A Critical Review of Service-Technique Teaching in Youth Volleyball Gylton Da Matta Volleyball Juniors, Youth Olympic Sports Academy, Department of Sports Performance, Fort Collins, CO Linda Gagen Norfolk State University, Norfolk, VA Michael C. Rhoads University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO ABSTRACT The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the importance of using developmentally appropriate serving strategies that will promote the game of volleyball and facilitate learning while minimizing injury. A critical review of serving discusses the main developmental, maturational, and technical issues related to socialization and long-term development in volleyball. Teaching complex serving styles (such as the jump serve to athletes under the age of 14) might have implications for athletes long-term development and might lead to injury. The adoption of developmentally appropriate practices in coaching young athletes is still a novelty for many coaches. Therefore, this article stresses the importance of implementing adapted or modified games and of teaching skills in a progressive fashion to aid development. Key Words: developmentally appropriate practice, motor skill development, volleyball serve Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 122 of 208
A Critical Review of Service-Technique Teaching in Youth Volleyball Serving is one of the most critical technical skills in volleyball. In order to gain competitive advantage in a match, players will adopt the most aggressive serving style (Gabbett, Georgieff, & Domrow, 2007). Beginners often struggle to perform effective serves due to maturation and strength issues (French, Rink, & Werner, 1990; Malina & Bouchard, 1991). Such limitations represent a teaching challenge for coaches (Rink, 2010). Coaches frequently feel a need to negotiate student-athletes expectations when teaching a developmentally appropriate skill, while athletes often resist, expecting to learn more advanced, fashionable skills. For example, most children want to emulate the elite volleyball players they see on television by learning to jump serve. On one hand, it is highly recommended to teach beginners from their intrinsic motivational perspective, if they are physically and psychologically ready (Gagen & Getchell, 2004; Velentzas, Heinen, Tenenbaum, & Schack, 2010). However, there is scientific evidence that, in the case of serving in volleyball, children do have limitations that require guidance and the adoption of a pedagogical progression in order to effectively teach this fundamental skill (French et al., 1991; French et al., 1990; Zetou, Tzetzis, Vernadakis, & Kioumourtzoglou, 2002). If beginner players are not developmentally ready to learn how to overhead and jump-serve, the consequences can be harmful. For instance, the overhead serve and the jump serve are complex discrete skills that require eye-hand coordination, timing, jumping skills, and proper landing skills. Children ages 7 12 generally are not mature enough to perform such skills proficiently (Lidor, Arnon, Hershko, Maayan, & Falk, 2007; Temprado, Della-Grasta, Farrell, & Laurent, 1997). Based on our observations as coaches, teaching the underhand serve has recently become less fashionable. In fact, the underhand serve has become a suppressed skill, giving place to the instruction of overhead and jump serving styles (floater and top spin). The Federation Internationale de Volleyball (FIVB), the governing body of volleyball, provides several recommendations that promote developmentally appropriate practice, including the use of underhand service for beginning players. In the case of volleyball initiation, teaching overhead serving has become the norm among coaches of youth athletes. It seems that there is a discrepancy between FIVB recommendations and coaches development programs in national federations. There are a few possibilities to explain why volleyball coaches are not teaching the underhand serve anymore: (1) perhaps coaches feel excessive pressure to win; (2) maybe coaches do not have the time to teach other serving styles; (3) for a tactical option, coaches have skipped teaching the underhand serve and have implemented teaching the overhead serve; or (4) coaching education programs have simply ignored the underhand serve and over emphasized the jump serve at early ages of learning. The adoption of a developmentally appropriate serving style has raised some fundamental questions among volleyball stakeholders. Is the underhand serve a suppressed skill? Is it necessary to learn the underhand serve in order to be a successful volleyball player? Does adopting the underhand volleyball serve increase the likelihood of injury prevention on the hitting shoulder? Does mastering the underhand serve support or obstruct the development of elite volleyball performance? In sum, all of these questions lead to a major dilemma: should Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 123 of 208
