ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

As a way to address the serious obesity epidemic in the United States, many physical education classes have become fitness centers designed to raise heart rates and burn calories. An unintended consequence of this emphasis on fitness, however, is the lack of attention to motor skill development. Motor skills do not develop miraculously from one day to the next or through maturation; they must be nurtured, promoted, and practiced. Physical education must promote both physical activity and motor skill development. If we want students to become physically active for life, we need to help them acquire the motor skills that will allow them to participate in a wide range of physical activities.
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [Jane Clark]
On: 24 March 2013, At: 14:00
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ujrd20
On the Problem of Motor Skill Development
Jane E. Clark a
a Department of Kinesiology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
To cite this article: Jane E. Clark (2007): On the Problem of Motor Skill Development, Journal of Physical Education,
Recreation & Dance, 78:5, 39-44
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2007.10598023
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions,
claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
39
JOPERD Volume 78 No. 5 May/June 2007
As we begin the 21st century, the United States is in the midst of an obe-
sity epidemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported
in 2004 that almost 18.8 percent of all children ages six to 11 and 17.4
percent of youths 12 to 19 are overweight (Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, 2007). As a way to address this serious issue, countless physical
education classes have become fi tness centers designed to raise heart rates and burn
calories. No one takes issue with providing children more physical activity time, but
an unintended consequence of this renewed fi tness emphasis is the lack of atten-
tion to motor skill development. What are the implications of de-emphasizing the
acquisition of motor skills in our physical education programs? This is not a new
problem. Motor skill development, as a curricular focus, has long been marginalized
in physical education. In this article, based on my Alliance Scholar lecture given at
the 2007 AAHPERD convention in Baltimore, I discuss the problem of motor skill
development with an eye to understanding why it has languished as a critical cur-
ricular focus in physical education and why it is important to keep it in our physical
education programs. In addition, I include fi ndings from the research I have done
over the last four decades on the development of motor skills.
The Maturation Misconception
The misconception that maturation underlies infants’ and children’s motor skill
development undermines both research and the need for instruction and practice
of motor skills in the early years. The view that maturation is the driving force be-
hind an infant’s changing motor behavior pervades our thinking about the motor
development of toddlers, preschoolers, and young children in the early elementary
grades. Running, jumping, galloping, hopping, kicking, throwing, and catching are
among the many motor skills that seem to appear one day in the child’s collection
of newly found behaviors. Or so it would seem. Parents and educators have a strong
sense that teaching motor skills to children is unnecessary until children are perhaps
eight or 10 years old, when specifi c sport skills are introduced. This seems to be a
deeply held misconception. What else could explain the lack of a requirement for
daily physical education that would include motor skill instruction in the preschool
and early elementary school years? But if motor skills do not develop primarily
through maturation, then how do they develop?
In the fi rst year of life, an infant progresses from a helpless newborn who can
barely lift its head to the active walking toddler capable of using its hands to grab
toys, food, and a variety of objects. Each month, the toddler almost miraculously
learns new skills. One month the infant is sitting, and the next crawling. Infants
appear to progress through the same sequences—rolling over, sitting, crawling,
standing, and fi nally, around the infant’s fi rst birthday, walking. For the infant’s
parents, these motor skills “just mature.” Since no one teaches the infant how to
sit or stand, a belief emerges in the culture’s folklore that maturation is the cause
On the Problem of Motor Skill Development
JANE E. CLARK
Jane E. Clark,
2007 Alliance Scholar lecturer
2007Alliance Scholar Lecture
Motor skills do not develop miraculously from one day to the next. They must be taught and practiced.
Downloaded by [Jane Clark] at 14:00 24 March 2013
40 JOPERD Volume 78 No. 5 May/June 2007
of these advancements in the infant’s motor repertoire. In
this sense, maturation would mean that these motor skills
emerge regardless of the environment and without instruc-
tion or specifi c practice—as if these behaviors were “wired”
into our bodies from the beginning of life. The problem with
maturation as an explanation of motor skill development is
that it is wrong.
Few would dispute the fact that certain motor behaviors,
such as refl exes, are embedded in the newborn’s nervous
system. But the other motor behaviors of infancy, those that
are called species-typical or phylogenetic, are far less prede-
termined. Indeed, these species-typical behaviors require
environmental support for their appearance; however, this
support is minimal and nonspecifi c. In fact, research would
suggest that the environment needs to be “just good enough”
for these preadapted behaviors to appear. This is the type of
environment in which most infants grow up. But imagine an
infant born in a space station circling Earth, where the pull
of gravity is one-sixth of Earth’s gravitational pull. Would
we see sitting, standing, and walking emerging as we do on
Earth? It would be unlikely, as most of our motor behaviors
are in response to and modulated by gravity. Without Earth’s
large gravitational force, head and trunk control would be
attained almost at birth, not at fi ve or six months as it typi-
cally is. If maturation were the correct explanation for motor
skill development, then it would not matter whether the
infant was born on the moon or on Earth; the sequence of
motor behaviors would unfold in the same way, regardless
of the environment.
Motor Skill Development Is a Lifelong Journey
The belief that maturation is how motor skills develop puts
more emphasis on the biological or hereditary aspects than
on environmental factors. But the process by which motor
skills develop is more complex. Motor skills change through
an interactive process between the individual’s biological con-
straints and the environment. The central nervous system,
the muscles, and the skeleton all develop; some changes
are prescribed by heredity, but our biological heritage is
modulated continuously by our environment and our life
experiences.
