Competitively engineering better child sport experiences

In the second half of 2024 we worked with a national sport on competitively engineering their junior sport experience. We had a project to work with another national sport to commence at the start of the year to competitively engineer their junior sport pathway, but that project was unfortunately cancelled. However, the positive is national sport interest in this type of work to enhance the sport experience for children in a planned development sequence that has evidence to support the progressions. In the case of both sports, we found the game design of the junior sport programs could be traced back to the AUSSIE Sports modified sport program of the late 1980s, however, we could find no record of any calculations to determine if the playing equipment and playing area dimensions were scaled appropriately and progressively for children as they grow and develop biologically and 'skillfuly'. .

In the recent project, we used competitive engineering as the framework for the work of modelling a progression of junior sport from age 7 to 12yo. Competitive engineering (Burton et al., 2011) is the practice of intentionally altering the sporting environment to improve the cognitive and behavioural outcomes of participants. This can be done by modifying the rules, equipment, the structures (like competition rules), or facilities (like the size of playing fields) of a sport.

A project a few years ago that we undertook using competitive engineering in an Australian football (AFL) competition (Elliott & Pill, 2016) found players, parents and coaches preferred the competitively engineered junior sport competition design to the 'regular' competition. If interested, I blog about that project here  and the paper is available open access here

In the recent project, we adopted protocols from Broadbent et al. (2021), Buszard et al. (2014, 2016), Gorman et al (2021) and van der Kamp et al. (1998) body scaling investigations to develop game models of the junior sport from age 7 to 12 yo for trialling with three age groups (u8/u10/u12). Body scaling is the process of matching the size of sports equipment to the developmental stage of a child. Studies on body scaling for children's sport suggest that children prefer using modified-scaled equipment, tend to be more engaged in modified-scaled games, report greater self-efficacy to execute skills, and perform skills better when the equipment and play are modified-scaled. There is some evidence that children’s skill development is accelerated when equipment and play area are modified-scaled. While there are studies we can draw on to provide evidence in support of equipment and play scaling for competitive engineering a modified junior sport program, the range of sports with published studies is limited. 

I first became interested in the idea of competitive engineering to provide an evidence backed junior sport game progression when I head Professor Niall Moyna in 2014 at the AFL National Coaching Conference speak about Michael Whelan's PhD thesis on the effect of altering the number of players, the dimensions of the playing area and the playing rules on the number of selected technical skills performed, possession characteristics, physiological responses and levels of enjoyment and perceived competence during junior Gaelic football (the thesis is available here). I wondered why more sports weren't investing in this type of research to bring an evidence base to the way their junior sport was competitively engineered. Too often, I still see in Australia children's sport, particularly in the 10 to 14yo age range, playing full field / full court like the adults play. A study we did with Australian football (AFL: Pill & Eliott, 2015) suggested that u14's playing full field probably have a different game experience (more ground balls) to adults playing on the same size ground, due to the differences in length of kick possible in an u14 compared to adult male. Local games of AFL that I watch at u12 and u14 are typically on full field and whichever team wins the ball out of the centre start/re-start generally has the play in their front half of the field until there is a score. Players down the other end of the field from the ball are chatting, dancing, or jogging on the spot to keep warm. I have seen young children playing chasey in the soccer goals square to keep warm and entertained. Occasionally a parent will shout 'focus on the game' - absurd as the game is nowehere near their child!

Côté et al.’s (2008) Developmental Model of Sport Participation (DMSP) suggests that the structure of junior sport has implications on the development of children’s motivation and game development, and therefore ability and willingness to progress to a more sport specialised competitive environment with youth sport. To that end, the process of competitive engineering seeks to provide four outcomes associated with children's motovation to play sport.

• .      Increase action and scoring
• .      Create maximum individual participation
• .      Keep scores close
• .      Promote positive social relationships

I reckon there may be advantages to youth sport retention from competitively engineering appropriate field and task conditions as youth move from the often modified and smaller sided game dimensions of children sport to youth sport, rather then immediately jumping to 'full field/court/pitch' conditions at the end of junior sport. 

Thanks for stopping by and reading this post. If you would like to connect with me on a project to do with the ideas in this blog or any of the other ideas that I have blogged about, you can contact me by the email link available here

References

Broadbent, N., Buszard, T., Farrow, D., & Reid, M. (2021). Scaling junior sport competition: A body-scaling approach? Journal of Sports Sciences, 39(23), 2746-2754.

Burton, D., Gillham, A. D. & Hammermeister, J. (2011). Competitive engineering: Structural climate modifications to enhance youth athletes' competitive experience. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 6(2), 201-217.

Buszard, T., Farrow, D., Reid, M., & Masters, R. S. (2014). Modifying equipment in early skill development: A tennis perspective. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 85(2), 218-225.

Buszard, T., Reid, M., Masters, R., & Farrow, D. (2016). Scaling the equipment and play area in children’s sport to improve motor skill acquisition: A systematic review. Sports Medicine, 46, 829-843.

Côté, J., Strachan, L. and Fraser-Thomas, J., (2008). Participation, Personal Development and Performance through Youth Sport. In Holt, N., (Eds.), Positive Youth Development through Sport (pp. 34-45). Routledge. 

Elliott, S., & Pill, S. (2016). Competitive engineering in junior Australian football: perceptions and experiences of parents, children and coaches of 9-a-side football in an Under-8 competition. South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation, 38(1), 43-57.

Gorman, A. D., Headrick, J., Renshaw, I., McCormack, C. J., & Topp, K. M. (2021). A principled approach to equipment scaling for children’s sport: A case study in basketball. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 16(1), 158-165.

Pill, S. & Elliott, S. (2015). Effects of Altering the Number of Players and the Dimensions of the Playing Area on the Possession Characteristics in Youth Australian Football. Sport Science Review, 24(3/4), 171-192.

van der Kamp, J., Savelsbergh, G. J., & Davis, W. E. (1998). Body‐scaled ratio as a control parameter for prehension in 5‐to 9‐year‐old children. Developmental Psychobiology: The Journal of the International Society for Developmental Psychobiology, 33(4), 351-361.