young children be taught a skill because Olympic and collegiate players predominantly use it? Just because elite players consistently adopt a given technique does not mean that coaches of young players should implement that technique, for the sake of competitiveness and modeling, without a critical reflection on the appropriateness of this coaching decision. In our experience, the larger problem is the practice among coaches of beginner athletes of skipping the teaching of foundational skills and instead leaping to the teaching of advanced performance skills. The purpose of this paper is to critically review current perspectives on service-technique teaching in volleyball. A Critical Review of the Literature Our review of literature on serving in volleyball found that little attention has been given to the adoption of developmentally appropriate practices. While the use of underhand serving has been recognized in research when developing skills tests (Bartlett, Smith, Davis, & Peel, 1991; Lidor et al., 2007), studies have not focused on developmental pathways for learning to serve. In fact, the vast majority of studies on serving in volleyball have focused on the overhand serve (Ram & McCullagh, 2003; Temprado et al., 1997; Velentzas et al., 2010; Zetou et al., 2002; Zubiar, Oña, & Delgado, 1999). The suppression of the underhand serve is clearly evident in the volleyball coaching literature. On one hand, there are at least three major books on coaching volleyball in which the underhand serve is not mentioned at all (Herbert, 1991; Shondell & Reynaud, 2002; USA Volleyball, 2009; Wise, 1999). On the other hand, the importance of the underhand serve for grassroots volleyball in schools and adapted volleyball receives much attention among national level coaches and international governing body materials (Dunphy & Wilde, 2000; FIVB, 2011; Neville, 1990; Selinger & Ackermann-Blount, 1986). According to the FIVB, the underhand serve is a skill that represents the first action in the game and the first steps to learn how to play at any level. In fact, underhand serving (commonly known among coaches as chipping) is the most used skill by coaches themselves in training, in warm-ups, in Minivolley, and in recreational situations (FIVB, 2011; Kessel, 2009; Rose & Schall, 1999; USA Volleyball, 2009). Yet due to specificity and time constraints, the underhand serve appears to have been discarded from the repertoire of volleyball teaching in many clubs, schools, and recreational centers (Savelsbergh, Geert & Van Der Kamp, 2000). In the past two years, the FIVB has reported that the jump float style has been the most effective in international competitions. While it is clear that little attention has been given to the developmental process of learning to serve in volleyball, the FIVB reports that skills performed at the elite level should not be the prescription for all skill levels (FIVB, 2011). For instance, while many elite teams are adopting the jump float and jump serve, the overhead standing serve is also becoming less popular internationally. It is our position that the elite athletes mindset should not be the model for all. We believe the choice to adopt a particular serving style is most influenced by coaches, parents, and peer mentors, primarily with the recommendation of top coaches who are motivated to win matches. However, during the early phases of learning, Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 124 of 208
winning should not be the main focus, but instead learning the correct form of different styles in order to create options and new playing opportunities. Culturally constructed beliefs about serving commonly held by coaches, parent-coaches and senior athletes frequently determine what service styles are adopted in different sport contexts. In the case of serving in volleyball, Asian countries often adopt the round-house (sidearm) serving style, which is unfamiliar to most Western coaches. Both the underhand serve and the round-house styles are viewed as two ends of a simple-to-complex progression (Selinger & Ackermann-Blount, 1986). Responding to FIVB recommendations, Olympic coaches promote early initiation and late specialization of service styles as a rule for ages 10 14. During this stage, jump serving is prohibited and overhead serving is allowed only at the age of 14. The intent to diversify the serving styles across age groups is clearly outlined through specific regulations that limit players under 12 and under 14 years old to serve overhead or to jump serve in official competitions for instance, in Brazil (Da Matta, 2004; FIVB, 2011). During the 2012 Olympic Games, players demonstrated great proficiency at serving. Overall, some of the top servers have reported that throughout their career they have experienced the underhand, overhead, and one kind of jump serving (Confederação Brasileira de Volleyball, 2012; FIVB, 2011). It has been reported that both expert and collegiate athletes have expressed higher anxiety in regard to serving because they have struggled earlier in their career either during practices or in critical