The Athletic Skills Model offers an alternative to dominant talent development theories in the form of holistic broad-based movement education, focusing on health and wellbeing. It places the emphasis on ‘physical intelligence’ – including attributes such as agility, flexibility and stability – through adaptable and varied training programmes, creating a skilled athlete before introducing sport specialization.The book sets out the scientific underpinnings of the ASM before going on to offer practical guidance on the content of the programme, how to adapt and vary the programme, and how to apply the approach to different age groups and sports. The ASM’s application in the youth development programme at AFC Ajax is explored in depth, before a future of talent development with an emphasis on athletic, rather than sport-specific, expertise is imagined.The Athletic Skills Model introduces an important and timely challenge to conventional wisdom in talent development and is a fascinating read for any upper-level student or researcher interested in youth development, skill acquisition, motor learning or sports coaching, and any coaches wanting to refresh their approach to talent development.
DOCUMENT
The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility and validity of an Athletic Skills Track (AST) to assess fundamental movement skills among 6- to 12-year-old children in a physical education setting. 463 Dutch children (211 girls, 252 boys) completed three tests: the Körperkoordination-Test für Kinder (KTK) and two Athletic Skills Tracks (AST-1, AST-2). The validity of AST-1 and AST-2 was examined by correlating the time (sec) needed to complete the tracks and the KTK Motor Quotient (KTK MQ). Overall, there was a small correlation between AST-1 and the KTK MQ (r = - 0.474 (p = 0.01)) and a medium correlation between AST-2 and the KTK MQ (r = - 0.502 (p = 0.01)). When split up by age group the associations between the Athletic Skills Tracks and the KTK MQ were large for 12-year old children (AST-1: r = - 0.767; AST-2: r = - 0.727) and smallest for 8-year olds with a medium association (AST-1: r = - 0.501; AST-2: r = - 0.469). The results suggest that children’s motor skills can be assessed with a quick, convenient, and low-cost motor competence test in a physical education setting, i.e. an Athletic Skills Track. This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in "Journal of Sports Sciences" on 3 March 2016, available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2016.1151920
MULTIFILE
The main aim of this study was to determine the agreement in classification between the modified KörperKoordinations Test für Kinder (KTK3+) and the Athletic Skills Track (AST) for measuring fundamental movement skill levels (FMS) in 6- to 12-year old children. 3,107 Dutch children (of which 1,625 are girls) between 6 and 12 years of age (9.1 ± 1.8 years) were tested with the KTK3+ and the AST. The KTK3+ consists of three items from the KTK and the Faber hand-eye coordination test. Raw scores from each subtest were transformed into percentile scores based on all the data of each grade. The AST is an obstacle course consisting of 5 (grades 3 till 5, 6–9 years) or 7 (grades 6 till 8, 9–12 years) concatenated FMS that should be performed as quickly as possible. The outcome measure is the time needed to complete the track. A significant bivariate Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.51 was found between the percentile sum score of the KTK3+ and the time to complete the AST, indicating that both tests measure a similar construct to some extent. Based on their scores, children were classified into one of five categories: <5, 5–15, 16–85, 86–95 or >95%. Cross tabs revealed an agreement of 58.8% with a Kappa value of 0.15 between both tests. Less than 1% of the children were classified more than two categories higher or lower. The moderate correlation between the KTK3+ and the AST and the low classification agreement into five categories of FMS stress the importance to further investigate the test choice and the measurement properties (i.e., validity and reliability) of both tools. PE teachers needs to be aware of the context in which the test will be conducted, know which construct of motor competence they want to measure and know what the purpose of testing is (e.g., screening or monitoring). Based on these considerations, the most appropriate assessment tool can be chosen.
MULTIFILE
