4.3 Article

Crosstalk between Gross and Fine Motor Domains during Late Childhood: The Influence of Gross Motor Training on Fine Motor Performances in Primary School Children

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182111387

关键词

motor development; gross motor skills; fine motor skills; physical education; physical activity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study explores the correlation between gross and fine motor skills in children aged 6-11, finding that they both significantly improve with age. However, the intervention of gross motor training programs did not appear to have an influence on fine motor skills. Further research is needed to clarify the effect of gross motor practice on fine motor performances.
Gross and fine motor competence have a close relationship during development and are shown to correlate to some extent. However, the study of the interaction between these domains still requires further insights. In this study, we investigated the developmental changes in overall motor skills as well as the effects of gross motor training programs on fine motor skills in children (aged 6-11, n = 240). Fine motor skills were assessed before and after gross motor intervention using the Box and Block Test. The gross motor intervention was based on the Test of Gross Motor Development-3rd Edition. Results showed that gross and fine motor skills correlate across all years of primary school, both significantly improving with age. Finally, the gross motor intervention appeared to not influence fine motor skills. Our findings show that during primary school age, overall motor development is continuous, but non-linear. From age nine onward, there seems to be a major step-up in overall motor competence, of which teachers/educators should be aware of in order to design motor educational programs accordingly. While gross and fine motor domains might be functionally integrated to enhance children's motor performances, further research is needed to clarify the effect of gross motor practice on fine motor performances.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据