By Francesco Sgrò [1] and Michele Barca [2]
[1] “Kore” University of Enna
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @francescosgro
ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Francesco_Sgro
[2] “Kore” University of Enna
Email: [email protected]
[1] “Kore” University of Enna
Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @francescosgro
ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Francesco_Sgro
[2] “Kore” University of Enna
Email: [email protected]
Learning is a complex process that arises from the interdependence of three learning domains (Hoque, 2016): cognitive (knowledge), psychomotor (skills), and affective (attitudes). It is well known that game-based physical and sport activities can offer development opportunities which are related to psychomotor and socio-affective (Sgrò et al., 2020; Sgrò et al., 2021), but what can we say about the effect of these activities on the cognitive domain?
Sports performance requires an important activation of cognitive processes (i.e., elaboration, understanding, development, and problem solving) related to the execution of tasks, together with rigid time constraints and continuous interactions with objects and opponents (Hodges et al., 2006). The greater the players’ tactical knowledge, the more the players can perceive and select relevant stimuli from the environment and ignore less useful information (Mcpherson, 2008). Therefore, it is essential that players learn how to adapt their performance to the constraints of each task and develop knowledge structures and cognitive processes so that they can anticipate any environmental changes (Williams et al., 2012) accordingly to the game flow. It is therefore evident that the development of cognitive factors (tactical and decisional knowledge) is essential for the development of sports skills, also in the initial approaches of sport education within the school context. Accordingly, having this awareness is essential for planning and delivering meaningful physical and sport education processes. However, teachers often attribute great importance to the technical aspects of performance, at the expense of the cognitive component (Metzler, 2011). In this regard, Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) is one of several second-generation pedagogical models, also identified as a game-based approach (GBA), which is focused on promoting contextualized and participatory games. (Harvey et al., 2020). In this regard, the aspect of the cognitive domain that is the most relevant in games and team sports is tactical knowledge. Indeed, it is undoubtedly believed that this knowledge plays a crucial role both in the teaching of play and sport in the school environment and in the field of extracurricular and professional sports performance (Ford & O'Connor, 2019; Marasso et al., 2014). Tactics include all the timely orientation settings that players voluntarily perform during the game to adapt, based on the immediate needs of an ever-changing opposition, their spontaneous or organized actions through a predetermined strategy (Lopes & Casey, 1994). Specifically, when an athlete performs tactical actions during a game phase, his/her ability to plan and anticipate situations that will affect his/her decision-making process will depend on his/her level of tactical knowledge (Kump et al., 2015). Tactical knowledge is defined as the ability to identify problems that arise while a game is in progress and to select the skills needed to solve them (Mitchell et al., 2020). Anderson (1976) has proposed two distinct classifications of tactical knowledge: declarative and procedural.
Declarative Tactical Knowledge (DTK) is the knowledge of factual information, or "knowing what to do" in the context of the game, through knowledge of the rules, positions, tasks and offensive and defensive strategies, as well as an understanding of the technical aspects of the game (Sánchez-López et al., 2021). In other words, DTK reflects the ability to express technical and strategic decisions, verbally or in writing (McPherson & French, 1991). If the player knows, for example, the dimensions of a volleyball court, the most appropriate skills for receiving a service, or with which part of the fingers to touch the ball to make a profitable setup, one could say that that player has an adequate level of declarative knowledge (Moreno et al., 2010).
