Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4, 427-434 2025 Publisher: Learning Gate DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.5997 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate History: Received: 24 January 2025; Revised: 24 March 2025; Accepted: 27 March 2025; Published: 5 April 2025 * Correspondence: lkoci@ust.edu.al The impact of a 12-week intervention training program on gross motor coordination and strength in children playing Basketball Ledina Koci1*, Natasha Kotorri1, Afrim Bilali2 1Sports University of Tirana, Faculty of Movement Sciences Tirana, Albania; lkoci@ust.edu.al (L.K.) 2Sports University of Tirana, Faculty of Physical Activity and Recreation Tirana, Albania. Abstract: This study investigates the effects of a 12-week coordination training program on gross motor coordination and strength in youth basketball players aged 10–12 years. A total of 96 participants (mean age = 11.3 ± 1.16 years) were divided into an intervention group (IG) and a control group (CG). The IG completed a structured coordination training program (15 minutes per session after the warm-up phase), in three sessions per week, while the CG followed their regular training routine (three sessions per week, routine training). Motor coordination was assessed using the KTK test battery and drop jump tests, while anthropometric measurements were also recorded. Results showed no significant differences in anthropometric measurements between the groups. However, the IG demonstrated significant improvements in motor coordination, particularly in lateral jumping, balance beam, and one-leg jumping tests (p < 0.05). Additionally, enhancements in lower-limb strength and power were observed, as reflected in improved drop jump Fmax, contact time, jumping height, and standing long jump performance tests (p < 0.05). These findings suggest that a targeted coordination training program can effectively enhance motor coordination, balance, agility, and lower-body strength in young basketball players, providing valuable insights for training and talent development in youth sports. Keywords: Agility, Lower-limb strength, Motor coordination, Training program, Youth basketball. 1. Introduction Basketball is considerate a popular game which includes technical, tactical, emotional and physical elements [1]. Success depends on many factors such as control the body weight, pay attention to time, quickly react and quickly perceive & analyze the information in order to make right decision [1, 2]. One of the most important components in basketball is coordination, which is studies by many scientists [3, 4]. Coordination is defined as ability to change from executing one action to another one depending on circumstances [5]. According to Svetlichkina, et al. [6] the role of coordination is to coordinate the central nervous system’ functions. The aim of coordination skill is to increase the motor experience through density and variability of movement control processes [7]. Coordination skills helps young basketball players to organize their energy resources wisely, use them efficiently by considering time, place and muscle group [8]. Every year basketball has higher and higher demands from basketball players in order to achieve better performance. According to Chicomban [9] and Dvejrina [10] the development of pupil’s general motor skills is a crucial condition for the creation of applicative coordination abilities that offer them to perform their actions [11]. The technique of basketball required good performance of coordination and motor development of basketball players [12] Dribbling is a technical procedure in basketball that increase the space and condition sense, coordination and the peripheral vision as well as intellectual competencies [13]. Dribbling in basketball is considerate as complex coordinative action [14]. This is because dribbling contains different directions with different 428 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 427-434, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.5997 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate speed, control the ball without visual aspect. Basketball players should simultaneously, perform the dribbling action by using forearm, hand and finger in order to enable the ball to bounce up to the waist level [14]. There are many other motor actions in basketball who needs the following coordination 1) coordinated movement of the arms, legs, trunk and head, 2) the peripheral vision 3) the motor memory 4) the complex interdependence of cognitive and intellectual skills (thinking, creativity, imagination, memory, and attention) under the produced condition, which has an unexpected nature, and the choice of the best method to complete the motor task. According to the research of Demcenco [14] the technical process of many actions in basketball is the significant way to help athletes acquire the effective coordination skills that are so crucial in daily life and in sports performance. Age 12-15 