Special Blogs

September Special Blog: Play with Purpose

9/14/2022

By Shane Pill
Associate Professor in Physical Education and Sport at Flinders University, Australia

Website: https://www.flinders.edu.au/people/shane.pill
Twitter: @pilly66
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shane-pill-phd-med-bed-lmachper-fachper-53a3b528/
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3970-6724
Blog: http://learningthroughsport.blogspot.com.au/

The path to the idea
I started to ‘play with’ game-based coaching in the early 1990’s after coming across Rick Charlesworth’s idea of a Designer Game. I had only one training session early in the week to prepare the first XVIII Football Team before the mid-week Associated and Catholic Colleges and Quit Cup competition matches. I felt the use of game form coaching using designer games that placed technical, tactical and fitness training into the one activity made sense in the context of the challenge that I had of bringing together the school players, who had played club football on the weekend at several different clubs, into a common game plan and understanding of how each other played.

It was not long after this, that the idea of Game Sense coaching emerged in Australia. In 1995, the school I was working at signed up to be a trial school of the new curriculum standards and profiles. The curriculum had a constructivist student-centred ‘outcomes based’ description and inquiry teaching orientation. The Game Sense approach seem well suited to student learning expectations in games and sport teaching of this curriculum, so I began to develop units of work using game forms as the focus of the lesson, through which to teach technical and tactical aspects of the game as coupled knowledge. The Game Sense approach was described as game-based with the game as the focus, possibly even the starting activity, of a session. I still used closed and open practice activities (see here for an explanation of closed and open practice activities https://learningthroughsport.blogspot.com/2019/01/closed-and-open-practice.html ).

From 1995-1999, the Game Sense coaching approach was frequently featured in articles in Sport Coach, the national coaching magazine provided to coaches accredited with the Australian Coaching Council. In 1999, the Australian Sports Commission released a resource of ‘game sense games’.

Game Sense or Designer Games, developing thinking players by placing the players in game situations and letting those situations ‘play-out’, and making player learning visible, player learning focussed and shaped using questioning in preference to ‘tell’ and ‘direct’ developed as features of my coaching and PE teaching. What was missing for me, was how to layer and level this learning into a continuum of achievement. Sometime in the late 1990’s, I came across Griffin, Mitchell and Oslin’s (1997) Teaching Sport Skills and Concepts: A Tactical Games Approach in a book display at the school. It provided the ‘macro’ view for a continuum of achievement that I had been looking for, by clearly setting out a progression through levels of tactical complexity.

The Tactical Games Model was described as a simplification of Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) 6-steps into 3-steps. I had no idea really, what TGfU was until then, so I looked it up.

A conundrum
Through the ideas of a Designer Game and Game Sense approach, I had viewed a game-based approach as more ‘organic’ than a 6-step or 3-step process. An advantage I had seen with a game-based approach was the ability to differentiate learner experience within a session based on learner readiness. I had not interpreted game-based as ‘game-only’ but in the early 2000’s what I was reading on the Game Sense approach and some other models of practice seem to encourage ‘the game is the teacher’ and game-based as ‘game-only’. For example, the Game Sense approach was narrowed in some explanations and descriptions to game sense games. I now describe that idea of an ‘organic’ game-based approach as non-linear pedagogy.

Play with Purpose
When I started at Flinders University in 2006, my colleague Russell Brown remarked that what I was doing was not “Game Sense”, it was something else and I needed another name for it. That same year, Jeff Emmel the National Executive Director from the Australian Council for Health, Physical Education and Recreation spoke to me after a workshop I presented. He was looking to publish a new resource. It is thanks to Jeff’s encouragement and support that Play with Purpose was published in 2007. Initially, my intention was to clarify the Game Sense approach as play with purpose, but then I was asked to model my thinking which resulted in the Play with Purpose ‘model’ below.

To understand the potential of games for player learning, I adopt the position that game-based learning (and therefore, game-based teaching or sport coaching) is a type of play with defined learning intentions and a corollary of this, defined player learning outcomes. For sport teaching in physical education, Play with Purpose provides both a curriculum development template from Reception/Kindergarten to Year 10, and a lesson design addressing teacher decision-making concerning what, why, and how to teach.

Consistent with teaching for effective learning principles, in physical education I recommend the first game form be purposefully used to review previous expectations of learning attainment, and identification of which players need what, if any, practice interventions, which players having had their cognition shaped and focussed by the inquiry episode are best served by returning to the initial game form play, and which players are ready for an elevated game challenge for further learning progression. The use “of questioning to stimulate thinking about the game” (Pill, 2013, p. 9) is central to developing thinking players by play with purpose. In this context, “guided discovery” is a purposeful environment, deliberately constructed and shaped by the pedagogical actions of the teacher/coach (Pill, 2017).

1 Comment

August Special Blog: The Grammar of Games

8/25/2022

2 Comments

By Dr Greg Forrest
Senior Lecturer and Academic Program Director of Health, Physical Education and Sport Studies at University of Wollongong.

Email: [email protected]
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/grammarofgames/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/greg-forrest-53a497b/

Originally posted in our Guest Blogs- January 2020

Greg has been a Physical Educator for 35 years, in schools, sporting environments and for the last 13 years lecturing and researching in games and sports, PE and Sport at UOW. The Grammar of Games emerged from his doctoral study into how undergraduate PE teachers from a variety of movement backgrounds understood and used GBA. It is the basis of movement courses in for PE and Sport Studies at UOW, where undergraduates are drawn from the wide range of sports and movement experiences available in the community. Greg has worked for a number of years with community-based sports and with beginners in sporting teams.

The playing, teaching and coaching of games and sports has been integral to engagement in movement in adult life. For many of us, especially those reading this blog, the most meaningful way to develop the skills to engage is through the use of Game Based Approaches (GBA). However, despite logical and persuasive arguments as to the value of the GBA in games and sports, uptake has been inconsistent and there has been consistent resistance from participants and practitioners to adopt the pedagogies. Simply put, transfer of learning has been uncertain or has not occurred in GBA. Therefore, this article will use the transfer lens to examine games and sports and suggest a new approach they may enhance ToL in games and sports.

Transfer of Learning (ToL) is typically seen as the use of understandings from one learning experience in another. It is a foundational expectation of PE, where the very purpose of our discipline requires transfer of understanding into lifelong engagement in movement. While many reasons have been given for GBA development, from a ToL perspective, developing movement skills simply did not transfer to game play understanding, especially for those who were not experienced in the game or sport selected. On the other hand, it was posited that GBA engaged learners in authentic, progressive, game play and, with supporting divergent questioning, students could improve game play understanding. To put this simply, advocates argued that by using a GBA there would be enhanced ToL for more students.

While much attention has been devoted to exploring the use of GBA and the development of the various aspects of the pedagogies, as evidenced by the wide variety of excellent posts in the TGfU blog, there has been limited exploration of GBA from a ToL perspective. To do so is a worthwhile process, especially considering the explicit lack of evidence of ToL in games and sports, PE and Sport. Areas of concerns with ToL identified in other education disciplines provide an interesting viewpoint, especially as some concerns can be directly connected to GBA use or lack of use. These inhibitors of ToL can be summarised as follows:

There is an inadequate amount of time in lessons, units, sessions to develop mastery in key concepts required to facilitate the transfer of these concepts into different contexts;
Activities assumed to be authentic and relevant by educators are not viewed in the same way by the learner;
There is a lack of clarity about what is to be transferred, leading to an over optimistic expectation of ToL, noted by Perkins and Salomon (1992) as the Bo Peep or ‘leave it alone’ teaching strategy and
There is an assumption by educators that learners will be motivated to engage with the transfer process, which requires them to be active agents who are willing to challenge old beliefs and adopt new ones.

When GBA are viewed from this perspective, a strong case can be made that GBA may provide compelling arguments but may be no more successful at ensuring ToL than the traditional approach, despite compelling arguments and best intentions. The points above may also provide reasons for inconsistent uptake and resistance in the PE community.

So, if a strong case can be made for potentially poor ToL, what is the starting point to addressing ToL issues? It may not actually begin with addressing pedagogy, which has been the focus of research and professional learning in PE. For me, it is interesting that advocates of GBA provided the initial way forward by arguing that strategy and tactics and decision making are key concepts in game play understanding. The grouping of sports into game categories also began to address recognised issues with the limitations with time, connecting sports together based on common concepts. However, the focus then shifted to pedagogical solutions which, from a ToL perspective, did not address the ‘elephant in the room’, that is the traditional perspective that Games and Sports operates as one of five /six, separate movement disciplines and is separate to the other areas. While understandable because the perspective was understanding games and sports, it immediately lost the ToL potential. After all, are all three concepts not important in these other PE disciplines?

Since we have come this far, what is the next step? This may be considered a heretical question BUT what if the traditional divisions of PE actually inhibit ToL, make it difficult, if not impossible for ToL to occur. Our learners come from all different movement backgrounds, but the disciplines create disconnected contexts that need to be learnt and understood, the very thing game categories tried to address.

So, what if we group all of these together under ‘Games and Movement Experiences’, treat them all as contexts where concepts interact organically with each other? How would this look for games and sports? It would mean that the concepts are not the sports of the disciplines but the underlying factors or concepts that underpin all of the game and movement contexts. What would such an approach look like?

Welcome to the Grammar of Games.

The ‘Grammar of Games’ identifies these interacting concepts and builds on developing a deep understanding of their relationship with each other in all games / movement contexts. It is an alternative approach to teaching and learning that originated in the games and sports field. The approach aims to improve understanding of all games and sports by attempting to address issues with ToL. Just as grammar provides the tools to understand the signs and symbols of language, the Grammar of Games aims to give meaning to movement experiences through deep understanding of the four ‘grammatical’ concepts that underpin and give meaning to all games or movement contexts.

The Grammar of Games does not necessarily draw upon new knowledge but builds upon the progress made in PE, especially in the GBA field but it perceives it in a different way. The Traditional Approach argued Movement Skill was the foundational concept that was transferable, GBA argued Strategy and Tactics, Decision Making were equally important for the ToL to occur. Based on my own extensive experiences, I have taken the liberty of adding Communication and Concentration as the fourth concept, as I believe it is the most neglected area of game / movement context understanding, especially for beginners. It also draws upon more thematic approaches in GBA that, of all GBA, have demonstrated some evidence of ToL (see Mitchell and Oslin, 1999). And the work of Gréhaigne, Richard and Griffin (2005), who have provided in depth content knowledge in the concepts of strategy and tactics and decision making but only applied this in FTI games and sports.

Figure 1: The Grammar of Games (Forrest, 2015)

So how does it work? Well, a game, sport or movement experience can be placed in the centre of the model (and if we want to connect with all students, any experience is valid). Every experience is founded in principles, action and primary rules, configurations and spaces. Play action can be a product of the plans we make beforehand (strategy) or during play (tactics), is based on decisions at a team or individual level, which in turn determined by movement skills, which then influence what we communicate about and concentrate on. However, each concept interacts with the others organically as play evolves and has an influence on the other three. For example, any tactical change will necessitate an alteration in what we concentrate on and what decisions we make and what movement skill adaptations we make. As we are dealing constantly with interaction, learning experiences are generally based in game play and the approach can be used at a more generic game level or in a specific sport context. However, the game play aspect positions the Grammar of Games firmly in the GBA family with the concepts providing both the basis of observation and questions and the frame in which to make game progressions. Thus, if the educator wishes to focus on Tactical Changes to strategy, he/she can progress the game by changing a parameter (primary rule) that directly impacts on tactics in play, all the while knowing that there may be potential changes to the other three concepts.

Using the Grammar of Games allows us to change our perspective (as educators and learners) in how we understand games and sport as movement experiences. By developing a deep understanding of the grammatical concepts and their relationship in play, players, students, coaches and teachers can have a greater opportunity to connect with each other through the activities used, regardless of their background. This means that it does not matter whether we teach, assess or program water polo, football, rock climbing, snowboard cross, hammer throw, diving, swimming, surfing, lacrosse, lawn bowls, cycling, show jumping or have students who engage in chess, cards or video games*. Each is simply a context where these four concepts interact.

There are also a range of advantages to such an approach in relation to ToL. They include;

An explicit connection with all movement experiences via the concepts provides the potential for authenticity with all students in our classes, irrespective of their movement background and clearly;
Content knowledge is based on four concepts, addressing the time factor in developing depth of understanding, allowing for more in depth of understanding and connection as activities to move from the simple (generic games) to more complex representations (game categories, disciplines, specific sports);
Assessment is based on the for concepts and how they interrelate in game play, regardless of the context, rather than a sport or category or discipline. Thus, students can demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of the concept across a range of discipline contexts and teachers can compare different contexts more effectively. The approach also removes the bias of assessing those who have learnt sports in different environments by requiring them to be flexible with the knowledge understanding and application of concepts, demonstrating true game play understanding;
The potential to improve teacher capacity to use educationally sound approaches such as GBA more meaningfully. An understanding of the four concepts provides an entry level into all movement experiences, removing the barrier of what we know based on the category or discipline and examining games and movement experiences based on how the concepts interact in the game in front of us. The concepts are also directly derived from GBA so by deepening our knowledge in these concepts from a general perspective, we have a greater capacity to meet the important markers that make GBA such a valuable pedagogy, such as game progression and questioning.

Using the Grammar of Games as the foundation of understanding in movement experiences and educational programs gives educators the capacity to potentially address the issues of ToL. By changing perspective on what are key concepts and contexts in relation to what we wish all students to learn and understand in games and movement experiences, we can have the potential to improve. While it cannot necessarily motivate people to change habits or willingly embrace the process required to enhance ToL, it gives us a unique opportunity to connect our learners and educators in a meaningful fashion and provide potential for GBA to meet some of the ToL challenges.

References
Forrest, G. (2015). New approach for games and sports teaching. Research and Innovation: Issue One. University of Wollongong.

Gréhaigne. J R, Richard, J.F. and Griffin. (2005) Teaching & Learning Team Sports and Games. Routledge Falmer, New York.

Mitchell, S. A. and Oslin, J. L. (1999) ‘An Investigation of Tactical Transfer in Net Games’, European Journal of Physical Education 4: 162–72.

Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1992). Transfer of learning. International Encyclopedia of Education, 2, 6452-6457.

2 Comments

August Special Blog: Moving Game Approach for the Teaching of Games

8/17/2022

0 Comments

Small-sided Games
Small-sided games were central to the approach. The ‘challenge to pedagogical knowledge of the PE teacher was in knowing how to progress the complexity of the games over time by changing game rules and conditions.

House (1995) session notes handout

Use of Grids
A grid layout was suggested for the organisation of games. Grid formations were a popular structure for games teaching in the 1980’s, and something that I remember being emphasised in mt PETE training at Teachers College in the mid-1980s.

Competence
Emphasis of the model was on the development of strategic understanding rather than isolated skill development. Drawing on Bunker & Thorpe (1983), Les explained teaching for understanding as three dimensions of learning: When, What and How.

