Year 12 · 2023 syllabus · 30 marks · Suggested 45 min

HMS: training and evidence

A focused practice assessment on training methods, principles and interpretation of synthetic performance data. It is educational practice, not a prescription for exercise or a complete HSC trial.

Focus outcomes: HM-12-04, HM-12-05; HM-12-06, HM-12-07, HM-12-09, HM-12-10. Original HSCScience questions; not an official NESA paper.

Return to student paper →

Check your own evidence

Tick only criteria supported by your response. This is a self-assessment, not a teacher-awarded result or predicted HSC mark. Use the linked lessons to repair missing evidence.

0 of 30 evidence points checked

Question 1 (1 mark)

Which example best represents specificity of training?

Answer and explanation

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

B: Selecting drills and demands that match the performance goal. Specificity means relating training demands and skills to the intended performance.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 2 (1 mark)

What is the best interpretation of progressive overload?

Answer and explanation

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

D: Training demand is adjusted as capacity adapts, with appropriate recovery. Overload challenges current capacity. Progression needs to account for adaptation and recovery.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 3 (1 mark)

Which feature distinguishes interval training?

Answer and explanation

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

A: Repeated work periods separated by planned recovery. Intervals organise repeated work and recovery. Intensity, duration and recovery determine the particular demands.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 4 (1 mark)

A group's mean test score improves after a program. Which additional evidence is most useful before attributing the change to the program?

Answer and explanation

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

C: Comparable control data and consistent testing conditions. Comparison data and standardised testing help evaluate alternative explanations.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 5 (3 marks)

Explain how specificity and progressive overload can work together in a training program, using a hypothetical endurance performance goal.

Marking criteria

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

Specificity connects training activity and demands to the endurance goal.
Progressive overload adjusts an appropriate demand as capacity develops.
Explain monitoring and recovery rather than assuming indefinite increases produce improvement.

One possible response

For a hypothetical sustained-running goal, relevant aerobic running sessions provide specificity. An appropriate session demand can progress as the athlete adapts. Monitoring response and allowing recovery are needed because increasing every variable indefinitely can undermine the program.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 6 (3 marks)

Distinguish continuous and interval aerobic training. Explain why a method should be chosen in relation to the performance goal rather than labelled universally best.

Marking criteria

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

Continuous training involves sustained activity without scheduled work–recovery intervals.
Interval training organises work bouts separated by recovery; its physiological demands depend on the chosen parameters.
Relate choice to the sport, goals, participant characteristics and training phase; no universal best method.

One possible response

Continuous training sustains an activity, whereas interval training alternates planned work and recovery. Either can support aerobic goals depending on intensity and duration. A choice needs to match performance demands and the participant's context; naming a method does not establish its suitability.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 7 (3 marks)

Using the synthetic table, calculate mean improvement for each group. Explain why this small dataset is insufficient to conclude the program caused the improvement.

Synthetic six-week shuttle-test scores; arbitrary score units
Group	Mean before	Mean after	Participants
Program	50	58	8
Comparison	51	54	8

Marking criteria

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

Program mean improvement = 58 − 50 = 8 score units.
Comparison mean improvement = 54 − 51 = 3 score units; difference in mean change = 5 units.
Small groups and absent allocation, variation or adherence information leave alternative explanations; a mean difference alone is not proof of causation.

One possible response

The program group improves by 8 units and the comparison group by 3, giving a difference in mean change of 5 units. This is consistent with a program effect but does not establish one. We need allocation, spread, adherence and testing information to evaluate confounding and uncertainty.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 8 (3 marks)

Explain reversibility and discuss how it affects interpreting a performance test after a period without usual training.

Marking criteria

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

Training adaptations can decline when an adequate stimulus is reduced or removed.
The rate and extent of decline vary with the adaptation, person and period without training.
A lower score may be consistent with reversibility but alternative influences such as test conditions or illness must be considered.

One possible response

Reversibility means adaptations may decline when the usual training stimulus is removed. The extent depends on the adaptation and context. A lower test score after a break may be consistent with reversibility, but conditions, illness and measurement variation should also be considered.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 9 (3 marks)

Why is a pre-exercise screening questionnaire useful, and why should it not be treated as a diagnosis or a guarantee that an activity is safe?

Marking criteria

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

Screening identifies information about relevant health history, symptoms or risk factors.
It can indicate when further assessment or qualified advice is required.
A questionnaire is not a clinical diagnosis and cannot eliminate all risk; screening information must be handled appropriately.

One possible response

Screening helps identify relevant history or symptoms and may show that further qualified assessment is needed. It does not diagnose a condition or guarantee safety. Its role is to inform appropriate next steps, with personal health information treated carefully.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 10 (3 marks)

A coach concludes a lower resting heart rate proves that a training program improved every aspect of performance. Evaluate the reasoning.

Marking criteria

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

A lower resting heart rate may be consistent with a cardiovascular adaptation in context.
One physiological measure does not establish improvement in every skill, fitness component or sport outcome.
Request relevant performance tests and consistent conditions; consider alternative influences and individual variation.

One possible response

A lower resting heart rate can be consistent with cardiovascular adaptation, but it does not measure every aspect of performance. Sport-specific skills and other fitness components require relevant tests. Testing conditions, individual variation and other influences must be considered before attributing the result to training.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 11 (4 marks)

Design an ethical classroom investigation comparing two training methods using existing anonymised, synthetic performance data. Explain four features of a defensible analysis.

Marking criteria

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

Specify a focused performance measure and compare change from baseline rather than only final values.
Check comparable groups and testing protocols; identify possible confounders.
Analyse variation and individual patterns alongside group means, noting sample size and missing data.
Keep data anonymous and label them synthetic; make a limited conclusion rather than a personal exercise prescription.

One possible response

Ask which method is associated with a larger change in a specified performance measure in the synthetic dataset. Compare baseline and follow-up values under the same protocol, examining group comparability. Report means and spread as well as individual changes and missing records. Keep records anonymous, label their synthetic origin and limit the conclusion to the modelled comparison.

Repair this skill in the lesson →

Question 12 (4 marks)

Evaluate this claim: ‘If some training improves performance, doubling every session must double improvement.’ Use training principles and evidence limits.

Marking criteria

Use these as evidence checkpoints. Award each point once; accept scientifically equivalent wording.

Training response is not necessarily linear, and performance gain cannot be inferred by simply doubling load.
Adaptation depends on an appropriate stimulus combined with recovery and participant context.
Excessive load can impair recovery and increase problems; no universal dose–response follows from the claim.
Evaluate using monitored outcomes and a defensible comparison rather than assuming a fixed rule.

One possible response

The claim assumes a linear relationship without evidence. Adaptation depends on an appropriate stimulus and recovery, and the response differs with context. Doubling every session could impair recovery rather than double improvement. A monitored comparison with relevant outcomes is needed; the statement should not be used as a training prescription.

Repair this skill in the lesson →