Perceptuala~zdMotorSkills, 1991, 7 3 , 624-626. O Perceptual and Motor Skills 1991
INFLUENCE OF AGE, SEX, H E A R I N G LOSS, A N D BALANCE O N DEVELOPMENT OF RUNNING BY DEAF CHILDREN ' STEPHEN A. BUTTERFIELD
Universily of Maine
Summary.-130 deaf boys and girls, ages 3 to 14 years, were tested on development of mature running form. The mature form in this skiU was associated with chronological age and performance of static and dynamic balance. Sex and hearing loss do not appear to affect development of running.
The ability to run is usually easily acquired and evolves out of walking (17). The principal dfference between walking and running is a period of nonsupport when the entire body is airborne. Children's first attempts at running are generally characterized by a rapid walk. With increased maturity, gains are made in strength, balance, and coordination; strides become longer until the nonsupport phase is achieved. I n fact, several studies (1, 2, 11, 14, 16) have reported similar developmental trends including an increase in hip, knee, and ankle extension at take-off, an increase in the duration of the nonsupport phase, greater closeness of heel to buttock during the recovery swing, and greater height of the forward knee at take-off. By age five, most children have developed reasonably functional running form (17). Fundamental motor skills are important because when refined and combined they evolve into more complex patterns used in sport and recreation activities (17). Among special populations, adequate development of motor skill may increase the likelihood of their participating effectively in integrated physical education and sport (10). Previous investigations have reported delayed motor development by deaf children in catching, kicking, jumping, and hopping (4); and stationary balance, catch, kick, overhand throw, two-hand strike, hop, jump, and skip (10). Previous investigations also identified factors believed to influence development of mature form in fundamental motor skills by deaf children. Age and balance ability were most commonly reported (5, 6, 7, 8, 9). The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of age, sex, hearing loss, static balance, and dynamic balance on development of mature running form by deaf children. Seventy-four boys and 56 girls, ages 3 to 14 years, participated. One hundred twenty-three (95%) had a hearing loss of 60 dB or more in the better ear. Heating loss for the remaining seven children ranged from 30 dB to 55 dB. Etiologies included 16 meningitis, 8 rubella, 23 genetic, 67 idopath-
'Address correspondence to S. A. Butterfield, Ph.D., Division of Health, l'hysical Education, and Recreation, Lengyel Hall, University of Maine, 04469.
DEVELOPMENT OF RUNNING: DEAF CHILDREN
625
ic, and 16 other causes. Subjects in the "other" category included children whose deafness was due to low incidence etiologies such as Treacher-Collins Syndrome, cytomegalovirus, premature birth, or birth injury. No subject was physically or mentally impaired. All deaf children received physical education instruction taught by qualified personnel (M = 2 class periods per week on an average of 3 1 minutes per class). The subjects were enrolled in residential or day schools for the deaf at the time of testing. To assess running development, children were individually administered the Ohio State University Scale of Intra-gross Motor Assessment (OSU-SIGMA) (13). Static and dynamic balance were measured by Items 2 and 7 of Subtest 2 of the Short Form of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (3). A pilot study was conducted to estimate interobserver agreement. The principal investigator's ratings of children's videotaped performances on the SIGMA were compared to those of one of the SIGMA'S authors (W. F. Ersing). Percent of interobserver agreement was then estimated by dividing agreements by agreements plus disagreements and multiplying that value by 100. Interobserver agreement was .96 at the time of testing. AU children were individually assessed by the principal investigator. Test instructions were presented according to the communication philosophy of the children's respective school. The following communication modes were used: oral method, Rochester method, and total communication (signing exact English). The principal investigator has had eight years experience teaching physical education in a residential school for the deaf. Scores were subjected to linear discriminant analysis (12) in w h c h five predictor variables (age in months, sex, hearing loss in decibels, static balance in seconds, and dynamic balance in heel-to-toe steps) were correlated with level of striking development (Levels 1, 2, 3, 4; OSU-SIGMA), the criterion variable. Means and standard deviations for the five predictor variables and number of subjects performing at each level appear in Table 1. Structure coefficients were interpreted for significant discriminant functions. Only structure coefficients greater than .30 were interpreted. The result for running was significant for the first function (Wilks lambda = .679, p < ,001). The greatest contribution was made by age (.96). Static balance (.53) and dynamic balance (.54) also contributed to the function. Sex (.12) and hearing loss (.24) did not contribute to mature running form of deaf children in this study. Although other investigators have reported delayed motor development by deaf children, it is probable that age and balance ability underlie the motor development of hearing children and deaf children ahke. This study is also consistent with previous reports (6, 7, 8, 9) that did not yield an association of sex or hearing loss with mature fundamental motor ski1 development by deaf children. Consequently, further investigations should address
626
S. A. BUTTERFIELD
TABLE 1 MEANSAND STANDARD DEVIATIONSFORAGE, SEX,DEGREEOF I~EARINGLOSSIN DECIBELS, STATICBALANCE, AND DYNAMIC BALANCE BY LEVELOF RUNNING DEVELOPMENT
Level
n
Age: mo.
