BrainGym® and Cross-lateral Activities 1juliekrause-singh.evitae.org/BrainGymActionResearch.pdf ·...

BrainGym® and Cross-lateral Activities 1

BrainGym® and cross-lateral activities: The effect of use in a 6th

grade keyboarding classroom.

Julie Singh

University of Colorado at Denver

May 5, 2007


Table of Contents

Section Page No.

Abstract 3

Literature Review:

How We Learn 4

How can we enhance learning? 5

What happens when whole-body learning occurs? 6

Cross-lateral Movement and BrainGym® 7

Keyboarding, BrainGym® and Cross-lateral Activities 8

Research Methodology Plan:

Participants 9

Independent Variables 9

Dependent Variables 10

Procedures & Data Collection 11

Planning 13

Results:

Typing Speed 15

Number of Lessons Completed 16

Average Number of Minutes per Lesson 17

Average Accuracy 18

Participant Observation Results 19

Participant Survey Results 20

Endo of Study Test Results 22

Discussion of Results 23

Conclusion 25

References 26

Literature Review Matrix 28


Students in school generally enter a classroom, sit down in a chair or at a desk and remain

seated for the remainder of the period. They have been trained since an early age to remain

sitting until the class period is finished. Contrary to this norm, research says this sedentary

classroom practice is not the optimum learning environment. According to Dr. Dennison,

“Movement is the door to learning” (Hannaford, 2005, p. 96).

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect in productivity when incorporating short

breaks with BrainGym® and cross-lateral activities in a sixth grade classroom at Erie Middle

School. Specifically the study will look at changes in productivity in terms of typing speed,

typing accuracy, and the number of lessons completed by forty-four students.

Dr. Dennison observed interdependence between physical development, language

acquisition, and academic achievement (Hannaford, 2005). Zull (2002) recounts that physical

movement is necessary to link abstract thoughts with new concrete experience. Jensen (1998, p.

38), a leader in brain-compatible research, finds that “all learning is mind-body” and that the part

of the brain that processes movement is the same part of the brain that processes learning .

Furthermore, researchers have purported that physical exercise and movement are the key to

learning. Gammon and Bragdon (1998, p. 65) state that “Physical exercise helps the brain grow

more effective cells”. Levine also supports this finding stating that “expending physical energy

often stimulates the flow of mental energy” (Levine, 2003, p. 223).


How We Learn

Learning occurs as we interact with our environment. As outside stimuli are encountered,

there are multitudes of communications occurring between the neurons (cells) in our brain. The

neurons communicate by firing off signals (electrical and chemical) to other neurons through

gaps (or synapses) in thread-like extensions called dendrites. These dendritic extensions become

the superhighways through which our sensory stimuli are processed into action. The process of

the nerve cells firing, connecting, and networking is, in fact, learning and thought. The pathways

in which the neuron signals travel, and thereby communicate, are varied and dynamic and can

change with each stimulus (Hannaford, 2005). There are approximately 100,000,000 neurons in

a human brain. Each neuron has the potential to be connected to thousands of other neurons

making an infinite number of pathways for communication to occur. (OECD, 2002). New

experiences and exposure cause the dendrite extensions on the neurons to branch out and grow.

These extensions provide different pathways for the signals to move. As long as these extensions

are still in use, the dendrite extensions continue to grow and become larger and healthier. If these

extensions are not used, they are lost. The phrase “use it, or loose it, is the ultimate truth of the

healthy brain’s capacity to learn, change and grow as long as we are alive” (Weiss, 2000, p. 4).

Plasticity is the extraordinary ability of the brain to change its structure and chemistry in

response to the environment (Weiss, 2000). Restak (2003) says that through brain research,

neuroscientists have found that the brain changes everyday. Most neuroscientists had largely

believed that the brain’s plasticity ceased after adolescence or early adulthood, but now believe

that to be a misrepresented idea. Brain plasticity is important because it provides potential for

growth in unused portions of our brain and helps reroute the pathways in which neural


communications are sent when brain damage occurs. For learning to occur, physical change in

the brain must occur (Zull, 2003).

