parts+of+proposal

Introduction to Literature Review The review of the literature explores the physiology of exercise, maturity and history of exercise and academic achievement, theories that explore the nature of exercise arousal and the social ramifications of exercise and cognition, and how these links between the physical and cognitive impact policy decisions. Finally, the current theory, correlations, and limitations of the existing literature are discussed.

Physiology The physiological effects of exercise are apparent whether the exercise is exercise play, aerobic, or anaerobic. Chronic exercise influences the hippocampus in 3 ways: 1) heightened neurongenesis, 2) enhanced neuron transmission, and 3) an increased concentration of neuron growth factors ( Trudeau, 2008 ). Therefore, “Exercise increases the level of brain chemicals called growth factors that help make new brain cells and establish connections between cells to enhance learning” ( Kotz, 2010 ) . Additionally, “Stretching increases the cerebrospinal fluid flow to crucial areas” ( Jensen, 2000 ). All of the physiological changes that take place in the body when exercise occurs correlate to cognitive performance and academic achievement. “The demarcation between mind and body, between academic education and physical education, is wavering” ( Vail, 2006 ). Consider that “The typical student who sits much of the day runs the following risks: poor breathing, strained spinal column and lower back nerves, poor eyesight, and overall body fatigue” ( Jensen, 2000 ). Exercise, in the form of play, may act as a catalyst to break up cognitive tasks according to Pelligerini in his 1998 study that explored the nature of play. “By exercise play we mean gross locomotor movements in the context of play” ( Pellegrini, 1998 ). He also states in his 1993 study of school recess that “As children sit for prolonged periods of time, they accumulate surplus energy; physical activity in recess is necessary to ‘blow off,’ or use up the energy so that they can concentrate on the more sedentary tasks of the classroom” ( Pellegrini ). Play, in both its aerobic and anaerobic forms have an impact on the physiology of the body, and thus cognitive performance. “Aerobic exercise involves the presence of oxygen in the muscle cells to assist the metabolism of free fatty acids into sources of energy for muscle contractions” ( Tomporowski, 1986 ). Whereas “Anaerobic exercise demands relatively high physical work levels and results in the accumulation of lactic acid in the bloodstream, which leads to localized muscular fatigue that limits the duration of physical exertion” ( Tomporowski, 1986 ). However, it is inconclusive as to whether or not aerobic or anaerobic exercise has a greater impact on academic achievement. Yet it does need to be noted that “Individuals who exercise routinely report changes in mental states during and after physical exertion” ( Tomporowski, 1986 ). These changes are largely dependent on the exercisers individual experiences and while “Some exercisers report that physical exertion facilitates their thinking processes, others report a debilitating effect of exercise on mental ability” ( Tomporowski, 1986 ). This could be due to the “attentional processes [which] directly [affect] the central nervous system; however, as exercise intensity or duration increases, the facilitative effects of exercise may be cancelled by the debilitating effects of muscular fatigue” ( Tomporowski, 1986 ). Maturity and history When considering the link between academic achievement and physical activity, one must consider that “The human body for the last 400,000 years, has primarily been walking, sleeping, leaning, running, doing or squatting. It has not been sitting in small chairs” ( Jensen, 2000 ). It is only in the last 200 years that formal education has demanded students to sit to learn, and only during the last century that education has been accessible to all students. Therefore, we do need to regard the constructs of the modern educational system as not only an ineffective means to provide instruction to students, but we also need to consider that modern educational practices do not fit the physical needs of our children. Although “The link between physical activity and academic achievement has been studied much more among elementary and middle school students that among college students” ( Anynomous ), educators need to understand that “The nervous system doesn’t even mature until somewhere between ages 15 and 20; we need more, not fewer breaks from learning” ( Jensen, 2000 ) , and therefore consideration must be taken when examining the literature. The human body was designed to react to its environment and that environment has changed at such a rapid pace on an evolutionary scale, that we, as modern educators, have neglected to connect the physical with the cognitive. Jensen notes that “Nonadrenaline can be triggered through student relay races, public speaking, achievable but tough deadlines, competitions, or socially risky activities. Dopamine can be triggered through positive social bonding, celebrations, nonmaterial rewards, or gross motor repetitive movements” ( Jensen, 2000 ). Don’t like—how to revise? Exercise Arousal One theory that contributes the idea that exercise can contribute to cognitive function and thus academic achievement is the theory of exercise arousal. Pellegrini noted in his 1998 study that “exercise play can lead to exercise arousal.” It is possible that this accounts for the comparative rapid learning of young children who take regular play breaks throughout the day. Jensen further notes that “A very short break or energizer increases arousal, but longer breaks allow the learner to be aroused and then come back to a more sustainable level of energy” (2000). This research supports the traditional recess time that elementary schools have, but this time is often cut out of the middle school day and the high school day, therefore, these