16 Weeks of Physically Active Mathematics and English Language Lessons Improves Cognitive Function and Gross Motor Skills in Children Aged 8–9 Years

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to examine the effects of physically active lessons, implemented through the Mathematics and English Language curriculum, on cognitive function and gross motor skill development. Following ethical approval, 192 children aged 8–9 years were randomly allocated to an intervention group (n = 98) or a control group (n = 94). The intervention consisted of 8 h.wk−1 of physically active lessons, equally split between Mathematics and English Language, for 16 weeks. Cognitive function (digit span, coding and arithmetic reasoning) and gross motor skill development (TGMD-3) were assessed at baseline and follow-up. The improvement in every domain of cognitive function was greater in the intervention group compared to the control group (group * time, p = 0.008–0.023, d = 0.34–0.42). Furthermore, total TGMD-3 score (group * time, p < 0.001, d = 1.16) and both sub-scales (locomotor, p < 0.001, d = 0.63; object control, p < 0.001, d = 1.29) also improved by a greater extent in the intervention group than in the control group. These findings suggest that 16 weeks of physically active lessons, taught in both Mathematics and English Language curriculum, synergistically improved cognitive function and gross motor skill development in primary school children aged 8–9 years.

The Influence of Motor Competence on Broader Aspects of Health: A Systematic Review of the Longitudinal Associations Between Motor Competence and Cognitive and Social-Emotional Outcomes

“… ✓ ✓ Battaglia et al [ 74 ] Experimental x ✓ ✓ x ✓ ✓ ✓ Bedard et al [ 75 ] Experimental x ✓ ✓ x ✓ ? x Berleze and Valentini [ 76 ] Experimental ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Biino et al [ 77 ] Experimental x ✓ ✓ x ✓ ✓ ✓ Boat et al [ 78 ] Experimental ✓ ✓ ✓ x ✓ ✓ x Botha and Africa [ 79 ] Experimental ✓ ✓ ✓ x ✓ ? x Capio et al [ 80 ] Observational x ✓ ...…”

“…Daily routine: screen time, play time, activities at home and transportation T3 : Object manipulation, locomotor skills; PSPCSA and daily routine Biino et al (2021) [ 77 ] Italy 36 19 (g) 7 (b) 60.6 ± 7.4 mo (5.1 ± 0.6 y) IG performed the respective PA interventions, composed of 45-min sessions twice a wk IG (1) attended a PA course enriched with cognitive demands tailored to challenge core EFs IG (2) attended a swimming course of the same frequency and duration. CG did not attend any structured PA additional to normal daily activities PDMS-2 Process-oriented Gross motor skills Executive functions (Forward Word Span Test, Trail Making Test) Experimental, 12 w T1: Motor competence; executive functions T2: Motor competence; executive functions Boat et al (2022) [ 78 ] Italy 192 102 (g) 90 (b) CG: 8.5 ± 0.8 y IG: 8.5 ± 0.9 y The 16-wk intervention involved a number of games within the physically active lessons, each linked to a specific mathematical or English language component. Each lesson contained a warm-up, an explanation, two main activities, and a summary TGMD-3 Process-oriented Object manipulation, locomotor skills Cognitive function (WISC-IV) Experimental, 12 w T1: Motor competence; cognitive function T2: Motor competence; cognitive function Botha and Africa (2020) [ 79 ] South Africa 97 6–7 y Intervention delivery focused primarily on perceptual-motor skills and incorporated different letters and shapes into gross motor activities.…”

“…Preschool-aged children (3–5 years) were recruited to participate in 21 studies [ 73 – 75 , 77 , 79 , 80 , 83 , 85 , 86 , 89 , 92 , 98 , 100 , 101 , 105 , 107 , 109 , 112 , 114 , 118 , 119 ], pre-adolescent children (6–9 years) in 20 studies [ 76 , 78 , 84 , 87 , 88 , 91 , 93 – 96 , 99 , 102 – 104 , 106 , 108 , 110 , 111 , 115 , 117 ], and only eight studies recruited adolescent participants (10–18 years) at baseline [ 71 , 72 , 81 , 82 , 90 , 97 , 113 , 116 ]. Although the studies included within this review were characterized by a wide range of sample sizes (10–33,717 children), 51% of included studies had sample sizes ≥ 100 participants.…”

“…For studies that met the inclusion criteria, motor competence was assessed using process-oriented, product-oriented, and circuit-based instruments. A process-oriented assessment was used in 21 studies [ 73 – 78 , 80 , 86 , 87 , 89 , 91 , 94 , 98 – 101 , 103 , 105 , 109 , 114 , 119 ], a product-oriented assessment in 22 studies [ 71 , 72 , 79 , 81 , 83 – 85 , 88 , 90 , 92 , 96 , 97 , 106 – 108 , 110 , 112 , 113 , 115 – 117 ], with the remaining six studies [ 82 , 93 , 95 , 102 , 104 , 111 ] using a circuit-based approach to assessment. Collectively, versions of the Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD) [ 120 ] were the most selected process-oriented assessments, with four studies using the Peabody Developmental Scales, 2nd Edition (PDMS-2) [ 121 ], and further studies using the Motorisk Utveckling som Grund för Inlärning (MUGI) Observation instrument [ 122 ] and the PE and Metrics assessment [ 123 ].…”

An After-School Football Session Transiently Improves Cognitive Function in Children

“…Given this definition, it is therefore unsurprising that much interest has been generated in the education sector and the academic community as to the factors that influence cognitive function in young people. In particular, given the proposed links between enhanced cognitive function and the subsequent beneficial effects of learning and academic achievement [2][3][4][5][6], strategies to enhance cognitive function are of particular importance in children and adolescents.…”