• Home
  • About
    • Game-Based Consensus Statement
  • IAB
  • Learning
    • Research
    • Resources
  • Events
    • 40th Anniversary >
      • 40th Anniversary Webinars
      • Special Blogs
      • 40th Anniversary Conference
    • Next Major Event >
      • 8th International Conference
    • Past Events >
      • PHYSEDagogy PE Summit 4.0
      • International TGfU Conferences >
        • 1st International Conference
        • 2nd International Conference
        • 3rd International Conference
        • 4th International Conference
        • 5th International Conference
        • 6th International Conference
        • 7th International Conference
      • AIESEP Conferences >
        • 2023 AIESEP Chile
        • 2021 AIESEP Banff
        • 2018 AIESEP Edinburgh
        • 2014 AIESEP Auckland
        • 2010 AIESEP A Coruna
        • 2006 AIESEP Jyvaskyla
      • Other GBA Conferences
      • Workshops >
        • TGfU & Physical Literacy
        • World Symposium
    • Projects >
      • Applying TGfU
      • 2016 Projects >
        • Name Change
        • New Constitution
        • Projects
      • Current Projects >
        • Leadership Fellow Program
        • Video Project Proposal
      • IAB Projects >
        • Games in times of restricted mobility
        • Professional Development Project
    • Event Awards
  • Social Media
    • Blog
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
  • News
    • Commemoration of Len Almond
    • Commemoration of Alan Launder
    • Commemoration of Joy Butler
    • Newsletter
  • Contact Us
    • Recommend a Resource
TGfU.Info
Contact Us

Game Contribution Assessment Instrument (GCAI)

11/2/2021

2 Comments

 
By Naoki Suzuki, Ph.D.
Tokyo Gakugei University

​

It has been argued that for performance assessment in games, a focus on the individual is inappropriate as individual performance is crucially affected by the capacities and motivations of other players (MacPhail, Kirk & Griffin, 2008). Furthermore, Suzuki et al. (2010) assert that comprehensive assessment should be based on the contribution to the game as a whole and not based on individual performance within the game.
 
GPAI - The developing international trend for teaching ballgames is via game-centered and/or player-centered approaches such as Teaching Games for Understandings, Play Practice, Game Sense, and the Tactical Games Model. In these approaches, assessment of performance within the context of the game is advocated. Arguably the most recognized assessment tool used to assess game performance is the Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI). The GPAI (Oslin, Mitchell, and Griffin, 1998) focuses on the individual's actions in modified games, but I suggest it does not adequately assess the individual's contribution to the team. The GPAI is comprised of seven elements: 1) decision making, 2) skill execution, 3) adjust, 4) cover,5) support, 6) guard/mark, and 7) base. Any number or combination of elements can be assessed to provide a measure of game performance. However, it is often difficult for assessors to complete accurate contextual performance assessments due to observation and recording challenges. Thus, the GCAI was developed.
 
GCAI - Developed in Japan, the GCAI (Suzuki et.al, 2010) focuses on the nature of participation according to the specific situation and the context within which it occurs. Thus, both teachers and students are engaged in the assessment process where measures of overall game participation (and its meaning) are interpreted according to the individual's ability within game contexts and game situations. Performance is also viewed holistically without emphasis on decontextualized learning segments.

Table.1 Comparing GCAI with GPAI
Picture
Table.2 Observation in GPAI & GCAI
Picture
Table.3 How to implement the GCAI
Picture
GCAI could be considered a more authentic assessment of game performance due to its assessment of each player’s contribution within specific situational and contextual game challenges. In addition, the use of a GCAI can further engage players/athletes in the assessment process, thus aiding the teaching/learning process. In the future, I would like to focus on developing a rubric for the GCAI.
References
MacPhail,A., Kirk,D., Griffin,L. (2008). Throwing and Catching as Relational Skills in Game Play: Situated Learning in a Modified Game Unit. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 27, 100-115.

Oslin,  J.L.,  Mitchell,  S.A.,  & Griffin,  L.L. (1998).  The  game performance  assessment instrument (GPAI): Development and preliminary validation. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 17, 231–243.
​

Suzuki,N., Matsumoto,D., Tsuchida,R., Suzuki,O., Hirose,K., Sakuma,N., Isano,R., (2010).New Instrument for Assessing Performance in Game Observation Settings -Game Contribution Assessment Instrument (GCAI)-, Poster Presentation, AAHPERD National Convention 2010 (Indianapolis: March 28, 2010)
2 Comments
    Picture

    TGfU SIG Executive

    This blog has been set up in response to the growing interesting in developing a global community for discussions on game-based approaches in Physical Education and Sport. The following pedagogical approaches have been identified with game-based approaches: Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU), Play Practice, Game Sense, Tactical Games approach, Games Concept approach, Tactical Games Model, Tactical Decision Learning model, Ball Schulle and Invasion Games Competence model.


    Archives

    December 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    February 2014
    June 2013
    May 2013
    June 2011
    May 2011
    October 2010


​© COPYRIGHT 2020 AIESEP TGfU Special Interest Group
Picture
Administration Only:  Executive space 
                                       IAB Space