Working in Movement

An important part of movement education is varying the movements that comprise an action. More available options for movement (at least those acceptable to the sensory motor system) usually means the more effective the movement and less wear and tear on the tissues. But this idea of developing a variety of movement options usually occurs in the context of a movement lesson. It isn't always easy to generalize to everyday actions.

But it might pay big dividends in the form of reduced injuries, at least according to a pair of European mathematicians. Why some athletes are injury prone describes how the two mathematicians figured out a simple way to model complex athletic actions, in this case cricket bowling. They found that some combinations of movements in the action allows small adjustments to actions, while some combinations offered no adjustments. It is where there are no adjustments, what they call reduced redundancy, that small injuries can become bigger ones. They tested their model on two bowlers, finding the one with reduced redundancy prone to injury. The number crunchers plan to apply their model to other sports. Others say more work is needed before the modeling technique can be applied more generally.

One of the things we all (hopefully) learn in school is how to read. But for some it's a lot more difficult than for others. A learning disability called dyslexia can jumble the words on paper, complicating this complex learning task even further. And it's not as uncommon as you might think. One estimate puts the dyslexic population at 10% of the general population.

Educational programs are well aware of this, of course, and offer remedial literacy programs for reading and writing (and 'rithmetic?). But there are others who don't hold much hope for traditional forms of instruction in solving the reading problem. One of them is the Learning Breakthrough Program, a commercial venture that sells a learning program for kids based on the idea that improving the functioning of the vestibular and sensory processing systems can better equip kids to read more easily. This and other such programs use the idea that defects in co-ordinating movement could affect eye-tracking and consequently reading and writing.

It makes sense that compromised sensory functioning could impede making sense of conceptual stuff like printed material. And it really makes sense to me that a compromised vestibular system could also cause problems. Certainly, improving the balance, stability and support functions of anyone, learning disabled or not, can offer an improved quality of life.

There are "studies" that suggest such programs are effective in raising learning disabled kids test scores. But I wonder if these classroom tests are the kinds of measures that really indicate better functioning. An exercise-based program, performed for a few minutes and day over a short time has some effects. But the question I have is: is it really a lasting learning experience, or something to improve test performance over the short term?