Mosston's styles of teaching: a review of command style.

Thomson, William C.

The rich heritage of twentieth century Health and Physical Education literature is a result of numerous influential authors and continues to impact teaching today. Certain elements of teaching are applicable across disciplines, whether in the classroom or on the playing fields. One writer in particular, Muska Mosston, notably contributed to Physical Education's body of literature with his detailed descriptions of the characteristics of various teaching methods. In categorizing these "Styles of Teaching" the strengths and weaknesses of each method of teaching a physical education lesson were analyzed. Mosston's analyses showed that for any style a teacher might choose, certain aspects or possibilities of the teaching-learning situation were facilitated while other aspects were diminished. In other words, there are always strengths and weaknesses inherent in any teaching strategy (Mosston & Ashworth, 2002). Mosston's work depicts the various Styles of Teaching as existing along a continuum based upon the types of decisions the teacher and learner will be required to make during the lesson segment in which the particular style is used (Mosston, 1992). This article will provide background information regarding the Spectrum of Teaching Styles, and a description of how the first style along this continuum--the Command Style--is used and note it's advantages and disadvantages. Subsequent articles in a proposed series will offer insights into each of the Teaching Styles, and offer practical suggestions regarding how they may be used by physical educators.

Why study and use different Styles of Teaching?

Styles of teaching are the "tools" of the teaching trade. In using the analogy of these teaching styles as tools, it is important to emphasize that one tool is not better than another, only more appropriate for a given task. A hammer is not "better" than a screwdriver, only more appropriate for the task of driving a nail. Different tools are therefore required for different jobs. Likewise, a particular teaching style may be more or less suited to a certain teaching/learning situation. This is the first answer to the question: "Why use different teaching styles?" Because we as teachers may have different learning objectives for different lessons throughout a unit of instruction, we need to rely on different methods of teaching to help our students achieve those objectives. At one point in a unit of instruction, we may want students to reproduce a movement in a precise, particular manner, with little or no variation from a model presented by the teacher. When we teach students how to use the forearm pass in volleyball, for example, we may explain and demonstrate this task and then have them practice the task with the goal of moving in a precise way using the prescribed technique. However, later we may ask students to use the movements in creative ways that are not pre-planned by the teacher. For example, small groups of students may be given the task of designing plays to use against a man-to-man defense in basketball. Each group may be able to form plays that logically will work, though the plays of each group differ from the other groups. Naturally these diverse situations require a different approach to the lesson. In fact, Mosston asserted that every activity we might teach to our students would have some elements or movements which we would wish students to copy, or reproduce, in a precise manner, but every activity would also contain some movement situations in which we would want students to create, or produce, their own unique movement patterns (Mosston & Ashworth, 2002). So, teachers use different styles because they have differing lesson objectives from day to day.

A second reason for learning about and using different teaching styles is that, obviously, students vary in their learning styles. Some students require close supervision and prescribed learning tasks while others thrive in creative endeavors. Not all learn the same way, so it makes sense to teach in a variety of ways.

Finally, teachers may simply have a personal desire to be better, to grow as a teacher. Like a skilled builder who can master a variety of tools and techniques, some teachers may want to learn more ways in which to present material and provide learning opportunities for their students.

What are the various Styles we might consider?

Mosston describes many differing styles of teaching, arranging them along a continuum defined by the role of teacher and students in decision making and performance execution. Mosston's styles are designated with a letter and a brief descriptive word or phrase. They are: Style A--the Command Style; Style B--the Practice Style; Style C--the Reciprocal Style; Style D--the Self-check Style; Style E--the Inclusion Style; Style F--Guided Discovery; Style G--Convergent Production; Style H--Divergent Production; and Style I--Going Beyond (Mosston & Ashworth, 1994). Table #1 displays each style name along with one distinguishing characteristic of the style.

Some background on the Styles of Teaching Spectrum

Joined by colleague Sara Ashworth, Mosston's conception of teaching styles evolved over time (Mosston & Ashworth, 2002). These styles are divided into two main categories. On the one hand are those styles categorized as "Reproduction" styles. The name comes from the idea that in each of the teaching situations in this category, the students try to copy a movement demonstrated by the teacher or a skilled demonstrator. For example, in a tennis lesson on hitting forehand groundstrokes, a teacher would demonstrate and describe the correct technique for hitting the shot, and after this demonstration the students would begin, in some way, to practice hitting forehands. They are trying to mimic (i.e., reproduce) what they have seen the teacher demonstrate, and they are judged to be more successful the closer their actions come to the actions which were demonstrated. The five styles in this category are the first styles listed: the Command, Practice, Reciprocal, Self-Check, and the Inclusion Styles. Each style asks students to reproduce some skill or movement that has been demonstrated, though each varies in the way in which students practice the movement task and the way in which they will receive performance feedback about their movements.