moments of an important competition (Da Matta, 2004, FIVB, 2011; Neville, 1990). Nonetheless, being able to perform multiple types of serves was perceived as a competitive asset (Da Matta, 2004; FIVB, 2011). Additionally, Olympic gold medalists and world-champion coaches indicated that learning a variety of serving styles across one s career is beneficial because it allows players to be more versatile both technically and tactically (FIVB, 2011; Da Matta, 2004). They also suggested that using different muscle groups and moving joints differently would protect players from injury in the long run (Ferretti, 1989; Sparrow & Newell, 1998). The pursuit of winning is understandable, but when players are at different skill levels, coaches should revise this view based on athletes needs and related fundamental principles of learning and skill development. In sum, there are multiple benefits to emphasizing underhand service for beginner volleyball athletes: socialization, injury prevention, and long-term development of expertise. Socialization into Volleyball The FIVB has in the past decade created volleyball coaching materials and implemented new rules that promote longer rallies, ball control, and a better understanding of the game in order to create more successful experiences as well as more enjoyment by those who play and those who watch volleyball (Da Matta & Turner, 1999; FIVB, 2011). These resources emphasize that having fun is directly associated with developing proper skills as well as being successful in the short- and long-term process of learning and playing volleyball. Therefore, although players Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 125 of 208
enjoy spiking, learning proper serving styles and passing technique is a critical approach for children and youths to be socialized into the game (Kessel, 2009). We believe winning at early stages should not be the ultimate goal for beginners. In fact, specializing in jump serving could constrain play and be detrimental to motivational aspects due to shortened rally length at young ages. Elite athletes report the importance of learning how to serve during socialization into the sport (Da Matta, 2004). In fact, exposing beginner athletes to the correct concepts of movements, in ways that intertwine specificity and variability of practice, meets the sequence and scope emphasized by experts from the Technical Committee of the sport s top governing body (Cardinal 1989; Da Matta, 2004; FIVB, 2011; Toyoda, 1989). In other words, scaffold instruction that helps young athletes master foundational skills is likely to increase their enjoyment of the game. For instance, if a 12-year-old player is consistently missing his/her overhead serves, he/she should be allowed to serve from a shorter distance and then progressively back up to the regulation base-line, after acquiring proper form. Coaches could also recommend that the player adopt an easier serving style, such as the underhand or sidearm serve (FIVB, 2011; French et al., 1991; Salmela, 1995). Injury Prevention in Volleyball Serving Coaches do not always consider structural or functional (primarily maturational) constraints in the pathway to developing a repertoire of effective motor performances (Gagen & Getchell, 2004). In fact, some motor learning theorists (e.g., Schmidt & Young, 1987; Shae & Morgan, 1979) and sports developmentalists such as French and Thomas (1987) strongly suggest the importance of addressing such constraints in the learning process. Moreover, expert practitioners elicit the importance of teaching sound technique in order to prevent career-ending injuries (Salwula, 1992). Volleyball statistics show that adult women players are more likely to be injured than their male counterparts, with half of the players in over-18 age groups likely to be injured at least once in a volleyball season (Bahr & Krosshaug, 2005). Volleyball should be considered a high-risk sport according to the frequency and gravity of medical findings regarding the high incidence of sport-related injuries (Ferretti, Papandrea, Conteduca, & Mariani, 1992). Using developmentally appropriate practices in this case, using multiple arm and shoulder positions during serving has long been a focus among coaches who work with athletes in early stages of motor skill acquisition to mitigate relatively high incidence of injuries that occur due to repetitive striking practice (Dunphy & Wilde, 2000, p. 149). Considering the high demands of the jump serve on ankle, knee, lower back, shoulder, and elbow joints, concern regarding injury-inducing movement should be taken seriously during the training process for teenagers and beginners. Such concern is higher for young players going through growth spurts, where the tenderness of their epiphyses may lead to chronic wear and tear, or even to tendonitis (Ferreti, 1989). In volleyball, shoulder tendonitis secondary to the overhead activities of spiking and serving is also commonly seen. An unusual shoulder injury involving the distal branch of the suprascapular nerve which innervates the infraspinatus muscle has been increasingly described in volleyball players (Floyd, 2007, p. 49). Appropriate Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 126 of 208