Sex: 0, bpy 1, g r l
3
30
4
100
Total
130
M SD M SD M SD
78.00 29.50 127.54 32.74 116.01 38.17
.36 .49 .46 .SO .43 .49
Hearing Loss, dB
Static Balance, sec.
Dynamic Balance, steps
85.93 20.99 92.80 16.29 91.21 17.64
2.63 2.91 5.64 3.65 4.94 3.71
0.83 1.34 2.81 2.46 2.35 2.39
environmental issues such as differences in child-rearing styles, school placement, and curricular emphasis as sources of variability in the motor development of deaf and hearing children. REFERENCES 1. BECK,M. (1966) The path of the center of gravit during running in boys pades one to six. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. o? wisconsin, Madison. 2. BROWN,E. W. (1978) Biomechanical analysis of the runnin patterns of girls three to ten years of age. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. oB0regon, Eugene. 3. BRUININKS, R. H. (1978) Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, examiner's manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. 4. BUTTERFIELD, S. A. (1986) Gross motor profiles of deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 62, 68-70. S. A. (1989) Influence of age, sex, heating loss and balance on development 5. BUT~ERFIELD, of throwing by deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 448-450. S. A. (1990) Influence of age, sex, hearing loss and balance on development 6. BUTTERFIELD, of sidearm striking by deaf chddren. Perceptual and Motor Skilk, 70, 361-362. 7. BUTTERFIELD, S. A., & ERSING,W. F. (1987) Age, sex, heating loss and balance in development of jumping by deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 64, 942. 8. BUT~ERFIELD, S. A , , & ERSING,W. F. (1987) Influence of age, sex, hearing loss, and balance on kicking development by deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skiffs, 64, 312. 9. BUTTEWIELD, S. A , , & ERSMG,W. F. (1988) Influence of age, sex, hearing loss and balance on catching development by deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 997998. 10. DUMMER,G. M., HAUBENSTRICKER, J. L., & STEWART,D. A. (1989) Performance of deaf
11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.
children and youth on the test of toss motor development. Paper presented at the National Consortium on Physical ~ c k c a t i o nand Recreation for h e Handicapped Conference, Washington, DC. FORTNEY, V. (1980) The kinematics and kinetics of the runnin pattern of two-, four- and e Lafayette, IN. six-year-old children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, ~ u J u Univer., KLECKA, W. R. (1980) Discriminant analysis. London: Sage. Loows, E. M., & ERSING,W. F. (1979) Assessing and rogramming gross motor development for children. Cleveland Heights, OH: Mohican ~extgook. MERSEREAU, M. (1974) A cinematic analysis of the development of the running pattern of female infants at 22 and 24 months of age. Unpublished master's thesis, Purdue Univet., Lafayette, IN. S r o c m , D. B., & JWS, S. L. (1968) Biomechanics of running. In R. L. Wickstmm (Ed.), Fundamental motor patterns. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger. Pp. 43-63. SMITH, L. (1977) Longitudinal changes in strike lengths and strike rate of children running. Unpublished master's thesis, Univer. of Wisconsin, Madison. WICKSTROM, R. L. (1983) Fundamental motor patterns. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Feblgsr
Accepted October 11, 1991.