The Curriculum Model
Les suggested the Moving Game Approach be implemented as a curriculum following Rink and Werner (1985) four stages of game skill development:
                Stage 1. Object control emphasised
                Stage 2. Skill combinations emphasised
                Stage 3. Strategic understanding emphasised
                Stage 4. Specialised roles emphasised
The Moving Game Approach was never published, unlike other Australian game-based approaches which appear in scholarly and empirical literature: Game Sense (Australian Sports Commission, 1996), Designer Games (Charlesworth, 1994) Play Practice (Launder, 1999: University of South Australia), Play with Purpose (Pill, 2007: Flinders University), Grammar of Games (Forrest, 2019: University of Wollongong), MASTER (Eather et al., 2020: University of Newcastle).

We would like to encourage you to continue supporting the 40th Anniversary of TGfU celebrations; including our next instalment in the special blogs where we will be discussing more limited visibility and/or country-specific models/approaches. Please visit http://www.tgfu.info/40th-anniversary.html for our other events.

References
Australian Sports Commission. (1996). Game sense: perceptions and actions research report. Canberra: ASC.

Bunker, D, Thorpe, R (1982) A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education 18(1), 5–8.

Charlesworth, R. (1994). Designer games. Sports Coach, 17(4), 30-33.

Eather, N., Miller, A., Jones, B., & Morgan, P. J. (2021). Evaluating the impact of a coach development intervention for improving coaching practices and player outcomes in netball: The MASTER coaching randomized control trial. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 16(3), 439–455.

Forrest, G. (2019). What we do may not be possible/ Transfer of learning and the Grammar of Games. Presentation at the ACHPER International Conference, University of Canberra.
https://www.achper.org.au/documents/item/751

Launder, A. (1999). Play practice: the games approach to t5eaching and coaching sports. Human Kinetics.

Mitchell, S. A., Griffin, L. L., & Oslin, J. L. (1994). Tactical awareness as a developmentally appropriate focus for the teaching of games in elementary and secondary physical education. The Physical Educator, 51(1), 21-28.

Pill, S. (2007). Play with Purpose. ACHPER Publications.

Rink, J., & Werner, P. H. (1985). Teaching physical education for learning. St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Pub.

0 Comments

August Special Blog: Designer Games- Rick Charlesworth

8/11/2022

0 Comments

A designer game “is a contest between teams in which a result (win/lose) is sought. The teams must strive to win while the game and design allows particular emphasis on aspects of hockey-craft in that particular environment” (Charlesworth, 1993). A designer game is constructed by manipulating “game parameters” (Charlesworth, 1993) such as: number of players; shape and size of pitch, scoring rules, size and number of goals, special rules (e.g., ‘no go zones’).
Specific emphasis in designer games included Transition and Playreading.
On transition: “In my view, perhaps the most critical aspect of real game situations is best catered for in competitive designer games as play doesn't stop until a goal is scored. In too many artificial training drills there is "a relaxation phase" not found in the competitive game. The metamorphosis from defender to attacker and back again is continuous and unrelenting and can not be given enough emphasis”

On playreading: “It is interesting to stop the game and ask teams what is going on. Often I will instruct one team to play a particular way and wait to see how long their opponents take to work out what is happening. Such questioning stimulates players to be more analytical during the game”
(Charlesworth, 1994, p. 32).

A designer game is meant to “provide a competitive, strategic, distracted, “decision-laden” environment” (Charlesworth, 1993, p. 33) to players.

We would like to encourage you to continue supporting the 40th Anniversary of TGfU celebrations; including our next instalment in the special blogs where we will be discussing more limited visibility and/or country-specific models/approaches. Please visit http://www.tgfu.info/40th-anniversary.html for our other events.

References

Charlesworth, R. (1993). Hockey Australia Level 3 NCAS Course: Discussion topic – Designer Games. Canberra, December.

Charlesworth, R. (1994). Designer games. Sports Coach, 17(4), 30-33.

0 Comments

August Special Blog: PlaySmart - “Thinking through Physical Education.”

8/5/2022

0 Comments

To celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model, there will be a monthly ‘spotlight’ focus on key models/approaches with the field of Games-Based Approaches (GBAs). This month, we are showcasing limited visibility and/or country-specific models/approaches. To start I would like to provide an outline of Tom Bell’s Play Smart model.

I first read Tom Bell’s description of The PlaySmart method (Bell, 2003) when I started researching for my PhD thesis (Pill, 2012). In 2011, we were able to align times and set up, using Skype, a games lesson team teaching situation where Flinders University PETE students were engaged with Tom Bell from Manchester Metropolitan University (UK) using his PlaySMART ideas, while he taught his class ‘on the other side of the world’, creating a UK v Aus PlaySMART competition. I have continued to draw on Tom’s ideas since that occasion.

The PlaySMART project was set up by Physical Education staff at Manchester Metropolitan University in the UK to investigate how students’ performance in physical education could be enhanced. The program aim was to challenge the
“traditional” view of skill development that Read (1993) found dominant in UK Schools - an almost exclusive preoccupation with the promotion of teacher defined and usually de-contextualised techniques (and therefore 11 years after Bunker and Thorpe (1982) had released details of their project challenging the same pre-occupation). In contrast to separation of technical and tactical components of skill associated with a “traditional’ view on skill development, PlaySmart methods reflected an alternative view, whereby both the cognitive and the motor control components were to be developed at the same time (Bell, 1993).

The PlaySmart program emphasis was on developing the thinking skills and problem-solving knowledge components of sports performance. Drawing on skill acquisition literature, the assumption was put forward that if students are to be flexible problem solvers they need to understand those problems at a conceptual level (Bell, 2003).

The PlaySmart method involved encouraging students to understand game moments through key factors, and how the factors relate to each and how they provide a tactical advantage. In PlaySmart these were called “Moments of Advantage”. (M.O.A.s). The movement sequence that led to the “Moment of Advantage” was termed a “Set Up” pattern. The movement pattern the individual or team makes to exploit this opportunity was called an “Endgame” sequence.

Students would be able to demonstrate their understanding of the game moments using “If Then Production” theory. Here, a “production” solved a problem by offering the player an appropriate association between certain problem conditions and an action (solution). The thinking sequence is: if (describe the challenge) then an appropriate response would be to (insert action) because (this consequence is anticipated) (Bell, 2003; Bell & Penney, 2004). Here, I see a tool for making player thinking visible, so you (teacher/coach) know what they (players) know (Ritchhart et al., 2011).

The PlaySMART method

Experience of the full game – this is a critical first phase that contextualises the activities that follow;
A focus on a ‘core task’ that relates to one identified part (phase of play) of that game;
Participation in ‘SMART challenges’ that are directly linked to the core task.

(Bell, 2003; Bell & Penney, 2004)

The “SMART” acronym stands for “Situation”, “Methods”, “Adaption”, “Reduction” and “Transfer” as a problem-solving strategy. Bell’s (2003) paper linked below, provides an example using Kabbardi of how the SMART method works.

This is an example of how I have used some of Tom’s ideas to inform inquiry activities in the Volleyball unit I teach at Flinders University

We would like to encourage you to continue supporting the 40th Anniversary of TGfU celebrations; including our next instalment in the special blogs where we will be discussing more limited visibility and/or country-specific models/approaches. Please visit http://www.tgfu.info/40th-anniversary.html for our other events.

References
Bell, T. (2003). The PlaySmart Programme. “Thinking through Physical Education.” Paper presented at the AARE/NZARE Conference, Auckland. https://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2003/bel03619.pdf

Bell, T., & Penney, D. (2004). PlaySMART: developing thinking and problem-solvers in physical education. In J. Wright, D. MacDonald & L. Burrows (Eds.). Critical inquiry and problem-solving in physical education (pp. 49-61). Routledge.

Bunker, D., & Thorpe, R. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education 18(1), 5–8.

Read, B. (1993). Practical knowledge and a games education at Key Stage 3. British Journal of Physical Education, Spring, 10-14.

Pill, S. (2012). Rethinking sport teaching in physical education. Doctoral dissertation, University of Tasmania. https://eprints.utas.edu.au/15016/

Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. John Wiley & Sons.