Research into brain function reveals that the brain is divided into left (cerebral cortex)

and right hemispheres, front and back cortexes, various lobes, forebrain, the brain stem and more

(Zull, 2002). Most of the functions or tasks for which the brain are responsible, require both

hemispheres of the brain to work together in parallel (OECD, 2002). Therefore, communication

and interaction between the neurons in the various parts of the brain is a necessity to integrate

functions into seamless action.

How can we enhance learning?

Hunter (c.f., Templeton & Jensen, 1996) indicates that most teaching strategies favor

teaching to the left side of the brain. Hunter explains that schools are handicapping all learners

by this approach. She goes on to say that a better approach is using brain-based learning

environments that teach to the whole brain. Wesson (2006) states that the human brain is

capable of establishing trillions of interrelated neural networks which render our capacity to

learn virtually limitless as long as the brain is stimulated and challenged on a continual basis.

Wesson also states that humans of all ages learn easiest when learning experience is hands-on

along with whole-body integrative movements. Whole-brain learning enables students to access

areas of the brain that were previously unavailable to them. This experience provides

improvements into learning and behavior that are immediate and profound. The result is

significantly improved education and performance (Cohen & Goldsmith, 2002).

Effective brain activity requires efficient communication between the various functional

areas located throughout the brain. When this communication does not occur freely, stress

develops and learning blockages occur. The use of cross-lateral movement facilitates the flow of


information to the brain so that we function at top efficiency (Cohen & Goldsmith, 2002).

Hannaford (2005, p. 97) notes that “every time we move in an organized, graceful manner, full

brain activation and integration occurs and the door to learning opens naturally”.


What happens when whole-body learning occurs?

Attention, memory, behavior, speed of recall and clarity, stress reduction, and building of

a healthier brain are all factors that are positively affected when whole-body learning occurs.

“Movement awakens and activates many of our mental capacities. Movement integrates and

anchors new information and experience into our neural networks” (Hannaford, 2005, p. 87).

Amen (2005) in his book Making a Good Brain Great, provides insight into enhancing the

cerebellum through coordination exercises. These exercises will provide improvement in

judgment, attention, the ability to think more clearly and faster as well as overall brain health.

Jensen (2003) discusses the relation between certain movements that increase stabilization of

images on the retina, alertness, attention and relaxation in the classroom. Sensory-motor

activities have an impact on the brain, are fun for students and feed directly into the brain’s

pleasure center.

Gammon and Bragdon (1998), point out that physical exercise promotes the production

of a growth factor which preserves the function and survival of brain neurons. They site

experimental studies with rats that show brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is increased

with exercise especially in the areas associated with memory formation and the translation of

cognition into action. Hannaford (2005) provides recent research findings to explain how

movement directly benefits the nervous system through the production of neurotrophins, or

natural substances, that stimulate the growth of nerve cells and increase the number of neural

connections in the brain.


Cross-lateral Movement and BrainGym®

After observation of the interdependence between physical development, language

acquisition, and academic achievement, Dennison (c.f., Hannaford, 2005) developed

BrainGym® in the 1970’s at the Valley Remedial Group Learning Center in CA. BrainGym®

consists of a series of movements that works through three functions: 1. Laterally – by

coordinating the left and right sides of the brain to communicate effectively; 2. Centering – by

coordinating the top and bottom areas of the brain for organization of thoughts and actions; 3.

Focusing – by coordinating the receptive brain stem with the forebrain for comprehension and

perspective (Cohen & Goldsmith, 2002). BrainGym® works by stimulating both the expressive

and receptive hemispheres of the brain to facilitate integrated learning (Amen, 2005). Metzler

(2003) discusses using brain-based learning using whole-body cross-lateral movements to

stimulate different parts of the brain to work together. The cross-lateral movements are

movements which occur when one or more limbs move repetitively across the body’s vertical

midline. The theory is that the repetition opens up neural pathways that facilitate a readiness to

learn and the ability of the brain to develop.

The success of using BrainGym® and other cross-lateral movements have been shown to

enhance brain functions in and outside of classroom settings. In a 1989 study, Hannaford (2005)

used BrainGym® in a 5th

grade special education classroom 5-10 minutes daily. Using the

Brigance Inventory of Basic Skills, the majority of the students showed growth of one to two

years in reading comprehension and more than half of the students showed a growth of one year

in math skills. At the 1995 annual Society of Neuroscience Conference nearly 80 studies

demonstrated that physical movement and games boosted cognition (Jensen, 1998).


