Testimonials from happy parents and children who've had Neuro Physiological Therapy with Open Doors Therapy

Neuro-Physiological Therapy does help children with...

  • special educational needs (SEN)
  • general learning difficulties (GLD)
  • specific learning difficulties; dyslexia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia
  • speech and language difficulties
  • autism spectrum disorder (ASD)
  • attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
  • schizoid personality disorder

News

u

Music Therapy has 'flipped' switch for US politician gunned down at point black range.

Music stimulates so many different areas of the brain. I use Musica Medica to help children with learning, emotional and behavioural difficulties at school. There are many other music therapies available at Nordoff -Robbins

http://www.nordoff-robbins.org.uk/content/what-we-do/music-therapy

Sunday Telegraph Feb 27 2011


u

Children under five need a daily workout

Babies were born to survive the rigours of stone age existence – being carried and bounced as the parent runs, walks, bends, climbs and turns......that was their first workout.  Moving around is not just about health and avoiding obesity, movement is the child’s first language and helps to create the neural networks upon which learning and thinking depend ....’sound of body, sound of mind.

Guardian 11th July 2011


u

The Genius of Natural Childhood

This is a ‘must, book for anyone caring for young children. Sally demonstrates how children were not designed to be born into our modern technological world; she shows the importance of ‘natural’, traditional and time honoured ways of bringing children up, with a perfect blend of scientific thinking and common sense.

Have a look at the 'books' tab on our research page for more info.


u

How to Be Outstanding

I am employed by Education Walsall to help deliver and steer this project and was commissioned to write the book ‘How to Be Outsatnding’

Express and Star 20th July 2011


u

Nursery World Article on Open Doors Therapy Work - Nov 2012

Child Development

Links shown between neuromotor skills and academic performance

Katy Morton, 12 November 2012, 12:00am

The first study of its kind to measure foundation stage children's neuromotor skills against their performance at school has found that children who struggle to sit still or hold a pencil may not have fully completed steps in their neurophysiological development as babies.

Researchers, led by former primary school teacher Pete Griffin, the founder of Open Doors Therapy, assessed the neuromotor immaturity of 60 reception children from Deanery C of E School in Sutton Coldfield, Birmingham.The aim of the study was to determine whether children who performed below their expected level, despite support and outstanding teaching, may have neuromotor immaturity, also known as neuro-developmental delay.

While similar research has been carried out, this is the first study to focus on children under the age of seven.

Children with more than one of the below may have neuromotor immaturity:

·         Difficulty sitting still

·         Poor sitting posture

·         Writing problems

·         Immature pencil grip

·         History of being early (10 months old) or late (16 months old) at learning to walk

·         History of being late at learning to talk.

Researchers assessed children's neuromotor immaturity using 14 tests devised by Sally Goddard Blythe, a consultant in neuro-developmental education and director of the Institute for Neuro-Physiological Psychology in Chester (INPP) in her book Assessing Neuromotor Readiness for Learning. According to Ms Goddard-Blythe, similar tests were used by doctors to assess the neuromotor skills of children starting school 30 years ago.

In the first test, children's asymmetrical tonic neck reflex was assessed. This is a primitive reflex found in newborn babies, but normally disappears around six months of age.

The second test measured children's ability to balance on one leg. This test assesses control of static balance and the ability to control balance using one side of the body independently from the other.

It can also determine the effects on language.

Children's ability to crawl on their hands and knees was also measured, along with their competence to rotate and turn their thumb to touch and oppose the tips of each finger. By the age of 30 months, a child should normally have developed finger/thumb opposition.

The findings showed that children whose results indicated serious issues in either of the tests tended to be in the bottom two ability groups. In total only 33 per cent of children with neuromotor immaturity were in the two highest academic groups compared to 77 per cent in the two lowest academic groups.

To improve the academic performance of those children with neuromotor immaturity, the school has introduced a targeted exercise programme designed by the Institute for Neuro-Physiological Psychology (INPP).

The INPP exercise programme involves children replicating movements that they should have made in the first few months of life. The programme is designed to give children a second chance to make the connections that were not made as babies.

The findings from the INPP exercise programme are due at the end of the year. Researchers are also repeating the study with 60 nursery age children.

Pete Griffin said, 'The study is very timely as there has been a lot about school readiness in the media lately and debate over the age in which children should start school. Our research showed a correlation between children's assessment outcomes and how teachers group them.'

He added, 'By working with younger children we hope to pre-empt neuro-developmental delay and try to remove barriers so children can cope better at school.'

 


u

Daily Mail Report Nov 7 2012 on research by Pete Griffin

The children being held back at school because their lazy lifestyles mean they can’t stand on one leg

A study of four and five-year-olds shows nearly a third struggle with tasks such as crawling

Researchers say children increasingly spend their early years sitting in front of screens or in prams

By LAURA CLARK

PUBLISHED: 23:29, 7 November 2012 UPDATED: 08:12, 8 November 2012

 

Researchers say that young children are spending more time in front of screens or ferried around in prams (file picture)

Tens of thousands of children are being held back at school because their sedentary lifestyles have left them lacking basic physical skills.

A study of four and five-year-olds shows nearly a third struggle with tasks such as balancing on one leg and crawling.

Researchers say children increasingly spend their early years sitting in front of screens and being ferried around in prams and car seats, with fewer opportunities to roll, climb, crawl and enjoy rough-and-tumble play. 

The study found those who struggle with basic physical exercises are significantly more likely to fall behind academically.

Sixty children in reception classes at a school in the West Midlands were given 14 short tests, including asking them to balance on one leg for three seconds and crawl a short distance.

The study found 30 per cent of pupils showed signs of physical immaturity and a further 42 per cent some signs of delays in development.

Some children even appeared not to have lost primitive baby reflexes, such as their arms and head extending when their head moves to the side.

The study, carried out by former primary headmaster Pete Griffin in conjunction with the Institute for Neuro-Physiological Psychology in Chester, found that of pupils in the bottom half of the group for physical maturity, 77 per cent were in the lowest two groups for academic ability.

Mr Griffin said: ‘The main issue is that children don’t have the same kind of physical challenge and upbringing they might have had 40 or 50 years ago.’

 

More...

 ‘Children are strapped into travel systems and are not physically picked up as much.

‘I don’t see family members throwing their babies up into the air as much. We do less of that.’ 

Babies also spend less time on the floor learning to roll and crawl, he said.

‘There’s less opportunity to climb, to roll, to jump.’ 

In these safety-conscious times, parents will stop their children walking along a wall in case they fall, he added.

 

The study found those who struggle with physical exercises are significantly more likely to fall behind academically

The rise of screen-based entertainment was likely to be having a ‘dramatic effect’, both because it led to sedentary lifestyles and stunted concentration.

‘There’s less creativity involved in playing on the screen or watching TV,’ he said.

‘TV comes in very small bites so children are not used to concentrating for long periods, video games move from one stimulus to another very rapidly.’ 

This was likely to have an effect on children’s ability to concentrate in the classroom, he warned.

Mr Griffin added that the pressures of today’s exam-focused schooling meant that children with immature physical skills were less likely to catch up.

‘There is less of a place for a late developer in the education system,’ he said.


Read more: 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2229567/The-children-held-school-lazy-lifestyles-mean-t-stand-leg.html#ixzz2IEvToNtW 
Follow us: 
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


u

Introductory Course

Movement Programmes to Break down the Barriers to Learning

One day introductory workshop

 

All of your children were born with over 100 baby reflexes, which they should have integrated before they started nursery. If these reflexes were not fully integrated they can act as a barrier to learning, preventing some of your children from reaching their full potential.

A number of movement programmes can release your children from these physical barriers and so make your learning support and interventions more effective and sustainable.

