Blog Posts

An experience with the game-based approach in teaching sports to children in an extension project at a Brazilian university

2/12/2021

By Guy Ginciene [1], Camila Amato [2], Eduardo Rodrigues Oliveira [3] and Thiago José Leonardi [4]

[1] Professor at the School of Physical Education, Physiotherapy and Dance of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9709-4223
ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Guy-Ginciene
Twitter: @guy_ginciene

[2] Master degree student on Graduate Program in Human Movement Sciences the at School of Physical Education, Physiotherapy and Dance of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul

[3] Master degree student on Graduate Program in Human Movement Sciences the at School of Physical Education, Physiotherapy and Dance of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul

[4] Professor at the School of Physical Education, Physiotherapy and Dance of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3843-2648
ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Thiago-Leonardi)
Twitter: @thiagoleonardi

Brazilian public universities are constituted by teaching, research, and extension. The extension is the interaction between university and society, through its different projects, developed by professors or technical servers.

In 2019, we started an extension project called Sports School at the School of Physical Education, Physiotherapy and Dance of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul. The aim was to teach sports to children between 6 and 11 years and, at the same time, contribute to the professional development of student-teachers (student of the Physical Education course).

Thus, the project was structured in an action research format, with moments of meetings (reflection) and classes (action) in a spiralling way. The working group was basically formed by two university professors and three student-teachers. One day of the week we met to plan, discuss, reflect, and re-plan the Didactic Unit (DU); and on two other days the student-teachers taught the classes to the children. The project was linked to a research project and therefore the student-teachers recorded their observations in a field diary and excerpts of the classes on their mobile phones through videos/audios.

In 2019, we taught four DUs: one mixed with approximately 10 lessons on invasion and net/wall games; one with 18 classes on net/wall games; one with approximately 10 mixed DU lessons again; and a DU with 20 invasion game lessons.
The classes were developed based on 4 aspects: (a) adaptation of the games to make them possible for the level of young players (smaller courts, adapted rules, smaller and lighter balls, etc.). (ALMOND, 1986; PAES, 2002); (b) majority use of activities with interaction between opponents (respecting the internal logic of invasion games and net/wall games) (GONZÁLEZ; BRACHT, 2012); (c) encouraging young players to reflect and verbalize the tactical-technical solutions to the problems presented by the games (GONZÁLEZ; BRACHT, 2012; KIRK; MACPHAIL, 2002; SARRUGE; GINCIENE; IMPOLCETTO, 2020; THORPE; BUNKER; ALMOND, 1986b); and (d) encouraging the protagonism of young players during the solutions presented by the game (GONZÁLEZ; BRACHT, 2012).

For this, the classes were organized in a format inspired by the model proposed by González, Darido and Oliveira (2017), by the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) (THORPE; BUNKER; ALMOND, 1986a) and Tactical Games Model (MITCHELL; OSLIN; GRIFFIN, 2013). The following script was established: (1) Initial talk; (2) First Movements; (3) Initial Game; (4) Tactical Awareness; (5) Tasks; (6) Final Game.

The Initial Talk (1) opened the lesson, explaining the contents of the day and recalling what had been worked on in the previous meeting. The First Movements (2) concentrated on coordination activities, inspired by the development of the coordination capacity of the "Ball School" (KRÖGER; ROTH, 2005) and the "Universal Sports Initiation" (IEU) (GRECO; BENDA, 1998) considering that the young players had punctual difficulties. The Initial Game (3) was intended to present the tactical problem of that class. For this, tasks that required attention of the young players for one or two tactical principles (GONZÁLEZ; BRACHT, 2012). After the initial game, a moment of Tactical Awareness (4) was held to seek young players’ understanding of what we were wanting to teach. This moment was inspired by the proposal of González, Darido and Oliveira (2017) and the tactical and comprehensive approaches (MITCHELL; OSLIN; GRIFFIN, 2013; THORPE; BUNKER; ALMOND, 1986b). The Tasks (5) were inspired by the tasks proposed in González, Darido and Oliveira (2017). These tasks were intended to train a specific tactical action, according to the purpose of the lesson. The Final Game (6) was similar to the initial game, where the young players could return to the same game and apply what was verbalized in tactical awareness (4) and trained in the task (5).

