Physical literacy has become central to kinesiology, yet its frameworks rarely distinguish the latent resources that make movement possible from the movement that can be observed, and assessment therefore tends to equate physical literacy with what fitness and skill tests capture. This article proposes a structural–developmental theory in which physical literacy emerges from two coupled subsystems. Motor literacy, the latent side, is organized from capacity to capability to ability across six domains. Movement literacy, the observable side, develops from action to pattern to skill across six lifespan stages. Meta-Motor Regulation, a predictive and adaptive process operating over three timescales, links the two. Illustrative cases from university teaching, coaching and ageing show how the subsystems can develop out of alignment. The theory yields five testable predictions and a dual-profile approach to assessment, teaching and kinesiology education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Farshid Tahmasbi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: