The Influence of Three Instructional Strategies on The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE INFLUENCE OF THREE INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE OVERARM THROW DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Physical Activity and Educational Services at The Ohio State University By Kevin Michael Lorson * * * * THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 2003 Dissertation Committee: Approved by: Dr. Jackie Goodway, Advisor ______________________ Dr. Phillip Ward Adviser Dr. Tim Barrett College of Education ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of three instructional strategies on the performance of the overarm throw. A secondary purpose of the study is to examine the influence of gender and instruction on throwing performance. The three instructional strategies were a critical cue (CUE), a biomechanical (BP), and typical physical education approach (TPE). The CUE strategy consisted of three cues: laser beams, long step, and turn your hips fast. The BP strategy was a translation of biomechanical information into a four-stage strategy. The TPE strategy was based on Graham and colleagues (2001) critical elements. The dependent measures of throwing performance were body component levels, component levels during gameplay, and ball velocity. Participants (n=124) from six first and second-grade classes were systematically assigned to an instructional approach. Mean body component levels for the step, trunk, humerus and forearm along with mean recorded ball velocity were calculated from the 10 throwing trials at the pretest, posttest, and retention test. Additionally, participants’ body component levels for the step, trunk, and forearm demonstrated in a throwing game were correlated with the body component levels demonstrated during practice. A MANOVA with repeated measures on the last factor revealed a non-significant multivariate Group effect (p=.068). Examining posttest body component levels, a significant difference between the CUE and TPE strategy for the step component. A significant Group X Time ii interaction (p=.04) with significant univariate Group X Time effects for the forearm (p=.03). A multivariate Time effect was found (p=.068) with significant univariate Time effects for the step, trunk, humerus, forearm, and ball velocity. Correlation coefficients between body component levels during practice and gameplay revealed the strongest relationship was for the trunk component, and the step component had the fewest significant relationships. Significant gender differences were present at the pretest with boys’ performance greater than girls for each dependent measure. Significant gender differences remained after instruction for each group for body components and ball velocity. Overall, the results suggest that any of the three strategies can positively influence more advanced body component levels and increase ball velocity. iii To Katie, and the many others who have made a difference. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincerest thanks and appreciation to following individuals who without their time, effort, expertise, and patience this daunting task would not have been possible. To Katie – Together we have made many things happen, your love and patience helped me through this. Thanks for being the one to turn to in times of frustration, and for making patient, understanding, and willing to make many sacrifices throughout this process. To Dr. Goodway – Thank you providing me with the all of the support, time, effort and guidance needed throughout this process. It has been four wonderful years of working with you. Your guidance and support has helped to mold me into a successful professional. Thank you for being a mentor and friend during my time at OSU. To Dr. Phil Ward and Dr. Tim Barrett – Thank you for your time, energy, and contributions to improve the quality of this study. To Mrs. Scarlet and Ms. Gray – for volunteering your time, effort, and insight while participating in this study. To the Fiesta and Woodbine School – Thank you for your effort and participation in all of the throwing activities. Special thanks to the classroom teachers for your help in distributing and collecting the necessary paper work. v To my current and former colleagues –Your friendship and assistance throughout my time here made the journey much more enjoyable. Special thanks to Susan Nye, Deb Pace, Tristan Wallhead, and Todd Harrison for being there throughout. To my Mom and Dad – Thank you for all that you have taught me, the work ethic you instilled in me, and your support. To my family and friends – Thanks. vi VITA September 30, 1976 Born – Orrville, Ohio 1998 B.A., Physical Education & Health Education Baldwin-Wallace College 2001 M. A., Physical Education Teacher Education, The Ohio State University. 1999-Present Graduate Teaching Associate, Sport, Fitness, and Health Program. The Ohio State University Winter, 2003 Adjunct Professor, Otterbein College FIELD OF STUDY Major: Education Physical Education Teacher Education Cognate: Sport Management vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract............................................................................................................ii Dedication....................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements...........................................................................................v Vita...................................................................................................................vi List of Tables ..................................................................................................xii List of Figures..................................................................................................xv Chapters: 1. Introduction............................................................................................1 Purpose Statement..........................................................................8 Research Questions and Hypothesis ..............................................8 Limitations ...................................................................................16 Delimitations................................................................................18 Basic Assumptions.......................................................................19 Definition of Terms......................................................................20 2. Review of Literature .............................................................................25 Theoretical Framework................................................................25 Dynamical Systems Theory...................................................25 Constraints Model..................................................................28 Fundamental Motor Skills............................................................31 Importance of Fundamental Motor Skills..............................32 Assessment of Throwing Performance ........................................34 Product Measures...................................................................36 Process Measures...................................................................36 Throwing Development ...............................................................46 Phases of the Throwing Motion.............................................46 Critical Features.....................................................................47 Attractors and Attractor Pathways.........................................51 viii Ancillary Effects....................................................................52 Constraints Model and Throwing ................................................53 Individual Constraints............................................................53 Gender Differences....................................................54 Task Constraints.....................................................................60 Environmental Constraints.....................................................62 Instruction and Throwing.......................................................62 Instruction and Throwing Performance .....................63 Teacher’s Ability to Instruct Throwing .....................67 Critical Cues...............................................................71 Critical Cues and Motor Skills...................................74 Critical Cues and Throwing.......................................75 Summary................................................................................78 3. Method Research Design...........................................................................80 Theoretical Framework................................................................81 Time Span of Study .....................................................................81 Setting ....................................................................................83 Fiesta School..........................................................................83 Woodbine School...................................................................84 Participants...................................................................................85 Instrumentation ............................................................................87 Qualitative Measures.............................................................87 Component Approach................................................87 Form used during gameplay......................................91 Throwing game .........................................................94 Quantitative