Download the article in pdf format

Publication date: 1.03.2021
DOI: 10.51871/2588-0500_2021_05_01_17

UDC 796.012.1


D.A. Venskovich

Belarusian State University of Physical Education, Minsk, Republic of Belarus

Key words: motor culture, culture of movement, culture of motor actions, culture of motor activity, personality.

Annotation. The article presents a historical analysis of the development of «motor culture» from the first mentions up to the present time. The opinions of famous scientists such as Ya.A. Komenskij, P.F. Lesgaft, A.K. Gasteva, Marcel Mauss, André Leroy-Gouran, L.S. Vygotskij, V.M. Vydrina and V.I. Stolyarova, E.V. Bondarenko, N.A. Bernshtein, E.S. Medvedeva, Zh.S. Gorbachev, G.A. Kucherenko, V.B. Korenberg, E.V. Fadeeva, I.E. Sirotkina and others were presented. The analysis between such terms as «motor culture», «culture of movement», «culture of motor actions», «culture of motor activity» and «counter-culture» was carried out.

Introduction. Currently, many authors examine the term “motor culture”. However, there is no consensus on this issue. We are going to examine opinions of scientists of different periods and trace the history of the evolution of motor culture.

Movement was always of interest of many scientists in not only the field of pedagogy, but also in mathematics, mechanics, anatomy, physiology and others. However, the breakthrough happened near to the XX century, when there was an ability to use photography to capture movement, which was examined by many disciplines, such as biomechanics, physiology, kinesiology. All above-mentioned disciplines study movement as a physical process. It is surprising that many scientists of different periods were interested in the motor culture. This fact served as the basis of theoretical analysis of the given article.

The purpose of this study is the theoretical analysis of the history of development of motor culture.

Methods and organization. Methods of analysis and synthesis, theoretical study methods were used.

Results and discussion. When discussing movement, Plato noted that they are the “therapeutic part of medicine”, Plutarch referred to it as the “storeroom of life”. Aristotle noted that “human organism becomes not only stronger, but also more symmetrical and beautiful, if the activity of its organs is awaken by movement” [1].

In their pedagogical works, Ya.A. Komenskij (1669) and J.J. Russo (1778) defined motor culture as the mean of cognition of the surrounding world [1].

P.F. Lesgaft (1887) understood movement as the development of the body with intellectual, moral and aesthetic improvement of a personality throughout life.

Such theorists as P.F. Lesgaft (1887), A.K. Gastev (1925) [1] claimed that the physical development should be inextricably connected to the intellectual.

Also in 1925, A.K. Gastev understood motor culture as motor habits and skills of the people, which included body movement throughout life.

French sociologist and anthropologist Marcell Mauss (1936) [1] referred to motor culture as the body technique. He defined the body technique as cultural and specific way of performing physical action. He also claimed that the body technique could change.  At the same time, new motor culture is created, which can also change and develop.

Anthropogenesis studies allowed suggesting that the beginning of motor culture could be marked by the bipedal locomotion.

One of the founders of national system of physical education, E.A. Arkin and V.V. Gorinevskij (1948) referred to motor culture as the mean of not only physical, but also moral and intellectual education [1].

Paleontologist and anthropologist Andre Leroi-Gourhan (1980) [1] suggested that the level of intellectual development of a person could be determined by motor culture.

Thoughts of L.S. Vygotskij (1983) [2] were reduced to the fact that motor culture is closely related to all their structural components. By these components, he meant not just physical improvement, but also the creative attitude to your own spiritual growth.

Tim Ingold (1988) [1] suggested that movement forms with experience.

According to V.M. Vydrin (1988) [3], he referred to motor culture as achievements of a person for developing physical capabilities, while increasing the level of their state of health in addition to the natural background, which is implemented by human’s motor activity.

While conducting further research, it was concluded that physical culture is considered now as body culture, culture of physical health and motor culture (culture of movement) [4].

While considering motor culture as culture of movement, V.I. Stolyarov believed (1991) [4] that it is primarily connected to motor activity. E.V. Bondarenko (2008) also supported this opinion [5].