Procedural tactical knowledge (PTK), on the other hand, is intimately linked to the authentic gameplay dimension of the game because it represents the tactical dimension of the behaviour and is characterized by a very complex logic due to its high unpredictability and randomness of events, referring to the player's performance in the context of the game (Sánchez-López et al., 2021). PTK is identified with "know-how", that is, the player's ability to perform sporting skills by understanding the dynamics of the game, even if he/she may not be able to express or describe it verbally (McPherson, 1994). Scientific literature argues that increasing DTK will make it easier for players to develop PTK (Williams & Davids, 1995). Therefore, it is clear the relevant role of PTK and DTK in the process that guides a student to become a good player. For this reason, in this note we believe it is essential to schematically illustrate some tools that teachers and grassroots coaches could use to evaluate their children:
Sports performance requires an important activation of cognitive processes (i.e., elaboration, understanding, development, and problem solving) related to the execution of tasks, together with rigid time constraints and continuous interactions with objects and opponents (Hodges et al., 2006). The greater the players’ tactical knowledge, the more the players can perceive and select relevant stimuli from the environment and ignore less useful information (Mcpherson, 2008). Therefore, it is essential that players learn how to adapt their performance to the constraints of each task and develop knowledge structures and cognitive processes so that they can anticipate any environmental changes (Williams et al., 2012) accordingly to the game flow. It is therefore evident that the development of cognitive factors (tactical and decisional knowledge) is essential for the development of sports skills, also in the initial approaches of sport education within the school context. Accordingly, having this awareness is essential for planning and delivering meaningful physical and sport education processes. However, teachers often attribute great importance to the technical aspects of performance, at the expense of the cognitive component (Metzler, 2011). In this regard, Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) is one of several second-generation pedagogical models, also identified as a game-based approach (GBA), which is focused on promoting contextualized and participatory games. (Harvey et al., 2020). In this regard, the aspect of the cognitive domain that is the most relevant in games and team sports is tactical knowledge. Indeed, it is undoubtedly believed that this knowledge plays a crucial role both in the teaching of play and sport in the school environment and in the field of extracurricular and professional sports performance (Ford & O'Connor, 2019; Marasso et al., 2014). Tactics include all the timely orientation settings that players voluntarily perform during the game to adapt, based on the immediate needs of an ever-changing opposition, their spontaneous or organized actions through a predetermined strategy (Lopes & Casey, 1994). Specifically, when an athlete performs tactical actions during a game phase, his/her ability to plan and anticipate situations that will affect his/her decision-making process will depend on his/her level of tactical knowledge (Kump et al., 2015). Tactical knowledge is defined as the ability to identify problems that arise while a game is in progress and to select the skills needed to solve them (Mitchell et al., 2020). Anderson (1976) has proposed two distinct classifications of tactical knowledge: declarative and procedural.
Declarative Tactical Knowledge (DTK) is the knowledge of factual information, or "knowing what to do" in the context of the game, through knowledge of the rules, positions, tasks and offensive and defensive strategies, as well as an understanding of the technical aspects of the game (Sánchez-López et al., 2021). In other words, DTK reflects the ability to express technical and strategic decisions, verbally or in writing (McPherson & French, 1991). If the player knows, for example, the dimensions of a volleyball court, the most appropriate skills for receiving a service, or with which part of the fingers to touch the ball to make a profitable setup, one could say that that player has an adequate level of declarative knowledge (Moreno et al., 2010).
Procedural tactical knowledge (PTK), on the other hand, is intimately linked to the authentic gameplay dimension of the game because it represents the tactical dimension of the behaviour and is characterized by a very complex logic due to its high unpredictability and randomness of events, referring to the player's performance in the context of the game (Sánchez-López et al., 2021). PTK is identified with "know-how", that is, the player's ability to perform sporting skills by understanding the dynamics of the game, even if he/she may not be able to express or describe it verbally (McPherson, 1994). Scientific literature argues that increasing DTK will make it easier for players to develop PTK (Williams & Davids, 1995). Therefore, it is clear the relevant role of PTK and DTK in the process that guides a student to become a good player. For this reason, in this note we believe it is essential to schematically illustrate some tools that teachers and grassroots coaches could use to evaluate their children:
(1) Questionnaires
McGee and Farrow (1987) are the pioneers in the use and development of questionnaires to study tactical knowledge. They designed different tests for several team sports, such as basketball, soccer, handball, badminton, tennis, gymnastics, soccer, and volleyball. During the development and subsequent validation of these questionnaires, they grouped all items or questions into three factors:
• remembering;
• understanding;
• thinking.
All questionnaires have the same question structure, with four possible answers, of which only one is correct. Some validated questionnaires are shown in the following table 1:
McGee and Farrow (1987) are the pioneers in the use and development of questionnaires to study tactical knowledge. They designed different tests for several team sports, such as basketball, soccer, handball, badminton, tennis, gymnastics, soccer, and volleyball. During the development and subsequent validation of these questionnaires, they grouped all items or questions into three factors:
• remembering;
• understanding;
• thinking.
All questionnaires have the same question structure, with four possible answers, of which only one is correct. Some validated questionnaires are shown in the following table 1:
Table 1. Questionnaire to assess DTK and PTK
Questionnaire |
Authors |
Aim |
Features |
Tactical Skills Inventory for Sports (TACSIS) |
Kannekens, R., Elferink-Gemser, M. T., & Visscher, C. (2009). |
Assess the levels of declarative and procedural knowledge in soccer players |
--------PTK: decision making and action in situations with variable dynamics |
The 35-question volleyball knowledge test |
Pritchard, T., Hawkins, A., Wiegand, R., & Metzler, J. N. (2008). |
Measurement of declarative and procedural knowledge in the school setting in the sport of volleyball |
--------15 on game strategies (PTK) |
The declarative knowledge questionnaire (DKQ) |
Moreno, A., Moreno, M. P., García-González, L., Gil, A., & Del Villar, F. (2010). |
Measurement of declarative knowledge in volleyball |
|
(2) Questioning and Answers (Q&A)
In addition to multiple choice questionnaires administered in decontextualized contexts, other authors proposed to use question and answer sessions within GBA teaching-learning processes (i.e., Tactical Games Model) for assessing the development of tactical knowledge of in-learning players. These questions should be short and be proposed at the end of the “first game”, to avoid altering the flow of the lesson, while they can be more complex during the relative "closing" phase. These are opportunities to ask students three types of questions:
a. What happened?
