| Date | November 2018 | Marks available | 1 | Reference code | 18N.2.HL:.tz0.2 |
| Level | Higher Level | Paper | Paper 2 | Time zone | time zone 0 |
| Command term | Identify | Question number | 2 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
A study investigated teaching that supports individual differences in skill learning. Two groups of 10-year-old participants were taught for four weeks using the following techniques:
● Variable practice (non-linear pedagogy)
● Drills (traditional pedagogy).
Participant movement was recorded by digital video and scored against criteria. The graph shows the mean score of successful movements during the pre-test performance (day 1), post-test performance (4 weeks), and retention testing (10 weeks).
[Source: Lee MCY, Chow JY, Komar J, Tan CWK, Button C (2014) Nonlinear Pedagogy:
An Effective Approach to Cater for Individual Differences in Learning a Sports Skill. PLoS ONE 9(8): e104744.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104744. Licenced under a Creative Commons International 4.0 licence,
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0. ]
Identify the highest mean movement score for retention testing.
Calculate the change between the pre-test and post-test mean movement scores for the variable practice participants.
Suggest reasons for the trends shown in the graph.
Markscheme
14 «points» ✔
15–5 ✔
=10 «points» ✔
Accept the subtraction in a different order.
Non-linear pedagogy/variable practice yields stronger learning outcomes because:
individual differences are taken into consideration when teaching ✔
there is high level of connectivity between athlete and coach that develops a deeper understanding of the individual ✔
learning is process oriented and therefore the learner understands how the movement fits in the larger programme ✔
Practicing in drill model creates improved retention because:
the motor programmes are developed and solidified ✔
Examiners report
All candidates attempted this question, and in general, it was answered well. Some candidates didn’t read the question fully and identified the group rather than the value.
All candidates attempted this question and performed well. Most candidates provided the working as well as the answer. Some candidates did not read the question and calculated the change between the post-test for variable and drill practice.
Candidates struggled with this question achieving an average of 0.5 marks for this question. Most candidates described the data presented on the graph. Some candidates were able to suggest reasons for the trends in the graph.