constraint-based task variations facilitate learning and assist in the acquisition of a more proficient movement form by utilizing multiple joint angles in volleyball serving. The use of multiple angles throughout practice may mitigate the risk of repetitive injury and allows more effective skill development. While more research is needed to determine the relationship between premature performance of advanced serves and injuries in young players, it is important for coaches of young volleyball athletes to consider the damage that could result. Our earlier research of elite volleyball preparation and performance suggested that focusing on teaching fundamental skills and teaching multiple serves at young ages might be beneficial for lengthening athletes careers by reducing over-use or repetitive motion injuries (Da Matta, 2004; Rhoads, 2012). Long-term Expertise Development In order to acquire more complex skills, individuals should engage in a variety of movement forms using appropriate learning strategies and game-like practice (Gagen & Getchell, 2004; Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2008). Developmentally appropriate practices tend to enhance performance, facilitate the acquisition of complex motor skills, and lead to sustainability of performance and expertise. In the case of skill acquisition in volleyball, a variety of movement forms would enhance the learning and performance of serves using the motor learning principle of positive transfer (Magill, 2007; Rink, 2010). Sidearm serves, which also provide relief in arm and shoulder positions, are employed by few servers other than elite Asian players. The sidearm serve, not often recognized in the typical progression of volleyball striking in North and South America, should be integrated into the fundamental stages of serving for all players (Selinger & Ackerman-Blount, 1986). Additionally, the underhand strike provides an opportunity to cross-train and progress sequentially into the overhand floater. The side serve utilizes an arm position that biomechanically and developmentally links underhand into the overhead pattern (Gallahue & Ozmun, 2006; Selinger & Ackerman-Blount, 1986). Because it is typically up to the beginner s coach to evaluate and select tasks that will facilitate meaningful participation and effective learning, coaches who are aware of the benefits of positive transfer and simple-to-complex developmental analysis should also be aware of the benefits of going from underhand to overhead serving during pre-puberty. Recommendations The focus here is on raising coaches consciousness regarding when and how to teach the most appropriate serving style. Coaches must understand the importance of properly teaching and practicing serving styles within a developmental framework that will facilitate athletes longterm development. Rink (2010) suggests the adoption of intratask and intertask variations incorporated into practice plans, sport units, and coaches developmental analyses. In addition, Rink suggests the use of multiple skill and serving styles as teaching strategies toward task presentations that are organized in sequential order and presented from simple to complex forms (Rink, 2010). Therefore, it is plausible that exposing athletes to a variety of serving skills will Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 127 of 208
build the movement foundations for later specialization based on choice and/or talent. This appropriate variation of skills, known as cross-training, is advised to avoid repetitive injuries (Bahr & Krosshaug, 2005). The use of variability in service styles is one method that was utilized over many different systems of play as a strategy to avoid early specialization, prevent injuries, and allow more intensity during training in post-puberty periods among young experts (Da Matta, 2004). The adoption of special rules to prevent injuries is one important strategy to overcome barriers to long-term development. Expert volleyball players in Brazil report that they were exposed to many systems and alternative methods of play, with the specific purpose of avoiding repetitive movement injuries that are common during long-term career paths (Da Matta, 2004; Da Matta, French & Salmela, in review). Teaching a developmentally appropriate spectrum of serving in volleyball is not only important for protecting and encouraging beginner players, it can also support development of elite athletes by preventing burn-out. Changing serving angles and styles might create a variability that is necessary to activate different muscle groups in different sequences while allowing others to rest, therefore eliciting a more ergonomic way to perform across time and during practice. Moreover, it is necessary to consider that as a person engages in more deliberate practice time, the amount of energy used decreases