Humans come with preadapted motor behaviors that are
built into the central nervous system. But even refl exes, such
as the sucking and grasp refl exes, are quickly modifi ed by the
infant’s experiences in the world. For the species’ survival,
these early experiences open a dialogue between the newborn
and its new stimulus-rich world. This dialogue provides a
cycle of perception and action with consequences. Hand
(palm) contact with an adult’s strand of hair results in the
all-too-well-known hair grasp by the infant. The grasp refl ex
action gives the infant both sensory information about the
hair in the hand (helping to form a perception of hair) and a
social interaction with the adult. The infant’s waking hours
are fi lled with such cycles of action and perception, each
providing the infant with a rich and rapidly expanding col-
lection of perceptual-motor experiences. These experiences,
of course, are not just for babies. All of our lives are spent
expanding and adapting to our perceptual-motor experi-
ences, and these experiences help to shape our motor skills
as they change throughout our life.
While the infant is born with innate motor patterns, these
patterns are a basis for the development of motor skills that
appear later. The process by which our motor skills change
over time is not maturation, but adaptation and learning.
These inborn motor patterns prepare the infant to adapt to
its new world. They provide a basis that experience modi-
es and, over time, that the infant incorporates into more
and more complex patterns of coordination that are better
adapted to the environment.
I wrote two papers that provide a framework for this lifes-
pan view of motor skill development (Clark, 1994; Clark &
Metcalfe, 2002). They focused on describing the development
of motor skills—not just any motor behavior, but those that
are voluntary, goal-directed, and consistently performed. To
identify these lifespan changes, the framework needed to
describe the developmental characteristics that have been
documented in the research literature. For example, dur-
ing an individual’s life there are periods of stability when
behaviors seem to form a coherent assembly that we might
label as typical for that time in a person’s life. These periods
would be expected to follow a specifi c order and would build
one upon the other. The directionality in which the changes
progress (toward some goal or end) would also be implied in
a developmental framework.
With these characteristics in mind, we selected the meta-
phor of a journey up a mountain to illustrate the develop-
Photo by Faye Egre
A fi rst-grade student completes a modifi ed vault. Motor skills
need to be learned and practiced; they are not automatically
acquired through maturation.
Downloaded by [Jane Clark] at 14:00 24 March 2013
41
JOPERD Volume 78 No. 5 May/June 2007
ment of motor skills (Clark & Metcalfe, 2002). The “mountain
of motor development” provides a framework to describe the
global changes that occur in our motor skills from birth to
death. Figure 1 is a schematic of the mountain broken into
its many periods. Since the mountain has been described in
detail in my previous two papers, I will only briefl y describe
it here and focus most of my attention on the preadapted
period and the fundamental motor patterns period, on which
my research has been centered.
The mountain’s base sits upon the prenatal period, when
the fetus, in the last two trimesters, is quite busy moving.
But our mountain metaphor begins at birth with the refl exive
period, which represents the infant’s behaviors in the fi rst two
weeks of life as the infant adjusts to the bright, buzzing, and
gravitational world. Refl exes, such as the rooting, sucking,
and gag, insure the infant’s survival. But very quickly (after
about two weeks), the infant’s behaviors are more sponta-
neous than refl exive, and some are actually goal-directed.
This marks the beginning of the preadapted period, in which
species-typical movements dominate. This period ends when
the infant has attained the two most fundamental motor
behaviors: independent walking and self-feeding. At that
point, the human infant has all that it needs to “survive” at
the most primitive level. The next period, the fundamental
motor patterns period, is characterized by the acquisition of
the basic coordinative patterns that form the basis for later-
emerging sport, dance, game, and other culturally promoted
motor skills. The fourth period, the context-specifi c motor
skills period, is the stage in which patterns are modifi ed for
a specifi c purpose (e.g., running is modifi ed for running the
hurdles, or the striking pattern is adapted to sports such as
baseball, tennis, and golf). Sitting at the top of the moun-
tain is the skillfulness period. Reaching the top period of the
mountain means the person has become a skilled motor
performer. While there is a continuum of skillfulness that
we all recognize, crossing the threshold into skillfulness
puts the mover into this period, but clearly it is a long trek
to the summit. For example, high school varsity athletes are
skilled, but college players and professional athletes are more
skilled. From playing high school basketball to playing at
the professional level is a long and diffi cult journey; in the
same way, a mountain climber might say that the last stage
of getting to a mountain’s summit is the most demanding.
It is also important to note that we do not stay at the top of
the mountain forever. When injury, aging, and other changes
occur in our body, we adjust our motor performance to ac-
commodate these changes. Thus, the compensation period
represents that time in our motor development journey when
we must compensate for these biological changes. Perhaps
the injury will heal and we can return to our mountain
climb. Or perhaps these bodily changes will result in our
being less skillful than we once were, perhaps returning to
a lower period on the mountain.
The Foundation Patterns of Coordination
From a theoretical and practical basis, the early periods when
the preadapted and fundamental motor patterns develop ap-
pear to be the most critical to later skill attainment. Seefeldt
(1980) suggested that if these patterns were not acquired, the
child would encounter a “profi ciency barrier” when trying
to learn the transitional motor skills that lead to skillfulness.
But what is it about these motor patterns that make them
“fundamental” or essential to later skillfulness?
Figure 2 shows a young boy trying to balance on a small
plate. To succeed at this task, all the body’s segments (head,
trunk, arms, and legs) have to align so that the pull of grav-
ity is directly over the base of support (i.e., the foot). Small
deviations from this alignment create a torque that pulls the
body toward the ground. As with this child, the body has to
nd a way to regain that balance. Clearly this is not an easy
task. Indeed, it takes almost six months for a human infant
to learn to sit without support (a position with a very wide
base compared to balancing on one foot). The human body’s
segmentation provides for a wonderful array of movements,
but it also presents an incredible management problem for
the neuromuscular system. Between each segment, there is
a joint. Each joint is a potential location for collapse. As we
move, each of these joint-segment combinations must be
controlled. At birth, no segment is controlled. The top heavy
head and trunk must be supported by the caregiver. It is not
until about two months after birth that the infant is able to
lift its head off the blanket and that is only when it is lying
on its tummy. Months will go by before rolling over and prop
sitting will occur. Standing alone and walking are achieved
almost a year after birth. Clearly, learning to control and
coordinate our multisegmented body is a long process.