The one day workshop will give you an introduction and overview:

  • Of how Barriers to Learning may be due to developmental delay
  • Of the Evidence that learning progress may be accelerated through developmentally based movement activities
  • Of the Theory behind different developmentally based programmes such as:

-      Neuro-motor readiness

-      Wings of Childhood

-      Balanceability

-      Movement, the brain and learning.

-      Brain Gym

-     Music based programmes

 

In addition, you will be given an introduction to activities that will help integrate the baby reflexes. These will help with:

·         Behaviour and attention difficulties

·         Anger Management

·         Balance and posture

·         Spatial awareness

·         Speech and language difficulties

·         Co-ordination skills – handwriting and other fine motor skills

·         Accelerating learning

 

The course is suitable for teachers, learning support assistants, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and anyone who has an interest in helping children to reach their full potential

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The course will involve gentle movement and some of these will be on the floor so please wear comfortable clothes and bring a blanket or yoga mat to lie on. You will be without shoes for some activities so you may want to wear socks.

Janice Graham:

·         Involved in primary education for over 30 years

·         Deputy Director Education Action Zone

·         Excellence Challenge Co-ordinator

·         Brain Gym and Rhythmic Movement Instructor

 

 

 

 

Pete Griffin:

·         Involved in primary education for over 30 years

·         Retired head teacher and Consultant

·         Neuro-motor therapist (INPP) and researcher

·         Articles in Daily Mail and Nursery World

 

 

The workshop will be facilitated by:

 

 

 

 

 

When: Friday 27th September, 2013, 09.00 for prompt 09.30 start for 15.00 finish

 

Where: Mercure Wolverhampton Goldthorn Hotel, 126 Penn Road, WV3 0ER

Refuelling: Buffet Lunch and light refreshments provided

 

Investment: £75 for one place, £120 for 2 places from the same setting

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*    ……………………………………………………………………………

 

 

Movement Programmes to Break Down The Barriers to Learning

Please reserve the following number of places -

Names of attendee(s) –

·         

·         

·         

·         

Any special dietary requirements:

 

 

 

Name:

School/Organisation:

Address:

 

 

Telephone:

Email:

Payment Details-

Tick as appropriate

I enclose a cheque for the full fee of £…………………

 

Please invoice my organisation

 

     

 

Please send the booking form and make cheques payable to:-

Janice Graham, 342 Penn Road, Wolverhampton, WV4 4DA

  


u

Pilot Study - four schools

This pilot study shows the link between Neuro Motor Immaturity and the ability of children in school.

Neuro Motor Immaturity (NMI)1

  • Attainment at Key Stage 1

  • Ability Grouping at Key Stage 1

  • Barrier to Learning

     

    Introduction:

    This pilot study asks the following questions:

     

  1. Is there a possible correlation between the degree of Neuro Motor Immaturity and the attainment of children in Key Stage 1?

 

  1. Is there a possible correlation between the degree of Neuro Motor Immaturity and the ability groups in individual schools of children in Key Stage 1?

 

  1.  Should Schools and National Bodies give greater consideration to Neuro Motor Immaturity and other developmental issues as a potential barrier to learning?

 

 

 

Neuro Motor Immaturity:

A simplistic way of viewing Neuro Motor Immaturity (NMI) is to understand that some children may retain their ‘baby wiring’, which could interfere with how the child neurophysiologically processes various sensory information and neurophysiologically responds to such information. It is described by Sally Goddard Blythe, in ‘Assessing Neuromotor Readiness for Learning’1, as the ‘retention of immature patterns of movement control’ (page 4). The book outlines a ‘Developmental Screening Test’ for children and the ‘School Intervention Programme’ both developed by Sally Goddard Blythe, at the Institute for Neuro Physiological Psychology (INPP). INPP have gathered together extensive  research, clinical practice all of which more fully explains how Neuro Motor Immaturity  may impact upon children’s learning , behaviour and coordination.

