Course:KIN355/2020 Projects/School Readiness

Force creation and stability at the time of projection

Defining the Concept and Its Importance

School readiness can be defined as the child’s ability to engage in the learning environment, the school’s preparedness for children, and support from family and community (High, 2008). Moreover, school readiness refers to the development of the whole child (High, 2008). Thus, it encompasses the child’s physical, social, motor, emotional, and language ability before kindergarten entry level (High, 2008). These behaviours from early experiences have been shown to be a significant contributor to academic performance (Sherry & Draper, 2013).

Prerequisites such as self-regulation and executive functioning are both important components when determining future academic success (McClelland et al., 2014). Complex executive functioning, such as the ability to problem solve, think critically, and reason, rely heavily on basic functions including inhibitory control, working memory, cognitive flexibility and attentional control (Bredin 2020; Diamond, 2010). Inhibitory control refers to the ability to ignore distraction; working memory is the ability to retain information and integrate it; cognitive flexibility is to view different perspectives and control attention; attentional control is the ability to attend to relevant and ignore irrelevant stimuli (Bredin 2020; Diamond, 2006). McClelland et al., (2014) also found that prekindergarten and kindergarten children showed better executive functioning ability when they scored higher on the behavioural regulation measure, Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders. Children must be proficient within basic executive functioning areas of development in order to exhibit preparedness for school. The failure to do so may exhibit challenges in learning and hinder academic achievement (Blair, 2002).

Fortunately, there is no distinct division in the brain between cognitive and motor control so utilization in one area may benefit the other (Diamond, 2010). In addition, there is co-activation between the prefrontal cortex and cerebellum that is associated with many cognitive tasks (Diamond, 2000). This becomes particularly important when analyzing early motor gross patterns and behaviours in young children in terms of determining school readiness. Motor behaviour can then enhance cognitive functioning in young children. This is highlighted in one study that found exercise and aerobic physical activity were shown to improve executive functioning and cognition (Hillman, Erickson, & Kramer, 2008). Motor behaviour can therefore improve a child’s sensorimotor experience, enhance fine and gross motor skills, and increase perceptual and spatial ability (Sherry & Draper, 2013). It is significant because early interventions promoting play, physical activity and motor behaviour are deemed important in predicting a child’s academic performance in school. Children who master basic cognitive abilities (inhibitory control, working memory, cognition) and self-regulation through the facilitation of motor behaviour can then demonstrate better academic performance and school readiness.

Role in Childhood Development and Contemporary Considerations

There is literature demonstrating the downward trend of school readiness among children beginning from the 1990s (Sherry & Draper, 2013; Dahl & NBER Working Papers, 2005). The contemporary issue regarding school readiness can be partly attributed to the growing gap between high and low income families as well as the differences in parental expenditure on children (Reardon & Portilla, 2016). It has been identified that following the 1990s, parental spending was significantly greater in children under 6 years of age (Kornrich & Furstenberg). High income families increased 27% of their spending towards children ages 0-5 and low income increased only 12% (Reardon & Portilla, 2016). These implications have shown that children born into poverty have lower scores on verbal ability, standardized tests and behavioural regulation (Emig & Child Trends, 2000) which can overall decrease school readiness. The funding for early intervention programs that promote motor skills have been identified, causing an increase in IQ scores and improved academic success.(Spodek & Saracho, 2006;2005).

Economically disadvantaged families may not have the resources or environment necessary to facilitate healthy cognitive development in children (Sherry & Draper, 2013) whereas more affluent families can afford to invest more money towards physical activity programs. Although the effect of sport participation is mostly studied on older children, enrolling children in early sports programs can possibly improve cognitive and perceptual development, executive functioning, and retention of motor skills (Becker, Grist, Caudle & Watson, 2018). Another study also found that activity based intervention in preschool children can improve locomotor behaviour although it was not measured with school readiness (Apache, 2005). Basic motor behaviour such as kicking, throwing and catching are working the attention and inhibitory control of the child to prepare for school readiness (Becker, Grist, Caudle & Watson, 2018). Mastering of motor skills can then be correlated with intellectual performance (Oja & Jürimäe, 2002). Evidence supporting this would be the role of the cerebellum in the brain moderating both motor control and cognitive function (Diamond, 2000). Overall, early participation in some sort of physical activity can help the child build school readiness.