For years, I studied two of these fundamental patterns of
coordination: walking and jumping. In a series of studies on
jumping (Clark & Phillips, 1985; Clark, Phillips, & Petersen,
1989; DiRocco, Clark, & Phillips, 1987; Jensen, Clark, &
Phillips, 1994; Phillips, Clark, & Petersen, 1985; Phillips &
Clark, 1997), we found that from the age of three to adult-
Figure 1. The Mountain of Motor Development
COMPENSATION
SKILLFULNESS (11 yrs...onwards)
CONTEXT-SPECIFIC MOTOR SKILLS
(7 yrs...11 yrs)
Profi ciency Barrier
FUNDAMENTAL MOTOR PATTERNS
(1 yr...~7 yrs)
PREADAPTED period
(2 wks to~1 yr)
REFLEXIVE period
(birth to 2 wks)
Downloaded by [Jane Clark] at 14:00 24 March 2013
42 JOPERD Volume 78 No. 5 May/June 2007
hood, there was an invariant coordination pattern for the
hip, knee, and ankle (or the thigh, shank, and foot) as the
jumpers extended their legs to create the force to lift the
body off the ground. While we can see qualitatively different
spatial patterns (the young children do not optimize their
take-off angles for either vertical or horizontal jumps), the
underlying force-producing pattern of coordination is the
same across ages and outcome performances (i.e., how high
or long they jump). These fi ndings do not mean that jumping
is innate and that no instruction or practice are needed. Quite
the contrary, our results show that children must learn how
to produce a jump that maximizes the height or the length
of the jump. This involves learning to coordinate the arms,
legs, and trunk before the take-off extension. It also means
that children must learn to control the forces created by the
segmental actions so as to maximize the take-off angle. Our
cross-sectional studies suggest that skillful jumping takes
many years to learn.
Similarly, our research on the development of walking
revealed the early appearance of fundamental interlimb
and intralimb coordination (Clark & Phillips, 1987; Clark
& Phillips, 1991; Clark & Phillips, 1992; Clark & Phillips,
1993; Clark, Truly, & Phillips, 1990; Clark & Whitall, 1989;
Clark, Whitall, & Phillips, 1988; Forrester, Phillips, & Clark,
1993; Whitall, Block, & Clark, 1992). But again, it was the
exibility and control of these coordinative patterns that
emerged with increasing locomotor experience. Indeed it was
in this latter set of studies that the idea of probing the rate
limiter to the development of motor skills emerged. When
infants were just learning to walk, for example, we found
that giving them a light touch stabilized their interlimb
coordination to that of an infant who had been walking for
a month (Clark et al., 1988). Similarly, when infants fi rst
walk, they spend most of their time with both feet on the
ground. It is not until they have been walking for about two
months that they walk with the same stance proportion as
adults (Clark & Phillips, 1993). Again as in our earlier work,
we proposed that postural control was limiting the rate of
locomotor development in the infants.
In fact, in both jumping and walking development, chil-
dren struggled with postural control. Much like the child in
Figure 2, the problem of generating the segmental forces to
jump, walk, run, gallop, or skip creates a considerable chal-
lenge to the neuromuscular system of the developing child.
Part of that challenge is how to manage the destabilizing
forces that threaten our balance. Does postural control de-
velop? And if so, how does it develop? What develops when
postural control changes across the lifespan?
Postural Control: An Important Process
Postural control involves not only balance, but also the
ability to assume and maintain a desired orientation. Every
movement we make involves postural control. Whether we
are standing quietly, running, hitting a tennis ball, or sit-
ting at a desk, gravity is always acting on our bodies. The
gravitational forces must be managed in all of our actions.
To accomplish this, the central nervous system (CNS) must
know where the body is: its orientation to the support sur-
face as well as the positions of all the segments and their
relationship to one another.
To help the CNS monitor the body, we have three major
sensory systems. The vestibular sensors, located in the inner
ear, are composed of the semicircular canals and the otolith
organs (the utricle and the saccule). These sensors provide
feedback to the CNS about the head’s rotational movements
(the semicircular canals) and the head’s linear acceleration
and its orientation to gravity (otoliths). Vision sensors pro-
vide information about what is in the environment as well
as our movement in that environment. Both the vestibular
and visual sensors are located in the head, whereas the third
group of sensors is distributed throughout the entire body.
This group is referred to as proprioceptors. They include the
joint and muscle receptors as well as the pressure receptors
that are located under the skin. Each of these sensors con-
tinuously sends information to the CNS about where the
body is at any one moment. It is the task of the CNS to use
this information to adjust the body’s position in order to
maintain or assume new positions.
This sensory feedback is critical to postural control, but it
has one important limitation: it is time delayed. Beginning
from the moment the sensor is stimulated, the delay includes
the time it takes the signal to reach the brain; the time the
brain takes to decipher the information, decide what needs
to be done, and issue a motor command; and the travel time
used by the command to reach the relevant body part. In
Figure 2. A Balancing Task
Downloaded by [Jane Clark] at 14:00 24 March 2013
43
JOPERD Volume 78 No. 5 May/June 2007
many cases, this time delay is too long, rendering the sensory
information useless for postural control. To work around this
time delay, the CNS estimates where the body will be in the
future and actually issues motor commands before receiving
the sensory feedback. In other words, the CNS anticipates.
This is an important ability that takes time to develop. In
our studies of infant postural development (Barela, Jeka, &
Clark, 1999; Chen, Metcalfe, Jeka, & Clark, 2007), predic-
tive or anticipatory behavior is evident in infants about two
months after they start to walk. Perhaps it is the dynamic
experience of moving upright over two little feet that pushes
this capacity to the forefront.
