The Brain Highways program is based on the general concepts of neurological re-organization and sensory integration. However, its application and format differs significantly from both pioneer and current programs in these fields.

Although the Brain Highways curriculum integrates some of the established movements found in traditional neurological re-organization and sensory integration programs, it also offers many original components and activities. Such additions are instrumental in participants’ progress and success.

Since the Brain Highways program differs in application, format, and content, we cannot apply previous studies or reviews of other neurological or sensory integration programs when determining its effectiveness. Instead, the sum total of all the Brain Highways components requires separate research and review.

We fully support the need and importance of scientific studies that are based on objective, empirical, measurable evidence. However, we do not support the idea that observable change is automatically deemed invalid without such data.

Until such studies exist, the Brain Highways program adopts the same criteria used within our judicial system.

There, scientific evidence is not the sole basis for making a decision. In order to arrive at a final conclusion, jurists are directed to consider the preponderance of evidence.

Considering the challenge of finding funds and the time to conduct valid research, analyzing the preponderance of evidence to assess program effectiveness may provide families with a more realistic alternative than a rigid stance of negating everything until scientific data and studies are published. The reality is . . . the number of today’s struggling children continues to rise, and families are searching for answers.

The bullets below highlight examples of prior research that supports application of various components of the Brain Highways program.

• There is a direct relationship between movement and learning. We now know that there is a pathway from the cerebellum (known for its role in posture, coordination, balance and movement) to parts of the brain involved in memory, attention, and spatial perception (Strick, 1995).
  
  
• Sensory integration focuses primarily on the remediation of brainstem functions as a way to improve functional skills (Ayres, 1972).
  
  
• The child is born with tissues of biological intelligence and the brain structure, but these only become useful when the child moves and explores the environment, manipulates objects, observes and describes what is seen, and makes use of the information in her world. Such actions are the foundations and building blocks for learning. This relationship between movement and learning continues throughout life (Capon, 1993).
  
  
• Neuroplasticity assumes that the central nervous system has the capacity for change and is able to modify its function and structure (Lenn, 1991).
  
  
• The nervous system learns by doing (Gilfoyle, Grady & Moore, 1972).
  
  
• Each developmental stage assimilates part of the previous one; full function depends on the functional level of the stage below. A child’s learning and behavior may be affected when natural development stages are “missed.” (Sasse, 1980).
  
  
• Proper neural pathways are laid when children acquire sensory motor skills through play and specific movements (Miller and Melamed, 1989).
  
  
• Sensory motor integration is fundamental to school readiness (Housten, 1982; Hannaford, 1995).
  
  
• Movement and physical activity help to integrate both brain hemispheres. If hemispheric specialization has not occurred by age seven, a child will have learning difficulties and not perform to their full potential (Taylor, 1997).
  
  
• Children who do not crawl adequately are more likely to be hyperactive and suffer learning disabilities since they may not have mastered eye-hand controller binocularity (Walsh, 1980).
  
  
• Specific neurological systems responsible for sensory processing, motor coordination, and maintaining attention are required for adequate cognitive development (Hammill, 1993).
  
  
• Vestibular input is necessary for static and dynamic balance development, eye-movement control, and motor planning. Children with poor vestibular processing are delayed in gross motor patterns that require coordination of both sides of the body and may have difficulty with eye-hand coordination and fine motor skills (Pyfer, 1981).
  
  
• The sensory input from the eyes, ears, muscles, and joints must be matched to the vestibular input before such information can be processed efficiently (Pyfer, J. & Johnson, R., 1981).
  
  
• Proprioception tell us about our spatial orientation of our bodies or body parts, the rate and timing of our movements, the amount of force our muscles are exerting, and how quickly our muscles are being stretched (Kalaska, 1988; Matthews, 1988; McCloskey, 1985).
  
  
• Proprioception plays a role in programming and planning bilateral action sequence movements (Goldberg, 1985).
  
  
• Learning to move and learning to accommodate to new demands depends on sensory processing and integration (Wolpert et. al., 1995).
  
  
• The term sensory defensiveness describes a disorganized response to sensory input due to an imbalance between inhibition and excitation within the central nervous system. Children who are sensory defensive are characterized as hyperactive, hyperverbal, distractable, and disorganized (Knickerbocker, 1980).
  
  
• Children who are under-responsive to sensory stimuli are frequently unaware of input that comes into their central nervous system, and they often seek stronger sensations. As a result of their under-responsiveness and under-reactivity, they are more prone to danger and injury. Children who over-respond to sensory stimuli often react negatively. Avoidance and withdrawal are typical responses to over-stimulation, but when such action is not possible, such children often lash out at the source of the input. (Dunn, 1997, 1999).
  
  
• In a study at the University of Purdue, seventy-five percent of children with learning disabilities had retained the Symmetrical Tonic Neck Reflex (STNR); this reflex was not present in any of the children without a history or learning disabilities (Bender, 1970).
  
  
• Exercises and movements that inhibit the Symmetrical Tonic Neck Reflex decreased hyperactivity (O’Dell and Cook, 1997).
  
  
• The Symmetrical Tonic Neck Reflex helps to complete a sequence of eye training skills (Blythe, 1992).
  
  
• Children who have retained the Tonic Labyrinthine Reflex when they start to walk will not acquire true gravitational security since head movement will alter muscle tone and thereby ”throw off” the center of gravity (Ayres, 1979).
  
  
• Retention of primitive reflexes can affect gross motor skills, fine motor skills, sensory perception, and cognition (Goddard, 1996).