Analysis and evaluation of performance
Apprends en jouant
Réponds à ces questions pour gagner de l'énergie, puis pêche et explore. Sans compte.
Pour les enseignants : diapos de leçon, notes de révision prêts à l'emploi pour Analysis and evaluation of performance (Physical Education, Performance) — utilise-les en cours, ou lance le thème en activité de classe interactive que tes apprenants jouent en direct.
Notes de leçon
Why analyse
- Analyse to identify what was effective, what needs development and why that judgement follows from evidence. Link the claim to a named activity, role, criterion and observed example. A final result alone cannot reveal every technical, tactical or fitness contribution.
- Separate description, analysis and evaluation: report what happened, interpret how it affected the stated performance, then judge against a criterion and propose a justified change. Use respectful task-specific language rather than turning a weakness into a label about the person.
Build a justified performance judgement
Methods of analysis
- Observation, video, event statistics, checklists, profiling, relevant tests and performer feedback can contribute different evidence. Define events and checklist criteria, use consistent recording and compare repeated examples. Video offers replay but camera angle, resolution and off-camera action remain limitations.
- Agree appropriate recording permissions and use school or club storage/sharing arrangements. Independent observers or another method can help check interpretation. A model performer is a suitable reference for a task, not a demand for identical technique or body appearance.
Choose evidence and recognise its limit
Types of data
- Quantitative evidence expresses an amount numerically, such as time in seconds or successful passes out of total attempts. Qualitative evidence describes observed features or decisions. A profile rating out of ten is quantitative but may be a subjective judgement, so define the scale and support it with evidence.
- Distinguish observation from inference: late elbow extension is visible on suitable video, whereas low confidence should not simply be assumed from appearance. Descriptions and numbers can strengthen each other without guaranteeing a complete account or identifying one cause.
Data type does not remove subjectivity
Analysing technique
- Preparation, execution and follow-through provide a useful breakdown of many discrete skills such as a throw. Define the phase, describe a visible feature and compare it with suitable task-specific criteria or a skilled reference. Explain how that feature might affect control, accuracy or outcome.
- Not every continuous activity fits the same three phases and not every visible difference is a fault. Age, task, rules and individual characteristics matter. Test a plausible explanation with more evidence rather than asserting that a single camera view proves the cause of an error.
A useful breakdown for a discrete throw
Analysing fitness
- Use activity demands and evidence to choose relevant fitness components and tests. A test result is an indicator under a particular protocol, not a full measurement of sporting ability or proof of why a skill failed. Keep conditions, equipment and units consistent for comparisons.
- Justify a suitable method and settings: continuous work may target endurance, short fast intervals repeated high-intensity demands, flexibility work a relevant range and plyometrics explosive performance. Interval training can also target aerobic fitness. Suitability, supervision where needed and recovery affect the plan.
A method needs a justified stimulus
Personal exercise programme (PEP)
- A personal exercise programme connects baseline evidence, the person’s aims and a relevant fitness priority to clear targets, training methods and FITT: frequency, intensity, time and type. Include preparation, recovery, appropriate progression and monitoring of response and participation. Do not assume an unrelated fitness plan fixes a technical or tactical weakness.
- Use SMART as a planning aid: define the task, measure, suitable challenge and review date. Terms such as achievable, realistic or relevant vary by course. PEP, AEP and analysis/action-plan assessment formats differ across boards; follow the current specification for assessed requirements rather than treating this general example as a coursework template.
Connect a programme to evidence
Evaluating
- Compare follow-up evidence with a suitable baseline and stated target using the same protocol where appropriate. Evaluate both outcomes and process: attendance, adaptations, response, technique and conditions. Explain what worked, what is uncertain and what change is justified next.
- A better post-test result alone does not prove a programme caused improvement. Familiarity, measurement error, other activity, health and changing opposition may contribute. Several comparable samples and complementary observations strengthen interpretation; avoid promising guaranteed progress.
Change observed does not prove one cause
Tactical analysis
- Tactical analysis examines decisions, available options and their effects in the actual role and opposition context. Record attempts as well as successful actions, difficulty, location and consequences. A safe high-completion option can have a different purpose from a riskier chance-creating pass.
- A failed result does not automatically prove a poor decision: execution, opposition and chance can affect it. Compare similar situations and explain the trade-off before judging the choice. A statistic supports interpretation but does not replace the explanation.
Make a tactical statistic interpretable
Compare rates with attempt totals
- Fictional comparable practice: A scores 6 from 10, or 60%; B scores 9 from 20, or 45%. B has the higher success count but A has the higher observed success rate. A percentage needs a denominator and clear event definition; comparing only the successful totals gives a different and incomplete account.
- The samples are small and practice conditions may not transfer fully to competition. Record repeat samples and context before treating a difference as stable ability. An agreed target such as 8 from 10 by a review date is a hypothetical learning example, not a norm or guarantee.
Fictional comparable shooting samples
Diapos
Sign up free to view the lesson slides
Step through every slide for this topic — plus flashcards and revision notes — with a free account.
Questions d'entraînement
Aperçu gratuit — 8 sur 35 questions. Inscris-toi pour toutes les voir.
1.What is performance analysis?
Easy- Asystematic evidence-based review of strengths and improvement priorities
- Breporting only the final result without context
- Cassuming an error proves low fitness
- Dcopying a model without considering the task
2.What is observation?
Easy- Achanging criteria for every attempt without recording it
- Bjudging only by reputation
- Cassuming a score reveals every technique detail
- Dsystematically watching against defined criteria
3.What is quantitative data?
Easy- Aopinions only
- Bstories
- Cdata in numbers
- Ddescriptions only
4.What is qualitative data?
Easy- Acounts
- Bdescriptive, non-numerical data
- Ctimes and scores
- Dheart rate numbers
5.Which is quantitative data?
Easy- Aa 100 m time of 12.5 seconds
- Bthe player looked tired
- Cthe technique seemed smooth
- Dthe coach felt happy
6.Which is qualitative data?
Easy- A14 goals scored
- Ba time of 11.2 seconds
- C70 per cent passing
- Dthe elbow extended late during the recorded throw
7.What is a model performer?
Easy- Aa spectator
- Ba referee
- Ca suitable skilled reference for comparison in the stated task
- Da beginner
8.What is performance profiling?
Easy- Aignoring weaknesses
- Brating strengths and weaknesses on a chart
- Cavoiding performance
- Dcounting only goals
Unlock all 35 questions & more
Crée un compte gratuit pour voir toutes les questions, les diapos, les cartes mémo et les notes de révision de ce thème.
Annales
Les annales d'entraînement pour ce thème arrivent bientôt.
Bientôt disponible