Our conceptualization of this predictive ability suggests
that our CNS develops an internal model or sensorimotor
map of the body and its world. This internal model provides
us with an estimation of where we are and a prediction about
where we will be if we carry out a particular movement. To
build such an internal model requires that we have experi-
ences that couple sensory information with movement
repeatedly and with variation. Thus as the child stands
up, attempts to step, and falls, the internal model uses this
perception-action cycle to build up something like a body
schema. The repeated attempts, successful and unsuccessful,
enhance the internal model so that after a few months of
independent walking, the infant can walk without falling
despite creating a wide range of large torques as the trunk
perches precariously atop the two wobbly legs. This concept
of an internal model is just that: a concept. But as such, it
provides us with a useful way to think about how the CNS
is using perceptual-motor experiences to become more
skillful. A strong internal model would allow for quick and
reliable actions that constitute the graceful movements of
the skilled performer.
The importance of postural control is striking in those fi rst
walking steps of the infant, but postural control is in every
movement that we make, no matter our age or experience.
This is very evident in children who are sometimes labeled
“clumsy.” Balancing on one foot can be almost impossible
for these children. And the lack of postural control has the
potential to make all their attempts to learn motor skills more
diffi cult. We have been studying these children for the last
few years. Years ago, they were merely classifi ed as clumsy.
Today, through careful screening, they may be diagnosed
as having developmental coordination disorder (DCD). For
more information on DCD, please see an article we wrote for
this journal in 2005 (Clark, Getchell, Smiley-Oyen, & Whitall,
2005). Our fi ndings from research with these children suggest
that their internal models for movement are more broadly
tuned than their age-matched peers (Kagerer, Bo, Contreras-
Vidal, & Clark, 2004; Kagerer, Contreras-Vidal, Bo, & Clark,
2006). This leads to the variable and inaccurate movements
that are characteristic of children with DCD.
Teaching for Motor Skill Development
Motor skills do not just come as birthday presents. They must
be nurtured, promoted, and practiced. If we recognize the
cultural misconception that motor skills just mature, then we
must be proactive in dispelling that misconception. Motor
skills take years to develop and require specifi c experiences
and instruction. It is, therefore, important that motor skill
development remain a central focus of physical education
curricula. Teaching motor skills is not mutually exclusive with
children being physically active. Indeed, if children do not
feel a sense of effi cacy regarding their motor skills, they are
less likely to participate in physical activities as they grow
older. If a child does not have good balance and has had
limited experience and few locomotor skills, then he or she
is not likely to accompany other children to a roller-skating
or ice-skating party. A strong motor skill foundation at the
start provides for new movement opportunities later in life
such as skiing, rock climbing, tennis, golf, and many others
that arise as we continue on our motor development jour-
ney. Just as educators recognize the importance of reading
literacy to a lifetime of reading, physical educators need to
recognize the importance of motor literacy for a lifetime of
physical activity.
Also critical to the development of motor skillfulness is
postural control. Although often assumed not to require
specifi c instruction, postural control is learned and does
require practice and instruction. Physical education teachers
should remember to specifi cally teach for postural control
by modifying tasks so as to reduce the base of support,
change the body’s orientation, or carry objects that make
postural management more diffi cult. The body’s internal
model for movement and postural control need many
and varied experiences to form a strong, reliable sense of
where we are and what will happen when we make spe-
cifi c movements.
Children who leave elementary school without a strong
foundation of motor skills are “left behind” in the same
way that children are left behind when they leave without
the prerequisite language or mathematical skills. At high
school graduation, students who leave without a sport or
other movement form and without the motor skills to learn
new skills are also “left behind.” As a profession, physical
education needs to battle the maturation myth and teach
motor skills from preschool to high school. Motor literacy
is as important as reading literacy. If we want a nation of
physically active citizens, then we need to help them acquire
the motor skills that will allow them to participate in a wide
range of physical activities. Physical education is the best
public health delivery system our nation has. We need to
exploit it as we promote both physical activity and motor
skill development.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank all her colleagues and students who
have signifi cantly contributed to the works cited here. Thanks also to
all the infants, children, and parents who gave so willingly of their
time to participate in our studies. Without their collaboration, there
would be no scientifi c advances. Finally, this work was supported
by NIH HD42527 grant.
Downloaded by [Jane Clark] at 14:00 24 March 2013
44 JOPERD Volume 78 No. 5 May/June 2007
References
Barela, J. A., Jeka, J. J., & Clark, J. E. (1999). The use of somatosensory
information during the acquisition of independent upright stance.
Infant Behavior and Development, 22, 89-104.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2007) Overweight and
Obesity: Home. Retrieved March 29, 2007 from http://www.cdc.
gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/index.htm
Chen, L. C., Metcalfe, J. S., Jeka, J. J., & Clark, J. E. (2007). Two steps
forward and one back: Learning to walk affects infants’ sitting posture.
Infant Behavior and Development, 30, 16-25.
Clark, J. E. (1994). Motor development. In V. S. Ramachandran (Ed.),
Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (3rd ed., pp. 245-255). New York:
Academic Press.
Clark, J. E., Getchell, N., Smiley-Oyen, A. L., & Whitall, J. (2005). Develop-
mental coordination disorder: Issues, identifi cation, and intervention.
Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 76(4), 49-53.
Clark, J. E., & Metcalfe, J. M. (2002). The mountain of motor develop-
ment: A metaphor. In J. E. Clark & J. H. Humphrey (Eds.), Motor
development: Research and reviews (vol. 2, pp. 163-190). Reston, VA:
National Association for Sport and Physical Education.
Clark, J. E., & Phillips, S. J. (1985). A developmental sequence of the standing
long jump. In J. E. Clark & J. H. Humphrey (Eds.), Motor development:
Current selected research (pp. 73-85). Princeton, NJ: Princeton Book.