Example of a net/wall class

Example of an invasion class

Evaluation of classes
During the class process, the learning of the young players was evaluated. For this, some strategies were systematically adopted during the year and others were tested in a shorter time. In the two main DU with a single theme (net/wall and invasion, respectively), we used the Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI) (OSLIN; MITCHELL; GRIFFIN, 1998). The categories observed, as well as the criteria used, were based on the specific contents of the class. Three evaluations were performed in each DU mentioned above. In the first DU, the children were evaluated in games of 1 vs 1, in reduced space. The games, regardless of the score, lasted 3 minutes, and were held in three different forms: first without implementing, through the action of grabbing and throwing; the second using hand rackets, made with adapted material; and the last using formal tennis rackets of the children’s size. In the second DU, the children were evaluated in games of 3 vs 3, in reduced space, with two targets (goal scorers), one on each side of the court. The aim was to score goals in the opponent’s target whilst the defenders guarded the target. The games lasted 4 minutes.

Other strategies were used in a formative way, in a shorter time, to monitor young players' learning. One of the strategies was to ask students to draw tactical actions of the game. The drawings, interpreted in the weekly meetings of the research group, showed the amount of detail each child was able to express, giving indications of how they were understanding the game. Another strategy was the creation of an observation form, based on the Team Sport Assessment Procedure (TSAP), in which the young players counted the number of actions of another young player while he/she was on the court. These forms were used throughout the process, as an element of "game observation" related to the role of performance analysts in Sport Education Model. This strategy also contributed to the young players' perception of the tactical actions of the games, as well as evidenced the way the children were able to declare here that they perceived during the games.

References

ALMOND, Len. Games making. In: THORPE, Rod; BUNKER, David; ALMOND, Len (Eds.). Rethinking games teaching. Leicstershire: Univesity of Loughborough, 1986.

GONZÁLEZ, Fernando Jaime; BRACHT, Valter. Methodology of The Teaching of Collective Sports. Victory: UFES, 2012. .
GONZÁLEZ, Fernando Jaime; DARIDO, Cristina Suraya; OLIVEIRA, Amauri Aparecido Bássoli De. Invasion Sport - 2nd edition. Maringá: Eduem, 2017.

GRECO, Pablo Juan; BENDA, Rodolfo N. Universal sports initiation: from motor learning to technical training. Belo Horizonte: UFMG, 1998. 230 p.

KIRK, David; MACPHAIL, A. Teaching games for understanding and situated learning: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe model. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education v. 21, p. 177–192, 2002. Disponível em: <http://ulir.ul.ie/handle/10344/2946>.0273-5024.

KRÖGER, Christian; ROTH, Klaus. Ball School: An ABC for beginners in sports games. São Paulo: Phorte, 2005.
MITCHELL, Stephen A.; OSLIN, Judith L.; GRIFFIN, Linda L. Teaching Sport Concepts and Skills. 3. ed. [S.l.]: Human Kinetics, 2013.

PAES, Roberto Rodrigues. School Physical Education: sport as pedagogical content of elementary school. Canoes: Ulbra Publishing House, 2002.

SARRUGE, Lara Carina; GINCIENE, Guy; IMPOLCETTO, Fernanda Moreto. Teaching the logic of volleyball game: a proposal from teaching games for understanding and the use of technologies. Movement (ESEF/UFRGS) v. 26, p. 1–14, 2020.

THORPE, Rod; BUNKER, D; ALMOND, L. Rethinking games teaching. Leicstershire: Univesity of Loughborough, 1986a. 79 p. An attempt to influence the way games are taught, aimed directly at teachers and the way they teach.

THORPE, Rod; BUNKER, David; ALMOND, Len. Rethinking games teaching. [S.l.]: Department of Physical Education and Sports Science, University of Technology, 1986b.

0 Comments

Game Contribution Assessment Instrument (GCAI)

2/11/2021

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

Table.2 Observation in GPAI & GCAI

Table.3 How to implement the GCAI

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

Engaging 100 pupils in a games based approach using Horst Wein's Game Model

2/10/2021

0 Comments

By Jack Rolfe
Founder of The Coaching Lab

Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @The_CoachingLab @JPR_25
Website: www.TheCoachingLab.org

It would be my natural bias to lean towards a games based approach to learning, creating environments that players interact with the game through adaptive formats, rules and changes in equipment. Given that players of all ages and abilities often ask “when are we going to play a game?” this would reflect the type of static and isolated environments we sometimes create.

At the end of each term we host a lighting carnival with a local school, a carnival that aims to provide an opportunity for pupils to learn by doing and have shared experiences of the sport that has been delivered in their lessons for the past 8 weeks. Catering for 100+ year 4 pupils is a constraint in itself and asks us to think differently. Dividing the hockey pitch in 12 mini courts, that would see one young leader facilitate the learning of each 4v4.

The modification of equipment and game formats is well documented and widely encouraged for player development but the implementation is not so widely taken-up in youth sport where we too often see the adult game impressed on young players. Similarly, there is a common belief that a player must learn the basics of the game before progressing to playing the actual game. Though when we look to identify the basics of the game, these would often be non technical; adaptability, communication, decision making and understanding of space and time.

Adopting Horst Weins small-sided-games format with double goal model, each pitch had two goals to attack and two goals to protect. The use of this model was to set up as a space that would ignite players interests and begin to develop an understanding of the space and decisions involved with each execution. A question we would reflect on as staff would be; what is the game asking players?

Using The Coaching Lab Animal MatchPlay Cards©, each of the 12 pitches had its own challenge card that both teams would looks to solve, creating a game within a game for players to explore. Hidden to the players, the impact would begin to change their lens of focus from the end score line being the only form of feedback to players trying to solve multiple problems during the game. Players would arrive at their pitch and be invited by coaches to chose one of the Animal MatchPlay Cards©.

Manipulating the task in the form of adding in challenge cards places the players learning experience at the centre, creating a sense of ownership and autonomy, that integrate new concepts and skills with the players previous experiences from donor sports such as AFL, soccer, basketball and netball.

The youth game should be centred around developing each individual and providing continual opportunities for growth. I stand by the belief that the smallest thing with the biggest impact is the game format our players play. It was Horst Wein who famously said that the game should be “tailored to fit the child. It should fit the child like a good pair of shoes”

Designed to support coaches and teachers use games as a learning tool with invasion games, you can discover more about the Animal MatchPlay Cards referenced in this blog by visiting www.thecoachinglab.org.

0 Comments

Developing Game Sense in Physical Education and Sport

2/9/2021

0 Comments

By Ray Breed
Lecturer of Exercise and Sport Science at Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ray-breed-6498b149/
Twitter: @PE_coaching

Teachers have been using tactical game-based teaching approaches in Physical Education for years, including variations of models such as Teaching Games for Understanding and Game Sense. In 2020, myself and a colleague (Michael Spittle) wrote a textbook specifically designed for primary and secondary PE teachers. This blog will provide an overview of the game sense approach that we provide in the book. Our game sense model emphasises and integrates tactical, technical and strategic skills within game contexts. Learners are challenged with problems to solve within small-sided, designer games and guided by open-ended questions. It is often thought that technical skills are not practiced within tactical approaches, but they are in fact learned concurrently with the development of tactical skills and understanding of the game.
The game sense model (in Breed & Spittle, 2021) is both a content/curriculum and instructional (pedagogical) framework, based upon common motor control, skill acquisition and pedagogical theories. Some of these include:

Figure 1: the game sense model based on motor learning theories.

The content of the model is organised by using a thematic approach containing small-sided designer games, classified in to 3 categories: invasion, striking and fielding, and net and wall games. There are many advantages of using such a thematic small-sided game approach, such as improving skill transfer, understanding of games and the context of skill, student enjoyment and more efficient use of curriculum time. Therefore, the game sense model focuses on the development of 3 broad outcomes:

Tactical: emphasis of game understanding and development of tactics and strategies
Technical: recognition and practice of movements within the context of games
Affective (personal and social): working and communicating together in small groups to design strategies and solve problems.