years old is the best period of time to improve coordination [15]. The aim of the study is to determine the effect of training program in motor coordination of basketball players aged 10-12 years old. 2. Methods 2.1. Participants The total number of participants was 96 youth basketball players. The mean age of participants was 11.3 years old (SD= 1.16). Measurements were performed in 2 groups of athletes- the intervention and the control group (4 teams); intervention group (pre and post measurements + 12 weeks’ included coordination intervention exercises) and control group (pre and post measurements + 12 weeks included standard routine exercises) The parents of the children received instruction on the study's protocols and asked to sign a written informed permission form before any measurements were taken. The subject's inclusion requirements were: (1) to play basketball; (2) to be between the ages of 11 and 13; and (3) to be in good health and free from injuries. Ethical approval was taken at Sports University of Tirana. 2.2. Anthropometric Measurements Children were tested in the morning to ensure accurate statistics. Children were barefoot and wear light clothing during the measurements. The position of both feet were in the center of the apparatus (Health O meter digital scale) so that the weight was distributed evenly across both feet for the body- weight measurements. The athletes were standing with their eyes forward, their arms dangling at their sides, their feet together, and their backs straight. The athlete's head was fitted with the height rob. During the measures, children were not permitted to move. 2.3. KTK Gross Motor Coordination Test Battery [16] Four standardized tests were administered to evaluate the motor abilities of participants. These assessments measure various facets of coordination, balance, agility, and motor control 1. The Balance Beam assessment measures dynamic stability (balance) and postural regulation; 2. Transference of Platforms assessment focusing on spatial-temporal organization, fine motor proficiency, rapidity, and agility and coordination of the lower and upper extremities; 3. The Lateral Jumping exam assesses agility, coordination, and lower limb strength; 4. The Jumping One Leg test evaluates unilateral lower-limb strength, coordination, and stability. 2.4. Drop Jump Test The electronic platform “Leonardo Mechanography” is part of the group of medical devices (Sports University Laboratory). It consists of two platforms with 4 (four) sensors each. Its software contains a protocol with 17 different tests, from which numerous data are obtained. The age of the subjects being tested ranges from 3 to 99 years. It serves not only for the assessment and examination of physical condition for healthy and sporty subjects, but also for geriatric purposes (in advanced age), to prevent the risk of basic activities as a result of age. In this study research it was used: 1. DJ (Drop Jump) and Drop Jump / Ground Contact Time Test 429 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 427-434, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.5997 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate With regard to explosive power of lower limb in youth were used standing long jump test. 2.5. Intervention Program Circuit intervention training for 12 weeks (3 times/ week) with a duration of 15 minutes after warm up phase (each training session) were included in this study research. The intervention program for each training session consisted in four type of exercises aiming as follows: 1. Coordination (3 times x 1 min with 30 seconds rest) 2. Speed/ agility without the ball (3 times x 1 min with 30 seconds rest) 3. Speed/ agility with the ball (5 times x 30 seconds with 30 seconds rest) 4. Strength/ endurance (2 to 4 times x 1 min with 30 seconds rest) 2.6. Statistical Analysis A descriptive analysis of the sample was conducted by determining the mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum of each study variable. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test confirmed that all data were normally distributed. ANOVA was used to make comparisons between groups and to determine differences between measurements. The significance level was determined as p < 0.05. All the analysis was calculated using SPSS software 20.0. 3. Results Table no 1 show the number of participants in control group and intervention group. The total numbers of subjects in this study was 94 participants (control group= 46 and intervention group= 48). The mean age of participants was 11.8 years old (SD 1.09). Table 1. Youth participation statistics take part in the study. N Mean Age Std. Deviation Youth participants Control 46 11.3 1.16 Basketball Intervention 48 12.2 0.77 Total 94 11.8 1.09 Table 2 show the mean and standard deviation of anthropometric parameters pre and post measurements. The mean of body height is 152.8 cm in pre-measurements and 154.2 cm in post- measurements. The mean of body-weight is presented with the value 48.5 kg in pre-measurements and 49.7 post-measurements in control group. Whereas, in experimental group the mean of body-height is 161.4 cm in pre-measurements and 162.7 cm in post-measurements. Body-weight has the mean 53.9 kg in pre-measurements and 55 kg in post-measurements. 