Promoting Positive Social Development

Adapted Bicycles for TeachingRiding Siciiis

Richard E. Klein Elaine McHugh Susan L. Harrington Timothy Davis Lauren J. Lieberman

Beverly ^as born with cere-bral palsy. At age tO, shev/as pedaling o three-wheel-er that suddenly overturned,throv/tng her to the pave-ment. She suffered seriousinjuries and required recon-structive facial surgery. AsBeverly grew into herteenage years, she wantedto ride a two-wheeler butwas often too apprehensiveto even make attempts. Attimes she and her parentstried tandems and otheradaptations, but nothingseemed right for her.Training wheels proved tobe nonproductive, cumber-some, and humiliating. Atage 15, she and her motherheard about a camp pro-gram designed to teach chal-lenged youngsters how toride bikes. Beverly wasenrolled. Because of herstrong desire and hard^o rk , she learned to ride atw^o-wheeier v/ithout train-ing wheels in one day—hervery first day at the camp.After returning home withher mother, Beverly bubbledwith pride: ''If I can ride abike, I can do anything!"

Beverly's story is true, and in ourfiles we have dozens of similar s tor ies-stories of children whose lives and out-

looks have suddenly brightened afterlearning to ride a bike. Tbey can now dosomething that until then had been onlya dream—to simply ride a two-wbeelerdown tbe street like other children tseebox, "Wbat Does tbe Literature Say?").

Ahemalives to I^ining Wheek

TVaining wbeels represent an estab-hsbed methodoiogy, even an institution,in our culture. As a consequence, in ourprograms we find ourselves dealingwith tbat fraction of children (andadults) for whom training wheels didn'twork, some of whom are individualswith disabilities. Introducing a newmethodology involves a paradigm shift.Tbe numbers of cbildren wbo bave par-ticipated in our program are small whencompared to the total candidate ridingpopulation; however, in cases wberetraining wbeels would otherwise meanthe end of the bicycling journey, ourmethods represent an invaluable alter-native.

Of course, children without disabili-ties can benefit considerably from ourmethodology, as well; but we believethe mass marketing culture that gives ustraining wheels isn't about to reverse itsreliance on training wbeels. Tbose chil-dren who aren't able to master ridingusing the training wheel paradigm willbe candidates for our trainers and metb-ods.

AtMressing lhe Challenge

Tbe challenge faced by the learningrider is to acquire effective internal feed-backs for balance while initially ridingwbat is perceived by the learner to be a

precarious and unstable device. Thesense of instability experienced by thenovice rider causes natural fears andactivates ineffective defensive respons-es. The body tenses up, and the defen-sive response actions which becomereinforced, are delayed, erratic, andoften counterproductive.

Sitnilarities exist in patterns of learn-ing among cbildren with and withoutphysical and cognitive disabilities. Theprimary difference for children with dis-abiUties is that learning may requireadditional time and specialized teachingstrategies. Our methodology includesboth speciahzed equipment and innova-tive teacbing techniques designed toovercome tbe problems faced by noviceriders and thereby to facilitate success.An unusual feature of our adapted bikeprograms is that a common methodolo-gy tends to work for children witb awide array of disabilities or challenges(as well as for youngsters and adultswithout disabilities).

Providing Stability

The methodology involves mechanical-ly modifying the bike so as to mitigateits instability. Tbe concept is to start offwith a stable, adapted bicycle and thento incrementally progress to a tradition-al two-wheeler. The progression isadjusted to meet individual needs. Tbefirst of a series of trainer bikes hascrowned rollers on the front and theback that ensure stability and yet retainthe dynamic attributes of a two-wheeler(see Figure 1). This bike isn't very agile,but it doesn't fall over—even should therider make awkward or faulty move-

50 • COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

what Does the Literature Soy About Bicycle Riding?

Why Is Bike Riding Important?Bicycles play a central role in the social

and physical lives of most children inAmerica. In our culture, expectations arehigh that children will learn to ride abicycle early in childhood, usually by 6or 7 years of age. The bicycle provides ameans of lifelong recreation with familyand peers. Both children and adults usebicycles for transportation as well. Inshort, being able to master bike riding istaken for granted as a societal norm andrite of passage.

In addition to providing recreationand transportation, bike riding con-tributes to the building of self-esteemand positive peer relationships, as wellas the development of strength, stamina,coordination, and overall well-being.Moreover, cognitive and perceptualmotor skills are involved. For example,biking inherently places increaseddemands on visual processing, becauseriding a bike results in a more rapidarrival of visual information than whenwe are walking or stationary. Otherskills required for successful ridinginclude decision-making, judgment, andkinesthetic and spatial awareness.

Research suggests the importance ofoffering children with disabilities, andmenial retardation in particular, chancesto use their motor abilities fully(Kusano, 2001). Children with disabili-ties often spend a great deal of leisuretime in pastimes like television andcomputer games, which are largelysedentary in nature. Inactivity leads to acycle of low physical ability and furtherinactivity (Kusano). Success in a physi-cal activity, conversely, fosters intrinsic

motivation for involvement in moreactivity. While many active alternativesexist, such as swimming, skating, horse-back riding, and various team sports,the bicycle has the special aspect ofbeing an easily accessible and relativelyinexpensive individual activity.Bicycling is a pleasurable, independentactivity, and it is a lifetime sport.The "Missing Bicyclists." Nobody yetknows for certain how many people failto master riding two-wheelers. Manynonriders have stopped trying, andhence we don't see them out there try-ing and falling over. Nonetheless, basedon inquiries to a number of profession-als and our own straw polls, we estimatethat a minimum of 3% of ali children donot master riding two-wheelers, for var-ious reasons. Some professionals whowork with children have estimated thenumber of nonriders as high as 11%.Rintala et al. (2001) reported that 4%-5.7% of children have severe motorproblems, and also that about 15% werefound to have moderate or mild motorproblems. We conjecture that the num-ber of nonriders is correlated with thesefindings. Whatever the estimate, signifi-cant numbers of children are affected.The State of the Art and D-ainingWheels. The scientific literature relatedto bicycles and engineering explanationssheds scant insight on how bicyclesactually function, and even less onteaching children to ride. Hand (1988)examined 20 papers in the scientific lit-erature related to bicycles in general,and found 17 of them to have outrighterrors or untruths. For overviews of thescientific bicycling literature, see Hand,

as well as Astrbm, Klein & Lennartsson(2005).

For children with disabilities, as wellas for some children without disabilities,training wheels become a crutch thatwon't at times allow the child to transi-tion to riding a two-wheeler. Bad pos-tures and habits are formed as well asfears. Typical traits include stiff arms, ahunched-over posture, a downwardstare, and a cautious cadence, as well asexcessive reliance on upper torso lean-ing in response to sensations of instabil-ity. For some children, training wheelsresult in repeated failure, consequentfrustration, and even injury.

Examination of the literature finds lit-tle in the way of actually teaching bicy-cle-balancing skills. One source is aBicycling magazine pamphlet (1991);however, the portion devoted to achieve-ment of balance focuses on use with aconventional bicycle and, by implica-tion, able-bodied children. The pam-phlet addresses balance attainment withthe abbreviated statement, "Let the childdevelop a sense of confidence alongwith his balance."

Klein (1989) initiated an engineeringstndy of bicycle dynamics at theUniversity of Illinois, which resulted in aseries of prototype designs and clinicalexperiments (Klein, 1998} designed tomodify two-wheelers to make the learn-ing environment more gradual and lessthreatening. Burt (2002), using some ofKlein's adapted bicycle designs, exam-ined the matter of teaching bicyclingskills to children with mild mental retar-dation.

ments. As children ride and becomemore comfortable, we incrementallyadjust the bike's behavior, throughmechanical modifications, so as tomake it more and more like a conven-tional bike. (See the adapted bike withmodified rear roller, as well as the near-by supply of interchangeable rollers, inFigure 2). Rollers with more pro-nounced crowns, and thus with greaterability to tip, replace flatter rollers, andeventually standard wheels replace

The primary difference for

children with disabiiities is

that learning may require

additional time and

specialized teaching

strategies.

rollers. Figures 3-5 illustrate typicaladaptations in the progression.

As the children progress through thesequence of trainer bikes, includingroller changes, as well as gearingchanges, they assume more and moreresponsibility for control of their bal-ance. By sensing how the bike respondsto their actions, intentional or other-wise, they improve their skills related tomaintaining balance while riding. Aschildren feel the connection between

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN • JULY/AUGUST 2005 • 51

Figure 1. The einiS^jf-Ievol

therapy trainer series.

their movements and the responses ofthe bike, they experience an "Aha!"

For some children, frainlng

wheels result in repeated

failure, consequent

frustration, and even

injury.

The Roots of the Methodology

Our instructional methodology is basedon the idea that people can learn orimprove a skili provided that they are inan environment that allows them to besuccessful as they master progressivelymore challenging tasks. In the field ofmotor development, dynamic systemstheory supports the concept that learn-ing results from the interaction betweenan individual, the task, and the envi-ronment. Altering the task and the envi-ronment can facilitate learning (Gagen& Getchell, 2004). In the case of ouradapted bike therapy program, we alterthe task (i.e.. riding a stable bike thathas the dynamic qualities of a two-wheeler and incrementally increasingthe challenge) and the environment(one-on-one teaching, specializedinstructional methods, and the immer-sion experience in a camp or clinic set-

ting). The child experiences success inriding at each level of challenge. Eachlevel allows the child to improve bal-ance and associated motor skills includ-ing visual discrimination, and thusbecome more graceful, coordinated, andefficient. Success at each level permitsadvancement to a yet more challengingconfiguration.

How It Works

Unlike bikes equipped with trainingwheels, our adapted bike therapy train-ers retain the ability to tip or lean.

Children thus get the feel of this action,albeit in a reduced or slow motion modeso that they are able to maintain an ade-quate degree of balance and control. Asthe child learns or "encodes" effectivemotor responses to maintain balanceand control in one zone, we progres-sively adjust the bike's dynamics tomake the riding increasingly challeng-ing. Increased challenge means that therider is called upon to play a greater rolein maintaining balance (through the useof increased visual discrimination aswell as steering actions) and, as a corol-lary, enjoys increased maneuverability.

As teacher-facilitators, our task is tofashion and manage the environment sothat the children can learn in a safe andefficient manner. We look for "participa-tion in steering" as an important mile-stone in the learning process of thebeginning rider. We define this as appro-priately and continually turning thehandlebars into the direction of thebike's lean while riding forward andpedaling.

The child shown in Figure 6 isdemonstrating proper participation insteering by turning the handlebars intothe direction of lean or tilt. This steeringaction causes the front tire's groundcontact point to continually repositionitself underneath the bicycle and riderso as to provide support and thus "bal-ance" the bike and rider. Participation in

Figure 3. An adapted trainer wHfi single rear reller, aleng with anearby supply el interchangeable rollers.

52 • COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Figure 3. A cautious child setsouf on the double-roller entry-level trainer.

steering is our most reliable indicator ofwhen to switch to a more challengingbicycle. We can evaluate whether thechildren are participating by watchingtheir arms in action and by observingtheir point of visual focus and their abil-ity to successfully maneuver the moreadvanced trainer bikes. In our adaptedbike therapy camps, smiling childrenare the rule—not the exception (seeFigure 7}.