0 Comments

April Special Blog: Launder (2001) Play Practice

4/19/2022

2 Comments

By Ellen-Alyssa Gambles
Academic Tutor in Exercise, Sport and Rehabilitation Therapies at the University of Sunderland, UK

Twitter: @13Efg
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ellen-gambles-pgcert-ba-fios-550508a9/
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5931-136X

Introduction
To celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model, there will be a monthly ‘spotlight’ focused on key models/approaches within the field of Games-Based Approaches (GBAs). To start I would like to provide an outline of Alan Launder’s Play Practice.

Launder describes himself as an “ill-prepared, and lonely young teacher” (Launder and Piltz, 2013, p.5) working in a Norfolk secondary school in 1957, who found the traditional methods of teaching PE to be ineffective for his pupils. A lack of equipment, poor facilities and large classes of adolescent boys - some described as “maladjusted youths” and “intellectually limited”- numbered as some of the issues he faced. Throughout his career in teaching and coaching in England, the USA and Australia, Launder adopted a process of trial, error, reflection and improvement to engage his pupils which gave rise to the rudiments of what was later formalised as Play Practice and was published in full in his 2001 book “Play Practice: The Games Approach to Teaching and Coaching Sports”. His methods were initially applied to cross-country running and then track and field sports, although he states they can equally apply to all types of games and sports as diverse as skiing, table tennis, rugby and surfing.

Launder credits a number of influences for the development of the Play Practice approach. The notion of legitimised failure from pickup games provides players with the opportunity to experiment, freed from potential criticism by authority figures (Launder, 2001, p. 14). He also refers to the small-sided modified games devised for tactical play when teaching football as described by Allen Wade, director of coaching for the Football Association (FA), in his 1967 publication (see our February Special Blog for more details).

The philosophy is firmly centred on the importance of enjoyment and success in driving engagement in sport, using structured situations for learning, understanding and competence. Launder uses the anecdote of a child playing baseball, who makes a potential base hit but runs directly to third base instead of first base, to emphasise the equal importance of the players understanding the rules of the games as well as being technically competent (Launder, 2001, p. 15).

The initial process for beginners is to assure success of playing a game by implementing appropriate simplified activities and/or modified equipment. The teacher uses their knowledge of the game to analyse and determine the most appropriate learning aspects for a group of players. An element of play is identified to emphasise and shape the practice for learning by modifying some of the variables of the game (e.g. rules, number of players, scoring etc.).

The many benefits of Play Practice are stated briefly as (Launder and Piltz, 2013, pp. 9-12):

Gives teachers ongoing opportunities to interact positively with their students.
Can make the learning environment more enjoyable for teachers and coaches.
Focuses on the learners and develops critically reflective practitioners.
Gives youngsters opportunities to cooperate with each other.
Provides a detailed analysis of skilled performance in sports.
Redefines the term “game sense” [i] and positions it as a critical element of skilled performance.
Introduces the strategies of simplifying, shaping, focusing and enhancing.
Emphasises the importance of time on task, maximum individual participation, and alignment.
Is supported by a clearly defined action plan for the instructional process.
Introduces the notion of working and advanced models of technique.
Introduces the notion of working tactical models.
Can be used to introduce a variety of sports - skiing, track and field, swimming, table tennis etc.
Can be employed by elite coaches.
Lends itself to innovation of all kinds and is continually evolving.
Its potential has yet to be fully explored
Can be taken up and applied piecemeal.
Has sound theoretical underpinnings (retrospective).

[i] ‘Games sense’, in this context refers to players needing an understanding of the rules, tactics, strategy and their strengths/weaknesses (and team-mates’) to solve problems. Launder and Piltz (2013) suggest defining it in this way broadens the understanding of the nature of skills in sport. Previous uses of this term were included in Thorpe and West (1969) work on badminton and also as the tactical model and title for Rod Thorpe’s workshops in Australia during the 1990s.

Difference between Play Practice and TGfU
The developers of both TGfU (Bunker and Thorpe, 1982) and Play Practice (Launder, 2001) shared similar origins of practical involvement in the English PE and coaching traditions and recognised their limitations. Play Practice arose from influences in the late 1950s with the publication of Modern School Athletics (McNab, 1970) and in 1973 the Journal of Health, PE and Recreation published an article by Launder where he outlined his “modern approach” to teaching soccer in schools. This article states ‘practising the techniques of kicking, controlling, heading and dribbling in drills outside the context of the game is also of limited value for there is little transfer to the real game’ (Launder, 1973, p.25).

Launder and Piltz (2013) describe the shared similarities of TGfU and Play Practice taking the activity and student into consideration, however they state the original linear TGfU model provided limited guidance for guiding professional practice. The authors also state that the primary differences between the two approaches lie in their fundamental aims. TGfU employs the game as the learning context and is concerned with ‘redressing the balance between tactics and technique’ (Launder and Piltz, 2013, p.13). Whereas the overriding aim of Play Practice was to make sports enjoyable, and to motivate and engage students enabling them to become competent enough to continue with it later (Launder and Piltz, 2013). Whilst TGfU was devised for games teaching, Play Practice also has been applied to more diverse sports such as skiing and surfing.

Play Practice firmly defines ball control in games as techniques, not skills, and that skilful players also need a willingness to play fairly, communication, tenacity, resilience and mental strength, agility and fitness. Emphasis is given to the elements of skilful play that a player might display whilst never having ball contact as well as times when on the ball.

The Ps of Perfect Pedagogy
The Ps of perfect pedagogy were devised as a clear basis to inform and encourage pre-service teachers undertaking their initial teaching experiences (Launder, 2001; Launder and Piltz, 2013).

PLAN- Plan the lesson effectively: consider the nature of the activity, ability and experience of pupils, the desired short and long term outcomes of the lesson and available time. These factors must take into account the required techniques, agility, understanding, and fitness levels of the pupils.
PREPARE A PROTECTED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT- A protected learning environment includes not only the removal of physical hazards but also considers psychological issues such as fear of failure. Pupils will perform better if they find the activity engaging and accept that failure is both inevitable and natural on the path to success.
PREPARE THE LEARNER- A welcoming attitude from the teacher develops a positive pupil environment. This could be further encouraged by dressing appropriately, using the child’s name, giving positive comments, etc at the beginning of the session so as to provide a major incentive for commitment to the session.
PRE-TEST-Starting a session with a challenge to help determine the groups’ entry level competencies in key aspects of performance. The challenges are structured to produce early success and rapid improvement to meet pupils’ knowledge, competence and attitude levels. The pre-test assessment underpins future sessions and the whole unit.
PRESENT THE TASK EFFICIENTLY-The teacher provides a clear understanding of the task to the pupils by a practical demonstration of the technical or tactical learning point/s supported with a verbal explanation using key words and phrases.
PROVIDE PLENTY OF PRACTICE- In practical terms, ensure a sufficiency of equipment to ensure pupils are provided with opportunities for purposeful relevant practice. Optimise planning, presentation, organisational and management strategies to maximise playing practice time and learning experiences.
PERTINENT PRACTICE- Practices need to be purposeful, demonstrating a clear relationship between the activity and the real sport. This must be developmentally appropriate for the pupil’s ability level.
PROVIDE FEEDBACK- Performance feedback is critical to enhance the learning and teaching process. For improvement to occur, the pupil needs an understanding of why a particular result occurs and what is required to prevent the problem – using key words and phrases can be helpful for a consistent message. The teacher provides structured situations that give learners immediate knowledge of the results of their efforts.
ENSURE GOOD POSITIONING AND PERCEPTION- The teacher needs to consider their position within the play area to observe and monitor the pupils. This will aid with providing feedback, assessing performance and progress, modifying practices, managing the group and task, progressing the lesson and ensuring good pacing.
PLAYFUL PRACTICE- Pupils will learn best when the lesson is playful and prepares them for real game situations.
PRAISE PERFORMANCE- Positive reinforcement from the teacher motivates pupils to engage more in their practice, helping them to recognise their efforts, improvements and successes.
PROGRESSIVE PRACTICE- Increase the challenge and complexity of the learning situation as pupils become more proficient. However, revisiting previous levels of performance and reviewing them will reassure pupils and reinforce a positive attitude for new activities.
PACED PRACTICE- Practice should be paced to avoid boredom and fatigue for the players.
PERSONALISED PRACTICE- Practices should be modified to meet the individual needs of the pupils

Play Practice Approach
The Play Practice approach adopts simplified games with modified equipment to allow students to get beginners playing the game quickly whilst providing the teacher with an insight into which aspects of performance require development. Teachers can apply the Play Practice approach incrementally (Launder, 2001, p.48) to select and implement into their teaching methods.
Thorpe, Bunker and Almond (1986) had introduced the pedagogical principles of ‘exaggeration’ and ‘representation’ in game-forms, and which are comparable to the processes that Launder described as ‘shaping’, ‘focusing’ and ‘enhancing’ play.

SHAPING PLAY: this is the notion of manipulating one or more of the critical variables of the game - the number of players, the size or shape of the playing area, the rules, the scoring system, the equipment, the goal etc- to make the game easier or more challenging as appropriate for the players. For example modifications could include:

Using small-sided mini games to give players more opportunity for increased participation and on-the-ball activity.
Altering the defender/attacker ratio to encourage passing options or teach players how to overcome the disadvantages of being outnumbered
Varying equipment-using larger/slower balls, hand pads or larger rackets with shorter handles to allow beginners to be more successful in adjusting their position to hit the ball. Alternatively raising the net in racquet games has the effect of slowing the game for beginners.
Adjusting the dimensions of the court to a long and narrow rectangle so as to encourage the tactic of hitting shots to the back of the court.
Modifying a secondary rule of the game such as replacing a throw-in with a less demanding kick-in in football, or improving inclusion and practising passing by ruling a minimum of passes before allowing a shot at a goal.
“Handicapping” more competent players can help prevent them dominating the game at the expense of weaker players. They may not be allowed to shoot goals, or be imposed with an alternative scoring system, or restricted to certain game positions.

FOCUSING PLAY: The teacher or coach uses questioning, cues or prompts with the players to help them gain insight into technical and tactical aspects of the game. Launder describes this as ‘teaching in the game’ (Launder, 2001, p. 57). This might take the form of the teacher stressing a particular tactical option, the similarities and differences between the activities and real game, focusing players on aspects of teamwork as required for defence or attacking moves or other components within the game (Launder, 2001). For example, instructing the player on how to hold the stick, asking them what to do when they get the ball, reminding the player to watch out for opposing team members etc (Launder and Piltz, 2013). Teams may also be permitted a small number of short time-outs to allow clarifications on the rules, or discussions of strategy and to make tactical decisions. The players benefit from these time-outs as it provides them with learning opportunities of the game and skilled play (Launder and Piltz, 2013).

ENHANCING PLAY: Players commitment and performance can be encouraged by adopting enhancements to play such as introducing time constraints, handicapping particular players, playing fantasy games and other challenges. One way of enhancing play is to restrict playing time to a few minutes so that motivation and attention is increased and fatigue less likely (Launder and Piltz, 2013). Another suggestion is to allocate leadership roles to the better players and emphasise the ways they can use their position to help their teammates. This both provides opportunity and recognition for their positive role model to offset what they could have got by dominating the game (Launder and Piltz, 2013). Launder (2001) also encourages Freeze Replay to help focus and enhance game play. In this situation all the players freeze in position on a given signal to allow a rewind back to a critical point for replay and consideration of alternatives.

The culmination of Play Practice is to use action fantasy games to enhance play (Launder, 2001). Children love to act out as their favourite sports player, something many of them do when playing in informal pickup games worldwide. Emulating their sporting idol playing for victory against their rivals in critical scenarios is an engaging concept. Action fantasy games are devised by selecting a scenario based on a particular team, match, score position etc. This might be a cup final with two teams at equal score and a limited amount of play time to win. A game card may be used to describe a scenario based on great players in major tournaments, and the students toss a coin to choose who to play out the match as (Launder, 2001).

Launder (n.d.) describes a number of stepping stones in the development of action fantasy games, one being the development that came from a table tennis game. As the players were not equally matched, the weaker players were becoming disengaged. Play was re-energised by ruling that fewer points were required to win so as to prevent the demoralising effect of significant differences in scores. Launder (n.d.) found that the fantasy games approach was effective at class management as its popularity kept pupils engaged and on task.

Fantasy Game Card Example
Taken from Launder and Piltz (2013, p.49)

“Figure 4.2 Sample Fantasy Scenarios
Lakers versus Bulls
It is the opening game in the final series. Before starting the game, the Lakers warm up with a 2v1 fast break. The Bulls warm up with 3 attackers outside of the key and 2 defenders. It is the last 4 minutes of the game. The Lakers are up by 1 point, 50 to 49. The ball is passed to set up a player with a clear shot.

Italy versus Argentina
It is the World Cup. Italy focuses on controlling the ball quickly and playing it off, using just 2 touches. They work in a 3v1 square. Argentina focuses on a 2v1 break to score a goal from 20m (66 feet). It is 5 minutes from half time and the score is 0-0. Two attackers dribble and pass to get past the goalie to score.

Williams versus Stosur
It is the final at the US Open. Both players work on their serve to improve consistency. Williams looks at placing the ball with depth in the serve. Stosur focuses on placing the ball wide in the serving area. It is the final set. Scores are one set all and it is 4-4 in the third.”

Final Thoughts
Both Launder (2001) and Launder and Piltz (2013) provide detailed examples of the application of Play Practice in action across sports including invasion games, court, striking/fielding, target and individual sports. Ultimately Launder’s work is focused on helping PE teachers and coaches provide enjoyable experiences that encourage their young players to continue with physical activity throughout their lives.

We would like to encourage you to continue supporting the 40th Anniversary of TGfU celebrations; including our next instalment in the special blogs where we will be discussing Griffin, Mitchell & Oslin (1997) Tactical Games Model. Please visit http://www.tgfu.info/40th-anniversary.html for our other events.

References
Bunker, D., & Thorpe, R. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education, 18(1), 5-8.

Launder, A. (1973). School for Schools: A Modern Approach. Journal of Physical Health Education & Recreation, 44(9), 25-27.

Launder, A. (2001). Play Practice: The Games Approach to Teaching and Coaching Sports. Human Kinetics.

Launder, A. (n.d.). Evolution of Play Practice. https://humankinetics.com/AcuCustom/Sitename/DAM/092/Timeline.pdf

Launder, A., & Piltz, W. (2013). Play Practice: Engaging and Developing Skilled Players From Beginner to Elite (2nd ed.). Human Kinetics.

McNab, T. (1970). Modern Schools' Athletics. Hodder & Stoughton.

Thorpe, J. & West, C. (1969). A test of game sense in badminton. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 28, 159-169.

Thorpe, R., Bunker, D., & Almond, L. (1986). A Change in Focus for the Teaching of Games. In M. Pieron, & G. Graham (Eds.), The 1984 Olympic Scientific Congress Proceedings Volume 6: Sport Pedagogy (pp. 163-169). Human Kinetics.

Wade, A. (1967). The F.A. Guide to Training and Coaching. Heinemann.

