Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [The UC Irvine Libraries]On: 07 November 2014, At: 17:42Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Early Child Development and CarePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gecd20
Promoting physical activity during earlychildhoodCarla Vidoni a & Arlene Ignico ba Department of Health & Sport Sciences , University ofLouisville , 114 Crawford Gym, Louisville, KY, 40223, USAb School of Physical Education, Sport and Exercise Science , BallState University , Muncie, Indiana, USAPublished online: 26 Nov 2010.
To cite this article: Carla Vidoni & Arlene Ignico (2011) Promoting physical activity during earlychildhood, Early Child Development and Care, 181:9, 1261-1269
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2010.523786
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Early Child Development and Care
ISSN 0300-4430 print/ISSN 1476-8275 online© 2011 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/03004430.2010.523786http://www.informaworld.com
Promoting physical activity during early childhood
Carla Vidonia* and Arlene Ignicob
aDepartment of Health & Sport Sciences, University of Louisville, 114 Crawford Gym, Louisville, KY 40223, USA; bSchool of Physical Education, Sport and Exercise Science, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USATaylor and FrancisGECD_A_523786.sgm(Received 29 June 2010; final version received 10 September 2010)10.1080/03004430.2010.523786Early Childhood Development and Care0300-4430 (print)/1476-8275 (online)Original Article2010Taylor & Francis0000000002010Dr [email protected]
The prevalence of obesity in children and adolescents from low-income familiesin the USA has become a significant concern over the last 20 years. One of themajor contributors to this problem is the lack of physical activity. The purpose ofthis paper is to describe initiatives designed to: (1) engage young children inphysical activity during professional preparation of physical educators, and (2)assist classroom teachers in providing quality physical activity experiences in theirdaily lessons. Children from a local preschool were brought to a university campusto participate in a 60-minute physical activity programme. Fundamental motorskills and movement concepts were the basis of the instruction in this programme.In addition, university instructors provided preschool classroom teachers from thecommunity with the basic knowledge of the ABCs of movement skills. Classroomteachers received information about how to include physical activity in theirlesson planning on a daily basis.
Keywords: preschool children; physical activity; fundamental motor skills; HeadStart children; early childhood physical education
The prevalence of obesity in children and adolescents in the USA has become aconcern over the last 20 years (CDC, 2009a; Pate et al., 2006). Significant attentionhas been paid to children from low-income and minority backgrounds. Findings haveshown that overall prevalence of obesity among preschoolers from low-incomefamilies increased from 12.4% in 1998 to 14.5% in 2003 and remained at 14.6% in2008 (CDC, 2009a). According to the State of America’s Children report (Children’sDefense Fund, 2010), 21.2% of young children between two and five years of age areoverweight or obese (Children’s Defense Fund, 2010).
The terms overweight and obese refer to weights that are greater than what isusually considered healthy for a specific height, and are determined by the body massindex (BMI). BMI is a numeric value calculated from an individual’s weight andheight. BMI is considered a reliable indicator of body fatness, and it is commonly usedto investigate weight categories that lead to health problems (CDC, 2009b). A child isconsidered overweight when her or his BMI is at or above the 85th percentile, butbelow the 95th percentile. A child is considered obese when her or his BMI is abovethe 95th percentile (CDC, 2009b).
Behaviour, genetic factors, and environment play an important role in BMI, whichmeans that family, school, and community can contribute to childhood obesity
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Vol. 181, No. 9, October 2011, 1261–1269
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
C. Vidoni and A. Ignico
(Esposito, Fisher, Mennella, Hoelscher, & Huang, 2009). For example, poor eatinghabits, TV watching, parents who are overweight and smoke, violent neighbourhoods,lack of parks and playgrounds, and limited space to play increase the likelihood ofphysically inactive children (Esposito et al., 2009; McDermott, 2007). Potentialconsequences of obesity and physical inactivity are risks of coronary diseases, type 2diabetes, and several other chronic diseases (CDC, 2010). In contrast, physical activityis one of the health indicators that can improve children’s lives and reduce risk ofdiseases (USDHHS, 1996). Participation in regular physical activity helps childrenbuild and maintain healthy bones and muscles, reduces the risk of developing obesityand chronic diseases, and reduces feelings of depression and anxiety (USDHHS,1996).
The risk of not providing young children with opportunities to be physically activecan result in negative long-term consequences. Children who are obese duringpreschool age tend to be obese during adolescence and adulthood (CDC, 2009a).Obese children also tend to perform motor skills poorly because of their increasedoverall mass (Goodway & Suminski, 2003). Research findings suggest that childrenwho engage in physical activity during childhood and adolescence are likely to bephysically active adults (Schneider & Lounsbery, 2008; Stodden et al., 2008). There-fore, children need to learn and master fundamental motor skills before participatingin sports and games.
Fundamental motor skills: building blocks for an active lifestyle
In the same way that children need to learn the ABCs before learning how to read andwrite, they need to learn fundamental motor skills before being skilful in playing sports,games and lifetime physical activities (Goodway & Savage, 2001). Fundamental motorskills are considered the ABCs of movement skills. They consist of locomotor andmanipulative skills. Locomotor skills allow movement from one place to another, andinclude skills such as running, skipping, sliding, galloping, leaping, hopping, andjumping (Haywood & Getchell, 2009). Manipulative skills, which involve the manip-ulation and projection of objects, and include movements such as catching, dribbling,striking, throwing, and kicking (Haywood & Getchell, 2009). Both manipulative andlocomotor skills require whole body movements and contribute to a child’s balanceand coordination (Pangrazi & Beighle, 2010).
Participation in fundamental motor skills during early childhood enables childrento engage in physical activity with competence and confidence (Goodway, Wall, &Getchell, 2009). In addition, these skills help children to develop cognitive, social, andphysical attributes (Clark, 2007). How can young children engage in quality physicalactivity to develop fundamental motor skills? How can early childhood professionalsbe prepared to promote more physical activity in young children? A few universitiesin the USA have created programmes to promote physical activity opportunitiesduring early childhood.
The West Virginia Motor Development Center (Carson, 2004) brings preschoolchildren to campus. In this programme, parents and grandparents are play partnerswith children and the lessons are led by college students enrolled in courses such asearly childhood education, elementary education, and physical education. Parents paya modest fee that covers the cost of equipment and supplies. According to Carson(2004) feedback from college students, parents, and grandparents who participate inthe programme have been very positive. It has been a great community-based
1262
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Early Child Development and Care
programme that advocates for physical activity in early childhood through multigen-eration learning experiences.
The Ohio State University also provides fundamental motor skills programmes topreschool children (see http://service-learning.osu.edu/celebration2.php). Undergrad-uate students enrolled in the motor development course provide fundamental motorskills instruction and assessment to young children in a Head Start centre and in achildcare centre. These programmes are supported by grant funding. Besides provid-ing children with quality of movement experiences, these initiatives offer undergrad-uate students an increased understanding of children’s development of fundamentalmotor skills, and finally, doctoral students gain valuable experiences in teaching andsupervising undergraduate students.
The following sections of this paper will describe two initiatives designed to: (1)engage preschool children in physical activity, through a university-based instruc-tional programme, and (2) assist and encourage classroom teachers to includefundamental motor skills in their daily lessons.
Bringing Head Start children to campus
Head Start is a national programme established in 1964 by President Lyndon B. Johnson.Head Start programmes provide children between the ages of three and five with socialand cognitive learning activities (USDHHS, 2009). The target population of the HeadStart programme is children from diverse and disadvantaged families. The programmefocuses mainly on developing reading and math skills that will help children to besuccessful in later school years (USDHHS, 2009). In 2008, a total of 896,077 childrenwere enrolled in Head Start preschools in the USA. The majority of children were: White(39%), African-American (29%), and Hispanic (36%). The smallest enrolments were:Asian-Pacific (3%), and American-Indian and Alaska Native (4%). Unspecified racewas accounted for 25% of enrolment (Children’s Defense Fund, 2010).
Although the reading, writing and math skills have been prioritised in the historyof the Head Start programme (Zigler, Gillian, & Jones, 2006), a concern has risenregarding the provision of meaningful experiences that incorporate play, collabora-tion, social and emotional development, and outdoor/physical activity (NAEYC,2009; Zigler, Gillian, & Jones, 2006). The NAEYC (2009) points out that physical,cognitive, social, and emotional domains are crucial in children’s development. Thesedomains are interrelated. This interrelationship is important because the change inone domain may facilitate the development of the other (NAEYC, 2009). The physicaldomain, such as movement skills has been acknowledged and encouraged in theprocess of children’s development of self-regulation, language, cognition, and socialcompetence (NAEYC, 2009; Zigler, Gillian, & Jones, 2006).
The inclusion of fundamental motor skills in children’s experiences openspossibilities to explore the environment, solve problems, increase vocabulary, anddevelopment of social skills (NAEYC, 2009; Pangrazi & Beighle, 2010; Stodden etal., 2008). These experiences should be intentionally rather than incidentally acquired.Fundamental motor skills should be taught through age-appropriate activities within asequential curriculum. Like reading, writing, and math, fundamental motor skillsexperiences need to be planned, taught, learned, reinforced, and assessed (Robinson& Goodway, 2009).
The Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) programme at Ball StateUniversity in Indiana is aligned with National Council for the Accreditation of
1263
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
C. Vidoni and A. Ignico
Teacher Education (NCATE) and National Association for Sport and Physical Educa-tion (NASPE) standards. The programme has provided quality physical activity forchildren enrolled in the local Head Start centre since 1990. Throughout these years theprogramme has evolved and faced challenges such as staff reductions and budget cuts.Recently, with the help of Ball State University, and grant funding from four externalagencies, the programme has not only to overcome budget cuts but has, in fact,expanded opportunities for Head Start children.
The local Head Start centre provides learning opportunities to approximately300 preschool children from disadvantage families. The school constitutes of 15% ofAfrican-American, 2.5% Hispanic, 72% White, 0.5% Indian/Alaskan, 0.5% PacificIslander, 9.5% other, and no Asian (data obtained from local Head Start programme).These children, who are approximately three and four years of age, are placed in20 classrooms. Each classroom consists of one teacher, one teacher-assistant, and amaximum of 20 children. Children have opportunities to engage in indoor and outdoorplay activities. The programme does not offer structured physical education classes.
Every semester 60 children from the local Head Start school are transported to BallState University campus to participate in 60 minutes of physical activity divided into30 minutes of physical education, and 30 minutes of dance education once a week for10 weeks. The Head Start school coordinator selects different classrooms each semes-ter for participation to ensure that more children in the school have the opportunityimprove fundamental motor skills. When 30 of these children participate in thephysical education portion of the programme, the other 30 participate in a danceeducation class. The two groups change location midway through the hour. The60 children are organised in small groups. Each small group consists of three PETEstudents and six children.
Preparing university students to teach young children
The Ball State University PETE students are enrolled in the motor developmentcourse. The PETE students are in their sophomore school year (average 20 years ofage). They receive instruction in theory and practice before and during theprogramme. Five weeks prior to the beginning of the programme, the PETE studentslearn about how to assess children’s fundamental motor skills by using the Test ofGross Motor Development (TGMD; Ulrich, 2000), how to analyse children’s perfor-mance of fundamental motor skills (Ignico, 1994), and how to start teaching theseskills to preschoolers. The TGMD was chosen because of its usefulness in studyingthe effects of various instructional formats on the gross motor development ofchildren. Each of the 12 motor skills includes three or four skills cues that arerepresentative of a mature pattern of movement. The TGMD provides four differentscores: raw scores, percentiles, subtests standard scores, and gross motor developmentquotient (GMDQ; Ulrich, 2000). The GMDQ is a standard score that represents abroad indication of gross motor competence in the 12 motor skills.
The locomotor skills, such as running, galloping, sliding, skipping, hopping, leap-ing, and jumping, are initially taught by instructing children to move from one side toanother (i.e. straight path), gradually increasing distance, direction, pathway, andspeed, and using creativity to narrate simple stories to engage children in movementand to increase their movement vocabulary. For example, the PETE major would say:‘In order to go to the other side of the forest, we will need to leap over the pond. Howare we going to leap over the pond? After running, leap high in the air over the pond,
1264
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Early Child Development and Care
and then when you land, continue to run!’ Then, the PETE students woulddemonstrate the movement and talk the children through the leaping action.
Object control skills, such as catching, throwing, kicking, dribbling, and striking,are initially taught by letting children practice several actions using different types ofequipment. For example, the PETE student would ask: ‘Can you toss and catch a scarfwithout dropping it? Watch the scarf, reach it, and pull it!’ Self-tossing and catchingmovements are considered precursors to catching an object tossed by another person.Scarves, balloons, beanbags, and lightweight playground balls are used during self-toss and catch activities prior to introducing partner tossing.
PETE students use a direct instructional approach, also called teacher-centredapproach (Rink, 2006). The content is delivered from simple to complex, with theimplementation of task progressions to achieve the lesson objectives. The preparationof the lesson plans is based on NASPE Active Start (NASPE, 2009a) and AppropriatePractices in Movement Programmes for Children Ages 3–5 (NASPE, 2009b). Eachlesson includes a warm-up and closure, the teaching of one object control and one ortwo locomotor skills emphasising the critical elements (i.e. cues) as goals. In addition,the lessons include psychomotor, cognitive, and affective objectives.
The PETE students are assessed during their teaching experience in four ways:lesson plans, teaching skills, reflective journals, and a child case study. The lessonplans are assessed on: (1) objectives, (2) development of simple to complex tasks, (3)organisation of tasks, and (4) communication using an age-appropriate movementvocabulary. The teaching is assessed by observing several behaviours, including: (1)safety and equipment distribution, (2) clear communication with children duringinstruction, (3) feedback and movement cues delivered during instruction, (4) enthu-siasm and leadership, (5) class control, (6) demonstration, (7) task organisation andquick transitions, and (8) time-on-task. Each lesson is assessed using a 10-pointrubric, and the assessment is used as one of the performance assessment indicators inthe students’ teacher education portfolio.
Three reflective journals are assigned on different days between weeks four andnine of the programme. The dates are chosen after the third week because the firsttwo weeks are dedicated to TGMD testing. PETE students start teaching lessonsduring week three. Journal one requires PETE students to reflect on their group ofchildren’s level of enthusiasm, engagement and performance of fundamental motorskills. Journal two requires students to describe a child who shows difficulty inperforming certain motor skills and prescribe activities that parents could do at homewith this child. Journal three requires students to reflect on their teaching behavioursbased on the teaching evaluations, and their eight children progress in motor-skillperformance.
PETE students also have a culminating project. At the end of the semester, eachPETE student develops a child case study. The child case study project requires eachPETE student to select a child from the programme and write a detailed report aboutthis child. The report includes: (1) a description of the child such as age and BMI, (2)an interview with the child regarding his or her physical activity experiences outsideof school, (3) the TGMD assessment with detailed information about the child’sability to perform fundamental motor skills, (4) suggestions of activities to improvethis child’s motor-skill performance at home with parental assistance, and (5) a reflec-tion about the teaching experience with preschoolers. This project is assessed viapaper (60 points) and oral/poster presentation (10 points). This project is also anassessment indicator in the PETE students’ teacher education portfolio.
1265
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
C. Vidoni and A. Ignico
The equipment used in this programme has been purchased mainly through grantfunding. All the equipment bought has been used by Head Start children only. Allballs are lightweight: volleyball and soccer trainers and eight-inch playground ballsare used for dribbling, catching, and kicking. Tennis, yarn, and small foam balls areused for throwing. Balloons and small foam balls are used for striking. In addition,some activities require the use of beanbags, scarves, jump ropes, hula hoops, cones,and poly spots.
The dance portion of the programme has been taught by a dance education instruc-tor. Six PETE students assist the instructor during a 30-minute lesson in a dancestudio. During the dance education activities, children have plenty of opportunities todevelop their space awareness by moving in general and self-space using differentpathways. The children also have opportunities to develop body awareness byidentifying their body parts, and manipulating objects such as wands, ribbons, sticks,and percussion tubes while moving.
On the final day of the programme children participate in a large-group sessioninvolving each of the skills taught during the programme. This includes a variety ofparachute, scooter, and obstacle course activities. In addition, the dance instructorleads a rhythm activity for both the children and PETE students. At the end of theculminating activity, the children receive a certificate of participation in the physicalactivity programme.
Including physical activity in the classroom setting
Communication between university faculty and classroom teachers is a key compo-nent in providing children with opportunities to learn. This partnership can benefitchildren to become competent movers and active adults. Ball State faculty providesworkshops for the teachers designed to increase children’s opportunities to bephysically active. These workshops provide Head Start teachers with strategies tocreate, practice, and assess physical activities.
Initial workshops for Head Start classroom teachers are designed to developawareness of the importance of physical activity. Initially, these workshops provideinformation about recent data related to the prevalence of childhood obesity, the riskof inactivity, the benefits of physical activity, and the role of the teachers in the livesof preschool children. Then, the tone of the workshops shifts from awareness ofphysical activity benefits to developing instructional strategies based on Active Start(NASPE, 2009a) and Appropriate Practices in Movement Programmes for ChildrenAges 3–5 (NASPE, 2009b).
Teachers are first asked to identify the physical activity opportunities throughouta school day, and the amount of time their children are engaged in these activities.They are then informed about the importance of developing fundamental motor skillsduring early childhood. Teachers are also informed that the NASPE recommends60 minutes of structured, and 60 minutes of unstructured daily physical activityduring preschool years (NASPE, 2009a), and that these 120 minutes should be dividedinto short bouts of physical activity (e.g. 15 minutes physical activity engagement).Structured time refers to activities in which the teacher is the initiator (e.g. green light,red light game), while unstructured time refers to activities in which children are theinitiators (e.g. free play).
The physical activity workshops also allow the preschool teachers practice funda-mental motor skills. These sessions typically include a discussion of fundamental
1266
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Early Child Development and Care
motor skills, practice, and assessment strategies, suggestions for teaching, and partic-ipation in activities that apply these skills. For example, teachers view a demonstrationof the four skill cues for galloping, practice galloping in different pathways anddirections, and then use a checklist to assess a partner on the four cues. After practic-ing several other locomotor skills, participants identify common childhood gamesinvolving locomotor skills and critically evaluate their effectiveness in terms of time-on-task, competition, and elimination. Finally, other activities are identified thatprovide developmentally appropriate alternatives (e.g. follow the leader, musicalhoops, and parachute).
Teachers follow a similar sequence for several manipulative skills (i.e. demonstra-tion, practice, assess, and create game). For example, teachers view a throwingdemonstration and then practice stepping on the opposite foot using a rubber footprinton the floor. They practice the other skill cues and then assess a partner with a check-list. In addition, common performance errors are identified as well as appropriatepractice tasks. For example, concepts such as avoiding targets in early learning andavoiding rushing (races) are identified and discussed. Through group discussion,participants discover the problems with large-team games. Teachers play develop-mentally appropriate activities, and then create an original activity involving at leasttwo manipulative and two locomotor skills that provide high time-on-task. In addition,they identify ways that parents can assist their children to develop physical compe-tence and continue enjoyment of physical activity at home.
Initiative outcomes
The effectiveness of the Head Start motor development programme and classroomteacher training has been assessed by: (1) children’s level of enthusiasm and partici-pation during the motor development programme, (2) PETE students’ feedback, (3)feedback from the classroom teachers and Head Start school coordinator, and (4) feed-back from teachers regarding the effectiveness of the physical activity workshops.
The children’s levels of enthusiasm and participation in the physical activityprogramme have been remarkable. During physical education and dance lessons,children have rewarded PETE students, classroom teachers, and the programme super-visors with their constant active engagement, smiling faces, attention to the instruc-tion, development of their movement skills, and their positive social interactions.PETE students consistently report positive changes in children’s social behaviours andimprovement in their fundamental motor skills. Not all students in the major intend toteach young children. However, their reports show that this experience during theearly stages in a teacher education programme has increased their teaching skills onmany different levels. More specifically, they recognise improvement in their abilityto: (1) plan and implement lessons, (2) make modifications for students who havedifficulty in accomplishing certain tasks, (3) communicate with children, (4) managebehaviour, (5) develop task progressions, (6) demonstrate tasks, (7) assess children’sperformance, and (8) assess their own teaching.
The feedback from teachers and the Head Start coordinator has been consistentlypositive regarding children’s active engagement and the quality of instruction.Unquestionably, this partnership between classroom preschool teachers and theuniversity faculty has been a building block to increase children’s opportunities to bephysically active when they are at the Head Start centre. Teachers have reported thatthey are able to include more structured physical activity in their lessons, to prompt
1267
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
C. Vidoni and A. Ignico
children about critical elements (i.e. cues) of motor skills, and to evaluate children’sperformance of motor skills.
Conclusion
The prevalence of overweight children in the USA, especially among low-incomefamilies, strengthens the need for implementing structured physical activity duringearly childhood programmes. Besides reducing the risks of a variety of diseases, thedevelopment of fundamental motor skills and regular of physical activity may benefitchildren’s social and cognitive development (Clark, 2007). This paper provided twoways to assist children from low-income families to overcome the challenge of limitedopportunities to be physically active. In addition, it described an effective strategy touse best practices and national standards.
Although the outcomes of these initiatives have been positive, it is important toreport that the initiatives are tiny steps to make a difference in the life of families froma low-income socio-economic background. Drummond et al. (2009) describe aprogramme, called Steps to a Healthier Arizona, that made a change in an entirecommunity. The programme combines local, regional, and state agencies to fightobesity and diabetes among young disadvantaged children. The children involved arefrom rural, cultural diverse, and low-income families. Nutrition and physical activitybest practices were implemented in childcare centres. The programme resulted inimprovement in children’s menus, meals and snacks, parents’ awareness of healthyeating habits, and children’s opportunities to play and be active. This programme isan inspiration to plan and implement larger initiatives that can directly impact thefuture of children from disadvantaged families.
Notes on contributorsCarla Vidoni is an assistant professor at the University of Louisville. She received her PhD inphysical education teacher education from The Ohio State University in 2005. She taught atBall State University’s School of Physical Education, Sport and Exercise Science for five yearsbefore joining the University of Louisville. Her research interests include investigation of theeffects of group contingencies on physical education students’ behaviours, fair play in physicaleducation, and promotion of physical activity during early childhood.
Arlene Ignico is a professor at Ball State University. She received her EdD in motor develop-ment/curriculum and instruction from the University of Tennessee in 1987. She has been teach-ing at Ball State University since 1987. Her research interests include children’s fitness,gender-role development/perceptions, motor skill assessment, and physical education teachereducation students’ professional dispositions.
ReferencesCarson, L. (2004). Multi-generation learning: Developing informed advocates and active
children. Teaching Elementary Physical Education Journal, 15(2), 13–15.CDC (Centers for Disease, Control and Prevention). (2009a). Obesity prevalence among low-
income, preschool-aged children (Mobility and Mortality Weekly Report). Retrieved fromhttp://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5828a1.htm
CDC (Centers for Disease, Control and Prevention). (2009b). Body mass index. Retrievedfrom http://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/assessing/bmi/
CDC (Centers for Disease, Control and Prevention). (2010). Childhood overweight andobesity. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/childhood/
1268
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Early Child Development and Care
Children’s Defense Fund. (2010). The state of America’s children, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.childrensdefense.org
Clark, J.E. (2007). On the problem of motor skill development. Journal of PhysicalEducation, Recreation and Dance, 78(5), 39–44.
Drummond, R.L., Staten, L.K., Sanford, M.R., Davidson, C.L., Ciocazan, M.G., Khor, K., &Kaplan, F. (2009). Steps to a healthier Arizona. A pebble in the pond: The ripple effect ofan obesity intervention targeting the child care environment. Health Promotion Practice,10(2), 156–167.
Esposito, L., Fisher, J.O., Mennella, J.A., Hoelscher, D.M., & Huang, T.T. (2009). Develop-mental perspectives on nutrition and obesity from gestation to adolescence. PreventingChronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice, and Policy, 6(3), 1–11.
Goodway, J.D., & Savage, H. (2001). Environmental engineering in elementary physical educa-tion: Developmental lessons. Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 12(2), 12–14.
Goodway, J.D., & Suminski, R. (2003). Learner and environmental constraints influencingfundamental motor skill development of at-risk Hispanic preschoolers. ResearchQuarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74(Suppl.), A31.
Goodway, J.D., Wall, S., & Getchell, N. (2009). Promoting and ‘active start’ for youngchildren: Developing competent and confident early movers. Strategies, 23(2), 30–32.
Haywood, K.M., & Getchell, N. (2009). Life span motor development (5th ed.). Champaign,IL: Human Kinetics.
Ignico, A.A. (1994). Assessment of fundamental motor skills. Muncie, IN: Brown & Benchmark.McDermott, L. (2007). A governmental analysis of children ‘at risk’ in a world of physical
inactivity and obesity epidemics. Sociology and Sport Journal, 24(3), 302–324.NAEYC (National Association for the Education of Young Children). (2009). Developmen-
tally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birththrough age 8. Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/DAP
NASPE (National Association for Sport and Physical Education). (2009a). Active start: Astatement of physical activity guidelines for children from birth to five years. Sewickley,PA: AAHPERD Publications Center.
NASPE (National Association for Sport and Physical Education). (2009b). Appropriate prac-tices in movement programs for children ages 3–5. Sewickley, PA: AAHPERD PublicationsCenter.
Pangrazi, R.P., & Beighle, A. (2010). Dynamic physical education for elementary schoolchildren. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.
Pate, R.R., Davis, M.G., Robinson, T.N., Stone, E.J., McKenzie, T.L., & Young, J.C. (2006).Promoting physical activity in children and youth: A leadership role for school. Circula-tion, 11(4), 1214–1224.
Rink, J.E. (2006). Teaching physical education for learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.Robinson, L., & Goodway, J. (2009). Instructional climates in preschool children who are at-
risk. Part I: Object control skill development. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,80(3), 533–542.
Schneider, H., & Lounsbery, M. (2008). Setting the stage for lifetime physical activity in earlychildhood. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 79(6), 19–23.
Stodden, D.F., Goodway, J.D., Langendorfer, S.J., Roberton, M.A., Rudisil, M.E., Garcia, C.,& Garcia, L. (2008). A developmental perspective on the role of motor skill competencein physical activity: An emergent relationship. Quest, 60, 290–306.
Ulrich, D.A. (2000). Test of gross motor development. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.USDHHS (United States Department of Health and Human Service). (1996). Physical activity
and health: A report of the surgeon general. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health andHuman Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for ChronicDisease Prevention and Health Promotion.
USDHHS (United States Department of Health and Human Service). (2009). About the officeof Head Start. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centersfor Disease Control and Prevention, Administration for Children and Families.
Zigler, E., Gillian, W.S., & Jones, S.M. (2006). A whole child approach: The importance ofsocial and emotional development. In E. Zigler, W.S. Gillian, & S.M. Jones (Eds.), A visionfor universal preschool education (pp. 130–148). New York: Cambridge University Press.
1269
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
UC
Irv
ine
Lib
rari
es]
at 1
7:42
07
Nov
embe
r 20
14
