Kindergarten Obstacle Course With Developmental Coordination Disorder
You teach kindergarten physical education, 25 students, 30 minutes, in a multipurpose room. The equipment available is 4 low balance beams, 12 beanbags, 6 hoops, and 10 poly spots. The planned obstacle course requires walking forward on a beam, hopping on one foot through hoops, and an overhand throw to a wall target 10 feet away. One student has developmental coordination disorder and an IEP goal for static balance; during practice they avoid the beam, bump into peers, and throw beanbags underhand with no target accuracy. Two other students are very advanced and finish in 20 seconds, then run across other stations. The class must rotate every 5 minutes. You need to keep the obstacle course concept but make it instructionally appropriate and safe for all learners.
1. Analyze the mismatch between the original task demands and the range of learners, citing specific task constraints.
Read the worked answer
The original course overloads the learners in three ways. First, the beam walking task requires dynamic balance and a narrowed base of support; the student with developmental coordination disorder has an IEP goal for static balance, so expecting forward beam walking without a progression is a mismatch. Second, hopping on one foot through hoops requires single-leg strength, dynamic balance, and motor planning-all areas affected by DCD-while the advanced students finish in 20 seconds because the task is too easy for them. Third, the overhand throw to a target 10 feet away requires force production and accuracy; the student is throwing underhand with no accuracy, which is a legitimate developmental starting point, not a behavior problem. The environment also creates conflict: fast finishers run across stations, and the 5-minute rotation gives no clear extension or practice quality. The task constraints, not the child, are the problem.
2. Propose three progressive modifications-one environmental, one task, one instructional-and justify each.
Read the worked answer
Environmental modification: replace the raised beams with floor tape lines and low poly-spot paths, and arrange the course in a loop with one-way traffic and cones marking waiting spots. This reduces fall risk and collisions while preserving the balance challenge. Justification: DCD affects balance and motor planning, so a wide, low surface gives a safer practice condition and the loop prevents the advanced students from cutting across stations.
Task modification: create three levels at each station. Balance: walk on floor line, then low beam, then beam with a beanbag carry. Jumping: two-foot jumps through hoops, then one-foot hops, then alternating feet. Throwing: underhand toss from 5 feet, then overhand from 5 feet, then overhand from 8 feet to a larger target. Justification: modifying the task rather than the child allows the student with DCD to succeed at an entry level while advanced students get an extension. Instructional modification: use a visual station card with one cue per station, pre-teach the loop, and assign peer partners who give a specific cue rather than take over. Justification: kindergarten students need concrete cues and predictable routines, and peer modeling supports motor learning without making the student with DCD dependent.
3. Describe a practical observation-based assessment you could complete during the lesson for all 25 students.
Read the worked answer
I would use a class-list checklist with three observable criteria: balances on one foot for three seconds with arms out, jumps with two-foot takeoff and landing inside a hoop, and throws underhand to a target from 5 feet with one step. Each criterion is scored 0, 1, or 2: 0 means no attempt or needs physical assistance, 1 means partial success with a cue, and 2 means consistent success. During the 5-minute rotations, I would stand at one station and observe five or six students at a time while the peer partners use the same picture rubric to tally trials. I would not time the course or compare students publicly.
For the student with DCD, I would add a note on the IEP goal: whether they attempted the floor line, accepted a partner cue, and improved from one trial to the next. The advanced students would be assessed on the extension level, such as carrying a beanbag on the beam, so the assessment remains challenging for them. At the end, I would have each student point to a face rating for “I tried my best” to capture effort separately from skill.