
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Sports Act. Living
Sec. Physical Education and Pedagogy
Volume 7 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fspor.2025.1441402
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Introduction: Assessment of motor competence is critical for planning and monitoring children's development. However, many assessment tools require time, training, and resources not available to most teachers. We aimed to evaluate the external aspect of construct validity of a rapid product-oriented fundamental movement skill assessment tool designed specifically for primary education settings.Methods: Fundamental movement skills of 73 children aged 4-8 were assessed using the KIDDO Challenge assessment tool and the Test of Gross Motor Development-2 (TGMD-2). We conducted correlational analyses between scores derived from the assessment tools. Results: We found significant associations (ranging from weak to moderate in nature; r range = -0.17-0.68) between scores of individual skills on the KIDDO Challenge and the TGMD-2. Age-and gender-standardised overall proficiency ratings between assessment tools exhibited a significant moderate, positive correlation (r=0.52, p<.01).Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the KIDDO Challenge and TGMD-2 were significantly associated in their assessment of children's overall fundamental movement skill proficiency. These findings may assist teachers or school administration in selecting rapid fundamental movement skill assessment tools with evidence of validity for motor competence screening in primary education settings.
Keywords: motor competence, Physical Education, Physical competence, Motor development, elementary school
Received: 31 May 2024; Accepted: 21 Mar 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Ward, Simpson, Rosenberg, Jackson, Gou, Derbyshire and Thornton. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Aaron Simpson, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.