Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Physical Literacy Assessment and Its Potential for Identification and Treatment of Children with Neuro-Developmental Behavioral Intellectual Disorders

  • Screening (J Cairney, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Developmental Disorders Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The following commentary proposes that the current identification protocols for identifying children with neuro-developmental behavioral intellectual disorders (NDBIDs) are limited. Increasing prevalence of physical inactivity in children and those diagnosed with NDBIDs creating public health concerns, new methods of identification, and treatment may be warranted. We suggest the diagnostic and treatment protocols for all children (not just those with NDBIDs) may be enhanced by using the concept of physical literacy as a philosophical premise for assessment instrument design and strength-based treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization. Quality physical education guidelines for policy makers. Paris: UNESCO Press; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  2. United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization. International charter of physical education, physical activity and sport. Paris: UNESCO Press; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Whitehead M. Definition of physical literacy and clarification on related issues. J Sport Sci Phys Ed. 2013;65:28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Almond L. What is the value of physical literacy and why is physical literacy valuable. J Sport Sci Phys Ed. 2013;65:35–41.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dudley D. A conceptual model of observed physical literacy. The Phys Edu 2015. 2015;72(5):236–60 .The author presents a unique conceptual model of observed physical literacy and establishes an assessment rubric on which future assessment protocols may be based. Seminal definitions of physical literacy and numerous models of physical education instruction were reviewed to establish common core elements of physical literacy. These core elements were then viewed through a Structure of Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) taxonomy lens to establish an assessment rubric that may be applied to extend understanding of student learning within this construct. The established core elements of physical literacy and the application of the SOLO taxonomy provide a potentially useful tool for future assessment item development.

    Google Scholar 

  6. LePrade R, Agel J, Baker J, Brenner JS, Cordasco FA, Cote J, et al. AOSSM early sport specialization consensus statement. Ortho J Sports Med. 2016;4(4):1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Antonovsky A. The salutogenic model as a theory to guide health promotion. Health Promot Int. 1996;11(1):11–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chief Medical Officer. Start active, stay active: a report on physical activity from the four home countries’ Chief Medical Officers. Department of Health. UK Government; 2011.

  9. Murray MJ. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in the context of autism spectrum disorders. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2010;12:382–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. World Health Organization. Meeting report: autism spectrum disorders and other developmental disorders: from raising awareness to building capacity. Geneva: WHO Production Services; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cairney J, Veldhuizen S. Is developmental coordination disorder a fundamental cause of inactivity and health-related fitness in children? Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;55(Suppl 4):55–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Orton ST. Reading, writing and speech problem in childcare: a presentation of certain types of disorders in the development of the language faculty. New York: WW Norton & Company; 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cairney J. Developmental coordination disorder and its consequences. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Chapter 1: developmental coordination disorder and its consequences: an introduction to the problem; 2015.

  14. Cairney J, King-Dowling S. Developmental coordination disorder. In: Matsen JL, editor. Co-morbid conditions in children with autism spectrum disorder. Cham: Springer; 2016 . p. 303–23.Recent review on research linking motor coordination problems and/or DCD to ASD.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Gillberg C. Deficits in attention, motor control, and perception: a brief review. Arch Dis Child. 2003;88:904–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Bruininks RH. Bruininks-Oseretsky test of motor proficiency examiners manual. Circle Pines: American Guidance Service; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Henderson SE, Sugden DA. Movement assessment battery for children. Therapy Skill Builders: Sidcup; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Folio MR, Fewell RR. Peabody developmental motor scales and activity cards. Austin: PRO-ED; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ulrich D. Test of gross motor development, 2nd edition. Examiner’s manual. Austin: PRO-ED; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Longmuir P, Boyer C, Lloyd M, Yang Y, Boiarskaia E, Zhu W, Tremblay M. The Canadian assessment of physical literacy: methods for children grades 4 to 6 (8 to 12 years). BMC Public Health. 2015;15:767.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Sport for Life Society. Physical literacy assessment for youth (PLAY) tools. Accessed via http://play.physicalliteracy.ca/ 5th June 2016.

  22. Blondis T. Motor disorders and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Pediatr Clin N Am. 1999;46(5):899–913.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Blythe S. The importance of movement in early development—foundation of developing physical literacy. J Sport Sci Phys Ed. 2013;65:98–109.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Biggs J, Collis KF. Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic; 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Thelan E, Smith L. A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Goodyear VG, Dudley, DA. I’m a facilitator of learning: understanding what teachers and students do within student-centered physical education models. Quest. 2015;67:274–89 .This article defines teacher action in student-centered learning environments. Through an exploration of teacher behavior, teacher–student interactions, and discussions around teacher-as-activator, the article argues that the teacher must play an active role in the classroom and should be considered much more than a “guide on the side.” Teachers should use a range of direct and indirect behaviors and dialogical exchanges to support and extend learning. These actions and interactions should be contextually relevant and aligned with the learning aims of the student-centered approach. In suggesting that facilitation provides a narrow perspective on teacher action, the article calls for further consideration around teacher-as-activator to consider the teacher as someone who activates new learning possibilities.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. World Health Organization. Report of the commission on ending childhood obesity. Geneva: WHO Production Services; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Missiuna CA, Pollock NA, Levac DE, Campbell WN, Whalen SD, Bennett SM, et al. Partnering for change: an innovative school-based occupational therapy service delivery model for children with developmental coordination disorder. Can J Occu Ther. 2012;79(1):41–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Studies, Faculty of Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia

    Dean Dudley

  2. Physical Literacy Research Group: Sport for Life Society, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Dean Dudley, Dean Kriellaars & John Cairney

  3. Faculty of Health Sciences, College of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Manitoba, R106 - 771 McDermot Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0T6, Canada

    Dean Kriellaars

  4. Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, 100 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8P 1H6, Canada

    John Cairney

  5. Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, 100 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8P 1H6, Canada

    John Cairney

Authors
  1. Dean Dudley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dean Kriellaars
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John Cairney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dean Dudley.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Dean Dudley, Dean Kriellaars, and John Cairney declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Screening

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dudley, D., Kriellaars, D. & Cairney, J. Physical Literacy Assessment and Its Potential for Identification and Treatment of Children with Neuro-Developmental Behavioral Intellectual Disorders. Curr Dev Disord Rep 3, 195–199 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-016-0092-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-016-0092-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation