the relationship of the volleyball pass, …/67531/metadc131060/m2/1/high... · the relationship of...

THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE VOLLEYBALL PASS, THE REPEATED

WALL VOLLEYS, AND VOLLEYBALL PLAYING ABILITY

OF ELEVENTH GRADE GIRLS

APPROVED;

Maj or Profes sor

Minor Professor

, y M w ^ \ Director of the Department of fiealth,

Physical Education and Recreation

Dean 6 f' the Graduate School

THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE VOLLEYBALL PASS, THE REPEATED

WALL VOLLEYS, AND VOLLEYBALL PLAYING ABILITY

OF ELEVENTH GRADE GIRLS

THESIS

Presented to the Graduate Council of the

North Texas State University in Partial

Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

By

Linda E. K ni y ht, B. S

Denton, Texas

J a nuar y, 1969

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES iv

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION 1

Statement of the Problem Definition of Terms Purposes of the Study Limitation of the Study Sources of Data

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 7

III. PROCEDURES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STUDY. . . 20

Preliminary Procedures Selection of the Subjects Class Procedures Selection of the Test General Procedures in Test Administration Description of the Test Treatment of the Data

IV. FINDINGS 29

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . 35

APPENDIX A. REPEATED WALL VOLLEYS TEST 38

APPENDIX B. TEST FOR THE VOLLEYBALL PASS 40

APPENDIX C. SUTTINGER ' S RATING SCALE 43

APPENDIX D. RAW SCORES 45

BIBLIOGRAPHY 51

i n

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I. The Means and Standard Deviations of the Repeated Wall Volleys Test and the Volleyball Pass ' 30

II. Coefficients of Correlation Among the Repeated Wall Volleys, the Volleyball Pass and Volleyball Playing Ability 30

III. Coefficients of Correlation Among the Judges' Ratings Using Suttinger's Rating Scale. . . 31

l v

CHAPTER I

I N T R O D U C T I O N

One of the p r i m a r y problems which teachers of p h y s i c a l

education have confronting them is to d e t e r m i n e the place

p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n occupies in the education of the youth

of today. As a result, teachers must be able to j u s t i f y

each phase of the p h y s i c a l education p r o g r a m .

P a r t i c i p a t i o n in the game of v o l l e y b a l l can make a

major c o n t r i b u t i o n to the high school c u r r i c u l u m in the area

of p h y s i c a l e d u c a t i o n . Many e d u c a t i o n a l values may e v o l v e .

Some of the values which may be derived are the (a) d e v e l o p -

ment of r e c r e a t i o n a l skills which may be used in later life,

(b) social d e v e l o p m e n t through teamwork and e n c o u r a g e m e n t of

good s p o r t s m a n s h i p , (c) physical d e v e l o p m e n t of the p a r t i c i -

pant, and (d) p a r t i c i p a t i o n by slightly h a n d i c a p p e d s t u d e n t s .

It may thus be recognized by physical educators as an

integral part of the physical education p r o g r a m of the high

school c u r r i c u l u m .

V o l l e y b a l l is a p o p u l a r game well suited for high school

girls, f i n the original game of v o l l e y b a l l , the p a r t i c i p a n t s

volleyed the ball lightly back and forth over the net. As

time p a s s e d , rule changes caused v o l l e y b a l l to become a

highly skilled game and now it is considered one of the

fastest games in the world/(3, p. 7). More and more people

at all age levels are participating in this sport all over

the world. So popular has it become that it is ranked in

the top five recreational team sports (10, p. 15). Hence,

volleyball should occupy an important place in the high

school physical education program.

The growing popularity of vo1leybal1•was indicated when

the Olympic Committee recognized it as an official Olympic

sport in 1957 and included it in the Olympic Games in 1960.

The popularity was further evidenced when the commi 11ee

included competition for women, as well as men, and included

it in the 1964 Olympic Games in Tokyo, Japan.

Since the game of volleyball requires a high level of

skill, physical educators must attempt to find methods which

will aid in measuring achievement and playing ability. The

skill an individual attains in volleyball depends upon the

ability of other team members. This one factor has made it

difficult for anyone to devise methods which will measure

achievement and playing ability in volleyball. The game has

been broken down into the following skills: (a) the serve,

(b) the volley, (c) the pass, (d) the recovery from the net,

(e) the spike, and recently (f) the dig. There are skill

tests and test batteries readily available to measure these

skills with a relative amount of accuracy.

In searching to find a method for measuring playing

ability, one will find repetitious use of the repeated wall

volley test alone or in a battery of tests. This test

appears to be the most reliable test for playing ability;

yet there is an apparent need for still other methods for

measuring playing ability.

Many experts consider the volleyball pass as the most

fundamental and essential skill in volleyball. Without a

good pass there is no set-up, attack, or team play. These

three skills are necessary in the game of volleyball; there^

fore, the pass could be an important factor in measuring

volleyball playing ability.

Marie Liba, manager of the United States. Volleyball

Team and Chairman of the United States Olympic Women's

Volleyball Committee for 1968, and Marilyn Stauff devised

a voileyball pass test in 1963. The test was found to be

reliable and valid in testing the volleyball pass, but it

was not tested for playing ability.

This study will attempt to determine whether or not

passing is a definite factor in predicting volleyball

playing ability. This information should be helpful in

determining course content. This study will endeavor also

to provide additional knowledge as to whether or not the

repeated wall volleys test and the volleyball pass are

related to volleyball playing ability. It is hoped that

this knowledge will aid the teacher and/or coach in the

classification of students, the measuring of student

achievement, the screening of potential players, and

4

supplying the teacher with an additional method of predict-

ing volleyball playing ability.

Statement of the Problem

This study sought to determine the relationship of the

volleyball pass, the repeated wall volleys, and volleyball

playing ability, as measured by a panel of four judges,

using 120 eleventh grade girls enrolled in physical educa-

tion classes at Odessa High School, Odessa, Texas, for the

Fall semester of 1967.

. Definition of Terms

The following terms and definitions were used in the

study:

1. Volleying.--Hitting the volleyball into the air

with the fingers or hands..

Passing.--Maneuvering the ball from one person to

another by volleying.

3. Playing a b i l i t y . — T h e ability to maneuver the ball

in such a way that it is of benefit to the team

during a game situation as determined in the

proposed study by a panel of four judges.

Purposes of the Study

The purpose of the study was to determine the relation-

ship of the volleyball pass, the repeated wall volleys, and

prediction of volleyball playing ability.

More specifically, the following null hypotheses were

t e s ted:

1. The correlation of the volleyball pass and the

repeated wall volleys is zero.

2. The correlation of the repeated wall volleys and

volleyball playing ability is zero.

3. The correlation of the volleyball pass and volley-

ball playing ability is zero.

Limitation of the Study

This study was limited in testing the volleyball pass

and the repeated wall volleys of 120 eleventh grade high

school girls enrolled in physical education classes at

Odessa High S c h o o l , Fall 1967. It was further limited to

a panel of four judges rating the subjects on volleyball

playing ability on a four-point scale.

Sources of Data

One hundred and twenty eleventh grade high school girls

enrolled in physical education classes at Odessa High S c h o o l ,

Fall 1967, were the human sources of data for the study.

This chapter presented an introduction to the study.

It included (a) statement of the problem, (b) definition of

terms, (c) purposes of the study, (d) limitations of the

study, and (e) sources of data used in the study.

CHAPTER BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Egstrom, Glen H. and Frances Schaafsma, Voileyball, Dubuque, Iowa, Wm. C. Brown Company, 1966.

