Aristotle University of Thessaloniki EUCAPA 2026 Prague
← Back to talk page
Use ← → to navigate · F full screen · Esc overview

EUCAPA 2026 · Prague

Motor competence in children aged 6–12 years

Cross-sectional associations with age, sex, and skill component

Andreas Skiadopoulos & Christina Evaggelinou

Adapted Physical Education Lab
School of Physical Education and Sport Science at Serres
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

Background & rationale

Why motor competence matters

Developmental importance

Motor competence is central to SDG Indicator 4.2.1, a primary measure of children’s developmental readiness, with lifelong links to physical activity, psychosocial well-being and academic performance.

  • Shows whether children are developmentally on track in health
  • Drives physical activity and supports health across the lifespan
SDG Target 4.2: equal access to quality pre-primary education

Source: Martins et al. (2024). J Motor Learn Dev, 12(3), 437–454.

Background & rationale

In Greek preschools, difficulties appear from day one

~25%of Greek preschool children are at risk or have movement difficulties
2.2 hof PE per week in Greek preschools, taught by early-childhood educators

MABC-2 classification by age

MABC-2 classification at 4 and 5 years: no difficulties 72.2% and 79.1%, at risk 12.5% and 11.8%, significant difficulties 15.3% and 9.2%

Kechagia et al. (2024), Alberta J Educ Res, 70(2); Karakesis (2024), WHO. Percentages by MABC-2 zones.

The gap

What happens after preschool?

Preschool

~25%at risk or with difficulties
2.2 hPE / week · early-childhood educators

Primary school

?at risk or with difficulties
2.7 hPE / week · specialist PE teachers
No study has tracked motor competence across the Greek primary-school years, or asked how much of it depends on which classroom a child is in.

Kechagia et al. (2024); Karakesis (2024), WHO.

Background & rationale

Motor competence is not one thing

Multi-domain structure

Distinct domains recruit partially different neural systems. Composite scores can mask intra-individual variability and misguide interventions.

Greek preschoolers

Low scores appear in both boys and girls.

Preschool MABC-2 scores by sex: dexterity 16.6 boys and 17.8 girls, ball skills 18.4 and 16.5, balance 25.1 and 24.6
Intra-individual variability in motor competence across five skill domains

Scores: Kechagia et al. (2024), Alberta J Educ Res, 70(2), 328–352.

Background & rationale

Why context matters: evidence from the literature

Contextual gap

No Greek study has modelled class-level contributions to domain-specific motor profiles. PE quality may vary substantially across classrooms, a potential equity concern.

  • Practice scheduling shapes motor learning outcomes (Bortoli et al., 1992)
  • Novel PE approaches improve coordination and cognition (Dalziell et al., 2019)
  • Cognitive challenge must match each child's motor level (Pesce et al., 2013)
  • PA type differentially drives cognitive and academic gains (Vasilopoulos et al., 2023a)
  • Creative and varied PA contexts do not uniformly enhance outcomes (Vasilopoulos et al., 2023b)

Study objective

Aim and hypotheses

Examine how gender, age and class context influence motor competence across three domains in Greek primary-school children aged 6–12, using a multilevel modelling framework.

H1

Domain × Gender

Motor competence differs across domains, and these differences vary by gender.
H2

Age effects

Age is associated with motor competence, but its effect is domain-specific.
H3

Class context

Classroom context contributes to both overall motor level and domain-specific profiles.

Methods

Sample, assessment and analysis

312children aged 6–12
50%girls (n = 156)
31classes
14primary schools

Assessment: MABC-2

Three domains evaluated:

  • Manual dexterity
  • Aiming & catching
  • Balance

Children with diagnosed developmental or neurological disorders were excluded.

Analysis: multilevel linear mixed-effects model (REML)

Two-level structure: students (level 1) nested in classes (level 2)

Separates child-level from classroom-level variance.

Urban and semi-urban schools, Macedonia, Greece · stratified by age and gender

Results · Prevalence

Motor challenges persist throughout primary school

Share of children competent in 3, 2, 1 or 0 MABC-2 components, by grade

Share of children competent in all 3, 2, 1 or none of the MABC-2 components by grade, 1 to 6
13%at risk (≤16th percentile)
9%severe difficulties (≤5th percentile)
≈ 1 in 5need targeted support
Even by Grade 6, only about half of children are competent in all three components.

Components: manual dexterity, aiming & catching, balance (MABC-2)

Results · Domain profiles

Balance > Aiming–Catching > Manual Dexterity

Mean MABC-2 standard score ± SD · * significant pairwise difference

Mean MABC-2 standard scores: balance 11.3, aiming-catching 10.7, manual dexterity 7.5, with significant pairwise differences

1Balance

2Aiming–Catching

3Manual Dexterity

Weakest at every grade

✓ H1 (domains): supported. All domain differences are statistically significant.

Results · Gender

Boys outperform girls only in aiming–catching

Mean MABC-2 standard score ± SD by gender

Mean MABC-2 standard scores by gender and domain

Gender × Domain interaction

F(2, 620) = 9.47, p < .001, η²p = .03

Boys > girls only in aiming–catching

Different profiles

Girls: Balance > Aiming–Catching > Manual Dexterity
Boys: Balance ≈ Aiming–Catching > Manual Dexterity

Same domains, different profiles. This matters for how we plan instruction.

Results · Class-level variability

The classroom shapes motor competence

Variance partition

Variance partition: student level 69%, class level 23%, residual 8%
23%variance due to class
17 of 31classes differ from the mean
R²c = .92variance explained

Class random intercepts (± 1.96 SE), all 31 classes ordered low → high

Class random intercepts with 95% intervals for all 31 classes, ordered from lowest to highest

Two-level LMM (children in classes), REML · R²c: fixed + random effects

Discussion

Four findings

1Manual dexterity is a priority domain

Consistently the weakest domain across all ages. Relevant to SDG 4.2.1: fine-motor deficits may constrain writing, tool use and academic skills.

2Gender differences are domain-specific

Boys’ aiming–catching advantage may reflect differential exposure to ball sports (sociocultural channelling). The overall gender effect is negligible, arguing against gender-based ability grouping.

3Class context matters

23% class-level variance, consistent with the bioecological model. PE quality, teacher expertise and resources are modifiable targets; class-level covariates are needed to identify mechanisms.

4One in five need targeted support

13% of children are at risk and 9% show significant movement difficulties; only about half reach competence in all three domains by Grade 6.

Take-home

Key conclusions

  • Motor competence is domain-specific: Balance > Aiming–Catching > Manual Dexterity
  • Gender differences are confined to aiming–catching (boys > girls)
  • Class context accounts for 23% of total variance
  • 17 of 31 classes deviate significantly from the grand mean

So what? Implications

Curriculum target

Prioritise manual dexterity in Greek primary-school PE curricula.

School-based equity

Address between-class differences in PE quality; class context shapes motor outcomes.

Assessment practice

Analyse at the domain level; composite scores mask intra-individual profiles.

Future research

Longitudinal designs with class-level covariates (teacher, PE curriculum, resources).

EUCAPA 2026 · Prague

Thank you

Andreas Skiadopoulos & Christina Evaggelinou

Adapted Physical Education Lab
School of Physical Education and Sports Science at Serres
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece