards,
and Rodgers 91).
TPR teaching
TPR teaches language in chunks, wholes, and not just separate lexical items (Richards, and
Rodgers 89). The teaching is based on few beliefs:
(a) comprehension abilities precede productive skills in learning a language;
(b) the teaching of speaking should be delayed until comprehension skills are established;
(c) skills acquired through listening transfer to other skills;
(d) teaching should emphasize meaning rather than form; and
(e) teaching should minimize learner stress
(Richards, and Rodgers 87-88)
The aim of TPR is to attain basic speaking skills. However, learners are to speak only after about
120 hours of action-based drills. Everyday situation role plays, slide presentation, writing and
reading activities to accompany teacher‟s narration and drills. Learners role is to listen and
respond physically to the taught elements as whole class and individually. Later, when the
45
learner decides s/he is ready to speak, they start to utter their own commands, instructions. The
well prepared teacher (most appropriately with a lesson plan) is then “the director of a stage play
in which the students are the actors” (qtd. in Richards, and Rodgers 92). As far as the correction
is concerned, the teacher should, again, follow the first language acquisition pattern, namely that
parents correct only some mistakes and only after some time (Richards, and Rodgers 91-92).
Storytelling, or TPRS, based on TPR, Krashen‟s The Natural Approach was introduced by
a Spanish teacher from California, Baine Ray, an experienced high school foreign teacher.
Likewise in TPR and Natural Approach there is stress laid upon comprehensible input,
communication, right brain/kinaesthetic sensory, entertaining activities and acquisition over
learning (Werstler 7).
As the TPR method is somehow repetitive, students may soon become bored, or adapted. This
phenomenon is called the “TPR wall”. Storytelling lowers the wall by encouraging students‟
imagination and creativeness when using acquired vocabulary to build up a story. Story lining
begins with short “mini-situations or stories”, which involves vocabulary taught accompanied by
gestures. These are later on used to create one, main story told first by the teacher and later on
retold by the student accompanied by other creative activities (Werstler 20-21).
In both TPR Storytelling and Krashen it is the message, or idea to be stressed, not it‟s form, or
accuracy. Consequently a claim is maintained that via kinaesthetic sensory connections between
understood and not understood messages are made and grammar rules can subconsciously be
guessed (Werstler 19).
3.3.2 TPR and Krashen’s critics
TPR is to certain extend different from the previous two methods. I did not find so many links to
brain-based education or any alternative ideas like in the methods already discussed. The
method‟s bases are more empirical, based on methodological findings, not sound opinions or
short assumptions. It does not go beyond methodology competences, does not try to find proof
beyond science and research. Yet, there are certain questionable aspects which need to be
46
pinpointed here. These are the ideas of left/right brain function, already discussed in the previous
chapters and the Krashen‟s Hypothesis, on whose ideas TPR is built.
Krashen‟s Hypothesis
The Krashen‟s Hypothesis and Natural Approach is very appealing as it shows how languages
can be learned in a natural way, the way a mother tongue is acquired. Silent period, for example,
is a typical example of this natural approach, for the same period is present in the first language
acquisition. However, every simple solution becomes more complicated when it comes to
practice. When analyzing the Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis, Krashen stresses the role of
LAD – Language Acquisition Device, and shows the contrast between acquisition and learning.
However, the author of LAD theory, Noam Chmosky, put it into the context of a child‟s initial
state, not an adult‟s. The statements that “learning can never become acquisition”, or
an assumption that “classroom learning does not lead to fluent, native-like speech” are
questionable (Romeo par. 2).
Firstly, the difference between the terms acquisition/learning and conscious/subconscious is not
clearly stated, which makes it rather impossible to recognize when someone is learning and when
acquiring (Romeo par. 3). The term acquisition becomes even more unclear when we realize that
the theory is mainly based on production, not comprehension. The question is whether the
structure is acquired when there is accuracy in usage or when there is accuracy in
comprehension. It is also not clear whether or not is the natural order of comprehension and
production the same and how do these two interact (Romeo par. 3). Although TPR highlights the
importance of acquiring/learning second language in a natural way by following the patterns
typical for first language acquisition it has to be remembered that a second language learner
exposed to a new language is in a very different position the a child acquiring/learning first
language.
Secondly, Krashen introduces an idea based on first language acquisition research, which says
that grammatical structures are learned in a particular order, a natural order. This natural order is
then suggested to be followed by the teachers, which strongly contradicts with a natural way
a child is exposed to it mother tongue. The idea of creating a natural environment but, at the
47
same time, building the curriculum on particular order of grammar structures sounds rather
confusing (Romeo par. 3). It seems that there are some aspects that are common for both first
and second language acquisition/learning, but then there are some, which are not. TPR, for
example, perceives silent period as a natural one in language acquisition, yet, it has to be taken
into account that the situation of a learner in the classroom environment is different from the
situation of a small child, who cannot speak at all. While it is natural for such a child to stay
silent it may not always come natural for a second language learner.
The Input Hypothesis, the idea of i + 1, when the learner acquires a new structure only if is just
a step higher than what the student already know is also difficult to define and follow. A learner
can acquire an utterance without full comprehension of its structure (e.g. formulaic expressions)
(Romeo par. 5). The time needed for understanding and production is much longer than is
suggested by Krashen.
The length of the path from
1) understanding [a question] to
2) giving a one-word answer [to the question] to
3) being able to give a full sentence answer, and then
4) being able to ask a similar question is quite unclear. (Romeo par. 7)
There are a lot of other factors to be involved in the process of acquisition. For example,
students‟ effort involved in the process of understanding input strongly influences
comprehension (Romeo par. 5). Why some students try hard while others seem not to care at all
is a question which cannot be answered by methodologists. The TPR tries to follow the i + 1
idea by ensuring understanding via gestures and movements. Yet, it depends much on the student
whether s/he takes an advantage of it.
Finally, the Affective Filter Hypothesis is also treated very generally and simplistic (Romeo par.
6). TPR suggests, that thanks to its methods the affective filter is lowered, because the structure
becomes explicit via gestures and movement. However, practise shows that there are a lot of
situations in which a student does not appreciate the methods, get puzzled and impatient.
Students usually try to find the easiest, shortest and the fastest way to comprehension, so they
often ask for simple translation.
48
On one hand, TPR, Krashen, and the ideas of Natural Approach definitely provide teachers with
methods and resources for the beginner levels, as well as for those more advanced. On the other
hand, there is no theoretical basis for curriculum, for deciding on what structure to teach (Romeo
par. 7). It is on teachers themselves to decide when to use TPR and when to choose some other
methods, depending on a given topic and students needs.
Learning Style model, Brain Gym and TPR show the teacher how activities with movement
element can be useful with both regular and SLD students. All three try to explain, all kinds of
arguments, why it is so important to include such activities in the lesson. The strongest
arguments were those connected with science, especially neuroscience. They are strongly
questioned by the world of science, though scientists do not seem to reject the need for
movement within lessons. I decided to see, how the activities work in the classroom, whether
they work with both regular and SLD students and under what circumstances.
49
Practical part
Practical part is based on active research I carried out in my school. The following sections give
a general overview of the school, teachers and students. There are also more detailed
characteristics of SLD students. Next, there follows a procedure used within the lessons together
with a description of students‟ work and behaviour. Each set of lessons is then discussed and
concluded.
4 Basic information
4.1 Overview
I have been an English teacher in Primary School with Polish Language Teaching in Český Těšín
for 9 years now, the same school I once attended. There are three English teachers and all three
of us are teaching both first and second graders. I have had a lot of opportunity to experience
a great diversity in every single class. Apart from obvious differences like age, gender and
interest in various subjects, there are students, for whom English is rather difficult to learn. SLD
students are very often among them. In order to help the students I try to invent all kinds of
scaffolding activities, use multisensory devices, work in groups and organize a half an hour
tutoring. SLD students have to face a number of difficulties due to their disabilities. The fact that
they take part in the activities and extra tutoring may be because of their parents‟ insisting, or
that the students are in fact willing to face their disability and want to find their way, experience
success and see progress. Being an SLD student myself I had to, and sometimes still have to,
fight my way through the thickets of my dyslexia disability. I can easily imagine all the stress
and luck of self confidence, for at my time SLD was an unknown phenomena and I had to
struggle on my own. I also know that it is possible to get the disability under control, to become
acquainted with it, and even like it. Yet, a hard work is absolutely necessary here. Yet, this hard
work can follow, when a person is actually interested in a subject, has a positive attitude and
experiences at least some success. On the other hand, it is impossible to avoid a failure too, or
the fact that there will be people more successful in the subject.
Though these are typical features of everybody‟s life a teacher, can play a significant part here.
Therefore, I decided to work with SLD students‟ and accompany them on their way through
50
English language. Exercising English via movement became one of my ways to do it. When
experimenting with movement activities at the elementary level I can see how helpful, enjoyable
and effective it can be. I have observed that SLD students change their attitude, become more
attentive and eager to cooperate. Though, a success or progress in English may not be seen
straight away, every teacher would see it as a “giant leap” for their students if they become more
optimistic, attentive and ready for work. For that reason I decided to do a research to see the
influence the activities with element of movement have on both regular and SLD students, to
specify areas and extend of improvement. The question is whether movement involvement
shows some usefulness not only for SLD students but also for regular students. I have to point
out here that because of so many counterarguments discussed in the theoretical part, I decided to
use movement activities only as a tool, as a means of introducing various topics, structures
and/or language areas, not as a result of their supposed brain or learning style preferences.
I agree with scientific arguments that movement in the class can be helpful, if it is used in
a reasonable way and follows the students‟ need and the subject discussed.
