94 Chapter 5 SRL subprocesses and performance progression (part two) The results of the MANCOVA analysis revealed significant differences for performance progression groups (F(6,80) = 3.451; p < 0.01). The ANCOVA analysis showed that the scores of advanced progressors were significantly higher than those of less advanced progressors for evaluation (F(1,85 = 3.611; p < 0.05, d = 0.47). No significant differences between the two performance progression groups were observed for reflection (F(1,85 = 0.219), planning (F(1,85 = 1.031), speaking up (F(1,85 = 0.167), effort (F(1,85 = 0.246), and self-efficacy (F(1,85 = 0.495) (all p > 0.05 with small effect sizes). Covariate weekly training hours were not significant (F(6,80)=1.040; p >0.05). Table 1. Characteristics of swimmers according to performance level and progression (N = 157). Performance level groups (N = 157) Performance progression groups (N = 89) Lower-level performers (n = 65) High-level performers (n = 92) Less advanced progressors (n = 66) Advanced progressors (n = 23) M SD M SD M SD M SD Age (years) 15.0 1.9 15.1 2.0 14.9 1.6 16.0 * 2.0 Swim training (hours per week) 9.8 3.8 11.2 * 4.4 10.8 4.4 12.7 * 3.9 Season’s best rST (%) 123.4 8.2 117.3 * 7.6 118.7 7.5 112.8 * 6.1 Performance progression (%) - - - 16.3 7.0 37.8 * 9.0 Note. Means (M) and standard deviation (SD) values for age, swim training hours per week and performance measures according to performance level and performance progression. * p < 0.05 (one-tailed) Table 2. Descriptive statistics for all self-regulated learning (SRL) subprocesses applied by swimmers according to performance level (N = 157). Lower-level performers (n = 65) High-level performers (n = 92) Effect sizes M SD M SD d Evaluation • 3.27 0.81 3.33 0.71 0.07 Planning • 3.26 0.97 3.39 0.91 0.15 Reflection • 3.42 0.79 3.61 * 0.60 0.28 Speaking up • 3.80 0.64 3.93 0.48 0.24 Effort ♦ 3.55 0.33 3.44 * 0.41 0.29 Self-efficacy ♦ 3.19 0.46 3.24 0.41 0.13 Note. Means (M) and standard deviation (SD) values for all self-regulated learning (SRL) subprocesses according to performance level. • meta-cognitive subprocesses were measured using a 5-point Likert scale (range 1 – 5) ♦ motivational subprocesses were measured using a 4-point Likert scale (range 1 – 4) * p < 0.05 (one-tailed)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw