How Much Instructional Time Is Necessary? Mid-intervention Results of Fundamental Movement Skills Training Within ABA Early Intervention Centers
Felzer-Kim, Isabella T.; Hauck, Janet L. (2020). Frontiers in integrative neuroscience, 14, 24. .
-
examining14Students, gradePK
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Fundamental movement skill (FMS) intervention - Felzer-Kim & Hauck et al. (2020))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Test of Gross Motor Skills- Third Edition (TGMD-3) Total Score |
Fundamental movement skill (FMS) intervention - Felzer-Kim & Hauck et al. (2020) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
20.75 |
12.40 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Test of Gross Motor Skills- Third Edition (TGMD-3) Object Control Subtest |
Fundamental movement skill (FMS) intervention - Felzer-Kim & Hauck et al. (2020) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
12.25 |
6.60 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Test of Gross Motor Skills- Second Edition (TGMD-3) Locomotor Subtest |
Fundamental movement skill (FMS) intervention - Felzer-Kim & Hauck et al. (2020) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
8.50 |
5.80 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 29%
Male: 71% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Michigan
-
Race Asian 14% Black 36% White 50% -
Ethnicity Other or unknown 100% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
Participants were recruited from two campuses of an Early Intensive Behavioral Intervention (EIBI) clinic; the study location is presumed to be in Michigan based on the study authors' institutional affiliation. The EIBI clinic operated using Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) principles. The study authors note that EIBI clinics generally use individualized therapy plans and a small staff to student ratio.
Study sample
The study included 14 preschool-aged children (mean age ˜ 54 months) with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) recruited from two campuses of an EIBI clinic. Participants were randomized within each campus to the intervention (n=8) or control (n=6) group. All 14 participants were included in the analytic sample. The sample consisted of 10 males and 4 females. The group included 7 White (50%), 5 African American (35.7%), and 2 Asian (14.3%) children.
Intervention Group
The Fundamental Movement Skills (FMS) intervention was delivered over a 10-week period. Intervention students received 15-min sessions, four days per week. Each session targeted a single skill (e.g., run, hop, throw) from one of the 13 fundamental movements using discrete trial training. This report presents findings for the first half of a 20-week intervention. Sessions were delivered one-on-one by the child's existing EIBI behavior technician. Instructional materials included a short video model on a tablet, a picture task card, and an abbreviated verbal direction. Following this stimulus, the participant completed one trial of skill, while the behavior technician provided physical prompting (i.e., most-to-least) and differential reinforcement. In addition to the FMS intervention, participants also participated in 5-minute daily active social games (4 days/week) that rotated activities but did not include direct FMS instruction.
Comparison Group
The comparison students continued with their regular therapy and were tested on FMS twice with an interval of 10 weeks.
Support for implementation
The intervention was delivered by the children’s existing behavior technicians at the EIBI clinic. To support implementation, one research staff member was present during intervention sessions to answer questions and collect video recordings.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, statistical significance, and sample size of the findings within a domain, the WWC assigns effectiveness ratings as one of the following: Tier 1 (strong evidence), Tier 2 (moderate evidence), Tier 3 (promising evidence), uncertain effects, and negative effects. For more detail, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).