2 Comments

March Special Blog: Horst Wein: Developing Game Intelligence

3/19/2022

0 Comments

To celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model, there will be a monthly ‘spotlight’ focus on key models/approaches with the field of Games-Based Approaches (GBAs). This month, I would like to discuss Horst Wein: Developing Game Intelligence.

In 2011, I was working on a paper on play with purpose for football/soccer coaching and a workshop to go with the paper for the 27th ACHPER International Conference proceedings with colleague John Murphy. During our exchange of ideas, John mentioned that the ideas I was sharing were aligned with the ideas Horst Wein shared at a workshop in Adelaide in 2007, when he had been in Adelaide to work with Adelaide City FC. I was coaching junior football/soccer at the time, and keen to grow my understanding of the game, and so undertook a research of Horst Wein’s ideas. I discovered a national player, elite level master coach, innovator of game-based coaching, and globally appreciated coach developer.

Horst Wein was a trained physical education teacher who became a world-renowned hockey coach (Germany and Spain men’s national teams) and football coach (FC Barcelona), and coach developer.

“The art of teaching lies in knowing for what activity (a technical move, a tactical behavior or a complex competition) the player is prepared for at a particular stage of physical and mental development” (Wein, 2000, p. 11).

His ideas have been implemented across the world of youth hockey and football. His ‘Game Intelligence’ model was applied to hockey (2002) and football (2004a). He was a strong advocate of small-sided games for children and youth game development in both hockey and football/soccer (Wein, 1981, 2000, 2007).

“the secret is: Stimulation through play” (Wein, 2004b, p. 4)

The Horst Wein Model

The player is at the centre of coaching

Therefore

Each age group has its own game matched to the physical and mental capacities of the young player
The training curriculum relates to the five levels of competitions

Games for Basic Abilities (6-7 years)
Games for Mini-Football (7-9)
Games for 5v5 and 7v7 Football (10-12)
Games for 8v8 Football (13)
Games for 11v11 Football (14+)

In the model, the coaching focus is on developing thinking players. “The intelligence of the player should be considered the real driving force behind his performance” (Wein, 2014a, p. 3). Systematically developing game intelligence through games was a core feature of Wein’s approach – “a varied and progressive training program with simplified games” (Wein, 2014a, p. 4).

Wein advocated that “The complicated adult game has to be simplified; a logical progression of competitions must e created, designed with increasing demands that adapt perfectly to the mental and physical capabilities of individual children” (2007, p. viii). “In a well structured scheme, young footballers grow at the same rate as their competitions grow in complexity and difficulty” (Wein, 2007, p. 2).

Wein proposed that “a coach’s objective should be to make the others [players] think instead of thinking for them…coaches must master the skill of posing questions…Through systematic questioning by the coach, the players are self-generating the information. Thanks to intelligent questions, many players become aware of problems they have never noticed before. When faced with problems presented by the coach, players have to think, examine, judge and evaluate until they find their own solutions” (Wein, 2007, p. 5).

Horst Wein suggested repetition through games to enable “the player to understand and read these game situations with the aim of making correct decisions and winning more often” (2004, Developing Game Intelligence, back cover).

Explaining why a cogent and coherent plan of progressive development is necessary in coaching to develop children and youth playing potential Wein suggest ed that “planning the development of young players is like preparing for a journey. It’s advisable to have a map (plan or model) to avoid getting lost and wasting time and energy” (2007, p. 10).

Horst Wein’s Game Intelligence model has all the hallmark features that we associated with a games-based approach. Horst Wein published his first book on coaching in 1968 but he is possibly best known for his 2004 book Developing game intelligence in soccer. For more information, you can see his Wikipedia profile here https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horst_Wein.

We would like to encourage you to continue supporting the 40th Anniversary of TGfU celebrations; including our next instalment in the special blogs where we will be discussing Launder (2001) Play Practice. Please visit http://www.tgfu.info/40th-anniversary.html for our other events.

Horst Coaching Ideas

References
Murphy, J., & Pill, S. (2011). Moving, Learning and Achieving in Football (Soccer). In G. Dodd (Ed.), Edited Proceedings of the 27th ACHPER International Conference (pp. 220-229). ACHPER. https://www.achper.org.au/documents/item/83

Wein, H. (1981/2000). La clave del éxito en el hockey/The key to better hockey. International Educational Management Systems

Wein, H. (2002). The development of game intelligence in hockey with mini hockey games. German Hockey Association

Wein, H. (2004a). Developing game intelligence in soccer. Reedswain.

Wein, H. (2004b). Small sided games to develop soccer intelligence. Institute for Youth Soccer, Germany.

0 Comments

February Special Blog: Coaching for Understanding- Wade (1967) and Worthington (1974)

2/21/2022

0 Comments

By Shane Pill [1] and Ellen-Alyssa Gambles [2]

[1] Associate Professor in Physical Education and Sport at Flinders University, Australia
Twitter: @pilly66
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shane-pill-phd-med-bed-lmachper-fachper-53a3b528/
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3970-6724
Blog: http://learningthroughsport.blogspot.com.au/

[2] Academic Tutor in Exercise, Sport and Rehabilitation Therapies at the University of Sunderland, UK
Twitter: @13Efg
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ellen-gambles-pgcert-ba-fios-550508a9/
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5931-136X

Please note some of this information was taken from Shane’s Blog: http://learningthroughsport.blogspot.com.au/ Check it out for more amazing resources!

Introduction
In 1986, Thorpe, Bunker and Almond in Rethinking Games Teaching wrote briefly about the influence of the original Loughborough games teaching team of Allen Wade, Eric Worthington and Stan Wigmore on the idea of using games as the vehicle for the transmission of skills. There is similarity with the pedagogical thoughts in these books to what some sport and coaching scientists espouse as 'contemporary' practice. In this 40th anniversary special blog, we would like to summarise some of the key ideas from Wade (1967) and Worthington (1974).

Wade- The F. A. Guide to Training and Coaching (1967)
Allen Wade, the Director of Coaching for the Football Association (FA) authored this book in 1967. The book has over 140 line drawings and over 60 photographs making it an excellent practical resource for players, teachers and coaches. It includes specimen schedules for off-season and in-season, specialised goalkeeper training and activity programmes for amateur players with limited time and facilities. "The main purpose of the book...is to present ideas and principles which require coaches to think. They in turn, must provoke thought and enquiry among their players" (p. vii).

The book is divided into three parts; (1) Principles, Systems and Tactics, (2) Principles of Training and Training Methods and (3) Definition and Acquisition of Skill.

In Part 1 Wade introduces his three principal phases of the game, namely attack, defence and preparation or mid-field play. Throughout the game players naturally flow between these phases based upon ball possession.
He argues that “the basic problem for players and coaches is one of understanding. We must be capable of presenting the game in such a way as to make its problems coherent at all levels. The principles of the game must be the foundation upon which systems of play and tactical considerations are developed. “(p.5) This aligns with contemporary pedagogical thinking within the games-based approach (GBA).

Wade details the principles of team play with numerous visual representations and providing explanations of player positioning and tactical considerations. The ten principles are given as:

Depth in attack
Depth in defence
Penetration in attack
Delay in defence
Concentration in defence
Width in attack
Mobility in attack
Balance in defence
Control and restraint in defence
Improvisation in attack

Chapter 2 discusses systems of play, expanding and debating upon two suggested extreme schools of thought for playing the game, namely man to man, and command of space. Wade provides detailed recognisable patterns of play (e.g W-M formation, deep centre forward, 4-2-2 system, sliding defences etc) with extensive visual representations. Wade opines that early-stage players need to develop all-round competencies and understanding of the game prior to specialisation.