b. What does it mean?
c. And now?
(3) Scenarios
Grehaigne et al. (1995) have suggested the use of game simulations through scenarios for assessing the tactical knowledge level of development. These scenarios are made by using some recordings of real game situations modified according to the objectives of the analysis, or animations made using specific software. These tools are considered important assessment procedures within the pedagogical process and valid support for the teachers in choosing the most appropriate teaching models to face the different tactical contents and to plan the necessary activities (Greco et al., 2010). Table 2 shows three validated tools of this type.
In addition to multiple choice questionnaires administered in decontextualized contexts, other authors proposed to use question and answer sessions within GBA teaching-learning processes (i.e., Tactical Games Model) for assessing the development of tactical knowledge of in-learning players. These questions should be short and be proposed at the end of the “first game”, to avoid altering the flow of the lesson, while they can be more complex during the relative "closing" phase. These are opportunities to ask students three types of questions:
a. What happened?
b. What does it mean?
c. And now?
(3) Scenarios
Grehaigne et al. (1995) have suggested the use of game simulations through scenarios for assessing the tactical knowledge level of development. These scenarios are made by using some recordings of real game situations modified according to the objectives of the analysis, or animations made using specific software. These tools are considered important assessment procedures within the pedagogical process and valid support for the teachers in choosing the most appropriate teaching models to face the different tactical contents and to plan the necessary activities (Greco et al., 2010). Table 2 shows three validated tools of this type.
Table 2. Scenario to assess DTK and PTK
Scenario |
Authors |
Aim |
Features |
Game Understanding Test |
Blomqvist, M., Vänttinen, T., & Luhtanen, P. (2005). |
Evaluate students’ game understanding in soccer. |
|
Declarative Tactical Knowledge Test (DTKT:Vb) |
Costa, G. D., Castro, H. O., Cabral, F. A., Morales, J. C., & Greco, P. J. (2016). |
Evaluating DTK in the sport of volleyball |
|
Measuring Declarative Tactical Knowledge in Basketball IMDTK-Bb |
Reis, C., Pérez Morales, J., Gomes, C., De Azevedo Alves Pereira, F., & Ibáñez, S. (2021). |
Evaluate DTK in the sport of basketball with an emphasis on game tactics, using reduced response time. |
|
In conclusion, considering the important role that an adequate development of tactical knowledge has in school and extracurricular sports training, these tools can be a support for teachers and coaches in enhancing the role of DTK and PTK within their learning processes.
REFERENCES:
Anderson, J.R. (1976). Language, memory, and thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Blomqvist, M., Vänttinen, T., & Luhtanen, P. (2005). Assessment of secondary school students’ decision-making and game-play ability in soccer. Phys. Educ. Sport Pedagogy, 10(2), 107–119.
Costa, G. D., Castro, H. O., Cabral, F. A., Morales, J. C., & Greco, P. J. (2016). Content validity of scenes of the declarative tactical knowledge test in volleyball–DTKT: Vb. Brazilian Journal of Kinanthropometry and Human Performance, 18(6), 629–637. https://doi.org/10.5007/1980- 0037.2016v18n6p629.
Ford, P. R., & O’Connor, D. (2019). Practice and sports activities in the acquisition of anticipation and decision making. In A. M. Williams & R.C. Jackson (Eds.), Anticipation and Decision Making in Sports (pp. 267–285). Routledge.
Greco, P., Memmert, D., & Morales, J. C. (2010). The effect of deliberate play on tactical performance in basketball. Perceptual and motor skills, 110(3), 849-856.
Gréhaigne, J. F., & Godbout, P. (1995). Tactical knowledge in team sports from a constructivist and cognitivist perspective. Quest, 47(4), 490–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00336297.1995.10484171.
Harvey, S., Gil-Arias, A., & Claver, F. (2020). Effects of Teaching Games for Understanding on tactical knowledge development in middle school physical education. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 20(3), 1369-1379.