Whilst the pedagogy of game sense can seem complicated, the process of presenting the games can be simplified in to 3 steps: (1) Develop and establish clear outcomes of the game (e.g., when to pass the ball, how to pass the ball); (2) Questioning to guide learning and help students explore movement solutions (e.g., when should you pass the ball?); and, (3) Modification of a task-constraint (e.g., rule, area, object) and replay the game to challenge the learners to discover tactical and technical movement solutions.

Figure 2: The game sense model: a content and pedagogical approach.

An example of the game sense pedagogy in an invasion game could be to begin with a simple game of 2 versus 1 ‘keeping off’. We could start with: (1) learning outcome focus on developing skills of (a) “when to pass” and (b) “how to pass”. (2) To emphasise the first outcome, we could then question ‘when should you pass the ball?’ to encourage exploration of movement solutions. Students should eventually come up with a solution, such as holding the ball until they ‘draw’ the defender (to allow them more time). (3) We could then modify a constraint to allow dribbling of the ball to challenge the learners to discover movement solutions based on the task-constraint modification. Finally, the figure below demonstrates the pedagogical process for presenting each small-sided game within the game sense model.

Figure 3: The game sense pedagogy for teaching small-sided games.

Reference:
Breed, R. & Spittle, M. (2021). Developing game sense in physical education and sport. Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL.

The book mentioned in this blog is a practical resource written by teachers for teachers. It is written in a clear sequence of: theoretical framework of the model; designing thematic tactical units; the pedagogy of teaching tactical games; descriptions of small-sided designer games for invasion, striking/fielding and net/wall games; two unit plans for each game category; and, a chapter on assessment. https://www.human-kinetics.co.uk/9781492594147/developing-game-sense-in-physical-education-and-sport/

0 Comments

Special Edition: Global Lesson Study for a Better Game-Based Approach

18/8/2021

0 Comments

By Naoki Suzuki Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Tokyo Gakugei University (Japan)

[email protected]

Lesson Study (Jugyo-Kenkyu), which developed in Japan, is attracting attention from around the world as a place for a professional development opportunity. In this article, I will introduce the Global Lesson Study, which is an attempt to gather people from all over the world to think about better game teaching. In the Global Lesson Study, the main activities are "watching research lessons" and "discussion about the lessons. Through these initiatives, we place importance on reflection to create better lessons.

Figure 1 Video Clip with Subtitles

A video clip with subtitles and Lesson plan were sent to the participants prior to the workshop. Then, after watching it, participants were encouraged to post their questions and opinions on Padlet for discussion before participating in the workshop.

Figure 2: Contents of the Padlet

In the workshop, the practitioner talked about the basic idea of the lesson and reflections on the practice, using slides. Based on this, small groups of 3-4 participants presented their opinions that they had prepared in advance, and then decided on a theme to discuss. We used Jamboard to organize these discussions. All team members should be able to explain what they had discussed in about two minutes using Jamboard. This was also a way to overcome the language barrier and encourage participation. After that, we gathered as a whole to confirm the discussion, and then divided into different groups from the group members we discussed earlier to discuss specific ways to improve the lesson. In conducting the discussion, each person made a presentation using Jamboard, discussed specific improvements based on the presentation, and wrote the contents in a Google Document shared by the whole group. Since all the groups' writings could be checked on a single sheet, the practitioner was encouraged to look at it and reflect again on their own teaching practices. At the end of the discussion, in the plenary session, practitioner reflected on the content of the previous discussions and presented his reflection and direction for improvement. The workshop then ended with the commentators summarizing and valuing the discussions.

