Effect of Tool Modified “Smarter Spotter” on Students’ Performance
in Bridge Motion
Galih Permana, Madya Madya and Putranto Putranto
Sport Education Program, Postgraduate School, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia,
Jl. Dr. Setiabudhi No. 229, Bandung 40154, Indonesia
Keywords: Tool Modified ‘Smarter Spotter’, Bridge Motion.
Abstract: The reason why the current researcher choose the title “Effect of Tool Modified ‘Smarter Spotter’ on Students’
Performance in Bridge Motion” is because there are still lots of students who find difficulties in performing
bridge motion. The difficulties faced by the students are caused by some differences in terms of height, weight
and flexibility between students. The researcher aims to create and to modify the available standardized tool
to solve the difficulties and to provide a safe learning for the students. The purpose of the current experimental
research is to discover the effect of tool modified “Smarter Spotter” on students’ performance in performing
bridge motion. The research was designed to be One group pretest-posttest design. The population of the
current research is the 10th grade of Pribadi Bilingual Boarding School’s students, while the research samples
are 15 students of X-A class at Pribadi Bilingual Boarding School Bandung who are taken by random
sampling technique. In accordance with the analysis of the data, it is revealed that T-count 3,96 is bigger than
T-table 1,74 on confidence level α=0,05 with dk(n-1)=14. By the test criteria, Ho is rejected if T-count>T-
table. In fact, T-count is at the level of rejection. Therefore, Ho is rejected. Based on the analysis of the data,
it can be concluded that the modified tool “Smarter Spotter” influences the 10th grade Pribadi school Bandung
students’ performance of bridge motion. According to the result of the analysis, it is recommended that the
teacher at the school should utilize the safe and reliable tool to improve students’ performance on gymnastics,
particularly bridge motion.
1 INTRODUCTION
Gymnastics can be described as activities which
result from performers testing their ability to control
body movements in relation to the force of gravity in
deliberately selected circumstances. Gymnastics
makes several distinctive contributions to the
education of elementary-age students. The structure
of gymnastics builds increasingly complex body
management and control which are the basis for later
skill learning. Gymnastics also makes demands on
strength, stamina, and flexibility. Strength, speed,
agility, and the ability to maintain a satisfactory
relationship between the different parts of the body
are essential to successful performance. These help
develop the overall physical capacity of children at
this crucial
Educational gymnastics is defined and a
framework for content development in educational
gymnastics is revisited (Susan Capel, 1986; Nilges-
Charles and Lynda, 2008). Gymnastics activity in
school usually as a basic technique, such as front roll,
back roll, handspring, and bridge motion. Bridge
motion is a basic which need a good balance. Several
studies have documented that various forms of
exercise (Zemková and Hamar, 2005). We can have a
look at the principle of balancing from biological and
physical points of view (Li and Warren, 2000).
Balance, like coordination, is understood by virtually
everyone to be a critical component of skillful
movement (Hudson, 2000). Therefore, every school
with high risk of gymnastic activity need some
gymnastic equipment for more safety. It is important
to make sure the equipment is simple and versatile
and that it allows for the physical development of the
greatest number of students in the safest possible way
(Warrell, 1978).
So, the writers made their own gymnastic
equipment for help student in bridge motion
Permana, G., Madya, M. and Putranto, P.
Effect of Tool Modified “Smarter Spotter” on Students’ Performance in Bridge Motion.
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education (ICSSHPE 2017) - Volume 1, pages 499-502
ISBN: 978-989-758-317-9
Copyright © 2018 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
499

technique. Because bridge motion is a very basic
technique, which describe how far the skill for
gymnastic basic such as handspring and cartwheel.
This tool is used with consideration height, weight
and the level of flexibility of students, so all students
can use it and are excepted to give good result in
bridge motion class. Therefore, this tool is expected
to enhance the skill of bridge motion although every
student has different physical characteristics.
This study is intended to answer the question,
learning bridge motion can increase when using the
Smarter Spotter?
2 MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION
2.1 Participants
Sample set based on random sampling as much as one
class of 15 students of class X High school of Pribadi
School in Bandung, West Java.
