I have noticed that authors in the literature sometimes divide characteristics of some phenomenon into "kinematics" and "dynamics".  

I first encountered this in Jackson's E&M book, where, in section 7.3 of the third edition, he writes, on the reflection and refraction of waves at a plane interface:


  
  Kinematic properties:
  (a) Angle of reflection equals angle of incidence
  (b) Snell's law
  Dynamic properties
  (a) Intensities of reflected and refracted radiation
  (b) Phase changes and polarization
  


But this is by no means the only example.  A quick Google search reveals "dynamic and kinematic viscosity," "kinematic and dynamic performance,"  "fully dynamic and kinematic voronoi diagrams," "kinematic and reduced-dynamic precise orbit determination," and many other occurrences of this distinction.

What is the real distinction between kinematics and dynamics?

In classical mechanics "kinematics" generally refers to the study of properties of motion-- position, velocity, acceleration, etc.-- without any consideration of why those quantities have the values they do. "Dynamics" means a study of the rules governing the interactions of these particles, which allow you to determine why the quantities have the values they do.

Thus, for example, problems involving motion with constant acceleration ("A car starts from rest and accelerates at 4m/s/s. How long does it take to cover 100m?") are classified as kinematics, while problems involving forces ("A 100g mass is attached to a spring with a spring constant of 10 N/m and hangs vertically from a support. How much does the spring stretch?") are classified as "dynamics."

That's kind of an operational definition, at least.
