information indicative of one’s progress towards goal attainment (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Jackson & Csikszentmihalyi, 1999). The development of an acute awareness of ongoing feedback directs an athlete’s attention to beneficial behaviours, which ought to be continued, and to the eventual need for refinement of others. Moreover, clear process
goals (Burton et al., 2001; Burton & Raedeke, 2008; Kingston & Hardy, 1997; Weinberg & Gould, 2003; 2011) provide an unequivocal opportunity to monitor progress. Thus, the lecture phase of the fourth Flow-PST seminar (Murdock, 2012e) demonstrated the inherent reciprocal relationship between clear goals and unambiguous intrinsic and extrinsic feedback. After conveying and discussing the motivational and instructional functions and effects of feedback in sport (Burton & Raedeke, 2008; Latinjak, Torregross & Renom, 2011; Smith, 2001; Weinberg & Gould, 2003; 2011), various sources of feedback were delineated and students were given the opportunity to offer examples of feedback cues from their sports. The discussion segued to the needs assessment phase of the instructional cycle during which the student-athletes considered where potential existed to make more effective use of the sources of feedback at their disposal.
The first activity in the acquisition and practice phase focused on Deciphering Relevant Feedback Cues. Because of the subjective nature of flow, internal, or sensory-
perceptual, rather than external sources of feedback were our focus. Jackson and Csikszentmihalyi (1999) describe the most important source of feedback as “the feedback the body itself provides, particularly in the form of kinesthetic awareness or knowledge of where it is in space” (p. 22). Accordingly, the task required that students consider visual, auditory, gustatory, olfactory, somatosensory, kinaesthetic, and coenesthetic sources of feedback available to them while performing. Thereafter, the participants individually considered and notated their perception of the importance of each feedback source they listed. This was conducive to directing their attention toward and raising their awareness of the manner in which each source could be purposefully monitored to facilitate and ensure progression towards their goals and performing within their IZOF.
The second in-class task required students to consider their optimal physical and mental readiness. For without optimal physical preparedness, not only is the establishment of an optimal mental mind set arguably less likely, it is also less probable that one will perform in flow (Jackson & Csikszentmihalyi, 1999). The individualised checklist of physical conditions and mental factors one needs to attend to in order to become optimally ready for performance provided the student-athletes with tangible feedback. Used effectively, the information ought to foster awareness of the target state and thereby the knowledge required to make befitting adjustments in one’s behaviour as desired. To emphasise the conceptual link between the first four mental training themes, students were reminded that optimal performance will result when one aims at
a balance between the realistic goals pursued and the tangible skills one has. When one adopts not only a process goal focus, but also deciphers and attends to the relevant feedback cues available, one can ensure that they are on a constant progression towards consistently performing within their IZOF.
To facilitate the individual goal setting process related to this particular theme, students were encouraged to determine specific “goal evaluation strategies” (Weinberg & Gould, 2003, p. 341) based on their most relevant feedback cues. Designing such a performance measurement system required each athlete to first notate, or revisit, the short-term goals they were currently vying for. The next step required students to indicate the feedback sources, which would offer evaluative information about the progress made towards goal attainment. The intention was to foster ongoing goal implementation and adherence by encouraging the student-athletes to determine how frequently and based on which specific feedback cues they could monitor their progress towards their goals. Moreover, in the Flow-PST context, goal support and commitment (Learner & Locke, 1995; Weinberg & Gould, 2003) was fostered through the in-class discussion at the start of each session during which students ought to report on their progress in increasing or refining their use of internal feedback cues. Finally, in preparation for the homework tasks, students were introduced to the concept of High- Five Evaluations. This form of evaluative feedback was intended as an additional means of
self-evaluation yet also as a means of providing interim feedback concerning the Flow- PST seminar.
3.8.5.1 High-five evaluations. The celebratory high-five gesture was demonstrative of the collaborative working environment and camaraderie established in class, yet also the evaluative feedback sought during this session and for the pilot study. The student- athletes in the Flow-PST seminar were well aware that the research objective of the seminar was to optimise an educational sport psychology mental training program for university students. They understood, therefore, that to optimise the program, their feedback was essential. One means of constructively providing evaluative information toward the goal of improving the mental training seminar was based on the act of giving a high-five. As illustrated in the template provided in the enclosed CD-ROM (see document 10), students were asked to offer evaluative feedback about their perceptions of the seminar thus far using the five digits of a hand as a guideline. In the space designated to the little finger (a), students had the opportunity to indicate what they felt we had done too little of during the seminar. Next, in the section for the ring finger (b), students could indicate what they deemed indispensable for the seminar. Whereas the middle finger (c)
was designated for feedback about aspects of the seminar which were clearly suboptimal or displeasing to the evaluator, the index finger (d) represented the space in which cautionary feedback could be offered. Finally, the thumb (e) indicated the section in which satisfaction or approval could be addressed. To ensure that miscellaneous feedback could also be notated if desired, a sixth category, the watch (f), provided a section in which students could comment on things which they also wished to share yet had not yet had the time to address. The high-five feedback task gave students an opportunity to share their perceptions of the Flow-PST seminar; yet, the same task could be used to evaluate one’s own progress towards enhancing one’s mental strengths.
For those interested, the high-five evaluation task was a means of independently evaluating their use of the mental training strategies introduced thus far from five perspectives. The student-athletes could assess (a) what they felt they were making insufficient use of, (b) which techniques they considered vital, (c) what they abhorred, (d) what they felt needed further consideration, and (e) what they deemed their most favourable performance enhancement strategies. As an alternative means of completing the same core task, one of the reflective writing/sport journal questions instructed students to: “Give yourself a high-five evaluation regarding your use of the various mental training
techniques you have chosen to use. Include any thoughts you wish to address” (Murdock, 2012e). To conclude the instructional cycle, students engaged in the feedback-related audio mental training exercises entitled: Respecting Patterns That Work Best for You (Orlick,
2003c) and Change Channels (Orlick, 2003a). Encouraging the student-athletes to pay
deliberate attention to their self-determined feedback cues ought to have fostered clarity pertaining to their proximity toward fulfilment of their process goals (Burton et al., 2001; Kingston & Hardy, 1997; Weinberg & Gould, 2003; 2011, 2015) and making adjustments as required—by changing channels to the appropriate process oriented focus. Moreover, using sensory-perceptual feedback as a foundation for one’s goal evaluation strategies promotes moment-by-moment concentration on the task at hand.
3.8.6 Session six: Assessing and fostering concentration (concentration on the