Physical Education and Children with CHARGE Syndrome: Research to Practice

Abstract

Introduction

Children with CHARGE syndrome often experience significantly delayed motor development, which affects their performance in many motor skills and physical activities. The purpose of this study was to determine the status of physical education provided to children with CHARGE syndrome. There were five main areas of focus: (1) physical education setting, (2) modes of communication, (3) modifications, (4) successful units, and (5) difficult units in physical education.

Methods

A validated questionnaire was completed by 26 parents of children aged 6–19 with CHARGE syndrome who were attending an international CHARGE conference for families. The questionnaire was used as the primary source to obtain parents’ perspectives on the physical education experiences of their children with CHARGE syndrome. The results of the feedback from parents were used to offer practical suggestions for physical education programming.

Results

The results revealed that the physical education placement affects children's success and parents’ satisfaction with regard to physical education. Also, children who had support staff, such as a teacher's aide, paraeducator, or intervenor in physical education had a more successful experience. A variety of communication methods were used with children with CHARGE syndrome. The physical education units that the parents documented as being successful were swimming, scooters, bowling, fencing, T-ball, dancing, rock climbing, floor hockey, field hockey, and gymnastics. The units that the children struggled with the most were fundamental motor skills, such as skipping, running, hopping, and any sports unit with a fast-moving ball.

Discussion

Physical education placements, communication, and modifications must be individualized for each child with CHARGE syndrome. In addition, support staff must be trained specifically for the unique needs of a child and the core curricular area of physical education.

Implications for Practitioners

Suggestions for improving the physical education program are included to increase children's involvement in class and success in the specific units that are offered.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arndt

K. L.

, Lieberman

L. J.

, & Pucci

(2004). Communication during physical activity for youth who are deafblind. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 1(2), Retrieved from http://journals.cec.sped.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=tecplus

Block

(2007). Including students with disabilities in general physical education. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks.

Columna

, Davis

, Lieberman

L. J.

, & Lytle

(2010, September). Determining the most appropriate physical education placement for students with disabilities, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 81, 30–37.

Girardi

M. M.

(2009). Balance: What is it and how does it work? Paper presented at the ninth International CHARGE Syndrome Conference, Bloomingdale, IL.

Hefner

, & Davenport

(2006, October 17). Clinical diagnosis. Retrieved from http://www.chargesyndrome.org

Houwen

, Hartman

, Jonker

, & Visscher

(2010). Reliability and validity of the TGMD-2 in primary-school-age children with visual impairments. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 27, 143–159.

Lieberman

L. J.

(Ed.). (2007). A paraprofessional training guide for physical education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Lieberman

L. J.

(2011). Hard-of-hearing, deaf or deafblind. In Winnick

J. P.

(Ed.), Adapted physical education and sport (5th ed., pp. 262–264). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Lieberman

L. J.

, & Houston-Wilson

(2009). Strategies for inclusion: A handbook for physical educators. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

10.

Lieberman

L. J.

, & MacVicar

(2003). Play and recreation habits of youths who are deaf-blind. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 97, 755–768.

11.

McKenzie

A. R.

, & Lewis

(2008). The role and training of paraprofessionals who work with students who are visually impaired. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 102, 459–471.

12.

Murofushi

, Ouvrier

R. A.

, Parker

G. G.

, Graham

R. I.

, Siva

, & Halmagyi

G M.

(1997). Vestibular abnormalities in CHARGE association. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology, 106, 129–134.

13.

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services, OSE/RS, 54 CFR (2006).

14.

Pangrazi

R. P.

, & Beighle

(2009). Dynamic physical education for elementary school children (16th ed.). San Francisco: Pearson Education.

15.

Patton

M. Q.

(2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

16.

Russotti

, Shaw

, & Spungin

S. J.

(2004). When you have a visually impaired student in your classroom. New York: AFB Press.

17.

Tegay

, & Yedowitz

(2009, November 13). CHARGE syndrome. Retrieved from http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/942350-overview

18.

Ulrich

D. A.

(2000). The Test of Gross Motor Development. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

19.

Williams

G. L.

, & Hartshorne

T. S.

(2005). Understanding balance problems in children with CHARGE syndrome. Deaf-Blind Perspectives, 12(2), 5–7.