2. Keith, Harold, "Volleyball," Sports and Games , New York, Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1953, pp. 331-334.

3. Lavega, Robert E., Voileyball Instructor's Guide, Chicago, The Athletic Institute, 1961, p. 7.

4. Meyer, Margaret Hinkel and Marguerite M. Schwarz, Team Sports for Women, Philadelphia, W. B. Saunders Company, 1959, pp, 364-404.

5. Mitchell, Elmer D., "Voile yb all," Sports for Recreation, New York, A. S. Barnes and Company, 1936, pp. 358-369.

6. Odeneal, William T, and Harry E. Wilson, Beginning Volleyball, Belmont, California, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 19'62.

7. Patterson, Ann, Team Sports for Girls , New York, The Ronald Press Company, 1958.

8. Porter, Lorena, "Volleyball for Classroom Teachers," Volleyball Guide July 1963-65, Washington, D. C., The Division for Girls and Womens Sports, American Association of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 1963, pp. 42-48.

9. Trotter, Betty Jane, Voile.yb all for Girls an_d Wom_en, New York, The Ronald Press Company, 1956.

10. Welch, J. Edmund, How to Play and Teach Volleyball, New York, Association Press, 1956.

11. Wells, Ward M., "Teaching Volleyball on a Coeducational Basis," Vo 11 e yb a 1.1 Guide July 1963-65 , Washington, D. C., The Division of Girls and Womens Sports, American Association of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 1963, pp. 49-50.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The literature reviewed in this chapter was chosen

because of its relationship to the investigation. Studies

pertaining to the use of the repeated wall volleys test,

variations of the repeated wall volleys test, and the serve

were reviewed.

Basset, Glassow, and Locke (1) conducted a study to

collect and assemble previous work done in testing, • set-up

proposed tests and refine and change test items according

to accepted criteria. The study used a serving test and a

volleying test, and took the height of the subjects into

consideration to see if height had any relationship upon

t h e t w o tests.

The volleying test had a six foot restraining line but

no attention was paid to the line after the initial volley.

There was a thirty second time limit and the ball had to be

hit above the net line drawn on the wall in order, to count.

Ball handling fouls were called. The score was the total

volleys minus one for each time the subject lost control of

the ball. The reliability of the serve was .84 and the

validity was found to be .79. The reliability of the volleys

test was .85 on the best of three trials and the validity was

7

8

.51. The correlation of the volleys test and the serve test

was .58.

The results of the study indicated that the two tests

were reliable and valid for testing the serve and the volley,

and the serving test alone is sufficient for predicting a

player's ability. Also, the validity of neither the serving

nor the volleying score is increased by including height as

a factor.

French and Cooper (7) conducted independent studies in

1937 for the purpose of devising an objective test in volley-

ball. Two hundred and twenty-seven high school girls were

divided into two groups. Group A consisted of 47 tenth,

eleventh, and twelfth grade girls, and Group B consisted of

180 ninth and tenth grade girls.

The subjects were given the repeated wall volleys test

with a three foot restraining line and ten trials for fifteen •C'J:, .'i > ' • :

seconds. The score was the sum of the best five trials. A

serving test, a set-up test, a pass test, and a recovery

from- the net test were also administered.

Results of the study indicated that the best singly

administered test for classifying students was the repeated

volleys test with .72 reliability in Group A. The repeated

volleys test and the serving test was the best combination

of tests with .81 reliability. In Group B the most useful

singly administered test was the serving test with a reli-

ability of .59. The best test combination was the repeated

9

wall volleys test and the serving test in Group B, with a

reliability of .61. French and Cooper concluded that the

differences in the correlation of the two studies were

probably due to the fact that Group A, which was composed

of older girls, was more experienced and was also tested in

smaller groups.

In 1940, Russell and Lange (12) conducted a study for

the purpose of finding a reliable and valid test for junior

high school girls. The repeated wall volleys test and the

serving test were used in the study. The serving test was

the same as French and Cooper's except the subjects were

given two trials of ten serves. The repeated wall volleys

test was the same one used by French and Cooper except the

subjects were given three trials of thirty seconds at the

three foot restraining line.

The subjects were given the repeated wall volleys test

and the serve test and were then judged by seven judges on

overall volleyball playing ability using a four-point

judges' rating form, but no explanation of the rating form

was given. The reliability of the repeated wall volleys

computed on two trials five days apart was .87 for the best

of three trials and .90 for the sum of three trials. The

seven judges used a four-point scale in studying the valid-

ity, rating sixty-six players during tournament play. The

validity correlations ranged from .63 to .80.

10

The findings disclosed that the two tests were reliable

and valid for junior high school girls and that the best of

the trials is as reliable as the sum. The two tests measure

different skills of volleyball playing ability. The best

estimate of ability was found by adding the best score in

the-repeated volleys test to the best score in the serve

test.

Crogen (6) in her study using 123 high school girls

sought to devise a simple classification test for high school

girls. The repeated wall volleys test and the jump-reach

test, were selected for the study.

The repeated wall volleys test with no -time factor was

used with a restraining line of six feet. After the ball

was thrown, the subject had an option of setting the ball

up to herself or setting the ball to the wall. The subject

continued until ten hits were recorded. Ball handling fouls

were called against the subject. The score was the number of

fouls subtracted from the ten hits.

The 129 high school girls were divided into groups

according to the scores they made on the repeated wall

volleys test. Sixteen teams consisting of eight players

played a round robin tournament of sixty games consisting

of fifteen minutes per game.

The reliabilities, with 1.29 girls, ranged from .48 to

.52 for ten hits on the repeated wall volleys test. The

same girls were retested with twenty hits and the reliability

11

went up to .83. It was found that the teams made up of

players with higher test scores won mo re games than those

with lower test scores, thus indicating validity of the

test. There was not a fine discrimination among those making

the highest score. The study revealed no relationship of

ability to jump and volleyball playing ability.

Brady (2) conducted a study using 522 regular class

members of freshman college men's classes in volleyball and

15 members of the Knoxville Y. M..C. A team, three time

winner of the Southern Y. M. C. A. Championship. The study

used the repeated wall volleys test with no floor restric-

tions and a one mijiute time limit. The purpose of the study

was to design a test by using four judges to measure volley-

ball playing ability of college men in physical education

classes enrolled at the University of Tennessee.

The results of the study revealed the best singly

administered test for volleyball playing ability, as mea-

sured by four judges, was the repeated wall volleys test

with no restraining line, and a one minute time limit. The

validity of the test was found to be .86 and the reliability

was .93. It was also noted that the group that practiced

the volleying test improved on the score made on the final

test and the group also tended to improve in individual

playing ability.

Marion Broer (3) conducted a study, in 1955, to deter-

mine the reliability of certain motor ability tests and skill

12

tests in volleyball, basketball, and softball. Two hundred

and thirty-four seventh and eighth grade girls were used in

the study.

The subjects were girls enrolled in Morgan Junior High

School for the Fall semester of 1955. The subjects were

tested on the various skill tests and the volleyball test

was administered at the end of a nine week volleyball unit.

The volleyball test consisted of the thirty-second wall

volleys test using a three foot restraining line with three

trials and a serve test.

It was found that three trials were reliable scores on

the volleys test with a reliability of .89. The sum of

twenty trials on the volleyball service had a reliability

of .81.

Butler (4) conducted a study in 1961, using thirty-two

tenth grade girls enrolled in a beginning volleyball class

at Council Training School in Normal, Alabama. The purpose

of the study was to determine the relationship of scores

obtained on the velocity serve test and the scores obtained

from the French and Cooper placement serve test.