The second main category of teaching styles is comprised by what are termed the "Production" styles. The primary characteristic here is that, unlike the Reproduction styles, students are not shown a particular way of performing, but rather are asked to perform creatively or to solve a movement problem without prior demonstration. They are asked to figure out a solution with teacher guidance, but not with a direct teacher demonstrated "solution". For example, imagine groups of students within a class are asked to create a dance routine using some number of steps (which may have been demonstrated in previous lessons) to a particular piece of music. These groups may create different dances, yet each one "solves" the movement problem of incorporating sequences of steps or moves given the music provided. Likewise, teams of students in a basketball unit may be asked to create some number of offensive plays to run against a man-to-man defense. The teacher has chosen not to have them copy a prescribed formula, but rather to have them think creatively (and hopefully take more ownership) to figure out how best to attack this particular kind of defense.

Characteristics of Command Style teaching

The Command Style of teaching (Style A) is the first component along Mosston's spectrum. In this style, all decisions about the learning situation are made by the teacher. Consider some of the decisions to be made: How many skill repetitions will the students perform? When will they begin to practice the skill to be learned and when will they stop? Where will the students stand? At what pace or tempo will they practice the skill? In command style teaching, all of these decisions are made by the teacher prior to the beginning of the lesson.

In this style, as in the first five styles, a typical lesson cycle would follow this pattern. The teacher introduces, explains, and demonstrates how to perform a certain motor task such as dribbling a soccer ball, performing the leg lunge exercise, or juggling two beanbags. The demonstration is critical because, when it comes to learning how to perform a motor task, visual learning is the most common learning medium. As Magill (1998) notes, we have a strong "tendency to give vision a predominant role when we perform motor skills". This demonstration is followed by a time of student practicing of the task. The most distinguishing characteristic of the Command style is that the students only move on a signal (a "command") from the teacher. These scenarios may serve to illustrate how this style plays out in the gym.

Scenario one: A teacher introduces a line dance to the class. S/ He stands in front of the group and demonstrates the first few steps of the dance. Next, s/he asks the students to follow along as s/he leads the students through these steps. As additional steps are demonstrated the students are again required to follow/mirror the teacher's lead. They are copying, or reproducing, the moves the teacher makes, and are only doing so when the teacher signals the move to be made. If the teacher says "grapevine right", the students perform a grapevine step to the right. They only perform a given step when it is signaled by the teacher.

Scenario two: Overhead setting is being introduced to a class in a volleyball unit. The class formation consists of two lines, each facing the other. Students will be working in pairs with the student across from them in the other line. Diagram #1 depicts this formation. Students X1 and Y1 are partners; X2 partners with Y2 and so forth; "T" represents the Teacher.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The teacher has explained and demonstrated the correct technique, and now asks the students in line #1 (who each have a ball) to prepare to pass to their partners in line #2. The teacher may remind the students of the skill movement cues (hand position, arm movements, foot position, etc), and the students wait for a signal before passing the ball. On that signal, perhaps "ready, pass!" or something similar, the students execute the skill, passing the ball across to their partner, who receives and holds on to it. Next, the teacher reminds these students in line #2 of the correct technique, and they wait for the "go" signal to pass the ball back to their partner in line #1. In this way, a few well-controlled skill repetitions are repeated. Before each skill repetition the teacher reminds the group of the skill cues, and perhaps makes general comments about group performance, and then provides an audible signal for the students to perform the skill. In other words, everybody passes the ball at the same time, and all have waited for the command to perform the practice trial.

The goal in this situation is to provide a so-called "movement foundation" for the skill or task to be learned. The teacher wants the students to experience a few controlled, precise repetitions. With this foundation laid, the teacher can be more certain when it is appropriate to move on to more complex uses of the movement (e.g., using it in game activities).