Figure. 3 Example of Jamboard contents

Table 1: Contents of Google Document

In the May workshop, Mr. Fujimoto, a teacher at Masago Elementary School in Niigata City, proposed a ball game for first graders. This lesson was developed around a game, and the discussion centered on the pros and cons of game modification and questioning. Some of the participants from the U.S. mentioned that this was their first experience with tactical learning in the lower grades of elementary school, and they were surprised that it could be implemented in the lower grades with game modification. In addition, various suggestions were made on how to ask better questions that would lead to better understanding of tactics, and the commentator explained how to make questions based on lesson observations.

At the July workshop, Mr. Kikuchi, a teacher at Setagaya Junior High School attached to Tokyo Gakugei University, proposed a striking/fielding game for first graders. The discussion at this workshop centered on how to conduct warm-ups and group composition. Regarding the warm-up, there were various opinions that the preparatory exercise done mainly by students was static stretching, and that dynamic stretching would be better, or that teachers should intervene intentionally, or that physical activity should be done in small-sided games from the preparatory exercise. I felt that the cultural characteristics of the country were strongly expressed here. In response to these discussions, the participants eventually found a direction to use small-sided games for preparatory exercises.

In the proposed class, the students were divided into four teams, and the leaders of these teams were all boys. This was not specifically decided by the teacher, but as a result of the team's decision, but some of the participants pointed out that there were problems with physical education instruction that led to such a situation. They also pointed out that there were differences in the way the students interacted with each other during the activities between boys and girls. Just the fact that junior high schools are conducting games with both boys and girls learning together, instead of separately, seems to be an innovative lesson in Japan, but I was reminded of the fact that we have created a gender perspective through the way boys and girls interact and contribute to the lesson.

In addition, this class was taught using a hybrid model of Game-Centered Approaches and sports education models, and various opinions were expressed about how to play the role of the learner. The discussion also touched on moral education in Japan, which led to a rethinking of the concept of responsible learning, which I feel was a valuable discussion.

In a questionnaire survey taken after the workshop, 100% of the participants answered that they had gained a lot from both workshops. In addition, 100% of the participants answered that they had the opportunity to participate in the 2nd workshop and 90% in the 3rd workshop. These results and the results of the free comments show that the attempt to collaborate on better physical education classes across countries is worthwhile. There are also many positive comments in the free text. A few participants mentioned the difficulty of verbal communication, and we will continue to take measures to solve this problem by making good use of technology.

Figure.4 Commemorative photo (May,2021)

We are planning to hold another Global Lesson study in October or November. Next time, we will propose a lesson on games for elementary school. If you are interested in participating, please contact me “[email protected]”.

Resources

Global Lesson Study in May
Mr.Fujimoto’s Lesson (Elementary PE):

<Lesson Plan>
https://www.dropbox.com/s/epjfan1wzac7r3s/Lesson%20Plan%20%28Shooting%20Game%29_Mr.Fujimoto.pdf?dl=0

<Video Clip of the Lesson >
https://youtu.be/OpzUDggM1jQ

Global Lesson Study in July
Mr.Kikuchi’s Lesson (Junior High PE):

<Lesson Plan>
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0joaxbovd1vfcbw/Lesson%20Plan%20%28Mr.Kikuchi%29.pdf?dl=0

<Video Clip of the Lesson >
https://youtu.be/j53iTSJnUW0

0 Comments

Teaching games within preschool physical education programs

1/8/2021

0 Comments

By Dr Aspasia Dania
Assistant Professor in Physical Education Teaching
School of Physical Education and Sport Science, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece

Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @AspasiaDania
Researchgate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Aspasia_Dania

Quality Physical Education (PE) programs should have a distinct place in young children’s education and development. Preschool age is recognized by educators and researchers as an extremely important period for adopting learning, health and expression habits and behaviors, since children at this age are more receptive to guidance and encouragement from significant others. Free play time and unstructured physical activity are important tools for achieving the above goals, but they are not enough on their own. There is data to support the view infants’ inherent need for movement can effectively be met through their participation in PE programs that offer various opportunities for exploration and interaction with the world around them. Games and game play activities can be an effective medium to this end, especially when they are designed according to developmentally appropriate principles and strategies. Games can provide a safe environment within which young children learn to act, think, interact, share, experiment, perform, understand and emotionally integrate experiences that can be valuable for staying active both within and outside school settings. Thus, the purpose of any PE curriculum designed for children of this age, should be on one hand to facilitate their game participation and learning, and on the other hand to increase their enjoyment and pleasure of interacting with others though purposefully structured content and activities.

