نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 گروه علوم ورزشی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
2 گروه رفتار حرکتی، پژوهشگاه تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، تهران، ایران.
3 گروه علوم ورزشی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات ، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
Extended Abstract
Background and Purpose
Early childhood represents a sensitive and formative stage for motor development. Before the age of seven, children experience rapid growth in coordination, balance, and fundamental motor skills (FMS), which serve as the foundation for later sport-specific abilities and lifelong physical activity. However, in today’s digital era, children’s opportunities for spontaneous play and outdoor activity have declined, leading to increased sedentary behavior, obesity, delayed motor skill acquisition, and even behavioral challenges. Within this context, structured physical activity programs are essential to counteract these negative trends.
Gymnastics is widely recognized as a “mother sport” because it encompasses a broad spectrum of movement patterns, combining locomotion, stability, and manipulation skills. It enhances strength, flexibility, endurance, agility, and coordination, while simultaneously fostering psychosocial attributes such as confidence, discipline, and teamwork. Developmental gymnastics, in particular, emphasizes age-appropriate, varied, and progressive exercises designed to stimulate neuromuscular growth and holistic development. Artistic gymnastics, by contrast, traditionally focuses on technical mastery of apparatus-based skills, posture, and flexibility, often with less variability and more repetition.
The purpose of this study was to design a developmental gymnastics program and compare its effectiveness with artistic gymnastics in improving motor coordination and fundamental motor skills in boys aged 5–7 years. The central hypothesis was that developmental gymnastics, due to its diversity and child-centered design, would yield superior outcomes in coordination and object control skills compared with artistic gymnastics.
Methods
This quasi-experimental study recruited 30 boys aged 5–7 years from District 4 of Karaj, all without prior formal training. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups: developmental gymnastics (n = 15) and artistic gymnastics (n = 15). Both groups trained for eight weeks, three sessions per week, each lasting 60 minutes, in a dedicated gymnastics facility. Certified federation coaches supervised the sessions, and lesson plans were implemented consistently without deviation.
Motor coordination was assessed using the (KTK), which evaluates gross motor coordination through four subtests: walking backward on balance beams, hopping over obstacles, jumping sideways, and shifting platforms. Fundamental motor skills were measured using the Test of Gross Motor Development–Third Edition (TGMD-3), covering locomotion (running, hopping, galloping, sliding, jumping) and object control (throwing, catching, striking, dribbling, kicking).
The developmental gymnastics program emphasized diverse tasks across locomotion, stability, and manipulation domains. Exercises included balance drills, ball handling, animal walks, plyometric activities, and creative movement patterns using varied equipment such as balls, hoops, mats, and boxes. In contrast, the artistic gymnastics program followed national guidelines, focusing on posture, flexibility, and basic artistic skills with less variability and more repetition.
Results
Both training protocols significantly improved motor coordination and fundamental motor skills (P < 0.05). However, the developmental gymnastics group demonstrated superior performance in motor coordination and object control skills compared with the artistic gymnastics group.
KTK results: Developmental group mean = 93.37 vs. Artistic group mean = 72.83 (F(1,21) = 223.143, P < 0.001, η² = 0.892).
TGMD-3 manipulation (ball skills): Developmental mean = 22.43 vs. Artistic mean = 20.64 (F(1,21) = 8.042, P = 0.009, η² = 0.229).
TGMD-3 locomotion: No significant difference (Developmental mean = 24.22 vs. Artistic mean = 25.04, P = 0.131).
Total TGMD-3 score: Developmental mean = 47.47 vs. Artistic mean = 44.86 (P < 0.016).
These findings indicate that while both approaches enhance motor outcomes, developmental gymnastics yields greater improvements in coordination and manipulation skills, with comparable locomotion outcomes.
Discussion
The results of this study highlight the unique advantages of developmental gymnastics in early childhood. While artistic gymnastics improved motor skills, its emphasis on technical precision and repetitive routines limited its impact on coordination and object control. Developmental gymnastics, by contrast, provided children with varied, playful, and progressive tasks that stimulated multiple neuromuscular pathways. This diversity likely explains the significant improvements observed in coordination and ball skills.
Coordination is a critical determinant of motor competence. Children with higher coordination are more likely to participate successfully in sports, avoid injuries, and experience positive psychosocial outcomes. The large effect size observed in KTK scores underscores the potential of developmental gymnastics to serve as a cornerstone of early childhood physical education. Object control skills, such as throwing, catching, and dribbling, are equally important because they transfer directly to popular team sports like football, basketball, and volleyball. By strengthening these skills, developmental gymnastics prepares children for broader participation in physical activities.