Each subject was given ten trials to execute ten under-

arm serves. The investigator observed the flight of the

ball from contact with the hand to landing. The score was

recorded to the nearest 1/100 second. At the same time the

distance was recorded to the nearest foot.

13

The reliabilities for these tests were determined by

correlating odd and even scores using the Pearson-Product

Moment Method. The correlation of the velocity serve test

was .97 and for ten serves was .98. The reliability of the

French and Cooper test was .74 and for ten trials was .84.

The tests had a coefficient of correlation of .16, which

indicated that the tests were not measuring the same

abilities.

In the Spring of 1960, Clifton (5) conducted a study

for the purpose of developing a single hit volleys test for

college women for use in evaluating volleying ability. The

subjects were tested on the wall volley using only one hit.

The investigator used a restraining line at five feet and

seven feet. The subjects were given three trials of thirty

seconds at both restraining lines with a two minute rest

between trials. If the subject lost control of the ball

she started again with the count of volleys. The score was

obtained by subtracting the volleying fouls and the restrain-

ing line violations from the total volleys; this was done

for each trial.

The subjects were tested on the volleys test once in

the middle of a fourteen week unit and retested one week

later. The day following the last volleying test the sub-

jects were rated on volleying ability during the class

period by five experienced judges. "Suttinger's scale was

used as a basis for developing definitive statements

14

describing the volley as made by selected judges" (5,

pp. 209-210).

The reliabilities for the trials at the five foot

restraining line ranged from .63 for the first trial to .84

for the sum of the first and second trials. The validity

ranged from .58 to .67. At the seven foot restraining line

the reliabilities ranged from .67 for the first trial to

.86 for the sum of the three trials. The validity ranged

from .74 for trial one to .70 for the sum of trials one and

two.

Mohr and Haverstick (10) conducted a study in 1963 to

investigate the reliability and validity of the repeated

wall volleys test at the three foot, five foot, and seven

foot restraining line. The study used 110 freshman and

sophomore university women. One trial of thirty seconds

was given at each restraining line. The subjects were then

judged by three experienced judges as to their playing abil-

ity. The reliability was .81 for the three foot restraining

line for one trial and .93 was the predicted reliability for

three trials. The reliability for the five foot restraining

line was .81 for one trial and .93 was the predicted reli-

ability for three trials. At the seven foot restraining

line .83 was the reliability for one trial and the predicted

reliability for three trials was .94. The validities were

.64 for one trial at three feet and .68 for three trials,

.67 for one trial at five feet and .72 for three trials.

15

.75 for one trial at seven feet and .79 for three trials,

five foot and seven foot scores for one trial was .69. The

correlations of the judges' ratings ranged from .81 to .88.

Since the correlations of the judges were so high the total

of the judges' scores was used for validity computations.

Kronquist and Brumback (8) conducted a study and seventy-

one tenth and eleventh grade high schools boys were used in

the experiment. The purpose of the study was to determine

the suitability of a rebound, wall volley test as a technique

for evaluating the volleyball playing ability of high school

boys .

The subjects were given three twenty second trials.

They were instructed to volley the ball against the wall in

a target area. The target area had a five foot line, eleven

feet from the floor. From both ends of this line, lines

extended toward the ceiling for at least four feet and no

restraining line on the floor.

The validity criterion was the objective rating given

the students by the three experienced volleyball teachers.

The validity of the test of the three classes was .69, .87,

and .74. The objectivity judges' ratings ranged from .82

to .90. The reliability for the three individual classes

was .82, .72, and .82. The reliability for all three classes

was .82.

In 1963, Liba and Stauff (9) conducted a study for the

.purpose of developing an overhead volleyball pass test. The

16

v o l l e y b a l l pass test was g i v e n to c o l l e g e w o m e n , and a

s e p a r a t e test was g i v e n to j u n i o r high s c h o o l g i r l s . A

r o p e was s t r e t c h e d a c r o s s the net at a h e i g h t of t h i r t e e n

feet and one at e l e v e n feet for c o l l e g e g i r l s , and t w e l v e

and ten feet for j u n i o r high s c h o o l g i r l s . A l i n e was

d r a w n ten and o n e - h a l f feet from the n e t , w h i c h was the

s t a r t i n g l i n e . T h e r e w e r e t h i r t e e n t w o - f o o t s q u a r e s d r a w n

d i r e c t l y in f r o n t of the s t a r t i n g line w i t h n u m b e r s one

t h r o u g h seven and r e g r e s s i n g b a c k to n u m b e r o n e . T h e s c o r e

w a s o b t a i n e d by m u l t i p l y i n g the d i s t a n c e the b a l l t r a v e l e d

by the h e i g h t of the b a l l . If the b a l l went o v e r the

h i g h e s t rope it w a s s c o r e d as t h r e e p o i n t s , b e t w e e n the two

r o p e s it was s c o r e d as two p o i n t s , one p o i n t was s c o r e d it

the b a l l w e n t u n d e r the e l e v e n foot r o p e , and no p o i n t s

w e r e s c o r e d if the b a l l did not reach the r o p e s .

It was found that the r e l i a b i l i t y was .85 for five

t r i a l s r e c o r d e d on each of two d a y s . The r e l i a b i l i t y of

.82 was found for ten t r i a l s on a s i n g l e d a y . T h e s t u d y was

a c c e p t e d v a l i d by its face v a l i d i t y . G o o d p e r f o r m a n c e in

p a s s i n g is d e f i n e d as the a b i l i t y to p a s s the b a l l to a

d e s i r e d h e i g h t and to h a v e the b a l l land at a d e s i r e d

d i s t a n c e . The test was d e s i g n e d to m e a s u r e both of t h e s e

e l e m e n t s and f u r t h e r p r o v i d e e v i d e n c e of i n a b i l i t y to

a c h i e v e t h e s e by r e c o r d i n g d e v i a t i o n s f r o m the d e s i r e d

h e i g h t and the d e s i r e d d i s t a n c e .

17

This chapter presented a review of literature related

to the investigation. This related literature also included

acceptable methods for measuring volleyball playing ability

and skill. Brief summaries of the findings were presented.


1. Bassett, Gladys; Ruth G1 as sow, and Mabel Locke, "Studies in Testing Volleyball Skills," Research Quarterly, VIII (December, 1937), 60-72.

2. Brady, G. F., "Preliminary Investigations of Volley-ball Playing," Research Quarterly, XVI (March, 1945), 14-17.

3. Broer, Marion, "Reliability of Certain Skill Tests for Junior High School Girls," Research Quarterly, XXIX (May, 1958), 139-145.

4. Butler, Willie Mae, "Comparison of Two Methods of Measuring the Degree of Skill in the Underarm Volley-ball Serve," Research Quarterly, XXXII (May, 1961), 261-262.

5. Clifton, Marguerite, "Single Hit Volley Test for Women's Volleyball," Research Quarterly, XXXIII (May, 1962), 208-211.

6. Crogen, Corrine, "A Simple Volleyball Classification Test for High School Girls," The Physical Educator, IV (October, 1943), 34-37.

7. French, E. L. and B. I. Cooper, "Achievement Tests in Volleyball for High School Girls," Research Quarterly, VIII (May, 1937), 1.50-157.

8. Kronquist, Roger A. and Wayne B. Brumbach, "A Modifi-cation of the Brady Volleyball Skill Test for High School Boys," Research Quarterly, XXXIX (March, 1968), 116-120.