and the movement efficiency increases (Sparrow & Newell, 1998). However, the application of correct form at the proper stage of development will certainly lead to a desirable outcome. In volleyball, it makes sense to use easy-to-complex serving styles at all level of play, from mini-volleyball to elite level and from standing to sitting volleyball as well (Kessel, 2009). Underhand serving is an important skill for cross-training in serving, yet it is not employed at the higher levels of play by experts and is often quickly abandoned by novices in the progression through the serving repertoire. As in many other sports, prerequisite skills are the main skills at the first stage of learning a motor pattern in a given modality (Young & Salmela, 2000). This is an issue of principle. Before doing a handstand, children must learn how to properly control their balance and develop their upper-body strength. The application and dissemination of developmentally appropriate practice among coaches must be empirically investigated and researched. One issue to be investigated is beginner coaches pedagogical knowledge. Another is the rationale that coaches use to decide when to use progressions to teach effectively. If coaches skip the underhand serve in the interest of more quickly developing athletes performance, then we argue that mastering the underhand serve in a progressive building repertoire of serving styles will actually benefit elite development. Athletes should be encouraged to develop a wider range of skills that contribute to lifelong participation in that sport by allowing more effective movement. As we advance further into the 21st century, coach educators must contemplate the whole spectrum of skill levels and not prescribe a given style because of the outcome at the elite levels. Inclusion, choice, and participation should be ideals that coach educators not only value but instill in their athletes. Olympic champions report that they adopt the underhand serve at the early stages of their careers (Da Matta, 2004); therefore, Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 128 of 208
this should be an indication that the suppression of the underhand strike requires debate, reflection, and a critical review. Because expertise development depends on quantity and quality (practice hours and good form), using techniques that enable athletes to remain in practice and stay healthy can contribute strongly to expertise development, if the appropriate form is adopted at the appropriate age and phase of learning (Da Matta, 2004; Rink, 2010). Coaches, teachers, and parents cannot effectively predict who will reach elite status in the sport, so it makes sense to adopt tasks that will allow children to be successful while promoting the sport and encouraging continuity of play. A common reason that children play sports is because it is joyful and fun. The notion of teaching jump serving because of the number of athletes who perform it at elite levels should not justify teaching it if learners are not ready to do so. In this regard, coaches are directly responsible for planning practices and for what content, techniques, and movement forms will be taught to young expert prospects. Choosing developmentally appropriate practices for competition is a critical criterion for successful performance at young ages. Coaches must possess a good understanding of how to regulate serving at young ages, so competition remains fair and encourages participation instead of limiting it. For this reason, early practices should be based on the best practices of skill acquisition and motor learning principles (Gallahue & Ozmun, 2006; Magill, 2007). The preparation to perform at the most elite levels desired and the acquisition of a physically active lifestyle are long-term goals that coaches should focus on achieving. Nevertheless, once socialized into sport, young athletes must be successful in order to continue their careers. Such success will depend greatly on their technical and tactical development as well as the level of competition in which their teams practice and play. Conclusion The purpose of this paper was to explain the importance of using developmentally appropriate serving strategies that will promote the game of volleyball and facilitate learning while minimizing injury. As recommended by the FIVB, the underhand serve, or even throwing the ball over the net, are developmentally appropriate tasks that should be adopted at critical phases of learning (Baacke & Sawula, 1972; Kessel, 2009). Even during early stages of game play, modifying the rules and adopting easier concepts should be valued teaching strategies that facilitate learning, inclusion, choice, and success. Moreover, it is important to highlight that developmentally appropriate practice is needed across athletes careers with regard to learning proper skills of multiple serves. The adoption of a developmentally appropriate regulation for ages 10 14 is sound practice. When collegiate players missed the 10 14 sensitive period of learning, tactical and technical skill performance suffered and injuries were more likely to occur (Hirtz & Starosta, 2002); this may have happened because of the lack of fundamental motor skills required to proficiently perform specific discrete skills (Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2008). As we discussed, athletes may not be able to perform the skills when they were not exposed to a variability of practice due to coaches beliefs about Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 129 of 208
