Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-54qdv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T09:14:12.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Practitioner Report – Conceptualising Motor Development: Issues and Implications for Practitioners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2015

Steve Hay
Steve Hay*
Affiliation:
Griffith University
*
Centre for Movement Education and Research, Griffith University, Qld 4111, Phone: (07) 3875 5650, Fax: (07) 3875 5771, E-mail: S.Hay@edn.gu.edu.au
Get access

Abstract

How practitioners conceptualise motor development has important implications for clinical practice, including the framing of the cycle of assessment, prioritisation, intervention, and reassessment. The flexibility and inclusiveness of these frameworks effectively determines what kind of questions are able to be asked concerning the developmental characteristics of children, the kinds of assessment and evaluation tools used to evaluate those characteristics, and the understandings of the processes of motor development that ultimately derive from those investigations.

Keywords

AssessmentDynamic Systems TheoryMotor DevelopmentMotor SkillsRemediation

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Educational and Developmental Psychologist , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , May 1997 , pp. 87 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Psychological Society 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Blanche, E. I., Bottecelli, T. M., & Hallway, M. K. (1995). Combining neuro-developmental treatment and sensory integration principles: An approach to pediatric therapy. Marrickville, NSW: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Black, J., Brown, P., & Hay, S. J. (1989). The proximo-distal debate revised: Is the wrist a significant intermediate control variable. Paper presented at the fourth conference of the International Graphonomics Society, Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar
Bobath, B., & Bobath, K. (1995). Motor development in the different types of cerebral palsy. London: William Heinemann.Google Scholar
Fogel, A., & Thelen, E. (1987). Development of early expressive and communicative action: Reinterpreting the evidence from a Dynamic Systems Perspective. Developmental Psychology, 23(6), 747–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, N. (1980). Strategies of representation in young children: Analysis of spatial skills and drawing processes. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
Kugler, P. N. K., Kelso, J. A., & Turvey, M. T. (1982). On the control and coordination of naturally developing systems. In Kelso, J. A. & Clark, J. E. (Ed.), The development of movement controland co-ordination (pp. 5–78). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Laszlo, J., & Bairstow, P. (1985). Perceptual-motor behaviour: Developmental assessment and therapy. London: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Magill, R. (1993). Motor learning: Concepts and applications (4 ed.). Madison, Wisconsin: Brown & Benchmark.Google Scholar
Roberton, M. (1978). Stages in motor development. In Ridenour, M. (Ed.), Motor development: Issues and applications (pp. 63–82). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Book Co.Google Scholar
Roberton, M. A. (1984). Changing motor patterns during childhood. In Thomas, J. R. (Ed.), Motor development during childhood and adolescence (pp. 48–90). Minneapolis: Burgess Publishers.Google Scholar
Roberton, M. A., & Halverson, L. E. (1984). Developing children-Their changing movement: A guide for teachers. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.Google Scholar
Stallings, L. (1982). Motor learning: From theory to practice. St Louis: C.V. Mosby Co.Google Scholar
Thelen, E., Kelso, J. A., & Fogel, A. (1987). Self-organizing systems and infant motor development. Developmental Review, 7, 39–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, E., Ulrich, B., & Jensen, J. (1989). The developmental origins of locomotion. In Woolacott, M. & Shumway-Cook, A. (Eds.), Development of posture and gait across the live span (pp. 25–47). Columbia: University of South Carolina.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. R. (1989). Naturalistic research can drive motor development theory. In Skinner, J. S., Corbin, C. B., Landers, D. M., Martin, P. E., & Wells, C. L. (Eds.), Future directions in exercise and sport science research (pp. 349368). Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics Books.Google Scholar
Touwen, B. C. (1979). Examination of the child with minor neurological dysfunction (2nd ed.). London: William Heinemann.Google Scholar
Wade, M. G. (1991). How to study movement in children. In Fagard, J. (Ed.), The development of timing and temporal organization in coordinated action (pp. 261–281). Holland: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Wade, M. G., & Berg, W. (1991). How to study movement in children. In Fagard, J. & Wolfe, P. (Eds.), The development of timing control and temporal organization in coordinated action (pp. 261–280). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Wickstrom, R. (1977). Fundamental motor patterns (2nd ed.). Philadephia: Lea and Febiger.Google Scholar