Isaac Scientific Publishing

Journal of Advances in Education Research

On the Centrality of Physical/Motor Activities in Primary Education

Download PDF (291.3 KB) PP. 24 - 33 Pub. Date: February 15, 2019

DOI: 10.22606/jaer.2019.41003


  • Evangelia Krevetzakis
    Teacher of Physical Education, Crete, Greece Doctoral Candidate, University of the Aegean


The aim of this paper is to reclaim the value of movement/physical activity, and hence the value of physical education in the school curriculum. The paper discusses, on the one hand, the role of movement/physical activity in the context of learning, by citing the relevant research literature, and more specifically the benefits of including movement/physical activity in the school curriculum (e.g., improvement of students’ short-term and long-term memory, stress reduction, invigoration of existing brain cells, growth of new neural connections, increase in focus and retention, regulation of students’ energy), and, on the other hand, the role of the human body in the process of concept development and meaning making. The implications of this discussion for an integrated approach to the teaching and learning of physical education is also discussed, something that can be used as a justification of physical education as a school subject which can contribute to students’ general education.


Physical education, movement, sensorimotor experiences, embodied thinking, brainbased learning, curriculum integration.


[1] Ausubel, D., Novak, J., & Hanesian, J. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wilson.

[2] Berlucchi, G., & Aglioti, S. (1997). The body in the brain: Neural bases of corporeal awareness. Trends in Neurosciences, 20, 560–564.

[3] Bidell, T., & Fischer, K. (1993). Beyond the stage debate. In R. Sternberg, & C. Berg (Eds.) Intellectual development (pp. 98–142). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

[4] Blakemore, C. (2013). Movement is essential to learning. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 74(9), 22-25.

[5] Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[6] Burton, L., &. VanHeest, J. ( 2007). The importance of physical activity in closing the achievement gap. Quest, 59, 212-218.

[7] Clark, A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[8] Clark, A. (1999). Embodied, situated, and distributed cognition. In W. Bechtel, & G. Graham (Eds.) A companion to cognitive sciences (pp. 506–517). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

[9] Cone, P., Werner, P., Cone, L., & Woods, A. (1998). Interdisciplinary teaching through physical education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

[10] Devis-Devis, J. (2006). Socially critical research perspectives in physical education. In D. Kirk, D. Macdonald, & M. O’Sullivan (Eds.), The handbook of physical education (pp. 37-58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

[11] Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[12] Damasio, A. (1996). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. London: Papermac.

[13] Egan, K. (1997). The educated mind: How cognitive tools shape our understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[14] Epelboim, J. (1997). Deictic codes, embodiment of cognition, and the real world. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 746.

[15] Fielden, S. (1995). The magical kingdom of movement. Hawaii: Edu Kinesthetics. future benefits of interdisciplinary studies. ESSAI, 7(1), p.26.

[16] Fogarty, R. (1991). The mindful school: How to integrate the curricula. Iri/Skylight Training & Publishing.

[17] Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

[18] Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences. The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.

[19] Gardner, H. (1997). Extraordinary minds: Portraits of four exceptional minds and the extraordinary minds in all of us. New York: HarperCollins.

[20] Glenberg, A. (1999). Why mental models must be embodied. In G. Rickheit & C. Habel (Eds.), Mental models in discourse processing and reasoning (pp. 77–90). New York: Elsevier.

[21] Golden, H. ( 2013). Integrating academics with physical education: how can it realistically be done? VAHPERD Journal, 34(2), 12-15.

[22] Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (1997). Relationships, meaning, and the science curriculum. Curriculum and Teaching, 12 (2), 83-89.

[23] Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2001). Some thoughts on the notion of purposeful learning. The Educational Forum, 65 (4), 316-325.

[24] Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2002). The utilization of sensorimotor experiences for introducing young children to molecular motion: A report of a pilot study. Physics Education, 37, 239–244.

[25] Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2005). On humanistic science education. ERIC DOCUMENT (ED506504).

[26] Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2015). Imagination and learning science. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science education, 480-483.

[27] Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2016). Imaginative science education: The central role of imagination in science education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

[28] Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2017). Implications of R.S. Peters notion of ‘cognitive perspective’ for science education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49 (10), 1016-1028.

[29] Hadzigeorgiou, Y., & Savage, M. (2001). Α study of the effect of sensorimotor experiences on the retention and application of two fundamental physics ideas. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 13(2), 9–21.

[30] Hadzigeorgiou, Y., & Fotinos, N. (2007). Imaginative thinking and the learning of science. Science Education Review 6 (1), 15-23.

[31] Hadzigeorgiou, Y., Anastasiou, L., Konsolas, M. & Prevezanou, B. (2009). A study of the effect of preschool children’s participation in sensorimotor activities on their understanding of the equilibrium of a balance beam. Research in Science Education, 39, 39–55.

[32] Hadzigeorgiou, Y. & Schulz, R. (2014). Romanticism and romantic science: Their contribution to science education. Science & Education, 23(10), 1963-2006.