older students do not benefit from exercise arousal as do younger students. Although “little research has been performed that evaluates the effects of exercise as a source of physical arousal on cognitive functioning,” according to Tomporowski in his 1986 study, he later proposed in a 2007 study that “the increased level of arousal induced by physical activity is believed to mediate increased response speed and accuracy.” Again, this is reflected in the testing scores among various age groups of students. Younger students traditionally test better that older students—whether this is due to “the shift or ‘narrowing’ of attention to those components of a task that are central to correct performance” (Tomporowski, 1986) or to some other factor is unknown. This compelling idea suggests also that the “effects of exercise will [vary] depending on the intensity and the duration of the exercise and on whether tests of cognitive functioning were administered during or after exercise” (Tomporowski, 1986), thus suggesting that different types of exercise may impact academic performance is different ways. The direct correlation between exercise arousal and academic performance is difficult to clarify, and one should note, like Tomporowski in his 1986 study, that “exercise produced arousal and fatigue are complex states, and any attempt to analyze exercise effects will demand increased attention to the measurement of the physical changes brought by exercise.” Social The social effects of exercise are apparent in not only student’s social development, but also their cognitive function. Tomporowski notes in his 1986 study that “children to not develop in a social vacuum.” Examining the connections between social, physical, and cognitive development is a complex task at best, but it is one worthy of further research. Pellegrini conducted several past studies that found that recess behavior of children related to their ability to solve hypothetical problems. And even though “preference for physical activity often varies also as a function of children’s temperament and age”, it is clear that the “extant data tell us that social interaction has important cognitive implications” (Pellegrini, 1993). In terms of improving the measureable outcomes of cognitive development, it may be that “exercise programs may prove to be a simple, yet important, method of enhancing aspects of children’s mental functioning that are central to cognitive and social development” (Tomporowski, 2007). Links between physical and cognitive The links between physical activity and cognitive development are becoming more and more known as the literature expands. In 1998, Pellegrini found that “physical activity levels may be important not only for physical development, but also perhaps for cognitive performance subsequent to physical activity, and even for aspects of social organization and social skills.” This contributes to Chomitz’s 2009 statement that “learning may be enhanced in physically active students.” The exact reasons are unknown as to why students who seem to be more physically fit seem to do better on cognitive tasks. Perhaps Jenson is correct in that “movement gives learners a new spatial reference to the room,” or perhaps it is that “movement can give learners a much needed break” (2000). No matter how it is examined though, the correlations between physical activity and cognitive development cannot be denied. However, it ought to be noted that Tomporowski found in his 1986 study that “the effects of exercise intervention will depend on the physical fitness of the subject tested and that “nonexercisers tend to view exercise as both physically and psychologically stressing, and may expect that exercise will produce a decrement in their abilities.” Policy The discussion of physical fitness and academic achievement is important in the face of “simultaneous pressures to meet academic achievement testing thresholds legislated by NCLB [No Child Left Behind]” (Chomitz, 2009). Castelli, in 2007, noted that “the pressure for academic performance such as that provided by [this mandate], forces teachers and administrators to make difficult decisions about how time in school should be allocated.” The result is a reduction in “time spent is physical activity programs (Tomporowski, 2007). With the focus in education in testing, it is no wonder that 30% of states do not require PE (Stevens, 2008). This coupled with no explicit policy at local levels for recess or PE standards leaves many schools and students in a deficit of physical activity associated with schools or even within the community (Pellegrini, 2009). It is vital that school boards realize the importance of and “understand the relationship of academic success to physical activity, fitness, and curricular PE [and its] importance in allotting scarce resources and for implementing the right mix of policies and programs” (Chomitz, 2009). Much research has been conducted in the area of time allotted toward PE and physical activity during the school day, and Trudeau found in 2008 that “Physical activity can be added to the school curriculum by taking time from other subjects without risk of hindering student achievement.” With this understanding, little stands in the way of schools “promoting fitness by increasing opportunities for physical fitness activity during PE, recess, and out of school time [to] support academic achievement” (Chomitz, 2009). It is in the public’s best interest to support physical fitness and physical activities at the schools “because most children attend public schools, it is believed that educational institutions may be the most plausible means of increasing the physical activity participation of children” (Castelli, 2007). Measures and procedures Both the measures and the procedures differed among the literature examined. Several studies cited Fitnessgram, SPARK (Sports, Play, Active Recreation for Kids), and general fitness tests to measure physical activity. For academic achievement, the MAT6 and 7 (Metropolitan Achievement Tests) MCAS (Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System), ISAT (Iowa State Achievement Test), generalized tests of cognition, and classroom performance were cited. All of these measures build a picture of correlation between physical fitness and academic achievement. Procedures were not discussed thoroughly except for Castelli’s 2007 study that performed a series of two-step hierarchical regressions to determine the correlation between measures of academic achievement and Fitnessgram subjects. Most fitness tests were conducted during the school day during scheduled physical education classes—none of the studies cited gathered data from physical activity outside of the school day. This needs to be finished…. Current Theory Researchers in the field of exercise and cognition have generally found that the correlation is too strong to deny. Tomporowski conducted a meta analysis that examined the effects of children’s intelligence, cognition, or academic achievement were reviewed and results were discussed in light of (a) contemporary cognitive theory development directed toward exercise, (b) recent research demonstrating the salutary effects of exercise on adults’ cognitive functioning, and (c) studies conducted with animals that have linked physical activity to changes in neurological development and behavior” ( Tompoorowski, 2007 ). In this meta analysis, Tomporowski found that : Colcombe and Kramer ( 2003 ) conducted a theory-driven meta analysis of 18 studies designed to assess the impact of physical activity on older adults’ cognitive performance. Tasks used in these studies were coded in terms of four specific types of mental processing: executive function, which involves scheduling, response inhibition, planning, and working memory; controlled processing, which requires the automatization of response sequences (Chodzko-Zajko and Moore 1994 ); visuospatial processing, which involves perceptual learning (Stones and Kozma 1989 ); and speeded processing, which places demands on simple reaction time (Spirduso and Clifford 1978 ). Their analysis revealed that aerobic exercise resulted in a moderately large effect on overall cognitive performance (Effect Size (ES)=0.47). Further, the strength of effect was related to the type of test employed. Greatest gains were found for tests of executive function (ES=0.68), followed by tests of controlled processing (ES=0.46), visuospatial processing (ES=0.42), and speeded processing (ES=0.27). These results were interpreted as evidence for a causal link between fitness level and brain vitality and, further, they indicated that the link is particularly strong when the effects of exercise training are evaluated with cognitive tests that tap into executive function. Similar conclusions were drawn by Hall et al. ( 2001 ) review of research” ( Tompoorowski, 2007 ). Therefore, based on the meta analysis, Tomporowski concluded that “ evidence suggests a causal relation between physical activity and children’s cognition, a theory-based evaluation of studies may be useful in elucidating mechanisms that underlie the relation between physical activity and children’s mental functioning” ( Tompoorowski, 2007 ). Furthermore, “ Evidence accrued from research conducted over the past few years suggests that gains in children’s mental functioning due to exercise training are seen most clearly on tasks that involve executive functions. Executive functions are involved in performing goal-directed actions in complex stimulus environments, especially novel ones, in which elements are constantly changing” ( Tompoorowski, 2007 ). These ideas are concurrent with what other researchers found. The major difference between Tomporowski’s conclusion and others are the age groups assessed. Trudeau found in his meta analysis that “there was little data on the relationship between Physical Fitness and academic achievement in school-aged children. Indeed, only 1 of the 37 studies included this age group” ( Trudeau, 2008 ). However, his conclusions are largely similar to Tomporowski’s, yet Trudeau does note that “Socioeconomic status is the largest predictor of academic achievement and is alone of the strongest predictors of Physical Activity participation in children” ( Trudeau, 2008 ). Building on these findings, it can be understood that Reynolds found in a study that was a follow up of an exercise-based treatment for children with reading difficulties, i.e. dyslexia, that “exercise treatment” therefore achieved its applied purpose 2006). And to add, based on Trudeau and Tomporwski’s meta analyses we can see the connection to The findings of Field, Diego, and Sanders that suggest that exercise is a positive activity for adolescents in many respects ( Field, 2001 ) . They found in their 2001 study that explored the relationships between exercise and academics among adolescents that not only did students with higher levels of exercise have less depression, used drugs less frequently, but that they generally had higher grade point averages that did students with low levels of exercise ( Field, 2001 ) . Add to the previous statements Kotz’s 2010 research that concludes, “Complex activities also upgrade the capacity to learn by enhancing attention and concentration skills, according to German researchers, who found that the high school students scored better on high-attention tasks after ding 10 minutes of a sophisticated fitness routine compared to 10 minutes of regular activity. (Those who hadn’t exercised at all scored the worst)” ( Kotz, 2010 ). All of these researchers’ conclusions support Castelli’s statement in 2007, that “Educational and health professionals have intuitively believed that individuals who are physically active and fit perform better in school.” Correlations Overall, “the findings contribute to an ever increasing body of work that correlates a significant relationship between academic