Implementing the NewMelliodelogy

The Camp/Clinic Setting

The methods and bikes that we havedeveloped typically work best in a campor a clinic environment. Both campsand clinics are typically structured to bea weeklong immersion experience as asuccession of daily riding periods. Wefind that children achieve better successin bike riding when instructional peri-ods are spaced out over a series of con-secutive days, in contrast to having anintense program concentrated in 1-dayor possibly a weekend (2-day] event.The children appear to learn best whenwe immerse them in bicycling for a con-secutive sequence of days.

At a camp setting, children are typi-cally divided into groups of 5 to 8 chil-dren. While one group receives bikeinstruction, other groups participate in

activities like art, swimming, or outdoorgames.

At a clinic, on the other hand, threeor four bike instruction sessions arescheduled each day for a week.Approximately 3 to 7 children attendeach session; children come only forbiking and are picked up following theirsession. In both settings, camps andclinics, the actual hands-on bike ses-sions typically last 1 to 1 1/2 hours.

Both the clinics and camps takeadvantage of our social natures.Instruction is one- or two-on-one, andseveral other children are present in theteaching area, usually a gym. Becausethe children progress at different rates,the children typically benefit from mod-eling of peers, (i.e., seeing others put-ting in effort and succeeding). We some-times use peers, often able-bodied sib-lings, who already ride proficiently to

Figure 4. Near the end ol theprogression to a conventionalbiko, a child rides en a bikewith a heavy front turf-styletire. The proud parent walksaleng nearby en|oylng thedelight of seeing his sen ride.

motivate participants by modeling thevarious stages of successful riding.

The camp/clinic format also makes itviable for experienced instructors toparticipate and provide initial guidanceto novice teachers. In addition, in sucha setting we can have a fleet of bikes(15-20) available, which makes instruc-tion efficient by minimizing the timeneeded to change bike configurations,as bikes at many levels of difficulty areconsistently ready to go.

Teaching Protocol

Initial instruction centers on getting thechildren on a bicycle, achieving comfortin pedaling, and using the hands insteering to maintain balance. We use aspacious floor area with few or noobstructions, rather than narrow path-ways like sidewalks. The primary objec-tives are to maintain a forward visualfocus, pedal continuously, initiate han-dlebar steering actions, and consequent-ly remain upright. Self-starting, turning,braking, and navigation (that is, main-taining a desired path and avoidingobstacles) are secondary. We focus onthese skills only after rudimentary bal-ance is achieved on a conventional ornear-conventional bicycle.

Accidents and falls are virtually non-existent on the roller trainers. The mosthazardous situation we face occurs afterthe children have made the transitiononto conventional two-wheelers. Withtheir newfound freedom, some childrenmay pedal faster than their ability tocontrol the bike. The ability to keeptrack of and avoid moving or stationaryobstacles requires practice over time forrefinement. We have the children workon these skills in controlled riding exer-cises that demand precision, not speed.

Once children are comfortable ridingtwo-wheelers, we engage them in taskshke navigating "figure eights," ridingwithin a defined lane using cones, andcoming to a controlled stop at an identi-fied line. Following achievement of rudi-mentary riding skills, we address ped-aling and braking. Finally, if time andfacilities permit, children ride on bicyclepaths outdoors with instructors whobring their own bicycles and helmets forthis purpose.

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN • JULY/AUCUST 2005 • 53

Figure 5. This child hos gradu-ated to o single relier bike.

Kinesthetic Learning andInstructional Cues

We don't teach anybody how to ride perse; instead, the adapted bicycles do theteaching. The children learn to controlthe bike through their physical and visu-al experiences while riding, rather thanthrough reliance on explanations ordemonstrations. All students learn moreeffectively with an experientialapproach, but this is especially true inthe case of children with disabilities[Wilson, 2001). The "Aha" experiencedwhen the child succeeds in being incommand of the bicycle, at whateverlevel of challenge, is ultimately respon-sible for achieving mastery.

