How Often Do You Move? Improving Student Learning in the Elementary Classroom through Purposeful Movement

Emily McGregor, Karen Swabey, Darren Pullen

Faculty of Education, University of Tasmania, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia.

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2015.36002                

Abstract

It is estimated that 85 percent of students in school are natural kinaesthetic learners. It has been suggested that these particular learners are not being catered to through traditional teaching practices. There is a growing body of evidence to support the connection between physical movement and increased student academic achievement. This research differs from existing literature as it focuses on teachers’ inclusion of physical movement in everyday classroom learning. The aim of this research was to investigate how and why elementary school teachers incorporate movement into everyday classroom learning. Qualitatively, significant differences were found between how teachers believed they integrated movement into their everyday classroom learning, and how movement can be integrated to benefit student’s engagement and academic achievement. These findings suggest that the integration of movement into everyday classroom learning significantly increases student engagement. Professional development for teachers as well as communities of practice, need to be accessible by teachers in order for them to learn how to integrate movement into their everyday classroom learning and therefore increase their students’ academic achievement as well as engagement in learning.

Keywords

Elementary Education, Purposeful Movement

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Whitton, D., Sinclair, C., Barker, K., Nanlohy, P. and Nosworthy, M. (2004) Learning for Teaching, Teaching for Learning. Thomson Social Science Press, Melbourne.
[2]	Spielmann, C. (2012) The Effects of Movement Based Learning on Student Achievement in the Elementary School Classroom. RevaRitz Shop, Hartford.
[3]	Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2014) National Assessment Program—Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). http://www.nap.edu.au/naplan/naplan.html
[4]	Tinning, R., McCuaig, L. and Hunter, L. (2006) Teaching Health and Physical Education in Australian Schools. Pearson, Frenchs Forest.
[5]	Reynolds, R. (2012) Teaching History, Geography and SOSE in the Primary School. 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.
[6]	Kraft, R. (1990) Experiential Learning. University Press, Denver.
[7]	Smith, P. and Pellegrini, A. (2013) Learning through Play. http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/documents/Smith-PellegriniANGxp2.pdf
[8]	Wade, V. (2008) Active Intervention: Kinesthetic Learning Style Leavens the Lump of Student Achievement of Autistic Students. Ph.D. Thesis, Capella University, Minneapolis.
[9]	Whitmire, R. (2010) Why Boys Fail. American Management Association, New York.
[10]	Ratey, J. (2008) Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain. Little Brown, New York.
[11]	Ashman, A. and Elkins, J. (2012) Education for Inclusion and Diversity. 4th Edition, Pearson, Frenchs Forest.
[12]	O’Leary, Z. (2010) The Essential Guild to Doing Your Research Project. Sage, London.
[13]	Saldana, J. (2009) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Sage, London.
[14]	McBride, B. (2011) Closing the Achievement Gap: Teaching to Gender Differences. https://www.nassp.org/tabid/3788/default.aspx?topic=Closing_the_Achievement_Gap_Teaching_to_Gender_Differences
[15]	Moyer, K. and von Haller Gilmer, B. (1954) The Concepts of Attention Spans in Children. The Elementary School Journal, 54, 464-466. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/458623
[16]	Kennedy, M. (1986) A Rationale. Arithmetic Teacher, 33, 6-7.
[17]	Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning Meaning and Identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932
[18]	Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books, New York.