430 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 427-434, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.5997 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Table 2. Descriptive statistics for anthropometric assessed in this study (pre and post by groups). Type_Intervention Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Control Body Height- pre 152.8 46 9.97 1.47 Body Height- post 154.3 46 9.88 1.45 Body Weight- pre 48.6 46 11.9 1.76 Body Weight- post 49.7 46 11.9 1.75 BMI- pre 7.6 46 3.48 .51 BMI- post 7.2 46 3.15 .46 Waist- pre 67.4 46 11.69 1.72 Waist- post 68.0 46 11.15 1.64 Intervention Body Height- pre 161.4 48 11.28 1.62 Body Height- post 162.8 48 11.39 1.64 Body Weight- pre 53.9 48 11.81 1.70 Body Weight- post 55.1 48 11.19 1.61 BMI- pre 6.4 48 3.11 .44 BMI- post 5.9 48 2.51 .36 Waist- pre 69.9 48 10.65 1.5 Waist- post 70.8 48 10.7062 1.54 The Table 3 indicates the mean and SD of gross motor coordination (KTK) test in pre and post for control group and experimental group. The mean of lateral jump test in control group is 65.2 jumps in pre-measurements and 67.4 jumps in post-measurements. In experimental group the mean of lateral jump test is 72.1 jumps in pre-measurements and 78.8 jumps in post-measurements. Table 3. Descriptive statistics for gross motor coordination (KTK) tests assessed in this study (pre and post by groups). Type_Intervention Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Control Lateral Jumping- pre 65.28 46 10.23 1.50 Lateral Jumping- post 67.41 46 9.78 1.44 Balance Backward- pre 44.84 46 11.81 1.74 Balance Backward- post 45.56 46 12.04 1.77 Jumping one leg- pre 16.82 46 4.19 .61 Jumping one leg- post 18.23 46 4.04 .59 Moving with plates- pre 19.91 46 4.19 .61 Moving with plates- post 21.80 46 4.17 .61 Intervention Lateral Jumping- pre 72.16 48 9.89 1.42 Lateral Jumping- post 78.81 48 8.21 1.18 Balance Backward- pre 45.16 48 11.50 1.66 Balance Backward- post 48.54 48 11.90 1.71 Jumping one leg- pre 17.81 48 3.82 .55 Jumping one leg- post 21.87 48 4.27 .61 Moving with plates- pre 22.08 48 3.33 .48 Moving with plates- post 24.27 48 3.20 .46 The Table 4 show the mean and SD for both important tests such as drop jump test and standing long jump test. In interventional group the mean of drop jump height is 33.1 cm in pre-measurements and in post-measurements the is 36.9 cm. Standing long jump test has the mean 156.4 cm in experimental group in pre-measurements and in post-measurements the mean was 161.4. 431 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 427-434, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.5997 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Table 4. Descriptive statistics for Drop jump test and Standing Long Jump assessed in this study (pre and post by groups). Type_Intervention Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Control Drop jump- Fmax (kg)- pre 50.85 46 11.04 1.62 Drop jump- Fmax (kg)- post 51.40 46 10.83 1.59 Drop jump- Contact Time pre .27 46 .05 .00 Drop jump- Contact Time post .28 46 .05 .00 Drop Jump- Jumping Height pre 29.34 46 5.03 0.74 Drop Jump- Jumping Height post 31.57 46 4.94 0.72 Standing Long Jump- pre 156.40 48 25.13 3.62 Standing Long Jump- post 161.4 48 24.72 3.56 Intervention Drop jump- Fmax (kg)- pre 49.260 48 11.6920 1.68 Drop jump- Fmax (kg)- post 52.21 48 9.8128 1.41 Drop jump- Contact Time pre .31 48 .4185 .06 Drop jump- Contact Time post .26 48 .2750 .03 Drop Jump- Jumping Height pre 33.18 48 6.5156 0.94 Drop Jump- Jumping Height post 36.91 48 5.5881 0.80 Standing Long Jump- pre 156.40 48 25.1349 3.62 Standing Long Jump- post 161.48 48 24.7269 3.56 Data results on table 5 show ANOVA comparison for the mean difference (post- pre) measurement between control and intervention group. The ANOVA results indicate no statistically significant differences between the intervention and control groups for any of the anthropometric measures (body height p = 0.58, body weight p = 0.943, BMI p = 0.972, and waist circumference p = 0.829) These findings imply that while the intervention may have influenced motor performance, it did not lead to significant changes in anthropometric characteristics over the study period. Table 5. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), between groups for anthopometric (mean difference post- pre). Source- Type Intervention Control Intervention Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Mean Std. Dev Mean Std. Dev Body Height 1.43 0.91 1.33 0.87 0.242 1 0.242 0.307 0.581 Body Weight 1.17 1.22 1.19 1.34 0.008 1 0.008 0.005 0.943 BMI -0.37 0.51 -0.37 0.79 0.001 1 0.001 0.001 0.972 Waist 0.61 1.74 0.86 1.62 0.443 1 0.443 0.047 0.829 The ANOVA results in Table 6 indicate statistically significant improvements in gross motor coordination for the intervention group compared to the control group in three out of four tests. Significant differences were observed in lateral jumping (p = 0.005), balance backwards (p = 0.033), and jumping one leg (p = 0.000), suggesting that the intervention effectively enhanced coordination, balance, and agility. However, moving with plates (p = 0.533) did not show a significant difference, indicating that the intervention had little to no effect on this specific motor skill. These results highlight the intervention’s overall positive impact on gross motor coordination, particularly in dynamic balance and jumping tasks. 432 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 427-434, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.5997 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Table 6. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), between groups for gross motor coordination (KTK) tests (mean difference post- pre). Source- Type Intervention Control Intervention Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Mean Std. Dev Mean Std. Dev Lateral Jumping 2.1 7.6 6.7 7.8 478.920 1 478.920 8.126 0.005 Balance Backwards 0.7 3.9 3.4 7.4 165.903 1 165.903 4.667 0.033 Jumping one Leg 1.4 2.2 4.1 3.5 164.886 1 164.886 19.154 0.000 Moving with Plates 1.9 1.7 2.2 2.7 2.061 1 2.061 0.392 0.533 The Table 7 show significant difference between groups in all the parameters such as drop jump- Fmax (p = 0.005), drop jump-jumping height (p = 0.037). Statistical improvements were found also for standing long jump test (p = 0.000) suggesting enhanced lower-body strength and power. Additionally, Drop Jump - Contact Time (p = 0.000) was also significantly affected, indicating possible improvements in landing mechanics. These findings highlight the effectiveness of the intervention in enhancing motor performance, particularly in explosive power and jump-related abilities. Table 7. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), between groups for Drop jump test and Standing Long Jump (mean difference post- pre). Source- Type Intervention Control Intervention Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Mean Std. Dev Mean Std. Dev Drop jump- Fmax (kg) 0.6 3.2 2.9 4.7 135.515 1 135.515 8.305 0.005 Drop jump- Contact Time 0.0 0.0 -0.0 0.0 0.037 1 0.037 18.274 0.000 Drop Jump- Jumping Height 2.2 3 3.7 3.8 53.068 1 53.068 4.471 0.037 Standing Long Jump-cm 2.2 4.2 5.1 3.4 198.224 1 198.224 13.935 0.000 4. Discussion The purpose of the study is to examine the impact of a training program on the motor coordination of basketball players aged 10 to 12 years old. Results indicated no statistically significant differences between the intervention and control groups for any of the anthropometric measures (body height, body weight, BMI, and waist circumference) Significant improvements were found in gross motor coordination for the intervention group compared to the control group in three out of four tests (lateral jumping, balance backwards, and jumping one leg) suggesting that the intervention effectively enhanced coordination, balance, and agility. These results highlight the intervention’s overall positive impact on gross motor coordination, particularly in dynamic balance and jumping tasks. Significant difference was found for intervention group in all the parameters such as drop jump- Fmax (kg), drop jump-contact time, drop jump-jumping height and standing long jump (cm), suggesting enhanced lower-body strength and power. These findings imply that while the intervention may have influenced motor performance, it did not lead to significant changes in anthropometric characteristics over the study period. The study of Zaichenko [1] demonstrated an improvement of motor coordination abilities in young basketball players of 10-12 years old after the interventional training program. The importance of improving coordinative motor skills is a common topic in many studies analyzing their effects in athletes. Also, the importance of developing the nervous system during childhood is often mentions in many research papers. Childhood is the crucial period time when the structures of neurons and their connections increase most efficiently and can help to improve motor skills such as speed of nerve impulses [17]. Early development of coordination by basketball specialist prepares kids for potential careers in sport. 433 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 427-434, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.5997 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate The limitation of the study: it is focused only in basketball discipline and the study sample included children from a particular geographic region and socioeconomic background. Future studies may include additional tests to assess a broader variety of motor coordination abilities. Future research could involve a more varied sample of youngsters to improve the generalizability of the results. However, the study includes a considerable number of basketball players in total which increases the generalizability of the findings and the statistical power of the findings. 