This study investigated the relationship between somatotype, level of competition, and performance in attack in elite level male volleyball players. The objective was to test for the potential covariation of competition level (Division A1 vs. A2) and playing position (hitters vs. centers vs. opposites) considering performance in attack. Anthropometric, body composition and somatotype variables were measured according to the Heath-Carter method. The attack actions of 144 players from 48 volleyball matches were analyzed and their performance was rated using a 5-point numerical scale. Results showed that players of Division A1 were taller, heavier, more muscular, and less endomorphic compared to those of Division A2. MANOVA and follow-up discriminant function analysis revealed somatotype differences among playing positions with centers and opposites being endomorph-ectomorph and hitters being central. Centers performed constantly better than hitters and opposites regardless of division and somatotype. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that variables defining ectomorph and endomorph players, centers, and players of Division A1 significantly determined the relative performance superiority and were able to explain the variation in performance by almost 25%. These results could be taken into account by coaches when assigning players to particular playing positions or when designing individualized position-specific training programs.

We investigated the effectiveness of two teaching formats that fall under the canopy of Mosston and Ashworth’s (2008) practice style, on fifth grade students’ motor skill performance and task engagement. Both formats are also known as station teaching or learning centers. In the teacher-rotated format (TR), the teacher decides the amount of time apportioned during practice at each station, whereas in the learner-rotated format (LR), each learner decides on task order and the amount of time spent at each station. Ten-year-old children (N = 60) were randomly assigned to the TR group (n = 20), the LR group (n = 25), and a control group (n = 15). A soccer dribbling test was employed to evaluate the soccer dribbling skill prior to and after the instructional intervention. The same soccer dribbling tasks were taught to the learners in both treatment groups in eight 30-min sessions. ANCOVA on the posttest scores showed a significant difference between the experimental groups and the control group (p < .001) and between the two experimental groups, favoring the LR group (p < .001). A 3 × 2 (Group × Test) repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant improvement of the soccer dribbling skill for both teaching formats (p < .001) but not for the control group. An ANOVA on the overall practice trial data yielded significant differences between the two formats, favoring the LR group (p < .001). Both formats were found to be effective, but the results indicate that given the opportunity to reapportion their practice time, learners in the LR format took advantage of this opportunity and improved their performance further.