E.V. Bondarenko (2008) [5] also considered motor culture as culture of movement, while pointing out two main elements: the technique of movement execution and the artistic merit.

E.V. Bondarenko (2008) [5] referred to the technique of movement execution as choreography and school of movement, to the artistic merit he referred as the diversity, harmony, musicality, visual appeal and artistry.

In his opinion, the choreography of the technique of movement execution must include:

– correct posture;

– correct position of arms and legs;

– correct body position in space.

School of movement includes:

– precise movement of the body and its individual parts;

– correct and precise leg movement on the ending stage of motor action;

– complete and precise actions;

– optimal movement amplitude;

– stable body position;

– free execution of motor action;

– absence of unnecessary compensatory movement.

The artistic merit of motor action include such elements as:

– diversity;

– harmony;

– musicality;

– visual appeal;

– artistry.

  1. Yu. Shumakov (1991) [6] includes in culture of movement such elements as:

– expression;

– rhythmicity;

– integrity;

– naturalness.

N.A. Bernshtejn (1991) [7] saw motor culture as specific locomotion, executed by a human in normal life.

E.S. Medvedeva (2000) [8] referred to motor culture as the process of health improvement of a population.

 G.G. Natalov (2000) gave a very interesting definition of “motor action culture”. He saw the given phenomena in conjunction with sports, which are “the system of values of motor action culture and the social institute of its development, expansion and exploration” [9].

Zh.S. Gorbachyova (2000) showed in her works that motor culture could form using means of rhythmical gymnastics [10].

The content of the term “motor culture” was examined by such scientists as T.N. Zhurina (2000), V.L. Krutkin (2001), V.L. Malakhov (2000) and N.T. Trofimova (2001) [11]. According to their opinion, it is “the realization by a person of the meaning of movement, understanding of the nature of executed movement and also having specific movement abilities” in the first place. In the second place, it is considered as “self-improvement and self-enrichment”.

According to Yu.M. Nikolayev (2001), motor action is a motivational link and level of knowledge [12].

G.A. Kucherenko (2005) [14], for example, characterized motor culture as “the integrative creation of personality traits, which is expressed in human’s motivation to realize their own inclinations and possibilities for showing motor and behavioral potential”.

She also points out that E.N. Fokina and A.T. Shchuka (1995) considered motor culture as the level of development of motor qualities [13].

V.B. Korenberg (2008) [14] suggested to define motor culture as “the area of culture related to the implementation of any motor activity evaluated from the point of practicability and aesthetic, and also to learning of an effective implementation of this activity”. He also implied that motor activity and activity of movement are different phenomena. However, his rendering also implied that culture of movement is a component of motor culture.

E.V. Fadeeva (2009) saw motor culture as culture of movement, culture of movement actions and culture of movement activity [15].

Many scientists, such as Yu.P. Kobyakov (2003) [16], O.Yu. Dzamaleeva (2003) [17], E.V. Bondaryenko (2008) [5], Yu.V, Naumenko (2011, 2015) [18, 19] accentuate on the motor and plasticity training in the structure of motor culture.

In turn, the motor and plasticity training includes such elements as:

– various diversity of motor abilities;

– perfect execution of motor actions including the simplicity of execution, precision and completeness of motor action;

– development of physical qualities. Levels of the development: high, medium, low;

– feeling the sense of rhythm of the execution of motor action;

– beauty and plasticity of the executed motor action;

–  incarnation of artistic images through execution of motor action;

– imagination, creativity in executing elements of motor action.

Taking I.E. Sirotkina’s opinion into account (2018) [20], motor culture is one of the areas of social activity, in which culture of movements, motor actions and motor activity are included, which contains a perfection of movements, effectiveness and practicability. Motor culture is understood as the perfection of motor activity, which includes movement and body movement aimed at cognition and inherent value.

Motor activity in pedagogy is defined as the result of your own theoretical perception and personal experience, which is obtained throughout life.

 The science also established a positive effect of motor culture on:

– the respiratory system;

– the cardiovascular system;

– the musculoskeletal system;

– the nervous system (Yu.F. Zmanovkij, 1988) [21].