Another important aspect is motivation and engagement. The developmental program incorporated frequent positive reinforcement, playful activities, and opportunities for social interaction. These elements fostered enjoyment, confidence, and teamwork, which are essential for sustained participation. Artistic gymnastics, while valuable for discipline and technical mastery, may be less engaging for young children due to its repetitive nature and performance-oriented focus.
The findings align with previous studies (Culjak et al., 2014; Buck et al., 1399; Karachel et al., 2017), which reported that structured gymnastics programs enhance FMS and coordination. They also support ecological perspectives emphasizing enriched environments and varied movement experiences during sensitive developmental periods. Importantly, the study demonstrates that developmental gymnastics can complement daily play and school-based physical education, offering a structured yet enjoyable pathway to motor competence.
From a practical standpoint, these results suggest that coaches, educators, and policymakers should prioritize developmental gymnastics in early childhood curricula. By integrating diverse, age-appropriate exercises, schools and clubs can maximize children’s motor development, reduce risks of obesity and inactivity, and lay the foundation for lifelong physical literacy.
Conclusion
In conclusion, both developmental and artistic gymnastics improved motor coordination and fundamental motor skills in boys aged 5–7 years. However, developmental gymnastics produced significantly greater gains in coordination and object control skills, while locomotion outcomes were similar across groups. The program’s emphasis on task diversity, progressive challenges, and child-centered design contributed to superior outcomes. Beyond physical benefits, developmental gymnastics also enhanced motivation, confidence, teamwork, and social interaction, underscoring its holistic value.
Therefore, practitioners seeking greater impact should adopt developmental gymnastics programs rather than relying solely on artistic gymnastics for children in this age range. Such programs can support comprehensive motor development, prepare children for future sports participation, and promote healthy lifestyles.
Article Message
Developmental gymnastics is a more effective approach than artistic gymnastics for improving coordination and object control skills in young children. Its implementation in early childhood education can foster holistic growth and lifelong physical activity.
Ethical Considerations
All procedures were conducted with informed consent from parents and approval from relevant educational authorities. Ethical standards followed the Declaration of Helsinki.
Authors’ Contributions
Conceptualization: Mohammad Meftahi, Ali Kashi, Saleh Rafiee
Data Collection: Mohammad Meftahi
Data Analysis: Mohammad Meftahi
Manuscript Writing: Ali Kashi and Mohammad Meftahi
Review and Editing: Ali Kashi
Project Management: Ali Kashi
Literature Review: Mohammad Meftahi and Saleh Rafiee
Other Contributions: Gymnastics coaches for program delivery
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the participating children, parents, coaches, and the Education Department of District 4, Karaj, for their support in conducting this study
کلیدواژهها English
11. Sheerin K, Williams S, Hume P, Whatman C, Gleave J. Effects of gymnastics training on physical function in children. In: ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive; 2012.
12. Smits-Engelsman BC, Hill EL. The relationship between motor coordination and intelligence across the IQ range. Pediatrics. 2012;130(4):e950–e956. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-3712
13. Dowley AC, Whitehouse WP, Mason SM, Cope Y, Grant J, Gibbin KP. Auditory neuropathy: unexpectedly common in a screened newborn population. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology. 2009;51(8):642–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03298.x
14. Moslehi M. A review of the side effects of lifestyle changes and sedentary lifestyle due to Covid-19 on children's health. Razi Journal of Medical Sciences. 2020;27(8):96–104. [In Persian].
15. Shahraki H. Investigating the effect of teaching gymnastic floor movements on the cognitive development of preschool children [Master’s thesis]. Isfahan: Islamic Azad University, Khorasgan Branch; 2000. [In Persian].
16. Corbin CB, Pangrazi RP, Franks BD. Definitions: Health, fitness, and physical activity. President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports Research Digest; 2000.
17. Culjak Z, Miletic D, Kalinski SD, Kezic A, Zuvela F. Fundamental movement skills development under the influence of a gymnastics program and everyday physical activity in seven-year-old children. Iranian Journal of Pediatrics. 2014;24(2):124–130.
18. Garcia C, Barela JA, Viana AR, Barela AMF. Influence of gymnastics training on the development of postural control. Neuroscience Letters. 2011;492(1):29–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2011.01.047
19. Bak S, Omidzadeh N. The effect of a developmental gymnastics program on the development of gymnastics skills among boys in the first grade of elementary school. Journal of Movement Behavior Sciences. 2019;3.