Keyboarding, BrainGym® and Cross-Lateral Activities

Keyboarding is a motor function according to Levine (2003). According to Rabin and

Gordon (2003), rapid fine motor skills are used in typing. Keyboarding requires eye-hand motor

coordination (Hopkins, 1998). Studies have shown that the successes of children who develop

gross and fine motor proficiency are highly related to proficient typing skills (Contes, 1983).

BrainGym® and cross-lateral activities have been found to enhance motor skills and eye-hand

coordination. Research indicates that anyone can achieve expert performance in sports, athletics

or academic pursuits using brain-based guidelines (Restak, 2003). Active learning is

accomplished by doing movements that crossover the midline of the body and activate the left

and right hemispheres of the brain. Examples of cross-lateral activities that cross over the

midline of the body would be as simple as crossing the left hand over to touching the right knee

or moving the right foot up to the left hand. Given that cross-lateral and BrainGym® activities

have been so successful in enhancing learning in other situations, this study will look at the

effectiveness of incorporating a five minute break with these activities into a sixth grade

keyboarding classroom. The study student of keyboarding productivity will be compared to data

from a previous group of students who did not participate in these activities.


Research Methodology Plan

Research Question and Hypotheses:

This study will assess the effects of incorporating a short break with BrainGym® and

cross-lateral activities into a sixth grade keyboarding classroom on student productivity in terms

of typing speed, the number of lessons completed and typing accuracy.

Participants:

The study will be done using two 6th

grade keyboarding classes at Erie Middle School.

The classes meet every other day (Alpha and Beta Days) for 55 minutes from 2:05 PM to 3:00

PM. The students in the study are enrolled in a semester-long, required keyboarding class that

began in January of 2007. The Alpha group consists of twenty-one students: 8 male and 13

female. The Beta group consists of twenty-three students: 10 male and 13 female. The study will

keep the identity of the students confidential. The Alpha group will participate in the

BrainGym® and cross-lateral activities and the Beta group will be used as a control group. I will

act as a “participant observer”. There are no ethical problems that will need to be addressed with

this study.

Independent Variables

The independent variables in the study will be having breaks with and without

BrainGym® and cross-lateral activities. Each class will have a break from 2:35-2:40 PM. The

Beta group’s break will consist of free-time: students can move about the room, and get a drink

from the water fountain if desired. The Alpha group will break and do a few minutes of cross-

lateral and BrainGym® activities followed by a few minutes of free-time. The students will be

highly encouraged to get a drink from the water fountain before returning back to work.


Dependent Variables

The dependent variables will be the student’s typing speed, typing accuracy, and number

of lessons completed. The keyboarding software program that the students use is called

SouthWestern Keyboarding: MicroType Pro. Each lesson is divided into a number of categories

including a section called “Build Skill”. Upon completion of each lesson, the students print out a

“Lesson Report” and grade it for typing accuracy. The grading rubric is as follows:

BUILD SKILL RUBRIC (Accuracy):

# Mistakes Grade (1-4) Proficiency Level Description

0 4 Advanced Exceeds Expectations

1 to 3 3 ½ Proficient + Meets Expectations

4 to 6 3 Proficient Meets Expectations

7 to 10 2 Partially Proficient Working Toward Expectations

11 or More 1 Not Proficient Does Not Meet Expectations

These grades are recorded for each lesson each student completes.

Initial keyboarding data reports were be printed by all students on 2/20 and 2/21. These reports

will continue to be printed at the end of each week throughout the duration of this study. The

reports include the average typing speed in words/minute (wpm) for the Build Skill section for

each lesson along with the number of lessons completed after each week.

I will act as a participant observer and I will take field notes noting the time when

students begin to fidget or become inattentive before and after each break. I will also write down

antidotal observations. I will also tally the number of times I remind students to continue to

remain quiet and stay on-task before and after their break.


Student attendance will be recorded on a daily basis.

At the conclusion of the study, each student will take a one-minute timed test which will

be graded for both accuracy and speed. The Alpha group will also take a survey about their

thoughts on the BrainGym® and cross-lateral activities.

