EISSN 1676-5133

PEDAGOGIC

BEHAVIOR OF THE INSTRUCTORS OF

CLASSES OF GROUP OF LOCALIZED FITNESS

Susana Carla Alves Franco1 sfranco@esdrm.pt Jos de Jesus Fernandes Rodrigues1 jrodrigues@esdrm.pt Marta Castaer i Balcells2 castaner@inefc.uld.es doi:10.3900/fpj.7.4.251.e

Franco SCA, Rodrigues JJF, Balcells MC. Pedagogic behavior of the instructors of classes of group of localized fitness Fit Perf J. 2008 JulAug;7(4):251-63.

ABSTRACT
Introduction: The aim of this pilot study is to make an application of the new developed instrument Fitness Instructors Behaviour Observation System Group Classes (SOCIF), and to describe which, in Resistance Training classes, the behaviour instructors tendencies are. Materials and Methods:There were observed Resistance Training sessions, in group classes, with the content of resistance strength. We registered the behaviours duration through an observation system of the instructors (SOCIF). Results: It was guaranteed excellent values of reliability intra -observer. Discussion: We have concluded that: When we confronted the results of this study with other studies, independently of the context, the two principal behaviours of the teachers, coaches or instructors are Information and/or observation, and the other behaviours present an variable occurrence; there are some behaviours that are never manifested by the instructors; the positive behaviours prevail in relation to the negatives; the instructors use behaviours that are important as pedagogical strategies to retain the participants to the exercise practice, such as positive affectivity, praise, hustle and conversation with participants. The behaviours seem to vary between instructors; the instructors behaviour seems to change their occurrence in agreement with the class phases. The instructors behaviour seems to be inuenced by the position of the exercises. The instructors, during the class, spend most of the time in exercise.

KEYWORDS
Behavior, Physical Fitness, Exercise.
1 2

Escola Superior de Desporto de Rio Maior - Rio Maior - Portugal Institut Nacional dEducaci Fsica de Catalunya - Lleida - Spain

Copyright 2008 por Colgio Brasileiro de Atividade Fsica, Sade e Esporte

Fit Perf J | Rio de Janeiro | 7 | 4 | 251-263 | Jul/Aug 2008

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

251

FR ANCO, RODRIGUES, B ALCELLS

COMPORTAMENTO

PEDAGGICO DOS INSTRUTORES DE AULAS DE GRUPO DE FITNESS DE LOCALIZADA

RESUMO
Introduo: Este estudo teve como objetivo realizar uma aplicao piloto do novo instrumento desenvolvido, Sistema de Observao do Comportamento dos Instrutores de Fitness - Aulas de Grupo (SOCIF), pretendendo-se identificar e descrever quais as tendncias comportamentais dos instrutores de fitness nas aulas de grupo, designadamente de localizada. Materiais e Mtodos: Foram observadas sesses de localizada, com contedo de treino de resistncia muscular. Foi efetuado o registro da durao dos comportamentos, atravs do instrumento SOCIF. Resultados: Foram encontrados valores excelentes de fidelidade intra-observador. Discusso: Verificou-se que: quando confrontados os resultados deste estudo com os de outros estudos, independente do contexto, os dois principais comportamentos dos professores, treinadores ou instrutores so a informao e/ou observao, parecendo que os comportamentos restantes apresentam variaes em termos de ocorrncia; existem alguns comportamentos que os sujeitos nunca manifestaram; os comportamentos positivos predominam em relao aos negativos; as instrutoras utilizam comportamentos que so importantes como estratgias pedaggicas para reter os alunos prtica de exerccio, quais sejam, a Afetividade positiva, avaliao positiva, presso e conversas com alunos. Os comportamentos evidenciam uma variao na sua ocorrncia, de sujeito para sujeito. Os comportamentos parecem mudar a sua ocorrncia de acordo com as fases da aula. Os comportamentos aparentam ser influenciados pela posio de realizao dos exerccios. As instrutoras, durante a aula, passam a maioria do seu tempo a realizar exerccio fsico.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE
Comportamento, Aptido Fsica, Exerccio.

LA

CONDUCTA PEDAGGICA DE LOS INSTRUCTORES DE CLASES DE GRUPO DE FITNESS DE LOCALIZADA

RESUMEN
Introduccin: El objetivo de este estudio piloto es hacer una aplicacin de lo Sistema de Observacin de la Conducta de los Instructores de Fitness - Clases de Grupo (SOCIF), y describir cules son las tendencias de conducta de los instructores en clases de localizada. Materiales y Mtodos: Han sido observadas sesiones de localizada, con el contenido de la resistencia muscular. Se registraron las duraciones de los comportamientos a travs de lo instrumento SOCIF. Resultados: Se ha encontrados excelentes valores de concordancia intra-observador. Discusin: Se ha concluido que: Cuando confrontados los resultados de este estudio con otras pesquisas, independientemente del contexto, los dos principales comportamientos de los profesores, entrenadores o instructores son la Informacin y/o la Observacin, y las otra conductas presentan una ocurrencia variable; Hay algunos comportamientos que nunca se manifiestan en los instructores; Hay una prevalencia de comportamientos positivos en relacin con los negativos; Los instructores utilizan comportamientos que son importantes como estrategias pedaggicas para retener los alumnos en la prctica de ejercicio, como por ejemplo: afectividad positiva, evaluacin positiva, presin y conversas con los alumnos. Los comportamientos parecen variar entre los instructores. Los comportamientos de los instructores parecen cambiar su ocurrencia de acuerdo con las fases de la clase. El comportamiento de los instructores parece ser influenciado por la posicin de los ejercicios. Los instructores, durante la clase, estn la mayor parte del tiempo en ejercicio.

PALABRAS CLAVE
Conducta, Acondicionamiento Fsico, Ejercicio.

