Running head: Pencil Grip Lesson Plan

Pencil Grip Lesson Plan

Melissa Broach

EXSC 351-001

February 24, 2017

1
Q1. The present lesson plan is designed for a 5 year old male kindergartner with a goal to

write his name legibly on a name tag for his first day at superhero camp by developing fine

motor mechanics to grip a pencil. Based on the Fitts and Posners learning stage theory, the

inexperienced learner can be classified in the cognitive stage therefore he should learn the

fundamental basics of the desired motor skill to address improper movements due to

unawareness and inability to correct his own body coordination (Fitts and Posner, 1967). A grip

movement task can be classified as a fine motor skill involving the object manipulation of a

pencil which requires the performer to demonstrate motor control and focus for small, yet

precise, movements. In the earlier years of the physical and cognitive development, gross motor

skills involving the larger muscle groups are more easily utilized and mastered first than precise,

fine motor skills of smaller muscles requiring more concentration (Kuhtz-Buschbeck et al.,

2003). A 5-year old beginning kindergarten typically cannot manipulate a pencil as easily as

they can throw a ball to a friend. To achieve the fine motor gripping of a pencil, a child must

acquire an ability to stabilize and control the object being manipulated via precise movements

delegated by the fingers for proper pencil positioning necessary for handwriting abilities.

2b. When an instructor, coach, or teacher delivers feedback by informing the learner of prior

actions performed to direct the learner into creating a solution to detrimental errors affecting

performance is called descriptive augmented feedback (Reid, Crespo, Lay, & Berry, 2007). This

type of feedback may be essential to learners who have a basic understanding of the performed

skill by allowing analysis of errors and construction of an improved skill method to correct the

outcome. On the other hand, prescriptive augmented feedback is given prior to the skill

acquisition regarding information on the correct manner of movement, positioning, and intended

goal. Prescriptive information is useful for inexperienced learners who do not understand how to

adjust their movement patterns to achieve a particular goal (Reid et al., 2007). Implementing

prescriptive augmented feedback with inexperienced learners to promote better motor learning

was used in the study conducted by Sullivan, Kantak and Burtner (2008) regarding the effects

2
on motor performance. The purpose of this study was to compare the learning abilities needed

for motor learning among children and adults to determine which types of feedbacks resulted in

better performance. The methods included 20 young adults and 20 children whom were divided

into groups based on whether they received feedback after every trail or received a 25%

feedback reduction in each of the four trails. The motor skill instructed involved extension and

flexion at the elbow joint to move a lever for a visual trajectory. Feedback included a graph

displaying the demonstrated trajectory prior to the test compared to the actual trajectory

performed by the participant. The dependent variables included the performance accuracy,

consistency, and retention of the motor skill while the independent variable was the amount of

feedback provided. The results of this study concluded that children who received reduced

feedback displayed more performance errors and less consistency than the children who

received 100% feedback after each trail. However, the children in both groups displayed better

movement outcomes when augmented feedback was given again after a period of time. Based

on these results, Sullivan et al., (2008) concluded practice should contain higher amounts of

augmented feedback for children due to inexperience, slower information processing skills, and

an inefficient ability to interpret body positions compared to adults. In relevance to the 5 year old

learner in the present lesson plan, the child participants were similar to my learner because they

also began in the cognitive stage of learning. However, a limitation in using the study to support

choice of feedback is that the study utilizes a gross motor skill involving the large muscle groups

of the arm to maneuver a lever instead of a fine motor skill such as writing. Given the response

to reduced feedback demonstrated more errors resulting in improper movements until correct

patterns were shown and explained in the Sullivan et al., (2008) study, I will provide prescriptive

feedback to my 5 year old cognitive stage learner. To implement prescriptive augmented

feedback, I will state to my learner to not grasp or clinch the pencil as when forming a fist, but to

instead hold the pencil with his thumb, index and middle fingertips. Another example of

prescriptive feedback with the pencil tip facing the learners chest on a table, I will state for him

3
to pinch the two sides of the pointed tip like a berry and while continuing to pinch quickly move

the pencil into a handstand with the pencil tip as the hands on the paper. The last example I will

state to the learner is to pretend that his hand is a dragon with the thumb representing the

bottom of the mouth and the other fingers representing the top of the mouth. The dragon lost his

tongue so the dragon must swallow the pencil to the tip in order to replace his tongue. To

breathe fire, the dragon needs his bottom and top lip to be pulled up slightly so the tip of the

tongue (pencil) is visible.

3b. A blocked schedule practices one particular motor skill for a set duration then after that

given time the next skill is practiced to teach the new learner proper positioning and movement

techniques of each skill. In contrast, a random practice schedule involves a variety of skills

implemented at random occurrences throughout the practice as means to better retention

necessary for a game-like setting (Handford et al., 1997). Random scheduling also includes

contextual interference in which skills are performed in different contexts and/or the learner

switches suddenly from one skill to another to achieve better attention skills and quicker

information processing (Williams & Ford, 2009). The purpose of the Beekhuizen and Field-Fote

(2008) study was to investigate the significance of utilizing massed, block practice as well as

somatosensory stimulation on hand and upper limb functionality with 24 subjects between the

ages of 16 and 70 diagnosed with chronic incomplete tetraplegia. Over a 3 week period

participants attended 2 hour sessions 5 times a week to either practice repetitive usage of

individual fine motor skills lasting 25 minutes each by the hands or attended session involving

the somatosensory stimulation of the median nerve (Beekhuizen & Field-Fote, 2008). The

dependent variables used in the study were fine motor tasks, somatosensory nerve stimulation,

and massed, blocked practice. The independent variables were hand functionality, pinch and

grip strength. The results of the study provided evidence of significant quality changes in the

functionality of fine motor skills utilized by the hands along with increased pinch and grip

4
strength when using massed practice with a blocked schedule. A limitation in the comparison of

the Beekhuizen and Field-Fote (2008) study with the present lesson plan is the older study

subjects diagnosed with a disability while the learner in the lesson plan is considered a typical

developing child. The study subjects most likely had exposure to the motor skills practiced prior

to the study which would place them in the associative stage of the Fitts and Posners learning

stage theory because acknowledgement of errors and outcomes would be better understood

than cognitive stage learners with errors and errors were likely due to physical limitations (Fitt &

Posner, 1967). However, the kindergartner does not have prior experience with gripping a pencil

therefore he would not understand the fundamental basics resulting in many errors and poor

accuracy. Strength in the similarities of the motor skill classifications, including fine motor skills

and object manipulation, between the study and the present lesson plan provides evidence for a

blocked practice schedule for learning to grip a pencil. Based on the Beekhuizen and Field-Fote

(2008) findings, the present lesson plan will employ a blocked schedule to help the young

learner develop precise finger movements and controls for better manipulation of a pencil. To

implement this type of practice, I will use different fine motor skills emphasizing pinching and

gripping movements for stronger motor control when using a pencil. One variant of the fine

motor skill similar to pencil gripping would be to instruct the child to grab small objects such as

marbles with just the tips of the thumb, index, and middle fingers to place the marbles into a jar

The diameter of the marbles would begin with a larger diameter then the diameter would

gradually decrease. Another variant of a fine motor skill would be to put beads on a string which

would require the usage of precise finger movement and the slight rotation of the wrist to line

the string with the hole of the bead and to string the bead through (Beekhuizen& Field-Fote,

2008). The last variant of a fine motor pinch task would be to have the learner practice locking

and unlocking with a key to practice motor control and manipulation of the key.

5
 References

Beekhuizen, K. S., & Field-Fote, E. C. (2008). Sensory stimulation augments the effects of

massed practice training in persons with tetraplegia. Archives of Physical Medicine and

Rehabilitation, 89 (4), 602-608.

Fitts, P. M., & Posner, M. I. (1967). Human performance. Oxford, England: Brooks and Cole.

Handford, C. (2006). Serving up variability and stability. In K. Davids, S. Bennett, & K. M. Newell

(Eds.) Movement system variability, 73-84. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Kuhtz-Buschbeck, J.P., Hoppe, B., Golge, M., Dreesmann, M., Damm-Stunitz, U., & Ritz, A.

(2003). Sensorimotor recovery in children after traumatic brain injury: Analyses of gait,

gross motor, and fine motor skills. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 45,

821-828.

Reid, M., Crespo, M., Lay, B., & Berry, J. (2007). Skill acquisition in tennis: Research and

current practice. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 10(1),1-10.

Sullivan, K. J., Kantak, S. S., & Burtner, P. A. (2008). Motor learning in children: Feedback

effects on skill acquisition. Physical Therapy, 88 (6), 720-732. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20070196