Style A--Strengths

As noted in the opening paragraph, each style has its' own strengths and weaknesses. In the Command Style, the pace of learning is very much controlled by the teacher. Students are learning a task and are asked to practice it using precise movements. Going at this slower, controlled pace, students are not rushed to perform. Waiting for the signal from the teacher, all students in the group move together; there are none who lag behind others in terms of number of skill repetitions. With the teacher reminding the group about correct skill technique, perhaps before each trial, students have multiple opportunities to hear and practice recalling the skill cues in addition to practicing the skill.

Style A--Weaknesses

As the reader can see, the fact that the teacher is giving start and stop signals to the group means there is little or no opportunity for the teacher to provide any performance feedback to individual students. If the teacher were to do so, it would mean all students would be left standing and waiting, doing no skill repetitions, while the teacher talks with the one student. Again, the essence of this style is that students only move or perform a task upon receiving a signal or command from the teacher. So, while an occasional group feedback comment may be made by the teacher, this style does not attempt to provide corrective feedback to individuals. Further, students who are more (motorically) advanced may be ready to move on to more gregarious activity. They may be bored by the slower pace. This, obviously, can lead to behavior management issues.

In summary, the Command Style follows this pattern:

(1) Teacher describes/demonstrates the skill to be learned; (2) Command signals are used to direct the student's pace of practice and number of practice repetitions; (3) Student success is judged in terms of similarity to the demonstrated model of performance.

Why employ this method of instruction?

When asked "What would be the strength or strengths of this style of teaching?", students in teaching methods classes invariably answer along these lines: "It keeps the students are under control". They see this style as one which a major factor appears intended to control off-task or improper behavior as much as practice a motor skill. However, while student behavior management and the manner in which students learn motor tasks are related they are not the same thing. One hopes the class is "under control" regardless of the Style of Teaching being used. Therefore, on further examination, the best purpose of the Command Style of teaching is to provide a learning situation in which students have the opportunity to practice a very few, discrete trials of a skill in hopes of building a learning foundation for future improvement of that skill. Motorically, the learner can concentrate on learning the very basic aspects of the skill, "getting the hang of it" so to speak. Cognitively, the learner is reminded of the skill cues which he/she is trying to learn, and these reminders from the teacher coupled with a controlled number of repetitions at, usually, a slow to moderate pace allows time for this information processing to occur. With emphasis on information processing, it is expected that the information about performing the task will be transferred from short term to long term memory, allowing for recall of that stored information at future practices (Shea, Shebilske, & Worchel, 1993).

Two obvious weaknesses are apparent in this Style. First, the style does not lend itself to providing feedback to individual students. The teacher's time is used giving group signals and occasional group feedback. If the teacher takes time to provide feedback to one student, all other students in class would be idle, waiting for the next "go" signal to perform a practice trial. Further, students who already can perform the task, or who learn the task quickly, will be ready to move on at a faster pace. The time taken for group signaling will, therefore, be a hindrance to these students, slowing down and limiting their opportunity for additional practice trails. In other words, the risk is that these students will be bored.

Style A offers perhaps the most straightforward way of introducing new motor skills to a class. In doing so it allows students to establish correct movement patterns at a learning pace designed to insure that no student is overly rushed for information processing time. However, this methodical pacing can leave some students straining to move at a faster rate. How then can a teacher structure the leaning situation so that all students practice at a pace more appropriate to their individual abilities? For the answer, the discussion moves to the next Style along the continuum, Style B, in the next installment of this series on the Styles of Teaching.

References

Magill, R. A. (1998). Motor learning: concepts and applications (5th Ed.). McGraw-Hill, Boston.

Mosston, M. (1992). Tug O War, no more: Meeting teaching learning objectives using the Spectrum of Teaching Styles, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 63, 27-31.

Mosston, M., & Ashworth, S. (1994). Teaching physical education (4th Ed.). Macmillan, New York

Mosston, M., & Ashworth, S. (2002). Teaching physical education (5th Ed.). Benjamin Cummings, San Francisco.

Shea, C., Shebilske, W., & Worchel, S. (1993). Motor learning and control. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

William C. Thomson, Ed.D., Assistant Professor, Longwood University Table #1 Style Style Name Characteristic A COMMAND Students only move on signal B PRACTICE Self-paced student practice C RECIPROCAL Feedback from a peer observer D SELF-CHECK Feedback to self E INCLUSION Multiple levels of task difficulty F GUIDED Learning directed by questions DISCOVERY G CONVERGENT Students converge on one PRODUCTION correct answer H DIVERGENT Multiple correct solutions to problem PRODUCTION I GOING Students conceive problem and BEYOND solution