These notes are not talking about racing technique, but of basic education. One of the most common troubles that afflict the society is the flight of archery archers after the first months of activity, in most cases due to a tendency to relegate to the standard imprinting little motivating, or worse, to the neglect of those who work for teaching.
The experimental work done by myself and Edo Ferraro, Coordinator of the Education FIARC in recent years turned towards this direction in an attempt to overcome this problem. And we think, in light of the results that they have got their hands on something important. Presumption aside, the logic of this "revolution" are interested to our dear old first basic course, and probably will evolve into more advanced stages of learning. It is inspired by a still teaching in the "experiment" but well known in the ' science teaching called "constructivism," never applied to the field sports and athletic disciplines. We come then to the point.
First is to make it clear that the time sequence of lessons is not scanned in any way by "steps" of problems, arguments or steps obbligati.Il usual basic course, which included lessons in the lineup (the feet of body axis shoulder arms, hand bow, bow arm, hand rope, release and follow-through) is now seen in its entirety, without these steps canonical "espositivistici.
The concept that must guide the instructor is the one that sees the expansion plans of force as the only objective to be achieved for the shooting technique, leaving details the interpretation of the covenant which gradually discovers own way that is most suited.
This is not completely deny the past, which has seen a detailed education in the canonization styles, sequences and phases of shooting, just simplifying the problem, with the sole target for learning "movement" in its entirety, and goal essential reach to raise awareness of the 'student towards an understanding of the concepts "power plan" and "dynamic expansion." In effect, these are the only fundamental and common points between all styles of shooting effective, regardless of their particular variants. Problems related to the loading of the arc (Levers, vertical, horizontal, bottom, top, power archery, etc..) Are secondary and accessories. It will be the same student to choose.
Split classes for subjects not seem particularly advantageous in light of the foregoing. Each student has a "relative time" learning scanned by discoveries related to its sensitivity and motor experience.
In other words, the first lesson the instructor must:
1) observe the student to his first pitches, trying not to influence it in any way with words and live models, this is because the motivation that led him to enroll in the course requires the embryo of "ideal model" for which, one supposes, he is very willing to fight to represent the best;
2) to study the attempt to "represent the ideal personal identifying the main obstacles that stand to achieve the objective, which in essence boils down to mastering buoyancy along the planes. In this attempt is probably contained an array of not entirely wrong, which should be encouraged because it optimizes the fullest.
What are the judging criteria that allow us to say that this matrix is \u200b\u200bto be optimized?
simply function as such is close to an ideal model in which the plans are met with a strong movement in expansion. This is the basic premise.
From this point on the actual teaching part of the "Building Staff." The personal construction based on the assumption that any kind of knowledge should not be "transmitted" from master to as good or evil has been any kind of teaching we have been experiencing so far in all fields (Espositivismo), with a teacher, that is, shaping by forcing the student to learn concepts and models. In this way, the knowledge remains stuck at 'outside the sphere of their knowledge and do not take root, if not with much effort, in depth (this effort is one of the first leaders of the many dropouts).
The teacher tries to uncover the pupil idealization of his own discipline, inspiring in bringing his personal interpretation which already partly owned by an idea at the start and that should gradually refine.
In this way learning takes substance, not be forgotten, and especially gratifying, because it's basically made just by the student. The teacher should encourage the student in order to highlight and possibly anticipate the obstacles that he will find the path, and will be the same student to propose solutions that do not involve the observance of any preconceived dogma and gratuito.L 'expansion along the plans of corrective force is the only "dogma" to be met, but it is a natural condition of optimization of the gesture in ergonomics, and instinctively (experimental teaching experience) it is contained, albeit in a more or less latent in every allievo.La figure blurs the image of the teacher who requires a learning path in predetermined steps, becoming a fellow (more experienced) of discovery, offering different paths until the most rewarding journey of self is formed by the alliance.
he "built" in first person what the most rewarding.
As for our specific discipline, the archery of any label, some arguments can not be resolved without the use of traditional teaching mechanics (such as safety rules!) but it works so extraordinarily effective, and can be expected, especially in the beginning, a sort of personal construction and method in which traditional teaching ( Espositivismo) walk together.
Teaching needs to be set in one direction and then through a flexible student-instructor dialogue continued, where the first "proposed" experiments and the second executes them by commenting them as deeply as possible.
From this dialogue, the instructor must learn to propose ideas for different situations gradually emphasize that the canonical obstacles that the student will find its way discoveries. In adhering
can never be said that what he does is just wrong, but these exercises should be proposed for which he receives, for example, instability, tension and discomfort. Its no longer be "mistakes" and then, but difficulty in overcoming obstacles. The task of 'Teacher, we repeat, must be to emphasize these obstacles to make them more insidious and less obvious, and therefore more easily mastered by the pupil himself.
not ever have to give the answer to a question. It must look to the student, and help in the search and once found, conceptualize. It will be necessary, clear, face an obstacle at a time, organizing questions and exercises with situations that could undermine the idea that motor or attitude to impede the acquisition of the student movement along the expansion plans of corrective force. How well the student must learn to "feel" in the movement, to perceive more deeply, trying to work on his feelings immediately bringing it to focus on the obstacles. All this keeping in mind that cognitive processes and the speed of learning are obviously not the same for everyone, and it is necessary to comply with the starting levels (physical, cultural and psychological) and the individual speed and capacity self-analysis and structuring of its motor and conceptual model, real personal filters through which we learn and we interpret reality. It should not be raping anyone.
What are the "problems" immediately emerging from wanting to apply this method? surely the difficult applicability and understanding of the instructor used to teach in the traditional way. In our training courses for instructors are qualified to FIARC the old canons, there is more to the great variety of reactions. There are those who staggers, rolls his eyes, he was seized by illness.
-Like, I do not have to correct? I must observe, keep me in lowering the shoulder of the arc pupil that pushes up, and what do I propose? - instead there who (and here's to worry about) not even a nod, saying with authoritative security that he had already discovered, and always understood, always applied the shock and amazement that the other colleagues.
Very often this misunderstanding. The real difficulty in understanding the method lies in the denial of a model to be followed slavishly, any model like the staff that the instructor has gained after years of hard work, and also that of Olympic champion. Reduce the model to two simple and fundamental objectives, the plans and the strength of the expansion, is a simplification elegant but requires extreme technical maturity and expertise in applying it, and a lot of courage in the "remove" their deeply held convictions made in years, accepting the interpretations of the student even if they deviate from the usual canons. It takes maturity and a desire to return (and recover) in question. Unfortunately they are not common plants in our backyard. Dear Instructors, have your say. Any exchange of experience is valuable, and these lines just want to stimulate a dialogue.
0 comments:
Post a Comment