Language and Movement
When Movement supports Language Learning and When It Does Not

For several years now, movement has been a central topic in educational discourse. In various education systems, such as the Finnish one, learning is increasingly viewed as a holistic process in which cognitive, social and physical dimensions interact (Castro-Alonso et al., 2024).  Interest in movement-based approaches has also been growing in the field of foreign language teaching. At the same time, many teachers are wondering what specific contribution movement can make to language learning. Is every form of movement automatically beneficial to the learning process, or can it sometimes distract from the actual learning objective?

By Natasha Devroede

Forms of Movement in Language Teaching

A key prerequisite for answering this question is to distinguish between different forms of movement in the classroom. Movement may involve learners actively engagingingestures or physical activities. It may also consist of observing movement, for instance through a teacher’s gestures or animations on acomputer screen. This distinction is crucial,as not every type of movementis equally suitable for every linguistic learning objective.Only against this background can we assess when movement is conductive to learning.

Movement and Vocabulary

A frequently cited approach in the context of movement and language learning is Total Physical Response (Asher, 1977). In this method, learners respond physically to linguistic input by performing or imitating simple actions (e.g., sitting down, representing a house with their bodies, etc.). This approach can be particularly helpful when introducing concrete, action-related vocabulary. The connection between linguistic input and physical activity supports comprehension and can also have a motivating effect.
At the same time, this approach has clear limitations. For example, it makes little sense to use this method to learn grammatical gender in German, as there is no clear semantic connection between movement and grammatical gender. If movement is nevertheless applied in such cases, there is a risk of mechanical responses without deeper semantic understanding. Movement is therefore most effective in vocabulary learning when it contributes to meaning construction rather than serving as mere activity for its own sake.

Movement and Grammar

What may surprise many teachers is that movement can also play a supportive role in grammar instruction, albeit in a different way than in vocabulary learning. It is particularly well suited to grammatical phenomena that involve relational or process-oriented aspects. For instance, two-way prepositions can be illustrated through the crossing or non-crossing of a boundary, word order can be represented by physically rearranging sentence elements in space, and modality can be conveyed through different bodily postures and perspectives, as illustrated in Figures 1 and 2: In such cases, movement helps to make abstract relationships visible and supports a functional understanding of grammatical structures.
These abstract grammatical concepts can also be learned through animations or VR environments: learners may either observe how grammatical relations are dynamically visualized or actively perform them in virtual space. In this way, complex structures become more tangible and the connection between form, meaning and function is strengthened. At this point, it may reassure learners who are reluctant to engage in physical activity in front of the class that recent research (Lan et al., 2019) suggests that activities involving greater physical movement (i.e., performing actions oneself) do not necessarily lead to better learner outcomes than use of the movement shown (e.g., through computer animations).  

Open Forms of Movement and Drama-Based Approaches 

In addition to highly structured forms of movement, more open approaches can also be found in foreign language teaching, particularly those inspired by drama pedagogy. Here, the focus is less on practicing predefined actions and more on experiencing linguistic situations, roles and relationships. Movement does not primarily serve to reinforce individual linguistic forms but rather supports the understanding of communicative intention. In the Multilingual Reader’s Theatre (MELT) project, students are encouraged to read youth literature texts aloud. During the preparation process, they must put themselves in the mind of the character they are playing and dramatize the text (Ilg et al., 2015).
Such approaches can be particularly beneficial when working on pragmatic aspects of language or expressing attitudes. At the same time, they require a high degree of pedagogical sensitivity. Not all learners benefit equally from open movement-based formats, and not every teaching context is suitable for drama-based elements (Read, 2007; Saunder, 2022). 

Limits and Risks of Movement-Based Instruction

 As compelling as movement-based approaches may be, they also entail certain risks. Movement can overwhelm learners and distract from the learner objective. Especially in heterogeneous classrooms, not all forms of physical activities are equally accessible to all students. There is also a danger that movement becomes an end in itself, with instructional decisions driven more by a desire for activation than by linguistic goals.
For classroom practice, this means that movement should not be used reflexively, but rather in a targeted and purposeful way. The key question is what function movement serves in a given learning context and whether it genuinely contributes to understanding.

Conclusion

 As compelling as movement-based approaches may be, they also entail certain risks. Movement can overwhelm learners and distract from the learner objective. Especially in heterogeneous classrooms, not all forms of physical activities are equally accessible to all students. There is also a danger that movement becomes an end in itself, with instructional decisions driven more by a desire for activation than by linguistic goals.
For classroom practice, this means that movement should not be used reflexively, but rather in a targeted and purposeful way. The key question is what function movement serves in a given learning context and whether it genuinely contributes to understanding.