How we are taught to move vs how we learn to move
This week we ran a Webinar on How We Learn to Move. It encapsulated our coaching journey since we started WildStrong and explored the questions of how do we really learn to move? And why is that often at odds with how we teach movement?
It’s a conversation about the shift from perfect form to something more human, a blend of structure and exploration. One that mirrors how we learn to speak, how we learn to play, and how we navigate the messy, ever-changing demands of real life.
In this blog, we’ve pulled together the main ideas from that session and how they’ve shaped the way we coach.
Why Prescriptive Coaching Became the Norm
Prescriptive coaching is everywhere. And for good reason: clear rules and idealised demonstrations give people something to hold onto. It helps coaches feel competent. It helps learners feel safe. Especially in gym settings, where people are often self-conscious or unsure, a list of cues can feel like an anchor.
But there’s a problem, that anchor can become a chain.
When we only teach movement through fixed drills and isolated techniques, we risk removing the very thing people need most: adaptability. Movement becomes something to get "right," instead of something to explore, express, or experiment with.
If we taught children to speak the way we often teach movement, by isolating and drilling parts, testing progress, and limiting natural play, most would never learn to talk.
From the Brain as CEO to Movement as Emergent
The traditional model of coaching assumes the brain is in charge. It sees the body like a machine, one that must be programmed with the "correct" movement patterns to produce the right output.
But what if that’s not how we move at all?
In the webinar, Andrew introduces an alternative, the idea that movement is emergent. That it comes from the whole body interacting with the world in real time. That learning to move isn’t about storing scripts in your brain, but about tuning into your environment.
Take walking on ice. We can describe good technique: lower your centre of gravity, shorten your stride. But that won’t teach you how to move safely and efficiently. What teaches you is the experience of walking on ice, slipping a little, adjusting, sensing, adapting. The learning happens in the doing.
This approach is often called ecological dynamics, and it’s built on the idea that movement arises from the relationship between your body and your surroundings. We perceive opportunities (a surface to balance on, a branch to grab) and respond to them in ways that make sense in the moment.
There Is No Optimal Form
We’re often taught to “lift with your legs, not your back” or to keep a straight spine at all costs. That kind of advice makes sense in a gym with barbells or in workplace safety manuals. But outside of those narrow contexts, it starts to break down.
What we usually call "good form" is often just conventional form, borrowed from sports, performance settings, or overly cautious risk management strategies. In real life, we lift weird things at odd angles. We twist, reach, crouch. The ground is uneven. The loads are awkward.
That’s why adaptability matters more than aesthetics.
If you only train one technique, that’s the only one you’ll feel safe using. But life rarely plays by those rules. When something unexpected happens—a trip, a shift in weight, a sudden twist, it’s your ability to move confidently outside of textbook positions that prevents injury.
When people do get hurt, they often blame themselves: “I must have lifted wrong.” But it’s not that the movement was wrong, it’s that their body wasn’t prepared for it.
Katy Bowman’s houseplant analogy sums this up well: if you raise a houseplant indoors and suddenly move it outside, it will struggle. It hasn’t built the resilience to handle wind, weather, or change. Our bodies are the same. Without varied exposure, we stay fragile.
Different goals also demand different forms. A person walking to conserve energy will move differently than someone walking to show confidence or carry a heavy object. The same is true for running, lifting, throwing - form follows purpose.
There are many ways to move well. What matters is that your movement makes sense for your context.
Designing for Skill, Not Scripts
In recent years as we work more and more with older populations whose needs are more complex, we have started to move away from cue-heavy instruction toward creating environments where people can experiment. We still coach and provide feedback. We still demonstrate possible solutions.. But the goal is less about getting it "right," and more about discovering what works.
Instead of teaching "the perfect deadlift," we might explore how to pick up heavy, awkward objects. Instead of rehearsing one way to run, we play with trail running, uneven terrain, speed changes, carries.
This helps people build transferable skills - not just the ability to repeat a movement, but the confidence to respond to whatever real life throws at them.
We still run Strength & Conditioning classes too, and there are still workouts with sets and reps; as the “why” of these groups is very different to the “why” of our older population groups. And in our more traditionally structured classes we still have emphasis on peer coaching and problem solving.
Permission to Explore
What comes up again and again in our classes and our coaching is the idea of permission. Permission to move without fear of getting it wrong. Permission to try, to adapt, to feel silly, to figure things out.
In the webinar, one participant shared how rigid instruction in the gym made them feel like they didn’t belong. It wasn’t until they started Brazilian jiu-jitsu, a space with more play, more mess, more exploration, that they rediscovered joy in movement.
We hear stories like this often. And it reminds us that as coaches, our job isn’t just to teach skills. It’s to create a culture where people feel safe enough to learn and give themselves the permission to move in ways that they may not have done for years.
The Coaching Continuum: From Prescriptive to Emergent
This isn’t an argument against structure. It’s a call to broaden our toolbox.
Sometimes, clear instruction is needed. Especially early on or with specific equipment. But as people gain confidence, we can shift toward more emergent, task-based learning - there is a prescriptive to emergent continuum.
Where you land on that spectrum depends on your goals, your group, your environment. What matters is that you’re intentional about it. That you ask why you’re coaching a certain way.
Final Thoughts
Movement isn’t about getting it right. It’s about making it yours.
At WildStrong, we’re still learning. But the more we step back from prescriptive instruction, and the more we lean into exploration, the more we see people grow in confidence, skill, and joy.
If you’re a coach, teacher, or movement-curious human, we invite you to experiment with this approach. Blend structure with play. Cue less. Challenge more. Create the conditions for movement to emerge.
Because that’s how we really learn to move.
More Resources If You Found This Interesting
We’ve compiled a reading and listening resources pack for coaches. Download your copy below.