INTRODUCTION
The systematic observation of the trainers behaviors during the trainings is a step for the understanding of the training process in a determined context1. The systematic observation is recognized by several authors as being an effective research instrument in the quantitative description of the behaviors of Sports trainers or coaches of Physical education2,3,4, and the usage of the data obtained through this instrument type has been given to the training process a scientic basis that the trainers can use to facilitate the development of athletes and teams5. Exist several systems of observation of the behavior of Sports trainers or coaches of Physical education6,7,8,9. Lacy & Goldston10 refer that is important that the investigators

use instruments of systematic observation to study the trainers behavior during their practice in several sports, seeking to establish a representative database of the trainers behaviors in varied sport situations, as already exist in several studies11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18. Lacy & Goldston10 append although that it is necessary that the observation systems, so we can increase its validity and delity, must take into account the sport and the cultural specicity in context, as it is, for instance, the case of the instrument created by Brewer & Jones19, that consisted of an adaptation of the observation system of Lacy & Darst7 to the context of the rugby. However, until now, in the tness area, it was not found any study concerning the pedagogic aspects related with the tness instructors intervention, namely

252

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

PEDAGOGIC BEHAVIOR OF FITNESS INSTRUCTORS

concerning the behavior of instructors of tness activities, nor any specic instrument for such. This study had as objective to accomplish a pilot investment of the new developed instrument, Observation System of the Behavior of the Fitness Instructors - Group Classes20, intending to identify and to describe the behavioral tendencies of tness instructors in the group classes, nominated localized. It is known that in other contexts, excepting tness, exist variables that can inuence the behavior of trainers/ teachers, as, for instance, the phases of the class13, having been found any study concerning the tness instructors behavior, nominated in group classes. On the other hand, according to Francis & Seibert21, one of the predominant styles of teaching in the group classes of tness is the Teaching Style by Command, which has as characteristic the fact that the instructors are predominantly in physical exercise, adopting several positions (stand, seating, lying lateral, lying ventral, lying dorsal, on four, seating exing the trunk or the head, stand up exing the trunk or the head), which can take them to have a best or worse the students view. This way, this study consists of the analysis of the tness instructors behaviors during the teaching of localized group classes, with the following queries: Which will be the most frequent behaviors of these instructors? Which will be the less frequent behaviors of these instructors? Which will be the existent ratio between the positive and the negatives behaviors? Will the behaviors vary its occurrence from subject to subject? Will the behaviors change in agreement with the phases of the class? Will the behaviors be inuenced by the position of accomplishing of the exercises? Will the instructors pass most of the class accomplishing exercises?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sample The sampling method used to study the behaviors instructors of localized classes was the Convenience Sampling, which does not allow to extrapolate the results and conclusions obtained in the universe in study, but that can be useful in a pilot study, for instance to test the rst versions of a research instrument22, as it is the case of this study. Exist several variables that can have inuence in the instructors behavior. The subject of the sample were selected according to the following criteria:

Only feminine sex; Must be member of Concelho de Lisboa (Portugal), because, although is not known any study concerning the subject, the cultural inuences of the region could eventually inuence in the instructors behavior. Be not licensed in the area of the Sports Sciences, but have a specic course tech-professional, since that the initial formation seems to inuence in the knowledge and, consequently, in the behavior of trainers/ teachers23,24,25,26; Have, at least, ve years of professional background, being this classication based in author Berliner25, although this is introduced for the context of the Physical education. According to Moreira & Janurio27, the professional background seems to have inuence in the teachers behavior. Were chosen just localized classes, because, according to some authors8,28, the type of activities can inuence in the behavior of trainers/teachers. The choice of the localized activity, and not another, among the several existent ones in the tness area, was due to this fact are one of the most practiced now in the gyms of Portugal. Were just chosen classes of intermediate level, that is the majority level of the localized classes in Portugal, because, according to Rodrigues15, the level (division) with that you work seems to have inuence in the trainers behavior. After been veried if the subjects were inside of the above mentioned criteria, were recorded in video (image and sound) three localized classes of intermediate level, taught by each one of the three instructors of group of tness classes, in three gyms of Concelho de Lisboa (Portugal), totaling, like this, nine classes. In spite of each class of the three instructors have been recorded, just the third class of each one of them was encoded, in way to reduce the interference effect that the observer, the camera and the microphone eventually can exercise on the instructors and the students. The female instructors had ages understood between 28 years and 34 years (30.333.21), and professional background in the tness group classes between 5 years and 14 years (8.334.93). All of them were non-licensed in the area of the Sports Sciences, but they had already frequented a technicianprofessional specialization course in classes of tness group. Of the courses that the instructors frequented, all had as content the localized, as well as other activities. Besides the courses that frequented, the instructors reported to continue to update their knowledge by going to one or two workshops/conventions a year. The frequency of localized teaching of classes varied between two and seven times a week (4.672.52). All the instructors taught classes of other activities of tness

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

253

FR ANCO, RODRIGUES, B ALCELLS

group. The frequency of teaching of classes of tness group (independently of the activity) varied between 8 classes and 12 classes a week (10.002.00). The instructors worked in the institutions where were recorded for at least 6.002.65 years (between 4 years and 9 years) and just one of them does not work in another gym. None exercised another professional activity, for besides the one of instructor of classes of tness group. Variable Relatively to the behavior tness instructors (dependent variable), in this study the following independent variables were considered: the phases of the class (warming; fundamental phase; stretching); The instructors physical exercise; The instructors view relatively to the students, derived of the position of the exercises that they are accomplishing. Malek et al.23 veried that the initial formation has inuence in the knowledge of the tness professionals (personalized trainers). Piron25 refers that the teachers behavior is inuenced by their knowledge and professional background, among other factors. In some studies, the variables initial formation24,26, professional background27, type of activities8,28, the apprentices level (division)15, revealed to have inuence in the behavior of trainers/ teachers. Like this, these variables, and eventually other, can inuence in the behavior of the instructors of classes of tness group, which were controlled the following variables: the instructors initial formation (non-licensed in the area of the Sports Sciences , but with one technician-professional specialization course in classes of tness group); the instructors professional background (5 year-old minimum, based on the denition of Berliner25, concerning a expert teacher); type of taught activity (localized); level of taught class (intermediate level); the instructors gender (feminine); region of the country (Concelho de Lisboa). Instrument To study the localized instructors behavior, was used the Observation System of the Behavior of the Fitness Instructors - Group Classes20. This observation system was inspired in the Observation System of the Behavior of the Trainer and of the Athlete (SOTA)8, just basing on the structure of the trainers behaviors. The specicity of the instructors intervention in the classes of tness group, as, for instance, the fact of the physical exercise accomplished by the instructors are almost constant in many of them, it took to the need of creation of a more adapted observation system for the analysis of these professionals behaviors of this area.