Clark, J. E., & Phillips, S. J. (1987). The step cycle organization of infant
walkers. Journal of Motor Behavior, 19, 421-433.
Clark, J. E., & Phillips, S. J. (1991). The development of intralimb co-
ordination in the fi rst six months of walking. In J. Fagard & P. Wolff
(Eds.), The development of timing control and temporal organization
in coordinated action (pp. 245-257). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Clark, J. E., & Phillips, S. J. (1992). A dynamical systems approach to the
development of intralimb coordination in the fi rst year of walking. In
M. H. Woollacott & F. B. Horak (Eds.), Posture and gait: Control mecha-
nisms (pp. 350-353). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Books.
Clark, J. E., & Phillips, S. J. (1993). A longitudinal study of intralimb
coordination in the fi rst year of independent walking: A dynamical
systems analysis. Child Development, 64, 1143-1157.
Clark, J. E., Phillips, S. J., & Petersen, R. D. (1989). Developmental stability
in jumping. Developmental Psychology, 25, 929-935.
Clark, J. E., Truly, T. L., & Phillips, S. J. (1990). A dynamical systems ap-
proach to understanding the development of lower limb coordination
in locomotion. In H. Bloch & B. I. Bertenthal (Eds.), Sensory-motor
organizations and development in infancy and early childhood (pp.
363-378). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
Clark, J. E., & Whitall, J. (1989). Changing patterns of locomotion: From
walking to skipping. In M. H. Woollacott & A. Shumway-Cook (Eds.),
Development of posture and gait across the life span (pp. 128-151).
Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
Clark, J. E., Whitall, J., & Phillips, S. J. (1988). Human interlimb coordi-
nation: the fi rst 6 months of independent walking. Developmental
Psychobiology, 21, 445-456.
DiRocco, P. J., Clark, J. E., & Phillips, S. J. (1987). Jumping patterns of mentally
retarded children. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 4, 178-191.
Forrester, L. M., Phillips, S. J., & Clark, J. E. (1993). Locomotor coordina-
tion in infancy: The transition from walking to running. In G. J. P.
Savelesbergh (Ed.), The development of coordination in infancy (pp.
359-393). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Jensen, J. L., Phillips, S. J., & Clark, J. E. (1994). For young jumpers, dif-
ferences are in the movement’s control, not its coordination. Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65, 258-268.
Kagerer, F. A., Bo, J., Contreras-Vidal, J. L., & Clark, J. E. (2004). Visuomo-
tor adaptation in children with developmental coordination disorder.
Motor Control, 8, 450-460.
Kagerer, F. A., Contreras-Vidal, J. L., Bo, J., & Clark, J. E. (2006). Abrupt,
but not gradual visuomotor distortion facilitates adaptation in chil-
dren with developmental coordination disorder. Human Movement
Science, 25, 622-633.
Phillips, S. J., & Clark, J. E. (1997). Temporal coordination and control
in the development of the standing long jump. In J. E. Clark & J. H.
Humphrey (Eds.), Motor development: Research and reviews (vol. 1,
pp. 99-121). Reston, VA: National Association for Sport and Physi-
cal Education.
Phillips, S. J., Clark, J. E., & Petersen, R. D. (1985). Developmental dif-
ferences in standing long jump takeoff parameters. Journal of Human
Movement Studies, 11, 75-87.
Seefeldt, V. (1980). Developmental motor patterns: Implications for el-
ementary school physical education. In C. H. Nadeau, W. R. Halliwell,
K. M. Newell, & G. C. Roberts (Eds.), Psychology of motor behavior and
sport—1979 (pp. 314-323). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Whitall, J., Block, M. E., & Clark, J. E. (1992). The development of walk-
ing: Interlimb coordination as coupled limit cycle systems. In M. H.
Woollacott & F. B. Horak (Eds.), Posture and gait: Control mechanisms
(pp. 315-318). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon Books.
Jane E. Clark (jeclark@umd.edu) is a professor and chair of the
Department of Kinesiology at the University of Maryland in College
Park, MD 20742.
Donham-Foutch
Continued from page 38
McCall, R. M., & Craft, D. H. (2000). Moving with a purpose: Developing pro-
grams for preschoolers of all abilities. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Mitchell, D., Davis, B., & Lopez, R. (2002). Teaching fundamental gym-
nastics skills. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
National Association for Sport and Physical Education. (2004). Moving
into the future: National standards for physical education (2nd ed.).
Reston, VA: Author.
O’Quinn, G. (1990). Teaching developmental gymnastics: Skills to take
through life. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Portman, P. A. (2003). Are physical education classes encouraging
students to be physically active? Experiences of ninth graders in
their last semester of required physical education. Physical Educator,
60(3), 150-161.
Sanders, S. W. (2002). Active for life: Developmentally appropriate movement
programs for young children. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; Washing-
ton, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Werner, P. (2004). Teaching children gymnastics (2nd ed.). Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics.
Shae Donham-Foutch (colemasl@nsuok.edu) is an associate pro-
fessor in the Health and Kinesiology Department at Northeastern
State University, in Tahlequah, OK 74464.
Downloaded by [Jane Clark] at 14:00 24 March 2013
... Appropriate practice tasks need to be methodically planned and designed to maximize the participation of all athletes, foster self-actualization (the ability to reach one's full potential) for performance at the appropriate difficulty level based on the skills of each athlete, and minimize "spotlighting" in front of their peers to promote self-efficacy (Nesbitt et al., 2021). Appropriate practice tasks are classified as being neither too difficult nor too easy for the performer and should include an element of fun to keep athletes motivated (Clark, 2007;Silverman, 2011). Additionally, one of the most important variables in the learning of motor skill is to include ample opportunities for the athlete to participate and engage with the equipment with minimal time between practice trials or waiting in line (Nesbitt et al., 2021;Rink, 2019). ...