4.2 Hypothesis and general characteristics
4.2.1
Hypothesis
My hypotheses are that involvement of body movements into the lesson will draw and hold the
students‟ attention – both SLD and regular. I expect the body movements to be helpful with
memorizing vocabulary items (e.g. separate words, phrases, and expressions), their meaning and
pronunciation. I also suppose the element of movement will draw and hold the students‟
attention during an introduction and revision of certain grammar aspects. Moreover, the body
movements should help the students to get the basic meaning of written texts, as well as to
improve their reading and listening comprehension.
On the other hand, I anticipate certain problems as for the timing, pace, discipline and
curriculum coverage. From my own experience I know that introduction and revision of
vocabulary via movement is time consuming. It needs the involvement of the whole class as well
as the individuals. Once used, an attractive activity involving body movements and gestures calls
51
for repetition, especially when it becomes the favourite one and longed for by all students in the
class. The teacher is to decide wisely what activity to choose in order to avoid discipline
problems and time wasting. There will be a need for spending more time on certain topics,
exercises, texts, songs, grammar points and vocabulary, as the movements and acting things out
is more time consuming that just reading, writing or drilling. Due to all these, there may be
a delay in the curriculum. And finally, as movement is an element of fun in the lessons, it may
relax the atmosphere too much resulting in further discipline problem.
Nevertheless, I expect the research to prove that involvement of body movement in the lesson
will improve SLD students‟ attentiveness, interest and involvement in the lesson and that the
slower pace does not necessary result in lower performance of other students in the classroom.
4.2.2 The general characteristics of the school, students and the English teachers
The Primary School with Polish Language Teaching in Český Těšín is situated on the PolishCzech border region. The students are mostly of Polish nationality and they are bilingual –
Polish and Czech. Yet, there is a strong dialect in the region, which is a combination of Polish,
Czech, sometimes German and Slovak. Due to that reason, this often results in serious problems
with proper use of official Polish and Czech language. The students struggle when asked to use
the official language, one or the other. For that reason they often prefer to stay silent. These
tendencies can persist till the second grade and students are often reluctant to speak their “mother
tongues”, not mentioning English.
On the other hand, they are very well equipped with both Polish and Czech sound systems,
which fact is very helpful when they learn English pronunciation. Polish and Czech languages
have both certain problematic areas in English pronunciation. For example, English sounds like
/h/, /ʃ /, /tʃ /, /l/ and long vowels are closer to the Czech sound system, while /w/ or / ŋ / sounds
are more typical for Polish. However, students are to acquire basic writing and reading skills in
both Polish and Czech during the first three terms. This is very demanding and may already
cause a lot of troubles for students with learning disabilities. As a result they may have
a negative attitude towards English, which, according to our School Education Programme
(ŠVP), is compulsory in the third form.
52
In our school there are three teachers of English – Teacher A and I are involved in the research.
Teacher C is not involved in the research. All three of us teach both the first and the second
graders. Teacher A and I are full time teachers and Teacher C is a part time teacher.
Teacher A has a long time experience. She prefers to use grammar translation method
interweaved with drills and some elements of game, for example vocabulary race or board
games. She sometimes uses visual aids. Her lessons are mostly teacher-centred. She requires her
students to know vocabulary. The vocabulary items are usually separate words. She gives her
students Polish translation of almost every single word. Students are required to know spelling,
pronunciation and Polish translation. She never uses miming or English explanation for the
vocabulary items she teaches. The students‟ knowledge of vocabulary is checked via oral
examination, reading and short vocabulary tests. As for grammar practise the teacher uses
pictures and drills. Students are examined orally and via tests with filling the gaps and closeended exercises. When teaching culture, the teacher introduces British and American traditional
holidays, like Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter.
Teacher C is for communicative approach in the lessons. She uses a lot of pictures, game, drills
and activities involving body movement. She also uses a lot of elements from grammar
translation, like the students‟ mother tongue for translation or grammar explanation, memorizing,
drills, etc.
As for me, I prefer a so called “jungle” approach. I perceive a language as a jungle, which I want
to discover with my students. Sometimes I use well-known paths, those that everyone should be
acquainted with, like basic vocabulary items, grammar, usage or culture. Both grammar
translation method and communicative approach can, in my opinion, come in handy. There are
all four skills present in the lessons, though it is sometimes difficult to provide them in
a balanced way. Other times I prefer to accompany my students on their own discovery tour by
giving them a topic, a real life material, a story, song, film, poem, web article, etc., and after
providing the students with necessary scaffolding they are allowed to work on various activities
through which they can discover the language by themselves.
I also provide some of the students with extra tutoring in order to help them with their homework
or material they need to revise. I often guide them how to learn in order to remember things
better. Apart from the tutoring, students with individual educational plan have an hour of
tutoring with a special educator, who helps them depending on their difficulties and disabilities.
53
I found movement as a useful element in my teaching style, especially with the first graders and
young second graders. The reason is that, in my opinion, the activities require enthusiasm,
a child-like playfulness and a more positive approach towards English lessons. The activities
with some element of movement are more attractive and less stressful. They also catch students‟
attention. I have not used the activities with second grader yet. It would probably come more
naturally, when they are “brought up” in such activities, rather than “thrown in” without any
previous experience. That is why I start the activities with younger students first, and then
continue with the older ones, though on a more sophisticated level, maybe using drama or short
theatre play.
5 Active Research
During the active research I observed pros and cons of teaching via movement. I concentrated on
both regular students, students with difficulties and SLD students. I also tried to check the effect
of movement activities formally by writing two tests: one at the beginning of the research in
December and another after three months in June. The tests were written by both A groups and B
groups. Each of the tests had three parts: vocabulary, reading comprehension questions and
open-ended questions. The vocabulary items, grammar structures and questions were covered
during the school year. The exercises tested the students‟ knowledge of vocabulary,
understanding of a text and the ability to give answers using grammar structures and vocabulary
items.
5.1 Research groups
For the research I decided to take fifth graders, beginner level students, who got acquainted with
some elementary vocabulary, grammar and structure during their first year of English. In order to
make the research as valid and reliable as possible I and my experienced teacher colleague
divided the fifth graders into four groups of 12/13 students each. Two groups were taught by my
colleague (1A and 2A); the two other were taught by me (1B and 2B). Teacher A taught 11
students in group 1A, 5 boys and 6 girls. In group 2A she had again 11 students, 7 boys and 4
girls. I taught 11 students in group 1B, 3 boys and 8 girls. In group 2B there were 10 students, 2
boys and 8 girls. Both of us had one or two students with learning disabilities in one or both of
54
the groups. For the sake of privacy I changed all the students‟ names. Teacher A had two
students in group 1A, John and Daniel. I had one student, Kate, in group 1B and two students,
Amanda and Aaron, in B2.
During the whole year I taught 2B group interweaving my methods with activities involving
movement. Group 1A, 2A were taught without any changes. As for 1B I resigned from most of
the activities. All four groups were on a similar level, though group 2B was a bit behind with the
material when compared to the other groups. There were 3 lessons of English every week.
Students worked with Chatter Box, by Derek Strange, text book, activity book and the cassette.
Apart from the books, all groups used the back side of their notebooks for all vocabulary items
introduced in the lesson. My teacher colleague and I introduced the vocabulary items in a similar
way – three columns, one for the English expression, one for the pronunciation and one for the
meaning. Yet, my teacher colleagues prefer Polish translation, while I like pictures and/or
English explanation more.
5.1.1 Characteristics of SLD students
There were five students in the groups who were diagnosed by the Pedadogicko-psychologicka
poradna (PPC) two in group 1A, one in 1B and two in 2B. The following paragraphs give their
short PPC diagnosis from their 4the grade and then the teachers‟ characteristics of the students
based on observation during English lessons.
John
John, 11 years old, was diagnosed in PPC on his parents‟ request in order to find out the reasons
of his learning difficulties. He was often out of school due to his frequent illness. He is also
an epileptic. Although the student was not diagnosed as SLD or ADHD there was a strong
suggestion, that his difficulties were very alike to those of an ADHD student.
PPC diagnosis
As for John, he was diagnosed as being a student with health impairment, whose learning
difficulties appeared because of his prolonged absence. He worked slowly, had difficulties in
55
nonverbal area, in graphic and visual coordination. There was fluctuation in his performance,
concentration. There were also difficulties in reading as he mostly read in syllabication. When
reproducing the text he needed questions to guide him. When writing he mixed the Polish and
Czech diacritical marks due to bilingualism. When counting to 20 he still used fingers and could
not follow adding and subtracting algorithms. All the difficulties could be helped by often
revision and practise. He should not be overloaded with information or tasks. Oral examination
was advised more than written form of checking John‟s knowledge.
The student in the English lesson
According to Teacher A, John was an impulsive student, but his impulsiveness depended on time
the lesson took place. In the mornings he was not really ready to concentrate and work, then,
during the day he was able to take part in the lesson, but at noon he was again sleepy and tired.
These problems were also connected with his epilepsy. He was willing to be on task when he
found it interesting, but whenever he needed to concentrate more, he resigned. That is why it was
necessary for the teacher to work with him individually. His exercises had to be shorter and
easier, so that he was able to complete them on more on his own. Jack especially liked work
sheets, when there was not need to write much. As he was often tired after school he was not
able to complete his homework, though his parents helped him a lot.
Daniel
Daniel, 11 years old, was diagnosed as a SLD student with dyslexia. The student was educated
according to the individual education programme and he was provided with an hour of tutoring
with a special educator week. His mother tongues are Polish and Slovak.
PPC diagnosis
As for Daniel, he had a weakened audio memory and audio synthesis. While reading Daniel had
problems with syllables, especially those with consonant cluster, typical for Czech. Daniel
struggled with connecting syllables and words into wholes. His reading was full of breaks and
corrections. Reading comprehension was good, as well as reproduction and repetition of a text.
Yet, it required time and a peaceful atmosphere.
56
He made minor mistakes in using diacritic signs when writing. There were tendencies to use
elements of Polish writing system, though. Going back to the written text in order to revise it was
of a little effect. It, therefore, was recommended to practise self correction and the ability to find
the mistake. In mathematics he used fingers when counting to ten. That slowed his work down
and caused difficulties in English numerical exercises as well. As Daniel had serious problems
with audio memory it was recommended to the teacher to practise it, mostly by using techniques
with some element of game.
The student in the English lesson
According to Teacher A, Daniel was a hardworking student and very attentive in the lessons. His
parents helped him a lot and his homework was always completed. His difficulties were mainly
in reading and writing. He wrote and read slowly and did a lot of mistakes in pronunciation when
the text was new to him. He also made mistakes in written works.
Kate
Kate, 12 years old, was diagnosed as a SLD student with mild dyslexia, visible especially in
spelling. An hour of tutoring with a special educator fortnight was a great help for her, as well as
practising with parents at home. Thanks to the support the situation got better during the past
time.
PPC diagnosis
As for Kate there was a visible difference in her reading and understanding of the read text. She
read with mistakes, which she rarely corrected. She changed and guessed the words when
reading out loud. Yet she understood the text and was able to reproduce it. When writing Kate
made minor mistakes, especially due to the lack of practise. She does not concentrate on
grammar or lexical rules when writing and use her intuition instead. It was, therefore, necessary
for her to revise things as well as understand and recognise the rules. There were some problems
with audio-motor coordination and reproduction of rhythmical units. It was recommended to
practise hand – ear coordination. The problems could worsen in a stressful atmosphere.
Therefore, she needed more time when reading or writing. Nonetheless, Kate was supposed to
keep up with regular students.
57
The student in the English lessons
Kate was a hardworking student, who was very attentive and interested in the lesson. However,
she often forgot to do her homework or to revise the covered topics. When reading or writing she
made mistakes caused mainly by her bilingualism. She knew about her difficulties and hence got
nervous whenever asked to write something on the blackboard or read a text out loud without
practising it first for several time.
Amanda
Amanda, 11 years old, was diagnosed as an ADHD student, who needed an assistant during her
first four forms. The fifth form was the first one without the assistant. Amanda was an adopted
girl.
PPC diagnosis
As for Amanda her results and work pace were very unstable. The difficulties concerned mainly
the attention and audio attention deficit. There persisted impulsive behaviour, psychomotor
unease, impatience or inability to deal with failure and more demanding tasks. The teachers were
to accept her difficulties due to her disability, avoid stress and conflict. They were suggested to
support individual work, introduce some elements of movement in the lessons and praise her.
Apart from all of these Amanda showed a great progress when compared to the previous years.
She became more ambitious, motivated and able to concentrate. Yet, she had a lot of difficulties
with accepting any kind of failure. Amanda attended an hour of tutoring with a special educator
once a week.
Amanda had reading difficulties – clumsy, syllabic reading, often without intonation.
Reproduction of a text was possible only to an extent and with mistakes, so that follow up
questions were needed. When writing in the notebook or a when writing a dictation she needed
more time, and still there appeared all kinds of mistakes. Amanda‟s negative emotions
influenced her handwriting, so that it became impossible to read. When rewriting form the
blackboard or a book she worked more carefully. When there was too much to rewrite or
an exercise was too difficult for her she lost her temper and refused to work. As for mathematics,
58
she struggles with adding and multiplication. She used fingers to count which takes a lot of time.
Her general performance did not meet the requirements of the 4 grade.
The student in the English lesson
Amanda was a very impulsive student. She was able to work hard and even help others when she
knew exactly what to do, how to do it, and when the exercise was of an interesting topic.
Unfortunately, there were not too much of such activities in the English lesson. She often left her
notebook at home, or had it at school but refused to write in it or write very carelessly, making
the text impossible to read. There was often no use to work with her individually in the lesson.
She would sit and do nothing. The best way to motivate her was to praise her, introduce
exercises she would be successful in, or do activities with some element of game/competition. At
the same time, it was necessary to follow the classroom rules, for Amanda had tendencies to
break them. It was rather impossible for her to read a text she had not first practised at home. She
refused to read, or read very quietly, quickly and every 4 word. When omitting the words she
often substituted it for other words in her mother tongue. She did not like writing into her
notebook, so her notes were often impossible to read. But, she liked it when a teacher brought
some work sheets for her to fill it in and stick in the notebook instead. In such a case she would
be eager to come and write things on the blackboard, to help others or explain the things she
understood but others did not.
Aaron
Aaron, 11 years old, was diagnosed as a student with SLD, namely with the serious difficulties in
communication skills. The difficulty is one step higher in the seriousness compared to dyslexia.
He was in the care of a clinical speech therapist for expressive dysphasia, speech difficulty on
motor bases.
PPC diagnosis
As for Aaron, he is the most seriously disabled in the group. Although the student cooperated
very willingly when taught individually, understood the instructions and worked hard,
nonetheless his learning disability was so profound, that it did not allow him to progress much.
His verbalization was slow, mostly by using short, but grammatically correct sentences. He had
59
great difficulties in pronunciation in all languages, particularly with /s/, /tʃ / and /ʃ / sounds. His
language intuition was weakened.
There were fewer problems with reading and understanding of a relatively short and easy text.
However, when writing Aaron made a lot of mistakes, mainly due to his pronunciation
difficulties.
The student in the English lesson
Aaron had a number of difficulties in English too. He paid attention mostly when there were
some whole class activities, for example singing a song, playing a game, writing vocabulary or
a short text. Otherwise he did not pay attention, started to daydream or went through the comics
in the book. The reasons probably were that he had either lost his interest, or did not understand
much of the exercise in the lesson, and was not able to take part in them. His passiveness and
indifference were often overlooked by the teacher, for the other student, Amanda was a very
demanding one and caught a lot of the teacher‟s attention. Aaron was able to read a short text
only after he had the possibility to practise it for some times, also with a cassette he got for
listening at home. His knowledge of vocabulary items was on a medium level. He often
pronounced them the way they were written. However, when the teacher corrected him by saying
the first syllable of the word he was ready to finish it correctly. He made a few mistakes when
rewriting things. All written exercises would be completed only with the teacher‟s, or other
student‟s help.
60
5.2 Activities with elements of movements
When deciding on what activities to choose and what ideas from Brain Gym, TPR and Learning
Style mode to follow, I tried to keep in mind scientists‟ arguments and opinions.
Brain Gym, though criticised by neurologists, rediscovers the need of exercising in the
classroom. Some of the Brain Gym exercises are similar to some ordinary PE exercises, like
running, walking or stretching. All such body movements can be integrated in the lesson and
have a beneficial influence on the students‟ attention and positive attitude toward the lesson.
Everybody needs to stretch out, run or walk from time to time. Although the whole theory of
Brain Gym healing influence on SLD students is not proved, I have observed that an element of
exercise in the middle of the lesson may gives be a relief to SLD students.
While Brain Gym does not give any ideas of involving the movement in the learning process,
TPR uses it as an element of the activities, which let the student feel safe when they are not
confident in the lesson. TPR stresses the need for a stress-free, relaxed atmosphere in the lesson
and the right to stay silence, when a student is not ready to speak. The exercises I have used are
often built on the idea to an extent. TPR-like activities give SLD students more time to think,
practise and at the same time stay “a step back” when they need it. Just observing others and
listening to their answers is sometimes enough for a student to remember things. And finally, the
useful umbrella-like idea behind Learning Style model supports both Brain Gym and TPR. I
agree with scientific arguments questioning some of Learning Style‟s claims, yet the discussion
reminded me as a the teacher, that there are many ways to learn and teach things and that they
kinaesthetic, audio and oral exercises should be interweaved in the lesson.
5.2.1 Activities internalizing vocabulary items
The lessons described below are aimed at internalizing new vocabulary items and structures from
a comic story by using TPR idea of replacing speaking for movement and staying silent. It also
tries to build on the conclusions drawn from the scientists‟ discussion, which, though critical
about the claims made by Brain Gym authorities, supports the element of body exercises in the
lessons. The activities described are language and body worm ups, which were then followed by
61
other exercising practising other skills like writing, reading or listening. The activities are using
kinaesthetic elements to check whether they can be found more effective when practising and
remembering new words and their meaning.
Procedure – the first lesson
At the beginning of the lesson the teacher asked students to open their books on the comic story
they had worked on the previous day. The teacher asked them to find in the story certain words,
or phrases she mimed to them. Students raised their hands when they found the item. Amanda
and Aaron paid attention, yet they did not come up with too many words. They did not orientate
in the text as quickly as the others at that stage. In order to give them a chance to participate
actively, the teacher chose some words from the text that should have already been familiar for
them. Whenever they recognised the movement and were able to find the word they raised their
hands up. Aaron lost concentration and stopped following the activity after approximately 5
minutes. He went through the other comic stories instead. Amanda got frustrated, because the
teacher did not give her the possibility to call out the answers. She became bad tempered because
of it. The teacher prised her for being active, encouraged her to be attentive and raise her hand
when she wanted to say the answer. She accepted the complement and stopped to misbehave.
Next, the students opened their notebooks and wrote the new vocabulary items down. They
wrote the items in a usual manner: three columns, one for English, one for pronunciation and one
for meaning. The teacher used pictures whenever it was possible. Aaron preferred pictures more.
He worked patiently and willingly. Amanda required translation. She scarcely drew. She worked
rather carelessly and did not finish the notes. Teacher checked her notes, corrected the mistakes
and encouraged Amanda to finish her notes which she finally did.
