In 2015, SAQ International were commissioned by Leicestershire Public Health to conduct a pilot research project on the impact of their structured movement programme on reception and Key Stage 1 children. The goal was to determine what difference movement training made to children's physical abilities, self-confidence, learning skills, behaviour, well-being and legacy.

The Pilot Project

The pilot project involved 14 schools, 7 of these schools as part of the intervention, with the remaining 7 part of a control group. Participating schools received staff training in Fundamental Movement and Early Essential Movement and a 'Champion' was identified within the school in conjunction with the head teacher who received Advanced Diploma Training. An intern was placed within the school 5 hours per day, 5 days per week to implement the programme as part of the PE programme, provide additional work for target groups and also provide individual support to children identified through the evaluation process as needing extra help.

The pilot also included resources, equipment and parents' workshops to ensure maximum engagement.

Method

The participating children were physically evaluated at the beginning of the project and at the end. Having established there were no established physical evaluation tests available which were suitable for this group of children we designed our own, using and adapting evaluation programmes from sports science and medicine.
The following tests were used:

- Hurdle-running Test – techniques such as arm, head, trunk and foot action were scored.

- Hopping – this was to evaluate the children's ability to control dynamic balance and proprioception whilst moving.

- Split T-Test – this was getting the children moving up and to the left and then repeating the test on the right. Distance covered each side was 8 metres, 4 sections of 2 metres each side. This evaluates agility, speed, accuracy.

- Wall Drill – Using the Fitlight the children were asked to hit and react to lights that came on using a small baton. The combination was 10 hits; this was to test eye-hand manipulation, reaction & coordination.

Importantly we called the tests 'challenges' and at no time did the children feel they were being put under pressure. We maintained a relaxed, friendly and fun atmosphere and the children really enjoyed the experience.

The same evaluations were repeated at the end of the year. The schools in the control group had no intervention and were evaluated at the end of the year so it was possible to determine the difference between the intervention and the non-intervention.

The Results

The results were dramatic:

- 48% difference in movement skills between the intervention and the control groups.

- The intervention group were 35% more likely to be more proficient at hopping than the control group.

- The intervention group were 11.5% better at eye-hand manipulation coordination skills than the control group.

- The intervention group were more superior in agility and accuracy by 14% compared to the control group.

Schools also reported the following:

- 50% reduction in below expected age in moving and handling outcomes.

- 38% increase in expected age moving and handling outcomes.

- 12% increase in exceeding expected age in moving and handling outcomes.

Lessons from the research

The results highlight a number of significant issues and these should be considered more widely by policy makers and the sports and education sectors:

1. Why aren't there more structured physically active movement programmes in primary schools? Private schools have physical activity as part of their curriculum every day, yet state children are lucky to get a few hours a week. Structured programmes on a daily basis will improve the schools educational results and also have other health and well-being impact on our children.

2. There is over-reliance on after school activities which only target less than 50% of the children. Currently a high percentage of children do not engage in sport because they are not competent in movement. Early intervention is the key to getting more children active and playing sport later on.

3. Finally, how do we increase the experience, knowledge and expertise of primary school staff and leave a longer-term legacy. Too often, programmes offered by trusts and governing bodies are run for a term and then dropped. Every child should be physically evaluated as part of their educational journey not just on numeracy and literacy.

Conclusion

The project was a challenging experience, however, many of the schools have now implemented the programme successfully. The number of the interns have been employed by the schools in the longer-term and having seen the results, increasing numbers of primary schools are asking for physical intervention programmes.

In the current funding climate, primary schools are under pressure to scrutinise how they use their sports premium for the best impact. This research suggests that providing training and resources to existing staff focusing on simple movement and physical literacy is the way forward. In focusing on this ensuring a school achieves competence and independence in delivery, and later focusing on sport, will ensure the best impact for their sports premium.

Alan Pearson is Managing Director of SAQ International