Which criteria to define motor competence? How much cultural and background factors influence the definition?

Motor competence (MC) is an umbrella term used to define the motor skill competency. Some authors consider the fundamental movement and motor coordination skills excluding motor fitness results while others highlight the quality of movement and the motor control outcomes. Within fundamental movement skills we can consider throwing, catching, running while motor control is about movement sequences. The scenario is difficult to investigate comparatively since the common habits or teacher-to-teacher suggestion affected the vision. In Italy, the assessment of MC is collected using Eurofit tests that are a measure of performance, in Germany the Mobak battery proposes throwing, slalom and rolling abilities. Another famous battery is the KTK that implies lateral jumps and balance. In northern Europe, an interesting battery include throwing a tennis ball and climbing wall bars (coordination, Fjørtoft et al., Phys Ther; 2011). Thus, what MC means in a practical way? Which form of motor outcome is more representative of MC concept? The efficiency in object control, in locomotor stability or in motor coordination? Indeed, during the childhood the stature increase of 50 cm and the mass of 12-15 Kg following tumultuous phases. Considering the motor skill, is well known that it depends on the maturation of the Central Nervous System, but, within this view, can we still consider the use of nomograms divided between male and female as robust approach? A strong definition of MC becomes important to clarify the contents and, as a consequence, common further assessment. Researchers, PE teacher and trainers should reach a clear and close definition of MC to implement a shared battery test. In point of this, the definition should define a goal-directed human movement rather than theoretical points (i.e. quality of movement) because the real scope of motor competence regards the long life and the everyday tasks.