Teaching Strategies and Training Outcomes in Men’s Artistic Gymnastics among Students of Shandong Sports University

This article reports the inferential component of a quantitative descriptive-correlational study on teaching strategies and training outcomes in men’s artistic gymnastics among students of Shandong Sports University. The analysis focused on three questions: whether the utilization of teaching strategies differed according to respondent profile, whether training outcomes differed according to profile, and whether teaching strategies were significantly related to training outcomes. Data were obtained from 285 male respondents using a researcher-made, expert-validated questionnaire covering demonstration and modeling, progressive skill drills, technology-assisted visual feedback, safety spotting and conditioning, and feedback and correction, together with skill acquisition, performance confidence, training discipline, safety awareness, and injury prevention. One-way analysis of variance and Pearson product-moment correlation were used in the inferential analyses reported in the dissertation. Significant differences were found across age, skill level, and weekly training-hour groups for all teaching strategies and training outcomes; years of gymnastics training produced a mixed pattern of significant and non-significant differences. Correlational results showed that technology-assisted visual feedback had significant positive relationships with all five training outcomes. Safety spotting and conditioning was most strongly related to skill acquisition, while feedback and correction had the strongest association observed in the study with training discipline (r = .750). The findings support differentiated, integrated, technology-assisted, feedback-rich, and safety-oriented gymnastics instruction while emphasizing that correlations indicate association rather than causation.

men’s artistic gymnastics, teaching strategies, perceived training outcomes, technology-assisted visual feedback, differentiated instruction

1. Aliriad, H. (2023). Level of motor educability in floor gymnastics courses to motion skills. JUARA: Jurnal Olahraga, 8(1), 531–536. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bores-García, D., Hortigüela-Alcalá, D., Fernández-Rio, F. J., González-Calvo, G., & Barba-Martín, G. (2021). Research on cooperative learning in physical education: Systematic review of the last five years. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 92(1), 146–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2020.1719276 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bouzid, M. S., Melki, H., Ben Romdhane, M., Hammoudi, S., Khalfallah, W., Rezgani, Y., Racil, G., & Padulo, J. (2025). The impact of video feedback on motor skill and motivation in acrobatic gymnastics through the use of digital tools in physical education. Journal of Human Sport and Exercise, 20(4), 1277–1292. https://doi.org/10.55860/pbyv8s24 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Casey, A., & MacPhail, A. (2021). Adopting a models-based approach to teaching physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 26(3), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2020.1823962 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Farana, R., Williams, G., Fujihara, T., Wyatt, H. E., Naundorf, F., & Irwin, G. (2023). Current issues and future directions in gymnastics research: Biomechanics, motor control and coaching interface. Sports Biomechanics, 22(2), 161–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2021.2016928 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Fernández-Río, J., Hortigüela-Alcalá, D., & Pérez-Pueyo, Á. (2023). Active learning methodologies and reflective practice in physical education. European Physical Education Review, 29(3), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X221147693 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. González-Víllora, S., Evangelio, C., Sierra-Díaz, J., & Fernández-Río, J. (2021). Hybridizing pedagogical models: A systematic review. European Physical Education Review, 27(2), 494–512. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X20929944 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Khataybeh, A., Al-Shadiedh, M., & Khasawneh, G. (2024). The effectiveness of cooperative learning strategy for mastery in enhancing the skill performance of some gymnastics floor movements. Pedagogy of Physical Culture and Sports, 28(4), 292–300. https://doi.org/10.15561/26649837.2024.0406 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Liu, W., & Cruz, A. B. (2022). Coaching behaviors and athlete outcomes: A meta-analytic review. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 15(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2020.1719207 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Lochbaum, M., Stoner, E., Hefner, T., Cooper, S., Lane, A. M., & Terry, P. C. (2022). Revisiting the self-confidence and sport performance relationship: A systematic review with meta-analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(11), 6381. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116381 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Magill, R. A., & Anderson, D. (2023). Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Martín-Rodríguez, A., & Madrigal-Cerezo, R. (2025). Technology-enhanced pedagogy in physical education: Bridging engagement, learning, and lifelong activity. Education Sciences, 15(4), 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15040409 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Mödinger, M., Woll, A., & Wagner, I. (2022). Video-based visual feedback to enhance motor learning in physical education—A systematic review. German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research, 52, 447–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12662-021-00782-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Panadero, E., Broadbent, J., Boud, D., & Lodge, J. M. (2022). Using formative assessment to influence self- and co-regulated learning: The role of evaluative judgement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 37, 535–557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-020-00506-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Schmidt, R. A. (1975). A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning. Psychological Review, 82(4), 225–260. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076770 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2019). Motor control and learning: A behavioral emphasis (6th ed.). Human Kinetics. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Starzak, M., Biegajło, M., Rydzik, Ł., Ambroży, T., & Jaszczur-Nowicki, J. (2022). The role of verbal feedback in the motor learning of gymnastic skills: A systematic review. Applied Sciences, 12(12), 5940. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12125940 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Treschman, P., Stylianou, M., & Brooks, C. (2024). A scoping review of feedback in physical education: Conceptualisations and the role of teachers and students. European Physical Education Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356336X241230829 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2021). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(5), 1413–1434. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01867-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]