As it is seen from the theoretical analysis of the definition of the term “motor culture”, currently there is no unambiguous definition and accurate terminology.

In our opinion, motor culture is combined with both spiritual wealth, moral principles and physical improvement, which is internal and external beauty.

Spiritual wealth of human includes the main values, which lie on the basis of their existence. Universal human values serve as the criteria of the degree of spiritual growth. Above all, health is referred to values ensuring human’s life. Thus, the use of motor culture is a mean of preservation, strengthening and improvement of the state of health. Moral principles of the personality are manifested as conscious careful attitude to your own health.

Methods, which serve to strengthening, preservation and increase of the level of health, increase in performance, acquisition of special knowledge, formation of motor skills and abilities, education of physical qualities, contribute to the physical improvement of an individual.

As the historical study shows, in recent years, the incidence of all categories of population and mortality increase, birth rate decreases, we gradually lose the reserve of physical health of a population [18, 19].

Motor activity of people is reducing to zero. It can be seen in studies conducted during learning period in school, university etc. Motor activity of a human is reduced to 50% [5, 15, 18, 20]. It is known that active motor activity is the main factor of the formation of human’s health.

When using the term “motor culture”, the term “culture of motor activity” is also used. There is also one more term, which is “body-motor culture” [4].

Taking into account the opinions of scientists of different periods, it is also important to note that the examined culture is a values-based attitude of an individual to their own motor actions and motor activity in whole.

This is the opinion that most of the scientists suggested about characteristics of motor culture.

As it was discovered, main indicators of “motor culture” are:

- interests;

- ideals;

- meanings;

- patterns of behavior;

- needs.

In scientific methodological literature, there is one more term, which is called “motor counter-culture” and which serves as both the opposite of the term “motor culture” and the disvalue.

Conclusion. To sum up all of the above, we have the need to note that in our opinion, “motor culture” should always include a knowledge-based component about movement, motor actions and motor activity of an individual throughout life, taking age and sex into account, their own concept about significance and necessity of using motor culture for each individual. A wish of a personality to achieve positive effect from an executed action with constant increase in the arsenal of various movements is also necessary. We must not forget about positive emotions obtained by an individual on motor activity classes.

Thus, the pedagogical concept of the formation of motor culture of an individual is implicated through organizing the activity of executed movement, their own realization of meaning of movement through fulfilling an individual’s potential. In our opinion, examination, development and use of motor culture on the modern stage is one of the main directions of modern education.  It should not be said clearly about specific period of the development of motor culture, because the development of motor culture lasts almost a lifetime