INFLUENCE OF AGE, SEX, H E A R I N G LOSS, A N D BALANCE O N DEVELOPMENT OF RUNNING BY DEAF CHILDREN ' STEPHEN A. BUTTERFIELD
Universily of Maine
Summary.-130 deaf boys and girls, ages 3 to 14 years, were tested on development of mature running form. The mature form in this skiU was associated with chronological age and performance of static and dynamic balance. Sex and hearing loss do not appear to affect development of running.
The ability to run is usually easily acquired and evolves out of walking (17). The principal dfference between walking and running is a period of nonsupport when the entire body is airborne. Children's first attempts at running are generally characterized by a rapid walk. With increased maturity, gains are made in strength, balance, and coordination; strides become longer until the nonsupport phase is achieved. I n fact, several studies (1, 2, 11, 14, 16) have reported similar developmental trends including an increase in hip, knee, and ankle extension at take-off, an increase in the duration of the nonsupport phase, greater closeness of heel to buttock during the recovery swing, and greater height of the forward knee at take-off. By age five, most children have developed reasonably functional running form (17). Fundamental motor skills are important because when refined and combined they evolve into more complex patterns used in sport and recreation activities (17). Among special populations, adequate development of motor skill may increase the likelihood of their participating effectively in integrated physical education and sport (10). Previous investigations have reported delayed motor development by deaf children in catching, kicking, jumping, and hopping (4); and stationary balance, catch, kick, overhand throw, two-hand strike, hop, jump, and skip (10). Previous investigations also identified factors believed to influence development of mature form in fundamental motor skills by deaf children. Age and balance ability were most commonly reported (5, 6, 7, 8, 9). The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of age, sex, hearing loss, static balance, and dynamic balance on development of mature running form by deaf children. Seventy-four boys and 56 girls, ages 3 to 14 years, participated. One hundred twenty-three (95%) had a hearing loss of 60 dB or more in the better ear. Heating loss for the remaining seven children ranged from 30 dB to 55 dB. Etiologies included 16 meningitis, 8 rubella, 23 genetic, 67 idopath-
'Address correspondence to S. A. Butterfield, Ph.D., Division of Health, l'hysical Education, and Recreation, Lengyel Hall, University of Maine, 04469.
DEVELOPMENT OF RUNNING: DEAF CHILDREN
625
ic, and 16 other causes. Subjects in the "other" category included children whose deafness was due to low incidence etiologies such as Treacher-Collins Syndrome, cytomegalovirus, premature birth, or birth injury. No subject was physically or mentally impaired. All deaf children received physical education instruction taught by qualified personnel (M = 2 class periods per week on an average of 3 1 minutes per class). The subjects were enrolled in residential or day schools for the deaf at the time of testing. To assess running development, children were individually administered the Ohio State University Scale of Intra-gross Motor Assessment (OSU-SIGMA) (13). Static and dynamic balance were measured by Items 2 and 7 of Subtest 2 of the Short Form of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (3). A pilot study was conducted to estimate interobserver agreement. The principal investigator's ratings of children's videotaped performances on the SIGMA were compared to those of one of the SIGMA'S authors (W. F. Ersing). Percent of interobserver agreement was then estimated by dividing agreements by agreements plus disagreements and multiplying that value by 100. Interobserver agreement was .96 at the time of testing. AU children were individually assessed by the principal investigator. Test instructions were presented according to the communication philosophy of the children's respective school. The following communication modes were used: oral method, Rochester method, and total communication (signing exact English). The principal investigator has had eight years experience teaching physical education in a residential school for the deaf. Scores were subjected to linear discriminant analysis (12) in w h c h five predictor variables (age in months, sex, hearing loss in decibels, static balance in seconds, and dynamic balance in heel-to-toe steps) were correlated with level of striking development (Levels 1, 2, 3, 4; OSU-SIGMA), the criterion variable. Means and standard deviations for the five predictor variables and number of subjects performing at each level appear in Table 1. Structure coefficients were interpreted for significant discriminant functions. Only structure coefficients greater than .30 were interpreted. The result for running was significant for the first function (Wilks lambda = .679, p < ,001). The greatest contribution was made by age (.96). Static balance (.53) and dynamic balance (.54) also contributed to the function. Sex (.12) and hearing loss (.24) did not contribute to mature running form of deaf children in this study. Although other investigators have reported delayed motor development by deaf children, it is probable that age and balance ability underlie the motor development of hearing children and deaf children ahke. This study is also consistent with previous reports (6, 7, 8, 9) that did not yield an association of sex or hearing loss with mature fundamental motor ski1 development by deaf children. Consequently, further investigations should address
626
S. A. BUTTERFIELD
TABLE 1 MEANSAND STANDARD DEVIATIONSFORAGE, SEX,DEGREEOF I~EARINGLOSSIN DECIBELS, STATICBALANCE, AND DYNAMIC BALANCE BY LEVELOF RUNNING DEVELOPMENT
Level
n
Age: mo.