The table below shows study’s data gathering plan:

Data Source

1 Alpha Group 2 Beta Group 3 Teacher

Typing Speed Build Skill Typing Speed Build Skill Observation Notes

Typing Accuracy Build Skill Typing Accuracy Build Skill Attendance Records

No. of Lessons Completed No. of Lessons Completed No. of Reminders Given

Typing Speed Final Test Typing Speed Final Test

Typing Accuracy Final Test Typing Accuracy Final Test

Post Study Survey

Efforts for reliability and validity in the study include gathering the same data from both

the control group and the study group of students. Student attendance will be monitored so that

absences can be accounted for.

Procedures and Data Collection

The MicroType Pro keyboarding software allows each student to complete lessons at

their own pace. At the beginning of the class period (when the bell rings at 2:05 PM), the stop-


watch will be started. Students will proceed with class following their normal routine. This

means that as class begins, students boot-up and log into their computers. They will begin

working on the lesson at the point they left off last. Thirty minutes into class (at 2:35 PM), a

break will be given. The Alpha group will proceed with one to three teacher-assigned and led

Brain-Gym® and cross-lateral activities lasting approximately 2-3 minutes, and the Beta group

will proceed with five minutes of free-time.

During break, the Beta group will be allowed to move around the room and mingle with

their peers. They will be allowed to leave the classroom one at a time to get a drink of water.

When the five minute period is over, the Beta group will be directed back to continue with their

keyboarding lessons until approximately 2:58 at which time they will shut down their computers,

push in their chairs, return their keyboard covers to the box and wait until the bell dismisses

them.

At break time, the Alpha group will be directed to get up out of their seats, push in their

chairs and then will be led in the Brain-Gym® and cross-lateral activities. Each activity will be

repeated for five to ten repetitions depending on the activity. Most days, students will participate

in three separate activities. The first activity will be simple such as the “Energy Yawn”, “Brain

Buttons” or “The Energizer”. The second activities done each day will include some version of

the “Cross Crawl” activity. In the “Cross Crawl” activities, the limbs extend across the vertical

midline of the body (right hand to left knee, etc.). The third activity will include activities such as

“Hook-ups” or “The Elephant”. These activities also cross the vertical midline of the body in an

effort to activate all areas of the brain to work together. Other activities involving movement

such as shooting soft balls at buckets, etc. may also be incorporated into the breaks depending on

the response of the students. Specific BrainGym® exercises are available in various references


including: Cohen, I. & Marcelle, G. (2002). Hands On: How to use Brain-Gym® in the

Classroom, A practical Photo Manual for Educators, Parents, and Learners. Ventura, CA: Edu-

Kinesthetics, Inc.

Once these activities are complete, the class will be directed to get a drink of water, one

at a time, and spend a couple of minutes of free-time before getting back to work on their

keyboarding lessons. At approximately 2:58, students will be directed to shut down their

computers, push in their chairs, return their keyboard covers to the box and wait until the bell

dismisses them.

At the conclusion of the study, the various data collected will be recorded in Microsoft

Excel. The data will be statistically analyzed and compared at the 95% and 99% confidence

levels using a two-tailed Student’s t-test to determine if the data for the Alpha and Beta groups

are different. Other statistical and graphical presentations of the data may also be made

depending on the results.

Planning

It is estimated that this study will take place over a six-week period beginning February

20, 2007 and ending March 30, 2007. Most of the BrainGym® and cross-lateral activities do not

require any special resources. There may be some cross-lateral activities that will use balls,

buckets, etc. A stopwatch will be used to track the time between the beginning of class to the

break, and from the conclusion of the break until the end of class.


Results:

The results for typing speed, typing accuracy, the number of lessons completed, and the

number of minutes required to complete each lesson are presented in tabular and graphical form

in Tables 1 through 4 and Figures 1 through 4. Note that the Alpha group had BrainGym®

incorporated into their short breaks and the Beta group is functioning as the control group.

Results for the Participant Observation which include the average number of daily

warnings given before and after breaks to remind students to remain quiet and stay on-task and

the average number of actual incidents of students’ off-task and fidgety behaviors are given in

Table 5.