This observation system allows to collect information concerning the behavior of the instructors of classes of tness group, could serve as instrument to be used as analysis of the instructors at professional level or to be used in future researches. For being adapted to a certain reality, its use is possible to be included in most of the activities of tness group (aerobics, step, slide, hip-hop, water aerobics, localized, combat, indoor cycling, stretching...). The observation system is constituted by six dimensions of the behavior of the instructors of classes of tness group: Instruction; Interaction; Activity; Control; Organization; Other Behaviors. The dimensions are constituted by the following analysis categories of the behavior: Instruction Information With the Exercise(IE); Information Without the Exercise(I); Demonstration With Information (DI); Demonstration Without Information (D); Correction With Exercise (CE); Correction Without Exercise (C); Positive Evaluation With Exercise (Av+E); Positive Evaluation Without Exercise (Av+); Negative Evaluation With Exercise (Av-E); Negative Evaluation Without Exercise (Av-); Questioning With Exercise (QE); Questioning Without Exercise (Q); Interaction Positive affectivity With Exercise (Af+E); Positive affectivity Without Exercise (Af+); Negative affectivity With Exercise (Af-E); Negative affectivity Without Exercise (Af-); Pressure With Exercise (PE); Pressure Without Exercise (P); Conversations With Students With Exercise (CAE); Conversations With Students Without Exercise (CA); Conversations With Others With Exercise (COE); Conversations With Others Without Exercise (CO); Activity Participatory Physical Exercise (EFP); Independent Physical Exercise (EFI); Control Observation With Exercise (OE); Observation Without Exercise (O);

254

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

PEDAGOGIC BEHAVIOR OF FITNESS INSTRUCTORS

Attention to the Verbal Interventions of the Students With Exercise (AIVAE); Attention to the Verbal Interventions of the Students Without Exercise (AIVA); Attention to the Verbal Interventions of Others With Exercise (AIVOE); Attention to the Verbal Interventions of Others Without Exercise (AIVO); Organization Administration With Exercise (GE); Administration Without Exercise (G); Other Behaviors Other Behaviors (OC). To accomplish the register, starting from the watching of the video, was used the method of Register of the Duration29,30 of each episode of behavior. To test the intra-observer delity, relatively to SOCIF it was , made the observation of a localized video, having been used the method of Register of the Duration29,30. Just as suggested by Mars31, the same observer analyzed the same periods of the video in two different occasions, separating the observations for at least one week, in this case, eight days. After the analysis of the video in two occasions, proceeded the determination of intra-observers delity level, using the Kappa of Cohen test. Were accepted delity values superior to 75%, being these considered of excellent concordance32. Of the 33 categories, 23 presented delity values of 100%. The 10 remaining categories presented values superior to 95%, and the values of Kappa of Cohen varied between 0.951 and 1.000, in other words, between 95.1% and 100%. Equipments and procedures To verify which the prole of the behavior of instructors of localized classes, was used the observation of the recorded video (sound and image). To accomplish the video recording, it was asked authorization to the responsible of each one of the gyms, as well as to the instructors and students. The recording team was constituted by two subjects, having been previously combined and trained all of the procedures to accomplish during the recording.

The content of the recorded was uploaded to a PC, through Windows Movie Maker software, and the watching been accomplished through the Window Media Player software, which has a chronometer incorporated. Data Handling After veried the quantity of time of each behavior category by the instructors (in seconds), these values were converted in percentage for subsequent statistical handling, having just been used the Descriptive Statistics. Were determined the mean and the standard deviation of the percentage of time of each dimension and of the several behaviors of the instructors of localized classes, in the totality of the class and for phase of the class, in exercise or not, as well as of the several behavior categories in the exercisess proposed that provide a position that allows to have a good view by the instructors (exercises in the ventral lied down position, dirsal position, on four, seating exing the trunk or the head, stand up exing the trunk or the head) and in the proposed exercises that provide a position that does not allow to have a good view by the instructors (exercises in the lateral lied down position, seating or stand). It was also calculated the ratio between the positive behaviors (Av+E, Av+, Af+E and Af+) and the negative behaviors (Av-E, Av-, Af-E and Af-). Finally, was calculated the sum of the behaviors considered by Carron et al.33 and Massey et al.14, as being the instructors pedagogic strategy for motivation and retention of clients (Av+E, Av+, Af+E, Af+, PE, P, CAE and CA). Limitations of the study The size of the sample is relatively small, and that is one of the limitations of this study (just one class of each one of the 3 instructors), so it is not possible to gure a characterization of the localized instructors that it can be generalized, and the data could not be representative of the behaviors prole of each subject, being this work a pilot study concerning this subject. Were just controlled the variables: gender, initial formation and years of the instructors professional background, region of the country, activity and still the level of

Table 1 - Percentages of each dimension of behaviors, in the totality of the class

Dimension of Behavior Instruction Interaction Activity Control Organization Other Behaviors

S1: Subject 1; S2: Subject 2; S3: Subject 3

mean standard deviation 60.7 4.8 8.1 3.8 4.0 2.8 22.1 6.8 4.5 1.3 0.7 0.1

S1 66.0 5.6 5.8 17.9 4.2 0.6

S2 56.5 6.1 0.8 30.0 5.9 0.7

S3 59.6 12.5 5.4 18.5 3.3 0.7

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

255

FR ANCO, RODRIGUES, B ALCELLS

the class variable, however, being able to exist another variables that can have inuence in the behavior of the instructors of classes of tness group (for example: level; gender and the students age; number of students27; institution; class time; place). The fact of the classes have been recorded in video can have altered the behavior of the students and instructors. Although we have not had as objective to study the students behavior, was made reference to the fact of the students behavior to be altered, therefore this can bring as consequence the alteration of the teachers behavior27.

of the critical components or of the most common errors. We left the following queries in open: Will the instructors opt to reduce the time in demonstration, in way to maximize the time of the students practice, and do they prefer to continue to explain the exercise while the students are already in physical activity? In spite of being increased the time of practice, in apprenticeship terms it wont be more difcult for the students to notice the information granted by the instructor while they are accomplishing exercise, since they have to render attention to two tasks36?
Table 2 - Percentages of each category of behaviors, in the totality of the class

RESULTS
The results of the study are presented in the Tables 1 to 7.

Behaviors IE I DI

mean sd 32.7 8.0 8.8 5.7 8.2 1.6 0.3 0.2 1.6 0.2 5.6 5.6 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.5 1.4 1.3 1.1 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 1.9 1.4 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.7 1.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 4.0 2.8 16.5 1.9 5.2 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 4.0 1.1 0.7 0.1

S1 33.6 14.6 9.1 0.3 1.4 3.7 1.3 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.2 2.7 1.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.8 14.7 3.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 3.7 0.6

S2 24.4 8.6 6.9 0.2 1.9 11.8 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.9 2.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.8 18.5 10.9 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.7 5.2 0.7

S3 40.2 3.2 9.9 0.5 1.7 1.1 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.1 2.9 1.4 0.7 0.0 2.6 0.1 1.4 2.9 0.0 0.4 0. 5.4 16.7 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.2 0.7

DISCUSSION
Continuously, are presented the relative results obtained of the three tness instructors behaviors observed during the teaching of localized classes. As we can ascertain in the Table 1, the dimension that presents larger percentage of time, in all the instructors, is the Instruction (60.694.84%), being followed by the Control dimension (22.106.83%). The dimension with smaller percentage is Other Behaviors (0.660.10%). The remaining dimensions vary from subject to subject, but in average terms the Interaction dimension (8.063.82%) appears in 3rd place, following by the Organization dimension (4.471.31%) and Activity dimension (4.01 2.77%). As we can verify in the Table 2, the behavior that on average had a larger percentage of time was IE (32.747.97%), being followed by OE (16.651.88%). These two behaviors occupy around half of the class (49.39%), and these, together with the Instruction Without exercise and With DI, occupy around 2/3 of the class (66.78%). Compared these results with other studies8,11,12,13,14,15,1 6,17,18,34,35 , it is veried that these two more durable behaviors of the instructors are also the most frequent behaviors found by other authors (Information and Observation), with the difference that the instructors of the present study were in exercise, characteristic of this activity type. The information that the instructors supply when they are accomplishing physical exercise can have several objectives, which are: the feature of a new exercise; the explanation concerning as how accomplish the new exercise; the feature of the errors to not to accomplish in the new exercise; the variation of the speed of the exercise; the placement of a variation element in an exercise; the feature of the number of repetitions of an exercise; remembering

D CE C Av+E Av+ Av-E AvQE Q Af+E Af+ Af-E AfPE P CAE CA COE CO EFP EFI OE O AIVAE AIVA AIVOE AIVO GE G OC

sd: standard deviation; S1: Subject 1; S2: Subject 2; S3: Subject 3

256

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

PEDAGOGIC BEHAVIOR OF FITNESS INSTRUCTORS

Why is that the instructors, in the middle of the exercise, recall the critical components or most common errors? Is that because they do not want to evidence some error that one or more students are committing, do they choose for, instead of correcting, to give information? The categories with less high values (COE, EFP, AIVAE, AIVOE, AIVO) are then same in the three subjects, being in this case of 0,00%. The remaining categories vary its subject order for subject order, not existing the same quantity of each type of behavior in each one of the instructors, seeming that these adopt different pedagogic strategies during the teaching of their classes. The inexistence of EFP might have been related with the type of programmed contents, because, for instance, exercises were not accomplished in groups. The ratio between the positive behaviors (Evaluation and Positive Affectivity, being or not in exercise) and the negative behaviors (Evaluation and Negative Affectivity, being or not in exercise) is about 6 for 1 (5.92/1), prevailing like this the positive behaviors. This fact is positive, because, according to Carron et al.33, Mageau & Vallerand37 and Cunha38, these types of behavior are important to motivate the students and, like this, to familiarize them with the exercise. Segrave & Ciancio17, when studying the behavior of a success coach of American football, veried that the praise is a type of predominant behavior of that coach, calling to the attention for the importance that the high level of praises can have in the apprentices motivation that do not have the obligation to do it, and that the high level of positive behaviors, instead of negatives, can have in the reinforcement of the apprenticeship. However, Claxton12, in a study that accomplished concerning the tennis trainers behaviors,

with more and less success, veried that the trainers with less success gave more praises. Being the Positive Evaluation, the Positive Affectivity, the Pressure and the Conversations With Students, behaviors that serve as the instructors pedagogic strategy for the apprentices retention33, when adding the percentage mean of these behaviors, being or not in exercise, we veried that the total percentage is of 8.81%. By the fact of we did not nd any study to allow to do this sum, it is not possible to establish comparisons, so we just left opened the following query: will this value translate the instructors pedagogic efcacy for the apprentices retention or not? The dimension that have larger predominance varies in the different phases of the class (Table 3). In mean terms, the Instruction and the Control are the dimensions that present larger percentages, prevailing the Control in the Warming (44.4515.77%) and the Instruction in the Fundamental Phase (67.884.96%) and in the Stretching (47.037.56%). However, when confronted the subjects, it is veried that, in the Warming, in the Subject 1 the Control prevails (62.20%), following by the Instruction (28.05%), while in the Subjects 2 and 3 the Instruction prevails (S2=44.04%; S3=56.30%) and the Control appears in 2nd place (S2=39.13%; S3=32.04%). In the Fundamental Phase the Instruction prevails in all the subjects (S1=72.97%; S2=67.62%; S3=63.05%), appearing the Control in 2nd place (S1=11.38%; S2=20.36%; S3=16.40%). In the Stretching, in the Subject 1 the Instruction is the dimension with larger percentage (50.85%), being followed by the Control (25.42%), in the Subject 2 the Control has the largest percentage (47.11%), following by the Instruction dimension (38.32%), and in the Subject 3 the Instruction prevails (51.92%) following by the Interaction (20.73%). In mean terms, the dimension with smaller

Table 3 - Percentages of each dimension of behavior, in the three phases of the class (Warming, Fundamental Phase and Stretching)

Class phases mean sd Warming S1 S2 S3 mean sd Fundamental S1 phase S2 S3 mean sd Stretching S1 S2 S3

Instruction 42.8 14.2 28.1 44.0 56.3 67.9 5.0 73.0 67.6 63.1 47.0 7.6 50.9 38.3 51.9

Interaction 4.3 2.6 3.3 2.4 7.2 8.7 2.8 6.4 8.0 11.8 9.3 7.0 2.5 4.6 20.7

Dimension of Behaviors Activity Control 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 2.7 4.8 0.4 5.3 10.2 9.6 15.5 2.8 12.2 44.5 15.8 62.2 39.1 32.0 16.1 4.5 11.4 20.4 16.4 27.5 18.7 25.4 47.1 9.8

Organization 8.2 4.9 6.5 13.7 4.4 3.1 0.6 3.8 2.7 2.9 5.2 1.9 5.1 7.2 3.4

Other Behaviors 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.6 1.0 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.6 0.0 1.9

sd: standard deviation; S1: subject 1; S2: subject 2; S3: subject 3

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

257

FR ANCO, RODRIGUES, B ALCELLS

percentage in the Warming is the Activity (0.00%), and in the Fundamental Phase and in the Stretching it is the Other Behaviors (0.740.25% and 0.830.99%, respectively). It seems that the behaviors have some variation in function of the phase of the class and in function of the subjects. When analyzing the Table 4, it is veried that the behavior with highest occurrence percentage differs in the several phases of the class, being OE the behavior with a larger percentage mean in the Warming (42.7015.24%),

the Instruction With Exercise in the Fundamental Phase (35.198.27%) and DI in the Stretching (25.43 13.06%). On average, more than 2/3 of the Warming (84.02%) are ocupied with the OE (42.7015.24%) and IE (41.3213.59%) behaviors. On average, more than 2/3 of the Fundamental Phase (72.71%) are ocupied with the IE (35.19 8.27%), I (11.86 6.79%), OE (11.083.04%), C (7.557.50%) and DI (7.031.78%) behaviors. On

Table 4 - Percentages of each category of behaviors, in the three phases of the class (Warming, Fundamental Phase and Straetching)

Behavior IE I DI D CE C AV+E AV+ AV-E AVQE Q Af+E Af+ Af-E AfPE P CAE CA COE CO EFP EFI OE O AIVAE AIVA AIVOE AIVO GE G OC

Warming mean sd S1 S2 41.3 13.6 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 2.4 1.5 0.4 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.7 15.2 1.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 7.3 5.5 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 2.0 4.5 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 13.6 0.7

S3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 3.7 0.0

Class Phases Fundamental phase mean sd S1 S2 35.2 8.3 11.9 6.8 7.0 1.8 0.2 0.3 2.2 0.5 7.6 7.5 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.6 0.9 0.7 1.6 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 2.5 2.0 0.8 1.1 0.6 0.5 1.3 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 2.7 11.1 3.1 4.8 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.6 2.6 1.0 0.7 0.3 18.3 12.5 5.2 0.1 1.6 4.8 1.4 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.3 3.4 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 8.5 2.8 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 3.4 0.6 7.2 0.0 2.4 16.1 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.2 1.2 1.7 1.3 1.7 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 9.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.5 1.0

S3 4.8 8.7 0.6 2.6 1.9 1.2 0.5 0.2 0.1 1.7 0.2 3.4 1.7 1.0 0.0 3.9 0.2 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.6

Stretching mean sd S1 S2 10.3 10.3 3.0 2.0 25.4 13.1 1.1 0.3 1.2 0.7 3.9 6.7 0.9 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 1.6 5.3 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.0 10.2 6.6 17.0 9.2 10.5 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 1.9 0.8 1.0 4.0 2.5 1.4 0.9 0.0 2.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.5 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.6 4.9 5.1 0.9 2.0 11.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.7 0.1 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 2.8 23.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 0.0

S3 22.2 1.3 0.9 0.6 0.0 0.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 13.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 12.2 6.6 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 1.9

27.6 41.5 54.1

39.3 25.7 40.6

38.7 12.6 25.0

60.2 35.9 32.0

10.4 14.4

20.3 24.0

sd: standard deviation; S1: subject 1; S2: subject 2; S3: subject 3

258

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

PEDAGOGIC BEHAVIOR OF FITNESS INSTRUCTORS

average, more than 2/3 of the Stretching (73.38%) are ocupied with DI (25.4313.06%), OE (16.999.17%), O (10.4610.98%), IE (10.3410.30%) and Independent Exercise (10.166.63%). In the Warming a larger percentage of Af+E exists in any one of the instructors (2.371.48%), comparatively to the other phases of the class. Maybe, the instructors want to create a positive climate soon in the start of the class, in way to motivate the students. It is in the Fundamental Phase that the PE and P behaviors appear with a higher percentile mean, respectively

2.541.48% and 0.841.08%, comparatively to other phases of the class. It is also in the Fundamental Phase that the students accomplish more intense physical effort, because it is natural that the instructors adopt more this type of behavior in this phase of the class, in way to guarantee that the students will maintain the activity motivating them to support the effort. Noticed that the encouragement for the effort is one of the strategies that, according to Carron33, the instructors should use to familiarize the clients to the exercise, being the Fundamental Phase favorable for such.

Table 5 - Percentages of each dimension of behaviors With Exercise and Without Exercise, in the totality of the class

Behavior Dimension Instruction Interaction Activity Control Organization Other Behaviors With Exercise Without Exercise With Exercise Without Exercise With Exercise Without Exercise With Exercise Without Exercise With Exercise Without Exercise With Exercise Without Exercise

mean sd 44.9 10.0 15.8 9.1 4.4 2.8 3.7 1.2 4.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 16.7 1.9 5.5 5.3 0.4 0.3 4.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.1

S1 46.1 19.9 3.1 2.6 5.8 0.0 14.7 3.1 0.5 3.7 0.0 0.6

S2 34.3 22.2 2.5 3.6 0.8 0.0 18.5 11.5 0.7 5.2 0.0 0.7

S3 54.3 5.3 7.6 4.9 5.4 0.0 16.7 1.8 0.2 3.2 0.0 0.7

sd: standard deviation; S1: Subject 1; S2: Subject 2; S3: Subject 3 Table 6 - Percentages of behavior With Exercise and Without Exercise, in the totality of the class, in their different phases and in different types of exercise, and total percentage of time in each phase of the class and in each type of exercise

Behaviors With Exercise Warming class phases Without Exercise total time With Exercise Fundamental phase Without Exercise total time With Exercise Stretching Without Exercise total time With Exercise exercise type Exercises with Good View Without Exercise total time With Exercise Exercises with Bad View Without Exercise total time total With Exercise Without Exercise

mean sd 89.8 8.0 10.2 8.0 16.8 6.7 67.1 16.6 32.9 16.6 65.6 10.7 68.6 17.5 31.4 17.5 17.7 4.3 82.0 4.5 18.0 4.5 57.3 19.5 55.4 32.2 44.6 32.2 42.7 19.5 70.7 13.9 29.3 13.9

S1 92.3 7.7 9.1 65.5 34.5 77.8 83.9 16.1 13.1 83.7 16.3 35.2 63.2 36.8 64.8 70.4 29.6

S2 80.9 19.1 20.3 51.4 48.6 58.0 49.5 50.5 21.7 76.9 23.2 65.0 20.0 80.0 35.0 57.0 43.0

S3 96.3 3.7 21.0 84.4 15.6 60.9 72.4 27.6 18.2 85.4 14.6 71.7 83.1 16.9 28.3 84.7 15.3

sd: standard deviation; S1: Subject 1; S2: Subject 2; S3: Subject 3

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

259

FR ANCO, RODRIGUES, B ALCELLS

The Stretching is the phase of the class where, on average, more Conversations With the Students appear, with the instructors are exercising or not (1.641.60% and 5.306.70%, respectively). It is in the Warming, following by the Stretching phase, that the G behaviors appear with more frequency, respectively with mean of 7.265.51% and of 5.241.90%. Comparing the results of this study with the study of Lacy & Martin13, concerning the volleyball coaches behaviors, can ascertain that the Observation behavior,

in our study With Exercise, was also what on average appeared with larger percentage in the Stretching, although IE has high predominance in our study and not in the one of Lacy & Martin7. Talking about the phase of Physical Preparation, which is the only that can allow some comparison with the Fundamental Phase of a localized class, in the study of Lacy & Martin13 the behaviors of Silence (Observation), Administration and Instruction prevail, and also in the present study the behaviors of Information prevail (With and Without

Table 7 - Percentages of each category of behaviors, in different types of exercises (With Good View and Without Good View)

Exercises With Good View Behavior IE I DI D CE C Av+E Av+ Av-E AvQE Q Af+E Af+ Af-E AfPE P CAE CA COE CO EFP EFI OE O AIVAE AIVA AIVOE AIVO GE G OC mean sd 39.3 5.4 4.8 0.6 6.7 1.0 0.4 0.3 1.5 0.6 3.0 2.1 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 2.0 1.6 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 2.0 1.4 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 24.7 5.6 2.8 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.4 4.2 1.1 0.5 0.2 S1 40.2 5.2 5.9 0.7 1.3 2.0 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 27.9 2.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 3.7 0.6 S2 33.5 5.2 6.3 0.3 2.2 5.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 1.3 0.9 1.7 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.0 1.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.0 4.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.1 5.5 0.2 S3 44.1 4.1 7.9 0.1 1.1 1.6 1.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 1.3 0.2 3.7 1.4 1.0 0.0 2.6 0.2 1.7 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 18.2 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 3.5 0.6

Exercises With Bad View mean sd 22.6 13.2 11.8 9.9 11.3 3.5 0.6 1.0 1.9 1.0 9.4 12.5 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.4 1.5 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.8 1.5 0.9 1.2 0.2 0.2 4.4 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 8.4 6.0 7.1 6.0 9.5 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 3.5 1.2 1.1 0.6 S1 30.0 19.7 10.9 0.0 1.4 4.6 1.4 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.9 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 2.5 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.4 7.6 3.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.8 0.5 S2 7.3 14.9 8.0 0.0 1.1 23.6 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.2 1.6 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.2 5.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 2.4 0.9 23.1 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 1.7 S3 30.4 0.7 15.0 1.7 3.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.4 8.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 14.3 12.9 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 1.0

S1: Subject 1; S2: Subject 2; S3: Subject 3

260

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

PEDAGOGIC BEHAVIOR OF FITNESS INSTRUCTORS

Exercise) and of Observation (With Exercise), but not the Administration. Naturally, in the Activity dimension do not exist Without Exercise behaviors (Table 5). The subjects are for the most part in exercise in the Instruction, Interaction and Control dimensions and the most part without being in exercise in the Organization and OC dimensions. It is natural that all subjects have more organizational behaviors when they are not to accomplish exercise, being clear that these predominantly happen before or after the accomplishing of the exercises, and beyond that it is not easy to match these two behaviors, when intended to manipulate materials. As shown in Table 6, all instructors have a higher percentage of With Exercise behavior at any stage of class, which may be a strategy to serve as a model and/ or motivate students to engage in exercises. However, this percentage is higher in the Warming, compared to Fundamental Phase or the Stretching. Except for the categories that are not subdivided into Exercise With and Without Exercise (DI, D, EFP, EFI and OC), only the categories Correction, Conversations, either with students or with others, Verbal Intervention of the Students and Administration, have higher Without Exercise percentage mean values than With Exercise (Table 2) would seem that the instructors choose to x, talk and be attentive to students as well as conducting organizational behavior, when accomplishing exercise. As for the type of exercises offered, all the instructors, though some more than others, have a smaller number of Exercise With behaviors that in the exercises, due to the positioning, not allow them to have a good view of their pupils, compared to those that allow a good view. It seems that when exercises are offered to students that the instructors, to realize them, they have not a good view of the students, and no longer need so many behaviors With Exercise, increasing their behavior Without Exercise. Perhaps this occurs because of the instructors stop doing exercise, changing the position in order to get a better view of the students, for example to observe them, since the behavior of the mean increases from 2.79% to 9.53% (Table 7). In all instructors, most of the lesson is, of course, occupied with the Fundamental phase (65.5510.69%). Although, on average, the instructors use more exercises that allow a good view than bad view, one of the three instructors does the opposite. Note that it is not considered negative the fact of being proposed exercises that do not allow a good view because the chosen position may be related to the fact that there is a need to adopt certain positions to be able to effectively work determined muscle groups or reach a certain goal, or the fact that they want to vary the exercises to work a specic muscle group.