  1. Corbin A. History of the body // A. Corbin, J.-J. Courtine, J. Vigarello // M: NLO. – 2012. – Vol.2: From the Great Revolution to the First World War. – Part 3: Bodywork, correction and exercises – 438 p.
  2. Vygotskij L.S. Collected works in 6 volumes. Problems of development of the psyche / L.S. Vygotskij // Pedagogy: M. – 1983. – Vol. 3. – St. Petersburg. – 285 p.
  3. Vydrin V.M. Theory of physical culture (cultural aspect) / Vydrin V.M. // L. – 1988. – 328 p.
  4. Stolyarov V.I. Modern theory of physical education (problems, solutions, innovative concept) / V.I. Stolyarov // Physical Culture and Sports: Minsk. – 1991. – Р. 56-63.
  5. Bondarenko E.V. Formation of the culture of movement of female students by means of aerobics / E.V. Bondarenko // Theory and Practice of Physical Culture. – 2008. – № 7. – P. 33.
  6. Shumakov N.Yu. An innovative concept of modernization of the theory and practice of physical education / N.Yu. Shumakov // Physical Culture and Sports: Minsk. – 1991. – P. 36-39.
  7. Bernstein N.A. About agility and its development / N.A. Bernstein // Physical culture and sport: Minsk. – 1991. – Р. 34-36.
  8. Medvedeva E.S. Formation of a culture of movements among female students of higher educational institutions: dis. abstract ... Cand. Ped. Sciences: 13.00.04 / E.S. Medvedeva // St. Petersburg State Academy of Physical Culture named after P.F. Lesgaft: SPb. – 1998. – 21 p.
  9. Natalov G.G. Formation of optimal motor activity / G.G. Natalov // Education. – 2000. – № 6. – P. 30-37.
  10. Gorbacheva Zh.S. Formation of plastic expressiveness in rhythmic gymnastics: dis. abstract... Cand. Ped. Sciences: 13.00.04 / Zh.S. Gorbacheva // St. Petersburg State Academy of Physical Culture named after P.F. Lesgaft: SPb. – 2000. – 24 p.
  11. Zhurina T.N. Pedagogical conditions for the formation of motor culture in future teachers / T.N. Zhurina / Theory and Practice of Physical Culture. – 2000. – № 3. – P. 10-11
  12. Nikolaev Yu.M. To the problem of development of the theory of physical culture / Yu.M. Nikolaev // Theory and Practice of Physical Culture. – 2001 – № 8. – P. 2-10.
  13. Kucherenko G.A. Motor culture of primary schoolchildren and its influence on personal development in educational activities: dis. abstract... Cand. Ped. Sciences: 13.00.01 / G.A. Kucherenko // Voronezh State Pedagogical University: Voronezh. – 2005. – 23 p.
  14. Korenberg V.B. On some basic concepts in our field / V.B. Korenberg // Theory and Practice of Physical Culture. – 2007. – № 2. – P. 11-12.
  15. Fadeeva, E. V. Motor culture of the future physical culture teacher / E.V. Fadeeva // Theory and Practice of Physical Culture. – 2009. – № 10. – Р. 39-40.
  16. Kobyakov Yu.P. The concept of human motor activity norms / Yu.P. Kobyakov // Theory and Practice of Physical Culture. – 2003. – № 11. – Р. 20-23.
  17. Dzhamaleeva O.Yu. Pedagogical technologies of mental and educational modeling of motional actions of students in physical culture lessons / O.Yu. Dzhamaleeva // М. – 2003. – Р. 34-36.
  18. Naumenko Yu.V. Program for the formation of a culture of a healthy and safe lifestyle / Yu.V. Naumenko, V.N Annenkov // HS. Health and Safety. – 2011. – № 10. – Р. 39-45.
  19. Naumenko Yu.V. Health, healthy lifestyle and individual physical culture / Yu.V. Naumenko // Valeology. – 2015. – № 2. – P. 92-100.
  20. Sirotkina I.E. Motor culture as an object of science / I.E. Sirotkina // Ethnographic Review. – 2018. – Р. 23-27.
  21. Zmanovskij Yu. F. Motor activity and cold training are the leading factors in strengthening the health of the child / Yu.F. Zmanovskij // Preschool education. – 1988. – № 8. – P. 45-51.

Spisok literatury

  1. Corbin A. Istoriya tela // A. Corbin, J.-J. Courtine, J. Vigarello // M: NLO. – 2012. – T.2: Ot Velikoj revolyutsii do Pervoj mirovoj voijny. – Chyast’ 3: Rabota nad telom, korrektsiya i uprazhneniya – 438 s.
  2. Vygotskij L.S. Sobranie sochinenij v 6 t. Problemy razvitiya psikhiki. / L.S. Vygotskij // Pedagogika: M. – 1983. – T. 3. – 285 s.
  3. Vydrin V.M. Teoriya fizicheskoj kul'tury (kul'turovedcheskij aspekt)/ Vydrin V.M. // L. – 1988. – 328 s.
  4. Stolyarov V.I. Sovremennaya teoriya fizicheskogo vospitaniya (problemy, puti resheniya, innovatsionnaya konceptsiya) / V.I. Stolyarov // Fizkul'tura i sport: Minsk. – 1991. – S. 56-63.
  5. Bondarenko E.V. Formirovanie kul'tury dvizheniya studentok sredstvami aerobiki / E.V. Bondarenko // Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoj kul'tury. – 2008. – № 7. – S. 33.
  6. Shumakov N.Yu. Innovatsionnaya kontseptsiya modernizatsii teorii i praktiki fizicheskogo vospitaniya / N.Yu. Shumakov // Fizkul'tura i sport: Minsk. – 1991. – S. 36-39.
  7. Bernstein N.A. O lovkosti i eyo razvitii / N.A. Bernstein // Fizkul'tura i sport: Minsk. – 1991. – S. 34-36.
  8. Medvedeva E.S. Formirovanie kul'tury dvizhenij u studentok vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenij: avtoref. dis. … kand. ped. nauk: 13.00.04 / E.S. Medvedeva // Sankt-Peterburgskaya gosudarstvennaya akademiya fizicheskoj kul'tury imeni P.F. Lesgafta: SPb. – 1998. – 21 s.
  9. Natalov G.G. Formirovanie optimal'noj dvigatel'noj aktivnosti / G.G. Natalov // Vospitanie. – 2000. – № 6. – S. 30-37.
  10. Gorbacheva Zh.S. Forrmirovanie plasticheskoj vyrazitel'nosti v hudozhestvennoj gimnastike: avtoref. dis. … kand. ped. nauk: 13.00.04 / Zh.S. Gorbacheva // Sankt-Peterburgskaya gosudarstvennaya akademiya fizicheskoj kul'tury imeni P.F. Lesgafta: SPb. – 2000. – 24 s.
  11. Zhurina T.N. Pedagogicheskie usloviya formirovaniya dvigatel'noj kul'tury u budushchih uchitelej / T.N. Zhurina / Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoj kul'tury. – 2000. – № 3. – S. 10-11
  12. Nikolaev Yu.M. K probleme razvitiya teorii fizicheskoj kul'tury / Yu.M. Nikolaev // Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoj kul'tury. – 2001 – № 8. – S. 2-10.
  13. Kucherenko G.A. Dvigatel'naya kul'tura mladshego shkol'nika i ee vliyanie na lichnostnoe razvitie v uchebnoj deyatel'nosti: avtoref. dis. … kand. ped. nauk: 13.00.01 / G.A. Kucherenko // Voronezhskij gosudarstvennyj pedagogicheskij universitet: Voronezh. – 2005. – 23 s.
  14. Korenberg V.B. O nekotoryh bazovykh ponyatiyakh v nashej sfere / V.B. Korenberg //Teoriya i praktika fiz. kul'tury. – 2007. – № 2. – S. 11-12.
  15. Fadeeva, E.V. Dvigatel'naya kul'tura budushchego pedagoga po fizicheskoj kul'ture / E.V. Fadeeva // Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoj kul'tury. – 2009. – № 10. – S. 39-40.
  16. Kobyakov Yu.P. Kontseptsiya norm dvigatel'noj aktivnosti cheloveka / YU.P. Kobyakov // Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoj kul'tury. – 2003. – № 11.
    – S. 20-23.
  17. Dzhamaleeva O.Yu. Pedagogicheskie tekhnologii myslitel'no- obrazovatel'nogo modelirovaniya dvigatel'nyh dejstvij studentov na zanyatiyah po fizicheskoj kul'ture / O.Yu. Dzhamaleeva // М. – 2003. – S. 34-36.
  18. Naumenko Yu.V. Programma formirovaniya kul'tury zdorovogo i bezopasnogo obraza zhizni / Yu.V. Naumenko, V.N Annenkov // OBZH. Osnovy bezopasnosti zhizni. – 2011. – № 10. –S. 39-45.
  19. Naumenko Yu.V. Zdorov'e, zdorovyj obraz zhizni i individual'naya fizicheskaya kul'tura / Yu.V. Naumenko // Valeologiya. – 2015. – № 2. – S. 92-100.
  20. Sirotkina I.E. Dvigatel'naya kul'tura, kak ob"ekt nauki / I.E. Sirotkina // Etnograficheskoe obozrenie. – 2018. – S. 23-27.
  21. Zmanovskij Yu. F. Dvigatel'naya aktivnost' i zakalivanie – vedushchie faktory ukrepleniya zdorov'ya rebyonka / Yu.F. Zmanovskij // Doshkol'noe vospitanie. – 1988. – № 8. – S. 45-51.


Information about the author: Dina Aleksandrovna Venskovich – Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, Associate Professor, Doctoral Student of the Belarusian State University of Physical Culture, Minsk, Republic of Belarus, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..