Newell Karl M
Department of Kinesiology, College of Health and Human Development, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park 16802, USA.
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2003 Dec;74(4):383-8. doi: 10.1080/02701367.2003.10609108.
A brief commentary is provided on the theoretical assumptions, scholarly impact and continuing influence of the schema theory of motor learning (Schmidt, 1975). The traditional contrasts of schema theory to the coordinative structure or dynamical systems framework are reemphasized, and limitations of the variability of practice experiments noted. A central problem for theories of motor learning is change over time, the basis on which learning is typically defined. Most theories including schema have, however, undervalued the importance of the time-dependent nature of change in deference to the almost exclusive study of the amount of some averaged change in behavioral outcome. The persistent and transitory change(s) in movement and outcome that are observed in action are reflections of multiple time scales of change in a dynamical system.
