Analysis of Motor Development Stages - Research Paper Example

Theoretical Analysis of the Stages of Motor Development and Learning Name Institution Date Abstract Motor development entails the changes in the ability to control body movements particularly in children. Information about the development of fine and gross motor skills is available from many sources including pediatric offices, parenting magazines and baby development books. While many agree that the ability to move is essential to human development, there has been divided consensus on the specific stages of motor development. There is growing evidence from existing theories that motor skill learning advances through different stages, in which different environmental and physical mechanisms predominate. This paper examines the effectiveness of the three theories of motor development in explaining the stages of development and learning of motor skills (Ayres, 2009, p. 23). The theories of motor development are: 1. Maturation theory, 2. Sensory processing theory and 3. Dynamic theories. The objective of the examination of these theoretical perspectives is to come up with a balanced line of inquiry and factual agreements on the merits of these theories in developing the stages of motor skill development and learning. Key Words: Motor development, motor skills, maturation, sensory processing, dynamic theories. Introduction In general, the existing theories have established a strong focus on the influences of environmental factors and physical factors on the process of development and learning of motor skills. These focuses have increasingly been utilized in developing the stages of motor development. The following is a brief and close examination of the theoretical perspectives proposed by each and every theory (Tecklin, 2008, p. 56). Maturation theories of motor development were developed and advanced by the developmental theorists who included Piaget, McGraw, Gesell and Bayley in the 1900s. Maturational theories are based on the normal developmental sequence of mental and motor development that is common to all children. With the central nervous system as the basis for motor development, maturationists propose that the normal sequence of development advances as the central nervous system matures. To some, these theories suggest a sequence of development that is strict and invariant in all normal children while to others the order of motor skills is merely but consistently a roadmap. Dynamic systems theory was initially developed by Bernstein in 1967 and has since been modified by others such as Heriza, Shumway, Horak and Thelen et al. Dynamic theorists perceive the motor development and learning as non-linear and influenced by many intrinsic and extrinsic factors affecting the development process. Dynamic theories emphasize the fact that no one system, such as the central nervous system, can be the ultimate controller of development. Instead, the confluence of many factors directs the development of certain characteristics and skills in children. Indeed motor behaviors do seem to develop in accordance to a fundamental scheme, timing, sequence and quality of developmental breakthrough though the modification impacts by other factors is also essential. These “other factors” that influence motor developments include genetic inheritance, nutrition/diet, and quality of prenatal care, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic level and diseases. Moreover, learning of new motor skills in both children and adults is influenced by motivation, cognitive abilities, opportunities and levels of stimulation and is dependent on the context, the motor task at hand and the desired outcomes (Shumway &Woollacott, 2007, p. 34). Sensory Integration theory was developed by A. Ayres, an occupational therapist. According to him, sensory integration is the neurological process which coordinates sensation from an individual’s body and from the environment making possible the effective use of the body within the environment (Ayres, 2009, p. 23). The theory expounds on the relationship between the brain and the environment explaining certain individual responses to sensory input and how this influences behaviors. Ayres suggested that this theory comprises of three elements which describe typical sensory integrative functioning, sensory integrative dysfunction and guideline to intervention programs. The first element describes learning as influenced by the capacity to absorb and process sensation from movement and the environment and utilize this in planning and coordinating behavior. The second element suggests that individuals with low capacities to process sensation may experience difficulties in the production of appropriate actions and consequently affect learning of behavior. Finally, the third element proposes that augmented sensation, as part of essential action that produces an adaptive interaction, enhances the capacity to process sensation, thereby improving learning behavior. Sensory processing theory emphasizes the importance of an individualized child directed programs (Haibach, Greg & Collier, 2012, p. 19). Methodology The study identified 21 children participants aged 4 years and below. The participants were of both genders with 11 males and 10 females. The socioeconomic status of their families varied and they were from different regions. The basis of the research was to monitor the learning process of locomotor skills in the children through observation until when they would demonstrate perfect mobility. Through comparison, the learning process would be grouped into three age groups, that is 1-2 years, 2-3 years and finally 3-4 years old; with similarities and differences noted. Results 16 of the participants demonstrated high levels of similarities in their process of learning walking skills. Within the first year, the learners learnt how to walk though some seemed a bit awkward and stumbled several times as they demonstrated walking intent. The learners demonstrated small choppy steps, wide support base, arms up high in a guarded position and a little to no trunk rotation.  In their second year that followed, the children demonstrated abilities to run hop and jump. In the third year of age, the children began top master skipping, galloping, leaping and sliding. These practice of locomotor skills were however fluid thus overlapping into other age groups. The length of time through which the learners were able to develop perfect locomotor skills varied greatly among them. Some took shorter while others took longer periods to move from one stage to another and to perfectly demonstrate stability in movement. 3 of the participants were not able to complete the stages as they developed neuromuscular diseases that restricted their learning process. The remaining two participants did not complete as a result of their demise. Conclusions From the study, the following conclusions were made. The process of learning locomotor skills began way before the children demonstrated their first assisted or independent step. This was believed to be as a result of them visually observing others in their environment walk which established the purpose for the action in them. They thus started formulating the objective of learning how to perform the actions in each stage which marked their transition from understanding the skill to learning how to execute it (Shumway, Marjorie & Woollacott, 2007, p. 89). The behaviors and characteristics demonstrated by the children toward locomotion in the second stage indicated that the children after understanding the purpose of the each action and having formulated the objective of learning how to perform them, had now progressed to a more refined movement showing the massive improvements (Tecklin, 2008, p. 24). The final stage of the process of learning demonstrated the locomotor skills having been internalized by the participants making the responses seem automatic. The learners’ progression to this final level meant that they could now practice all forms of locomotion effectively in whatever environment with little cognitive involvement compared to the first two stages (Haibach, Greg, & Collier, 2012, p. 33). It was also concluded that the length of the learning process varied from individual participant to individual participant based on varieties of factors such as learner motivation, stimuli from the environment, coordination of practice and other factors identified by the dynamic theorists. The effects of the neuromuscular diseases on the learning process of locomotor skills demonstrated that indeed the skill development is influenced by neurological system such as the central nervous system. It is worth noting that two different existing theories significantly emphasized the relationship between the brain and the development and learning of motor skills. The initiation of understanding and purpose, the development of objective and the execution of skills are all in relation to the maturity progress of the central nervous system (Tecklin, 2008). The results and conclusions from this study without any doubts confirmed that the stages of development and learning of the motor skills indeed occur in different phases. This is in line with the previous demonstration by the existing theories of motor development which suggests the three stages of motor learning and development i.e. symmetrical, reciprocal, asymmetrical and crossing the midline stages (Tecklin, 2008, p. 18). Discussion Locomotor skills are part of motor skills and entail a group of movement of the body by the feet. The vestibular system located in the inner ear enables the processing of locomotion information. It assumes a significant role in the physical development of children. Poor vestibular processing may result in delayed activities of motor skill development. Motor development theorists have always emphasized the existence of the stages of reciprocal, symmetrical, asymmetrical and crossing the midline in the lateral and bilateral motor development. Symmetrical integration entails both sides of the body performing in mirror-image unison, whereby the actions by one side of the body are similar to those on the other side. This stage of development entails performance of same action at the same time by both sides of the body. Examples include jumping and clapping (Haibach, Greg. & Collier, 2012). The reciprocal integration entailed locomotion with movement of both sides of the body in opposite motion at the same time. For instance while one arm or leg moves forward the other one move backwards. Such actions are demonstrated through actions such as walking, climbing and crawling. Asymmetrical Integration entails the action of each side of the body in different patterns to complete single specified tasks. This includes actions such as kicking the ball whereby as one leg kicks the ball the other one is planted on the ground for support. In simpler terms, Asymmetrical integration entails performance of actions independently by each side of the body for a single task and marks a critical stage in the development of locomotor skills in children as it is significantly more with the brain has to coordinate 2 different streams of actions (Haibach, Greg & Collier, 2012, p. 44). The “midline” referred to in the crossing the midline is an imaginary line that is down the center of the body from the top of the head to the toes. Instinctively reaching across an individual’s own body to complete an action is the main concept in crossing the midline. This is the fourth stage in the development of motor skills. At this stage the brain has already perfected the independent coordination of locomotion of the two side of the body. The system commences on crossing the imaginary vertical line and midline in the middle of the body. This midline which is invisible does not always divide the whole body but this may only affect some of the extremities or sense. At school age if a child is unable to cross the midline shows poorly developed integration. This may be evident in activities such as writing, reading motor planning and the coordination of gross and fine motor. In children with poor bilateral integration, inefficient patterns, procedures and strategies may be established (Connolly & Forssberg, 2007, p. 77). References Ayres, A. J. (2009); Sensory integration and learning disorders; Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services Connolly, K .J & Forssberg, H. (2007); Neurophysiology and Neuropsychology of Motor Development; Mac Keith Press, London Haibach, P., Greg, R. & Collier, D. (2012). Motor Learning and Development; Scheridan Books, New York Shumway-C., Marjorie H. & Woollacott, H (2007); Motor Control: Translating Research into Clinical Practice; Anne, Philadelphia. Tecklin, J.S (2008); Pediatric Physical Therapy, 4th edition, Baltimore Read More