Seminar 4 –
Summary and Discussion
Motor learning
Four talks covering different aspects of intervention. From the first talk
by Bouwien Smits-Englesman practical guidelines based on motor learning
principles were presented including the importance of context something
that all agreed with, and the variability of practice, targets and goals.
Time on task was noted as the most important variable with additional discussion
on child orientation in finding optimal solutions to movement problems
such as providing multiple experiences to ‘discover’ invariant
features. Discussion surrounding context was extended to include learning
context analysis merging assessment and intervention. The question was
posed whether children with DCD have difficulty in exploring the options
within certain parameters.
Cognitive neuro-science
A more specific line was taken by Peter Wilson who presented a cognitive
neuro-scientific approach followed by work on motor imagery training methods.
Discussion on this surrounded the accurate measurement of mental imagery
and how to modify tasks accordingly with the typos of information needed
to provide professionals with guidelines.
Dynamic development and Ecological perspective
Mike Wade presented a tour of approaches to motor control and developmental
theories honing in on a dynamical approach and the opportunities it might
offer. The discussions on this and in subsequent sessions appeared to accept
this mode of thinking noting that it fitted well with ecological models
and with the numerous variables that seemed to impinge on the intervention
process. The nature of the task proved to be topic of wide discussion with
the group noting that there is a lack of current research on this and we
are relying on older models, while noting the importance of this in intervention
research and practice.
This approach was taken and greatly extended by Cheryl Missiuna who challenged us with approaches that were very much family and community based and concentrated on changing the demands of the environment at the same time as assisting the child. This was seen by the group as being a step change forward in provision and extended how we view intervention, noting that it would fit comfortably within a social definition of disability. It moves us away from an individual model of intervention moving towards changing the context and environment in which the child is operating.
Comparisons across intervention methods
David Sugden concluded the seminar and the series with a presentation examining
the role of theory empiricism, and experience in intervention research
drawing comparisons with Morton’s brain, cognitive and behavioural
levels in developmental disabilities in general. Discussion centred on
clinical and research work being more in tune with each other with the
proposal for a continual exchange of information. The issue was raised
about whose responsibility was it to make the link between research and
clinical work.
Final discussions detailed some of the variables involved in successful intervention. There was little disagreement on these even though different disciplines were represented at the seminar. However, it was noted that ‘camps’ of methods were present which locked individuals into ‘methods’ and the subsequent lack of flexibility may miss important variables in the intervention process.