Families that live in overcrowded neighbourhoods have access to small spaces which correlates to reduced play opportunities for young children. It can hinder their school readiness and later learning (Emig & Child Trends, 2000). Some studies have shown that participation in outdoor and complex play, greatly improves school readiness (Becker, Grist, Caudle, & Watson, 2018) while others have found that indoor physical activities are more closely related to developing critical thinking skills needed for learning (Oja & Jürimäe, 2002). Play encourages body movement, improving coordination and allowing exposure to various environmental stimuli that enhance cognitive function (Sherry & Draper, 2013).

There are prominent sex differences regarding physical activity in a sample of children 6 years of age. Girls spend less time outdoors in comparison to boys but there was no significant difference in school readiness (Oja & Jürimäe, 2002).

Exposure to technology and screen-time is another important trend affecting school readiness in children today. An extensive body of literature discovered negative developmental effects associated with the use of technology in young children (Duch, Fisher, Ensari, & Harrinton, 2013; Tomopoulos et al., 2010). High levels of screen time are associated with low levels of physical activity (Greca & Loch, 2016) which can have adverse effects on cognitive development (Duch et al., 1013) and delay school readiness. Consequently, children who engage in high levels of screen-time exhibit poor vocabulary scores (Carson, Rahman & Wiebe, 2017) while children with higher rates of physical activity showed better fine motor control (Oja & Jürimäe, 2002). Deprivations in school readiness may be reversible if proper gross motor skill interventions are integrated to reach adequate levels of cognitive function, perceptual ability and fine motor skills (Sherry & Draper, 2013). These findings are consistent with the role motor behaviour play during early childhood to predict school readiness and future academic performances.

Practical Applications

As previously discussed, school readiness depends largely on children’s ability to regulate their own behaviour. Selecting and successfully monitoring behaviours is achieved through executive functioning, which is a set of mental skills including attentional control, working memory, inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility (High, 2008). The development of these skills is necessary for cognitive control of behaviour, a major component of school readiness. As a result, the following activities will focus primarily on  improving and developing executive function.

Game 1: What time is it Mr. Fox?

Purpose: This activity encompasses all four of the major components in executive functioning. Attentional control refers to the individuals capacity to attend to the relevant stimuli such as the time Mr. Fox calls out, and ignore the irrelevant stimuli such as a peer tying a shoelace. Cognitive flexibility is the ability to switch between tasks and alter movement patterns to assist in adapting to changes in the environment. For example, as the game is played students will be able to shift between responses, generate alternative strategies and learn from errors. They will have to decide how big their steps will be, and what the most effective strategy will be to avoid being tagged but also reach Mr. Fox to win the game. Inhibitory control is the ability to develop control by learning to ignore a behavioural impulse and carry out a more appropriate behaviour. For example, the students ability to suppress the prepotent motor response of moving forward after reaching the designated number of steps (as indicated by Mr. Fox). Working memory is a type of memory used for reasoning and decision-making. This is seen when players myst pay attention to both the number of steps taken and the time Mr. Fox is expressing.

Target Age: 4-7 years old (Students should be able to run and count to 10)

Equipment/Environmental Space: No equipment is required. The activity can be played anywhere, whether inside a gymnasium or a field. The only requirement is a large space where children are able to move safely.

Instructions: 'What time is it Mr. Fox?' requires at least three people, but more people make more fun. The objective of the game is to be the last player standing.

1. All players must be lined up, side-by-side at one end of the room/field.
2. One leader will be selected to be “Mr. Fox” and they will stand at the opposing end of the play space.
3. All at once, players will ask “What time is it Mr. Fox?”.
4. Mr. Fox responds by calling out a time of day. Each time corresponds to the number of steps the players must take. For example, if Mr. Fox calls out 9 o’clock, players must take 9 steps forward. The players can decide how big or small each of their steps are
5. Once Mr. Fox says “Midnight” he has the ability to turn around and tag the players before they reach their starting line. If Mr. Fox tags any players, they become foxes with him.
6. The game continues with Mr. Fox calling out times, and players taking the designated number of steps forward and running back to the start space, until all players are caught.
7. The final player who is left will be “Mr. Fox” the following round.

(Harvard University, n.d.)