Article
Full-text available
School-aged children receive a myriad of physical, social, emotional, and cognitive benefits from being involved in sport, as well as several academic benefits. Children who participate in sport are more likely to have a higher GPA, increased daily attendance, and have greater high school graduation rates than their non-sport participating peers. Unfortunately, participation in sport is in decline. Several factors are to blame for the downward trend, although the overwhelming research consensus is that children do not perceive sport to be fun due to behaviors related to their coaches. Sport coaches can provide the invaluable opportunity to develop healthy lifestyle behaviors that continue through adulthood. To facilitate positive outcomes from participating in sport, practice settings need to include developmentally appropriate skill progressions and ample opportunities for all players to participate and contribute, and a team atmosphere that fosters player self-actualization. To those points, it is important for sport coaches to remember and utilize best-practices for developing motor skills (sport-related skills) of their athletes. Designing developmentally appropriate practice tasks is vital to the athlete’s motor skill progression throughout the season and for the athlete’s self-efficacy to continue to participate in sport. The following are foundational sport pedagogy strategies to help coaches enhance the skill development and progression for their athletes throughout the season. Pedagogical topics covered include: (a) task presentations of skill, (b) designing appropriate practice tasks, and (c) applying skill into the tactical setting.
... Expanding on this idea, Vandorpe et al. [20] have even speculated that MC in 6-to 8-year-old children predicts future sports participation. Considering that the development of fundamental movement skills competence is not an innate process [58,63], it becomes essential to provide children with appropriate and tailored opportunities for practice. This approach is necessary for them to acquire and enhance multiple movement skills effectively, which subsequently lays the groundwork for the mastery of more advanced sports skills [64]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Introduction Motor Competence (MC) is related to the development of healthy lifestyles in children and adolescents, and many studies have compared it with different variables, including sports participation. This investigation aimed to characterize the components and total scores of MC regarding different physical activity practices, such as physical education (PE) classes, futsal, volleyball, and ballet, and to compare MC regarding sports, sex, and age-groups. Methods Using a cross-sectional study, 398 Portuguese children and adolescents (398 participants: 200 boys and 198 girls; 12.649±3.46 years) were conveniently chosen between 2022 and 2023. Four groups of different sports were created: PE classes (n = 187), futsal (n = 80), volleyball (n = 101) and ballet (n = 30), and four different age groups: 7 to 9 years old (n = 117); 10 to 12 years old (n = 65), 13 to 15 years old (n = 96) and, 16 to 19 years old (n = 120). All participants reported to participate in at least two training sessions per week (1 hour each) for at least two years. MC was assessed with Motor Competence Assessment (MCA) comprising three components with six tests (two tests for each component). Participants’ total MC was calculated as the average of the three components of the MCA. Data were analyzed by applying ANOVA one-way with LSD post-hoc. Results Differences were found in MC among groups, where futsal participants showed better scores in general. Sex comparison showed that boys have a higher MC when practicing futsal, especially compared to volleyball players. Age-group analysis showed that younger participants had better MC levels compared to older ones. Conclusion The whole group showed the 50th percentile of MC, but volleyball adolescents showed results below this reference. MC is intrinsically linked to an individual’s motor experiences and motivations rather than depending directly on the specific practice of the sport.
... Each child's motor skills naturally vary; some exhibit proficiency while others lag behind. It is crucial, particularly for physical education teachers, to pay attention to the motor development of each learner [9]. Presently, a significant issue is the prevalence of low fitness levels among many elementary school children [10]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background and Study Aim. The assessment instrument for gross motor skills in physical education is crucial in developing fundamental motor skills in elementary school students. This research aims to formulate an assessment tool for gross motor skills tailored to students aged 7-9, aligning with their specific characteristics. Material and Methods. This study adopts a research and development approach utilizing the 4D development procedure (Define, Design, Develop, Disseminate). It involves the validation process by five experts in motor skills and physical education, comprising faculty members from five distinct universities. The trial subjects encompass 310 elementary school students aged 7-9, while the instrument's effectiveness is evaluated by 35 individuals, including physical education teachers and students. Statistical analyses encompass content validity, criterion validity, test-retest reliability using Cronbach's alpha, and descriptive percentage analysis. Results. This research has produced a gross motor skills assessment instrument comprising 11 movement components: sit and stand up, rolling, one-leg stand, gallop, slide, jump, bouncing a ball, catching, throwing, kicking, and hitting. The content validity result is 1>0.763, criterion validity (rxy) > 0.304, Cronbach's alpha value for all items > 0.60, and the average perception assessment of instrument effectiveness > 93%, falling into the category of extremely high. Conclusions. The assessment instrument demonstrates high validity and reliability, effectively addressing the challenges associated with the need for assessments tailored to the evaluated subject's characteristics, objectives, and relevance. An easily comprehensible instrument, coupled with language accessibility, yields positive outcomes for physical education teachers in the assessment process.
... Co więcej, jeśli nie zadbano o warunki umożliwiające dziecku prawidłowy rozwój motoryki dużej, może ono przez całe życie może mieć trudności z nabywaniem umiejętności motorycznych. Prawidłowy rozwój motoryki dużej ma więc kluczowe znaczenie, lecz niestety często jest ignorowany na etapie wczesnej edukacji (Clark 2007). Obecnie w mediach możemy przyglądać się dyskusji ministra sportu i turystyki Kamila Bortniczuka ze środowiskiem lekarskim dotyczącej określenia kompetencji lekarzy rodzinnych. ...
