A Study on Constructing the Order of the Teaching Materials on Apparatus Gymnastics to Learn “Spring Motion”: Focusing on the Relation between “Forward Roll Bridge” and “Spring Motion from a Higher Level”*

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop eŠective teaching plans for learning how to ``spring'' by creating lesson plans using a ``forward roll bridge (FRB)'' as the teaching material and analyzing the eŠectiveness of the lesson plans through their execution in classes. These lessons of ``spring motion from a higher level (SMH)'', which were taught over 6 school hours in total, were carried out as a part of the unit on apparatus gymnastics spanning from April 15th to the 28th, 2016. Participants were 5th grade students (32 male, 31 female, 2 classes) of the F elementary school, which is located in Hiroshima prefecture. These lessons were followed by the ``FRB (10 school hours in total)'' lessons developed for this study, in which the students learned ``the spring motion with hip subduction, from forward roll (SHF)'' and aimed to do the ``SMH'', landing on the ground. The F elementary school employs a subject teacher system throughout the elementary school, and the students had already learned the ``antenna bridge (AB)'' and the ``FRB'' in the previous year. The results of this study were as follows; (1) An improvement of the students' athletic skills for doing all of the moves, ``AB'', ``FRB'', and ``SMH'', was observed after the 6 school hour lessons. It expressly indicates that the lesson plans were eŠective for teaching ``SMH''. (2) A correlation of the achievements of ``FRB'' and ``SMH'' was found in the ˆrst lesson (|r| ≦0.700, p<0.0001). This result indicates that ``FRB'' should be learned before ``SMH'', to produce a higher achievement rate. After the 6th lesson, the correlations between ``AB'' and ``FRB'' (|r|≦0.348, p<0.006) and between ``FRB'' and ``SMH'' (|r|≦0.440, p<0.0001) were found. This might show that eŠectiveness of ``FRB'' as a move connecting the learning of ``AB'' and ``SMH''. (3) The qualitative analysis of the students' movements indicated that there were two types of students who were not able to do ``SMH'', those students who achieved ``SHF'' but could not do the spring, and those students who had not achieved ``SHF''. This diŠers from former studies that showed only the latter type of students existing. This indicates that the di‹culties of ``SMH'' were that 1) the students ˆrst need to achieve two skills, ``SHF'' and ``pushing with hands'', and 2) the students need to adapt themselves for another situation in order to be able to do the move.