| Objective:The aim is to study the application of "cooperative learning method" and traditional teaching method in the teaching of fitness and bodybuilding specialties,explore the advantages and disadvantages of the two teaching methods,optimize the content and methods of teaching fitness and bodybuilding specialties,improve the theoretical and practical abilities of specialties students,and enhance the core competitiveness of specialties.Methods:The data were statistically analyzed and conclusions were drawn through the literature method,mathematical and statistical method,expert interview method and experimental research method.The specific process was as follows: 24 fitness and bodybuilding special students were divided into two groups of 12 students each according to their individual special literacy scores in fitness and bodybuilding special.They were taught theoretically and practically using traditional teaching methods and cooperative learning teaching methods respectively,in accordance with the school’s talent training program for fitness and bodybuilding special students,for 6 class hours per week,for a period of 12 weeks of teaching methods of intervention.Before and after the experiment,the students’ personal qualities(BMI,body fat percentage,FMS functional movement screening,three major items,circumference),special practical skills(testing and evaluation,warm-up,training plan development and demonstration,cold body,use of aerobic equipment)and theoretical tests of fitness and bodybuilding were measured,and the cooperative learning of the experimental group was monitored and controlled during the experiment.In terms of special practical skills,there are six stages(test and evaluation,warm-up,training plan development and demonstration,cold body,use of aerobic equipment,and private lesson instruction).The theoretical knowledge test was conducted in the fitness and bodybuilding special theory test,combining the theoretical course and special practical skills learning content and practical operation.The experimental group carried out the following eight modules of experimental control and design respectively a.pre-course pre-study,b.role-playing in turns,c.cooperative group division of labor and responsibility,d.cooperative group learning objectives,e.monitoring and intervention,f.self-assessment and mutual evaluation within the cooperative group,g.feedback and remediation,h.group performance and rewards and punishments,through the introduction of cooperative learning teaching methods to establish good group adaptation and improve the teaching effect.Results: 1.Changes in personal special literacy of fitness and bodybuilding special students before and after the experiment of traditional teaching methods:(1)FMS functional movement screening scores,three major coefficient indexes were 14.0±0.46 vs.18.3±0.31,3.5±0.22 vs.4.2±0.23,with significant differences(p=0.030,p=0.044,p<0.05);(2)body fat percentage index was 17.5±1.17% versus 16.9±0.94%,not significantly different(p=0.697,p>0.05);(3)circumference index(large arm circumference,chest circumference,waist circumference,hip circumference,thigh circu mference)was not significantly different(p=0.523,0.433,1.000,0.813,0.909,p>0.05)Changes in special practical skills and theoretical tests of fitness and bodybuilding special students:(1)the total score of personal training practical skills was18.3±0.69 versus 39.0±1.77,an improvement of 20.7 points,an improvement rate of113.1%,a significant difference(p=0.005,p<0.05);(2)the theoretical score was 70.7±1.42 versus 81.0±1.64,an improvement of 10.3 points,an improvement of 12.8%,which was not significantly different(p=0.807,p>0.05).Changes in non-cognitive ability scores:(1)Desarques social behavior,group cohesion,motivation to learn,affective performance and cooperative spirit scores were42.88±6.46 versus 44.80±6.37,66.40±4.96 versus 68.10±8.85,67.40±9.06 versus69.10±10.63,10.50± 2.06 points vs.11.10±1.17 points,none of which were significantly different(p=0.453,p=0.079,p=0.086,p=0.097,p>0.05)2.Changes in personal specific literacy of fitness and bodybuilding special students before and after the experiment of cooperative learning teaching method:(1)FMS functional movement screening scores and three major coefficient indexes were 16.7±0.62 versus 18.5±0.32,4.2±0.24 versus 4.9±0.21,with significant differences(p=0.016,p=0.039,p<0.05)(2)body fat percentage index was 16.8±1.39% versus15.1±0.96%,which was not significantly different(p=0.325,p>0.05);(3)circumference index(large arm circumference,chest circumference,waist circumference,hip circumference,thigh circumference)was not significantly different(p=0.601,0.282,0.115,0.690,0.656,p>0.05)Changes in the special practical skills and theoretical tests of fitness and bodybuilding special students:(1)the total score of personal training practical skills was 18.3±0.57 points versus 46.9±0.77 points,an improvement of 28.6 points,an improvement rate of 156.3%,with a highly significant difference(p<0.001);(2)the theoretical performance index was 71.7±1.15 points versus 90.3±1.34 points,an improvement of 18.6 points,an improvement rate of 25.9%,with a significant difference(p<0.001).Changes in non-cognitive ability scores:(1)group cohesion,learning motivation,affective performance and cooperative spirit scores were,68.1±8.04 vs.80.9±11.96,64.5±8.06 vs.76.1±15.64,11.5±1.83 vs.14.9±1.93,respectively,with significant differences(p=0.007,p=0.025,p=0.006,p<0.05);(2)De Saxe social behavior scores were 41.6±11.80 versus 49.7±3.79,which were not significantly different(p=0.150,p>0.05)3.Changes in students’ personal specific literacy when comparing the two teaching methods after the experiment:(1)FMS functional movement screening scores,three major coefficients,and circumference(waist circumference)indexes were 15.8±0.34 points versus 18.6±0.31 points,4.2±0.23 versus 4.9±0.21,and 78.0±1.81 cm versus72.7±1.03 cm,respectively,with significant differences(p=0.018,p=0.038,p=0.047,p<0.05);(2)body fat percentage index was 16.9±0.93% versus 15.1±0.95%,no significant difference(p=0.192,p>0.05);(3)circumference index(large arm circumference,chest circumference,waist circumference,hip circumference,thigh circumference),no significant difference(p= 0.917,0.371,0.075,0.245,p>0.05)Changes in the special practical skills and theoretical tests of fitness and bodybuilding special students:(1)the total score of personal training practical skills39.0±1.77 points versus 46.9±0.78 points,an increase of 7.9 points,an increase of20.3%,a significant difference(p=0.001,p<0.05);(2)the theoretical performance index81.0±1.64 points versus 90.3±1.35 points.improved by 9.3 points,an improvement rate of 11.5%,a significant difference(p=0.001,p<0.05).Changes in non-cognitive ability scores:(1)group cohesion,motivation,affective performance and cooperation scores were 44.8±6.37 versus 49.7±8.17,68.1±4.96 versus 80.9±8.04,69.4±9.06 versus 76.1±8.06,and 11.1±1.17 versus 14.9±1.82,respectively,with highly significant differences(p<0.001).Conclusions: 1.Both traditional and cooperative learning teaching methods can improve students’ personal specific literacy,but the traditional teaching method is less advantageous than the cooperative learning method in the development of FMS functional movement screening test,three major coefficients,and circumference(waist circumference).2.Both traditional and cooperative learning methods can improve students’ personal training practical skills,but the cooperative learning method can significantly develop plan development and practical skills,cold body,and 3.Both traditional teaching methods and cooperative learning methods can enhance students’ non-cognitive skills,but the cooperative learning method can significantly improve non-cognitive skills such as social behavior,group cohesion,cooperative spirit,and learning motivation under the teaching method than the traditional teaching method. |
PDF Full Text Request