[33] Hadzigeorgiou, Y., & Stamatis, P. (2017). How relevant is R.S. Peters concept of education to science education? Interchange, 48(1), 1-18.

[34] Hannaford, C. (2005). Smart moves: Why learning is not all in your head. Great Rivers Books.

[35] Harri, R., Marttinen,J. McLoughlin,G., Fredrick III, R., & Novak, D. (2017). Integration and Physical Education: A Review of Research. Quest, 69, 37-49.

[36] Haynes, C. (Ed.) (2002). Innovations in interdisciplinary teaching. Westport, CT: Oryx.

[37] Ito, M. (1993). Movement and thought: identical control mechanisms by the cerebellum. Trends in the Neurosciences, 16, 448–450.

[38] Jacobs, H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1250 N. Pitt Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

[39] Jensen, E. (2005). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum.

[40] Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[41] Jones, C. (2009). Interdisciplinary approach - Advantages, disadvantages, and the future benefits of interdisciplinary studies," ESSAI: Vol. 7, Article 26. Available at:

[42] Kaittani, D., Derri, V., & Kioumourtzoglou, E. (2016). Interdisciplinary learning in education. A focus on physics and physical education. Sport Science 9, 22-28.

[43] Kirkendall, D. R. (1985). Effects of physical activity on intellectual development and academic performance. Washington, DC: American Academy of Physical Education.

[44] Klein, J. (1996). Crossing boundaries: knowledge, disciplinarities and interdisciplinarities. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.

[45] Kretschmann R. (2018) Values and value education in physical education. In A. Schneider, J., K?hler, & F. Schumann (Eds.) Fairplay im sport. Angewandte Forschung im Sport (pp. 69-82). Wiesbaden: Springer.

[46] Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.

[47] Lengel, T., & Kuczala, M. (Eds.) (2010). The kinesthetic classroom Teaching and through movement. Thousand Oaks, CA Corwin Press.

[48] Lock, M., & Farquhar, J. (Eds.) (2007). Beyond the body proper. Reading the anthropology of material life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

[49] McNamee, M. (1998). Education, philosophy and physical education: analysis, epistemology and axiology. European Physical Education Review, 4 (1): 75–91.

[50] Mak, B., & Vera, A. (1999). The role of motion in children’s categorization of objects. Cognition, 7, 11–21.

[51] Markman, A., & Dietrich, E. (2000). In defense of representation. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 138–171.

[52] Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9, 105–119.

[53] Pellegrini, A., & Bohn, C. (2005). The role of recess in children’s cognitive performance and school adjustment. Research News & Comments, January/February 2005. Available on line: education/the_benefits_of_movement_in_schools#_ftn3.

[54] Piaget, J. (1971). Genetic epistemology. New York: Norton.

[55] Popeska, B., & Jovanova–Mitkovska, S. (2016). Integration and correlation concepts in physical education. Research in Kinesiology, 44, 262-269.

[56] Port, R., & van Gelder, T. (1995). Mind as motion. Explorations in the dynamics of cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[57] Ratey, J. (2002). User’s guide to the brain. Perception, attention, and the four theatres of the brain. Vintage.

[58] Ratey, J., & Hagerman, E. (2008). Spark: The revolutionary new science of exercise and the brain. New York: Little, Brown and Co.59. Rohrer, D., & Pashler,

[59] (2010). Recent research on human learning challenges conventional instructional strategies. Educational Researcher, 39, 406–412.

[60] Rohrer, D., & Pashler, H. (2012). Learning styles: Where’s the evidence? Medical Education, 46, 634-635.

[61] Rovegno, I., & Dolly, J. (2006). Constructivist perspectives on learning. In D. Kirk, D. Macdonald, & M. O’Sullivan (Eds.), The handbook of physical education (pp. 242-261). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

[62] Sandford, R., & Rich, E. (2006). Learners and popular culture. In D. Kirk, D. Macdonald, & M. O’Sullivan (Eds.), The handbook of physical education (pp. 275-291). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

[63] Seitz, J. (1993). I move.... therefore I am. Psychology Today, 26, 50–55.

[64] Seitz, J. (2000). The bodily basis of thought. New ideas in Psychology, 18, 23–40.

[65] Stefanich, G., & Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2001). Models and applications. In G. Stefanich (Ed.), Science teaching in inclusive classrooms (pp. 61-90). Cedar Falls, IA: Woolverton.

[66] Tishman, S., & Perkins, D.N. (1995). Critical thinking in physical education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 66(6):24-30.

[67] Thelen, E., Schoner, G., Scheier, C., & Smith, L. B. (2001). The dynamics of embodiment: A field theory of preservative reaching. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 1–34.

[68] Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[69] Watson, A., , Timperio, A., Brown, H., , Best, K., &, and Hesketh, K. (2017). Effect of classroom-based physical activity interventions on academic and physical activity outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Behavioural Nutrition & Physical Activity, 14, 114. 10.1186/s12966-017-0569-9

[70] Whitmer, R. (2014). Instruction in motion brings PE into classroom. Available on line: https://www.

[71] Wilson, M. (2001). The case for sensorimotor coding in working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8, 44–57.