Bike Camp Requirements

At present, we as researchers, subject toour limitations, deliver the therapywhen we are able to partner with a localinstitution that serves as host. Six mainingredients are required for a camp orclinic using the host format:

1. Involvement of an institution is criti-cal. This can be a school, a universi-ty, an area bicycling club, a park dis-trict, or a civic organization. Theinstitution typically provides thespace, tbe liability insurance, non-profit status to entice donors to con-tribute, and tbe infrastructure torecruit cbildren and volunteerinstructors.

2. A knowledgeable and dedicated pro-fessional, typically a physical thera-pist, occupational therapist, or

adapted physical education teacher,is needed as camp director to seethat the camp happens, and providecoordination, troubleshoot, andoversee therapy.

3. A camp also requires one or morepeople with previous experience tomentor newer instructors and volun-teers so that they become skilled inknowing what bikes to use next,what visual cues to look for, andwhen to accelerate each child ontothe next level of challenge.

4. Another essential person is someonewith technical, maintenance, andrepair expertise. The technical per-son needs to be familiar witb bothtbe therapy and the needs of the chil-dren, as well as knowledgeableabout the varied equipment options.

5. Some means of documentation isdesirable, including video recording,preassessment, on-going charting,and progress assessment for eachchild.

6. Last, of course, an array of bikes isnecessary.

Adapted Bicycle TrainerAvailability

The adapted bicycles, as sbown in tbeaccompanying photographs, are worksin progress and prototypes designed andindividually handcrafted by Dr. Klein.Our limited fleet of adapted bikes num-bers less than 50 at present, but newadapted bikes and new designs areunder development. These adaptedbicycle concepts are not patented butrather are in the public domain.

Recruiting Participants

In our bicycle programs to date, wehave worked with children with a widearray of disabilities and needs.Diagnosed disabilities include Downsyndrome, autism, Asperger's syn-drome, sensory integration disorders,spina bifida (mild), arthritis, cerebralpalsy, hydrocephalus, mental retarda-tion, visual disorders, Prader Willi syn-drome, fetal alcohol and drug syn-dromes, learning disabilities, orthopedicchallenges, gross motor delays, epilepsy,shaken baby syndrome, developmentaldelay, hearing and balance problems,and many more. Age ranges are typical-

ly from age 7 to age 18, but older indi-viduals can be accommodated.

When we accept or recruit childrenfor camps or clinics, we typically seekout children who want to ride a bicycle,are ambulatory, have sufficient vision tosee obstacles, have all limbs and use ofthose limbs, are cognitively capable ofunderstanding cause and effect, and areable to manipulate and control theirextremities in order to grip and turn thehandlebars and keep feet on the pedals.However, in some cases children wbodo not fit these criteria have been suc-cessful.

Eacb child and associated case histo-ry is different; therefore, no set teachingformulas exist per se. and no guaranteesfor success can be made. We can say,however, that every patticipating childhas benefited from the camp or clinicexperiences, and 70% to 80% ofenrolled children typically succeed inriding two-wheelers without trainingwheels during a period of 1 week. Somelearn in as little as 30 minutes, and

Figure 6. Participation In steer-ing means steering Into thedirection of the ttit er lean.

some require hours; others return for asecond camp.

Evaluating Barriers to Success

In our clinical work to date, havingworked with about 600 cbildren, only asmall percentage (typically 20%-30%}

54 • COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

has not succeeded in riding two-wheel-ers. We believe it is important to assessthe reasons that some ehildren have notsucceeded, with an eye to improvingour methodology. To date, we haveidentified a number of issues or reasonswhy children do not succeed: inade-quate stamina, hmited motor control,lack of focus, behavioral challenges, tac-tile defenslveness, severe obesity, verylow musele tone, and severe cognitiveimpairment.

