1. U. S. poll showed a percent attrition rate of children who quite sports for life by the age of.2. Single-sport specialization is defined as , is to blame for the decline insport participation.3. Another activity like sports have also contributed to the decline.4. 3 side effects of single sport specialization are:.5. List the skills acquired in each phase:Discovery stage Fundamental movement Skills/Drills stage Early Starts/ Early Finishes-Physiological evidence6. of high school athletes go on the play in college.7. go on to a professional career.8. "Since 2002, there has been increase in those injuries in girls aged in North America. "9. "In youth baseball across North America of Tommy John surgery — once nearlyexclusive to the ranks of professional pitchers — is being performed on players aged ."10. "The Oakland Children’s Hospital surveyed NBA players, and found that thosewho were single-sport athletes starting in Grade 8 were injured at a rate times higherthan those who were multi-sport athletes, and had shorter playing careers."11. Playing multiple sports provides a physical literacy, a base of fundamental movement that crossessports and prevents injuries when the body is still too young to handle those motions. Scars of all Kinds12. is another byproduct of single sport specialization.13. When a sport defines an athlete for so long, athletes tend to lose purpose after their season/careeris ended. The tend to suffer an , and don’t know their role in life. Shouting in the windYouth sports was a $ industry in 2014. Last year, it cracked the $ mark.

Hi i need comment on my homework or something to add. *argue for and against quantitative and qualitative techniques respectively. which ones would you lean towards when conducting an investigation and why?   quantitative techniques, usually presented through surveys, are more practical, take less time, and can design samples in which any person or household of the target audience has the same probability of participating. however, the questionnaires must be carefully written by highly trained professionals, in such a way that they do not contain ambiguous or biased questions, that they are easily understandable by any member of the sample, and that they contemplate all the objectives of the research. besides that they do not allow to deepen in the reason of the facts. qualitative techniques, on the other hand, are based on the observation of natural behaviors, discourses, open responses for the subsequent interpretation of meanings. studying reality in its natural context can be extremely useful to learn more about the phenomenon studied. however, more specialization is required, they are not applicable to statistics, so it is not possible to make measurements, it entails a higher cost per studied population (which is also reduced), whose results do not necessarily represent the general population. i believe that knowing the situation of the general population, through statistics is essential. in addition, because of the possibility of studying a much larger population in less time and with less amount of economic resources, i would lean towards quantitative research.