2.2 Procedures
In this study the research used experiment design with
pretest- posttest experimental one group design (Jack
Fraenkel, 2011). This study is a quantitative test of
basic skill in gymnastic (Lord, Murray, Chapman,
Munro and Tiedemann, 2002) A number of
experiments have demonstrated that optical motions,
like those produced when an observer moves through
an environment, have an effect on postural stability or
stance (Stoffregen, 1985). This research start from 21
April until 26 May 2015, with the meeting an hour
that’s appropriate with the curriculum in that school.
Total of meeting this study is 16 with 90 minutes /
meetings, 3 times / week.
2.3 Instruments
The research using Schembri instruments, the scale
value is 1-5. This instrument can measure the value
of balance and strength (5). The data processing is
done by testing the normality, its homogenity, and
continued with the T-Test.
2.4 Tools Specification
Figure 1: Smarter spotter.
Figure 1 (Cont.): Smarter spotter.
Source: Own Picture
This tool shaped like a beam which was formed with
the aim to support the arcing back when students
doing bridge motion. This tool has a length of 60 cm,
width 50 cm, height 40 cm. To facilitate the use of the
tool due to high students are different. Then this tool
using two pieces of mattress. Every mattress have a
same size of length and width, and the height of any
additional mattress is 6 cm. this extra Mattress can be
installed and removed as needed as it uses adhesive
on each surface.
In practice, this tool not only helps students do
bridge motion. The students also must still do practice
repeatedly in order to get an automation motion.
Students also still need support from their friend
when do bouncy body. It is aimed so that the students
can do the learning of bridge motion with maximum
results.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1 The Results of the Calculation of
the Score Average and Standard
Deviation
Table 1: The calculation of the score average.
Sample
Pretest
Postest
Average
Standard
Deviation
Average
Standard
Deviation
Experimental
Group
2,73
0,88
3,80
0,74
The average before treatment was 2,73 and the
standard deviation 0,88. After given treatment and
posttest, the average increased to 3,80 and the
standard deviation 0,74.
3.2 The Result of Lilliefors Test
Table 2: Lilliefors test.
Sample
Lo
pretest
Lo
postest
L
table
Conclusion
Experimental
Group
0,20
0,21
0,23
Normal
ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education
500

The value of the Ltable is 0,23. Then the value of Lo
on pretest is 0,20 and Lo on posttest is 0,21. As for
the criteria if Lo exceeds Ltabel, the hypothesis is
rejected and otherwise if Lo less than Ltabel the
hypothesis is accepted. From the data, it can be
described that Lo < Ltable which means data on
pretest and posttest of both groups is normal.
3.3 The Result of Homogeneity
Table 3 : Homogeneity.
Sample
Test
Fcalculate
Ftable
Conclusion
Experimental
Group
Pretest
1,05
4,60
Homogen
Postest
Based on table 3.3, the Fcalculate 1,05 and Ftable
4,60. It means Fcalculate < Ftable is 1,05 < 4,60. As
for the criteria of homogeneity, if Fcalculate <
Ftable so the variances is homogen it means the
hypothesis is accepted. Otherwise, if Fcalculate >
Ftable the hypothesis was rejected. From this data we
can see the hypothesis was accepted, it means that
booth data is homogen.
3.4 The Result of Hypothesis
The next step is to test the hypothesis using a t-test
calculations. It aims to find out, is it true the smarter
spotter can increase the skill of bridge motion the
student in Pribadi Senior High School. The
hypothesis is:
Ho:
There is no effect from the tool (Smarter Spotter) to
skill of bridge motion
Ha:
There is have effect from the tool (Smarter Spotter)
to skill of bridge motion
The results of hypothesis testing can be seen in
table 4:
Table 4: T-test.
Sample
T-Calculate
T-table
Conclusion
Experimental
Group
3,96
1,74
Ha accepted
Based on table 3.4 , we can see T-Calculate (3,96)
greater than T-table (1,74) with significance level
0,05 and degree of freedom 14. The criteria is
accepted if T-calculate > T-table. Based on the result,
T-Calculate bigger than T-table, it means Ha is
accepted. This situation can explain, if the smarter
spotter can support the student doing bridge motion.
3.5 The Result of Hypothesis
The Smarter Spotter has been given through the
treatment to the students of class X Pribadi Senior
High School as much as 16 x. It aims to find out if
there is a change or not about the results of a study of
bridge motion.
This tool has a secure tool, the specification and
the size is general, so all students can using it.
Because this tool has a bearing that can be plugged
and unplugged easily fit the needs of students with the
design of the tool Smarter Spotter who already have
a copyright and its own standards, of course these
tools is a new alternative for PE teachers in
developing gymnastics in school. With the results that
have been obtained from the research, it will be
discussed on the discussion section of this discovery.
Based on the data that has been retrieved and the data
analysis that has been done about the modified tool
give good impact to student learning bridge motion,
the author obtained the findings that will described in
this section.
Learning using Smarter Spotter give a good effect
on the result of learning bridge motion This is because
the Smarter Spotter can support the students to do the
learning of gymnastics and resolve difficulties
experienced by students in doing bridge motion.
In doing bridge motion, some students having
trouble in certain points such as the position of the
body or the position of the foot. With the Smarter
Spotter, aims to decrease the difficulty and then the
skill student in bridge motion is changing after given
this treatment
The authors assume by using Smarter Spotter can
change the skills of the students in doing bridge
motion, because doing bridge motion it’s not easy,
but every student must be able doing that, because
bridge motion is the fundamental for doing next step
in gymnastics. It is also reinforced by the results of
the analysis using t-test, where the average rating on
a pretest is 2.73 and the average on posttest is 3.80.
Its mean the tool give a changes in treatment session.
Based on the data it can be concluded that Smarter
Spotter bringing good impact to process learning
bridge motion on grade X-A Pribadi High School.
4 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of processing and data analysis,
data it can be concluded that Smarter Spotter bringing
Effect of Tool Modified “Smarter Spotter” on Students’ Performance in Bridge Motion
501

good impact to process learning bridge motion on
grade X-A Pribadi High School. It means, modified
Smarter Spotter giving support to PE teacher and
students in process learning gymnastics, specifically
in bridge motion.
The modified Smarter Spotter have big
implications in physical education specifically in
gymnastic. Expected the PE teacher can improve the
tool for better implication than before. So the result
of this research, could be developed and be of benefit
to the parties that are related to physical education.
REFERENCES
Jack Fraenkel, 2011. How to design and evaluate research
in education 8th edition.
Hudson, J. L. 1996. Biomechanics of balance: Paradigms
and procedures. In: T. Bauer (Ed.), Proceedings of the
XIIIth International Symposium on Biomechanics in
Sports (pp. 286-289). Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada:
Lakehead University.
Li, L., Warren, W. H. 2000. Perception of fading during
station: Sufficiency of dense motion parallax and
reference objels. Vision Research, 40, 3873-3894.
Lord S. R., Murray S. M., Chapman K., Munro B.,
Tiedemann A. 2002. Sit-tostand performance depends
on sensation, speed, balance and psychological status in
addition to strength in older people. J. Gerontol. A. Biol.
Sci. Med. Sci., 57, M539– M543.
McCurdy, K., Langford, G. 2006.The relationship between
maximum unilateral squat strength and balance in
young adult men and women. Journal of Sports Science
and Medicine, 5, 282-288
Nilges-Charles, Lynda M. 2008. Assessing Skill in
Educational Gymnastics. Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation and Dance (JOPERD), v79 n3
p41-51.
Stoffregen, T. A. 1985. Flow structure versus retinal
location in the optical control of stance. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 11, 554-565.
Susan Capel. Educational Gymnastics Meeting Physical
Education Goals, 1986 Educational Gymnastics,
Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance,
57:2, 34-38.
Warrell, E. 1978. Equipment for Indoor Educational
Gymnastics. Journal of Physical Education and
Recreation, v49 n9 p29.
Zemková, E., Hamar, D. 2005. Postural sway response to
exercise: the effect of intensity and duration.
International Journal of Applied Sports Sciences,
17(1), 1-6.
ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education
502