 

 Neuro Motor Immaturity in this pilot was assessed by looking at the ‘soft signs’1 of neurological dysfunction, the retention of three specific primitive (baby) reflexes and visual perception and motor integration. Using the 4-7 year old screening tests, outlined in ‘Assessing Neuromotor Readiness for Learning’1 the children in each school:-

  • Neuromotor Tests
    • Proprioception and control  of static balance (Romberg Test)
    • Control of static balance using one side of the body, independently of the other (One Leg Stand)
    • Creeping on hands and knees
    • Crossing the midline
    • Finger and thumb opposition
  • Tests for Primitive Reflexes
    • Asymmetrical Tonic Neck Reflex (ATNR)
    • Symmetrical Tonic Neck Reflex (STNR)
    • Tonic Labyrinthine Reflex (TLR)
  • Tests for Visual Perception and Visual-Motor Integration

 

Using the 14 tests in 'Assessing Neuromotor Readiness for Learning' by Sally Goddard Blythe, the children’s Neuromotor Immaturity was assessed. The children were divided into 5 groups according their scores using the INPP recommendations. For the purpose of this study they were then divided into three groups namely:

 

  • Those children with Few Issues
  • Those children with Some Issues
  • Those children with Major Issues

 


 

 

Score

INPP Recommendation

Group for Purpose of this Study

Percentage of  262 Children

0%

No Action Required

Few Issues

 

21%

<25%

May benefit from INPP developmental exercise programme

25-49%

INPP school developmental exercise programme recommended

Some Issues

52%

50-74%

 INPP school developmental exercise programme recommended but may need referral or individual INPP programme

Major Issues

 

27%

 

75-100%

Referral for further professional assessment

 

Key Stage 1 Children:

 

 The 262 children included in this study, all were attending one of four, mixed sex, state maintained schools in the Midlands. The year groups assessed were designated by the schools, according to their own priorities. Contributing to a pilot research project was of secondary importance.  When considering the factors that may affect a child’s attainment at school, schools and the national bodies would include the following possibilities:

 

  • Social and Economic Background
  • Ethnic Background
  • Geographical Location
  • Home background
  • Home language
  • ‘Looked after children’
  • Parental Expectation
  • Birth date
  • Inner Ability
  • Health
  • Behaviour,
  • Motivation
  • Learning Difficulties
  • Pre School Experience
  • Teacher Expectation
  • Quality of Teaching
  • The School Attending
  • Curriculum Structure
  • Individualised Learning
  • Support and Intervention

 

These are by no means the only ‘barriers to learning’ and they are not absolutes.  Rarely though, if at all, are issues to do with Neuro Motor Immaturity considered.  Perhaps this is because the Plowden2 concepts of ‘readiness to learn’ and ‘child centred’ education was implemented in a confused and haphazard way in the 1960’s and 1970’s, and so became generally discredited. Knowing about child development is no longer seen as an essential part of a teacher’s training. Previous smaller scale pilot projects have shown a possible relationship between Neuromotor Immaturity and attainment of children in school. These projects have focused upon individual schools, in this study there is the opportunity to utilise and combine the data from four schools which seems a good and viable option. A larger sample size would give results that would be more indicative of schools generally even though there is considerable variation from one school to the other.  In Ofsted terms, all these schools were at least classified as ‘Good’.

Year groups and size for each school

 

School

All Schools

School A

School B

School C

School D

Total of Children Assessed

262

29

51

113

69

Year 1 (Age 5-6)

123

29

0

57

37

Year 2 (Age 6-7)

139

0

51

56

32

 

Attainment:

In maintained, English schools teachers, periodically assess pupil’s progress, against National Curriculum Level Descriptors.  Within the National Curriculum is an expectation of the level which children will attain at the end of each specific school year. For the purpose of this study the children were classified according to their National Curriculum Attainment level:-

  • Above National Expectation

  • At National Expectation
  • Below National Expectation

 

Attainment and National Expectation*

Level

P4

P5

P6

P7

P8

1c

1b

1a

2c

2b

2a

3c

3b

3a

Points

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

Year 1

Below Expectation

At Expectation

Above Expectation

Year 2

Below Expectation

At Expectation

Above Expectation


Of the 262 children included in this study their attainment for each subject was:

 

Attainment

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Above Expectation

38%

22%

32%

At Expectation

35%

42%

42%

Below Expectation

27%

36%

36%

 

It should be noted that under the current administration there seems to be a greater emphasis upon progress rather than just end of key stage attainment. Schools are now being challenged to achieve 4 points progress in Year 1 and 6 points in Year 2.

 

Ability Grouping:

 

Variation between the schools is such, that a child in the ‘top’ group in one school may be placed in an ‘average’ or lower group in another. Quite often factors outlined previously to do with catchment may account in part for this variation. The four schools involved in this study are all based in very different catchment areas and each has a different pupil profile. Since before the 1980s, the number of children taking free school meals has been seen as a key factor in judging the degree of social deprivation within an individual school’s population.  In order to try to better support such children, schools with higher free meals uptake have attracted additional funding. The current administration, targets free school children, individually, by allocating a ‘pupil premium’ to them, which schools are expected to account for.

 

Across the four schools in this study, the percentage of Free School Meals in each school varied from very high, quite high to very low – 69%, 26%, 23% and 3.3%. So the schools each have very different catchment areas.

 

 In order to better equalise the varying factors between schools I looked at each school individually and divided the children into three ‘teaching’ or ability groups. Were possible these were approximate thirds

 

Specific to each school the children were divided into

 

  • More Able
  • Able
  • Less Able

 

The groups   could not be divided exactly into equal thirds, as much depended upon where there was a natural break in the distribution of levels. Of the 262 children, the overall ability grouping of the children was distributed:-

 

Subject

More Able

Able

Less Able

Reading

35

34

32

Writing

33

33

34

Numeracy

29

41

30

 

I must reemphasise that a child in a Less Able Group in a high achieving school may be equivalent to an Able Child in a less well achieving school.

 

The Results

 

  1. Is there a possible correlation between the degree of Neuro Motor Immaturity and the attainment of children in Key Stage 1?

     

    The results below demonstrate children having   ‘Major issues’ with Neuromotor Immaturity they are more likely to achieve Below National Expectation in Reading, Writing and Numeracy.

     

    Of the children with Few NMI Issues only 9% scored Below National Expectation in Numeracy and 13% in Reading and Writing.

     

    Of the children with Some NMI Issues 25% scored Below National Expectation in Numeracy, 24% in Reading and 37% in Writing.

     

    Of the children with Major NMI Issues 48% scored Below National Expectation in Numeracy, 42 % in Reading and 54% in Writing.

     

    A child with Major Issues is between 3-6 times more likely to fall below National Expectation than a child with Few Issues.

     

    Conclusion

    There is a likely relationship between Neuro Motor Immaturity and a child’s attainment against National Expectation.

  1. Is there a possible correlation between the degree of Neuro Motor Immaturity and the ability groups in individual schools of children in Key Stage 1?

 

The results below demonstrate that children with major NMI issues are more likely to be in their school’s lower ability group and children with few NMI issues are more likely to be in their school’s higher ability group.

The results:

Of the children with Few NMI Issues only 6% were less able in reading, 4% in Writing and 17% in Numeracy

Of the children with Some NMI Issues 26% were less able in reading, 27% in Writing and 23% in Numeracy.

Of the children with Major NMI Issues 62% were less able in reading, 60% in Writing and 56% in Numeracy

A child with Major Issues is between 3-15 times more likely to be in a less able group than a child with Few Issues.

 

 

Using the numerical value comparing ability groups to NMI score the data was subjected to a Chi Square analysis. The probability of the relationship between NMI issues and ability group occurring by chance was less than 0.5%

The p values were:-

Reading – 0.0000199223

Writing – 0.0000000461

Numeracy – 0.00000002529

 

A child with Major NMI issues is more likely to be in the Lower Ability Group in their school and conversely and child with Few NMI issues is more likely to be in the higher ability group.

 

Conclusion:

There is a strong correlation between Neuro Motor Immaturity and the ability group a child may be placed in.

 

  1. Should Schools and National Bodies give greater consideration to Neuro Motor Immaturity and other developmental issues as a potential barrier to learning?

     

    Given that the relationship between Neuro Motor Immaturity and both children’s attainment at school, and their likely ability group, schools and national bodies, should give greater consideration to Neuro Motor Immaturity and other developmental as a potential barrier to learning.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Appendix 1.

     

Key Stage 1 Children and Neuromotor Immaturity  - Data for each School

School

All

A

B

C

D

Children Assessed

262

29

51

113

69

% Free School Meal

30

69

23

25

3

Year 1 (Age 5-6)

123

29

0

57

37

Year 2 (Age 6-7)

139

0

51

56

32

% Neuro Motor Immaturity  Issues

Few

Some

Major

Few

Some

Major

Few

Some

Major

Few

Some

Major

Few

Some

Major

21

52

28

10

66

24

9

45

43

28

61

25

28

46

46

Subject

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

% Achieving Above National Expectation

33

23

31

10

3

24

33

12

24

44

28

34

43

48

41

% Achieving At National Expectation

45

40

44

69

42

48

49

49

52

12

28

26

50

39

49

% Achieving Below National Expectation

23

38

26

21

55

28

18

39

24

44

44

40

7

13

10

Subject

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

Reading

Writing

Numeracy

%More Able

35

33

29

41

31

34

32

30

40

33

39

10

35

32

33

% Able

34

33

41

38

34

38

38

25

28

36

33

55

25

41

41

% Less Able

31

34

30

21

34

28

30

45

32

31

27

35

41

28

26

 

 

Appendix 2.

 References:

 

  1. Goddard Blythe SA, 2012.  Assessing neuromotor readiness for learning.  The INPP developmental screening test and school intervention programme. Wiley-Blackwell.  Chichester.                         ISBN  9781119970682
  2. Plowden Report. Children and their Primary Schools. HMSO 1967

 

Other reading:

  1. Reflexes, Learning and Behaviour’ by Sally Goddard Blythe                        ISBN 0 9615332 8 5
  2.  ‘Physical Activities for Improving Children’s Learning and Behaviour’, by Cheatum and Hammond                                                                                                                                                                                            ISBN 0 88011 874 1
  3. ‘The Well Balanced Child’ by Sally Goddard Blythe                           ISBN 1 903458 6 3 3
  4.  ‘An Organic Basis for Neurosis and Educational Difficulties’ by Blythe & McGlown                  ISBN 0950670405
  5.  ‘What’s going on in there?’ by Lise Eliot                                                       ISBN o 553 37825 2

www.inpp.org.uk  -  NDD, primitive reflexes, research, literature, training, programmes, international affiliations, conferences etc

www.standards.dfes.gov.uk – search ‘primitive reflexes’ for a school based research project.

www.brainandbehaviour  - link between cognitive development and balance and co-ordination

www.learning-connections.org.uk – Links between primitive reflexes and learning

www.spldc.org.uk –specific learning difficulties and NDD

www.centredge.com – the effects retained primitive reflexes can have on children

www.lcch.co.uk  –‘ A window into dyslexia’ - primitive reflexes

www.stophyper.com – ADHD and primitive reflexes

www.stoppingadhd.com – ADHD and primitive reflexes

 

 


Have you seen an interesting article on children's learning difficulties somewhere?

Please contact us to tell us about it and if we have permission and it could be useful to other we will publish it here.