教练对板球增强反馈(和技术)的看法

Kevin Tissera, Dominic Orth, Minh Huynh, A. Benson
{"title":"教练对板球增强反馈(和技术)的看法","authors":"Kevin Tissera, Dominic Orth, Minh Huynh, A. Benson","doi":"10.1177/17479541231213540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Coaches utilise augmented feedback to help channel learning and skill acquisition in sports. However, the rationale and pedagogical approaches underpinning feedback (and technology) strategies employed by coaches remain poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to explore cricket coaches understanding towards the role of feedback, and how feedback (and technology) strategies are enacted within practice settings, viewed within pedagogical frameworks. An online questionnaire (Qualtrics) consisted of fixed-text and free-text questions. Fixed-text responses were analysed exploring associations (frequencies, chi-square) or differences (Mann-Whitney U) between coaching groups, with free-text questions examined through reflexive thematic analysis, exploring approaches to presenting athletes with feedback (and technology use). Overall, 134 coaches (94% male, 6% female) aged 18–69 years from 12 countries responded to the questionnaire. Following silhouette and k-modes cluster analysis, results were explored for two coaching groups: community cricket coaches ( n = 84, 63%) and higher-performance coaches ( n = 50, 37%). Significant differences showed greater coaching experience, qualifications, and time spent coaching per week for the higher-performance coaching group ( p < 0.0125), in addition to higher self-efficacy around feedback, albeit with a small effect size ( p < 0.001, r = 0.29). Community coaches showed a significant difference in manipulating feedback strategies on motivational factors ( p < 0.0125). Reflexive thematic analysis identified different rationales for the perceived role of feedback and use of technology across coaching groups, underpinned by contrasting pedagogical approaches (coach-centred versus athlete-centred). Responses highlighted the co-adaptive properties of coach-athlete dyads (evident in how/why feedback was manipulated). Overall findings present opportunities to further coach education to improve understanding and operationalisation of feedback (and technology).","PeriodicalId":507869,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sports Science &amp; Coaching","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A coach's perspective on augmented feedback (and technology) in cricket\",\"authors\":\"Kevin Tissera, Dominic Orth, Minh Huynh, A. Benson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17479541231213540\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Coaches utilise augmented feedback to help channel learning and skill acquisition in sports. However, the rationale and pedagogical approaches underpinning feedback (and technology) strategies employed by coaches remain poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to explore cricket coaches understanding towards the role of feedback, and how feedback (and technology) strategies are enacted within practice settings, viewed within pedagogical frameworks. An online questionnaire (Qualtrics) consisted of fixed-text and free-text questions. Fixed-text responses were analysed exploring associations (frequencies, chi-square) or differences (Mann-Whitney U) between coaching groups, with free-text questions examined through reflexive thematic analysis, exploring approaches to presenting athletes with feedback (and technology use). Overall, 134 coaches (94% male, 6% female) aged 18–69 years from 12 countries responded to the questionnaire. Following silhouette and k-modes cluster analysis, results were explored for two coaching groups: community cricket coaches ( n = 84, 63%) and higher-performance coaches ( n = 50, 37%). Significant differences showed greater coaching experience, qualifications, and time spent coaching per week for the higher-performance coaching group ( p < 0.0125), in addition to higher self-efficacy around feedback, albeit with a small effect size ( p < 0.001, r = 0.29). Community coaches showed a significant difference in manipulating feedback strategies on motivational factors ( p < 0.0125). Reflexive thematic analysis identified different rationales for the perceived role of feedback and use of technology across coaching groups, underpinned by contrasting pedagogical approaches (coach-centred versus athlete-centred). Responses highlighted the co-adaptive properties of coach-athlete dyads (evident in how/why feedback was manipulated). Overall findings present opportunities to further coach education to improve understanding and operationalisation of feedback (and technology).\",\"PeriodicalId\":507869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Sports Science &amp; Coaching\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Sports Science &amp; Coaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541231213540\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sports Science &amp; Coaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17479541231213540","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

教练员利用增强型反馈来帮助引导体育学习和技能掌握。然而,人们对教练所采用的反馈(和技术)策略的基本原理和教学方法仍然知之甚少。本研究旨在探讨板球教练对反馈作用的理解,以及在教学框架内,如何在实践环境中实施反馈(和技术)策略。在线问卷(Qualtrics)包括固定文本和自由文本问题。对固定文本的回答进行了分析,探讨了教练组之间的关联(频率、卡方)或差异(曼-惠特尼U),并通过反思性主题分析对自由文本问题进行了研究,探讨了向运动员提供反馈(和技术使用)的方法。共有来自 12 个国家的 134 名年龄在 18-69 岁之间的教练员(94% 为男性,6% 为女性)回答了问卷。在进行剪影和 K 模式聚类分析后,对两个教练群体的结果进行了探讨:社区板球教练(84 人,占 63%)和高水平教练(50 人,占 37%)。显著差异表明,成绩较好的教练组在教练经验、资质和每周执教时间方面都更胜一筹(p < 0.0125),此外,他们在反馈方面的自我效能感也更高,尽管影响较小(p < 0.001,r = 0.29)。社区教练在操作反馈策略的动机因素方面存在显著差异(p < 0.0125)。反思性主题分析发现,不同教练群体对反馈的作用和技术的使用有不同的认识,其基础是截然不同的教学方法(以教练为中心和以运动员为中心)。回答强调了教练员-运动员二人组的共同适应性(在如何/为何操纵反馈中显而易见)。总体研究结果为进一步开展教练员教育提供了机会,以提高对反馈(和技术)的理解和操作性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A coach's perspective on augmented feedback (and technology) in cricket
Coaches utilise augmented feedback to help channel learning and skill acquisition in sports. However, the rationale and pedagogical approaches underpinning feedback (and technology) strategies employed by coaches remain poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to explore cricket coaches understanding towards the role of feedback, and how feedback (and technology) strategies are enacted within practice settings, viewed within pedagogical frameworks. An online questionnaire (Qualtrics) consisted of fixed-text and free-text questions. Fixed-text responses were analysed exploring associations (frequencies, chi-square) or differences (Mann-Whitney U) between coaching groups, with free-text questions examined through reflexive thematic analysis, exploring approaches to presenting athletes with feedback (and technology use). Overall, 134 coaches (94% male, 6% female) aged 18–69 years from 12 countries responded to the questionnaire. Following silhouette and k-modes cluster analysis, results were explored for two coaching groups: community cricket coaches ( n = 84, 63%) and higher-performance coaches ( n = 50, 37%). Significant differences showed greater coaching experience, qualifications, and time spent coaching per week for the higher-performance coaching group ( p < 0.0125), in addition to higher self-efficacy around feedback, albeit with a small effect size ( p < 0.001, r = 0.29). Community coaches showed a significant difference in manipulating feedback strategies on motivational factors ( p < 0.0125). Reflexive thematic analysis identified different rationales for the perceived role of feedback and use of technology across coaching groups, underpinned by contrasting pedagogical approaches (coach-centred versus athlete-centred). Responses highlighted the co-adaptive properties of coach-athlete dyads (evident in how/why feedback was manipulated). Overall findings present opportunities to further coach education to improve understanding and operationalisation of feedback (and technology).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信