Developing motor competency in youths: Perceptions and practices of strength and conditioning coaches

Figures & data

Table 1. An overview of the 10 most, and 10 least important motor competencies to develop based on percentage of response frequency

Movement	Not Important (% scoring a 1 or 2)	Important (% scoring a 4 or 5)
Most important
Acceleration	0	99
Deceleration	0	99
Hip hinge (bilateral)	0	99
Sprinting	1	97
Turning	1	97
Landing (bilateral)	0	96
Landing (unilateral)	0	96
Cutting	0	94
Hip hinge (unilateral)	1	94
Jumping (Vertical)	0	94
Least important
Hurdling	36	35
Cycling	31	32
Jogging	33	30
Cartwheel	32	28
Handstand	34	27
Galloping	45	25
Vaulting	51	17
Rowing machine	53	15
Skating	55	8
Skiing	62	3

* Percentages do not add up to 100% due to rounding and excluding the percentage of response frequencies that did not fit the groupings for perceptions (i.e., excludes percentage of responses scoring a 3, “somewhat important”).

Figure 1. Percentage of response frequency relating to a) how frequently practitioners deliver S&C sessions to their athletes or individuals; and b) their average duration of S&C delivery

Table 2. An overview of the 10 most, and 10 least frequently developed motor competencies based on percentage of response frequency

Movement	Not frequently developed (% scoring a 1 or 2)	Frequently developed (% scoring a 4 or 5)
Frequently developed
Hip hinge (bilateral)	0	96
Lunge (horizontal)	1	94
Squat (bilateral)	0	93
Upper body vertical pulling (unilateral/bilateral)	3	92
Jumping (Vertical)	1	90
Jumping (horizontal)	3	90
Upper body horizontal pushing (Unilateral/bilateral)	3	90
Hip hinge (unilateral)	1	89
Hip mobility	0	89
Upper body horizontal pulling (unilateral/bilateral)	3	89
Not frequently developed
Climbing	83	8
Handstand	68	8
Vaulting	85	8
Rowing machine	70	8
Swimming	77	7
2 handed striking	85	7
1 handed striking	82	7
Cartwheel	70	7
Skating	92	7
Skiing	99	1

* Percentages do not add up to 100% due to rounding and excluding the percentage of response frequencies that did not fit the groupings for practices (i.e., excludes percentage of responses scoring a 3, “sometimes”).

Table 3. Greatest mean score rank changes between perceived importance and coaching practices (i.e., frequency of developing motor competencies)

	Perceived Importance of developing each motor competency				Frequency of developing each motor competency
Movement	Mean	SD	Rank		Mean	SD	Rank	Rank difference
Greatest rank increase
Upper body horizontal pushing (Unilateral/bilateral)	4.30	0.74	36		4.30	0.72	6	↑ 30
Upper body vertical pushing (unilateral/bilateral)	4.32	0.71	32		4.27	0.81	9	↑ 23
Upper body horizontal pulling (unilateral/bilateral)	4.34	0.75	29		4.27	0.74	8	↑ 21
Knee hinge (unilateral/bilateral)	4.20	0.86	47		3.92	0.84	26	↑ 21
Anti-lateral flexion	3.80	0.82	62		3.55	0.94	42	↑ 20
Olympic lifting derivatives	3.44	0.94	74		3.35	1.06	54	↑ 20
Upper body vertical pulling (unilateral/bilateral)	4.41	0.69	22		4.31	0.71	4	↑ 18
Lateral flexion	3.44	0.92	73		3.13	1.07	58	↑ 15
Jumping (lateral)	4.21	0.77	45		3.85	0.77	31	↑ 14
Jumping (repeated)	4.24	0.75	40		3.90	0.76	27	↑ 13
Greatest rank decrease
Reacceleration	4.48	0.69	20		3.48	0.95	50	↓ 30
Turning	4.65	0.59	7		3.72	0.97	35	↓ 28
Cutting	4.61	0.60	10		3.70	0.93	36	↓ 26
Change of Direction combinations	4.49	0.67	17		3.62	0.95	39	↓ 22
Deceleration	4.89	0.36	1		4.08	0.91	21	↓ 20
Balance (moving)	4.35	0.93	28		3.55	1.01	44	↓ 16
Landing (unilateral)	4.75	0.53	5		4.10	0.66	19	↓ 14
Kicking	4.00	1.07	56		2.42	1.33	70	↓ 14
Dribbling (hands)	3.59	1.17	68		1.96	1.07	82	↓ 14
Swimming	3.54	1.26	70		1.79	1.00	84	↓ 14