In Table 7, except for the G behavior in exercises with bad viewing all behaviors without exercise, on average, have a higher percentage, compared to exercises with good viewing. Moreover, except for DI, D, CE behaviors and the Independent Exercise in exercises with good viewing all the behavior With Exercise, on average, have a higher percentage, compared to exercises with bad visualization. When exercises are proposed where there is poor visualization of the students by the instructors, during their implementation, the average behavior of OE decreases to 24.68% and 7.13% and the average O behavior increase from 2.79% to 9.53%, passing them to observe less the students, whether they are in exercise or not. Moreover, in this situation, the average behavior of Independent Exercise increases, 0.97% to 8.35%, would seem that the instructors now have to look less to achieve more Independent Exercise, which, eventually, may be due to the fact that those do not wanting to be a bad model or not feel comfortable when adopt an incorrect position with the head, for example in hyperextension or in rotation. Another aspect to highlight is the fact of the instructors, when they propose exercises to students that do not allow them to have a view for their implementation, in addition to reducing the time to exercise, spend more to correct the students, since the average behavior of C increases from 3.01% to 9.41%. Does the fact of exercise instructors conduct that leads to a reduction correction of the behavior of students, which according Cunha 38, are important in achieving the success in learning? It is noted the occurrence of an increase in DI, from 6.68% to 11.27%, and a reduction in the total of Information (With Exercise and Without Exercise) from 44.10% (39.29%+4,81%) to 34.34% (22,58%+11,76%), when are proposed exercises in which the instructors have a poor view of students during its execution. Are the exercises more complex or more difcult to observe the exercises by the students, for example due to the position, leading the instructors to take be more careful in their explanation, leaving only those to only present information, demonstrating too? Since the total Conversations Without Exercise increased from 0.60% to 4.39%, when carrying out exercises with poor visualization, it was coincidence or the fact of instructors no longer perform physical exercise allows them to talk more with students? The fact of instructors are accomplishing exercise possibly does not facilitate the development of conversations, because the instructors are teaching other important functions to perform, such as providing feedback. The feedbacks are important both to improve the performance and to motivate students33,37,38,

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

261

FR ANCO, RODRIGUES, B ALCELLS

which leads the subjects to remain in activity, but the conversations are important for adhesion to exercise33. With this study, we were able to carry out a pilot application of the Observation System of the behavior of Fitness Instructors - Group lessons at the level of instructors of localized, which it was concluded that: When confronted the results of this study with other re searches8,11,12,13,14,15,16,16,18,34,35 it appears that, regardless the context, the two main behaviors of teachers, coaches or Instructors are the Information and / or observation would seem that the other behaviors have variations in terms of occurrence; The COE, EFP, AIVAE, AIVOE and AIVO behaviors, never occurred in any of the sample; The positive behavior predominate relatively to the negative, what appears to be benecial, since they seem to encourage positive motivation behavior and adhesion of customers to exercise33,37,38. The instructors use the behaviors: Positive Evaluation, Positive Affectivity, Pressure and Conversations With Students, which, according Carron et al.33 are important pedagogical strategies to retain customers; The behavior showed a variation in the occurrence from subject to subject; The behavior seems to change its occurrence according to the phases of the lesson; The behaviors appear to be inuenced by the conducting position of the exercises; The instructors, at the classes, spend most of their time performing physical exercise (70.7013.88%), which can be problematic for their health39. Remembering again that, as the data of this study refer only to a localized class in each of the three instructors of tness, these are not representative of either the prole of each of the instructors, nor the prole of the tness instructors in general, the data can not be generalized. With the implementation of the monitoring system can be used to make a descriptive and comparative analysis of the behavior of the tness instructors, and can check how much inuence that some variables can have on various categories of behavior. Recomendations It would have been interesting to have a larger sample and have observed more classes of each instructor, which would have drawn a little more consistent conclusion and not just referring to occurrences of one class of each instructor. Following this study, it is pertinent leave the following suggestions for future researches: Conducting interviews with stimulation of memory with the watching of video lessons taught by instructors, to understand the opinion of instructors with regard to why a certain type of behavior that they have;

Conducting interviews and questionnaires with students to nd out what kind of behavior they prefer that their instructors have; Studying in detail what kind of conversation that the instructors have with students at the beginning and end of the lesson and at the stage of physical practice; Studying in detail the instruction behavior of instructors; Consider what sequences of behavior exist in instructors; Verify whether the instructors have consistency, for their behavior in several classes, from the same time of a certain activity, trying to draw a behavior prole for each; Verify if there is a instructors prole of a particular activity, or if they have an individual prole; Verify if the behavior of instructors are related to the used teaching styles; Verify if the prole of instructors varies depending on other variables, which are the activities taught, the country region, the gyms, timetables, the number of students, the level of students, the training of instructors, the experience of instructors, the gender of instructors, among others. In short, there is still much to study, relatively the behavior of instructors from the tness group classes. It is hoped that this work was a contribution to the development of other studies in Sports Pedagogy applied to the tness area, which still has much to exploit. It is hoped that this study may be a seed for the blooming of knowledge about the educational aspects in the tness area.

REFERENCES
1. Potrac P Brewer CJ, Jones R, Armour K, Hoff J. Toward an holistic under, standing of the coaching process. Quest. 2000;52(2):186-99. 2. Sarmento P Veiga AL, Rosado A, Rodrigues J, Ferreira V. Pedagogia do , Desporto. Instrumentos de Observao Sistemtica da Educao Fsica e Desporto. Cruz Quebrada: Edies da Faculdade de Motricidade Humana; 1998. 3. De Marco GM, Mancini VH, Wuest DA, Schempp PG. Becoming reacquainted with a once familiar and still valuable tool: systematic observation methodology revisited. I J Phys Educ. 1996;33(1):17-26. 4. Mars H. Systematic observation: an introduction. In: Darst PW, Zakrajsek DB, Mancini VH, editores. Analyzing physical education and sport instruction. Champaign, Il: Human Kinetics; 1989. 5. Martin G, Hrycaiko D. Effective behavioral coaching: whats it all about? J Sport Psychol. 1983;5:8-20. 6. Costa FC. O sucesso pedaggico em educao fsica. estudo das condies e fatores de ensino-aprendizagem associados ao xito numa unidade de ensino. [tese]. Cruz Quebrada: Instituto Superior de Educao Fsica; 1988. 7. Lacy AC, Darst PW. evolution of a systematic observation system: the asu coaching observation instrument. J Teach Phys Educ. 1984;3(3):59-66. 8. Rodrigues J, Rosado A, Sarmento P Ferreira V, Veiga AL. O Sistema de , observao do comportamento do treinador e do atleta (sota). estudo

262

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

PEDAGOGIC BEHAVIOR OF FITNESS INSTRUCTORS

ilustrativo em natao e voleibol. In: Sarmento P editor. Pedagogia do , desporto. Estudos 1. Cruz Quebrada: Edies da Faculdade de Motricidade Humana 1992. 9. Smith RE, Smoll FL, Hunt E. A system for the behavioral assessment of athletic coaches. Res Q. 1977;48(2):401-7. 10. Lacy AC, Goldston PD. Behavior analysis of male and female coaches in high school girls basketball. J Sport Behav. 1990;13(1):29-39. 11. Bloom GA, Crumpton R, Anderson JE. A systematic observation study of the teaching behaviors of an expert basketball coach. Sport Psychol. 1999;13(2):157-70. 12. Claxton DB. A systematic observation of more and less successful high school tennis coaches. J Teach Phys Educ. 1988;7(4):302-10. 13. Lacy AC, Martin DL. Analysis of starter/nonstarter motor-skill engagement and coaching behaviors in collegiate womens volleyball. J Teach Phys Educ. 1994;13(2):95-107. 14. Massey CD, Maneval MW, Phillips J, Vincent J, White G, Zoeller B. An analysis of teaching and coaching behaviors of elite strength and conditioning coaches. J Strength Cond Res. 2002;16(3):456-60. 15. Rodrigues J. O comportamento do treinador. Estudo da inuncia do objetivo dos treinos e do nvel de prtica dos atletas na atividade pedaggica do treinador de voleibol. [thesis]. Cruz Quebrada: Edies da Faculdade de Motricidade Humana; 1995. 16. Santos R, Rodrigues J. A atividade pedaggica do treinador de jovens em tnis. Desp Investig Cinc. 2002;0:11-20. 17. Seagrave JO, Ciancio CA. An observational study of a successful pop warner football coach. J Teach Phys Educ. 1990;9(4):294-306. 18. Sequeira P Hanke U, Rodrigues J. O comportamento do treinador de alta, competio de handebol no treino e na competio. Itinerrios. 2006;2 Srie(2):81-99. 19. Brewer CJ, Jones RL. A ve-stage process for establishing contextually valid systematic observation instruments: the case of rugby union. Sport Pshychol. 2002;16(2):138-59. 20. Franco S. Observao do comportamento pedaggico dos instrutores de aulas de grupo de tness [thesis]. Lleida: Institut Nacional dEducaci Fsica de Catalunya; 2004. 21. Francis LL, Seibert RJ. Teaching a group exercise class. In: ACE, editor. Group tness instructor manual. San Diego: American Council on Exercise; 2000. 22. Hill M, Hill A. Investigao por questionrio. Lisboa: Edies Silabo; 2002. 23. Malek MH, Nalbone DP Berger DE, Coburn JW. Importance of health , sciences education for personal tness trainers. J Strength Cond Res. 2002;16(1):19-24. 24. Petrica J, Sarmento P Videira M. A instruo. Anlise dos comportamentos , de instruo em professores preparados por modelos distintos. Ludens Cinc Desp. 2004;17(4):11-9.

25. Piron M. Para una enseanza ecaz de las atividades fsico-deportivas. Barcelona: INDE Publicaciones; 1999. 26. Rosado A, Pereira A, Fernandes A, Martins C. Observao do comportamento do professor. Comparao de dois grupos de professores com especializaes prossionais diferenciadas no ensino do atletismo. In: Sarmento P editor. Pedagogia do desporto estudos 1-2-3. Cruz Quebrada: , Edies da Faculdade de Motricidade Humana; 1997. 27. Moreira MIFV, Janurio C. Anlise das decises pr-interactivas e interactivas em professores expert e principiantes relativamente dimenso instruo. In: Ferreira V, Sarmento P editores. Formao desportiva pers, pectivas de estudo nos contextos escolar e desportivo. Cruz Quebrada: Edies da Faculdade de Motricidade Humana; 2004. 28. Sarmento P Rodrigues J, Veiga AL, Rosado A, Ferreira V. Anlise do com, portamento do treinador. Estudo comparativo em modalidades contextualmente diferenciadas. Ludens - Cinc Desp. 1993;13(1):20-3. 29. Anguera MT, Blanco , Losada JL. Diseos observacionales, cuestin clave en el proceso de la metodologa observacional. Metodol Cienc Comport. 2001;3(2):135-60. 30. Mars H. Basic recording tatics. In: Darst PW, Zakrajsek DB, Mancini VH, editores. Analysing physical education and sport instruction. Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics; 1989. 31. Mars H. Observer reliability: issues and procedures. In: Darst PW, Zakrajsek DB, Mancini VH, editores. Analysing physical education and sport instruction. Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics; 1989. 32. Pestana MH, Gageiro JN. Anlise de dados para cincias sociais - A complementaridade do SPSS. Lisboa: Edies Silabo; 2003. 33. Carron AV, Hausenblas HA, Estabrooks PA. Social inuence and exercise involvement. In: Bull SJ, editor. Adherence issues in sport and exercise. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons; 1999. 34. Brito A, Rodrigues J. As decises e os comportamentos do treinador de ginstica artstica. Desp Investig Cinc. 2002;I:21-39. 35. Potrac P Jones R, Armour K. Its all about getting respect: the coaching , behaviors of an expert english soccer coach. Sport Educ Soc. 2002;7(2):183202. 36. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning. Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics; 1999. 37. Mageau GA, Vallerand RJ. The coach-athlete relationship: a motivational model. J Sport Sci. 2003;21:883-904. 38. Cunha FA. Feedback como instrumento pedaggico. EducaoFsica.org [serial in internet]. 2004 [cited 2008 Apr 10]; [about 19 screens]. Available from: http://educacaosica.org/joomla/index.php?option=com_content& task=view&id=147&Itemid=2. 39. Rocha RS, Brando F, Cipriano H, Asseiceiro C, Veloso A. Prevalncia de perturbaes musculoesquelticas em instrutores de tness. Estudo exploratrio. Desp Investig Cinc. 2003;3:89-106. Submitted: 04/12/2008 - Accepted: 06/22/2008

Fit Perf J. 2008 Jul-Aug;7(4):251-63.

263