TRADITIONAL STATIC VS. DYNAMIC WARM UP

Action Research By:-Dewan Monika

Sharma Atul. March 2013.

BORING & INACTIVE

FUN & ACTIVE

INTRODUCTIONResearch Question

What is the effect of using a variety of creative dynamic warm-up strategies along with static stretches on students' attitude towards warm-up and their participation in PE class?

DYNAMIC ? STATIC ?

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

It became a CONCERN for us since we realized that even though Warm up is for their benefit, yet it was not able to meet their FUN and FITNESS need!!

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? ( CONTINUED….)

STRETCHING is not Warm-up.….

THE CONCERN…. Traditional static stretches: Holding the extension of any muscle for

a prescribed length of time.

Does not warm us up.

Works on Range of Motion not HR

Doing similar routine movements can make warm-up boring.

IMPORTANT UNDERSTANDING…Dynamic warm-up: Slow controlled movements intended to

allow heart rate to increase.

Reduce muscle stiffness.

Increase blood flow in body and mind through active tissues.

Increase muscle temperature and reduces chances of injuries.

VARIABLES….. DEPENDENT: Student attitude towards

warm-up and their participation in PE class.

INDEPENDENT: Traditional static warm up and Dynamic warm-up strategies.

ATTRIBUTE: Gender - A difference in the attitude of boys and girls as an effect of the style of warm up.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE Little, T., and A.G. Williams (2006)

“Dynamic-stretch protocol produced significantly faster agility performance than did both the no-stretch protocol and the static stretch protocol.”

REVIEW OF LITERATURE (CONTINUED…)

Pope, R., Graham, B., Kirwan, J., and Herbert, R.(2000) suggests:

“General static stretching has minimal effect on injury prevention.”

REVIEW OF LITERATURE (CONTINUED…)

Thacker, Gilchrist, Stroup and Kimsey (2004)

“Static stretching was not significantly associated with a reduction in total injuries.”

REVIEW OF LITERATURE (CONTINUED…) Taylor, Kristie-Lee; Sheppard, Jeremy M ; Lee,

Hamilton and Plummer, Norma (2009) reveals

“A dynamic warm-up routine is superior to static stretching when preparing for powerful performance; however, these differences can be eliminated if followed by a moderate to high intensity sport specific skill warm-up.”

RESEARCH DESIGN

Repeated measures design for the same Group Pre and Post test.

To measure Student Attitude and participation administered Pre intervention for both the units.

Post test design to obtain difference in attitude and participation.

INTERVENTION Unit 1: Traditional style warm up.(Static

stretches either by self, or led by a teacher or a peer.)

Unit 2: Dynamic strategies intervention. **Activities: Follow the leader, musical stretches, aerobic warm up, tag games, jump ropes, Yoga, fitness stretches and create a group warm up routine.** Understanding: Benefits of warm up, FITT Principle, HR monitoring.

SAMPLE Convenience Sample - 100 Grade four and

five students (54 Boys and 46 Girls) from Co-Educational PE classes at the American Embassy School, New Delhi, India.

Age range is from nine through eleven years.

PE class met twice every week for 8 weeks

for two consecutive PE units where the two types of interventions ( Traditional and Dynamic) were implemented.

ETHNIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE STUDENTS

United

State

sKo

rea

United

King

domIsra

el

Austr

aliaJap

anIndia

Canad

a

German

y

Botsw

ana

ItalyMex

icoFra

nce

Malaysi

a

Swede

n

Netherl

ands

Switze

rland

New Zea

land

Singa

pore

Czech

Republi

c

Portug

al

Denmark

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Number of students

Number of students

INSTRUMENTATION & DATA COLLECTION

Repeated measures design for the same Group Pre and Post test.

Student Self assessment Attitude Likert Scale, administered Pre and Post intervention for both the units.

Participation performance measured weekly, Pre and Post intervention, using teacher observation scale.

• Researcher bias• Maturity• History

RESULTS: ATTITUDEUnit 1 Traditional warm up score change vs Unit 2 Dynamic warm up score change.