Results for the end of the study participant survey and the timed tests are presented in

Tables 6 and 7. Figures 5and 6 give a graphical view of the timed test results.


Typing Speed

The results for typing speed comparisons are summarized in Table 1 and Figure 1.

Table 1

Results for Typing Speed with (Alpha) and without (Beta) BrainGym® Breaks

Week Of:

Alpha Group Average Typing Speed

(WPM)

Beta Group Average Typing Speed

(WPM)

February 12-16 18.87 17.23

February 19-23 17.41 14.61

February 26-March 2 18.89 14.79

March 5-9 20.51 15.36

March 12-16 22.14 17.47

March 19-23 22.81 16.58

March 26-30 24.40 18.90

Average 20.72 16.42

Std. Dev. 2.51 1.58 Probability Null Hypot (t-test) 0.00

Typing Speed Comparrison

0.005.00

10.0015.0020.00

25.0030.00

Feb

12-16

Feb

19-23

Feb

26-

Mar2

Mar

5-9

Mar

12-16

Mar

19-23

Mar

26-30

Week of:

Typ

ing

Sp

eed

(W

PM

)

ALPHA

BETA

Figure 1: Results showing typing speed comparison between two 6th

grade classrooms. The

Alpha group had short breaks with BrainGym® and the Beta group had short breaks that were

unstructured.


Number of Lessons Completed:

The results for the number of lessons completed comparisons are summarized in Table 2

and Figure 2. Note that these results do NOT take into account the attendance of the students. A

comparison between the average number of lessons completed by forty-three students in first

semester keyboarding class are included in the table as well.

Table 2

Results for Lessons Completed with (Alpha) and without (Beta) BrainGym® Breaks

Week Of:

Alpha Group Average Lesson Number

Completed

Beta Group Average Lesson Number

Completed

February 12-16 6.19 6.26

February 19-23 8.05 7.43 February 26-March 2 9.29 8.78

March 5-9 11.33 10.30

March 12-16 12.14 12.43

March 19-23 15.10 13.43

March 26-30 16.38 15.57

Average 11.21 10.60

Std. Dev. 3.69 3.38

Probability Null Hypot (t-test) 0.75

Average Lesson Number Completed Results for First Semester after 10 weeks of class (no BrainGym®) 11.95

Average Lesson Number Completed

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

Feb

12-16

Feb

19-23

Feb

26-

Mar2

Mar 5-

9

Mar

12-16

Mar

19-23

Mar

26-30

Week Of:

Lesson NumberALPHA

BETA

Figure 2: Results showing the comparison between the average number of lessons completed for

two 6th

grade classrooms. The Alpha group had short breaks with BrainGym® and the Beta

group had short breaks that were unstructured.


Average Number of Minutes per Lesson:

The comparative results for the average number of minutes required to complete one

lesson are summarized in Table 3 and Figure 3. Note that these results take into account the

attendance of the students.

Table 3

Results for the Average Number of Minutes/Lesson with (Alpha) and without (Beta)

BrainGym® Breaks

Week Of:

Alpha Group Average Number of Minutes

per Lesson Completed

Beta Group Average Number of Minutes

per Lesson Completed

February 12-16 89.93 83.96

February 19-23 74.04 90.20


March 5-9 72.38 87.97

March 12-16 85.31 87.98 March 19-23 76.32 93.39

March 26-30 75.22 87.43

Average 78.40 88.83

Std. Dev. 6.56 3.59


Average Number of Minutes per Lesson Comparrison

0.0020.0040.0060.0080.00

100.00120.00

Feb

12-16

Feb

19-23

Feb

26-

Mar2

Mar 5-

9

Mar

12-16

Mar

19-23

Mar

26-30

Week Of:

Min

ute

s/L

es

so

n

ALPHA

BETA

Figure 3: Results showing the comparison between the average number of minutes required to

complete one lesson for two 6th

grade classrooms. The Alpha group had short breaks with

BrainGym® and the Beta group had short breaks that were unstructured.


Average Accuracy Grades:

The comparative results to date for average accuracy grades for each lesson to are

summarized in Table 4 and Figure 4.

