SmarterEd

Aussie Maths & Science Teachers: Save your time with SmarterEd

  • Login
  • Get Help
  • About

HMS, BM EQ-Bank 607

Evaluate the effectiveness of different types of feedback for an elite athlete in the autonomous stage of learning who is attempting to refine a complex gymnastics routine. Justify your response with reference to specific feedback types.   (8 marks)

--- 22 WORK AREA LINES (style=lined) ---

Show Answers Only

*Recommended “Evaluation” language is highlighted in bold throughout the answer below.

Evaluation Statement

  • Different feedback types show varying effectiveness for elite autonomous gymnasts refining complex routines.
  • This evaluation looks at how well feedback improves technique and whether it disrupts performance for autonomous gymnasts.

Feedback and improvement

  • Task-intrinsic feedback is highly effective for elite gymnasts to detect precise errors.
  • This is due to autonomous athletes possessing exceptional body awareness to feel minor deviations. For example, gymnasts instantly recognise when landing positions shift millimetres off-center.
  • In this regard, delayed video analysis can achieve superior refinement by revealing imperceptible errors. Slow-motion replay identifies slight arm positioning flaws that feel correct during execution.
  • A critical strength is combining internal sensing with objective external viewing.
  • This comprehensive approach optimises technical refinement.

Performance disruption

  • Concurrent feedback is only partially effective because it risks disrupting performance flow.
  • Elite gymnasts can process brief real-time cues like “extend” during tumbling passes. However, excessive concurrent feedback interrupts automatic flow states.
  • Performance feedback is most effective when it is highly specific. For example, discussing precise hip angles rather than general form is much better feedback for autonomous gymnasts.
  • While strong for isolated corrections, concurrent feedback shows limitations during full routines. Although effective for single skills, it proves less suitable for complete performances.

Final Evaluation

  • Weighing these factors shows task-intrinsic and delayed video feedback are highly effective.
  • The strengths in precision refinement outweigh minimal disruption risks.
  • Concurrent feedback remains moderately effective when used judiciously.
  • Overall, this evaluation demonstrates autonomous gymnasts benefit most from self-generated and delayed feedback.
  • Implications suggest coaches should prioritise video analysis while minimising real-time interruptions.
Show Worked Solution

*Recommended “Evaluation” language is highlighted in bold throughout the answer below.

Evaluation Statement

  • Different feedback types show varying effectiveness for elite autonomous gymnasts refining complex routines.
  • This evaluation looks at how well feedback improves technique and whether it disrupts performance for autonomous gymnasts.

Feedback and improvement

  • Task-intrinsic feedback is highly effective for elite gymnasts to detect precise errors.
  • This is due to autonomous athletes possessing exceptional body awareness to feel minor deviations. For example, gymnasts instantly recognise when landing positions shift millimetres off-center.
  • In this regard, delayed video analysis can achieve superior refinement by revealing imperceptible errors. Slow-motion replay identifies slight arm positioning flaws that feel correct during execution.
  • A critical strength is combining internal sensing with objective external viewing.
  • This comprehensive approach optimises technical refinement.

Performance disruption

  • Concurrent feedback is only partially effective because it risks disrupting performance flow.
  • Elite gymnasts can process brief real-time cues like “extend” during tumbling passes. However, excessive concurrent feedback interrupts automatic flow states.
  • Performance feedback is most effective when it is highly specific. For example, discussing precise hip angles rather than general form is much better feedback for autonomous gymnasts.
  • While strong for isolated corrections, concurrent feedback shows limitations during full routines. Although effective for single skills, it proves less suitable for complete performances.

Final Evaluation

  • Weighing these factors shows task-intrinsic and delayed video feedback are highly effective.
  • The strengths in precision refinement outweigh minimal disruption risks.
  • Concurrent feedback remains moderately effective when used judiciously.
  • Overall, this evaluation demonstrates autonomous gymnasts benefit most from self-generated and delayed feedback.
  • Implications suggest coaches should prioritise video analysis while minimising real-time interruptions.

Filed Under: Stages of learning Tagged With: Band 5, Band 6, smc-5921-85-Feedback comparisons

Copyright © 2014–2025 SmarterEd.com.au · Log in