Gross Motor Development
Gross Motor Development
Gross Motor Development
The Encyclopedia of Child and Adolescent Development. Edited by Stephen Hupp and Jeremy D. Jewell.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2020 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
DOI 10.1002/9781119171492.wecad023
2 Growth in Childhood
and dribbling are core skills for playing basketball. Many of these LC and OC skills, and
the combination of them, are referred to as fundamental motor skills (FMSs). FMSs
are considered to be the building blocks for more advanced movements and skills.
For example, sports such as basketball are composed of running, jumping, throwing,
catching, and so on, even though in a very advanced form they may look quite different.
FMSs are integral to more advanced movement forms, so they should be developed
and taught during early childhood, because most are not mastered naturally. Children,
therefore, need instruction, opportunity, and experience to develop mature levels and
competence in these skills. Otherwise, they may not be motivated and sufficiently
confident to attain the physically active lifestyle that is critical to a healthy life (Stodden
et al., 2008). Childhood is a significant period in the development of these FMSs and
gross movement in general. Most children pass through a series of fairly predictable
developmental sequences in mastering FMSs from an initial, or immature, phase to an
elementary level to a mature level of skill. Of course, not all children, adolescents, or
even adults attain a mature level in the performance of these movements. Generally,
this is because of a lack of opportunity, instruction, or practice.
As mentioned, gross motor is a category of human movement often used jointly with
the term fine motor, the latter of which involves human movement generally produced
by the small muscles or muscle groups of the body. Handwriting, sewing, keyboard-
ing, and playing many musical instruments would be examples of fine movements. Even
though movements can be categorized as gross or fine, many human movements include
characteristics of both gross and fine movement. For example, archery is generally con-
sidered a gross movement, because the large muscles of the shoulders, back, and arms
play such a prominent role in this sport. However, fine movements, such as the tiny
adjustments made in hand position on the bow, are instrumental to achieving accuracy.
An individual may have developed the gross motor competency to perform well in these
types of skills; however, to improve or perfect the skill, the fine motor aspects must also
be honed (Payne & Isaacs, 2016).
The terms gross movement and fine movement are useful in categorizing different kinds
of movement, but only in a simplistic or “quick and dirty” way. Though general agree-
ment can usually be achieved in determining whether a movement is gross or fine, the
process is limited by the fact that so many movements include characteristics of both
categories. For example, most would agree that walking and running are gross move-
ments, because the most important movements involved are generated by large muscles
or muscle groups. However, even walking and running have fine motor characteristics,
as the smaller muscles of the foot (and even the toes) make adjustments to achieve the
desired direction of the walk or run. Similarly, most would consider playing the piano
a fine motor skill, because the action of the small muscles of the forearms and hands
seems to be most critical to success. However, the larger muscles of the torso, back, and
shoulders are essential for placing the body in the proper position for the hands to do
their work.
These voluntary gross movements are generated via an impulse from the higher brain
centers, such as the motor cortex. From there, a “message” is sent to the appropriate
working muscles to initiate the desired movement. However, some gross movements,
including several that appear early in infancy, are not skills at all, are not intentional, and
are not produced by the higher brain centers. They are reflexes: responses to a stimulus
that are involuntary and controlled by the lower brain centers, such as the brain stem,
rather than the motor cortex. Some may be completely processed in the central nervous
system below the level of the brain. Several of these reflexes constitute a fairly dominant
form of movement during the first few months of life and, by definition, are involuntary
responses to a stimulus. One example of an infant reflex that is a gross movement is
the stepping reflex. The stepping reflex is thought to be a precursor to later voluntary
walking, which may not occur until months later. This reflex is elicited when the infant
is held upright with the feet touching a flat supporting surface. The pressure on the
bottoms of the feet is the stimulus for a fairly mature-looking walking action of the legs.
However, at this age, the stepping reflex involves the legs only (not arm movement).
This reflex is normally present during the first 6 weeks following birth and typically
disappears by the fifth or sixth month of life, several months before most infants are able
to walk voluntarily and independently. Another example of a gross motor infant reflex
is the crawling reflex. This reflex is believed to be critical to the development of later
voluntary crawling. The crawling reflex is elicited when the baby is placed in a prone
position on the floor or any flat surface. The alternate stroking of the bottoms of the
feet is the stimulus that causes the baby to alternately move their legs and arms as in
voluntary crawling, which will typically appear several months later. The crawling reflex
is generally present from birth through the third or fourth month of life.
Another early reflex that is an example of gross movement involves the attainment
of upright posture: the parachuting (propping) reflex. The parachuting reflex is a gross
motor reflex that occurs when the baby is tilted off balance in any direction. For example,
if the baby is shifted to the left, the arms “parachute” out in that direction in what appears
to be a protective action to guard against a fall. While this looks intentional, these actions
are reflexive, involuntary, and responses to the stimulus of being placed off balance. The
forward and downward parachute reactions can be elicited around the fourth month,
and the sideways propping reaction may be observed around the sixth month. The back-
ward reaction may not be observable until several months later, between 10 and 12
months, or even a bit later.
These are a few examples of infant reflexes. They are involuntary responses to stim-
uli that are gross movements and thought to be a possible basis for similar voluntary
movements that will typically ensue in the weeks or months to come. Many other infant
reflexes, such as the palmar grasp, sucking, Babinski, palmar mandibular, and palmar
mental reflexes, are produced via fine movements where the relevant stimuli elicit small
movements generated by the smaller muscles or muscle groups of the body.
short, up-and-down jump that was often more vertical than horizontal, even though the
intention was to attain horizontal distance. At such a young age, the participants used
very slight arm action to help achieve forward momentum. Older, more mature children
(4 and 7 years of age) tended to employ greater forward lean at takeoff and a more vigor-
ous arm swing (backswing followed by a vigorous forward thrust). Thus, they typically
gained considerably more distance in their jump. Between 8.5 and 9 years, children were
found to demonstrate an even more mature pattern as they employed greater knee flex-
ion and forward inclination at takeoff, and a longer and more explosive arm swing to
provide more momentum for their jump. They also advanced their legs during the jump
with the knees slightly bent and the thighs parallel during the flight phase. The knee
bend during flight enabled a lower trajectory during the flight phase. Thus, more dis-
tance could usually be gained from the jump. Upon landing, these more mature jumpers
flexed their legs upon contact with the supporting surface to absorb some of the shock
of landing, leading to a softer and more graceful-looking landing.
step while throwing, but the step is taken with the leg on the same side as the throwing
arm. The throwing arm is also more fully prepared as it rises above or slightly behind
the shoulder with even greater elbow flexion than what was previously seen. As the arm
is thrust forward to propel the object, a follow-through becomes noticeable as the arm
moves forward and downward following the release of the object. In short, the forward
momentum of the arm is gradually diminished rather than abruptly halted. To assist in
creating a more forceful throw, a more vigorous forward flexion at the waist is common.
By 6.5 years or older, with appropriate opportunity, practice, and instruction, children
often achieve even more maturity in their throwing, characterized by taking a step for-
ward with the leg opposite (contralateral) to the throwing arm just before the actual
throw. This is vital to achieving forward momentum and throwing velocity. Also, in addi-
tion to fully preparing the arm behind the body prior to the throw, the mature throw
is characterized by a trunk rotation. This opens the body to allow for a more complete
preparation of the arm behind the body prior to the forward thrusting of the arm. As the
forward step is taken, the body simultaneously rotates in conjunction with the forward
arm action to enhance the power of the throw. A final major characteristic of the mature
throw is an abrupt snap of the wrist just prior to release of the projectile. Though seem-
ingly insignificant, a carefully timed and abrupt wrist snap can add considerable force
to the resultant velocity of the projectile.
Catching is another gross motor skill commonly used for sports, games, physical
activities, and many daily function and work-related activities. The goal of this skill,
of course, is to control and possess a projected object. Catching can occur with one
or two hands. Several components are necessary to become a mature catcher, such
as eye–hand coordination, the ability to track an object with the eyes, perceptual
awareness, and fine motor skills related to hand and finger control. Initially, catching
is two handed and is characterized by children standing stationary with palms upward
and arms outstretched, usually fully extended, toward the oncoming projectile (e.g., a
ball). A hugging (arms are extended sideways to catch the ball) or scooping (arms are
extended forward but more under the object) action of the arms is initially used to gain
control of the ball as the hands are minimally involved (Haywood & Getchell, 2014). At
this level of maturity, the catch is usually characterized by the arms staying relatively
rigid upon contact as no “give” is provided to soften the arrival of the projectile. The
catch may also be characterized by an extension of the waist away from the ball, as
the head turns to the side. Both of these characteristics give the appearance of fearful
reactions to the oncoming projectile.
With additional maturity, children can move or adjust their bodies to catch the ball
(Haubenstricker et al., 1983). At this level, as the child awaits the oncoming object,
a slight flexion of the arms is noticeable as the arms extend toward the approaching
ball with the hands now facing each other, rather than with the palms upward. The
hands contact the ball first, rather than the arms, though the ball may still be drawn
toward the body, resulting in a basket-like catch against the chest. The most mature
two-handed catch is characterized by the arms relaxed and at the catcher’s sides until
the ball approaches. At that time, the hands raise and initially contact and maintain
control of the ball, rather than the arms. The ball is maintained in the hands and not
drawn toward the chest. In addition, upon contact, the hands lower as the arms extend to
absorb the shock of the oncoming ball. This action is often accompanied by a slight flex-
ion at the knees to lower the body and assist in the shock-absorption process. Catching
Gross Motor Development 9
performance generally improves as children (aged 4 to 8 years) mature (Du Randt, 1985)
but is, again, very much dependent on the degree of opportunity, practice, and instruc-
tion they experience.