5. Conclusion The finding of our experiment proves the hypothesis that the interventional training improved the motor coordination of basketball players 10-12 years old. These improvements help in athlete's future sports career. Transparency: The authors confirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study; that no vital features of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained. This study followed all ethical practices during writing. Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. This open-access article is distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). References [1] Y. Zaichenko, "Integral development of coordination and cognitive abilities of young basketball players 6-7 years old," Health Technologies, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 30-35, 2023. [2] A. Bilali and A. Spahi, "The correlation between body mass and height with motor abilities in youth basketball players," European Journal of Health and Science in Sports, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 22-25, 2017. [3] K. Cai et al., "Mini-basketball training program improves social communication and white matter integrity in children with autism," Brain sciences, vol. 10, no. 11, p. 803, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10110803 [4] Y. K. Chiu, C. Y. Pan, F. C. Chen, Y. T. Tseng, and C. L. Tsai, "Behavioral and cognitive electrophysiological differences in the executive functions of taiwanese basketball players as a function of playing position," Brain Sciences, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 387, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060387 [5] V. A. Aleksandrova and V. V. Shiyan, "Integral index of coordination abilities estimation among the athletes who are involved in different kinds of sport," Physical Culture: Education, Training, and Speech, vol. 2, pp. 1-5, 2016. [6] А. А. Svetlichkina, L. N. Porubayko, and A. V. Dorontsev, "Dorintseva prospects of functional test use among highly- qualified female callisthenics gymnasts for the level of physical load planning," Russian Journal of Physical Education and Sport, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 22-27 2021. [7] Y. V. Semenova, "Fitness-aerobics is one of the means of students’ physical upbringing reform at a specialized secondary educational institution," Current Problems of Development of Sportive Tances, Aerobics and Fitness, pp. 62-65, 2010. [8] Е. V. Putintseva, "Competitive readiness upbringing among the dancers-beginners with the help of business games," Nauchno-Sportivnyj Vestnik Urala I Sibiri, vol. 1, no. 9, pp. 64-72, 2016. [9] M. Chicomban, "Effectiveness of learning the ball throwing through basket in basketball game based on algorithm- type programming," Science of Physical Culture, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 25-30, 2012. [10] O. A. Dvejrina, Development of coordination abilities in physical education classes at school. Russia: Lesgaft National State University of Physical Education, Sport and Health, 2000. [11] A. Spahi, A. Bilali, and J. Jarani, "The role of a training program based on fitness and athletics, to improve the cardiorespiratory fitness and agility to young basketball players during a 6–month period," European Journal of Health and Science in Sports, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 11-15, 2016. [12] A. Moannă, Basketball methods. Buzău: Alpha Publishing House, 2005. [13] R. GheŃu, Basketball theory and methods. Craiova: Universitaria Publishing House, 2010. [14] A. Demcenco, "Development of applicative coordination abilities of 12-13 years old pupils through basketball elements," Journal of Physical Education and Sport, vol. 79, no. 17, pp. 527-532, 2017. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2017.02079 [15] A. Paşcan, "Training and development of psychomotor skills of middle school students through creative exercises specific to school basketball," Doctoral Dissertation, PhD Thesis, 2011. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10110803 https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060387 https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2017.02079 434 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 4: 427-434, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/25768484.v9i4.5997 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate [16] E. J. Kiphard and F. Schilling, Body coordination test for children 2, revised and expanded item. Weinham: Beltz Test, 2007. [17] D. A. Szabo, N. Neagu, and I. S. Sopa, "Research regarding the development and evaluation of agility (balance, coordination and speed) in children aged 9-10 years," Health, Sports & Rehabilitation Medicine, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 33–40, 2020. https://doi.org/10.26659/pm3.2020.21.1.33 https://doi.org/10.26659/pm3.2020.21.1.33