PDFE #14

The difference between part and whole practice methods:

Part Practice: a way of simplifying a task into parts. Making a complex skills easier to learn the basic parts. The three types of part practice are segmentation, fractionization, and simplification.

In segmentation, one aspect of a skill is practiced first, then after that part of the skill is acheived, the second part is added. After the first and second parts are added together and learned, then the 3rd part is added, and so on. Individual aspects of a skill are added on one at a time until the whole skill is put together and performed successfully.

Whole practice is just practicing every part of a skill at once. It is skipping any breakdown of a skill and just practicing the skill over and over as a whole.

Lab 8.2 results:

Participant: Kara Experimenter: Marley

Trial: Count:

1 2

2 1

3 1

4 2

5 3

6 2

7 0

8 2

[1-minute break]

9 1

10 2

11 1

12 1

13 2

14 3

15 3

16 3

[1-minute break]

17 3

18 2

19 2

20 2

21 3

22 2

23 3

24 2

[1-minute break]

25 2

26 2

27 3

28 2

29 3

30 2

31 3

32 2

[5-minute break]

Retention test:

1 3

2 2

3 4

4 4

5 3

6 4

7 3

8 3

Average: 2-3

In our juggling lab, the part practice was more successful. I was the participant doing each individual step and the results show that by the time I put all the steps together, I was better skilled at juggling than Kara, who only did whole practice. This was a pretty successful study because neither of us could juggle (this is probably still the case), so we were able to start at the same ability level.

The results matched my expectations for this lab. Juggling is a skill that can be broken down and is easier learned in parts. However, this is not the case for all skills. As the lab gives the example, a pole vaulter can practice the steps in order until he completes the entire vault. A runner, however, can break down the correct way to step to move faster, but in order to learn the skill of a faster run he must just run. Another example would be leaping in dance. You can practice the preparation, but there is not actual way to stop mid air and start over in steps. Leaping is an example where whole practice is the most practical.

Other factors that could have affected our results were there may have been a difference in our beginning skill level. It could have been that even though neither of us could juggle successfully, I may have had more practice/experience in the past. Another factor could be our coordination abilities. This lab could just show that I have a higher hand-eye coordination ability instead of showing how part practice can be more successful than whole practice.

PDFE #11

Date: 11/15/10

Activity: Berry Club Soccer Practice

Site: Richards Gym

Instructor/coach: Seth Mason

# of Students: 16

Grade Level: College

Total # of recorded intervals x 15 seconds: 2160 seconds

Code designated intervals (A, I, M, W) x 15 seconds/total =

A= 59.7%

I= 11.8%

M= 3.5%

W= 25%

These are pretty good percentages, especially since it is a soccer practice. Management is good time, this was them marking off soccer goals and getting things situated. Instruction was just at the beginning and a little throughout their scrimmages and some towards the end. Waiting is 1/4 which seems like a lot, but in 36 minutes for a soccer scrimmage where they rotate players it isn't a crucial amount of time. The activity (playing) takes up almost 60% which seems like a healthy amount of activity. Overall, for this one player that I observed there was a good balance between the four categories. I don't think the coach needs to make any adjustments to the practice. All players had a good amount of warm up and active playing time. The coach also made sure there wasn't a lot of standing around wasting time.

PDFE #12

Knowledge of Results (KR) is the extrinsic information given to a learner that tells them something about how successful their actions were with respect to the desired outcome. Sometimes KR can be redundant because the learner is aware of what they have done wrong. Often times these notifications of the obvious can be annoying to a learner. However, many times the learner is not aware of the results of their actions and need aid in knowing how successful, or unsuccessful they are in order to fix it. Performance activities like diving, gymnastics, and ice skating require an observer to coach them correctly because it is many time hard to know if they are doing the movements correctly.

Knowledge of Performance (KP) helps a learner know the quality of their movements. This is sometimes referred to as kinematic feedback and is a type of information that instructors, coaches, and therapists use often in real-world settings. KP provides information about the pattern in space or time either of the movement or of the implement the learner is moving. Examples of this would be a baseball coach saying "your grip on the bat is too low" or a diving coach saying "your tuck wasn't tight enough." This information is different from KR because it does not necessarily provide information about the level of achievement. Instead, KP focuses on the quality of movement.

Data

Participant: Melissa Edwards Experimenter: Marley Simonis

5 to 10 seconds between trials. Knowledge of Results

Trial: CE

1 1.5 inches short

2 1 inch short

3 .5 in short

4 0 [on target]

5 .5 in short

6 .75 in short

7 4 cm too far

8 3 cm too far

9 1 cm too far

10 1 cm too short

[1-Minute break]

11 3 cm too short

12 .5 cm short

13 1 in too far

14 1 in too far

15 1 cm short

16 4 cm short

17 .5 in short

18 .5 cm too far

19 .5 cm short

20 .5 cm far

[1-Minute break]

21 .5 in too far

22 0 [on target]

23 1/20 in too short

24 .5 in too short

25 1/16 in too short

26 .5 in too short

27 1/32 in too short

28 .5 cm too short

29 3/4 in too short

30 3/4 in too far

[5-Minute break]