Modifications/Extensions: To ensure all students are optimally challenged various extensions and modifications can be made.

Extensions can be made by altering the players form of locomotion. Rather than taking steps (after Mr. Fox calls out a time), students could be instructed to move using a different fundamental movement skill such as hopping or skipping. Further, once the players have taken their steps and are waiting for Mr. Fox to call out another time, they could improve their balance by waiting on one foot.

Modifications can be made to increase inclusivity of the classroom. The size of the playing space can either decrease (or increase to enhance the difficulty). Limiting the playing area will allow players to run a shorter distance but will also make it easier for Mr. Fox to catch them. Another modification is through peer assistance. Having students pair up will build self-confidence and will alter the game dynamics by not singling out any players. Having students with different abilities work together would also build classroom rapport, work on communication and teamwork skills.

Game 2: Simon Says

Purpose: This activity encompasses all four of the major components in executive functioning. Attentional control refers to the individuals capacity to attend to the relevant stimuli such as whether or not Simon says “Simon says” or not. If Simon does not say “Simon says” the player should be able to ignore the irrelevant stimuli such the movement simon has indicated. Cognitive flexibility is required for the children to successfully change their behaviour according to the different set of rules – if the player hears ‘Simon says’ they know to listen to the preceding instruction. Inhibitory control is the ability to develop control by learning to ignore a behavioural impulse and carry out a more appropriate behaviour. For example, the students ability to suppress the prepotent motor response of preforming a movement even when Simon does not say “Simon says”. Finally, working memory will be tested as the player must remember the rules of the game and apply them to the competition.  

Target Age: 3-8 years of age

Equipment/Environmental Space: No equipment is required. The activity can be played anywhere, whether inside a gymnasium or a field. The only requirement is a large space where children are able to move safely.

Instructions: ‘Simon Says’ requires at least three people, but more people make for more fun. The objective of the game is to follow instructions and stay in the game as long as possible; the last player standing wins and becomes the next ‘Simon’.

1. One person is selected to be Simon, they will stand in front of the group
2. The remaining players will lined up side-by-side at one end of the playing area.
3. Standing in front of the group Simon tells the players what they must do.
4. Players must ONLY obey what Simons says when Simon begins with the words “Simon Says”. For example, if Simon says “Simon says touch your nose” then all players must touch their nose. But if Simon says “touch your nose” then no players should touch their nose; if they do they are out.
5. The game continues until there is only one person left in the game, this person will become the next ‘Simon’.

Modifications/Extensions To ensure all students are optimally challenged various extensions and modifications can be made.

To increase simplicity of the game, Simon could be limited to five different directions. For example, Simon is only allowed to name parts of the face to touch. This way players have less actions and body parts to remember.

To increase difficulty, players could incorporate more movement. For example, “Simon says do five jumping jacks”, this would incorporate more physical activity and improve fundamental movement skills. Another extension would be ‘Simon Says do the Opposite’. In this version the players have to do the opposite of what Simon indicates. For example, if Simons says “Simon says sit down” the players have to stand. If Simon says “Simon says be quiet” everyone makes a lot of noise. But if Simon says “be quiet” the players must be quiet.

Summary

School readiness encompasses: the support of family, the school’s preparedness for children and the child’s ability to engage in the learning environment. It refers to the development of the whole child. School readiness is determined through analyzing early gross motor patterns and behaviours. Children who score high on behavioural regulation measures generally have strong executive functioning abilities, which are key determinants for school preparedness. Children from low-income families generally lack school readiness. It is believed that low-income parents lack the ability to make expenditures on pre-school activities, like early childhood sports programs, which have been shown to improve school readiness.

References

Apache, R. R. G. (2005). Activity-based intervention in motor skill development. Perceptual and

Motor Skills, 100(3_suppl), 1011-1020. doi:10.2466/pms.100.3c.1011-1020

Blair, C. (2002). School readiness. integrating cognition and emotion in a neurobiological

conceptualization of children's functioning at school entry. The American Psychologist, 57(2), 111-127. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.57.2.111

Becker, D. R., Grist, C. L., Caudle, L. A., & Watson, M. K. (2018). Complex physical activity,

outdoor play, and school readiness among preschoolers. Global Education Review, 5(2), 110.