In Chapter 3, Wade provides an in-depth discussion of modern (in the mid-1960’s) tactical development, underpinned with supporting figures. A range of tactical plays are introduced:

Supporting or zoning on the ball
Setting-up play
Keep ball
Square passing
Diagonal running
Movement off the ball
Blind side play
Cross over plays
Overlapping runs and runs from behind attacking players
Reverse passing
Changing the pace of the game
Playing accurately to feet
Screening
The wall pass
Dribbling and Committing defenders
Tactics in defence
Half retreating defence
The full retreating defence

Example
The picture below is taken from the book (p.95) and is one of the numerous illustrations which the author uses to explain the key tactical considerations. This diagram focuses on Blind Side Play.

In Chapter 4, Wade suggests questions that can be used to provide an analysis of the game, identify strengths and weaknesses, so as to understand what is happening and anticipate how it could develop.

The second section of the book considers the application of sports physiology in terms of training plans for fitness, endurance and speed, strength and power. Wade suggests that training follows what we would now describe as a games-based approach.

Match Practice – providing opportunities to develop systems of play and tactical awareness
Small-sided games – to develop general principles of play and group tactical possibilities
Functional training: phase practice - developing understanding between small groups of players
Tactical practice - developing set plays in various phases of the game

Chapters 9 and 10 forms the third part of the book, with discussions on skill and coaching and teaching. Skill is defined as "the application of techniques in a situation where the player has co-operative possibilities and, at the same time, is opposed by one or more players" (p. 181). The chapter reinforces the games-based approach that players need to experience and understand the reasons for particular aspects of game play, not just how they are achieved.
Wade’s philosophy here is that coaching football skills, such as heading or dribbling, by reducing them to their component parts for repetitive practice has deficiencies.
“Repetition for the sake of repetition may only be of limited value”. (p.184)
As co-operative play is integral to the game of football the need to make decisions will arise, any practice sessions must provide opportunities for a player to improve their skills in making such decisions.

Worthington- Teaching Soccer Skill (1974)
Eric Worthington's Teaching Soccer Skill added to the coaching literature a clear description of how and why to use small-sided games to teach game skills. Chapter 3 is a great read for any coach or teacher of an invasion game. In this chapter, Worthington sets out his coaching approach called Principles of Play. He asserted that, "with a practical understanding of the principles of play it is again a normal feature for such players to be able to fit into any system of play or formation" (p. 54). For this reason, Worthington proposed the use of small-sided games and the Principles of Play approach especially for young players.

The following principles of play are contained in the approach:

Delay in defence: first defender
Depth in defence: second defender
Concentration and balance in defence: the third defender
Depth and width in attack: the second attacker
Penetration in attack: the first attacker
Mobility in attack: the third attacker

Although some illustrations of practice sessions in the book look somewhat "traditional", progressing from warm-up to skill practice to games, Worthington suggested that "initially, the coach should do no more than organise the players to play" (p. 160). This led into one of the key coaching tenets of the text, Realism - "To effect the best transfer from what is done in training session, practices should be used which are similar to those that players face in the game...the more realistic a practice the better the transfer will be" (p. 161).

Another of the pedagogical tenets of the Principles of Play approach is the concept of "Freeze replay". This is where "the players must stop precisely where they are at the time the coach demands that they stop" (p. 172). The coach the uses this real situation as a "living tactical board to show the players what they are doing" (p. 172). The way Worthington described the use of this pedagogy, the coach goes into observation of the game play knowing what game moment they are looking for, as they have decided going into practice what point they wish to develop with the players.

In Chapter 7, Worthington sets out a continuum from "artificial" and "part" to "real" and "whole" game skill practice, which we suggest is a useful reference when thinking about the purpose of an activity when coaching.

In Chapter 7, Worthington set out an explanation for the purpose of what was called "conditioned games", which are different to games where players are allowed to respond "freely" as the coach deliberately restricts the game to change the condition of practice. It is explained that the conditions of games can be purposefully changed in the following ways:

Vary the number of players
Change the pitch shape or size
Change the method of scoring
Change the laws of the game
Demand the players respond in a set way during play

Teaching Soccer Skill adopts a "non-verses" stance to the instructional style of the coach; however, the "art" of coaching is described as organise, observe, then coach.

Final Thoughts
Throughout this blog, you will have seen similarities between the ideas presented by Wade and Worthington (over 50 years ago) and some of the current sport teaching and coaching literature. It is important to reflect upon early sources of literature to see “what has come before”. For example, this suggested lesson format from 1954 looks similar to the game-practice-game format of the Tactical Games model.

Image from 1954: The Teaching Technique- Playground Games for Secondary Boys, p.6

We would like to encourage you to continue supporting the 40th Anniversary of TGfU celebrations; including our next instalment in the special blogs where we will be discussing Horst Wein: Developing Game Intelligence. Please visit http://www.tgfu.info/40th-anniversary.html for our other events.

References
Pill, S. (2018) Developing Thinking Players- Coaching Sport for Understanding. Learning Through Sport- Play with Purpose [Blog]. Available from: https://learningthroughsport.blogspot.com/2018/03/coaching-sport-for-understanding.html

Thorpe, R., Bunker, D. and Almond, L. (1986) Rethinking Games Teaching. Loughborough: University of Technology, Loughborough

Wade, A. (1967) The F.A. Guide to Training and Coaching. London: Heinemann.

Williams, L.C. and Willee, A.W. (1954) The Teaching Technique: Playground Games for Secondary Boys. Blackie and Son.

Worthington, E. (1974) Teaching Soccer Skills. Lepus Books.

0 Comments

January Special Blog: Mauldon and Redfern’s (1969) ‘New Approach’

1/14/2022

1 Comment

By Ellen-Alyssa Gambles
Academic Tutor in Exercise, Sport and Rehabilitation Therapies at the University of Sunderland, UK

Twitter: @13Efg
Researchgate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ellen-Gambles-2
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ellen-gambles-pgcert-ba-fios-550508a9/
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5931-136X

Introduction
To celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model, there will be a monthly ‘spotlight’ focus on key models/approaches with the field of Games-Based Approaches (GBAs). To start I would like to provide an outline of Mauldon and Redfern (1969) Games Teaching: A New Approach for the Primary School. This book has been considered as an early writing on games teaching in England, similar to what would later become known as GBAs.

Background Information
It is relevant to initially consider this book within the terms of the prevailing educational landscape and the changing climate of opinions. An outcome of the 1944 Education Act was that secondary education in England was provided by grammar schools and secondary modern schools, with children being allocated on the basis of their 11 + selection test result. The majority of children went to the secondary moderns and the more academic minority to the grammar schools, a situation which informed Primary school teaching. Towards the end of the 1950s it was recognised that the system was failing, and in the early 1960s a committee was set up to review the secondary education system. In 1963 the Central Advisory Council for Education (CACE) produced the Newsom report, “Half our Future” which led to the discontinuation of the selection test.

In August 1963 the Minister of Education asked CACE 'to consider primary education in all its aspects, and the transition to secondary education', which initiated a review of the UK primary education system by the Plowden Committee which was detailed in their report “Children and their Primary Schools”. The abolishment of the 11+ test for most children opened the door for changes in attitude within primary schools as they encouraged a more progressive, child-centred style of teaching with the emphasis moving towards “finding out” as opposed to “being told”.

“Games Teaching- a new approach for the Primary School”, co-authored by two female PE university lecturers, was published 2 years after the Plowden Committee Report. The book was originally written due to ‘the authors’ uneasiness about the teaching of school Games in general and about the methods used at the Primary level in particular’ (Mauldon and Redfern, 1969, p.v).

The Plowden report had tasked teachers with ensuring that “girls and boys at the top of the primary school will be acquainted with the rudiments of the national games- netball, hockey and tennis for the girls, football and cricket for the boys” (Plowden, 1967, p.258). Hence, the book was aimed at both teachers who might have little knowledge of how to play a game and so feel apprehensive in games lesson planning, but also those who did have some experience of playing games.

Chapter 1: Games in Education and Chapter 2: The Complexity of Games
In these Chapters, the authors present a debate for the inclusion of games in the curriculum and the values attributed to games; as education for leisure, outdoor exercise, as a compensation for academic endeavour, as a vehicle to encourage fair play and character-building qualities etc. They argue that games are attractive to children but that Primary schools provide a limited range of the traditional games which are often not appropriate for their needs and abilities until towards the end of Junior school.

They remarked on observing how these games often serve to curb the physical capacity of children, describing “immobile figures” on a pitch, and how the school focuses on their sporting elite whilst disregarding the misery and humiliation of those with little aptitude or athletic ability.

When we are all familiar with the joy that young children obtain from simple bodily actions and sense of accomplishment as they develop physically and mentally, it seems a woeful description of games in the education system. This can be further underlined by a quote provided from Colin Cowdrey, England Test cricketer, that “to thrust a bat into a child’s hands at an early age and teach him how to hold it in the conventional way is enough to kill any interest in the game for ever” (Mauldon and Redfern, 1969, p.8).

Chapter 3: Developmental Stages in Games
The authors opine that, young children welcome new experiences with unbounded curiosity and enthusiasm. By providing opportunities to participate in a diverse range of pursuits that employ differing apparatus, they will become generally skilful.

I was struck by the phrases- “they are guided towards a recognition of the principles governing games as a whole” (Mauldon and Redfern, 1969, p.17) and later “to share ultimately in the process of making a new game or a variation of one already known, finding answers to problems arising and then playing it according to mutual consent, is surely of greater value than only learning prefabricated games with externally imposed rules” (p.17) - which provides similarities with what we now consider the basic principles of GBAs.

The Approach
As this book is confined to discussing games within the context of Primary education, the authors stated their definition of a game as “an activity in which a minimum of two people, themselves on the move, engage in competitive play with a moving object within the framework of certain rules”. (p.vi)

As children progress through Primary school, the authors suggest four stages for appropriate evolving games play associated with child development.

Stage 1: Exploratory play- where children are provided access to a wide variety of apparatus (e.g., quoits, beanbags, different sized balls, hoops, shuttlecocks, assortment of bats, etc) primarily individually but in the company of others.
Stage 2: Play for acquisition of skill, individually, e.g., with the desire to beat their personal best.
Stage 3: Moves on from Stage 2 to a greater emphasis on playing with others, elementary rule making and rudimentary understanding of the behaviour and control of the apparatus.
Stage 4: Increasing emphasis of playing a “proper” game, competing with others, problem-solving, tactical and rule development.

All games include a moving object which can be affected upon using apparatus or a part of the body and may be aimed at a goal/target, space or a player. A game includes one or more of the types of activity outlined below:

Sending away the object (striking/throwing)
Gaining possession of the object (catching/collecting)
Travelling with the object (carrying/propelling)

Mauldon and Redfern advocate for teachers to look at games which have similar properties rather than teach individual sports. This consideration can lead to a thematic curriculum focusing on game classifications and they proposed the following three categories:

Category 1: Net games
Concerned primarily with striking within a divided area with equal sized teams. This does not include gaining possession of the object. Sports include badminton, tennis, volleyball, table tennis etc.
Category 2: Batting games
There are 2 sides, the batting and the fielding sides. The batting side focus on striking into unoccupied spaces, whilst the fielders are concerned with throwing, catching and collecting. Therefore, the fielding team are aiming to gain possession of the object. Sports include cricket, baseball, rounders, softball etc.
Category 3: Running games
Both teams are throwing or striking and catching or collecting and carrying or propelling. Within running games all players are concerned with gaining possession of the object. There are equal sides which compete in and share the same area, the games involve passing and shooting at a target. Sports include football, hockey, rugby, basketball, netball etc.

Emphasis is placed upon the teacher understanding these basic activities and integrating them with a firm knowledge of each child’s abilities and perspective when devising lesson plans. It is important that P.E. does not consist of mainly imparting expertise but rather encourages children’s curiosity and interest in why and how things happen in games (p.43).

Lesson plan template

Start the lesson with a chosen game- this may be a familiar game or one newly invented. Consideration may be given to size of playing area, apparatus, rules, team size etc.
During the game, when problems arise or weaknesses become evident, play is suspended
The teacher guides the players to consider the issues and encourages them to investigate the problems using a questioning approach.
Discoveries are shared and the solutions examined
The techniques involved are practised and 'coached'
Game play is resumed focusing on the key problems which have been investigated and the practised solutions.

Alternatively, an identified weak or neglected aspect of play from previous sessions could be used as the starting point. The children could then provide their own suggestions to resolve the issue and resume the original game.

Note: The time spent in a session on investigating and intervening will vary according to the developmental stage of the children. Mauldon and Redfern suggest that one or two investigations will likely be sufficient in most cases.

Example
Chapter 9 provides a guide using examples of experiments and problems relating to the three basic types of activity and the four stages of evolving game play. Reproduced below is an example (p.96-97):

‘Throwing and Collecting

Situation. A group of children playing a running game which involves the ball being bounced or thrown to one another, and players are not allowed to travel once they are in possession of the ball. The passing is not sufficiently skilful to allow a fluent game to proceed, and play becomes rather static.

Suggestion. In twos find out where the ball has to be placed if a running player is to receive it in such a way that he can throw it almost immediately.

Questions.
a) Do you aim the ball at your partner, if not where should you send it? Why?
b) What do you have to take into account in judging where it should go?
c) If he is marked to which side of him should you try to get it?
d) If you are bouncing the ball to your partner how can you make it easy for him to receive it?

Responses.
a) The ball should be sent into a space where you judge the receiver will be when he catches it, and to the right for a right-handed player if possible, so that the follow-through of the receiving action can merge into the main action.
b) The speed, direction and ability of the receiver.
c) To the free side of the player receiving it.
d) The bounce should make contact with the ground so that it is rising to about shoulder height as it is caught and should not be directed at the feet of the receiver.’

Final Thoughts

Throughout the book the focus is on movement education and teaching for understanding. It emphasises that the developmental stage and ability of the children is paramount in games teaching. The role of the Primary teacher is to facilitate an environment which encourages guided discovery and problem-solving.

“It is essential that numbers, equipment, and size of pitch are appropriate for the children concerned, and the teacher must obviously know, not so much the rules of the official versions of these games, but how to assist girls and boys to acquire experience in the fundamental activities involved.” (p.42).

We would like to encourage you to continue supporting the 40th Anniversary of TGfU celebrations; including our next instalment in the special blogs where we will be discussing Coaching for Understanding- Wade (1967) and Worthington (1974). Please visit http://www.tgfu.info/40th-anniversary.html for our other events.

References
Mauldon, E. and Redfern, H. (1969) Games Teaching: A New Approach for the Primary School. London: MacDonald and Evans.

Newsom, J. (1963) Half our Future: A Report of the Central Advisory Council of Education England. London: H.M.S.O.

Plowden, B. (1967) Children and Their Primary Schools: A Report of the Central Advisory Council of Education England. London: H.M.S.O.

1 Comment

September Special Blog: Play with Purpose

August Special Blog: The Grammar of Games

August Special Blog: Moving Game Approach for the Teaching of Games

August Special Blog: Designer Games- Rick Charlesworth

August Special Blog: PlaySmart - “Thinking through Physical Education.”

April Special Blog: Launder (2001) Play Practice

March Special Blog: Horst Wein: Developing Game Intelligence

Horst Coaching Ideas

February Special Blog: Coaching for Understanding- Wade (1967) and Worthington (1974)

January Special Blog: Mauldon and Redfern’s (1969) ‘New Approach’

40th Anniversary Special Blogs

Archives