Finally, students were asked to stand up and as the teacher spoke out the vocabulary items
students were asked to mime them out. It worked very well. Students reacted quickly. Whenever
there was a difficult word, there always were a few students, who knew how to mime it. Others
followed them. Aaron was very attentive at the beginning. He observed others and mimed the
vocabulary after them, though he was a bit unsure. It was clear the exercise was not effortless to
him. Aaron concentrated on the movements more than on their meaning. Amanda was rather an
observer. She did not want to participate much. She was embarrassed at this point. Yet she paid
62
attention, mimed the things from time to time, when the movement was easy, or did not require
too much afford. She tried to show, that she did not care at all. However, she behaved herself and
did not disturb others.
Procedure – the second lesson
The lesson started with vocabulary revision. The teacher asked the students to stand up, she said
all kinds of vocabulary items and the students mimed them. Then, the teacher changed the
activity to be student centred. One student was to choose a vocabulary item, came in front of the
classroom and mimed it for others to guess. The student chose another one to say the answer and
come with another word. The teacher allowed the students to have their notebooks open. The
activity went smoothly. All the students participated. Aaron did not orientate in his notes from
the previous lesson first, but as he tried to be on task he was able to recognise most of the mimed
words. He tried to catch up with the others and worked patiently with his notes. Whenever he
managed to recognise a word he raised his hand energetically. He wanted to give the answer, but
he often struggled with pronunciation. He said the word the way it was written. However, when
the teacher gave him the first syllable of the word he was able to finish it correctly. It seemed
that Aaron caught the sound of the word, but he was not able to reproduce it when reading the
word from his notes.
Amanda had fun. She made comment on her friends, laughed at them and, though being a bit
disruptive, she paid attention. When the teacher asked her to calm down and try to recognise the
words, she did so, but for a rather short period of time. If she managed to get the answer right
and had chance to mime the word she was very pleased. However, she became timid in front of
the blackboard. Others encouraged her. They were patient with her. Finally, she chose an easy
word to mime – usually some verb of movement, not necessary taken from the list of vocabulary
covered on the previous lesson. Others accepted it. She willingly chose one student to answer
and prised him/her. She went back to her place and participated in the activity.
Presently, the teacher wanted to check students‟ reading ability and their spelling of the practised
vocabulary items. Students chose their roles, read the comic out loud, and then answered
comprehension questions. Aaron and Amanda were eager to read. Their spelling improved, but
they still made some mistakes and needed help. Aaron did not give the answers to the
63
comprehension question at that stage. Amanda was attentive and wanted to answer, but she did
not get all of the answers right. The students and the teacher encouraged and prompted them by
giving some follow up questions or hints as to in what picture was the answer.
Procedure – the third lesson
The third lessons started with reading which was again followed by a short vocabulary game
with students miming the words and expressions from the comic. This time it worked faster.
Both Aaron and Amanda recognised the words. When asked to answer some questions they often
came up with one word answer only, or they needed some time to find it in the comic. They were
encouraged to use their vocabulary again. They worked willingly and paid attention most of the
time.
Conclusion
Generally, the activity of miming vocabulary items called for everybody‟s attention. The first
part of the first lesson, when the teacher mimes the words, worked well with regular students.
Aaron and Amanda were a bit lost. They could not orientate in the text well. In order to give
them the opportunity to participate the teacher asked more students to give the proper answer.
The teacher acted as if she was not sure of the answer and wanted students to verify it. All
students were willing to do so and repeated the proper answer. At this point both Aaron and
Amanda wanted to give their answers too. Nobody minded the fact that they actually repeated
the same words after their colleagues. They were looked satisfied to have the opportunity to get
it right.
I was not sure, whether Amanda and Aaron remembered the words and their meaning better
when the activity was done the first time, but as they got used to it, got familiar with all kind of
movements and their equivalents in English, they became more independent and relaxed.
Amanda was not disruptive during the activity that is why I assume she paid attention. Aaron
took an active part in the activity and tried not to stay behind, so it also seems the activity
worked with him.
64
In the students‟ centred activity Amanda misbehaved from time to time, but the teacher had it
under control. Aaron participated in the activity. He did not lose his concentration that fast, when
compared to other activities. Moving around the class held students attention for about 10
minutes. After the activity, regular students worked attentively for the rest of the lesson. There
were little discipline problems. However, Aaron lost his concentration in the second part of the
lesson. Amanda tried to work hard. She did not disturb.
The test results
The tests results on vocabulary, where maximum points in both pre and post tests were 23, the
students and their groups scored as follows: Aaron, group 2B, scored 15 points in the pre test and
13 points in the post test. His score was a bit smaller at the end of the research than it was at the
beginning. It may be due to the fact, that vocabulary was mainly practised orally and there was
not enough writing. The stress was on pronunciation and meaning, not on spelling.
Amanda, group 2B, scored only 3 points in the pre test, but got 11 in the post test. She seemed to
have some progress than. Yet, her results on the tests are influenced by her attitude at a given
moment. When writing small revision tests her results were often of a mixed quality. Both Aaron
and Amanda had problems with spelling in both pre and post tests. The average score of the
regular students in group 2B was 13, 8 in the pre test and 14, 6 in the post-test. Aaron was then
close to the average in both tests. Amanda was far below the average in the pre test and got
closer to the average at the end.
Kate, group 1B, also scored 15 in the pre test, but she scored the same number of point in the
post test. She continued to make the same mistakes in spelling, following her intuition. It may be
the result of her underestimating home works and revisions as was mentioned in her
characteristics. However, when we compare her results with the average results of regular
students 13,3 in the pre-test and 14,9 in the post test, it is clear she was a few points above the
average.
David‟s results were 12 points in the pre test and 9 in the post test. Jack scored 0 points in the pre
test and 6 in the post test. Their results were the poorest and so were the results of their group,
1A – 8,3 points in the pre test and 11,5 in the post test. Yet, Jack‟s results were also influence by
65
his emotional condition. Moreover, he continued to miss in the lesson as was pinpointed in his
profile.
The alarming fact is that the group 2B, which practised vocabulary by involving movement
element showed the least average progress of all groups. There can be a lot of reasons for that
and one can be, that there was too much of game like activities and too little of more formal
activities during which the students would treat the subject seriously and more responsibly.
To sum up, activities involving movement catches all students‟ attention and help them be
involved in the lesson. However, due to the time consuming character of such activities there is
too small amount of time left for writing and practising spelling. Moreover, the relaxed
atmosphere during the activities may change the students‟ attitude towards the subject into more
relaxed. They may start to underestimate the subject or perceive the lessons as time for relax and
game.
There would be more time needed to see more clearly whether, and which activities are helpful
and which are not necessary. The time would also make it possible to hold more measuring tests
and see how the students‟ results changed.
66
5.2.2 Activities internalizing grammar structures
The lessons described in this section are aimed at internalizing present continuous structure. The
same activities may be used with other grammar structures as well and they are much similar to
the activities used for internalizing vocabulary. The TPR idea of replacing speaking and
translation for movement is followed here. Brain Gym claims speaking for physical exercises
were also taken into the consideration, though the movements are not suppose to follow strict
patterns introduced by Brain Gym founders. The aim of the activities was to check whether
kinaesthetic activities are helpful for SLD students, which was claimed by Learning Style model
founders.
Procedure – the first lesson
The first lesson was a lead-in to the present continues grammar structure. The students were
already familiar with all kind of verbs as they had been introduced in the previous lessons. The
teacher had distributed a list with verbs and pictures illustrating the meaning of the verbs.
Presently, the students were asked to look through them and find those they knew. Then the
teacher read the verbs out loud one by one. Students were to repeat the words after the teacher.
The teacher sometimes added gestures and other words to the verbs, like “eat spinach”, “watch
a robber, or “climb Mount Everest”. This made the repetition funny, surprising and caught
students‟ interest. Amanda did not like repeating words much. She murmured them. The added
words made her laugh, or protest but she was then more willing to say them out loud. The
situation also got better when the teacher made a joke and encouraged her to speak loudly and
clearly. She obeyed. Aaron tried to repeat the words. He gradually lost his attention and started to
daydream.
Next the teacher mimed one of the verbs and asked the students to guess what it was. The
students then chose a verb and mimed it in front of the class. At that stage only verbs were
practised. Aaron was rather passive, but he paid attention and whenever there was an easy verb,
.like “play football” he raised his hand. The same was true with Amanda, though she misbehaved
when she was not given the opportunity to give all the answers she knew.
67
After the activity the teacher introduced the present continuous structure. She asked the students
to recall what their friends had mimed and put their ideas on the blackboard this time making
present continuous sentences. The teacher then asked students to come to the blackboard and
underline the elements that repeated in the sentence – is and -ing ending. She drew a simple
graph and asked the students to fill it in following the structure of the sentences from the
blackboard. Person – is – verb -ing, and the end of the sentence.
HE (Jack, a boy, ...)
 SHE (Amanda, a girl, …)
IS
verb + ing
(jumping, watching, …)
…
IT (a dog, a book, …)
The students put down the notes from the blackboard and continued with exercises in the
workbook to practise the verb to be and -ing ending in the present continuous structure.
Procedure – the second lesson
The lessons started with a revision of present continuous. The students recalled the structure of
present continuous sentences and did reading exercises from the book to practise the structure.
After that the teacher divided the class into two groups – A and B. Aaron was in one group and
Amanda in the other. The teacher took slips of papers with verbs written on them and put them
face down on her desk. Group A started. The group was to choose one of the members to
approach the desk, choose one word and mime it in front of the class. The group then had one to
two minutes to guess the activity and say a full present continuous sentence, e.g. “She is playing
football”. During the activity the students were required to give full sentence answers. If the
group did not manage to guess the sentence in time the other one could answer. The groups took
turns and collected points for correct answers. Aaron paid attention and participated. He started
to orientate in the list of verbs and used the simple graph of present continuous. Amanda had
problems with misbehaviour. There was a tension in her group for the teacher decided to cross
their point for misbehaviour. She stopped working for some time to exhibit her disagreement.
