Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

TGfU-SE, Nonlinear pedagogy, and Functional games show favorable motor skill development in school-based physical educationSpecific teaching models improve motor skills in school children

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that TGfU-SE, Nonlinear pedagogy, and Functional games show favorable motor skill outcomes in school-based settings.

This systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness of various physical education teaching models, including TGfU-SE, Nonlinear pedagogy, Functional games, and Cooperative models, on motor skill development in school-aged children and adolescents. The analysis focuses on school-based physical motor execution and sport-specific performance outcomes.

In the primary network, TGfU-SE, Nonlinear pedagogy, and Functional games showed the most favorable relative effect estimates for motor skill development. In a broader sensitivity network, the Cooperative model showed the highest P-score and estimated effect only when a single specific study on visual-motor integration was included. These results suggest varying degrees of effectiveness depending on the specific network and inclusion criteria.

Several limitations impact the certainty of these findings, including substantial heterogeneity, network inconsistency, and sparse comparisons. The risk of bias and the sensitivity of treatment ordering to outcome definitions and participant age further complicate the results. Consequently, the P-score ordering should be interpreted as conditional effect estimates rather than proof of universal superiority.

For clinical and educational practice, teachers should select and implement structured teaching models based on student age, learning objectives, sport content, and the specific teaching context. The lack of a definitive hierarchy means no single model is currently proven to be universally superior.

Helping children develop physical skills is about more than just playing outside. It involves specific teaching methods that help students master movement. This study looked at how different physical education models affect the motor skills of school-aged children and adolescents.

Researchers found that three specific models—Hybrid Teaching Games for Understanding, Nonlinear pedagogy, and Functional games—showed the most favorable results for motor skill development. These methods help students improve their physical execution and sport-specific performance. Another model, Cooperative, showed high scores only when a specific study on visual-motor integration was included.

While these findings are promising, the evidence is not yet definitive. The researchers noted that the results were inconsistent across different studies and that some data was sparse. Because of these inconsistencies, no single teaching model can be declared as universally superior. Teachers are encouraged to choose a model based on the specific age of the students and the goals of the lesson.

What this means for you:
Specific teaching models like Functional games and Nonlinear pedagogy help children develop better motor skills.

Common questions

Which teaching models are best for children's motor skills?

The study found that Hybrid Teaching Games for Understanding, Nonlinear pedagogy, and Functional games showed the most favorable results for motor skill development. These models help students improve their physical execution and sport-specific performance in a school setting.

Is one teaching method better than all others?

The research does not show that one single method is definitely better than all others. Because of inconsistent data and sparse comparisons, the results are seen as a set of estimates rather than proof that one specific model is universally superior for every student.

How should teachers choose a physical education model?

Teachers should choose a teaching model based on the specific age of the students, the learning goals, the sport content, and the overall teaching context. Since results vary, the best approach depends on the specific needs of the classroom.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedOct 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
Motor skill development is a central objective of school physical education, yet the comparative effectiveness of teaching models remains unclear. This systematic review and network meta-analysis compared physical education teaching models for motor skill development in school-aged children and adolescents. Records were identified from Scopus (n = 300), Web of Science (n = 41), OpenAlex (n = 63), and PubMed (n = 33). After removal of 42 duplicates, 395 records were screened, 65 full texts were assessed, and 21 studies were retained in the systematic review. Thirteen studies contributed to the under-18 primary network restricted to school-based physical motor execution or sport-specific performance outcomes; 19 contributed to a broader sensitivity network. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261417609). Random-effects models estimated standardized mean differences (SMD) relative to Control and P-score rankings. The primary network contained nine treatment nodes. Hybrid Teaching Games for Understanding–Sport Education (TGfU-SE), Nonlinear pedagogy, and Functional games showed the most favorable relative effect estimates in the primary network. However, the treatment ordering was sensitive to outcome definition, participant age, and individual studies, while substantial heterogeneity, network inconsistency, sparse comparisons, and risk of bias remained. In the broad sensitivity network, Cooperative had the highest P-score and estimated effect only while the single Akil visual-motor integration study was included; the node disappeared when that study was removed. Restricting the primary network to participants younger than 18 years improved population and outcome comparability and reduced heterogeneity, but significant inconsistency, sparse comparisons, and risk of bias preclude a definitive hierarchy. The P-score ordering should therefore be interpreted as a set of conditional effect estimates rather than proof that one teaching model is universally superior. In practice, physical education teachers should select and implement structured teaching models according to student age, learning objectives, sport content, and teaching context. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261417609, identifier PROSPERO (CRD420261417609).
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.