Does the Animal Fun program improve motor performance in children aged 4–6 years?
Animal Fun 计划是否能改善 4-6 岁儿童的运动表现？

Research has demonstrated that if children feel confident about their motor ability they engage more often in physical activities such as dancing and sports compared with those children who lack confidence in this area (Hay et al., 2004, Mandich et al., 2003). This suggests that targeting motor skills development may be a suitable approach to increasing physical activity participation in children, known to be important for the prevention of obesity and cardiovascular disease (Biddle, Gorely, & Stensel, 2004).
研究表明，与对舞蹈和运动缺乏信心的孩子相比，如果孩子对自己的运动能力有信心，他们会更频繁地参与体育活动，例如舞蹈和运动（Hay et al.， 2004， Mandich et al.， 2003）。这表明，针对运动技能发展可能是增加儿童体育活动参与度的合适方法，这对于预防肥胖和心血管疾病非常重要（Biddle， Gorely， & Stensel， 2004）。

Interventions have targeted physical activity participation in an effort to improve health outcomes (Marcus et al., 2006). Increased participation in physical activities in turn results in practice which is essential for motor skill development. It also leads to social skill development by providing opportunities to interact with other children in a play situation. Schoemaker and Kalverboer (1994) established a link between motor coordination difficulties and social and affective problems in children as young as 6 years. Piek, Bradbury, Elsley, and Tate (2008) found that kindergarten children’s level of motor coordination was negatively related to anxious/depressed behavior as reported by the mother, which is consistent with the finding for older children (Pearsall-Jones et al., 2011, Rigoli et al., 2012). This is a serious concern as these children were only between 4 and 5 years of age. Furthermore, Bart, Hajami, and Bar-Haim (2007) found a relationship between motor ability in five year old children at kindergarten, and scholastic, social and emotional development a year later in their first year of school. It appears that targeting motor skill development prior to children commencing school may have many beneficial consequences for children.
干预措施针对体育活动参与，以改善健康结果（Marcus 等人，2006 年）。增加对体育活动的参与反过来会导致练习，这对运动技能的发展至关重要。它还通过提供在游戏环境中与其他孩子互动的机会来促进社交技能的发展。Schoemaker 和 Kalverboer （1994） 建立了 6 岁儿童的运动协调困难与社交和情感问题之间的联系。Piek、Bradbury、Elsley 和 Tate （2008） 发现，幼儿园儿童的运动协调水平与母亲报告的焦虑/抑郁行为呈负相关，这与年龄较大的儿童的发现一致（Pearsall-Jones 等人，2011 年，Rigoli 等人，2012 年）。这是一个严重的问题，因为这些孩子只有 4 到 5 岁。此外，Bart、Hajami 和 Bar-Haim （2007） 发现幼儿园 5 岁儿童的运动能力与一年后上学第一年的学业、社交和情感发展之间存在关系。看来，在儿童开始上学之前针对运动技能发展可能会对儿童产生许多有益的影响。

Few physical activity programs have targeted the pre-school age despite the evidence to suggest that the transition from pre-school/kindergarten to the first year of formal schooling is a critical period in terms of development (Entwisle and Alexander, 1998, La Paro et al., 2000). Targeting fundamental movement skills (FMS), the FMS program (Hands & Martin, 2003) includes pre-school age children and targets body management, locomotor skills and object control. However, this program does not have any published reviews of its efficacy. It is based on a task-specific approach (Revie & Larkin, 1993) which argues that “repeated exposure to a given task, under the right constraints (task and environmental)” (Wilson, 2005, p. 816) will result in stable patterns of movement emerging, provided the child is ready in terms of maturational and biomechanical development. This approach is based on dynamical system theory (Thelen, 1995), which has been applied extensively in the investigation of motor coordination.
尽管有证据表明，从学前班/幼儿园过渡到正规学校教育的第一年是发展的关键时期，但很少有针对学龄前儿童的体育活动计划（Entwisle 和 Alexander，1998 年，La Paro 等人，2000 年）。针对基本运动技能（FMS，程序（Hands&Martin，2003）包括学龄前儿童，并针对身体管理、运动技能和物体控制。但是，该程序没有任何关于其疗效的已发表评论。它基于一种特定任务的方法（Revie & Larkin，1993）认为“反复接触给定的任务，在正确的约束下（任务和环境（Wilson，2005，第816页）将导致稳定的运动模式出现，前提是孩子在成熟和生物力学发展方面已经准备好了。这种方法基于动力系统理论 （Thelen， 1995），该理论已广泛应用于运动协调的研究。