Fortunately, it did not last and she soon joined her group.
68
Procedure – the third and fourth lesson
The third lesson started with a revision of verbs from the list. Then the students made pairs and
prepared some of the verbs to mime them in front of the class. In the meantime the teacher drew
again a simple graph on the black board to remind the students of the grammar structure. This
time, however, the person changed.
 They (students, friends, …)
ARE verb + ing
…
The pairs then showed what they have prepared. The rest of the class gave full sentence answers,
e.g. “They are waiting for a bus”. The activity was followed by written exercises on present
continuous structure.
The fourth lesson started with a game – verbs race. The groups were again divided into two
groups. Each group put down on the blackboard as many verbs as possible. The members of the
group ran one by one to the blackboard and wrote the words down. The activity worked very
well. Whenever a student was not sure about the spelling he/she asked a friend for help. Students
corrected and helped each other during the competition willingly. Aaron and Amanda were fully
involved in the activity. They asked their friends, the teacher or consulted their notes when they
were not sure. The lesson proceeded with reading and writing exercises focused on the tense.
Conclusion
The structure was easy for the students. They did not make a lot of mistakes while practising it.
The activities were attractive for them and they cooperated willingly.
As for Amanda and Aaron, they struggled at the beginning because they did not know the verbs.
After approximately two weeks of practise Amanda became familiar with most of them. Yet
when miming games she only chooses the verbs expressing some element of sport, like running
or playing football. It seemed she felt uneasy in front of the whole class. Aaron got only some of
69
the verbs. He did not internalized most of them. The reason for that may be that it was rather
difficult for him to read the words and to remember the pronunciation. When writing the
sentences he made a lot of spelling errors. He was not able to use the verb to be in the present
continuous structure. The same was true with Amanda. Moreover, she often refused to do the
written exercises. Her handwriting was often illegible. The teacher gave her some worksheets so
that her notes became clearer. Only after that she started to work willingly and paid attention to
her handwriting.
The test results
The usage of various grammar structures were also on the pre and post test. The maxim points
were 16 in both tests. The students were supposed to answer questions in full sentences. Amanda
scored only 1 point in the pre test but she managed to get 7 in the post test. In comparison with
other students she showed the second largest progress. As for Aaron he did not scored a single
point on either of the tests. He did not probably understand the exercises and rather focused on
vocabulary exercises on the test for they were the only one where he fully understand what to do.
Aaron did not show any progress as far as grammar structure is concerned neither on the test nor
in the lesson.
Kate, from group 1B showed the second largest progress when compared with regular students.
While she got only 4 right answers in the pre test she managed to get 12, 5 at the post test. In fact
her group made the biggest progress of all other groups in grammar structures.
As for Daniel, his progress was not significant, only a bit with 7 points in the pre test and 9 in the
post test. The average number of points in his group was 14, 6. John from the same group got 8
points in the pre test and only 3 at the end. His score was far behind average in his group.
To sum up, it is interesting that though group 2A had the largest average number of points
compared to the other four groups, the SLD students in the group were left behind. On the other
hand Kate and Amanda got very close to the average of their groups. Yet, it is again necessary to
say, that apart from several obvious successes in group 2B, and the fact that the group did make
progress it is still necessary to say that the progress was rather small when compared to the other
groups. It is possible that the instructions on the test checking their ability to use grammar
70
structures were not established well, for the student often gave one-word or two-words answers
instead of answering with a full sentence.
5.2.3 Movement as scaffolding for comprehension
The following lessons show how to substitute translation for movement and how
pantomime can help students understand the meaning as well as context of a story or
a song. There are two lesson sets. In one set students worked with a comic text and in
the second set with a song. Both sets of lessons were arranged in such a way so that the
there was no need for translating the text. The aim was to gain understanding without
translating. The activities were inspired by TPR storytelling, where a story is
accompanied with all kinds of miming. It is also suggested by Learning Style model that
students with kinaesthetic style should be given an opportunity to experience things via
movement. It was also suggested by the model that students with SLD mostly prefer the
style. The second set of the lessons working with a song uses Brain Gym theories,
which call for exercising in the lesson. Though the exercising does not strictly follow
any of those suggested by Brain Gym, there are both gross and fine motor body
movements involved in the activities.
A silent film Procedure – the first lesson
The students were already familiar with a comic text from their student‟s book. They
read it and put down some vocabulary items on the previous lessons. There were also
previously mentioned vocabulary activities in the lesson so that the students already had
some ideas for vocabulary movements.
First, the students read the text out loud to recall the story. Then the teacher read some
of the sentences or expressions and students were to decide how to mime it the best
way. All the students were involved. Aaron stayed aside. He did not bring in any new
ideas. He observed others without any interest. Amanda made loud comments, she
laughed but she also did not participate in the activity.
Next, the teacher asked students to make two groups. She explained that one group was
71
going to be the actors in the silent film, while the other group was going to read the text.
The students could decide what to do. It was not necessary for them to form two groups
of the same number of people. Amanda preferred reading at first but then she realized
she would not be able to read it properly so she chose to be in the group of actors. Aaron
was not sure so the teacher suggested him he might start with miming first. Everyone
had one or two roles to read or act out, yet the students were told that they would swap
their roles several times.
Then the groups worked on their parts. They got 5 minutes to prepare the comic as a
silent film. There was some disagreement on who was going to play whom. Amanda
refused to cooperate. She only calmed down when the teacher repeated the possibility to
play the role in the second round. She agreed, though there was a tension between the
students from time to time. Aaron did what others told him to do. He knew what was
going on and what was he supposed to do. Yet, he did not seem to enjoy it. He just
obeyed his friends. The teacher encouraged them to help each other, practise miming
and reading. They did so willingly.
The preparations took more time. Instead of 5 minutes there were 10 needed for
preparation. Finally they acted out the silent film. In the first round it did not work too
well. The readers had to wait for the others to finish their acting. Some of the readers
struggled with their text. Aaron was prompted but he managed to play his role. Amanda
played her role but without any enthusiasm and carelessly. After the first round the
teacher asked the students to play the silent film once more, keeping their roles at this
point, just to internalize the movements the procedure.
What followed was the change of roles within the groups. Most of the students were
happy to play other people‟s roles. The same was true about the readers. However,
Aaron did not pay attention much so he did not really know how to play his role.
Amanda found out what to do on her own. Aaron needed teacher‟s help for other
students were busy with their roles. Finally, they were ready to act the comic again.
There were several more changes. Aaron tried to focus on the task, he did not struggle
that much. Amanda lost her patience.
In the last part, students were asked to change groups. Readers became actors and vice
72
versa. There was no problem in that. Actors worked on them own. Readers were helped
by the teacher. They practised slow reading to make it easier for the actors to follow the
text. Aaron and Amanda required help. Students tried to help them. It worked quite well.
All the students got the idea and knew what they were supposed to do. There was only
enough time to play the film once. After that the lesson was finished. Students looked
tired. They worked hard.
A silent film Procedure – the second lesson
There was revision of all kinds of structures from the comic. Students came one by one
to the blackboard and acted out one of the sentences or set of words from the comic.
They were asked not to use their books this time. They remembered the words quite
well. Even Amanda was involved. However, Aaron was allowed to use his book, for he
looked rather lost. He finally managed to participate in the lesson. He orientated in the
text, though some of his answers were not correct or complete. When he was miming
the words others found it difficult to recognise what vocabulary item it was but they
managed after the teacher‟s help. Amanda did not get much opportunity to mime things,
but she did not seem to care much. She participated and observed the classroom. She
paid attention. Sometimes she peeped into the book to check the word. The teacher
tolerated it and encouraged her to come to the blackboard and act something out. It took
her some time. When she was ready she raised her hand, the teacher prised her and
invited her to show what she had prepared. She was quite good at miming, though a bit
timid, which sometimes made her gestures unclear for the others.
A silent film Procedure the third lesson
The lesson was aimed at checking the students‟ understanding of the comic. The teacher
prepared WH- questions (i.e. What, Why, Where, When, Who) for the students. The
questions were asked orally and every WH-word was mimed by the teacher. Students
were allowed to have their books opened. Aaron needed hints, which helped him to
answer the questions, like follow up questions, translation or pointing out the number of
the picture in the book. He needed more time in order to give the answer. Other students
did not disturb but they were rather bored. Amanda was ambitious and tried to answer
73
the questions. Though she often misunderstood the questions or wanted to give an
answer, not really focusing on the given question.
Conclusion
Though the activities were taken with a lot of enthusiasm they were quite demanding.
There was a need for cooperation, support and patients. Learning English was somehow
put aside for other aspects took it place. There was a lot of mother tongue discussion
especially among the actors. At the moment of putting together the reading and miming
the activity became chaotic and difficult for the teacher to maintain. It is possible that
the activity would have worked better with older students. I suppose acting the story
out, for example in a form of a role play, would have been more effective.
Amanda and Aaron were lost at the beginning. They needed a lot of support and help.
The students were supposed to help each other, but it was impossible at the beginning.
They were too much concerned about themselves. The teacher was unable to support all
of them. Aaron lost his concentration. Amanda became disruptive.
On the other hand, when the students got used to the procedure the activity started to
work better, became more fluent and attractive for the students. That is why the activity
would be more effective if it had been repeated with other texts as well. It is possible it
would take less time and struggle as the students would already be familiar with the
procedure and what is actually expected from them. The reason why I resign from
retrying the activity more often was lack of time and the fact the group was left behind
when compared to the other groups. Shortly speaking, the Silent film activity may work
better with more advanced students, or when the group has enough time to spare and
hence can afford to spend a few lessons on the activity.
A song Procedure – the first lesson
On the previous lesson students got acquainted with a new song from a film they
watched. The film enriched a set of lessons, which treaded about travelling and places to
74
visit. The song was also connected with the topic. Students put the song into their
notebooks on that lesson.