Sex: 0, bpy 1, g r l
3
30
4
100
Total
130
M SD M SD M SD
78.00 29.50 127.54 32.74 116.01 38.17
.36 .49 .46 .SO .43 .49
Hearing Loss, dB
Static Balance, sec.
Dynamic Balance, steps
85.93 20.99 92.80 16.29 91.21 17.64
2.63 2.91 5.64 3.65 4.94 3.71
0.83 1.34 2.81 2.46 2.35 2.39
environmental issues such as differences in child-rearing styles, school placement, and curricular emphasis as sources of variability in the motor development of deaf and hearing children. REFERENCES 1. BECK,M. (1966) The path of the center of gravit during running in boys pades one to six. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. o? wisconsin, Madison. 2. BROWN,E. W. (1978) Biomechanical analysis of the runnin patterns of girls three to ten years of age. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. oB0regon, Eugene. 3. BRUININKS, R. H. (1978) Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, examiner's manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. 4. BUTTERFIELD, S. A. (1986) Gross motor profiles of deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 62, 68-70. S. A. (1989) Influence of age, sex, heating loss and balance on development 5. BUT~ERFIELD, of throwing by deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 448-450. S. A. (1990) Influence of age, sex, hearing loss and balance on development 6. BUTTERFIELD, of sidearm striking by deaf chddren. Perceptual and Motor Skilk, 70, 361-362. 7. BUTTERFIELD, S. A., & ERSING,W. F. (1987) Age, sex, heating loss and balance in development of jumping by deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 64, 942. 8. BUT~ERFIELD, S. A , , & ERSING,W. F. (1987) Influence of age, sex, hearing loss, and balance on kicking development by deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skiffs, 64, 312. 9. BUTTEWIELD, S. A , , & ERSMG,W. F. (1988) Influence of age, sex, hearing loss and balance on catching development by deaf children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 997998. 10. DUMMER,G. M., HAUBENSTRICKER, J. L., & STEWART,D. A. (1989) Performance of deaf
11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.
children and youth on the test of toss motor development. Paper presented at the National Consortium on Physical ~ c k c a t i o nand Recreation for h e Handicapped Conference, Washington, DC. FORTNEY, V. (1980) The kinematics and kinetics of the runnin pattern of two-, four- and e Lafayette, IN. six-year-old children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, ~ u J u Univer., KLECKA, W. R. (1980) Discriminant analysis. London: Sage. Loows, E. M., & ERSING,W. F. (1979) Assessing and rogramming gross motor development for children. Cleveland Heights, OH: Mohican ~extgook. MERSEREAU, M. (1974) A cinematic analysis of the development of the running pattern of female infants at 22 and 24 months of age. Unpublished master's thesis, Purdue Univet., Lafayette, IN. S r o c m , D. B., & JWS, S. L. (1968) Biomechanics of running. In R. L. Wickstmm (Ed.), Fundamental motor patterns. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger. Pp. 43-63. SMITH, L. (1977) Longitudinal changes in strike lengths and strike rate of children running. Unpublished master's thesis, Univer. of Wisconsin, Madison. WICKSTROM, R. L. (1983) Fundamental motor patterns. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Feblgsr
Accepted October 11, 1991.
