ISSN:0033-6297    

DOI:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483968

出版商:Taylor&Francis Group    

年代:1989

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

Recently the definition of motor development seems to have engendered a debate among a number of scholars in the field. We suggest that the controversy stems from confusion about whether motor development is a product or a process. When motor development is defined as change over time in motor behavior, the focus is on motor performance (i.e., product), whereas when motor development is defined as a process, the emphasis is on the underlying mechanisms of change. Clearly, the proper definition of motor development includes both the product and process of change. Through an historical overview of the field, we trace the origins of this definitional confusion and its impact on the study of motor development. The paper concludes with our position as to the future directions for motor development research.

ISSN:0033-6297    

DOI:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483969

出版商:Taylor&Francis Group    

年代:1989

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

Four questions are presented: What are the historical roots of motor development; How can motor development be characterized; How should motor development be conceptualized; and How should motor development be organized? A brief history presents the psychological roots of motor development and emphasizes the individual researchers who have created the area of motor development since the 1960s. Motor development is characterized as a composite of the researchers, knowledge, application of knowledge, systems for delivering knowledge, and graduate programs in motor development. Motor development should be a perspective rather than a structure or subdiscipline. All courses in human movement should be taught from a developmental perspective, research should be done within the appropriate subdiscipline, and some of that research should be developmental. Motor development will be best served if researchers align with scientists within the subdisciplines and share developmental information in cross-disciplinary groups.

ISSN:0033-6297    

DOI:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483970

出版商:Taylor&Francis Group    

年代:1989

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

In this paper I explore the common history of developmental psychology and motor development, concluding that the field of motor development should be defined in a manner analogous to the way its parent field, developmental psychology, is defined. Therefore, I view the study of motor development as the study of change in motor behavior across the lifespan. This was the implicit definition used by the first textbook in the field, Espenschade and Eckert's (1967)Motor Development. Two implications of this definition are (a) with change in motor behavior as the focus of study, age becomes a“marker variable”in developmental research, and (b) the lifespan perspective frees (and forces) motor development researchers to reexamine causation. These implications further suggest that the organismic paradigm is no longer sufficient for the field of motor development. I propose that general systems theory, exemplified in the study of motor development by dynamical systems theory, is a possible, new paradigm for lifespan motor development research.

ISSN:0033-6297    

DOI:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483971

出版商:Taylor&Francis Group    

年代:1989

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

A concept of life span motor development is presented. Evolution of the author's concept of motor development is traced from its beginnings in classic developmental theory rooted in the biological sciences. Influenced by contemporary motor control theory and the writings of Milani-Comparetti, mechanistic models of nervous system function were abandoned in favor of active organism concepts. Application of classic developmental theory to the practice of physical therapy led to a specific focus on righting behaviors and eventual discovery of the limitation of classical neurodevelopmental theory for the explanation of adult motor behaviors. The author's current research focus is summarized; it was formulated from a perspective of lifelong development and is directed toward describing age related movement patterns in a series of righting tasks.

ISSN:0033-6297    

DOI:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483972

出版商:Taylor&Francis Group    

年代:1989

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

This paper traces the origins of the current dissatisfaction with the term physical education. A retrospective–comparative overview is given of the major conceptual trends and structural developments that have arisen since the academic status of physical education has been questioned. This quest starts in the United States in 1964, then moves to the Francophone sphere, on to Germany and Great Britain, and ends in the Low Countries. Four major conceptual trends are identified which are disciplinary, multi- or inter-disciplinary or cross-disciplinary in nature. In an attempt to integrate these divergent approaches, the concept of kinanthropology is presented as an epistemological claim and a common denominator for both the science and the professional applications concerned with humans in movement.

ISSN:0033-6297    

DOI:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483973

出版商:Taylor&Francis Group    

年代:1989

数据来源: Taylor

摘要:

It is suggested that sport is not only popular but also plays a highly significant part in the lives of many. One explanation focuses on the analysis of the tension excitement generated by sporting encounters. Particular emphasis is placed on the work of Elias and Dunning, who suggest that in societies at a late stage in the“civilising process,”affect-control is strongly established, so that people's expressions of sentiment are strongly restrained. Excitement in such societies is thus to be found not so much in real-life situations as through mimetic or“imitative”excitement, which resembles that produced in critical situations in real life, but in a safe and pleasurable way. A second approach draws on a variety of theoretical perspectives, although the contributions derived from Emile Durkheim's later work on the sociology of religion are prominent. The argument is advanced that sports encapsulate symbolically the social natures, relations, and identities of the collectivities that generate them. Sport, therefore, is perceived as a form of collective representation that may be invested with great social significance. Finally, relationships between the two approaches are considered.

ISSN:0033-6297    

DOI:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483974

出版商:Taylor&Francis Group    

年代:1989

数据来源: Taylor

ISSN:0033-6297    

DOI:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483967

出版商:Taylor&Francis Group    

年代:1989

数据来源: Taylor