The Animal Fun program (Piek et al., 2010) was designed by a multidisciplinary team of researchers and health practitioners to promote both motor coordination and social skills in young children aged 4–6 years by imitating the movements of animals in a fun, inclusive setting. The program uses a task-specific approach based on dynamical systems theory (Thelen, 1995) and is administered by pre-school/kindergarten teachers following comprehensive training. Animal Fun is an inclusive, universal program involving all children within the class. This reduces any stigma that may result from particular children being chosen for a ‘special’ program. The program promotes both gross and fine motor skills training together with social/emotional development. This program is based on several key principles in relation to motor skill development. First, children need to feel competent and confident in their ability to perform particular activities (Sugden & Chambers, 2003). Next, although appropriate technique is important and forms part of the program, more importantly, children must enjoy what they are doing so they will continue to practice and improve their skills (Chambers & Sugden, 2006). What they are doing must also be meaningful. Young children love to imitate, and by imitating animals with which the children are familiar they attach meaning to the tasks as well as having fun and enjoyment (Piek et al., 2010).
动物乐趣计划（Piek 等人，2010 年）由研究人员和健康从业者组成的多学科团队设计，旨在通过在有趣、包容的环境中模仿动物的运动来促进 4-6 岁幼儿的运动协调和社交技能。该计划使用基于动力系统理论 （Thelen， 1995） 的特定任务方法，并由学前班/幼儿园教师在接受综合培训后进行管理。Animal Fun 是一个包容性的通用计划，涉及班上的所有孩子。这减少了因特定儿童被选入“特殊”课程而可能导致的任何耻辱感。该计划促进粗大和精细运动技能训练以及社交/情感发展。该计划基于与运动技能发展相关的几个关键原则。首先，孩子们需要对他们进行特定活动的能力感到有能力和自信（Sugden & Chambers， 2003）。接下来，尽管适当的技术很重要并且是该计划的一部分，但更重要的是，孩子们必须享受他们正在做的事情，这样他们才会继续练习并提高他们的技能（Chambers & Sugden， 2006）。他们所做的也必须是有意义的。年幼的孩子喜欢模仿，通过模仿孩子们熟悉的动物，他们赋予任务意义，同时也获得了乐趣和享受（Piek et al.， 2010）。

In order to evaluate the Animal Fun program (Piek et al., 2010), a randomized cluster controlled trial, registered in the Australian and New Zealand Clinical trials registry (ACTRN1209000869279) was carried out. This program evaluated the motor, social and emotional changes that occurred as a result of the Animal Fun program. In the current paper, the findings for the children’s motor skill development are presented, comparing the scores on motor ability at pre-intervention, around 6 months later following the intervention and then 18 months after the initial testing as a follow-up.
为了评估 Animal Fun 计划（Piek 等人，2010 年），进行了一项在澳大利亚和新西兰临床试验注册处 （ACTRN1209000869279） 注册的随机整群对照试验。该计划评估了 Animal Fun 计划导致的运动、社交和情感变化。在本文中，介绍了儿童运动技能发展的发现，比较了干预前、干预后约 6 个月和初始测试后 18 个月作为随访的运动能力评分。

