17th Annual ECSS-Congress, Bruges 2012

Abstract details

Abstract-ID: 991
Session: [MO-PM11] Physical Activity in Children 1
Lecture room: E108
Date & time: 02.07.2014 / 13:00 - 14:00
Title of the paper: The influence of different teaching methods on motor learning in school children
Authors: Braun, C., Focke, A., Stein, T., Seidel, I.
Institution: Karlsruher Institute of Technologies
Department: Institute of sports and sports science
Country: Germany
Abstract text Introduction Augmented feedback and observational learning are essential factors in motor skill learning (Magill, 2007). To our knowledge there is no study comparing the effectiveness of these two aspects in a school setting. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate different teaching methods (feedback, observational learning and their combination) for children in elementary school (2nd grade) and high school (5th grade) by learning the sport lacrosse. Methods Two hundred and eight subjects, 2nd grade (N=99) and 5th grade (N=109), performed lacrosse two times a week for 45 minutes in their sport class over five weeks. All subjects were divided into four different learning groups: feedback group (A), observational group (B), combination group (feedback and observation, C) and a control group (no lacrosse training, D). The feedback for group A and C was given as knowledge of performance, verbal, terminal, qualitative with a reduced frequency (systematical reduction) and as a combination of error and correction cues. For the observational learning groups B and C the model was always the same person. A pre-post-retention test design was used. After the pretest (T1) and a five week training program, the post test (T2) was conducted directly after the last training session. The retention test (T3) followed after another four weeks. The test battery includes throwing and catching of straight and variable balls in lacrosse. Physical activity and emotions were used as moderator variables. The experiment is not completed yet, so only the N=64 subjects (all 2nd grade, A=17, B=15, C=12, D=20) were analyzed so far. Results No significant interaction between test time and learning group was found for the straight catching task. All groups improved their performance from T1 to T3. In contrast for the tasks throwing and variable catching a significant interaction between test time and learning group was revealed (p= .014, Ƞ= .122; p= .012, Ƞ=.125). In the throwing task post hoc tests showed significant differences between T1 and T3 for all treatment groups (A, B, C) but not for the control group (D). For variable catching post hoc tests revealed significant differences between T1 and T3 only for the feedback (A) and the observation group (B) but not for the combination (C) and the control group (D). Discussion For 2nd graders both feedback and observational learning improved lacrosse performance after a five week training. Further analysis of the data could give information about differences between 2nd and 5th graders and might help to understand which teaching method is best for different school settings. References Magill, R.A. (2007). Motor Learning and Control. Concepts and Applications. (8th edition). Boston: McGraw-HillPark
Topic: Motor Learning
Keyword I: Feedback
Keyword II: Observational learning
Keyword III: school children