Table 4

Results for the Average Accuracy Grades with (Alpha) and without (Beta) BrainGym® Breaks

Week Of: Alpha Group

Average Accuracy Grade Beta Group

Average Accuracy Grade

February 12-16 3.67 3.63

February 19-23 3.60 3.68


March 5-9 3.70 3.75

March 12-16 3.68 3.79

March 19-23 3.65 3.85

March 26-30 3.79 3.85

Average 3.66 3.75

Std. Dev. 0.07 0.09


Typing Accuracy Comparrison

3.00

3.20

3.40

3.60

3.80

4.00

Feb

12-16

Feb

19-23

Feb

26-

Mar2

Mar 5-

9

Mar

12-16

Mar

19-23

Mar

26-30

Week Of:

Ac

cu

rac

y G

rad

e

ALPHA

BETA

Figure 4: Results showing the comparison between the average accuracy grade for each lesson

for two 6th

grade classrooms. The Alpha group had short breaks with BrainGym® and the Beta

group had short breaks that were unstructured.


Participant Observation Results:

The number of times the whole class was reminded before and after breaks to remain

quiet and on-task are shown in Table 5 along with the average number of actual incidents and the

average time of the first incident recorded for individual students who were off-task and

fidgeting in class.

Table 5

Results for the Participant Observation Results with (Alpha) and without (Beta) BrainGym®

Breaks

Alpha Group Beta Group

Average for the Number of

Whole Class Reminders per

Class 3.11 4.57 Std. Dev. for Average

Number of Whole Class

Reminders per Class 1.37 1.91 Average for Number of

Incidents for Individual

Students per Class 3.83 4.54 Std. Dev. for the Number of

Incidents for Individual

Students per Class 1.74 2.06

Average Time after

transition* of warning

(min.) 12.09 13.09 Std. Dev. for the Ave. Time

after transition* of warning

(min.) 6.52 7.33


Participant Survey Results:

The survey and survey results that was administered to the Alpha group are presented below.

Table 6

Survey of Alpha Group After BrainGym® Study

1. BrainGym Survey

1. What is your gender?

Response Percent

Response Total

Male 26.7% 4

Female 73.3% 11

Total Respondents 15

(skipped this question) 0

2. Approximately how many words/minute (GWAM) do you type?

0-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 25 or more Response Average

Approximate GWAM typing speed

7% (1) 27% (4) 33% (5) 7% (1) 27% (4) 3.20



3. Please rate how well you liked doing BrainGym activities in your keyboarding class:

I liked it very

much I sort-of liked

it It was ok I didn't really

like it I hated it! Response Average

Rating Scale:

7% (1) 0% (0) 33% (5) 20% (3) 40% (6) 3.87



4. Please rate if you feel doing BrainGym helped you to feel more attentive:

Yes, I felt very

attentive I felt pretty attentive

I didn't feel any different

I felt less attentive

I couldn't stay on task

afterward

Response Average


Ratings: 13% (2) 27% (4) 33% (5) 13% (2) 13% (2) 2.87



5. Please rate whether you believe doing BrainGym helped you to type faster:

Yes, I definately typed faster

after BrainGym

I think I typed faster after BrainGym

I don't think I typed any faster or

slower after BrainGym

I think I typed slower after BrainGym

I am sure I typed slower

after BrainGym

Response Average

Ratings: 29% (4) 21% (3) 36% (5) 7% (1) 7% (1) 2.43



6. Please rate how well you think BrainGym activities helped you to type more

accurately:

I am sure I typed more accurately.

I think I typed more

accurately.

I don't think it made a

difference in my accuracy.

I think I typed less

accurately.

I am sure I typed less accurately.

Response Average

Ratings: 33% (5) 7% (1) 33% (5) 20% (3) 7% (1) 2.60



7. Please feel free to give any comments you have about BrainGym.

Total Respondents 9



End of Study Timed Test - Typing Speed

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

Group

Avera

ge C

lass S

peed

(GW

AM

)

Alpha

Beta

End of Study Timed Test

The results for the timed test given at the end of the study are presented in Table 7. The

results are given as the number of words typed per minute (GWAM) and the number of errors

made.

Table 7

Results for the Participant Observation Results with (Alpha) and without (Beta) BrainGym®

Breaks

Alpha Group Beta Group

Average for the Number of

Words per Minute Typed

(GWAM) 18.88 14.91 Std. Dev. for Average

Number of Words per

Minute Typed (GWAM) 9.06 5.62 Median Words per Minute 16 14


Average for Number of

Errors 1.60 1.57 Std. Dev. for the Average

Number of Errors 1.64 1.31 Median Number of Errors 1 1


End of Study Timed Test - # Errors

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

Group

Avera

ge N

um

ber

of

Err

ors

Alpha

Beta

Figures 5 and 6: Results showing the comparison between the average speed and number of

errors for a timed test given at the end of the study for two 6th

grade classrooms. The Alpha

group had short breaks with BrainGym® and the Beta group had short breaks that were

unstructured.


Discussion of Results The results clearly indicate that the use of BrainGym® in the 6

th grade keyboarding

classroom was effective in increasing students’ typing speed and decreasing the number of

minutes required to complete one lesson. A paired, two-tailed student t-test was conducted on the

two sets of data indicating that at the 95% confidence level, there is a significant difference in the

results for the students with BrainGym® (Alpha group) and without BrainGym® (Beta group)

(see Tables and Figures 1 and 3 and box plots below). Both box charts below show that a little

less than 75% of the Alpha group averaged a faster typing speed and also averaged fewer

minutes per lesson than the Beta group.

The t-test results do not indicate a significant difference at the 95% confidence level for

the average number of lessons completed and the average typing accuracy during the lessons and

for the typing accuracy for the post lesson test (see Tables and Figures 2 and 4 and the box plots

below).

Average Typing Speed Average Minutes/Lesson

Words per Minute Average Number of

Minutes Required to

Complete One

Lesson

Alpha Alpha BetaBeta

Alpha Alpha Alpha Beta BetaBeta

Lesson

Number Completed

Number of

Errors

Average

Accuracy Grade

Average Number of

Lessons Completed

Average Typing

Accuracy

Typing Accuracy

Post Study Test


The results for the post lesson test in terms of typing speed also did not prove to be

significant at the 95% confidence level, however, the results do indicate differences between the

groups with and without BrainGym® at about the 85% confidence level (refer to Table 7 and

Figure 5 and the box plot below).

The results for the number of whole class reminders and incidents for the number of

individuals fidgeting were lower for the Alpha group (BrainGym®), but not by a significant

amount.

The post-study survey results do not show any trend in terms of whether students felt that

they benefited from having BrainGym® incorporated into their breaks during class. Interestingly

enough, a few students have actually asked to continue using BrainGym® during their breaks.

Since the conclusion of the study, BrainGym® has not routinely been incorporated into breaks

and I have noticed that although students generally suspend the keyboarding program during

their break time, most students remain sedentary in their chairs usually browsing on the World

Wide Web.

Beta Alpha

Typing Speed

Post Study Test

Typing Speed in

Words per Minute


The results that were compiled throughout the study were organized by weekly periods

with the first weekly period (February 12-16) listed giving a baseline comparison of the two

classes prior to beginning the BrainGym® with the Alpha group. These results show that the

overall average typing speed decreased slightly for the Beta group and increased slightly for the

Alpha group throughout the study. It must be noted that throughout the lessons, students are

continually learning new letters and numbers and also practicing the keys that they have learned

in previous lessons. This may account for the slight overall changes in typing speed for both

groups. The average number of minutes to complete each lesson decreased by about ten minutes

for the Alpha group from the onset of the study to the conclusion, and for the Beta group, the

average increased by about five minutes.

Conclusion

The study indicates that leading students in a few minutes of BrainGym® prior and

during to keyboarding class is an effective way to help students increase and maintain faster

typing speeds and complete more lessons per minute. This finding is supported by several

different researchers who indicate that using cross-lateral movements and physical movement

enhances learning by improving judgment, attention and the ability to think more clearly. Ideally

the study should be extended for a longer time period and with other classes to truly understand

if the differences that were observed are due to the groupings of students or can be attributed to

outliers in the data.

In the future, I plan to incorporate BrainGym® or similar activities in my classroom to get

students up and out of their seats. Next year, I will be teaching mathematics for 90 minute

blocks and knowing how effective using BrainGym® was in the 6th

grade keyboarding

classroom, I believe it will be effective helping students refocus during the long class sessions. I


am very encouraged that just by adding a few minutes of BrainGym®, significant improvements

were made in student’s typing speed and the time to complete one lesson and am looking

forward to seeing how it can enhance learning in other classroom settings.

References:

Bevill, K. (2003). Gray Matters Brain Educational Cards. Learning in Motion:

K.G. Bevill.

Cohen, I. & Marcelle, G. (2002). Hands On: How to Use Brain Gym® in the

Classroom A Practical Photo Manual for Educators, Parents, and Learners.

Ventura, CA: Edu-Kinesthetics, Inc.

Cowles, M. (1983). An Analysis of Young Children Learning Keyboarding Skills.

ERIC # ED238542.

Gamon, D. & Bragdon, A. (1998). Building Mental Muscle: Conditioning

Exercizes for the Six Intelligence Zones. South Yarmouth, MA: Allen D. Bradon

Publishers, Inc.

Hannaford, C. & Pert, C. (2005) Smart Moves: Why Learning Is Not All in Your

Head. Great River Books.

Hopkins, G. (1998). Keyboarding Skills: When Should They Be Taught?

Education World.

Howard, P. (2000). The Owner's Manual for The Brain: Everyday Applications

from Mind-Brain Research. Austin, TX: Bard Press.

Jarrett, O.; Maxwell, D.; Dickerson, C.; Hodge, P.; Davids, G.; Yetley, A. (1998)


Impact of Recess on Classroom Behavior: Group Effects and Individual

Differences. The Journal of Educational Research 92.

Jensen, E. (1998). Introduction to Brain-Compatible Learning. San Diego, CA:

The Brain Store, Inc.

Jensen, E. (1998). Study Guide for Teaching with the Brain in Mind. National

Urban Alliance

Levine, M. (2003). The Myth of Laziness. New York, New York: Simon &

Schuster

Metzler, M.; Williams, S. (2003). A Classroom-Based Physical Activity and

Academic Content Program: More than a Pause that Refreshes? Dissertation

Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2002).

Understanding the Brain: Towards a New Learning Science.

Rabin, E.; Gordon, A. (2004, April). Tactile feedback contributes to consistency

of finger movements during typing, Experimental Brain Research, 155,3.

Resak, R. (2003). The New Brain. USA: Rodale Inc.

Weiss, R. (2000, July). Brain-Based Learning The wave of the brain. Training &

Development. ASTD Magazines

Wesson, K. (2006). From Synapses to Learning: Understanding Brain

Processes. Excerpted from the Faculty Guidebook: A Comprehensive Tool for

Improving Faculty Performance. San Jose, CA

Zull, J. (2002). The Art of Changing the Brain. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus

Publishing, LLC.


Literature Matrix Review

Changes in: Author Attention Memory Negative

Behavior Emotion & Pleasure

Speed of

Recall &

Clarity

Enhanced Performance & Learning

Brain Plasticity - Chemical Production and Structure Change

Builds Healthier Brain

Relieves Stress

Keyboarding Relationship

Amen, D. ; 2005 X X X X

Bevill, K.; 2003 X X X X X X

Cohen, I. & Marcelle, G. ; 2002 X X X

Contes; 1983 X

Gammon, D. & Bragdon, A. ; 1998 X X

Hannaford, C.& Pert, C.; 2005 X X X X X

Hopkins; 1998 X

Howard, P. ; 2000 X X X X

Jarrett, O.; Maxwell, D.; et. al X X X

Jensen, E. ; X X X

Jensen, E. ; 1998 X X X X X X

Levine, M. ; 2003 X

Metzler, M. ; Williams, S. X X

OECD, 2002 X X X

Rabin and Gordon; 2003 X

Restak, R. ; 2003 X Templeton, R.& Jensen, R. ; 1996 X X X X

Weiss, R. ; 2000 X X X X X X X

Wesson, K. ; 2006 X X X

Zull, J. ; 2002 X X

BrainGym® and Cross-lateral Activities 1juliekrause-singh.evitae.org/BrainGymActionResearch.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of BrainGym® and Cross-lateral Activities 1juliekrause-singh.evitae.org/BrainGymActionResearch.pdf ·...