As yet, we do not have the resourcesand professional expertise to achievesuccess with all children. On the otherhand, in a few instances we have beensurprised by a child's success when wedidn't expect it. Thus, we must avoidmaking assumptions and be open to

We often find ourselves in

the faith and magic

business, as the chiidren

come to heiieve (or have

faith) that they can do

whatever we suggest that

they can do.

giving any child with a desire to learnthe chance to succeed. Also, althoughwe have successfully taught someadults to ride bikes, at present we havelimited equipment in sizes suitable foradults.

Retention and GeneralizationIssues

After leaving our camps and clinics,children may or may not continue touse their newly acquired skills. To date,our data on retention and generalizationare sporadic and anecdotal. Based oninformal reports, we estimate that asmany as one third of our children fail toincorporate riding into their everydayroutines.

On the other hand, the situation atthe North Carolina School for the Deaf(NCSD) in Morganton, a residentialsehool for children who have multipledisabilities, provides some insight into

Figure 7. A smiling and success-ful child. Look crt Me! I can deIt!

the potential for skill maintenance andgeneralization. During the 2002-2003school year, two of our adapted biketrainers were left on loan with staff. Inthat time, 25 children were introducedto bicycle riding with the trainer bikes.and 23 of the 25 were successful in rid-ing two-wheelers. Moreover, of the 23successful riders, all but one were ableto retain and generalize riding skills, asthe school has scheduled weekly bicy-cling activities. The two children whodid not master bicycle riding are lowfunctioning, but progress was madeeven in these cases. The one child who

failed to generalize the bike riding skilldeveloped a behavior problem of jump-ing off of the moving bicycle—thus, rid-ing was discontinued for the child'ssafety.

It is our hypothesis that those chil-dren in our regular camps and clinicswho fail to continue to ride after campis over need additional consistent,supervised riding experiences to gener-alize the skills.

In our clinical experiences to date,we have found that most children withDown syndrome, mild cerebral palsy,and developmental delay are generallyable to maintain and generalize the rid-ing of a bicycle. On the other hand, wefound that children with severe autism,very low cognitive functioning, andsevere visual impairments have greatestdifficulty in retention and generalizationof the skill. Research involving estab-lishing a suitable postcamp/postclinicinfrastructure and protocol is ongoing.

Tfie Magic af Hie BicycleWe can do ail sorts of things to preparea child for that first ride on a conven-tional bike without training wheels.After participating in one of our campsor clinics, the child has encoded thenuances of motor responses needed tobalance and steer. But—if a childremains convinced that he or she willfall once on a two-wheeler, then thechild will most likely fall. His or her lackof belief causes fears, and the fears inca-pacitate the body, making it tense and

Children ar« fasciniHed with the bilces and hew they work.

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN • JULY/AUGUST 2005 • 55

It is ftunning to see hew

easy It is fer mest ciiiidren

te ride biices ence Hiey

iiave getten past the fears

and have enceded hasic

haiancing.

and rigid and causing the visual focus tobe fixated on the handlebars and frontfork, as opposed to taking the horizoninto account. The bike and the child willfall, largely because of the rigidity of therider and inadequate visual input.

As a result of our research, severalpoints have become clear:

• Children, even those with an array ofchallenges, are fully capable of learn-ing how to ride a bicycle that is recon-figured with modifications such asours.

• Even for children with disabilities, thetime required to master bicycle ridingis relatively short, often a matter of afew hours or a few days.

• Once children are capable of balanc-ing and riding on a two-wheeler, wesee remarkable improvements inmobility, level of activity, and self-esteem.

Many children with longstandinghistories of being unable to shed train-ing wheels and to master two-wheelershave become delighted, proficient ridersas a result of participation in our rela-tively brief interventions. One child, age12, mastered bicycle riding in 3 days inone of our clinics, despite years of pre-vious failures ovifing to cerebral palsyand other issues.