specificity. However, such variability might be motivating and necessary in order to tactically overcome opponent adjustments (Van Emmerik, 2007). From a coaches standpoint, we should not suppress teaching the underhand serve or any of the fundamentals of volleyball just because Olympians, professional players, and beach volleyball experts do so (FIVB, 2011). Effective teaching of volleyball at early stages of athlete development involves offering choice, supporting inclusion, and proposing tasks in which all athletes can be successful. Aligned with the importance of pedagogical practices, it is important to arrange service-training methods that will improve athletes physical skills, physical performances, and mental attitudes respecting their maturation and skill levels. Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 130 of 208
References Baacke, H., & Sawula, L. (1972). FIVB coaches manual I. Lausanne, Switzerland: FIVB. Bahr, R., & Krosshaug, T. (2005). Understanding injuries mechanisms: A key component of preventing injuries in sports. British Journal of Sport Medicine, 39, 324 329. Bartlett, J., Smith, L., Davis, K., & Peel, J. (1991). Development of a valid volleyball skills test battery. Journal of Physical Education Recreation & Dance, 62(2), 19 21. Cardinal, C. (1989). Technical development of the volleyball player. In FIVB coaches manual (pp.197-210). Lausanne, Switzerland: FIVB. Confederação Brasileira de Volleyball. (2012). Rules, regulations and systems of play for athletes from 12 16 years of age. Retrieved on Dec 21, 2012, from www.cbv.com.br/fmv.bh Da Matta, G. (2004). The influence of deliberate practice and social support systems on the development of expert and intermediate women volleyball players in Brazil. Doctoral dissertation. University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC. Da Matta, G., French, K., & Salmela, J. Retrospective practice histories and career paths of Olympic and intermediate women volleyball players in Brazil. International Journal of Exercise Sports Psychology. The paper has not been published yet Da Matta, G., & Turner, E. (1999). Spectator demographics and the impact of rally scoring system and other possible rule changes, on spectators at an intercollegiate women s volleyball tournament. Colorado Springs, CO: American Volleyball Coaches Association. Dunphy, M., & Wilde, R. (2000). Volleyball today (2nd ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning. Federation Internationale de Volleyball. (2011). Coaches manual. Lausanne, Switzerland: FIVB. Ferretti, A. (1989). Cooperation of team doctor and coach in the prevention of injuries. In FIVB coaches manual, 405-410. Lausanne, Switzerland: FIVB. Ferretti, A., Papandrea, P., Conteduca, F., & Mariani, P. (1992). Knee ligament injuries in volleyball players. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 20, 203 207. Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 131 of 208
Floyd, R. T. (2007). Manual of structural kinesiology (16th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. French, K., Rink, J., Rickard, L., Mays, A., Lynn, S., & Werner, P. (1991). The effects of practice progressions on learning two volleyball skills. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 10(3), 261 275. French, K. E., Rink, J. E., & Werner, P. H. (1990). Effect of contextual interference on retention of three volleyball skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 71, 179 186. French, K. E., & Thomas, J. R. (1987). The relation of knowledge development to children s basketball performance. Journal of Sport Psychology, 9, 15 32. Gabbett, T., Georgieff, B., & Domrow, N. (2007). The use of physiological, anthropometric and skill data to predict selection in a talent-identified junior volleyball squad. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25, 1337 1344. Gagen, L., & Getchell, N. (2004). Combining theory and practice in the gymnasium: Constraints within an ecological perspective. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 75(5), 25 30. Gallahue, D. L., & Ozmun, J. C. (2006). Understanding motor development: Children, adolescent, adults (6th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill. Herbert, M. (1991). Insights and strategies for winning volleyball. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Hirtz, P., & Starosta, W. (2002) Sensitive and critical periods of motor co-ordination development and its relation to motor learning. Journal of Human kinetics, 7, 19-28. Kessel, J. (2009). Minivolley: Volleyball 4 youth. Colorado Springs, CO: USA Volleyball. Kitsantas, A., & Zimmerman, B. (2002). Comparing self-regulatory processes among novice, non-expert, and expert volleyball players: A microanalytic article. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 91 105. Lidor, R., Arnon, M., Hershko, Y., Maayan, G., & Falk, B. (2007). Accuracy in a volleyball service test in rested and physical exertion conditions in elite and near-elite adolescent players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 21, 937 942. Magill, R. A. (2007) Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 132 of 208