5 Summary
Overall, the development of gross movement is integral to achieving competence in var-
ious sports, games, and physical activities as well as many activities of daily living. They
are vital for children’s growth and independence. Integral to accelerating children’s gross
motor development is understanding the child’s level of development. Once that has
been determined, developmentally appropriate movements or activities can be selected
to provide opportunity, practice, and instruction to optimally assist the child in master-
ing the gross motor skills.
SEE ALSO: Early Child Learning of Social and Cognitive Skills; Fine Motor Development;
Motor Disorders; Movement, Space, and the Development of Spatial Thinking; Physical
Education; Studying Cognitive Development in Infants and Toddlers; Studying Cogni-
tive Development in School-Aged Children
References
Adolph, K. E., Vereijken, B., & Shrout, P. E. (2003). What changes in infant walking and
why. Child Development, 74(2), 474–497.
Barnett, L. M., Van Beurden, E., Morgan, P. J., Brooks, L. O., & Beard, J. R. (2009).
Childhood motor skill proficiency as a predictor of adolescent physical activity. Journal
of Adolescent Health, 44(3), 252–259.
Butterfield, S. A., & Loovis, E. M. (1998). Kicking, catching, throwing and striking
development by children in Grades K–8: Preliminary findings. Journal of Human
Movement Studies, 34(2), 67–81.
Du Randt, R. (1985). Ball-catching proficiency among 4-, 6-, and 8-year-old girls.
In J. E. Clark & J. H. Humphrey (Eds.), Motor development: Research and reviews
(Vol. 2, pp. 35–44). Princeton, NJ: Princeton Book.
Gallahue, D. L., Ozmun, J. C., & Goodway, J. (2012). Understanding motor development:
Infants, children, adolescents, and adults (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Haubenstricker, J. L., Branta, C. F., & Seefeldt, V. D. (1983). Standards of performance for
throwing and catching. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the North
American Society for Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity, Asilomar, CA.
Haywood, K., & Getchell, N. (2014). Lifespan motor development (6th ed.). Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics.
Kretch, K. S., Franchak, J. M., & Adolph, K. E. (2014). Crawling and walking infants see the
world differently. Child Development, 85(4), 1503–1518.
Lopes, P. V., Rodrigues, P. L., Maia, R. A. J., & Malina, M. R. (2011). Motor coordination as
predictor of physical activity in childhood. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science
in Sports, 21(5), 663–669.
10 Growth in Childhood
Payne, V. G., & Isaacs, L. D. (2016). Human motor development: A lifespan approach
(9th ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Seefeldt, V., Reuschlein, S., & Vogel, P. (1972). Sequencing motor skills within the physical
education curriculum. Paper presented at a meeting of the American Association for
Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, Houston, TX.
Stodden, D., Goodway, J. D., Langendorfer, S. J., Roberton, M. A., Rudisill, M. E., Garcia, C.,
& Garcia, L. E. (2008). A developmental perspective on the role of motor skill
development in physical activity: An emergent concept. Quest, 60(2), 290–306.
Vandorpe, B., Vandendriessche, J., Vaeyens, R., Pion, J., Matthys, S., Lefevre, J.,
… Lenoir, M. (2012). Relationship between sports participation and the level of motor
coordination in childhood: A longitudinal approach. Journal of Science and Medicine in
Sport, 15(3), 220–225.
Wild, M. (1938). The behavior pattern of throwing and some observations concerning its
course of development in children. Research Quarterly, 9(3), 20–24.
Further Reading
Gabbard, C. (2016). Lifelong motor development (6th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott
Williams & Wilkins.
Piek, J. P. (2006). Infant motor development. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Piek, J. P., Baynum, G. B., & Barrett, C. (2006). The relationship between fine and gross
motor ability, self-perception, and self-worth in children and adolescents. Human
Movement Science, 25(1), 65–75.
V. Gregory Payne (PED, Indiana University, 1981) is a former Associate Dean, Chair,
and Professor in the Department of Kinesiology at San Jose State University, USA,
specializing in human motor development. A Fellow of the National Academy of
Kinesiology, he is lead author of Human Motor Development: A Lifespan Approach
(with L. D. Isaacs, 2016, Routledge) and the first Distinguished Professor at Shenyang
Sport University, China. He is a recipient of the Southwest District American Alliance
for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance Scholar Award, and the Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport Research Writing Award. Greg is a former President
of the National Association for Sport and Physical Education and former Chair of the
National Motor Development Academy.
Seung Ho Chang (PhD, The Ohio State University, 2014) is an Assistant Professor in
the Department of Kinesiology at San Jose State University, USA. He earned his PhD in
kinesiology with a specialization in motor development and physical education teacher
education. His primary research area is the motor competence and physical activity of
disadvantaged preschoolers with developmental delays.