7SR012 Assignment Brief 2025-26
Module Code &
Title
Module Leader
7SR012 Science and Practice of Training Programme Design
MC Thessaloniki:
Module Internal
Antreas Stafylidis Moderator
Assessment
Weighting &
100%
Assessment Limits
Assessment Title
Christos Karavas
Mode of Assessment Case Study Presentation
Case Study
LO1 Systematically analyse and evaluate the performance requirements of a
sport and its athletes.
Learning
Outcomes
Assessed
LO2 Plan and implement an evidence-based, individualised, sports specific
periodised training programme based on an understanding and application of
scientific principles.
LO3 Critically reflect upon the design and implementation of the training
programme to identify areas for future improvement.
Any other Essential Information
The case study will be presented live online to the module
tutor via MS Teams.
Submitting this assessment & getting feedback
Upload PDF of
slides to canvas
submission
portal by
deadline:
Monday
22/05/2026
before 2pm
When to submit
the assessment
Live presentation
will be delivered When you will be
given your grade &
to the module
tutor during an feedback
arranged one-toone meeting the.
Each student will
be issued an
individual 30 min
timeslot. Note
that extensions
are not
permitted for
live assessments.
Up to 20 working days following
assessment
Slides online via
Canvas
How you will be given
How to submit this
Grade and written feedback via
your
grade
&
Presentation
assessment
CANVAS speedgrader
feedback
online via MS
Teams
When you are given your feedback, you should make notes of how you will use it to improve any
future assessments.
Employability skills developed by this assessment
All assessments provide you with the opportunity to develop skills that are useful to employers. This
assessment will allow you to develop the employability skills indicated below.
Planning & Organising
Presentation skills
Problem Solving & Analysing
Verbal Communication and interpersonal skills
Leadership
Creativity
Self-Awareness & Confidence
Personal reflection
Academic misconduct & how to avoid it
The University takes any form of academic misconduct very seriously. No student should have an
unfair advantage over another as a result of academic misconduct; whether this is in the form of
plagiarism, collusion or cheating. When you are preparing your assessment, you need to make sure
that all your information is accurate, that everything you hand in is your own work, and that you
have referenced all your sources properly. By submitting a piece of work, you are declaring to the
University that it is your own, and you are responsible for ensuring it comes up to the required
standards.
It is vital that you understand how to avoid academic misconduct as the maximum penalty for an
offence is exclusion from the University. You should therefore consult the Student Union guidance
on this. There are temptations on the internet for you to take “short cuts”. Do not be tempted to
either commission work to be completed on your behalf, search for completed past academic work,
or to cheat in other ways.
What you need to do to complete this assessment
Task(s)
The case study presentation should reflect your own work with an athlete
and will be delivered orally with the support of Microsoft PowerPoint slides.
The presentation should include the following elements:
1. Present a needs analysis considering the demands of the sport and
the specific needs of the athlete. This should include:
a) a kinesiological, metabolic and injury analysis of the sport, utilising
relevant academic literature.
Completed
Y/N
b) an athlete profile detailing relevant general information about the
athlete, their training status and injury history
c) an athlete profile benchmarking the physical capacities of the
athlete based on appropriate use of objective physical
assessments.
d) An interpretation of this profile using suitable comparative
analysis, to provide an evaluation of the athlete’s current
capabilities in relation to the demands of the sport, the
competitive and training requirements.
e) Appropriate objective training goals on which to base the
programme structure and content, agreed with the athlete and
technical coach where appropriate.
(Approx. 5-6 min of 20 min presentation)
2. Present a justification of the training programme based on the needs
analysis, including:
a) an overview of the longitudinal or annual training structure
(macrocycle) based on the needs analysis, illustrating how the
programme has been designed to be integrated alongside the
technical aims and objectives of the sports training programme
and competition schedule and aligned to the stated training goals.
b) specific detail of a minimum 8 week period within the annual
cycle, showing the structure and content of separate training
phases that demonstrate the manipulation of key training
variables based on scientific principles and an evidence-based
approach to improving physical capacities related to sports
performance outcomes.
c) Within the detail of an identified training phase or phases, outline
specific session structure and content that reflects the key aims of
the training session and the phase of training it falls within.
Demonstrate how the selection of training variables reflect the
desired adaptations and outcomes of the training. Present session
examples for appropriate elements of the programme, which may
include sessions emphasising strength, power, speed, agility
and/or endurance.
(Approx. 10-11 min of 20 min presentation)
3. Present an evaluation of the training programme, demonstrating:
a) objective re-assessment data to show progression in physical
capacities against benchmarked performance profile data
b) if appropriate, regular monitoring data collected and utilised
throughout the training programme
c) reflection on the key aspects of the programme, identifying key
areas of strength and areas for future development
Approx. 4-5 min of 20 min presentation
4. Responses to questions from the module tutor
Adhere to assessment limit - 20-minute presentation (+2min), 10 minutes for
questions
General assessment guidance
The University of Wolverhampton provides you with a huge range of resources to help you develop
the skills needed to succeed with your studies, including completing assessments. These include
online resources, workshops, and drop in sessions. You should consult the ‘Skills for Learning’ web
page for further information.
How your work will be assigned a grade
Learning
Outcome 1
Systematically
analyse and
evaluate the
performance
requirements of
a sport and its
athletes.
100 – 70%
(Distinction)
69 – 60%
59 – 50%
49 – 40%
39 – 0%
(Merit)
(Pass)
(Fail)
(Fail)
Limited
Excellent
awareness and
comprehensive
understanding of Little or no
awareness and holistic Detailed awareness
the needs of the understanding of
understanding of the and understanding
sport and athlete. the needs analysis
needs of the sport and of the needs of the
process.
Limited
Sound awareness and
sport and athlete.
athlete. Detailed
understanding of the examination of
Detailed
examination of the
Inadequate and not
needs of the sport and the evidence base
examination
of
the
evidence base in
at required
athlete. Competent in relation to the
evidence base in
relation to the
standard with
sporting
examination of the
relation to the
sporting demands.
learning outcome
demands.
Limited
evidence base in
Comprehensive and sporting demands.
athlete profile not fully met. Little
relation to the
fully relevant athlete Detailed and largely
demonstrating a evidence of
sporting demands.
relevant athlete
profile demonstrating
attempts to engage
developing
Sound athlete profile
profile
a strong
understanding of with module
demonstrating an
demonstrating a
understanding of
content.
performance
understanding of
performance profiling good understanding
performance profiling profiling methods
of performance
methods. Excellent
but lacking in
methods. Use of
profiling methods.
use of comparative
comparative analysis sufficient detail.
Little to no attempt
Good use of
analysis in the
in the development of Limited to no use
to examine relevant
comparative
development of
of comparative
largely appropriate
academic literature
analysis in the
appropriate training
analysis in the
training goals based
or utilise recognised
development of
goals based on the
on the needs analysis. development of
applied practices to
appropriate training
needs analysis.
appropriate
support statements.
goals based on the
training goals
needs analysis.
based on the
needs analysis.
Goals potentially
very generic and
lacking clarity of
outcome and links
to the needs
analysis.
Learning
Outcome 2
100 – 70%
(Distinction)
69 – 60%
59 – 50%
49 – 40%
39 – 0%
(Merit)
(Pass)
(Fail)
(Fail)
Little application of
training
methodology with
very limited
justification of the
Limited
Excellent
programme, lacking
application of
comprehensive and
in the application of
Detailed and
training
creative application of
sound scientific
creative application
methodology with
training methodology
principles and with
of training
Sound application of
limited
with a thorough
limited
methodology with training methodology justification of the
Plan and
justification of the
consideration of the
good justification of
with appropriate
programme,
specific needs of
implement an programme based on
the programme
justification of the
lacking in the
sound
scientific
the sport or
evidence-based,
based on sound
programme based on
application of
principles and
athlete(s). Broad
individualised,
scientific principles
sound scientific
sound scientific
consideration of the
and unspecific
and consideration of
principles and
principles and
sports specific
needs of the
training prescription
the
needs
of
the
consideration
of
the
with
limited
periodised
athlete(s). Excellent
and justification.
athlete(s). Detailed
needs of the
consideration of
training
comprehensive and
Inadequate and not
and creative
athlete(s). Sound use the specific needs
creative examples of
programme
at required
examples of
of evidence-based
of the sport or
evidence-based
standard with
based on an
evidence-based
practice within the athlete(s). Limited
practice within the
learning outcome
understanding
practice within the training programme. use of evidencetraining programme.
not fully met. Little
training
Desired outcomes and based practice
and application
Desired outcomes and
evidence of
programme.
Desired
adaptations
largely
within
the
training
of scientific
adaptations clearly
attempts to engage
outcomes and
justified and aligned
programme.
principles.
justified and aligned
with module
adaptations justified to the content of the Desired outcomes
to the specific and
content. Little or no
and aligned to the
training phases and
and adaptations
detailed content of
use of evidencespecific content of
sessions.
not fully justified
the training phases
based practice
the training phases
or aligned to the
and sessions.
within the training
and sessions.
content of the
programme, or
training phases
evaluation of the
and sessions.
programme.
Learning
Outcome 3
100 – 70%
(Distinction)
69 – 60%
59 – 50%
49 – 40%
39 – 0%
(Merit)
(Pass)
(Fail)
(Fail)
Critically reflect
Good evaluation of
upon the design
Sound evaluation of Limited
Detailed and thorough the programme with
the programme with evaluation of the
and
evaluation of the
appropriate
appropriate
programme or
implementation
programme with
performance data,
performance data, reflection
of the training
appropriate
and personal
and personal
identifying the
performance data,
reflection
programme to
reflection identifying key strengths and
and personal
identifying the key
identify areas for
the key strengths and areas of
reflection clearly
strengths and areas
future
areas of development development of
articulating the key
of development of
of the programme. the programme.
improvement.
strengths and areas of the programme.
Inadequate and not
at required
standard with
learning outcome
not fully met. Little
evidence of
attempts to engage
development of the
programme.
Very well designed
and delivered
presentation, with
strong and detailed
responses to
questions.
Well designed and
delivered
presentation, with
good responses to
questions.
Well designed and
delivered
presentation, with
sound responses to
questions.
Potentially poor
aspects of
presentation
design and
delivery, with
potentially poor
responses to
questions.
with module
content.
Potentially poor
aspects of
presentation design
and delivery, with
potentially poor
responses to
questions.