Malina, R. M. & Bouchard, C. (1991). Biological maturation: Growth, maturation and physical activity. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Neville, W. J. (1990). Coaching volleyball successfully. Champaign, IL: Leisure. Ram, N., & McCullagh, P. (2003). Self-modeling: Influences on psychological responses and physical performance. The Sport Psychologist, 17, 220 241. Rhoads, M. (2012). Learning to spike in volleyball with verbal and visually-enhanced feedback. Doctoral dissertation. University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO. Rink, J. (2010). Teaching physical education for learning (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. Rose, R., & Schall, M. (1999). Serving. In M. Wise (Ed.), Volleyball drills for champions (pp. 1 26). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Salmela, J. (1995). Learning from the development of expert coaches. Coaching and Sport Science Journal, 2, 3 13. Savelsbergh, J., Geert, P., & Van Der Kamp, J. (2000). Information in learning to co-ordinate and control movements: Is there a need for specificity of practice? International Journal of Sports Psychology, 31, 467 484. Sawula, L. (1992). Growth and development principles for male and female volleyball players. FIVB Operational Manual IV Extended Theoretical Information. (pp. 122-139) Lausanne, Switzerland: FIVB. Schmidt, R. A., & Wrisberg, C.A. (2008). Motor learning and performance (4th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Schmidt, R. A., & Young, D. E. (1987). Transfer of motor control in motor skill learning. In S. M. Cormier & J. D. Hagman (Eds.), Transfer of learning (pp. 47 49). Orlando, FL: Academic. Selinger, A., & Ackermann-Blount, J. (1986). Arie Selinger s power volleyball: The complete guide to the sport by coach of the silver-medal winning U.S. Women s Olympic volleyball team. New York: St. Martin s. Shae, J. B., & Morgan, R. L. (1979). Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of a motor skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5, 179 187. Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 133 of 208
Shondell, D., & Reynauld, C. (2002). The volleyball coaching bible (2nd ed). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Sparrow, W. A., & Newell, K. A. (1998). Metabolic energy expenditure and the regulation of movement economy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 173 196. Temprado, J., Della-Grasta, M., Farrell, M., & Laurent, M. (1997). A novice-expert comparison of (intra-limb) coordination sub-serving the volleyball serve. Human Movement Science, 16, 653 676. Toyoda, H. (1989). The development of the volleyball athlete. Teaching basic individual techniques. In Coaches Manual I (pp. 211 277). Lausanne, Switzerland: FIVB. USA Volleyball. (2009). Volleyball systems and strategies. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Van Emmerik, R. E. (2007). Functional role of variability in movement and coordination and disability. In W. E. Davis & G. D. Broadhead, (Eds.) Ecological task analysis and movement (pp. 25 51). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Velentzas, K., Heinen, T., Tenenbaum, G., & Schack, T. (2010). Functional mental representation of volleyball routine in German youth female national players. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 22, 474 485. Wise, M. (1999). Volleyball drills for champions. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Young, B. W., & Salmela, J. H. (2000). Perceptions of training and deliberate practice of middle distance runners. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 33 (2), 167 181. Zetou, E., Tzetzis, G., Vernadakis, N., & Kioumourtzoglou, E. (2002). Modeling in learning two volleyball skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 94, 1131 1142. Zubiar, M., Oña, A., & Delgado, J. (1999). Learning volleyball serves: A preliminary article of the effects of knowledge of performance and of results. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89, 223 232. Authors Note Gylton Da Matta is the director of YOSA Youth Olympic Sports Academy, Department of Sports Performance. Michael Rhoads is at the School of Psychological Sciences. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Gylton B. Da Matta, Ph.D., 1256 Sunflower Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80521. Email: gdamatta@gmail.com or lmgagen@nsu.edu Volume 6, Issue 2, Fall 2013 Page 134 of 208