The Effect of Kinesthetic and Demonstration Techniques of Instruction Upon Standing Broad Jump Performance

• Main Author: Meyer, Howard Philip
• Format: Others
• Language: English
• Published: ScholarWorks 1972
• Subjects: Kinesiotherapy; Medicine and Health Sciences; Movement and Mind-Body Therapies
• Online Access: http://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/1251; http://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2244&context=dissertations

A test of standing broad jump ability was administered to ninety-three sixth grade boys to compare the kinesthetic and demonstration methods of instruction. The subjects were classified on the Neilson-Cozens Classification Index and divided into three groups. The first group received the kinesthetic method of instruction, the second group was instructed using the demonstration method, and the third group did not receive any formal instruction. The data were examined by computing the mean and standard deviation of each pre-test and post-test group. The mean and standard deviation of the pre-test scores were 60.61 and 7.589. The mean and standard deviation of the post-test scores were 61.31 and 7.397. When each pre-test score was subtracted from its corresponding post-test score it was revealed that the demonstration group showed an increase in performance of eighteen boys, the kinesthetic group increased by sixteen boys and the group receiving no formal instruction increased by seven boys. Analysis of variance of matched groups revealed an F ratio of 2.68 which was not significant at the .05 level. An alternate approach was attempted in which the effect of the pre-test scores were partialled out from the post-test scores. Subjected to matched group analysis of variance design indicated an F ratio of 2.68 which was not significant at the .05 level. The resu1ts of a randomized group analysis without matching revealed an F ratio of 2.68 which was quite similar to the previous results and also insignificant at the .05 level. Randomized group analysis without matching between post-test scores and the regression equation indicated an F ratio of 2.72 which again was found insignificant at the .05 level of significance. It was found that no statistically significant difference could be obtained by use of one instructional technique exclusively in preference to another.