20. Kohn-Saal E, Imani-Rad R, Ebrahimi-Atri A, Shah-Tahmasbi B, Mohammad-Rahimi N. The role of gymnastics exercises on the development of motor skills and health-related physical fitness in children aged 4 to 12: A review study. In: The 14th International Conference on Sport Sciences. Tehran, Iran; 2024. [In Persian].
21. Emery CA, Cassidy JD, Klassen TP, Rosychuk RJ, Rowe BH. Effectiveness of a home-based balance-training program in reducing sports-related injuries among healthy adolescents: a cluster randomized controlled trial. CMAJ. 2005;172(6):749–754. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.1040805
22. Salami S, Shams A, Shamsipour Dehkordi P. Psychometric properties (validity and reliability) of the Body Coordination Test for Children (KTK) among 5–14 years children in Tehran City: Pilot study. Motor Behavior Journal. 2019;11(38):71–96. https://doi.org/10.22089/mbj.2018.5960.1687. [In Persian].
23. Jaakkola T, Watt A, Kalaja S. Differences in the motor coordination abilities among adolescent gymnasts, swimmers, and ice hockey players. Hum Mov. 2017;18(1):44–49. https://doi.org/10.1515/humo-2017-0006
24. Madić D, Cvetković M, Popović B, Marinković D, Radanović D, Trajković N. Effects of developmental gymnastics on motor fitness in preschool girls. Facta Universitatis, Series: Physical Education and Sport. 2018;16(1):11–18.
25. Šalaj S, Milčić L, Šimunović I. Differences in motor skills of selected and nonselected group of children in artistic gymnastics in the context of their motor development. Kinesiology. 2019;51(1):133–140. https://doi.org/10.26582/k.51.1.16
26. Madić D, Cvetković M, Popović B, Marinković D, Radanović D, Trajković N. Effects of developmental gymnastics on motor fitness in preschool girls. Facta Universitatis, Series: Physical Education and Sport. 2018;16(1):11–18.
27. Salami S, Rahimian Mashhadi M, Shamsipour Dehkordi P. Validity and Reliability of the Test of the Development Motor Skills Development of Ulrich in 7-9 years of Girls and Boy Children in Tehran. Motor Behavior. 2019;11(36):127–148. https://doi.org/10.22089/mbj.2018.5080.1592
28. Rudd JR, Barnett LM, Farrow D, Berry J, Borkoles E, Polman R. The impact of gymnastics on children’s physical self-concept and movement skill development in primary schools. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science. 2017;21(2):92–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2016.1273225
29. Rudd JR, Barnett LM, Farrow D, Berry J, Borkoles E, Polman R. Effectiveness of a 16-week gymnastics curriculum at developing movement competence in children. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 2017;20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2016.06.013
30. Coelho J. Gymnastics and movement instruction: Fighting the decline in motor fitness. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 2010;81(1):14–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2010.10598409
31. Saeedi M, Bambaeichi E, Sadeghi E. The effects of basic gymnastic trainings on postural stability in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences. 2016;12(1):19–24. https://doi.org/10.22122/jrrs.v12i1.2575 [In Persian].
32. Lorås H. The effects of physical education on motor competence in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports. 2020;8(6):88. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports8060088
33. Karachle N, Dania A, Venetsanou F. Effects of a recreational gymnastics program on the motor proficiency of young children. Science of Gymnastics Journal. 2017;9(1):17–25. https://doi.org/10.52165/sgj.9.1.17-25
34. Awanis A, Larasati N, Ariyanti L. Effectiveness of rhythmic gymnastics for the development of gross motor in preschool age children. FISIO MU: Physiotherapy Evidences. 2025;6(2):188–92. https://doi.org/10.23917/fisiomu.v6i2.6060
35. Oka S, Tanaka S, Hamachi N, Nonaka K, Harada N, Kondo A. Comparison of motor performance in typically developing children engaged in gymnastics and classical ballet. Journal of Physical Therapy Science. 2025;37(8):403–407. https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.37.403
36. Diamond A. Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology. 2013;64:135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750
37. Adolph KE, Hoch JE. Motor development: embodied, embedded, enculturated, and enabling. Annual Review of Psychology. 2019;70:141–164. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102836
38. Best JR. Effects of physical activity on children’s executive function: contributions of experimental research on aerobic exercise. Developmental Review. 2010;30(4):331–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2010.08.001