We often find ourselves in the faithand magic business, as the childrencome to believe (or have faith) that theycan do whatever we suggest that theycan do. We use a delicate but engagingmanner to establish rapport with thechildren. In addition, we stack the oddsin the learner's favor by bringing eachchild through a series of small steps orprogressions in bike adaptations, so thatthey accept their accomplishment ateach stage as the norm, and are willingto try the next step. Belief is the prereq-

uisite; when one believes, all sorts ofthings become possible. The presence ofpeer role models helps build belief.

It is stunning to see how easy it is formost children to ride bikes once theyhave gotten past the fears and haveencoded basic balancing. Several yearsback we worked with one particularlyinquisitive and articulate girl, age 9 atthe time, who mastered riding a two-wheeler. Following her first successfulride, she turned to us in amazement,and almost indignation, and said, "Whydidn't you tell me it was so easy?"

ReferencesAstrom, K, Klein, R., & Lennartsson, A.

(2005). Bicycle dynamics and control.IEEE Control Systems Magazine. 8(3).

Bicycling magazine. (1991). Teaching yourchild to ride. [Pamphlet]. Emmaus, PA:Author.

Burt, T. (2002). Effects of adapted bicyclesplus feedback on acquisition, mainte-nance, and generalization of conventionalcycling skills for children with mild mentalretardation. Unpublished doctoral disser-tation, Ohio State University, Columbus.

Gagen, L., & Getcbell, N. (2004). Combiningtheory and practice in (he gymnasium.Journal of Physical Education, Recreation,and Dance. 75(5). 25-30.

Hand, R. (1988). Comparisons and stabilityanalysis of linearized equations of motionfor a basic bicycle model Unpublisbedmaster's thesis, Cornell University,Department of Theoretical and AppliedMechanics, Itbaca, NY.

Klein, R. (1989). Using bicycles to teach sys-tem dynamics. IEEE Control SystemsMagazine, 6(4), 4-9.

Klein, R. (1998). Design and use of adaptedtraining bicycles for children with specialneeds. Symposium, North AmericanFederation of Adapted Physical Activity,Minneapolis, MN.

Kusano, K. (2001, July). APA with the"drama" of daily life—facilitating full useof motor ability in children with tnentalretardation (pp. 87-90), Adapted PhysicalActivity, 13th International Symposium,Vienna. Austria.

Rintala, P., Ahonen, T., Cantell, M.,Huisman, T, Koljonen, M., Laasonen, K.,et a!. (2001, July). Physical activity andchildren with teaming disabilities (pp.131-136). Adapted Physical Activity. 13thInternational Sytnposium, Vienna.Austria.

Wilson, C. (2001. July). PIPSS—Playgroundintervention program for social skills (pp.197-201). Adapted Physical Activity, 13thInternational Symposium, Vienna,Austria.

Richard E. Klein tCEC Chapter fi47).Associate Professor Emeritus, Department ofMechanical Engineering, University of Illinoisat Urbana-Champaign. Elaine McHugh,Associate Professor, Sonoma State University,Rohnen Park, California. Susan L.Harrington (CEC Chapter ffl71). CertifiedAdapted Physical Education Professional,Yolo County Office of Education. Woodland,California. Timothy Davis (CEC Chapter»77), Assistant Professor, State University ofNew York (SUNY) at Cortland. Lauren J.Lieberman, Associate Professor, Deparimentof Physical Education, SUNY at BmckportBrockpori, New York.

The author may be contacted through his Website: www.losethetraingwheels.org

Our thanks to John Crowter and Steve Smith,photographers of the children in this article.

TEACHING Exceptional Children. Vol. 37,No. 6 pp. 50-56.

Copyright 2005 CEC.

Ad IndexAGS, p 31

Captioned Media Program, p 67

Council for Ebtceptional Children,

pp. 5, 40, 57, 58, 59, cover 4

Crisis Intervention Institute, p 1

Curriculum Associates, p 41

NASCO, p. 49

National University, p 24

Penn State University, p 4

SRA/McGraw Hill, cover 2

University of Nebraska, p 11

56 • COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN