Examination Of Landing Error Scoring System Scores For Division 1 Basketball Players

The aim of the study was to establish possible differences in both aerobic and anaerobic fitness parameters among different positions (point guards, guards and small forwards, and power forwards and centers) in basketball. Based on previous research on certain differences among play positions in basketball, aerobic and anaerobic fitness capacity values of basketballers in different positions were analyzed. Seventy adult basketball players (age 24.37±4.05 years) from the Croatian Division 1 league were classified as point guards (n=20), shooting guards and small forwards (n=26), and power forwards and centers (n=24). Six variables of cardiopulmonary function were obtained using spirometry and spiroergometry test. Regarding aerobic abilities, a significant difference among the three positions was found only in the VO2max parameters (p=.00) in favor of power forwards and centers (5.55± 0.6 l/min) when compared to point guards (4.7± 0.6 l/min) and shooting guards and small forwards (5.01±0.6 l/min). No significant difference was found in the Croatian basketballers’ anaerobic capacity parameters among the three different play positions.

Download Full-text

An Investigation of the Assumptions Underlying the Scoring System of the Arizona Articulation Proficiency Scale: Revised

Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools ◽

10.1044/0161-1461.1004.241 ◽

1979 ◽

Vol 10 (4) ◽

pp. 241-245

Author(s):

Richard J. Schissel ◽

Linda B. James

Keyword(s):

Scoring System ◽

Frequency Of Occurrence

This study examines the assumptions underlying the scoring system of the Arizona Articulation Proficiency Scale: Revised. Twenty-one children between the ages of four years two months and six years 11 months were administered the Arizona Articulation Proficiency Scale: Revised and the Screening Deep Test of Articulation. The subjects' performance on the two tests was compared for the phones: [s], [l], [r], [t∫], [θ], [∫], [k], [f], and [t]. Results suggested that 1) the production of most sounds in only two contexts does not necessarily reflect the accuracy of production of those sounds in other contexts, and 2) for the sounds tested, the weightings assigned on the basis of their frequency of occurrence rather than the frequency with which they were misarticulated overestimated the extent of many articulation errors.

Download Full-text

From the Editor of a Special Edition-Division 1/Division 9 Newsletter

Perspectives on Hearing and Hearing Disorders in Childhood ◽

10.1044/hhdc9.1.1 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 1-1

Keyword(s):

Language Learning ◽

Collaborative Effort ◽

Special Edition ◽

Hearing Disorders ◽

Division 1 ◽

Share Information

It is my pleasure to introduce this newsletter, which is the first collaborative effort between Division 1, Language Learning and Education and Division 9, Hearing and Hearing Disorders in Childhood to share information we believe affiliates from both divisions will find useful.

Download Full-text