Cálculo experimental de las curvas de dispersión

seminar instructional cycle was systematically adhered to during each of the 90-minute seminar sessions. As illustrated in Figure 3, during the seminar, participants were led through the first six steps of the cycle. Each session commenced with student-driven feedback and discussion about the homework tasks from the previous week. Thereafter, the theme for the current seminar was conveyed through the next five steps of the instructional cycle: theoretical input, individual needs assessment, acquisition and practice, individual goal setting, and a combination of centring and imagery rehearsal. The instruction phase came to an end with the conclusion of the centring and imagery rehearsal step depicted in the instructional cycle. Although the student-athletes were required to independently integrate their selected performance enhancement strategies into their practice settings each week, that step is also depicted as a constituent element of the instructional cycle. For completing the practical homework task of integrating and eventually maintaining the use of the chosen performance strategies represented both the transfer and application of the new skills from the educational to a practical setting. Moreover, the homework tasks were the foundation upon which the subsequent opening seminar discussion was based. Hence, throughout the semester, a continuously overlapping series of the instructional cycle ensued; it essentially recommenced as each new dimension of flow was dealt with in the respective seminar session.

Figure 3. Phases of the Flow-PST weekly seminar instructional cycle. Notes: *Each Flow-PST session commenced with feedback and discussion pertaining to the homework tasks from the previous session. **Students were instructed to complete the performance strategy integration and maintenance step independently during their upcoming practice sessions.

3.7.1.1 Feedback and discussion. With the exception of the introductory session, each session commenced with feedback and discussion in regard to the homework tasks given

the prior week. To facilitate the discussion, which took place before introducing the game plan for the respective session, the same recurring question was posed: What did you do and how did it go? The open-ended question served to invite participants to engage in a

discussion of their experiences since our last session. Moreover, students used this opportunity to pose questions as needed. In any seminar setting, the length of a discussion can vary and so too did those which took place during the pilot study. It is worthy of mention that time limits were not rigidly adhered to for the mere sake of exactitude. However, a wristwatch with an alarm function was used habitually to keep track of and signal the need to come to a close and progress forward after 10 minutes. Thus, while discussions and the remaining elements of the instructional cycle were never abruptly interrupted, an effort was made to remain cognizant of the planned time guidelines. Only once the approximately 10-minute feedback and discussion phase was complete, was the theme for the day introduced.

3.7.1.2 Theoretical input. Delineating a dimension of flow commenced with the conveyance of essential theoretical background relevant to the theme as well as an indication of the practical relevance thereof. The information was conveyed with Microsoft PowerPoint presentations in a frontal lecture format. Nonetheless, the arguably engaging

presentations systematically included questions and activating interludes with which to engage students and foster interaction. Each presentation encompassed a definition of the

Feedback and discussion* Theoretical input Individual needs assessment Acquisition and practice Individual goal setting Centring and imagery rehearsal Performance strategy integration and maintenance**

construct at hand, made reference to leading scholarly work related to the theme, and provided examples of when and how the theme is important for optimal sport performance. Furthermore, the PowerPoint presentations included references to related

supplementary reading material which would be uploaded on StudIP, the university’s

online learning platform, immediately subsequent to the seminar session. Naturally, the respective PowerPoint presentation was also uploaded to the learning platform so students

could independently peruse the material as they deemed fit. While those elaborate presentations are not offered as supplementary documentation accompanying this dissertation (out of deference for both copyright issues and for the sake of brevity), as described later in this chapter, the more succinct session reviews and checklists have been provided (as itemised in Appendix A, please see document six in the enclosed CD-ROM:

Complete Session Reviews and Checklists). In total, approximately 20 minutes of each session were designated to the provision of theoretical instruction. Within each presentation, the theoretical discussion of the theme segued into a consideration of the personal relevance thereof for each participant.

3.7.1.3 Individual needs assessment. Employing the performance profiling technique (Burton & Raedeke, 2008; Butler & Hardy, 1992; Jones, 1993; Taylor & Taylor, 1995; Weston et al., 2011), students were required to indicate their perceived level of proficiency in pertinent mental performance skills related to their sport performance domain. While the skills recommended as worthy of consideration reflected the performance strategies inherent in the TOPS 2 (Hardy et al., 2010), the students were welcome to make additional suggestions. Therefore, at the beginning of the Flow-PST seminar, students were asked to engage in this individual needs assessment process to enhance self-awareness. Specifically, the student-athletes individually rated themselves on a scale from low proficiency (1) to high proficiency (10) for each respective mental performance skill. By shading in everything below the given score, the athletes created clear visual representations of their perceived skills. As suggested by Taylor and Taylor (1995), the student-athletes were encouraged to consider any score below seven as an indication that the skill in question is potentially worthy of improving. Thus, using the resulting portrayal, students could identify their strengths and areas in need of improvement. (As itemised in Appendix A, the Performance Profile Template employed has

been provided in the enclosed CD-ROM; please see document seven). Essentially, with that introductory activity, students set the stage for what was to come forth during the remainder of the semester.