Given the relationship between physical activity participation and motor performance (Hay et al., 2004, Mandich et al., 2003), intervention programs that improve children’s motor skills are essential to ensure that they have the best opportunity to increase their physical activity participation. The early years are an important time to develop appropriate skills, and as the transition from pre-primary/pre-school or kindergarten to the first year of formal schooling has been identified as a crucial time in a child’s development (Entwisle and Alexander, 1998, La Paro et al., 2000), the preschool year seems an appropriate time to provide interventions to improve children’s motor skills. The current study investigated one such intervention, the Animal Fun program (Piek et al., 2010), and found a significant improvement in children’s motor skills when assessed 18 months after the initial pre-test. This improvement was not found for the children in the control condition. This movement skills program was administered four days a week for 30 min each day, and was designed to be fun for the children.
鉴于体育活动参与与运动表现之间的关系（Hay 等人，2004 年，Mandich 等人，2003 年），提高儿童运动技能的干预计划对于确保他们有最佳机会增加体育活动参与至关重要。早期是发展适当技能的重要时期，由于从学前班/学前班或幼儿园过渡到正规学校教育的第一年已被确定为儿童发展的关键时期（Entwisle 和 Alexander，1998 年，La Paro 等人，2000 年），学龄前似乎是提供干预措施以提高儿童运动技能的适当时机。目前的研究调查了其中一种干预措施，即动物乐趣计划（Piek et al.， 2010），并在初始预测试后 18 个月进行评估时发现儿童的运动技能有显着改善。在对照条件下的儿童没有发现这种改善。这个运动技能计划每周进行四天，每天 30 分钟，旨在为孩子们带来乐趣。

It is now well established that boys and girls differ in their motor ability, even in the early ages (e.g., Anastasi, 1981, Capute et al., 1985, Pedersen et al., 2003, Piek et al., 2002, Thomas and French, 1985, van Waelvelde et al., 2003). Overall, boys have been found to perform better on motor skills such as running, jumping and catching, whereas girls have better fine motor skills (Thomas & French, 1985). Although it has been suggested that such differences may result from sociological factors such as gender stereotyping (Thomas & French), there is also neurological evidence identifying differences between boys and girls in brain structure in relation to motor related tracts (De Bellis et al., 2001, Liu et al., 2011). In the current study, the BOT-2SF was used to assess changes in motor performance. This is one of the few motor tests that uses sex specific norms for all ages of the test, and as standard scores were used in the current study, should control for any sex differences. As the Condition × Time × Sex interaction was not significant, the intervention did not impact differently on boys and girls. Furthermore, when looking at the whole sample (intervention and control conditions), girls did not significantly increase their motor performance over time. However, the boys’ motor performance was significantly better in Year 1 at the follow-up testing compared with the pre-test scores. These results suggest that boys, but not girls, improve their motor proficiency during the transition stage to year 1. Although physical differences such as body proportions, body mass and fat mass between boys and girls have been investigated (Williams, Wood, & De Ste Croix, 2011), there has been very little research investigating differences in motor development in boys and girls, particularly for subtests of motor performance such as locomotion and manual control. Williams et al. suggest that the age of 6 years is where physical characteristics such as body, muscle and fat mass start to differentiate between boys and girls, and it is possible that this may be a factor contributing to differences in rates of motor development for boys and girls. This is an area in need of further research. It is also possible that this sex difference is a result of different levels of motor performance in Australian boys and girls, given that the BOT-2 is based on norms from children in the USA (and hence the need for Australian norms).
现在已经确定的是，男孩和女孩的运动能力不同，即使在早期也是如此（例如，Anastasi， 1981， Capute et al.， 1985， Pedersen et al.， 2003， Piek et al.， 2002， Thomas and French， 1985， van Waelvelde et al.， 2003).总体而言，男孩在跑步、跳跃和接球等运动技能上表现更好，而女孩的精细动作技能更好（Thomas & French， 1985）。尽管有人认为这种差异可能是由社会学因素如性别刻板印象（Thomas & French）造成的，但也有神经学证据证明男孩和女孩在与运动相关的大脑结构上存在差异（De Bellis等人，2001年，Liu等人，2011年).在目前的研究中，BOT-2SF 用于评估电机性能的变化。这是为数不多的对所有年龄段的测试使用性别特定规范的运动测试之一，并且由于当前研究中使用了标准分数，因此应控制任何性别差异。由于 Condition×Time× 性互动不显著，因此干预对男孩和女孩的影响没有差异。此外，当观察整个样本 （干预和控制条件） 时，女孩的运动表现随着时间的推移并没有显着提高。然而，与测试前的分数相比，男孩们在后续测试中 1 年级的运动表现明显更好。 这些结果表明，在过渡到 1 年级的阶段，男孩而不是女孩提高了他们的运动熟练度。尽管已经调查了男孩和女孩之间的身体比例、体重和脂肪量等物理差异（Williams， Wood， & De Ste Croix， 2011），但几乎没有研究调查男孩和女孩在运动发展方面的差异，特别是对于运动表现的子测试，如运动和手动控制。Williams 等人认为，6 岁是身体特征（如身体、肌肉和脂肪量）开始区分男孩和女孩的时期，这可能是导致男孩和女孩运动发育速度差异的一个因素。这是一个需要进一步研究的领域。这种性别差异也可能是澳大利亚男孩和女孩运动表现水平不同的结果，因为 BOT-2 是基于美国儿童的规范（因此需要澳大利亚规范）。

Further research is also required to investigate the transfer of the program to other activities, such as play in the playground or at home. Given that this program was designed to be like a game where the children imitate animals, it is possible that children practiced these skills out of classroom time. This would be an additional advantage of a program that focuses on fun rather than basic skill practice, and further research investigating this would be beneficial.
还需要进一步的研究来调查该计划向其他活动的转移，例如在操场或家中玩耍。鉴于该计划的设计就像一个让孩子们模仿动物的游戏，孩子们有可能在课堂时间之外练习这些技能。这将是专注于乐趣而不是基本技能练习的课程的额外优势，进一步调查这将是有益的。

It should be noted that a limitation of the study which needs to be addressed in further research was that children in the intervention condition had poorer motor skills at pre-test than the control group, despite matching the control and intervention schools on key variables such as SES, school size and location. Also, the boys were poorer than the girls overall in the intervention group. However, none of the 3-way interactions were significant, suggesting that the intervention effect was not moderated by other variables such as sex or motor problems, indicating that this is a real effect.
应该注意的是，该研究的一个局限性需要在进一步的研究中解决，即处于干预条件的儿童在测试前的运动技能比对照组差，尽管在 SES、学校规模和位置等关键变量上与对照组相匹配。此外，干预组的男孩总体上比女孩差。然而，没有一个 3 向交互作用是显着的，这表明干预效果不受其他变量（如性或运动问题）的调节，表明这是一个真正的效果。

The Animal Fun program (Piek et al., 2010) was found to significantly improve motor performance. However, given that the motor ability of the intervention group was significantly poorer than the control group at baseline despite being matched for SES, school location and school size, further investigation is needed to determine whether the program would lift performance above that of a control group which has been matched for initial motor ability. Despite this limitation, this randomized controlled trial of the Animal Fun program has provided promising initial findings that a universal movement program focusing on fun and embedded into the usual kindergarten or pre-primary/pre-school curriculum may be a useful approach to improving motor proficiency in children prior to commencing their formal years of schooling.
发现 Animal Fun 计划（Piek 等人，2010 年）可以显着提高运动性能。然而，鉴于干预组的运动能力在基线时明显差于对照组，尽管与 SES、学校位置和学校规模相匹配，则需要进一步调查以确定该计划是否会将表现提升到高于初始运动能力匹配的对照组的表现。尽管存在这一限制，但这项 Animal Fun 计划的随机对照试验提供了有希望的初步发现，即专注于乐趣并嵌入通常的幼儿园或学前班/学前班课程的通用运动计划可能是提高儿童运动熟练度的有用方法开始他们的正式学校教育。