On the Relationship between Objective Measures and Performance in Basketball: Selecting Teams of Seventh Grade Girls

Abstract

The present study examines the utility of several objective measures to predict which girls were selected for one of six junior high school basketball teams. One purpose of this research was to examine the extent to which differences between coaches' selection strategies might have contributed to the apparently contradictory results among previous attempts to identify correlates of coaches' ratings or team selections. Linear discriminant models of six coaches' team selections were constructed from measures of basketball and athletic skills, strength, physical measures, and competition anxiety obtained during the first week of practice. These models provided greater-than-chance agreement with coaches' player selection for each team (87%–93% correct classification). A cross-modeling procedure revealed that the six coaches' selections could be modeled in terms of one of three approaches to selection: a) Select the aspirants who possess the best basketball skills (three teams), b) select the aspirants with greatest size and strength and least competition anxiety (two teams), and c) select only the aspirants with both types of attributes (one team). The results indicate that it may be difficult to identify a single set of measures to select skillful or potentially skillful basketball players, because of differences in how coaches might choose to define these terms     

Productivity in educational psychology journals from 2003 to 2008

Productivity of individuals and institutions in educational psychology journals has been previously examined in three separate studies (Hsieh et al. [Hsieh, P., Acee, T., Chung, W., Hsieh, Y., Kim, H., Thomas, G. D., et al. (2004). An alternate look at educational psychologist’s productivity from 1991 to 2002. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 333–343]; Smith et al. [Smith, M. C., Locke, S. G., Boisse, S. J., Gallagher, P. A., Krengel, L. E., & Kuczek, J. E., et al. (1998). Productivity of educational psychologists in educational psychology journals, 1991–1996. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 173–181]; [Smith, M. C., Plant, M., Carney, R. N., Arnold, C. S., Jackson, A., Johnson, L. S., et al. (2003). Further productivity of educational psychologists in educational psychology journals, 1997–2001. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 422–430.]) spanning the years 1991–2002. The present study updates this literature by examining the same five journals: Cognition and Instruction, Contemporary Educational Psychology, the Educational Psychologist, Educational Psychology Review, and the Journal of Educational Psychology from 2003 to 2008. Individual productivity was calculated by the number of (a) articles published and (b) points based on a formula that considers author position in relation to the number of authors. The University of Maryland and Richard E. Mayer maintained their positions as the top research institution and author, respectively. There was also growth in collaboration as well as international involvement as measured by number of authors.     

Instructional design approaches for improving a course in productivity and work measurement

This article explores the teaching styles of the professor, learning styles of the students, characteristics of the students, comparisons of Pearson's correlation coefficients between student grades earned in the course versus their cumulative grade point averages, and factors to consider for future Web‐enhanced courses. The objectives of the course were to develop students' understanding of productivity and work measurement. It also explored the ability to understand and apply systems thinking and innovative planning for the purpose of improving personal productivity, the productivity of other people, and the productivity of systems and organizations.