The teacher started the lesson with singing the song with a guitar, which was a worm up
and a revision of the previous lesson. Students were allowed to read the song from their
notebooks. Then the teacher asked some of them to read it out loud. Those students who
are not ready to read it on their own can read it with a friend they choose. Aaron and
Amanda choose their partners. They read the text with difficulties and leave out some
words.
Next, the teacher asks the students to stand up. The teacher cut the song into words and
expressions. All the class decides on how to express the meaning via gestures. If there is
a word students do not know the teacher tries to explain the word using gestures,
drawing or a paraphrase. When they are ready with the first verse of the song there
follows a revision, after which they continue with the second verse. Having the second
verse finished there again is a revision of the first and the second verse. The activity
continues till the end of the song. Everyone concentrates and take an active part in the
activity. Amanda shows a bit of her disapproval. It is clear she feels uneasy when it
comes to movements. Aaron forgets to say the words when miming the meaning. He
concentrates entirely on the movements. The teacher asks him to say the words as well
as show them. He struggles with that. It seems the activity is too much for him. Yet,
after revising the same words and movements again and again he finally gets it right.
Finally, the students are asked to sing the song from the beginning till the end and
accompany it with the movements. At this point the pace is important. They start to sing
it slowly, so that they have enough time to sing the words and show the meaning. The
students sing the song several times speeding it up. There is a lot of fun. As the pace
speeds up students tend to concentrate on the movements more than on the words. To
calm the students down the teacher support them to sing the song once more, this time
in a moderate pace. All students cooperate willingly. As Aaron likes singing he catches
the words quite quickly. He does not know it by hart yet. Amanda likes the motion, but
she does not much care about the words. The teacher shortly revised the song showing
all kinds of gestures from the song and asking the students to recall the words. It worked
well with regular students. Aaron and Amanda observed the rest of the class. They were
75
attentive but rather passive. After the activity the teacher continue with the material
started in the previous lessons. Students work well. Amanda and Aaron were rather
passive during the lesson.
A song Procedure – the second lesson
The lessons started with a warm up. Students were asked to stand up and sing the song
accompanying it with the movements. The teacher played the guitar and speeded the
pace up, the same way she did in the previous lesson. Then some of the students were
willing to be teachers and lead the song in front of the class. The teacher moved to the
back of the class. Presently, students were asked to sing a so called mini version of the
song, using just their fingers and minimising other gestures. All the students had a lot of
fun. The teacher even changed the pitch of the song so that it sounded as if mice were
singing. All students sang at the time. Amanda concentrated at the movements more.
She boycotted singing in a way. It seemed she did not especially like singing. Aaron
tried to both sing and mime the song. It was obvious it was sometimes difficult for him.
After the mini version came maxi version. Students used their whole body to mime the
song. This time the teacher encouraged them to sing it as if they were bears, loud and in
a low pitch. Students had a lot of fun. They did not feel embarrassed at all. Aaron did
not look relaxed. He concentrated and as he did not yet catch the words nor the
movements he could not gain from the activity as much as the others. Amanda behaved
well. She did not disturb nor spoil the activity.
After the worm up students went back to the topic of the lesson. Though the song was
no longer a lead in they worked and cooperate during the lesson. The same was true
about Amanda. Aaron‟s attentiveness did not change much. He still had problems with
inattentiveness.
A song procedure – the third lesson
In the third lesson another activity with the song was introduced. This time, however,
the activity took place in the middle of the lesson in order to have a break, a moment of
76
relaxation. All students were glad. They kept asking about the song from the beginning
of the lesson. Students singed and mimed the song once. They the teacher explained
them that in the activity they were to leave out some words so that only movement
would be left. At the beginning one word is left out. Then there are more and more
words. Student enjoyed the activity. Whenever somebody forgot and sang the word out
loud the others would laugh at them. The teacher however did not observe any
embarrassment or tension. She tried to make funny and cheering up comments so that
no one felt uneasy.
After approximately 7 minutes students were asked to take their seats. There was a short
revision of the vocabulary from the song. Student came to the blackboard one by one
and mimed one expression from the song. Others were guessing. Both Amanda and
Aaron were ready to take part in the activity. It was clear they had already learned some
of the words from the song.
After the activity the teacher continued the lesson. However, the students seemed rather
exhausted, tired and though they worked without any disturbance their concentration
and attentiveness was on a lower level.
A song conclusion
The activities students cooperated willingly. Regular students did not show any difficulties with
following the procedure. They recognised new expressions, their meaning and spelling quickly.
They also worked and cooperated more actively then during other types of activities Yet, I did
not observe any significant difference in progress made during the activities with movement
elements and progress made during activities without it.
As for Aaron, the combination of body movements and singing seemed rather difficult at the
beginning. He was attentive and tried to do his best, yet I am not sure whether the activities were
relaxing for him. It even looked as if he was a bit stressed at the beginning. The last activity
showed he internalized some of the expressions and caught the meaning as well as pronunciation
of some words. Again, however, I was not able to recognize any significant difference in his
progress during these activities and other activities not accompanied by movement.
77
As for Amanda she enjoyed the atmosphere of the activities, though she stood rather aside at the
beginning. She tended to observe the class more and was willing to step into the activity after
some time. It also took her more time to internalize the words and the movements.
It is questionable whether the students internalized the real meaning of the mimed words.
Whenever the teacher wanted to use some of the expressions on the lessons it was often
necessary to remind the students a motion from the song or sing a part of it. Then they knew
stride away, what the teacher had meant. It maybe, therefore, concluded that both movement and
translation (or picture when possible) is needed to internalize the meaning.
A silent film and a song – the test results
The activities were instructed in a way so that they help the students understand the meaning of
a given text. When being tested students were supposed to answer comprehension questions after
reading a short comic story. The story was very alike the comic stories the students had worked
on during the year. The questions were also similar to those given the students during the lessons
in both A and B groups. However, the fact that the students were to give sentence answers by
themselves caused them a lot of trouble on both tests. Both Teacher A and I concluded after the
pre test that all the students struggled with WH- questions. They were not sure about their
meaning. Knowing that, we often revised WH- questions in all groups, reminding the students
the importance of WH- questions. Also group 2B was exposed to. After the post test Teacher A
still complained about the problem with WH- questions. The test results had confirmed that.
Group 2A, which scored at the beginning the largest number of points when compared to the
other groups, was beaten by group 1B. 2A scored 9, 3 point out of 32 in the pre test and 17, 8 in
the post test. Group 1B scored 9 points in the pre test and 21, 3 point in the post test. The average
progress in 1B group was 12, 3 while in the group 2A it was only 8, 5.
As for the students with learning difficulties in the groups David, group 2A, showed the progress
of 7 points, Jack from the same group did not score any points on the post test. Teacher A
suggested that it may be due to his lack of concentration, changeable mood and attitude towards
the learning process. She claimed that Jack had always showed unstable results due to the
factors.
78
Kate, from the 1B group, scored 5 points in the pre test and 22, 5 in the post test. Her
improvement was then 17, 5 points, which was high above the average in her group.
In the light of these strongest groups group 2B was left behind. The average progress of the
groups was 5, 8 which was again the lowest. There were students, whose improvement was over
average or around it. Yet the average improvement was rather low. Amanda‟s score was 0 in the
pre test and 6 in the past tense. It is a low score when compared to the average improvement in
other groups. She was not able to give full sentence answers to the questions, but on the other
hand she did understand the questions, which should be considered as success for her.
As for Aaron he was not able to answer the questions neither in the pre nor in the post test. As he
always needed scaffolding when answering questions in the lessons it may be assumed that he
would be able to answer some of the questions orally.
In short, comprehension of a text is a very complex matter. Some students understand more when
the text is read for them and they struggle when they are to read it by themselves. Others,
however, prefer to read the text more. PPC always advises the teachers to check SLD students‟
knowledge orally suggesting, that their written performance may be misleading. This might be
the reason, why the students did not score many points in the test.
Moreover, the tests required written answers, while the teachers are advised by PPC to focus on
oral production in the case of students with learning disabilities. The research requires objective
proof of where the students started and where they were at the end of the research. That is why I
decided to use written tests, though it is not an assessment style I normally use with these
children. However, I would suggest some differences in the exercises on the test. For example
multiple choices, where students would have to choose best answers could be partly a solution
on the test. In that way students would not have to concentrate on the form of their answers, but
just choose the one they would find proper. Such a multiple choice would also check the
comprehension.
The fact, that, again, group 2B did not show that much progress may be due to the above
mentioned reasons. Another reason may be that the students got too little written exercises. Oral
exercises accompanied with movement dominated the lessons. Other groups had no, or a very
little of such lessons and they were also more teacher centred. I would rather not state at the
79
point that these proves the element of movement in the class as ineffective or even disruptive. It
calls for more research of many different teachers and different groups.
80
Final conclusion
The activities described in the section were some of those introduced to group 2B during the
research. They were to catch students‟ attention, build positive attitude, improve their English in
some areas and, hence, bring some experience of success. As I have already pointed out, the
positive attitude and experience are likely to encourage a student to work hard in the subject.
During the activities I paid a lot of attention to students with learning disabilities. However, it
was also important to see how ordinary students behaved, worked and progressed during the
research time.
My hypothesis that the body movements in the lesson would draw and hold the students‟
attention proved to be true in most of the cases. SLD students were on task most of the time,
when compared to the regular activities. The situation when it did not work was, when the
activity became too complex and demanding for the students, especially for SLD students.
Especially Aaron got lost and, though trying, he was not able to follow some of the activities.
The activities also proved to be useful when there was need for a break and when students
demonstrate tiredness or lack of concentration. What worked best in the situation, were the
activities connected with vocabulary and the activities accompanying songs. They did not take
too much time, were easy for both regular and SLD students to understand and brought some
results in both classroom work and on the test.
However, the activities should probably be used as the basis for other exercise like writing,
reading comprehension, answering questions, and grammar exercises. They should not be just
followed by oral production.
The second hypothesis that the activities would work the best with vocabulary items proved to be
true to some point. Students did remember the vocabulary items yet they practised it mainly
orally. There was not enough writing or using the vocabulary items in other exercises and
contexts.
As for my expectations that the element of movement would draw and hold the students'
attention during introduction and revision of certain grammar aspects, it also proved to be true to
an extent. It gave the students a lot of opportunity to use the grammar structures during the
81
activities. Yet, there seem to be need for more written exercises. Other groups had more time to
practise them and their scores were better.
Finally, I observed that if there are too many such activities in the lesson, students actually lose
the respect towards the subject. It meant that they no longer perceived the subject as an important
thing, which required hard work. As the activities usually took more time or were repeated in
a set of lessons. Whenever I ceased from using movement in the class and tried to focus on
different skills more, it took the students some time to realize they need to study and take some
responsibility for their learning. The students became too relaxed and got the impression that
English is easy and funny, so there was no need to learn it. This situation was anticipated and
was therefore not a surprise. I did want to combine all kinds of activities and not to cling to the
one researched so that no language area was neglected. It is needed to be said that the slower
pace affected other students‟ results, at least according to the test‟s results. It cannot be firmly
stated though, for there were some students in group 2B, whose average improvement and
number of points scored on the post test were upper average or close to it.
Accompanying students on their way of learning is often very demanding. All students are
individuals, have different needs, struggles, strengths, weaknesses, backgrounds, etc. As for SLD
students there can be a lot of struggle in language learning. Activities with elements of
movement were to support them in the first place. At the same time the activities were meant to
be arranged in such a way, so that other regular students would not be left behind when
compared to other students. I have some experience in teaching English via movement and
during the time it became clear that the activities are mostly appreciated by the students, as they
tried to do their best. Both regular and SLD students enjoy them. Yet, appreciation and
enjoyment do not necessary mean progress or success in the subject, though might be expected
as a result of students‟ becoming more optimistic, attentive and ready for work. From this angle I
perceive Aaron‟s and Amanda‟s attentiveness in the lesson as a very positive result of the
research.
Nonetheless, it is necessary to say that there was no significant improvement in any of language
areas. In fact the level of group 2B was lower in all areas after the research then it was at the
beginning. According to the tests group 1B showed the highest average progress among the all
four groups in the post test. Though the group was almost devoid of activities employing
movement during the whole research, it still turned out to be the strongest on the test. Even,
82
Kate, the dyslectic student in the group, made the biggest progress when compared to the other
SLD students. Amanda, from group 2B, also showed some improvement. It was not that
significant, but when I compare her results from the previous time they were definitely better at
the end of the research. However, bearing in mind the fact that she became stronger in other
subjects too, her improvement may be due to her growing up more than to other factors like
movement activities or lack of them.
The research generally proved movement activities to be effective attention catchers. I suggest
they would work best when used for this particular purpose. They also help students to
experience language in a different way, relax a bit, and lower their affective filter. Yet, according
to my research, the activities do not necessary bring progress. Rather it may happen that they
cause a regress due to slowing down the pace of the lesson, when they are time consuming or too
complex. Apart from that, the tests provided to mark students‟ progress should be prepared and
consulted with a PPC advisor or a teacher specialized in SLD issue. The results of the tests
would perhaps be more informative and reliable, should these procedures have been carried out
in practice.
Both the active research and the studies described in the theoretical and practical parts shed light
on the process of teaching for me. I had a lot of opportunities to look closer into the methodology
studies of teaching children with learning disabilities, and it proved to be a complex and
demanding issue. The theories and claims discussed in the theoretical part concerning learning
disabilities, their causes, brain laterality, and movement are of a mixed value. Yet, thanks to
interesting and profound reviews, scientific documents and discussions, I came to a conclusion
that it is best for a teacher to focus on teaching process as well as students‟ interests and needs of
a given time, place and environment, rather than be too concerned about unclear, disputable
theories.
83
Bibliography:
Bartoňová, Miroslava. Kapitoly ze specifických poruch učení I. Vymezení současné
problematiky. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2007. Print.
Dennison, Paul E. Brain Gym. Teacher’s Edition Reviewed. Venture, California: EduKinesthetics Inc., 1989. Print.
Dennison, Paul E., and Gail E. Dennison. Zapni si mozog!.Transl. Ĺubomíra Fallerová.
Nyíregyháza: Nyírség, 1993. Print.
Dzięgło, Dominika. “The Effectiveness of the Vocabulary Teaching Techniques of Total
Physical Response Storytelling.” MA thesis. University of Silesia, 2004. Print.
Kinsella, Kate. “Understanding and Empowering Diverse Learners in the ESL Classroom.”
Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Ed. Joy M. Reid. Boston, Massachusetts:
Heinle & Heinle Pub, 1995. 170-194. Print.
Kroonenberg, Nancy. “Meeting Language Learners‟ Sensory-Learning-Style Preferences.”
Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Ed. Joy M. Reid. Boston, Massachusetts:
Heinle & Heinle Pub, 1995. 74-86. Print.
Larsen-Freeman, Diane. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford
University Press, USA: 2000. Print.
Lockhard, Walter F., and Cristina Perez Arraiza. “Krashen‟s Model: The Theoretical Basis
of the Natural Approach.” Practical English Teaching Sep. 1988. 50-52. Print.
Oxford, Rebecca L. “Gender Differences in Language Learning Styles: What Do They
Mean?” Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Ed. Joy M. Reid. Boston,
Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Pub, 1995. 34-46. Print.
Peck, Sabrina. ”Learning Styles in Elementary School ESL.” Learning styles in the
ESL/EFL classroom. Ed. Joy M. Reid. Boston, Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Pub,
1995. 128-133. Print.
84
Reid, Joy. “Perceptual Learning Style Preference (PLSP).” Learning styles in the ESL/EFL
classroom. Ed. Joy M. Reid. Boston, Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Pub, 1995.
202-207. Print.
Schneider, Elke, and Margaret Crombie. Dyslexia and foreign language learning. David
Fulton Publishers, 2003. Print.
Serfontein, Gordon. Potíže dítěte s učením a chováním. Trans. Milan Koldinský. Praha:
Portál, 1999. Print.
Zelinková, Olga. Poruchy učení. Praha: Portál, 2003. Print.
Electronic sources:
Allen, Bill. “Understanding the Dynamics of The Corpus Callosum and Brain Integration.”
LD Coach.com. 2005. Web. 9 Dec 2009.
Asher, James J. “Language By Command The Total Physical Response approach to
learning language.” In Context: A Quarterly Humane Sustainable Culture 6 (1984):
35. Web. 8 Dec. 2009.
Asher, James J. Total Physical Response. Sky Oaks Productions, Inc. n.d. Web. 9 Dec.
2009.
Ballone, Lena M., and Charlene M. Czerniak. “Teachers‟ Beliefs About Accommodating
Students‟ Learning Styles In Science Classes.” Electronic Journal of Science
Education 6.2 (2001): 2-42. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Barrett, Stephen. “Applied Kinesiology: Muscle-Testing for „Allergies‟ and „Nutrient
Deficiencies‟.” Chirobase. n.p., 28 Mar. 2003. Web. 8 Dec. 2009.
Barrett, Stephen. “Mental Help: Procedures to Avoid.” Quackwatch.n.p., 10 July 2003.
Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
“Brain Gym & Educational Kinesiology.” Ki-Healings at Althaia House. n.p., n.d. Web. 7
Dec 2008.
85
Bricheno, Pat, and Mike Younger. “Some Unexpected Results of a Learning Styles
Intervention?” Raising Boys’ Achievement. Sep. 2004. Web. 6. Sep. 2009.
Bruer, John T. “In Search of ... Brain-Based Education.” The Brain and Learning. Ed.
Jossey-Bass Inc Pub, 2007. 51-69. Web. 16 Nov. 2009.
Carroll, Robert T. “Brain Gym (educational kinesiology).” The Skeptic’s Dictionary,
Robert T. Carroll, 23 Feb. 2009. Web. 16 Nov. 2009.
Carroll, Robert T. “Forer Effect.” The Skeptic’s Dictionary, 23 Feb. 2009. Robert T.
Carroll, 23 Jan. 2009. Web. 7 Nov. 2009.
Cave, Tammy, Jason Ludwar, and Wendy Williams. “Brain-based Learning.” Alberta.
Government of Alberta, 2005. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
“The Chi Machine Integrates the Brain & Body.” Oasis Energy Therapy, n.p., n.d. Web. 9
Dec. 2009.
Coffield, Frank, David Moseley, Elaine Hall, and Kathryn Ecclestone. Learning Styles and
Pedagogy in Post16 Learning: A Systematic and Critical Review. Trowbridge:
Learning and Skills Research Center, 2004. Web. 6 Dec. 2009.
Committee on Children with Disabilities. “The Treatment of Neurologically Impaired
Children Using Patterning.” Pediatrics 104.5 (1999): 1149-1151. Web. 9 Dec 2009.
Crombie, Margaret. “Foreign Language Learning and Dyslexia.” Hilary McColl. n.p., n.d.
Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Dennison, Paul E., and Gail E. Dennison. “Brain Gym History.” Brain Gym International.
Brain Gym International., 2009. Web. 9 Dec. 2009.
EdComs. “Education, Training and Employment.” Youth Justice Board. Youth Justice
Board., 2008. Web. 7 Dec. 2009.
86
Felder, Richard M., and Eunice R. Henriques. “Learning and Teaching Styles In Foreign
and Second Language Education.” Foreign Language Annals 28.1 (1995): 21-31.