NO KR: Retention Test

1 3/4 in too short

2 .5 in too short

3 1mm too short

4 0 [on target]

5 .5 in

Participant: Marley Simonis Experimenter: Melissa

Trial KR? CE

1 N 1 in

2 Y 1/16 in

3 Y 3/4 in

4 Y 1/4 in

5 N 1/8 in

6 Y 1/4 in

7 N 1/2 in

8 Y 1/2 in

9 Y 1 in

10 N 0 [on line]

[1-Minute break]

11 N 1/2 in

12 N 0 [on line]

13 N 3/4 in

14 N 1/16 in

15 Y 1 1/4 in

16 Y 1/2 in

17 N 3/4 in

18 N 1/4 in

19 N 1/8 in

20 N 1/2 in

[1-Minute break]

21 N 1/4 in

22 Y 1/2 in

23 N 1/16 in

24 N 1/4 in

25 N 1/4 in

26 Y 1/2 in

27 Y 3/4 in

28 N 1/2 in

29 N 1/2 in

30 N 1/2 in

[5-minute break]

We did not have time to do the retention test.

Melissa's approximate average: .41 in

Marley's approximate average: .52 in

Providing KR seemed to help in this situation. However, sometimes when I requested KR I started doing worse. But overall, since Melissa had better accuracy it seemed that KR was helpful.

One thing I noticed was that Melissa was very dependent on the KR. Once she did not receive them, it was hard for her to figure out where the line was. As I got more comfortable not using KR, my performance increased.

Overall though KR seemed to help. Since we were blind folded in this activity KR was really necessary. This shows how in some sports and activities the learner cannot determine how good or bad their results are and have to have someone to tell them.

Improvement through KR could be seen in Melissa's first few trials as she gradually got closer to the line after receiving each result.

The results matched our expectations. KR wasn't significantly beneficial but helpful enough that both participants were near the line. Only occasionally did we miss the line by a large amount, and that was usually after a long break. When we kept in 5-10sec rhythm we improved.

I surprisingly did better without the KR than I expected. I do not know what to attribute that to. It seemed that sometimes after receiving KR my performance decreased.

One factor that could have contributed to results is the participants ability to remember how far their wrist should slide in order to get the pen on or near the line. Being able to recall what it felt like to get it on the line could greatly help in accuracy.

PDFE #10

In varied practice, the learner practices more than one variation of a task so that he or she can learn the relationship between parameter settings and the resulting environmental outcomes. Factors like distance, speed, angle, etc. can all be changed from trial to trial to relate the parameter settings to the outcomes of movement. It is thought to enhance schema, the rule relating the parameter settings to the outcomes of a movement. Varied practice should help a learner to generalize learning experiences to novel demands within the same class of movements.

Constant practice, however, only uses a specific pairing between the parameter value for that one target and the resulting outcome. For example, just throwing the ball from one place over and over. It develops a skill for that one distance, but there is no experience when the parameters change. Constant practice does not help the learner to generalize learning experiences to novel demands within the same class of movements - the learner is not familiar with any variation in demand.

Condition 1 - Constant Practice -

Participant: Marley Simonis

Experimenter: Kara Hardy

5-10 seconds between trials:

5 out of 15 were within the hoop

(1-minute break)

6 out of 15 were within the hoop

(1-minute break)

7 out of 15 were within the hoop

1 out of 15 was on the dot

(5-minute break)

RETENTION TEST:

Zero of the 5 were made within the hoop

Sum: 20

Condition 2 - Varied Practice -

Participant: Kara Hardy

Experimenter: Marley Simonis

5-10 seconds between trials:

5 out of 15 were made within hoop (1 pt each)

3 out of 15 were made on the dot (2 pt each)

The 1 point shots were varied on distance. Some were made from 4m, 5m, and 6m.

2 of the dot shots were made from 4m. One of the dot shots was made from 6m.

(1-minute break)

Zero of 15 shots were 1pt

2 of 15 shots were made on the dot. One from 6m, the other from 5m.

(1-minute break)

4 out of 15 shots were made in the hoop (1 pt each) 2 from 5m, 2 from 6m.

2 out of 15 shots were on the dot (2 pt each) both from the 4m distance.

(5-minute break)

RETENTION TEST:

One shot out of 5 was made inside the hoop, not on the dot, at the 5m distance.

It seemed that the variety test worked better in the experiment (It could just be that Kara is a better thrower than I am).

My constant practice wasn't very good. At some points there was a series of improvement as I learned how to NOT throw the bean bag. But then as I kept going my performance decreased significantly. After the 5 minute break I tested the retention and my retention was zero. In our experiment of this trial the constant practice was not beneficial to improving this skill.

Presentations Lineup

1. Bethani and Mandi

2. Robert, Amanda, and Jeff

3. Lindsay, Caitlin, and Meredith

4. Caysie, Jenny, Lauren, and Emma

5. Marley and Kara

6. Katie, Susan, and Melissa

7. Nathan and Ehsan