The two tailed t-test showed statistically significant improvement in student attitudes towards warm up. (t = 2.6245, df=99, P = 0.0101).

ATTITUDE SCORESGroup Traditional

Warm up

Dynamic

Warm up

Mean 1.15 2.81

SD 3.63 4.37

ATTITUDE MEAN SCORES - TRADITIONAL VS. DYNAMIC WARM UP

Series10

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Pre test Mean Traditional stylePost test Mean Traditional stylePre test Mean Dynamic warm upPost test Dy-namic Warm up

RESULTS: PARTICIPATIONUnit 1 Traditional warm up score change vs Unit 2 Dynamic warm up score change.

The two tailed t-test showed no significant difference in student participation during the two units (t = 0.6944, df=99, P = 0.4891).

PARTICIPATION SCORES

Group Traditional Warm

up

Dynamic Warm

up

Mean 2.95 2.54

SD 3.91 3.25

Participation Mean scores for Traditional vs Dynamic warm up

Traditional Warm up Dynamic Warm up0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

1.61

2.98

0.76

2.67

Attitude Mean of change in scores for boys and girls

GirlsBoys

ATTITUDE CHANGE: GENDER ( ATTRIBUTE VARIABLE)

DISCUSSION Attitudes: Significant improvement from pre

to posttest condition using the dynamic warm up intervention.

Participation: Students participation scores did not reflect a statistically significant change in participation.

Gender attribute variable: The attitude of boys showed a greater improvement with the inclusion of dynamic warm up strategy than the girls.

ACTION Discuss and share results with the

administrators and PE Department.

Give students opportunities for ownership of learning within PE classes as much as possible.

Introduce dynamic approach to warm up from the beginning of the school year.

PROCESS OF CREATING A DYNAMIC WARM UP ROUTINE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-tHltiHad0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdVagZjgMdQ

REFERENCES Cassey, E. (2011, December). The 6 Characteristics of a Good Dynamic Warm-up.

Retrieved February, 2013, from http://www.ericcressey.com/6-characteristics-good-dynamic-warm-up  

Dexter, K., Stroup, D., Gilchrist, J., & Thacker, S. (2002). The impact of Stretching on Sports Injury Risk: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Retrieved January, 2013, from http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc website: http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pub-res/shinsplints.pdf   Kamb, S. (2012, September 1).

How to Warm Up Properly and Avoid Injury. Retrieved February, 2013, from www.nerdfitness.com website: http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2012/01/09/warm-up

Kumar, P., & Jose, S. (2009, September). Comparison between static and dynamic warm-up exercise regimes on lower limb muscle power. Retrieved February, 2013, from http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=711 Little, T., & Williams, A. (2006, February).

 

REFERENCES ( CONTINUED…) Mueller, J., & Nichols, N. (n.d.). An In-Depth Look at the Warm Up [Reference Guide to

Warming Up]. Retrieved March 9, 2013, from www.sparkpeople.com website: http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/ fitness_articles.asp?id=1036

O’Donnell, K., & Seagrave, L. S. A. (n.d.). Using Dynamic Warm-Up Exercises instead of Traditional Warm-Up routines. Retrieved January, 2013, from www. sports-coach.net website: http://www.nwaswimaths.com/programs/Dynamic%20Warm-Up.pdf

Pope, R., Graham, B., Kirwan, J., & Herbert, R. (2000, February), Effects of differential stretching protocols during warm-ups on high-speed motor capacities in professional soccer players. Retrieved December, 2012, from The NCBI Home website: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16503682  

A randomized trial of preexercise stretching for prevention of lower-limb injury. [White paper]. Retrieved January, 2013, from The National Center for Biotechnology Information website: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ 10694106

Taylor, K.-L., Sheppard, J. M., Hamilton, L., & Norma, P. (2009). Negative effect of static stretching restored when combined with a sport specific warm-up component. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, Nov(12.6), 657-61.