Web. 7 Nov. 2009.
Geake, John Gregory. “The neurological basis of intelligence: A contrast with „brainbased‟ education.” Education-Line. Oxford Brookes University, 24 July 2006. Web.
7 June 2009.
Goldacre, Ben. “Brain Gym exercises do pupils no favours.” Guardian.co.uk. Guardian
News and Media Limited, 18 March 2006. Web. 9 Dec 2009.
Goswami, Usha. “Neuroscience and Education: From Research to Practise.” Nature
Review Neuroscience. University of Cambridge Faculty of Educatio, 12 April 2006.
Web. 9 Dec 2009.
Hanušová , Světlana. “Developing communicative competence in learners with specific
learning difficulties.” mood-link-a. Pedagogická fakulta, Masarykova univerzita,
2008. Web . 7 Nov. 2009.
Hanušová, Světlana. “Výuka cizích jazyků u detí s SPU a dyslexií.” Školní vzdělávací
program. Jazyk a jazyková komunikace. Pedagogická fakulta, Masarykova
universita, Dec. 2006. Web. 6. Oct. 2009.
Hastings, Steven. “Learning styles.” TES Connect. TSL Education Ltd., 4 Nov. 2005. Web.
7 Oct. 2009.
Hocking, Claire. “What is Brain Gym?.” Whole Brain Learning. Clair Hocking, 2005.
Web. 7 Dec. 2009.
Howard-Jones, Paul et al. “Neuroscience and Education: Issues and Opportunities.”
Teaching and Learning Research Programme. Teaching and Learning Research
Programme, 2007. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Jarvis, William T. “Chiropractic: A Skeptical View.” Chirobase. n.p., 28 April 2000.
Web. 8. Oct. 2009.
87
Juříčková, Olga. “Teaching English Vocabulary to Children with Specific Learning
Difficulties.” MA thesis. Univerzita Pardubice. University of Pardubice, 2006. Web.
7 Dec. 2009.
“Learning Connections Programme in Quinsland School.” Learning Connections. The
Learning Connections Centre, Sep. 2000. Web. 7 Jan. 2009.
Maguire, Tom. “Brain Gym”. HLT Magazine. Copyright Pilgrims Ltd., 2000. Web. 11
Nov. 2008.
Marinova-Todd, Stefka H., D. Bradford Marshall, and Catherine E. Snow. “Three
Misconceptions about Age and L2 Learning.” TESOL Quarterly 34.1 (2000): 9-34.
Web. 7. Oct. 2009.
Marsh, David et al. “Insights & Innovation. Special Educational Needs in Europe.
Teaching Languages to Learners with Special Needs.” European Commission, Jan.
2005. Web. 7 Jan. 2009.
McCrone, John. “„Right Brain‟ or „Left Brain‟-Myth Or Reality?” Rense.com. New
Scientist, RBI Limited, 2000. Web. 7. Oct. 2009.
McGinnis, Amanda Marie. “The Role of Attention in Second Language Development:
implications for language classrooms.” MA thesis. The University of Montana. The
University of Montana, Spring 2007. Web. 4 Dec. 2009.
Medical Dictionary. The Free Dictionary by Farlex, Inc., 2009. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Moris, Rich. “Left Brain, Right Brain, Whole Brain?” Sing Surf. Creative Commons
License, 2007. Web. 7 Oct. 2009.
Novella, Steven. “Chiropractic – „A Brief Overview‟, Part 1.” Science-Based Medicine.
Science-Based Medicine, June 2009. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Novella, Steven. “Psychomotor Patterning.” Science & Pseudoscience Review in Mental
Health. Connecticut Skeptic 1.4 (1996): 6. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
88
Ortiz, Alba. “English Language Learners with Special Needs Effective Instructional
Strategies.” CAL Center for Applied Linguistics. CAL, Dec. 2001. Web. 7 Jan. 2009.
Oxford, Rebecca L. “Language Learning Styles and Strategies: an Overview.” Language
Styles and Strategies. n. p., 2003. Web. 7 Dec. 2009.
Pytel, Barbara. “Brain Gym, Brain Exercise Users Claim Success.” Suite 101.com.Barbara
Pytel, 28 Jun 2007. Web. 9 Dec 2009.
Ramey, David. “PBS Was Correct to Criticize Chiropractic Pseudoscience: A Response to
the American Chiropractic Association.” National Council Against Health Fraud.
Stephen Barrett., 19 June 2001. NCAHF. Web . 8 Oct. 2009.
Randerson, James. “Experts dismiss educational claims of Brain Gym programme.”
Guardian.co.uk. Guardian News and Media Limited, 3 April 2008. Web. 9 Dec
2009.
Richards, Jack C., and Theodore S. Rodgers. “Total Physical Approach.” Approaches and
Methods in Language Teaching.
En Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987. 87-98. Retrieved at Reino Unido.
Web. 7 Oct. 2009.
Rochford, Regina A., and Christine Mangino. “Are You Teaching the Way your Students
Learn?” Radical Pedagogy 8.1 (2006): n. pag. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Romeo, Ken. “Krashen and Terrell‟s „Natural Approach‟.” Stanford University. Stanford
University, California, 2007. Web. 6. Sep. 2009. Web. 8 Dec. 2009.
Sharp, John G., Jenny Byrne, and Rob Bowker. “The trouble with VAK.” e-journal of the
British Education Studies Association 1.1 (2008): 89-97. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Snook, Ivan. “Learning Styles and Other Modern Educational Myths.”. PESA Philosophy
of Education Society of Australasia. Ivan Snook, 2007. Web. 6. Sep. 2009.
Swain, Frank, and Simon Evans. “Brain Gym.” Sense about Science. Sense about Science,
April 2008. Web. 9 Dec 2009.
89
Titlová, Helena. “Multisensory Approach in Teaching English to Upper Primary Learners
with SLD.” MA thesis. Pedagogická fakulta Masarykovy university. Masarykova
univerzita, 2007. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Vanderwolf, Case. “Methods of teaching. Research Evidence vs. Ideology and SelfInterest.” SQE Society for Quality Education, Dec. 1993. Web. 6 Oct. 2009.
Walcot-Gayda, Elizabeth. “Understanding Learning Disabilities.” Fact Sheet. 44.1 (2004):
n. pag. Web. 7 Jan. 2009.
Werstler, Jessica M. “Total Physical Response Storytelling: a Study in Actively Engaging
Students Across the Modalities.” MA thesis. Central Connecticut State University
Digital Archive. Central Connecticut State University, Dec. 2002. Web. 4 Dec. 2009.
Additional Sources:
Dunn, Opal. Beginning English with young children. London and Basingstoke: Macmillan
Publishers Ltd., 1983. Print.
Gruder, David. “Establishing Energy System Readiness to Benefit from Treatment.”
Energy Psychology. Gregory Nicosia, 2006. Web . 9 Dec 2009.
MLA Citation Examples. University of Maryland University College, 2009. Web. 9. Dec.
2009.
Niehaus, Shane. “Brain Gym Works!” Spectrum Whole Person Training. n.p., n.d. Web. 9
Dec 2009.
The Purdue OWL Family of Sites. The Writing Lab and OWL at Purdue and Purdue U,
2009. Web. 9 Dec. 2009.
90
ROSZAK Kamila. Activities for Teaching English to Children with Special Needs. Brno:
Masaryk University, Faculty of Education, Department of English Language and Literature,
2009. 92 p., Supervisor Dr. Rita Chalmers Collins
Annotation
The work deals with the topic concerning Activities with element of movement for teaching
English to children with special needs, that is students with special learning disabilities (SLD)
and attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD). The objective of the thesis is to show, how
movement activities work with SLD and regular students. The theoretical part of the thesis
focuses on theories and methods that explain the reasons for various learning difficulties and
propose activities with element of movement as a possible help. It shows the problem from
various points of view, not only methodological but also scientific. In practical part I describe an
active research aimed at the issue of the activities and both regular students as well as students
with special needs. The chapters describe the school where the active research was done, the
teachers teaching there and the students who participated in it. There is a description of activities
done in the lessons and conclusions based on the students‟ action in the class and their test
results. The final conclusion gives a summary of the active research and draws some conclusions
based on it.
Keywords: Learning disabilities, special learning disabilities (SLD), Learning Style model,
Brain Gym, Total Physical Response (TPR), brain, hemispheres, laterality, scientific, scientific
evidence, neuroscience, kinaesthetic, movement, attention.
91
Anotace
Diplomová práce pojednává o aktivitách provázených pohybem ve výuce angličtiny dětí se
specifickými poruchami učení (SPU) a poruchami pozornosti (ADHD). Cílem této práce je
ukázat, jak tyto aktivity fungují ve vyučování anglického jazyka. Teoretická část je zaměřena na
teorie a metody. Vysvětluji možné důvody pro potíže při učení a poukazuji na aktivity provázené
pohybem jako na pomocné a účinné. Tato problematika je dále ukázána z různého úhlu pohledu,
nejen metodického, ale také vědeckého. V praktické části popisuji aktivní výzkum zaměřený na
problematiku těchto aktivit a jejich vliv jak na běžné žáky, tak na žáky se speciálními potřebami.
V této části popisuji školu, ve které byl tento výzkum prováděn, učitele a také žáky, kteří se ho
zúčastnili. Následně jsou popsány jednotlivé aktivity a závěr založený na práci žáků v těchto
hodinách a na výsledcích provedených testů. Konečný záběr shrnuje tento výzkum.
Klíčová slova: : Poruchy učení, specifické poruchy učení (SPU), styly učení, Cvičení Mozku,
celková fyzická odpověď (TPR), mozek, hemisféry, lateralita, věda, vědecké důkazy, neurologie,
kinestetický, pohyb, pozornost
92