Article
Full-text available
Artykuł ma na celu ukazanie zależności między aktywnością fizyczną a zdrowiem i rozwojem człowieka, przy czym największą uwagę skupia na wieku przedszkolnym. Pokazuje lukę w badaniach dotyczących tego okresu na gruncie polskim oraz wskazuje istotne kierunki poszukiwań (wpływ aktywności fizycznej na rozwój psychofizyczny oraz umiejętność uczenia się dziecka, czynniki wpływające na aktywność fizyczną dziecka oraz ich korelacje). Na tym tle przedstawione jest funkcjonowanie systemowej placówki przedszkolnej, polskiej oraz norweskiej, celem wywołania refleksji wśród dorosłych opiekujących się dziećmi w wieku 3-7.
... Locomotion, object control, and stability motor skills are measured to assess FMS (Lubans et al., 2010). A child with excellent FMS can independently control and navigate his or her environment (Clark, 2007). Additionally, FMS proficiency is positively associated with PA, fitness levels (Morgan et al., 2013), and motor competence, helping predict PA and subsequent obesity from childhood to adulthood (Stodden et al., 2008). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study aimed to examine the differences in physical activity (PA) level, fundamental movement skill (FMS), and obesity-related factors in preschoolers. A cross-sectional study was conducted in 426 preschool children aged 3–5 years. Participants were assigned to the low PA group (LPAG), moderate PA group (MPAG), and high PA group (HPAG) according to the total score obtained in the PA questionnaire for young children. FMS and obesity-related factors were also analyzed. PA was compared by age and sex, and FMS and obesity-related factors were compared between groups. Significant differences were found according to sex. Boys were more active than girls in the 3–4 years age group, but no significant differences were observed at the age of 5 years. LPAG showed lower FMS than MPAG and HPAG, although this was not statistically significant. However, body mass index (BMI), BMI z -score, body fat, and muscle mass showed significant differences in terms of PA levels. Consideration of age and sex is crucial in promoting PA among preschoolers. Additionally, better obesity-related factors are associated with higher PA levels, and FMS may be a useful tool in evaluating health and fitness.
Article
Full-text available
Background Research on how the physical activity home environment affects fundamental movement skills (FMS) in preschool children in China is limited. However, the role of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in this relationship is still unclear. This study aims to analyze gender differences in FMS, explore associations between the physical activity home environment, MVPA, and FMS, and investigate MVPA's mediating role in these relationships. Methods We recruited 169 preschool children (95 boys, 74 girls; mean age 4.9 years) from four kindergartens in Hengyang, China. The Family Environment Scale on Motor Development for Preschool Urban Children (FESMPD) assessed physical activity home environment. Objective measurement of MVPA used ActiGraph wGT3-BT accelerometers. The Test of Gross Motor Development-3 (TGMD-3) evaluated FMS. Statistical analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in SPSS, with sociodemographic variables as controls. Results Boys exhibited significantly higher levels of MVPA, parenting style, locomotor skills, and object control skills compared to girls ( P < 0.05). MVPA, parenting style, and FMS showed positive correlations ( R = 0.355–0.568, P < 0.05). Similarly, MVPA was positively correlated with the physical activity home environment ( β = 0.237–0.568, P < 0.05). Parenting style emerged as a significant predictor of children's MVPA levels ( β = 0.956, P < 0.001), and MVPA was a predictor of the development ofFMS and its subdomains ( β = 0.097–0.207, P < 0.05). Furthermore, MVPA partially mediated the relationship between parenting style and the development of FMS in preschool children. The physical environment was also a significant predictor of children's MVPA ( β = 0.637, P < 0.05), and in turn, MVPA predicted the development of FMS and its subdomains ( β = 0.188–0.343, P < 0.01). Notably, MVPA fully mediated the relationship between the physical environment and the development of FMS. Conclusion Overall, this study highlights the important roles of physical activity home environments and individual levels of MVPA in developing FMS in preschool children, noting significant gender differences. Parenting style greatly affects both MVPA and FMS development, while the physical environment fully mediates this relationship. Collaborative efforts among kindergartens, families, and communities are essential to support MVPA and improve FMS development.
Article
The Furtado-Gallagher Children Observational Movement Pattern Assessment System (FG-COMPASS) is an observational tool using sequential decisions to assess fundamental movement skill proficiency. The current version of the test has three locomotor and five manipulative skills. Adding two more locomotor skills to the assessment tool enriches its scope, enabling a more comprehensive and nuanced evaluation of individual movement skills. We assessed expert-non-expert rater agreement and inter/intra non-expert rater reliability of two new scales for the locomotor subscale. We divided this study into two parts. In Part I, we filmed 60 children aged 5–10 years old who performed gallop and vertical jump skills. A motor behavior expert then classified the videotapes using our newly created rating scales. Next, we selected eight videos for training purposes and 24 videos for testing purposes. In Part II, 30 undergraduate students underwent rater training. Rating data were analyzed using weighted kappa (Kw) and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), and these indices showed ‘very good’ agreement between the expert and the non-expert raters for vertical jump (Kw = .96) and gallop (Kw = .89). The ICC expert to non-expert rater values for vertical jump and gallop were .98 and .94, respectively; and mean kappa values for inter-rater reliability between non-experts were considered ‘very good’ for vertical jump (MKw = .92) and ‘good’ for gallop (MKw = .78). The ICC inter-rater values were .98 and .95 (considered ‘excellent’) for vertical jump and gallop, respectively; and the kappa intra-rater values were .96 and .85, respectively, with intra-rater ICC values .98 and .92. Thus, the proposed rating scales were reliable for assessing vertical jump and gallop. Future studies should focus on criterion-related validity and reliability evidence from live performances.
