COMPARING THE MOTOR SKILLS OF 4 AND 5-YEAR-OLD EDUCABLE MENTALLY RETARDED GIRLS WITH THEIR PEER GROUPS USING PEABODY DEVELOPMENTAL MOTOR SCALES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32461/2226-3209.1.2018.178354Abstract
Abstract. Objective: The development of motor skills in preschool children plays a fundamental role in
subsequent learning, with some researchers believing that motor skill learning determines future learning, and superior mental processes result from the proper development of the perceptual-motor systems. Motor performance in children affects their learning skills, so the lack of proper motor activity is a hurdle involved in a child’s explorative, playing and learning experiences. Method This descriptive, analytical study is cross-sectional in nature. The researcher described and analyzed the motor skill of two subject groups, one consisting of normal girls and the other consisting of educable mentally retarded girls, aged 4 to 5, across Tehran’s kindergartens. Multistage randomization was performed to select a statistical population totaling 60 subjects. The test consisted of two parts; one assessed the gross motor skills and the other assessed the fine motor skills. Results: Data were analyzed by the analysis of variance and t-test. The results indicated that there was a statistically significant deference between 4 and 5-year old normal and educable mentally retarded girls. There was not a significant difference between 5-year old normal and educable mentally retarded girls in terms of the mean value of the fine and gross motor skills and their sub-categories. There was not a significant difference between 4 and 5-year old normal girls
in the fine and gross skills based on the Peabody test. Conclusion: Mentally retarded girls had lower ability at gross and soft motor skills than normal girls, and the Peabody test was a proper method to examine this property.
Keywords: Motor skills, mentally retarded children, Peabody test
References
Barsch RH. Perceptual-motor curriculum: Special child publications; 1968.
Cratty BJ. Adapted physical education for handicapped children and youth: Love Publishing Company; 1980.
. French RW, Jansma P. Special physical education: Merrill Publishing Company; 1982.
Boucher BH, Doescher SM, Sugawara AI. Preschool children's motor development and self-concept. Perceptual
and motor skills. 1993;76(1):11-7.
Ayres AJ. Improving academic scoresthrough sensory integration. Journal of Learning Disabilities.
;5(6):338-43.
Harris SR, Heriza CB. Measuring infant movement: Clinical and technological assessment techniques. Physical
therapy. 1987;67(12):1877-80.
Akbar Fahimi N. EDPA Examination in Normal 1-6 Year-Old Girls in Tehran. Master's Thesis.
;University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences. [In Persian]
Fulks M-AL, Harris SR. Predictive accuracy of the Miller Assessment for Preschoolers in children with
prenatal drug exposure. Physical & occupational therapy in pediatrics. 2005;25(1-2):17-37.
Ratzon N, Greenbaum C, Dulitzky M, Ornoy A. Comparison of the motor development of school-age children
born to mothers with and without diabetes mellitus. Physical & occupational therapy in pediatrics. 2000;20(1):43-57.
Folio MR. Peabody developmental motor scales. DLM Teaching Resources. 1983.
Tavasoli A, Azimi P, Montazari A. Reliability and validity of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-for
assessing motor development of low birth weight preterm infants. Pediatric neurology. 2014;51(4):522-6. [In Persian].
Dotty A, Mcewen I, Parker D. effect off testing content on ball skill performance in five years old children with
out developmental delay acupational therapy 1998;73(3):312-8.
Case-Smith J, Allen AS, Pratt PN. Occupational therapy for children: Mosby St. Louis; 2001.
Palison R, Kolob T, Haley S. validity of the Peabody development gross motor scale as an evaluation measure
of infants receiving physical therapy physical ther Physical Therapy. 1998;75(11):939-48
Margo N, Susan K, Steven D. Effect of otitis media with effusion on gross motor ability in preschool – age
children. pediaterics. 1997;99(3):334-7.
Sommerfelt K, Sonnander K, Skranes J. neuropsychologic and motor function in small-for-gestation
preschooler. Pediatric Neural. 2002;26(3):186-91.
Ghasemi M. Comparison of Girls with Down Syndrome and Down Syndrome in Driving Ozer Tesque Skill
Test. Thesis Master's Degree in Psychology. 1995;University of Tehran, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences
[In Persian].
Babapur J. Comparison of Normal and Dyslexic Students Using His Lincoln Test Zoretsky. Master Thesis.
:62-9. [In Persian].
Derekhsanrad A. Standardization of pivotal motor developmental test in preschool girls MSc Thesis. 2004. [In
Persian].
Crowe W, Auxter D, Pyfer J. adapted physical education and research. mosby company. 1981;4th edition.
Downloads
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