Bredin, S. (2020) Physical Activity and Executive Function [File format]. https://canvas.ubc.ca/courses/60344/pages/6-dot-3-sport-and-executive-function?module_item_id=2482533

Carson, V., Rahman, A. A., & Wiebe, S. A. (2017). Associations of subjectively and objectively

measured sedentary behavior and physical activity with cognitive development in the early years. Mental Health and Physical Activity, 13, 1-8. doi:10.1016/j.mhpa.2017.05.003

Dahl, G. B., & NBER Working Papers. (2005). Impact of family income on child achievement

National Bureau of Economic Research.

Diamond, A. (2000). Close interrelation of motor development and cognitive development and

of the cerebellum and prefrontal cortex. Child Development, 71(1), 44-56. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00117

Diamond, A. 2006. “The early development of executive functions”. In Lifespan Cognition:

Mechanisms of Change Edited by: Bialystok, E. and Craik, F. I.M. 70–95. New York: Oxford University Press.

Diamond, A. (2010). The evidence base for improving school outcomes by addressing the whole

child and by addressing skills and attitudes, not just content. Early Education and Development, 21(5), 780-793. doi:10.1080/10409289.2010.514522

Duch, H., Fisher, E. M., Ensari, I., & Harrington, A. (2013). Screen time use in children under 3

years old: A systematic review of correlates. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 10(1), 102-102. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-10-102

Emig, C., Ed, & Child Trends, Inc., Washington, DC. (2000). School readiness: Helping communities get children ready for school and schools ready for children. child trends research brief. ().

Greca, João Paulo de Aguiar, Silva, D. A. S., & Loch, M. R. (2016). Physical activity and screen

time in children and adolescents in a medium size town in the south of brazil. Revista Paulista De Pediatria, 34(3), 316-322. doi:10.1016/j.rppede.2016.01.001

Harvard University. (n.d.) Executive Function Activities. Center on the Developing Child. https://www.neurodevelop.com/File/8b7deb81-280e-445c-b2ec-640e04b09fac

Hillman, C. H., Erickson, K. I. and Kramer, A. F. 2008. Be smart, exercise your heart: Exercise

effects on brain and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9: 58–65.

High, P. C., and Committee on Early Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care and Council on

School Health, American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Early Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care and Council on School Health, & and the Committee on Early Childhood, Adoption, and Dependent Care and Council on School Health. (2008). School readiness. Pediatrics, 121(4), e1008-e1015. doi:10.1542/peds.2008-0079

Kornrich, S., & Furstenberg, F. (2012;2013;). Investing in children: Changes in parental

spending on children, 1972–2007. Demography, 50(1), 1-23. doi:10.1007/s13524-012-0146-4

McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Duncan, R., Bowles, R. P., Acock, A. C., Miao, A., & Pratt,

M. E. (2014). Predictors of early growth in academic achievement: The head-toes-knees-shoulders task. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 599. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00599

Oja, L., & Jürimäe, T. (2002). Physical activity, motor ability, and school readiness of 6-yr.-old

children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95(2), 407. doi:10.2466/PMS.95.5.407-415

Reardon, S. F., & Portilla, X. A. (2016). Recent trends in income, racial, and ethnic school

readiness gaps at kindergarten entry. AERA Open, 2(3), 233285841665734. doi:10.1177/2332858416657343

Rubin, R. (1972). Sex differences in effects of kindergarten attendance on development of school

readiness and language skills. The Elementary School Journal, 72(5), 265-274. doi:10.1086/460704

Spodek, B., & Saracho, O. N. (2006;2005;). Handbook of research on the education of young

children (2nd ed.). Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi:10.4324/9781315045511

Sherry, K., & Draper, C. E. (2013). The relationship between gross motor skills and school

readiness in early childhood: Making the case in south africa. Early Child Development and Care, 183(9), 1293-1310. doi:10.1080/03004430.2012.721358

Tomopoulos, S., Dreyer, B. P., Berkule, S., Fierman, A. H., Brockmeyer, C., & Mendelsohn, A.

L. (2010). Infant media exposure and toddler development. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 164(12), 1105-1111. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.235

Welsh, J. A., Nix, R. L., Blair, C., Bierman, K. L., & Nelson, K. E. (2010). The development of

cognitive skills and gains in academic school readiness for children from low-income families. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 43-53. doi:10.1037/a0016738