In each subsequent seminar session, approximately 10 minutes was allotted for the needs assessment phase. As the assessments were completed during the first week of the seminar, the participants were asked to refer back to their performance profile and iterate their perceived strengths and room for improvement as a reflection of what was discussed thus far during the session. This was done to foster a collaborative learning environment in which the students were encouraged to share and learn from one another, for this ought to promote and contribute to the satisfaction of students’ needs for relatedness (Deci et al., 2006; Deci & Ryan, 2014). Moreover, as described by Tinto (1997), such collaborative environments foster not only students’ sense of community and willingness to bond with their peers, but also serves to keep them more optimally engaged and persistent in the learning environment. Bearing both the importance of the relevant mental performance skill and an awareness of their related strengths and areas in need of improvement in mind, students transitioned from the needs assessment step of the learning cycle to learning tangible ways to enhance performance.

3.7.1.4 Acquisition and practice. To augment the relevant theory, all students were introduced to and asked to engage in techniques or strategies one could employ to foster the aspect of performance in question. The in-class tasks introduced during the 20- minute acquisition and practice phase were chosen based on the ease with which they could be explained and easily executed in class. This provided participants with the opportunity to immediately gauge the benefit of the strategies in question. Naturally, students were provided with written explanations and task descriptions for what was learned and practiced in class. Moreover, where applicable, they were directed to acquaint themselves with the additional strategies briefly described in class and available via the online learning platform. To foster students’ autonomous yet substantiated decision- making processes, the homework tasks the students could choose from were described as of equal relevance and an explanatory rationale was provided for the choices given (Assor et al., 2002; Reeve & Jang, 2006; Reeve, 2009). On a weekly basis, students had the recurring homework assignment to choose what works best for them as an individual. Initially,

a specific number of tasks to be completed were purposefully not dictated, as from a research perspective, it would have been of interest to examine variations in the students’ reports of the number of tasks engaged in and how that was potentially related to one’s described locus of motivational regulation. An unforeseeable problem, however, necessitated reconsideration of that methodological decision in the fourth seminar session.

During the feedback and discussion phase of the third Flow-PST theme (clear goals),

instruction as to which tasks or even how many must be completed each week. Specifically,

as described in the pertinent Session Review and Checklist (as provided in the enclosed CD-

ROM; please see document six), we came to the conclusion that “having too many tasks each week… is daunting (can cause undesired stress) and… if everything is “optional” then fewer of the tasks [will be] used” (p. 3). As a reflection of that seminar discussion instigated by the participants, I decided to alter my initial plan of action. Provided students engaged in any two tasks of interest outside of class, they continued to have the

freedom to choose from any of the possibilities at hand. The decision provided the explicit teacher-driven directive students desired whilst nonetheless providing opportunity for autonomous decisions to be made pertaining to which tasks were of greatest interest. Finally, students were reminded that they would be asked to share their experiences with the remainder of the class during the forthcoming session. While students were collectively encouraged to participate in testing the respective performance enhancement strategies introduced during the actual class session, thereafter, they were invited to consider how they could optimise their mental strength in regard to the theme in question on an individual basis.

3.7.1.5 Individual goal setting. The approximately 10-minute goal setting phase of the weekly seminar instructional cycle served two purposes. First, the process focused students’ attention on what had been conveyed and experienced during the seminar. Moreover, it required students to systematically translate the accumulated information into specific steps towards achievement of self-determined goals, which reflected their momentary individual mental performance needs. Setting individual goals for the enhancement of the respective aspect of mental performance (dimension of flow) in question allowed students to not only consider what they wished to improve, rather, it dictated that they determine which specific performance strategies they planned to adopt to facilitate their endeavour.

3.7.1.5.1 The goal setting form. A goal setting form was employed to facilitate the in-class

goal setting process; the form included ten sections to complete. The initial procedure was based on relevant theoretical considerations which called for the establishment of dream, long-term, intermediate, and short-term goals for both practice and competition (Burton & Naylor, 2002; Burton et al, 2001; Burton & Raedeke, 2008; Weinberg & Gould, 2003, 2011). Although setting goals based on the athlete’s initial needs assessment and with relevance to their practice settings was the focus, participants were not expressly prohibited from

the statement of quantifiable goals, which identified the specific characteristics of the improved technique or behaviour desired, and an indication of the type of goal (outcome, performance, or process). During each session, participants were encouraged to ensure that the respective goals set emphasised both quantitative and qualitative aspects of performance where feasible. Next, the perceived difficulty of the goal was rated, and a specific time or timeframe in which it should be achieved was established. Students then successively contemplated potential barriers, determination of a means of circumventing them, and a specific plan of action towards goal attainment. Furthermore, each athlete was required to indicate quantifiable levels of attainment (complete, partial and self- acceptance). Goals were hence set for the attainment of the overall conceptual objectives of the respective session. Finally, the participants were required to determine specific dates on which progress made thus far would be evaluated.

While the goals set in class were independent of the strategies students could opt to use to facilitate goal attainment, the goal setting work completed during the seminar was preliminary in nature. As previously delineated, during the feedback and discussion phase of the instructional cycle one week later, students were expected to come prepared to critically reflect on and discuss their experiences integrating and maintaining the performance strategies chosen. In that respect, during the discussion of their experiences, students were encouraged to evaluate their progress, and where applicable, consider how they could refine or change the performance strategies employed to better facilitate goal attainment. Once clear goals were established in class, however, they needed to be reinforced.

3.7.1.6 Centring and imagery rehearsal. Weekly, students engaged in imagery rehearsal to reinforce the fundamental aspects of and foster a positive experience of the theme (dimension of flow) conveyed. As imagery can be used to see, feel, and promote a belief in (Murphy & Martin, 2002; Vealey & Greenleaf, 2001; 2007) one’s ability to perform within one’s individual zone of optimal functioning (Hanin, 2000; Orlick, 2000). Without exception, visualisation was inevitably preceded by some form of centring exercise. Arguably, the technique of centring, or employing breathing exercises to foster focus as well as emotional and physiological regulatory control, is essentially a form of arousal regulation (Hall, 1998; Munroe et al., 2000); specifically, relaxation (Hardy et al., 2010; Thomas et al., 1999). Although imagery and one-breath relaxation are two distinct performance strategies, they were nevertheless combined in the aforementioned rudimentary form when employed during the final phase of the weekly flow instructional cycle. Thus, during the approximately 10-minute in-class imagery rehearsal phase,

students were first guided in employing the centring technique and then asked to mentally create (or recreate) a primarily kinaesthetic, yet ideally multisensory, positive, or successful

experience of the dimension of flow in question.

3.7.1.6.1 Audio supported mental rehearsal. Sport psychologist Dr. Terry Orlick’s Zone of Excellence audio recordings (2003a; 2003b; 2003c; 2003d) were used for each imagery

session. The specific audio recordings employed are indicated in each respective seminar session review. The audio exercises were chosen based on how well they directly underscored the respective theme. To additionally enable students to engage in imagery rehearsal independently, each student-athlete was provided with a zip file containing the complete set of Zone of Excellence CDs (2003a; 2003b; 2003c; 2003d). For those interested in

keeping track of their independent imagery rehearsal, participants were given a handout entitled Zone of Excellence Log with which to record the date on which they used an audio

recording, which specific track they used, when, and additional commentary as they deemed fit. Akin to the other performance strategies, while imagery was one of the mental training strategies used in class, students were instructed to independently determine if they would continue to use the available audio recordings as a means of fostering the dimension of optimal performance introduced.

3.7.1.7 Performance strategy integration and maintenance. The Flow-PST participants were encouraged to not only try new performance enhancement strategies and practice them independently between sessions; they were expected to choose specific strategies to habitually integrate into their practice settings. To foster student autonomy, beyond reminding students of the room for flexibility and conveying the relevance of the various tasks as commensurate (Reeve & Jang, 2006), each week, students were given the recurrent instruction to employ “any strategy [which] makes intuitive sense to you

[emphasis added]” (Orlick, 2000, p. 90). Active engagement in this step was the only element of the weekly instructional cycle which took place outside of the seminar. Once independently determined as an integral aspect of one’s desired mental training program, students were encouraged to maintain the use of their chosen strategies by means of regular evaluation and refinement of the use thereof where applicable. This step and all performance strategies tested were thus to be considered ongoing and cumulative.