9. Liba, Marie R. and Marilyn R. Stauff, "A Test for the Volleyball Pass," Research Quarterly, XXXIV (March. 1963), 56-63.

10. Mohr, Dorthy R. and Martha J. Haverstick, "Repeated Volleys Test for Women's Volleyball," Research Quarterly, XXVI (May, 1955), 179-184.

18

19

11. Russell, Naomi and Elizabeth Lange, "Achievement Tests in Volleyball for Junior High School Girls," Research Quarterly. XI (December, 1940), 33-41.

CHAPTER III

PROCEDURES IN THE DEVELOPMENT

OF THE STUDY

This study sought to investigate, through experimenta-

tion, the relationship of the results of the repeated wall

volleys, the volleyball pass and playing ability. The experi

ment consisted of a repeated wall volleys test, a voileyball

pass test and a panel of four judges rating the subjects on

playing ability at the end of a six week volleyball unit.

Preliminary Procedures

Literature pertaining to volleyball was surveyed and

previous studies related to the present study were reviewed.

A pilot study with the four judges was conducted for the

purpose of predicting objectivity and inter-judge reliabil-

ity. The judges were given copies of the rating scale one

week prior to rating the subjects on playing ability. They

were asked to familiarize themselves with the rating scale.

The judges chosen to rate the subjects were well

qualified. Each one had been a physical education instruc-

tor for at least five years and three of the five had

coached volleyball teams for Interscholastic League Compe-

tition for a three year period.

20

21

Four days prior to rating the subjects on playing

ability, the judges met for one hour and forty-five minutes.

The first thirty minutes was spent reviewing and discussing

the rating scale with'the judges and the investigator. The

next hour the judges rated the overall playing ability of

twelve players who were not included in the study.

Each subject wore a white pennie with six inch numbers

on the back and front. Twelve subjects were rated ten times

during a regulation match which consists of two out of three

games which were eight minutes or fifteen points in length.

Immediately following the rating of the players, the judges

met for further discussion of the rating scale.

Selection of the Subjects

The subjects in the study were-150 girls enrolled in

the eleventh grade physical education classes for the Fall

semester of 1967. Due to a number .of absences during the

four-day testing period, only 120 subjects were included in

the study. None of the absences were attributed to the

proposed study.

Class Procedures

The five classes included in the investigation met

five days a week for a six-week volleyball unit. The unit

included the history of volleyball, volleyball pass, set-up,

serve, spike, dig, block, recovery from the net, court

22

positions, and offensive and defensive tactics. All subjects

participated in a double round-robin tournament.

The first day of the sixth week of the volleyball unit

the subjects completed their double round-robin tournament.

On Tuesday the Repeated Wall Volleys Test was administered

and on Wednesday the Volleyball Pass Test was administered.

On Thursday a n d T r i d a y the subjects were rated by four

judges on playing ability. During the four days of testing

the subjects were allowed to warm-up for the first fifteen

minutes of the class period. The warm-up period consisted

of exercises for the fingers, arms, and legs and included

drills of the set-up, pass and serve. Each student being

tested had the same amount of practice on each skill.

Selection of Tests

Since the study was concerned with volleying ability,

passing ability, and playing ability, it became necessary

to select separate tests which would measure each of these

effectively. The criteria used for the selection of these

tests were validity, reliability, objectivity, and ease of

administration. Mohr and Haverstick's Repeated Wall Volleys

Test (2), hereafter referred to as Repeated Wall Volleys

Test, was chosen as the instrument to measure volleying

ability. Liba and Stauff's Volleyball Pass Test (1), here-

after referred to as the Volleyball Pass Test, was chosen as

the instrument to measure passing ability and Suttinger's

23

R a t i n g S c a l e (3) was used by the j u d g e s to m e a s u r e p l a y i n g

a b i l i t y .

G e n e r a l P r o c e d u r e s in T e s t A d m i n i s t r a t i o n

F a c i l i t i e s and e q u i p m e n t w e r e p r e p a r e d for the t e s t i n g

p r o g r a m in c o m p l i a n c e w i t h the s p e c i f i c a t i o n s as set up by

M o h r and H a v e r s t i c k ' s R e p e a t e d W a l l V o l l e y s Test (2) and

L i b a and S t a u f f ' s P a s s T e s t (1). W h i t e t a p e was used in

m a r k i n g l i n e s in the g y m n a s i u m , a c a n v a s was p a i n t e d for

a t a r g e t , two ropes w e r e used o v e r the net and s c o r e cards

w e r e p r i n t e d . C l i p b o a r d s , p e n c i l s , w h i s t l e s , stop w a t c h e s ,

w e r e a v a i l a b l e p r i o r to the t e s t i n g p e r i o d .

T h e i n v e s t i g a t o r and t h r e e s t u d e n t a s s i s t a n t s a d m i n -

i s t e r e d the R e p e a t e d W a l l V o l l e y s T e s t . T h e s t u d e n t

a s s i s t a n t s w e r e c h o s e n from each c l a s s p e r i o d and the same

a s s i s t a n t s w e r e used t h r o u g h o u t the t e s t i n g p e r i o d . P r i o r

to the t e s t i n g p e r i o d c a r e f u l d i r e c t i o n s w e r e g i v e n to the

s t u d e n t a s s i s t a n t s c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r d u t i e s . D u r i n g the

a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the test' the i n v e s t i g a t o r was r e s p o n s i b l e

for c a l l i n g i n c o r r e c t v o l l e y s and line v i o l a t i o n s . O n e

s t u d e n t a s s i s t a n t was r e s p o n s i b l e for t i m i n g and r e c o r d i n g

the s c o r e , w h i l e the o t h e r a s s i s t a n t c o u n t e d the n u m b e r of

c o r r e c t v o l l e y s . All s u b j e c t s w e r e g i v e n c a r e f u l i n s t r u c -

t i o n s i n c l u d i n g a d e m o n s t r a t i o n of the R e p e a t e d W a l l V o l l e y s

T e s t p r i o r to the test a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . No p r a c t i c e t r i a l s

w e r e a l l o w e d and each s u b j e c t was t e s t e d at one s t a t i o n .

24

The investigator and three student assistants admin-

istered the Volleyball Pass Test. The three student

assistants were chosen in each class. Prior to the testing

period, careful directions were given to the student

assistants concerning their duties. The investigator was

responsible for recording the scores. One student assistant

was responsible for measuring and announcing the height

score and another assistant retrieved the volleyball and

returned it to the subject. All subjects were given care-

ful instructions, including a demonstration concerning the

Volleyball Pass Test prior to the testing period. Two

practice trials were allowed.

Four judges rated the subjects on overall playing

ability. The subjects were rated during their class periods

for two days.

Description of the Tests

The Repeated Wall Volleys Test allowed the subject to

stand behind a line seven feet from the wall, ten feet in

length, and toss the ball to the wall with an underhand

toss. When the ball returned the subject volleyed the

ball repeatedly against the wall above a line ten feet long

and seven feet and four inches from the floor for thirty

seconds. If the subject lost control of the ball, she

25

recovered it and brought it back to the seven foot line and

started with a toss again. The score for each trial was the

number of times the ball was clearly volleyed (not tossed or

held) from behind the proper line to the wall and above the

net line. The number of times the subject stepped over the

restraining line and the number of times the ball was not

clearly hit were subtracted from the total number of volleys

to determine the score for one trial".

The subject was given three thirty second trials and

a rest period of thirty seconds between each trial. The

score for the entire test was the sum of the three trials.

(A description of the test and the score card may be found

in Appendix A.)

The Volleyball Pass Test required the'subject to stand

behind a restraining line ten feet and five inches from the

net. The ball had to be clearly volleyed in order to be

scored,. There was no penalty for stepping on or over the

restraining line; however, they were encouraged to stay

behind the line. Each student was given two practice trials

prior to the test. The subject was given five trials and

the score for the entire test was the sum of the five trials.

Two ropes were strung above the net from one side of

the court to the other side. The top rope was placed at

thirteen feet above the floor and the lower rope was placed

eleven feet above the floor. The target was a canvas strip,

two feet by thirty feet, and was placed so that the center

26

of the target area number eight was twenty-three feet and

five inches away from the passer. Three points were given

for a ball which cleared the thirteen foot rope and two

points for a ball that was volleyed between the thirteen

foot and the eleven foot ropes. A retrial was allowed if

any pass was clearly interfered with by a rope. The

distance score was determined by the number of the area in

which the ball landed on the target. The total score for

a given trial was determined by the height score being

multiplied by the distance score. A ball landing on a lifte

was given the higher score. (A description of the test and

score card may be found in Appendix B.)

Each subject was rated ten times during a regulation

match. A match consists of two out of three games, which

consists of eight minutes or fifteen points. The four

judges rated the subjects during two class periods. The

Suttinger Rating Scale was used for rating playing ability.

The scale ranged from four (excellent) to one (poor). (A

description of the rating scale may be found in Appendix C.)

Treatment of Data

Mohr and Haverstick's Repeated Wall Volleys Test (2)

and Liba and Stauff's Volleyball Pass Test (1) were admin-

istered to 120 subjects to determine volleying and passing

ability. The four judges used Suttinger's Rating Scale (3)

to rate the subjects on overall playing ability. This scale

27

was selected to determine playing ability. The tests were

administered at the completion of a six week unit in volley-

ball. Data were reported for the 120 subjects who completed

the tests.. All scores were recorded in terms of raw scores.

(The raw scores may be found in Appendix D.)

Statistical data were calculated through the use of

means and standard deviations. Relationships among the

three test scores were calculated by means of the Pearson

Product-Moment zero order method of correlation. Reliability

of the four judges' ratings was calculated by means of the

Pearson Product-Moment zero order method of correlation.

This chapter presented the procedures in the development

of the study. It included (a) preliminary procedures, (b)

selection of subjects, (c) class procedures, (d) selection

of tests, (e) description of tests, and (f) treatment of the

data.


1. Liba, Marie R. and Marilyn R. Stauff, "A Test for the Volleyball Pass," Research Quarterly, XXXIV (March, 1963), 56-63.


3. Suttinger, Joan, "A Proposed Predictive Index of Volley-ball Playing Ability for College Women," Unpublished study, University of California, Los Angeles, California, May, 1957.

28

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS

This chapter presents an analysis and interpretation

of the findings of the study. A Volleyball Pass Test and

a Repeated Wall Volleys Test were administered to 120 sub-

jects at the end of a six-week volleyball unit. Playing

ability of the subjects was measured by ratings of four

judges. The study sought to determine the relationship of

Mohr and Haverstick's Repeated Wall Volleys Test (3), Liba

and Stauff's Volleyball Pass Test (2), and volleyball

playing ability determined by four judges using Suttinger's

Rating Scale (4).

Table I presents the means and standard deviations of

the Repeated Wall Volleys Test and the Volleyball Pass Test

An analysis of the data shows a mean score of 2 on the

Repeated Wall Volleys Test. This mean was exceptionally

low. The mean score of 66 on the Volleyball Pass Test

was considerably higher due, in part, to the method of

scoring.

29

30

TABLE I

THE MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE REPEATED WALL VOLLEYS TEST* AND

THE VOLLEYBALL PASS**

Test Mean Standard Deviation

Repeated Wall Volleys 2 5

Volleyball Pass 66 26

*The number of completed volleys against a wall in thirty seconds for three trials was recorded for the Repeated Wall Volleys Test score.

**The height multiplied by the distance for a total of five trials was recorded for the Volleyball Pass Test score

As shown in Table II, there was a substantial rela-

tionship among the scores of the Repeated Wall Volleys

Test, the Volleyball Pass Test, and the Judges' Ratings.

TABLE II

COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION AMONG THE REPEATED WALL VOLLEYS, THE VOLLEYBALL PASS AND

VOLLEYBALL PLAYING ABILITY

Repeated Wall Playing Test Items Volleys Ability

Voileyball Pass .46 .46

Repeated Wall Volleys .50

31

The coefficient of correlation between the Repeated Wall

Volleys Test and the Volleyball Pass Test was .46, which is

significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. The coef-

ficients of .46 between the Volleyball Pass and Playing

Ability, and .50 between Repeated Wall Volleys and Playing

Ability were also significant beyond the .05 level (l,p. 201).

Table III shows the reliability of the ratings of

playing ability among the four judges. The correlation

coefficient of .49 between the ratings of Judges 1 and 4

was the lowest obtained. The coefficients between the

ratings of Judge 4 and Judges 2 and 3 were .53 and .52

respectively, denoting a higher degree of reliability.

Consistent and reliable ratings were obtained between

Judge 1 and Judges 2 and 3, as evidenced by coefficients

of .60 in both cases. A coefficient of .71 between the

ratings of Judges 2 and 3 represented the most substantial

degree of reliability among the judges.

TABLE III

COEFFICIENTS OF CORRELATION AMONG THE JUDGES' RATINGS USING SUTTINGER'S

RATING SCALE

Judges 2 3 4

1 .60 .60 .49

2 .71 .53

3 .52

3 2

T h e c o r r e l a t i o n of the V o l l e y b a l l P a s s T e s t and the

R e p e a t e d W a l l V o l l e y s T e s t w i t h v o l l e y b a l l p l a y i n g a b i l i t y

r e v e a l e d that the two t e s t s m a y be r e l i a b l e for p r e d i c t i n g

p l a y i n g a b i l i t y of high s c h o o l g i r l s . D u e to the s u b -

s t a n t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p among the j u d g e s ' r a t i n g s , S u t t i n g e r ' s

R a t i n g S c a l e a p p e a r s to be an a c c e p t a b l e tool for m e a s u r i n g

p l a y i n g a b i l i t y of high s c h o o l g i r l s .

.The e x c e p t i o n a l l y low m e a n s c o r e on the R e p e a t e d W a l l

Voll.eys T e s t m a y be a t t r i b u t e d to the fact that the s u b j e c t s

w e r e not a l l o w e d to v o l l e y the b a l l a g a i n s t the w a l l d u r i n g

the six w e e k v o l l e y b a l l u n i t . P e r h a p s if a l i m i t e d a m o u n t

of p r a c t i c e time had been r e q u i r e d each period,, the test

s c o r e s w o u l d h a v e r e v e a l e d a m o r e a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t i o n of

p l a y i n g a b i l i t y .

T h e r e s t r a i n i n g lines and v o l l e y f o u l s a p p e a r e d to

a f f e c t the p e r f o r m a n c e "of the s u b j e c t s d u r i n g the R e p e a t e d

W a l l V o l l e y s T e s t . V o l l e y i n g fouls and r e s t r a i n i n g line

v i o l a t i o n s w e r e s u b t r a c t e d from the s u b j e c t s ' c o m p l e t e d

v o l l e y s c o r e s . H e n c e , the low m e a n score m a y h a v e been

a t t r i b u t e d to lack of e x p e r i e n c e in v o l l e y i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y

in r e s t r i c t e d a r e a s . P e r h a p s a test w h i c h does not i n c l u d e

a r e s t r a i n i n g l i n e should be used for this age g r o u p .

T h e c o e f f i c i e n t s of c o r r e l a t i o n a m o n g all f o u r ' j u d g e s

r e v e a l e d a s u b s t a n t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p . H o w e v e r , a h i g h e r

c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n J u d g e s 2 and 3 m a y h a v e b e e n due to

33

the fact that t h e s e j u d g e s are c u r r e n t l y c o a c h i n g v o l l e y b a l l

t e a m s .

M o t i v a t i o n w a s an i m p o r t a n t v a r i a b l e in this s t u d y .

T h e s u b j e c t s w e r e e n c o u r a g e d by the i n v e s t i g a t o r and t h e i r

t e a m m a t e s to m a k e the best p o s s i b l e s c o r e s on the two t e s t s

and to p l a y to the best of t h e i r a b i l i t y w h i l e b e i n g r a t e d

on p l a y i n g a b i l i t y by the f o u r j u d g e s . P e r h a p s , if the

unit had b e e n e x t e n d e d to e i g h t w e e k s , the a d d i t i o n a l

e x p e r i e n c e w o u l d h a v e been r e f l e c t e d in t h e i r p l a y i n g a b i l -

ity. T h e s u b j e c t s ' class g r a d e s w e r e a form of e x t r i n s i c

m o t i v a t i o n .


1. Garrett, Henry E. , Statistics in Psychology and Education, 6th ed., New York, David McKay Company, Inc., 1966.

2. Liba, Marie R. and Marilyn R. Stauff, "A Test for the Volleyball Pass," Research Quarterly, XXXIV (March, 1963), 56-63.


4. Suttinger, Joan, "A Proposed Predictive Index of Volley-ball Playing Ability for College Women," Unpublished study, University of California, Los Angeles, California, May, 1957.

34

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents a summary of the problem, an

analysis of the results, conclusions based on the results

of the study, and recommendations.

The study was designed to determine the relationship

of the repeated wall volleys, the volleyball pass, and

volleyball playing ability. The hypothesis under test

was that the correlation of the volleyball pass, the

repeated wall volleys, and volleyball playing ability is

zero.

Data for determining the relationship of the repeated

wall volleys, the volleyball pass, and volleyball playing

ability were provided by the scores from the administration

of Mohr and Haverstick's Repeated Wall Volleys Test, Liba

and Stauff's Volleyball Pass Test, and four judges' rating

of the subjects on playing ability using Suttinger's Rating

Scale. The subjects were 120 eleventh grade girls enrolled

in physical education classes at Odessa High School, Odessa,

Texas. The experimental period was for thirty class

periods .

35

36

The results based upon this study appeared to justify

the following conclusions:

1. The hypothesis under test in this study cannot be

accepted.

2. Liba and Stauff's Volleyball Pass Test may be used

in predicting playing ability of high schoo 1. gir1s .

3. Mohr and Haverstick's Repeated Wall Volleys Test

at the seven foot restraining line may be used to

predict playing ability of high school girls.

4. Suttinger's Rating Scale is an acceptable tool for

measuring playing ability of high school girls.

As a result of this study, the following recommendations

are presented:

1. That additional studies of similar design should be

conducted with high school girls.

2. That additional studies should be conducted using

the Repeated Wall Volleys Test with a three foot

restraining line and/or no restraining line for

high school girls.


the Repeated Wall Volleys Test or the Volleyball

Pass Test on more experienced players.


other types of volleyball skill tests and playing

ability in order to determine whether or not a

37

combination of skill tests would better predict

playing ability.

A P P E N D I X A

R E P E A T E D W A L L V O L L E Y S T E S T

P r o c e d u r e s for a d m i n i s t e r i n g the t e s t :

T h e s u b j e c t s t a n d s b e h i n d the s e v e n foot line and t o s s e s the b a l l to the w a l l w i t h an u n d e r h a n d t o s s . W h e n it r e t u r n s , she v o l l e y s it r e p e a t e d l y a g a i n s t the w a l l a b o v e the net l i n e , for t h i r t y s e c o n d s . T h e b a l l m a y be set up as m a n y t i m e s as d e s i r e d or n e c e s s a r y to m a i n t a i n c o n t r o l ; it m a y be c a u g h t and r e - s t a r t e d w i t h a t o s s as at the b e g i n n i n g . If the b a l l g e t s out of c o n t r o l , it m u s t be r e c o v e r e d by the p l a y e r and b r o u g h t b a c k to the seven foot line to be s t a r t e d again w i t h a t o s s .

• 1 0 '

I I

7 ' 4 " I

W a l l • 1 0 '

i i 7' I

F l o o r I 1 0 '

7' R e s t r a i n i n g L i n e

S c o r i n g :

T h e s c o r e for each t r i a l is the n u m b e r of t i m e s the b a l l is c l e a r l y v o l l e y e d (not t o s s e d or h e l d ) f r o m b e h i n d the p r o p e r line to the w a l l , on or a b o v e the net l i n e ; a n o t h e r p e r s o n c o u n t s the t i m e s the p l a y e r steps o v e r the

38

39

restraining line (telling her as she does so). The latter is subtracted from the former to obtain the score for the trial. The score for the entire test is the sum of those for the three trials.

Score Card

Trials Volleys Foul s Total of Trial

1

2

3

Sum of Trials

APPENDIX B

TEST FOR THE VOLLEYBALL PASS

Procedures for administering the test:

Height: 3 points are given for a ball that goes over the 13 foot rope.

2 points for a ball that goes between the 13 foot and 11 foot ropes.

1 point for a ball that goes under the 11 foot rope.

0 points for a ball that fails to reach the rope.

Distance: The distance score is the number of the area in which the ball lands. A ball landing on a line is given the higher score.

Fouls: The ball must be clearly volleyed in order to be scored. Any ball that is pushed or thrown scores a zero. No fouls are counted for stepping on or over the restraining line; however, students should be encouraged to stay behind the line.

The total score for a given trial is the height score multiplied by the distance score, for example, rope score equals 3 points, distance score equals 8 points, trial s core would be 24.

The subject should be given two practice trials. Any pass in which the path of the ball is clearly interfered with by a rope is taken over.

40

41

13' rope

11

8.5'

restrain-

ing line

1 rope

I 1 2 3 4 5 6

23.5'

4 3

Diagram for Volleyball Pass Test

42

Score Card

Trial Vertical Height Horizontal Range Trial Score

1

2

3

4

5

Total Score

APPENDIX C

SUTTINGER'S RATING SCALE 1

Criteria for subjective ratings:

4 (Excellent)

Handles the ball with ease, using fingertips and display-ing control over the hits. Plays position well, moving out when necessary to make a save or to cover. Set-ups are high and accurate, the team play is very prominent. Place-ment and strategy in offensive play is evident, and spikes and blocks are usually successful. Rarely has trouble receiving serves, and rarely misplays the ball.

3 (Average to Good)

Has control over the ball but lacks the quality of ease. Plays position well, but is not aggressive in backing up others. Team play is seen. Set-ups are usually high or accurate and some indication of placement is seen if of-fensive play. Spikes and blocks are attempted, but with not too much success. Usually handles serves with no trouble. _

2 (Poor to Average)

Skill in handling the ball is poor, especially noticeable on more difficult plays. Leaves position to play the ball, but some indication of team play is shown. Set-ups are attempted, but with not too much success. Placement is not indicated in offensive play. Erratic in handling serves.

1 (Poor)

Often unable to handle the ball, using fists or palms at times. Is continually out of position. Negligible evi-dence of team play is seen. Set-ups seldom attempted and/ or unsuccessful. Offensive strategy is absent with returns usually either unsuccessful or inconsistent.

•'•Joan Suttinger, "A Proposed Predictive Index of Volley-ball Playing Ability for College Women," unpublished study, University of California, Los Angeles, California, May, 1957.

43

Judges' Rating Form

44

Student Number

P i nn i e Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Total Score

•

Each student will be rated ten times during a thirty minute g ame situation.

APPENDIX D

RAW SCORES OF SUBJECTS PARTICIPATING IN THE TESTS

.

Repeated Wall Volleys Volleyball Pass Test

Student Test Trials Trials

Student Total Number 1 2 3 Total 1 2 3 4 5 Total

2 1 0 0 1 0 16 24 16 14 70

3 2 0 0 2 10 8 0 0 12 30

4 2 1 0 3 18 21 21 18 12 90

5 0 0 0 0 16 0 12 10 10 48

6 2 0 0 2 21 15 15 24 15 90

7 0 0 0 0 8 8 12 6 12 46

8 0 0 0 0 8 0 12 14 10 44

9 0 1 0 1 15 0 24 12 18 69

10 0 0 0 0 16 16 12 0 15 59

11 1 0 0 1 .0 0 10 8 15 33

12 1 0 0 1 0 21 0 10 14 45

13 1 0 0 1 12 8 12 8 12 52

14 0 0 1 1 15 0 16 14 24 69

15 9 11 5 25 12 21 24 18 14 89

16 0 0 1 1 24 21 18 21 21 105

17 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 16

18 1 0 2 3 18 21 18 21 21 99

19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

22 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 0 0 24

23 3 1 2 6 21 21 24 21 21 108

24 0 0 0 0 8 10 12 12 8 50 26 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 0 0 30

27 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 6 18

28 0 0 0 0 18 18 8 21 15 80 29 0 0 0 0 0 12 8 8 15 43 30 0 0 0 0 0 10 12 10 0 32 32 0 2 o • 2 21 0 16 16 12 65 34 0 1 2 3 12 18 12 15 15 72 35 4 3 0 7 21 21 18 15 14 89 36 1 0 0 1 8 8 12 15 15 58 37 0 0 0 0 24 21 18 24 15 102 38 3 0 6 9 18 21 24 15 15 93 39 3 0 0 3 8 12 8 16 0 44 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 12

45

RAW SCORES OF SUBJECTS PARTICIPATING IN THE TESTS--Continued

46


Student Test Trials Trials

Number 1 2 3 Total 1 2 3 4 5 Total

41 0 0 0 0 14 21 8 18 0 61 43 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 16 18 46 44 0 2 0 2 10 0 14 16 18 58 46 14 1 2 17 12 18 18 18 15 81 48 0 0 1 1 0 24 18' 18 24 84 49 0 0 0 0 10 0 14 12 12 48 53 0 0 0 0 10 16 14 21 0 61 54 0 0 1 1 0 21 21 10 8 60 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 56 0 0 0 0 15 10 12 24 18 79 57 0 0 0 0 0 12 16 0 10 38 59 1 0 0 1 18 16 0 12 6 52 60 0 0 0 0 12 18 0 0 21 51 61 0 0 0 0 12 12 18 14 14 70 62 1 0 0 1 18 15 21 21 21 96 63 6 0 1 7 24 18 21 18 18 99 64 0 1 0 1 0 12 21 14 0 47 66 0 0 0 0 8 16 12 10 24 70 68 0 0 0 0 24 18 21 21 24 108 69 0 1 1 2 24 21 24 18 8 95 70 0 1 1 2 21 21 12 21 24 99 71 0 5 6 11 15 24 16 10 16 81 72 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 10 14 48 73 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 8 0 20 74 0 0 0 0 15 14 0 14 12 55 76 0 0 0 0 12 10 0 0 12 34 77 1 0 0 1 8 0 10 0 24 42 78 6 1 4 11 24 21 24 21 21 111 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 12 12 38 81 1 0 0 1 21 21 18 21 24 105 82 0 0 5 5 21 18 18 21 21 99 83 0 0 0 0 15 24 16 14 0 69 84 0 0 0 0 15 21 16 10 18 80 85 0 0 0 0 12 12 24 24 18 90 86 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 10 22 88 2 0 2 4 24 16 15 24 21 100 89 0 2 0 2 24 24 16 16 24 104 90 3 1 5 9 24 21 15 16 21 97 91 0 10 0 10 24 24 24 15 24 111 92 0 0 3 3 24 24 0 21 18 87 93 1 2 0 3 14 24 18 24 18 98 94 1 2 0 3 15 6 14 21 21 77 96 0 0 0 0 21 21 12 0 21 75

RAW SCORES OF SUBJECTS PARTICIPATING IN THE TESTS--Continued

47


Student Numbe r

Test Trials Trials Student Numbe r 1 2 3 Tot al 1 2 3 4 5 Total

97 0 0 0 0 18 15 12 21 12 78 98 1 0 0 1 0 0 24 12 12 48 99 4 2 0 6 18 21 14 18 12 83

100 0 0 0 0 14 0 10 10 14 48 101 0 0 0 0 21 24 0. 0 21 66 102 1 0 0 1 0 18 12 0 14 44 103 0 1 2 3 21 12 14 16 18 81 106 0 0 2 2 0 21 21 18 12 72 107 0 0 0 0 14 8 10 12 0 44 109 0 0 0 0 12 10 12 18 10 62 110 0 0 0 0 0 21 14 21 21 77 112 0 0 0 0 21 16 21 24 16 98 113 0 2 1 3 15 21 16 10 24 86 114 0 1 0 1 14 10 24 16 0 64 115 6 6 0 12 24 24 12 21 21 102 116 0 0 1 1 0 16 12 18 8 54 117 8 5 2 15 18 18 18 24 21 99 118 0 0 0 0 16 21 12 0 0 49 119 13 23 11 47 18 24 21 21 24 108 122 1 0 0 1 18 16 0 0 0 34 123 2 0 1 3 21 15 21 21 10 88 124 0 0 1 1 24 16 24 21 12 97 125 0 2 0 2 16 24 18 16 12 86 126 2 14 1 17 21 21 15 15 24 96 127 0 0 0 0 6 14 12 12 0 44 129 0 0 2 2 8 14 12 10 12 56 130 2 4 1 7 21 21 24 21 24 111 131 0 1 0 1 16 16 24 14 14 84 132 1 1 1 3 0 12 21 16 0 49 133 2 0 0 2 12 18 21 18 24 93 134 1 0 1 2 8 0 18 12 10 48 135 0 0 1 1 14 0 12 14 12 52 136 0 0 0 0 21 18 18 21 21 99 137 0 0 2 2 24 6 0 24 10 64 140 0 0 0 0 14 6 0 12 24 56 141 0 0 0 0 8 14 0 10 0 32 142 2 0 0 2 18 8 0 0 12 38 143 1 0 0 1 10 10 0 8 0 28 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 14 18 44 145 5 3 0 8 18 21 15 16 16 86 146 4 0 0 4 10 18 0 24 0 52 147 0 0 0 0 0 15 10 10 18 53 149 0 3 1 4 0 24 24 21 21 90

RAW SCORES OF JUDGES' RATINGS OF SUBJECTS' PLAYING ABILITY

Student Number Judge 1 Judge 2 Judge 3 Judge 4 Total

2 12 10 18 12 52 3 23 18 19 18 78 4 24 19 27 16 86 5 18 16 22 12 68 6 13 11 21 16 61 7 19 10 16 21 66 8 15 15 18 19 67 9 11 14 18 14 57

10 19 13 19 21 72 11 17 13 17 20 67 12 27 12 19 21 79 13 15 11 15 16 57 14 23 14 18 20 75 15 17 21 18 14 70 16 13 11 19 11 54 17 12 10 19 11 52 18 23 15 18 21 77 19 13 11 17 11 52 22 18 12 19 19 68 23 27 24 26 18 95 24 17 14 19 15 65 26 13 13 18 13 57 27 12 11 13 12 48 28 16 10 19 12 57

. 29 17 15 20 14 66 30 10 10 13 11 44 32 13 10 15 13 51 34 18 11 19 13 61 35 28 20 21 17 86 36 14 12 14 12 52 37 23 13 22 14 72 38 21 10 22 12 65 39 21 15 20 20 76 40 12 11 14 11 48

48

49

RAW SCORES OF JUDGES' RATINGS OF SUBJECTS' PLAYING ABILITY--Continued


41 16 10 16 15 57 43 13 11 14 12 50 44 20 12 19 14 65 46 27 13 20 13 73 48 24 26 19 17 86 49 17 14 19 15 65 53 15 18 20 11 64 54 13 12 12 13 50 55 12 13 15 13 53 56 14 10 12 12 48 57 15 11 16 10 52 59 23 15 13 13 64 60 11 12 14 12 49 61 13 13 13 12 51 62 12 16 15 12 55 63 26 25 19 21 91 64 11 10 14 11 46-66 14 11 13 13 51 68 19 18 15 18 70 69 14 12 13 15 54 70 14 10 15 12 51 71 27 24 16 14 81 72 12 12 14 14 52 73 14 12 12 13 51 74 12 13 14 15 54 76 13 12 17 15 57 77 13 12 13 12 50 78 32 18 16 18 84 80 13 10 13 12 48 81 11 11 14 14 50 82 18 14 24 16 72 83 15 11 12 12 50 84 16 16 20 24 76 85 20 19 17 18 74 86 15 13 15 16 59 88 25 19 19 21 84 89 19 16 20 17 72 90 19 21 21 23 84 91 27 . 29 18 24 98 92 26 24 21 27 98 93 16 10 19 13 58 94 12 16 15 16 59 96 11 17 18 13 59

50

RAW SCORES OF JUDGES' RATINGS OF SUBJECTS' PLAYING ABILITY—-Continued


97 13 11 13 19 56

98 12 10 15 13 50 99 18 13 18 10 59

100 13 12 12 14 51 101 17 19 28 21 85 102 14 10 14 14 52

103 16 13 17 18 64

106 17 15 22 15 69

107 14 13 18 15 60

109 18 10 15 16 59 110 13 15 15 14 47 112 15 12 16 14 57 113 14 . 14 16 14 58 114 14 11 19 16 60 115 23 15 18 16 72 116 14 11 21 13 59 117 24 16 11 19 70 118 12 10 12 12 46 119 33 30 22 17 102 122 17 13 17 13 60 123 17 15 21 14 67 124 17 19 18 16 70 125 13 14 13 12 52 126 33 24 24 20 101 127 12 11 12 13 48 129 11 10 12 10 43 130 16 16 19 18 69 131 17 13 14 16 60 132 11 12 17 14 54 133 16 12 17 15 60 134 15 15 14 14 58 135 11 12 15 13 51 136 11 20 16 17 64 137 12 18 13 13 56 140 12 10 12 12 46 141 18 13 22 20 73 142 19 17 15 13 64 143 13 12 14 15 54 144 14 12 17 17 60 145 15 11 17 16 59 146 21 15 16 16 68 147 20 15 17 17 69 149 16 16 19 17 68

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Egstrom, Glen H. and Frances Schaafsma, Voileyball, Dubuque, Iowa, Wm. C. Brown Company, 1966.

Garrett, Henry E., Statistics in Psychology and Education, 6th ed., New York, David McKay Company, Inc., 1966.

Keith, Harold, "Volleyball," Sports and Games, New York, Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1953, pp. 331-334.

Lavega, Robert E., Voileyball Instructor's Guide, Chicago, The Athletic Institute, 1961.

Meyer, Margaret Hinkel and Marguerite M. Schwarz, Team Sports for Women, Philadelphia, W. B. Saunders Company, 1959.

Mitchell, Elmer D., "Volleyball," Sports for Recreation, New York, A. S. Barnes and Company, 1936, pp. 358-369.

Odeneal, William T. and Harry E. Wilson, Beginning Volleyball, Belmont, California, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1962.

Patterson, Ann, Team Sports for Girls, New York, The Ronald Press Company, 1958.

Porter, Lorena, "Volleyball for Classroom Teachers," Volley-ball Guide July 1963-65, Washington, D. C., The Division for Girls and Womens Sports, American Association of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 1963, pp. 42-48.

Trotter, Betty Jane, Voileyball for Girls and Women , New York, The Ronald Press Company, 1956.

Welch, J. Edmund, How to P.1JLZ _ajn_d_ Teach Volleyball, New York, Association Press, 1956.

Wells, Ward M., "Teaching Volleyball on a Coeducational Basis," Voileyball Guide July 1963-65, Washington, D. C.,

51

52

The Division of Girls and Womens Sports, American Association of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 1963, pp. 49-50.

Articles

Bassett, Gladys, Ruth Glassow, and Mabel Locke, "Studies in Testing Volleyball Skills," Research Quarterly, VIII (December, 1937), 60-72.

Brady, G. F., "Preliminary Investigations of Volleyball Playing," Research Quarterly, XVI (March, 1945), 14-17.

Broer, Marion, "Reliability of Certain Skill Tests for Junior High School Girls," Research Quarterly, XXIX (May, 1958), 139-145.

Butler, Willie Mae, "Comparison of Two Methods of Measuring the Degree of Skill in the Underarm Volleyball Serve," Research Quarterly, XXXII (May, 1961), 261-262.

Clifton, Marguerite, "Single Hit Volley Test for Women's Volleyball," Research Quarterly, XXXIII (May, 1962), 208-211.

Crogen, Corrine, "A Simple Volleyball Classification Test for High School Girls," The Physical Educator, IV (October, 1943), 34-37.

French, E. L. and B. I. Cooper, "Achievement Tests in Volley-ball for High School Girls," Research Quarterly, VII (May, 1937), 150-157.

Kronquist, Roger A. and Wayne B. Brumbach, "A Modification of the Brady Volleyball Skill Test for High School Boys," Research Quarterly, XXXIX (March, 1968), 116-120.

Liba, Marie R. and Marilyn R. Stauff, "A Test for the Volleyball Pass," Research Quarterly, XXXIV (March, 1963), 56-63.

Mohr, Dorthy R. and Martha' J. Haverstick, "Repeated Volleys Test for Women's Volleyball," Research Quarterly, XXVI (May, 1955), 179-184.

Russell, Naomi and Elizabeth Lange, "Achievement Tests in Volleyball for Junior High School Girls," Research Quarterly, XI (December, 1940), 33-41.

53

Unpublished Material

Suttinger, Joan, "A Proposed Predictive Index of Volleyball Playing Ability for College Women," Unpublished study, University of California, Los Angeles, California, May, 1957.

the relationship of the volleyball pass, …/67531/metadc131060/m2/1/high... · the relationship of...

Documents