Volume 9, Issue 18 (12-2019)                   JRSM 2019, 9(18): 1-16 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Mousavi S K, Yaali R, Bahram A, Abbasi A. Effect of nonlinear pedagogy on the performance of the short backhand serve of badminton ‌. JRSM 2019; 9 (18) :1-16
URL: http://jrsm.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2449-en.html
1- , r.yaali@gmail.com
Abstract:   (4098 Views)

Motor learning or the acquisition of coordination is a process of searching for stable functional coordination patterns, into which a system can settle during a task or activity. Human as complex creatures can choose the best pattern based on conditions within different coordination patterns and also achieve goals of tasks. So the purpose of this study is to determination the effect of a Nonlinear Pedagogy approach for the effectiveness of the movement and acquisition of skills. Accordingly, in this study 14 participants (with the average 19.64 and SD 0.74) are taught the short backhand serve of badminton with using linear and nonlinear pedagogy approaches. Linear approach Based on traditional Viewpoint using the descriptive methods and repetive instructions. On the other hand, nonlinear Pedagogy Approach Based on the ecological dynamics theory using manipulation of task constraints especially task constraints including equipment and rules Planned and conducted. Performance accuracy were selected to analyze further selections and used analysis of covariance to measure the effect of the independent variable measured. The test significance level was considered P <./ 05. Despite the progress of both groups to the pre-test, no difference was observed between the two groups in accuracy scores (F=0.092 and p=0.767) and both were equal to achieve results of the task as an indicator of skill acquisition. Our findings indicate that nonlinear pedagogy approach, resulted from theory of ecological dynamics, consider the complexity of Acquisition the skill and inherent tendency of individuals with providing movement affordances. Also, this approach can be effective in the fulfilment of goal tasks.

Full-Text [PDF 995 kb]   (1485 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: motor behavior
Received: 2017/02/28 | Accepted: 2017/09/14 | Published: 2020/02/8

References
1. 1. Chow J.Y, David's K, button C, Renshaw I, (2016). Nonlinear pedagogy in skill acquisition. 1st Ed Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781315813042]
2. Abernethy B, Maxwell JP, Masters RSW, et al. Attentional processes in skill learning and expert performance. (2007), Handbook of sport psychology, 3rd ed. Hoboken, p. 245-63. [DOI:10.1002/9781118270011.ch11]
3. Williams AM, Hodges NJ (2005) Practice, instruction and skill acquisition in soccer: Challenging tradition. Journal of Sports Sciences 23: 637-650. [DOI:10.1080/02640410400021328]
4. Ranganathan, R, & Newell, KM. (2013), Changing Up the Routine: Intervention-Induced Variability in Motor Learning, Exercise Sport Science Review, 41, pp. 64-70. [DOI:10.1097/JES.0b013e318259beb5]
5. David's K, Button C, Bennett S, editors (2008) Dynamics of skill acquisition: a constraints-led approach. 1st ed. USA: Human kinetics.
6. MARK L. LATASH (2008), synergy, Oxford University Press, New York. [DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333169.001.0001]
7. Chow JY, David's KW, Button C, Renshaw I, Shuttleworth R, Uehara LA (2009). Nonlinear pedagogy: implications for teaching games for understanding (TGfU). TGfU: Simply Good Pedagogy: Understanding a Complex Challenge. 1:131-43.
8. David's, K. Bennett, S. & Newell, K.M. (Eds). (2006). Movement system variability. Cham- Paign, IL: Human Kinetics. [DOI:10.5040/9781492596851]
9. Latash, M.L. J.P. Scholz, and G. Schöner (2002). Motor control strategies revealed in the structure of motor variability. Exerc. Sport Sci. Rev. 30:26 -31. [DOI:10.1097/00003677-200201000-00006]
10. Lee MCY, Chow JY, Komar J, Tan CWK, Button C (2014) Nonlinear Pedagogy: An Effective Approach to Cater for Individual Differences in Learning a Sports Skill. PLoS ONE 9(8) journal. Pone. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0104744]
11. Smith T.J, Henning R, Wade M.G, Fisher T, (2015) Variability in Human Performance. CRC Press is an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group. [DOI:10.1201/b17319]
12. Edelman GM, Gally JA, (2001). Degeneracy and complexity in biological systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 98(24):13763-8. [DOI:10.1073/pnas.231499798]
13. Tan CWK, Chow JY, David's K (2012) 'How does TGfU work?' examining the relationship between learning design in TGfU and a nonlinear pedagogy. Physical education and sport pedagogy 17: 331-348. [DOI:10.1080/17408989.2011.582486]
14. Seifert L, Button C, Davids K, (2013). Key properties of expert movement systems in sport. Sports Medicine. 43(3):167-78. [DOI:10.1007/s40279-012-0011-z]
15. Hong, S.L. & Newell, K.M. (2006b). Practice effects on local and global dynamics of the ski-simulator task. Experimental Brain Research, 169(3), 350-360. [DOI:10.1007/s00221-005-0145-4]
16. Rein, R. Button, C. David's, K. & summers, J. (2010). Cluster analysis of movement patterns in multiarticular actions: A tutorial. Motor Control, 14(2), 211-239 [DOI:10.1123/mcj.14.2.211]
17. Chow, J.Y. David's, K. Button, C. & Koh, M. (2008). Coordination changes in a discrete multi-articular action as a function of practice. Acta Psychological, 127(1), 163-176. [DOI:10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.04.002]
18. Komar J, Chow J-Y, Chollet D, Seifert L (2014). Effect of analogy instructions with an internal focus on learning a complex motor skill. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 26(1):17-32. [DOI:10.1080/10413200.2013.771386]
19. Komar J, Chow J-Y, Chollet D, Seifert L, (2015). Neurobiological degeneracy: Supporting stability, flexibility and pluripotentiality in complex motor skill. Acta psychological. 154:26-35. [DOI:10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.11.002]
20. Lee MCY, Chow JY, Komar J, Tan CWK, Button C (2014) Nonlinear Pedagogy: An Effective Approach to Cater for Individual Differences in Learning a Sports Skill. PLoS ONE 9(8) journal. Pone. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0104744]
21. Rab G, Petuskey K, Bagley A, (2002). A method for determination of upper extremity kinematics. Gait & posture. 15(2):113-9. [DOI:10.1016/S0966-6362(01)00155-2]
22. Thelen E, Smith LB, Karmiloff-Smith A, and Johnson MH (1994) a dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action: MIT Press.
23. Newell KM (1986). Constraints on the development of coordination. Motor development in children: Aspects of coordination and control. 34:341-60. [DOI:10.1007/978-94-009-4460-2_19]
24. Chow JY, David's K, Button C, Renshaw I, Shuttleworth R, et al, editors (2009) Nonlinear Pedagogy: Implications for Teaching Games for Understanding. Ottawa, Canada: Physical Health Education Association.
25. Renshaw I (2010) a constraints-led perspective to understanding skill acquisition and game play: a basis for integration of motor learning theory and physical education praxis? Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 15: 117-137. [DOI:10.1080/17408980902791586]
26. Araújo D, Davids K (2011). Talent development: From possessing gifts to functional environmental interactions. Talent Development & Excellence. 3(1):23-5.
27. Zelaznik HN (2014). The past and future of motor learning and control: what is the proper level of description and analysis? [DOI:10.1123/kr.2014-0035]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Research in Sport Management and Motor Behavior

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb