Introduction

Physical activity has great potential to contribute to a healthy lifestyle (Hallal, Victora, Azevedo & Wells, 2006). Extracurricular sports in clubs, for example, have a positive effect on the achievement of recommended physical activity goals (Kokko, Martin, Geidne, Van Hoye, Lane, Meganck, Scheerder, Seghers, Villberg, Kudlacek, Badura, Mononen, Blomqvist, De Clercq & Koski, 2019), but school sports also play an important role in influencing physical activity behavior (Schmidt, Will & Woll, 2016).

Digitalization opens up new possibilities for physical education in terms of both content and methodology. While it was previously only possible for professional sports or ambitious amateurs to use video analysis to support movement learning and generate visual feedback in addition to traditional verbal feedback, today's technology makes this far less time and resource-intensive. In this context, motivation also plays an important role, which can be influenced by the use of technology (Weir & Connor, 2009) and is also a significant influencing factor with regard to motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016). Motivational benefits from the use of digital devices in the classroom could have a positive effect on extracurricular physical activity behavior. Methodological added value in the sense of improved performance could counteract the accusation of instrumentalization. However, the effectiveness and practicability of digital devices would first have to be ensured. Results in the extracurricular sector suggest that visual feedback methods could be superior to feedback based solely on verbal feedback (Rhoads, Da Matta, Larson & Pulos, 2014). However, as there is a lack of reliable information from the school setting, a research overview should help to assess the potential of visual feedback. Initial indications of a positive nature can be found in Boyce, Markos, Jenkins and Loftus (1996), O'Loughlin, Chróinín and O'Grady (2013) and Palao, Hastie, Guerrero Cruz and Ortega (2015), among others

Methodology

By means of a systematic review (Liberati, Altman, Tetzlaff, Mulrow, Gotzsche, Ioannidis, Clarke, Devereaux, Kleijnen & Moher, 2009) within the Educational Resources Information Center [ERIC], the research literature of the last thirty years is examined for its content and qualitative fit and compared with regard to its effects and framework conditions. To ensure qualitative consistency, the search will be limited to English-language peer-reviewed articles published in journals.

Results

With regard to expected findings, it is assumed that errors in movement execution can be corrected more quickly due to better visualization, which is considered essential for motor learning (Erbaugh, 1985), and that visual feedback through digital devices is therefore preferable. However, studies indicate that not only visual feedback alone, but also its framework conditions have an influence on the generation of learning progress, which is why the settings in which positive effects are observed also become the focus of interest in this context (Rucci & Tomporowski, 2010).

Outlook

The information obtained should provide clues as to the extent to which the feedback culture in

(sports) lessons should be adapted to the changed conditions, but also to the new opportunities, taking into account all the protagonists involved.

A subsequent study in the school context could consider not only short-term goals of improving performance and increasing motivation, but also long-term goals such as attitudes towards extracurricular sport. Effects on physical activity should be examined.

Bibliography

Boyce, B. A., Markos, N. J., Jenkins, D. W. & Loftus, J. R. (1996). How Should Feedback be Delivered? Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 67(1), 18-22.

Erbaugh, S. J. (1985). Role of Visual Feedback in Observational Motor Learning of Primary-Grade Children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60(3), 755-762.

Hallal, P. C., Victora, C. G., Azevedo, M. R. & Wells, J. C. K. (2006). Adolescent Physical Activity and Health. Sports Medicine, 36(12), 1019-1030.

Kokko, S., Martin, L., Geidne, S., Van Hoye, A., Lane, A., Meganck, J., Scheerder, J., Seghers, J., Villberg, J., Kudlacek, M., Badura, P., Mononen, K., Blomqvist, M., De Clercq, B. & Koski, P. (2019). Does sports club participation contribute to physical activity among children and adolescents? A comparison across six European countries. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 47(8), 851-858.

Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J. & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLOS Medicine, 6(7).

O'Loughlin, J., Chróinín, D. N. & O'Grady, D. (2013). Digital video: The impact on children's learning experiences in primary physical education. European Physical Education Review, 19(2), 165-182.

Palao, J. M., Hastie, P. A., Guerrero Cruz, P. & Ortega, E. (2015). The Impact of Video Technology on Student Performance in Physical Education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 51-63.

Rhoads, M. C., Da Matta, G. B., Larson, N. & Pulos, S. (2014). A meta-analysis of visual feedback for motor learning. Athletic Insight, 6(1), 17.

Rucci, J. A. & Tomporowski, P. D. (2010). Three types of kinematic feedback and the execution of the hang power clean. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 24(3), 771-778.

Schmidt, S., Will, N. & Woll, A. (2016). Sporting activity of German children and adolescents in clubs and at school. The motor skills module study (MoMo). Monatsschrift zur Wissenschaft und Praxis des Sports mit Lehrhilfen, 233.

Weir, T. & Connor, S. (2009). The Use of Digital Video in Physical Education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18(2), 155-171.

Wulf, G. & Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 23(5), 1382-1414.