Page 237 - Čotar Konrad Sonja, Borota Bogdana, Rutar Sonja, Drljić Karmen, Jelovčan Giuliana. Ur. 2022. Vzgoja in izobraževanje predšolskih otrok prvega starostnega obdobja. Koper: Založba Univerze na Primorskem
P. 237
Sensory Integration as the Path for Nurturing Toddlers’ Wellbeing
Table 2 The Results of Testing the Difference Significance in the Experimental Group
Regarding the two Measurements
Sensory materials Measurement zp
st nd
Trampoline . (.) . (.) –. .
Therapy ball – ‘small’ . (.) . (.) –. .
Therapy ball – ‘peanut-shape’ . (.) . (.) –. .
Balance board . (.) . (.) –. .
Funnel spinning . (.) . (.) –. .
Balancing pad . (.) . (.) –. .
Platform swing . (.) . (.) –. .
Obstacle course . (.) . (.) –. .
Walking and climbing* . (.) . (.) –. .
Lifting and carrying . (.) . (.) .
Pushing . (.) . (.) . .
.
Notes * On slopes and substrates (spongy stairs, climbing cliff, tactile paths). Standard devi-
ations in parenthesis.
significant difference regarding all exercises except in the activities ‘balance
board,’ ‘lifting and carrying,’ and ‘pushing’ were determined in this group be-
tween two measurements. Table 2 shows the differences between the first
and second measurement in the experimental group. Statistically significant
differences were determined in the activities that included the trampoline, a
therapy ball – small, a peanut-shaped therapy ball, funnel spinning, a balance
pad, a platform swing, an obstacle course, walking and climbing on slopes,
and substrates. In other words, it has been confirmed that children’s progress
will be enhanced in the experimental group because the children were ex-
posed to everyday conduct sensory activities and the use of sensory-motoric
incentives. However, before running the test of significant differences in the
control group between the two measurements, it could not be concluded
that the changes in the experimental group are due only to activities imple-
mentation. Therefore, further analyses will reveal that. In addition, no change
was recorded in the activities ‘balance board,’ ‘lifting and carrying,’ and ‘push-
ing.’ This can be explained in two ways that should be verifies empirically in
future studies. First of all, it is possible that these activities don’t really con-
tribute significantly to a child’s development and, secondly, the result can be
assigned to measurement limitations in this study (the test items or the small
group of participants), and to the educator’s way of assessment.
Control group – two measurements. Table 3 shows the differences be-
237
Table 2 The Results of Testing the Difference Significance in the Experimental Group
Regarding the two Measurements
Sensory materials Measurement zp
st nd
Trampoline . (.) . (.) –. .
Therapy ball – ‘small’ . (.) . (.) –. .
Therapy ball – ‘peanut-shape’ . (.) . (.) –. .
Balance board . (.) . (.) –. .
Funnel spinning . (.) . (.) –. .
Balancing pad . (.) . (.) –. .
Platform swing . (.) . (.) –. .
Obstacle course . (.) . (.) –. .
Walking and climbing* . (.) . (.) –. .
Lifting and carrying . (.) . (.) .
Pushing . (.) . (.) . .
.
Notes * On slopes and substrates (spongy stairs, climbing cliff, tactile paths). Standard devi-
ations in parenthesis.
significant difference regarding all exercises except in the activities ‘balance
board,’ ‘lifting and carrying,’ and ‘pushing’ were determined in this group be-
tween two measurements. Table 2 shows the differences between the first
and second measurement in the experimental group. Statistically significant
differences were determined in the activities that included the trampoline, a
therapy ball – small, a peanut-shaped therapy ball, funnel spinning, a balance
pad, a platform swing, an obstacle course, walking and climbing on slopes,
and substrates. In other words, it has been confirmed that children’s progress
will be enhanced in the experimental group because the children were ex-
posed to everyday conduct sensory activities and the use of sensory-motoric
incentives. However, before running the test of significant differences in the
control group between the two measurements, it could not be concluded
that the changes in the experimental group are due only to activities imple-
mentation. Therefore, further analyses will reveal that. In addition, no change
was recorded in the activities ‘balance board,’ ‘lifting and carrying,’ and ‘push-
ing.’ This can be explained in two ways that should be verifies empirically in
future studies. First of all, it is possible that these activities don’t really con-
tribute significantly to a child’s development and, secondly, the result can be
assigned to measurement limitations in this study (the test items or the small
group of participants), and to the educator’s way of assessment.
Control group – two measurements. Table 3 shows the differences be-
237