Chapter
The chapter explores the interconnection between movement experiences and cognitive functions, emphasizing the pivotal role of the body, perception, and motor skills in cognition. It delves into the significance of motor activity in fostering executive functions, with a focus on relevant research in children. The chapter presents studies on the correlation between motor skills and cognitive development, as well as interventions aiming to enhance both motor competence and executive functions. Recommendations include implementing physical activity programs, particularly aerobic exercises demanding cognitive effort, as they exhibit the potential to augment school achievement. Consideration of activity intensity is crucial, with evidence suggesting that regular moderate-intensity aerobic exercise may induce positive neurochemical and morphological changes in brain areas associated with executive functioning. The authors propose that health and education professionals incorporate strategies promoting executive function development in children through daily practices, fostering a comprehensive understanding of interdependent processes and developmental outcomes. While existing evidence is promising, further research is essential to solidify knowledge and fortify effective intervention proposals. Collaboration among researchers, teachers, and school administrators is imperative for implementing practices that holistically nurture children’s development.
Article
Background: Locomotor and object control skills are considered essential skills for children to learn due to their potential impact in aiding in future healthenhancing physical activity. Evidence indicates that out-of-school time programs (OST) can provide meaningful movement opportunities for children. It has been found that leaders of OST programs are not equipped with the proper training to improve children’s motor skills. The purpose of this study was to gather expert consensus on the essential motor skills that should be practiced and evidencebased activities that should be integrated during OST programming. Methods: A three-round Delphi method was used to establish expert consensus on essential motor skills that children (5–10 years of age) should practice and evidence-based activities that should be integrated during OST programming to enhance child motor skill development. Results: Seven experts completed three rounds, and consensus was established (>70% agreement). Five essential motor skills were identified: overhand throwing, kicking, catching, jumping, and striking. Six evidence-based activities were agreed upon: team sport play, racket sports, swimming, resistance training, jogging/walking, and game-based approaches. Conclusion: Results from this study provide specific motor skills and evidencebased activities that program leaders could integrate during OST programming to enhance child motor skill development. Keywords: leadership, children, after-school
Article
Full-text available
The principles of dynamical systems were used to study the effects of changing internal (i.e., developing subsystems) and external (i.e., task demands) constraints on the development of jumping. Children, 3, 5, 7, and 9 years old, and 3 groups of adults—of average skill, skilled in volleyball, and skilled in gymnastics—were filmed performing two different tasks, a standing long jump and a vertical jump. The results revealed that despite changes in both external and internal constraints, there were no differences in the pattern of coordination for jumping. Differences were found in the position and magnitude variables. Clearly, the constraints manipulated here were insufficient to disrupt the stability of the jump's coordination. We suggest that these results indicate that jumping is a stable movement organization that transcends the changes in constraints associated with developing subsystems and particular task demands. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Book
This third edition of Teaching Children Gymnastics will help you tailor a gymnastics program to your teaching situation while combining the best facets of developmental skills, health-related fitness, and conceptual learning based on process characteristics of body, space, effort, and relationships. Internationally renowned author and educator Peter Werner and coauthors Lori Williams and Tina Hall guide you through the process of teaching gymnastics skills and then linking those skills into sequences.
Article
The purpose of this investigation was to identify changes in key takeoff parameters and body configuration (at takeoff) which may contribute to the age-related differences in the distance attained in the standing long jump. Film records of 102 children from 5 age groups (3,4...7 yr) were reduced and then submitted to a multivariate analysis of variance on 15 variables of interest. The results revealed that at takeoff the ankle, knee and hip joint angles showed no indication of age-related differences. The shoulder angle, however, evidenced increasing flexion with increasing age. Significant differences in all segmental angles of inclination at takeoff were found, but the differences were confined primarily to contrast between the 3 year olds and the other age groups. Across the age groups, there was a tendency for the mass center of the body to be located horizontally farther from the toes. Only the horizontal component of the mass center's velocity was significantly different across all age groups. Therefore, the projection angle tended to decrease as the resultant velocity increased. Findings were discussed in terms of the struggle younger children experience in maintaining dynamic stability while generating sufficient horizontal velocity at takeoff to project themselves forward.
Chapter
In this chapter we discuss the development of infant locomotor coordination from a dynamical systems perspective. Specifically, the organization of the lower limbs during walking and running is modeled after coupled, nonlinear limit cycle oscillator behavior. Using coordination measures of relative phase between component oscillators, evidence is presented to suggest that infants achieve adult-like coordination in both gait modes. Moreover, there is evidence that walking and running can be characterized as having the same patterns of inter- and intralimb coordination, based on relative phase data. If coordination is not fundamentally altered to enable the transition from walking to running, we may ask what precludes an earlier appearance of running in the developmental sequence. Given that each gait has distinctive energetic qualities, we raise the possibility that the infant faces an energy management task rather than a re-coordination task. Mechanical energy analyses are discussed as a means to probe the control features within the common coordination, as well as to identify the source of limitation.
Chapter
A dynamical systems approach is pursued for understanding the development of lower limb coordination in locomotion. Following the synergetic strategy proposed by Kelso and Schöner (1988), we sought first a collective variable to describe the lower limb action. We report here on our work to identify this collective variable. For interlimb and intralimb coordination, we propose that the phase lag relationship is an appropriate candidate for the collective variable. Whether this variable is measured at selected points (i.e., point coordination) or is measured throughout the gait cycle (i.e., continuous coordination) depends on the questions asked. With the collective variable identified, future work is directed to mapping the collective variable onto an attractor. Preliminary evidence suggests that a periodic attractor would be suitable.
Chapter
Our previous work on the development of temporal organization in walking revealed that interlimb (i.e., between limb) coordination was adult-like with the infant's first walking steps. In the present paper, we describe our efforts to study intralimb (i.e., within limb) coordination. Using a dynamical systems approach, we argue that the leg motion seen in walking can be modeled as a low dimensional limit cycle attractor. Coordination within and between the legs, then, is viewed as the coupling of these limit cycle systems. Here we describe how intralimb coupling can be expressed in terms of the phasing relationship between the thigh and shank's motion. We then present data on this phasing relationship in one infant over her first six months of walking and compare it to that of an adult. Finally, we argue that the principles of dynamical systems offer a predictive and generative framework within which to understand the development of coordination.