achievement and physical fitness” (Chomitz, 2009). Stevens found in 2008 that the results “do suggest that the influence of physical activity on achievement do build over time [and] indicate that a link does exist between physical activity and achievement.” Furthermore, Trudeau stated that “physical activity was positively associated with better cognitive function in children [and that] some groups ,particularly middle school students and younger, seemed to benefit more from physical activity” (2008). Three studies independent of each other, and all reaching the same conclusion that fitness and academic achievement are related. How this relationship is understood, however, is very difficult to discern, yet researchers do see the specifics of these correlations in specific areas. Trudeau noted in 2008 that “physical activity has a positive influence on concentration, memory, and classroom behavior.” Castelli found in 2007 that “performance on reading and mathematics were both related to aerobic fitness and BMI.” Added to the previous, a 2010 brief from an anonymous author claimed that, “students who met cardiovascular fitness standards were six times more likely to meet reading standards and two-and-a-half times more likely to meet mathematics standards.” This is similar to what Stevens found in the 2008 study that “students who received more time in physical education scored significantly higher on the English and Language Arts test; however, no significant difference was found between the two groups mathematics scores.” Tomporowski found that “highly fit subjects were observed to perform better on the mental task that subjects classified as of average fitness” (1986). Vail found correlation between aerobic fitness and math and BMI and test scores (2006). Pellegrini discovered that “the academic performance of children in the experimental group was superior to that of the control children” (1998). The correlative evidence is overwhelmingly in support of exercise having an impact on academic achievement. Limitations that the researchers noted were few. The multitude of factors ranging from school type, age of students, socioeconomic status, and other variables make declaring a direct correlation between fitness and academic achievement difficult to do. “Given that school was related to academic performance, yet poverty was not, the current data suggest that school effectiveness may be related to individual academic achievement. However, it should be noted that the measure of individual poverty was based solely on free/reduced meals, and thus, future research may want to examine this relationship more closely using additional measures of socioeconomic status ( Castelli, 2007 ). And, “Although there were positive trends in the relationship, the intervention groups did not score significantly higher on academic standardized testing as a result of increased physical activity engagement. However, findings from this study have limited application as it was conducted in an already high achieving, affluent school district” ( Castelli, 2007 ). Furthermore, “Only the variables that correlated with either academic achievement or fitness were included in subsequent regression analyses ( Castelli, 2007 ). Finally, “[It was] found in [their] analysis that the relationship between fitness and achievement was statistically significant after controlling for the students’ race/ethnicity and the indicator of SES that was available in [their] data set.” ( Chomitz, 2009 ). However, all of these limitations do not erase the significance of the relationship between academic achievement and exercise and fitness. The California Department of Education was one of the main sources that researchers cited to recognize the correlation between overall physical fitness. Roberts found that, “Students whose mile run/walk times exceeded California Fitnessgram standards or whose BMI exceeded Centers for Disease Control sex- and age-specific body weight standards scored lower on California standardized math, reading, and language tests than students with desirable BMI status or fitness level, even after controlling for parent education among other covariates. Ethnic differences in standardized test scores were consistent with ethnic differences in obesity status and aerobic fitness. BMI-for-age was no longer a significant multivariate predictor when covariates included fitness level” ( 2010 ). As well, based on a California Department of Education study conducted in 2001, a positive relationship was observed between physical fitness and the Stanford Achievement Test across all three grade levels, such that higher levels of fitness were associated with higher academic achievement ( Castelli, 2007 ). The CDE conducted a further study in 2004 that Vail cites, “that students who do better on academic achievement tests are also more physically fit than their peers who don’t score as well” ( Vail, 2006 ). What the literature concludes, is that, “Active learning has significant advantages over sedentary learning” ( Jensen, 2000 ). And that exercise is a positive activity for adolescents in many respects (Fields, 2001). However, “It cannot be inferred from these data that physical fitness causes academic achievement to improve. It is more likely that physical and mental processes influence each other in ways that are still being understood” ( Vail, 2006 ). In fact, “Although much more research and replication is needed, these results suggest that opportunities for vigorous play actually exacerbate active children’s classroom inattention, [and] it may also be the case that specific types of vigorous activity interact statistically with type of cognitive task and children’s age and gender” ( Pellegrini, 1993 ). The research correlations are strong, but not entirely conclusive on the connections between academic achievement and physical fitness. We are at about 3500 words here--I can still add a section on statistics--do you think that we need it?