Evaluating a school skills programme for Australian Indigenous children: a pilot study

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an occupational therapy skill development programme in improving handwriting, scissor use, visual motor co-ordination and classroom behaviour, in a group of grade-one Australian urban Indigenous students. The sample (N = 13) was randomly assigned to an experimental group or comparison group. Both groups were exposed to the intervention. The experimental group received a six week school skills programme in addition to regular schooling, while the comparison group received regular schooling only. Following this, the comparison group received the same six week programme. Participants underwent pre- and post-testing using Beery-Buktenica's Developmental Test of Visual Motor Integration, Conner's Abbreviated Symptom Questionnaire, and two non-standardized handwriting and scissor skill measures. Results indicated that participants significantly improved in aspects of handwriting, scissor skills, and behaviour, but not visual motor co-ordination, following participation in the programme. The experimental group demonstrated greater improvements only in handwriting ability scores (p = 0.037), compared to a comparison group. It was concluded that a school-based occupational therapy programme was effective in improving handwriting, in a group of grade-one Australian Indigenous children.

Developmental Test of Visual–Motor Integration (VMI): An Effective Outcome Measure for Handwriting Interventions for Kindergarten, First-Grade, and Second-Grade Students?

“…These results are consistent with previous research using the VMI as an outcome measure after handwriting and related interventions (Howe et al, 2013;McGarrigle & Nelson, 2006;Poon et al, 2010). In each of these cases, the VMI was not sensitive enough to measure changes in handwriting and related visual-motor integration skills after occupational therapy interventions.…”

“…If the VMI and handwriting are correlated, as the literature suggests, it is curious that handwriting outcome measures in this study, and others, show consistent gains after interventions, and VMI scores do not (Howe et al, 2013;McGarrigle & Nelson, 2006). There are likely several reasons for this, but the most obvious is that the VMI measures a related but different construct from handwriting.…”

“…• The results of this study add to the current research suggesting that the VMI may not be an effective outcome measure for handwriting interventions (Howe et al, 2013;McGarrigle & Nelson, 2006). …”

“…McGarrigle and Nelson (2006) found that the VMI was not sensitive in detecting change in visual-motor coordination after a 6-wk occupational therapy intervention. They noted changes in handwriting, but no significant change in VMI scores.…”

“…Although research has demonstrated that VMI scores are a predictor of handwriting legibility (Brossard-Racine et al, 2011;Cornhill & Case-Smith, 1996;Volman et al, 2006), recent research has suggested that it is not an effective outcome measure for handwriting interventions (Howe et al, 2013;McGarrigle & Nelson, 2006;Poon, Li-Tsang, Weiss, & Rosenblum, 2010). McGarrigle and Nelson (2006) found that the VMI was not sensitive in detecting change in visual-motor coordination after a 6-wk occupational therapy intervention.…”