Hodges, N. J., Starkes, J. L., & MacMahon, C. (2006). Expert performance in sport: a cognitive process. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 471– 488). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hoque, M. E. (2016). Three domains of learning: Cognitive, affective and psychomotor. The Journal of EFL Education and Research, 2(2), 45-52.
Kannekens, R., Elferink-Gemser, M. T., & Visscher, C. (2009). Tactical skills of world-class youth soccer teams. Journal of Sport Science, 27, 8, 807-812.
Kump, B., Moskaliuk, J., Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2015). Cognitive foundations of organizational learning: Re-introducing the distinction between declarative and non-declarative knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1489. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg. 2015.01489.
Lopes, L.L., & Casey, J.T. (1994). Tactical and strategic responsiveness in a competitive risk-taking game. Acta Psychologica, 85, 39–60.
Marasso, D., Laborde, S., Bardaglio, G., & Raab, M. (2014). A developmental perspective on decision making in sports. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 7(1), 251–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2014.932424
McGee, R. & Farrow, A. (1987). Test questions for Physical Education Activities. Champaign.
McPherson, S. L. (1994). The development of sport expertise: Mapping the tactical domain. Quest, 46(2), 223– 240.
McPherson, S. L. (2008). Tactics: using knowledge to enhance performance. In D. Farrow, J. Baker, & C. MacMahon (Eds.), Developing sport expertise: researchers and coaches put theory into practice (pp. 155– 167). London, UK: Routledge.
McPherson, S.L., & French, K.E. (1991). Changes in cognitive strategies and motor skill in tennis. J Sport Exerc Psychol;13(1):26-41.
Metzler, M. W. (2011). Instructional Models for Physical Education (3rd ed.). Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb Hathaway.
Mitchell, S., Oslin, J., & Griffin, L. (2020). Teaching Sport Concepts and Skills: A Tactical Games Approach. Human Kinetics. Publishers (UK) Ltd;
Moreno, A., Moreno, M. P., García-González, L., Gil, A., & Del Villar, F. (2010). The development and validation of the declarative knowledge questionnaire in volleyball. Motricidad: European Journal of Human Movement, 25, 183-195.
Pritchard, T., Hawkins, A., Wiegand, R., & Metzler, J. N. (2008). Effects of two instructional approaches on skill development, knowledge, and game performance. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 12, (4), 219-236.
Reis, C., Pérez Morales, J., Gomes, C., De Azevedo Alves Pereira, F., & Ibáñez, S. (2021). Construct Validation of a New Instrument to Measure Declarative Tactical Knowledge in Basketball. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 128. 003151252110162. 10.1177/00315125211016247.
Sánchez-López, R., Etxeazarra, I., & Castellano, J. (2021). Validation of a Football Competence Observation System (FOCOS), Linked to Procedural Tactical Knowledge. Sustainability. 13. 6780. 10.3390/su13126780.
Sgrò, F., Barca, M., Schembri, R., Coppola, R. & Lipoma, M. (2021). Effects of different teaching strategies on students’ psychomotor learning outcomes during volleyball lessons. Sport Sciences for Health. 1-9. 10.1007/s11332-021-00850-8.
Sgrò, F., Barca, M., Schembri, R. & Lipoma, M. (2020). Assessing the effect of different teaching strategies on students' affective learning outcomes during volleyball lessons. Journal of Physical Education and Sport. 20. 2136-2142. 10.7752/jpes.2020.s3287.
Williams, A. M., & Davids, K. (1995). Declarative knowledge in sport: a by-product of experience or a characteristic of expertise? Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 259-275. doi:10.1123/jsep.17.3.259.
Williams, A. M., Ward, P., Bell-Walker, J., & Ford, P. R. (2012). Perceptual-cognitive expertise, practice history profiles and recall performance in soccer. British Journal of Psychology, 103(3), 393-411.
Anderson, J.R. (1976). Language, memory, and thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Blomqvist, M., Vänttinen, T., & Luhtanen, P. (2005). Assessment of secondary school students’ decision-making and game-play ability in soccer. Phys. Educ. Sport Pedagogy, 10(2), 107–119.
Costa, G. D., Castro, H. O., Cabral, F. A., Morales, J. C., & Greco, P. J. (2016). Content validity of scenes of the declarative tactical knowledge test in volleyball–DTKT: Vb. Brazilian Journal of Kinanthropometry and Human Performance, 18(6), 629–637. https://doi.org/10.5007/1980- 0037.2016v18n6p629.
Ford, P. R., & O’Connor, D. (2019). Practice and sports activities in the acquisition of anticipation and decision making. In A. M. Williams & R.C. Jackson (Eds.), Anticipation and Decision Making in Sports (pp. 267–285). Routledge.
Greco, P., Memmert, D., & Morales, J. C. (2010). The effect of deliberate play on tactical performance in basketball. Perceptual and motor skills, 110(3), 849-856.
Gréhaigne, J. F., & Godbout, P. (1995). Tactical knowledge in team sports from a constructivist and cognitivist perspective. Quest, 47(4), 490–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00336297.1995.10484171.
Harvey, S., Gil-Arias, A., & Claver, F. (2020). Effects of Teaching Games for Understanding on tactical knowledge development in middle school physical education. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 20(3), 1369-1379.
Hodges, N. J., Starkes, J. L., & MacMahon, C. (2006). Expert performance in sport: a cognitive process. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 471– 488). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hoque, M. E. (2016). Three domains of learning: Cognitive, affective and psychomotor. The Journal of EFL Education and Research, 2(2), 45-52.
Kannekens, R., Elferink-Gemser, M. T., & Visscher, C. (2009). Tactical skills of world-class youth soccer teams. Journal of Sport Science, 27, 8, 807-812.
Kump, B., Moskaliuk, J., Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2015). Cognitive foundations of organizational learning: Re-introducing the distinction between declarative and non-declarative knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1489. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg. 2015.01489.
Lopes, L.L., & Casey, J.T. (1994). Tactical and strategic responsiveness in a competitive risk-taking game. Acta Psychologica, 85, 39–60.
Marasso, D., Laborde, S., Bardaglio, G., & Raab, M. (2014). A developmental perspective on decision making in sports. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 7(1), 251–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2014.932424
McGee, R. & Farrow, A. (1987). Test questions for Physical Education Activities. Champaign.
McPherson, S. L. (1994). The development of sport expertise: Mapping the tactical domain. Quest, 46(2), 223– 240.
McPherson, S. L. (2008). Tactics: using knowledge to enhance performance. In D. Farrow, J. Baker, & C. MacMahon (Eds.), Developing sport expertise: researchers and coaches put theory into practice (pp. 155– 167). London, UK: Routledge.
McPherson, S.L., & French, K.E. (1991). Changes in cognitive strategies and motor skill in tennis. J Sport Exerc Psychol;13(1):26-41.
Metzler, M. W. (2011). Instructional Models for Physical Education (3rd ed.). Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb Hathaway.
Mitchell, S., Oslin, J., & Griffin, L. (2020). Teaching Sport Concepts and Skills: A Tactical Games Approach. Human Kinetics. Publishers (UK) Ltd;
Moreno, A., Moreno, M. P., García-González, L., Gil, A., & Del Villar, F. (2010). The development and validation of the declarative knowledge questionnaire in volleyball. Motricidad: European Journal of Human Movement, 25, 183-195.
Pritchard, T., Hawkins, A., Wiegand, R., & Metzler, J. N. (2008). Effects of two instructional approaches on skill development, knowledge, and game performance. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 12, (4), 219-236.
Reis, C., Pérez Morales, J., Gomes, C., De Azevedo Alves Pereira, F., & Ibáñez, S. (2021). Construct Validation of a New Instrument to Measure Declarative Tactical Knowledge in Basketball. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 128. 003151252110162. 10.1177/00315125211016247.
Sánchez-López, R., Etxeazarra, I., & Castellano, J. (2021). Validation of a Football Competence Observation System (FOCOS), Linked to Procedural Tactical Knowledge. Sustainability. 13. 6780. 10.3390/su13126780.
Sgrò, F., Barca, M., Schembri, R., Coppola, R. & Lipoma, M. (2021). Effects of different teaching strategies on students’ psychomotor learning outcomes during volleyball lessons. Sport Sciences for Health. 1-9. 10.1007/s11332-021-00850-8.
Sgrò, F., Barca, M., Schembri, R. & Lipoma, M. (2020). Assessing the effect of different teaching strategies on students' affective learning outcomes during volleyball lessons. Journal of Physical Education and Sport. 20. 2136-2142. 10.7752/jpes.2020.s3287.
Williams, A. M., & Davids, K. (1995). Declarative knowledge in sport: a by-product of experience or a characteristic of expertise? Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 259-275. doi:10.1123/jsep.17.3.259.
Williams, A. M., Ward, P., Bell-Walker, J., & Ford, P. R. (2012). Perceptual-cognitive expertise, practice history profiles and recall performance in soccer. British Journal of Psychology, 103(3), 393-411.