Developmentally appropriate games for preschool children should promote learning: (a) within movement (games that help children understand how, when, why and in what way we move), (b) about movement (games that promote those cognitive skills supporting the desired movement effect, such as decision making, response inhibition, selective attention, etc.) and (c) through movement (games that use movement as a means for teaching latent concepts e.g. fair play, responsibility, etc.). However, their effective integration within PE programs will depend on the teacher’s ability to use principles that are specific for this age group. Based on what has been mentioned so far, the principles and protocols outlined below can help PE teachers during the design of games for preschool children.

A. Principles for designing games for preschool children

Create game challenges by integrating new concepts and skills with children’s previous experiences
Integrate a variety of experiences within each game (i.e. visual, auditory, kinaesthetic)
Use equipment and/or implements in a non-traditional/conventional way (i.e. in a striking fielding game, a tennis racket can be used as a “fishing stick” and tennis balls as “fish” that should be carried from one base to the other)
Proceed from general skills and concepts to more specific ones (i.e. start with sending small balls to a target and then proceed to sending balls in relation to time/space/effort concepts)
Use fantastic stories/scenarios to introduce youngsters to new content
Use questions and group discussion to facilitate the learning of latent concepts (i.e. use adjectives such as “cold” and “hot” to explain taggers’ move in relation to others in a tag game)
Plan sufficient time for each activity and differentiate instruction according to children’s reaction to game learning activities
Set up challenging game play environments to trigger children’s interest and motivation to participate and stay focused

B. Lesson organization protocols for preschool children

Rituals for every part of the lesson
1. Entering or Leaving to the lesson: Use teacher greeting and parent/guardian farewell rituals (e.g. when entering the PE lesson children can “give five” to the PE teacher, gather in a circle, use equipment to play until the lesson starts, etc.)
2. During the lesson: Use specific rules of conduct (e.g. “We help our classmates”, “We freeze when we hear the whistle”, “We have big ears when we listen to new instructions”, etc.)
Strategies for conflict management and resolution:
1. Explain that every child has the right to express their opinion without being interrupted
2. Use student suggestions to problem solve
3. Name undesired or dangerous behaviors and clearly explain their implications
Use body language (e.g. one hand up = “everyone near me”, two hands up = “put equipment down and listen to new instructions”)

In line with relevant learning theories (Dewey, 1938; Piaget, 1953; Vygotsky, 1978; Bruner, 1986), I advocate for the use of game-based instruction within preschool PE. Since Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) is a beneficial approach for learners of all ages, it would be interesting to launch future TGfU initiatives aiming at providing PE practitioners with curriculum content and material especially designed for this age group.

References
Bruner, J. S. (1986) Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, M.A, Harvard University Press.
Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and education (New York, Macmillan).
Piaget, J. (1953). The origin of intelligence in the child (London, Routledge and Kegan Paul).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in society. The development of higher level psychological processes (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press).

0 Comments

Themes and Application for TGfU in Elementary Physical Education: Insights from a Practitioners Perspective

1/7/2021

3 Comments

By Michael Ertel

Physical Education Teacher
Buffalo Public Schools
NYS AHPERD Executive Council Member

Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeertel/
Twitter: @MikeErtel10

My name is Michael Ertel, and I teach elementary physical education at the Buffalo Public Schools in Buffalo, NY. I have taught health and physical education (HPE) for six years while coaching youth soccer at various elite levels. As a current practitioner serving HPE along with an ardent games-based advocate, I hope to contribute a unique perspective to this blog to serve all disciplines of the profession.

It is clear from the original work of Bunker and Thorpe (1982), that teaching games for understanding (TGfU) was an intentional games-based curriculum model developed for secondary-school students. Rovegno (2010), Memmert and Konig (2007), and other scholars, however, provide a structured framework that transfers the hallmark themes of TGfU to an elementary school setting. This TGfU framework will be of value to pre-service and in-service teachers and is outlined by the following sections contained below: an analysis of the themes encompassed in the model with direct applications to elementary physical education; and a curriculum foundation with an accompanying block schedule for a 4th or 5th-grade TGfU soccer unit.

Major Themes of TGfU and Relation to Elementary Physical Education

Rovegno (2010) highlighted major themes consistent in the TGfU literature at the secondary level. Analyzing these themes from an elementary physical education lens will enable practitioners of younger students to feel comfortable and more confident applying TGfU principles in their settings.

THEME 1: Instructional Adjustments/Modifications

The modification of equipment, game structures, and instructional groupings is well documented and widely encouraged within the physical education community. Whether it is a teacher candidate in an elementary methods course or a seasoned master teacher, the modification of lessons to meet the unique needs of all students is critical. All students deserve an equal opportunity to attain competency in the skills, tactics, and strategies contained within each physical education class. Combining common principles between TGfU and the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework will allow physical educators to accentuate multiple means of expression, representation, and engagement within an emotionally and physically safe learning environment.

Although TGfU is an accessible learner-centered model of physical education, teachers of elementary students may need to consider the instructional approach they employ for skill interventions and equitable learning opportunities across the spectrum of ability levels within their class. “TGfU advocates isolated drills and instructions common to more traditional approaches to address poor technical skill execution within the game (Bunker and Thorpe 1986; Kirk and MacPhail 2002). This could be seen in the practice task interjected between the introductory and final games for a TGfU approach” (Renshaw et. al, 2016 p. 17). To avoid decontextualizing skill acquisition in an isolated task, the teacher can manipulate the constraints (rules, time, space, equipment) to simplify the techniques for elementary students who are executing poor technical skills within a game. For example, if some students are struggling with the accuracy of a push pass within a small-sided game of soccer, a teacher could provide a restraining line or “free zone” that allows students the opportunity to attain a higher degree of success with the technique.

Please refer to the block schedule below to understand how instructional modifications and adjustments can be planned and executed within an elementary physical education TGfU soccer unit.

THEME 2: Teaching for Understanding

Teaching games to students should not be isolated teaching sports skills, but rather games instruction is a means to teach critical skills and apply meaningful tactics and strategies that are foundational to many sports and activities played around the world (Rovegno, 2010). To be clear, game-sense, TGfU, play-practice, or any other games-based curriculum or pedological model is not to be confused with a games and activities or “roll the ball out” approach whereby no substantive learning or transfer takes place. Despite the abundance of research documenting the successes of models-based practices in the profession and the equally critical bevy of literature on the multi-activity model, many teachers apply this one-size-fits-all approach around the world. The traditional “skill and drill” lesson is an approach that Thorpe et. al (1986) laments. This is where a modified game at the end of the lesson is used to allow children to practice the learned isolated skills. GBA research has shown that this type of approach is not the most effective way to produce skillful players in any physical activity environment. Ultimately, elementary students must be afforded the time to learn and practice necessary skills and tactics within game-like situations that foster the knowledge needed to support skillful gameplay.

How do we know that learning is taking place with our elementary school students teaching games for understanding in physical education? As a practitioner in the field, the use of inquiry-based reflective questioning serves numerous purposes to demonstrate positive student outcomes. Posing thought-provoking questions to your students can deepen interest and curiosity, assess knowledge and understanding, and redefine tasks for students with a wide range of abilities (Grout and Long, 2009). Through these tenants, a master teacher can effectively and efficiently utilize and balance well-planned convergent (open) and divergent (closed) questions within each TGfU lesson to garner an understanding of the content for your students.

To understand how reflective questioning can be used within an elementary PE teaching games for understanding a soccer unit, please refer to the block schedule and pedometer journal prompt and rubric for assessment 1.

THEME 3: Progression of Skills

Development and progression are crucial to any curriculum and therefore an important consideration at the elementary level. In the lower grades, students need to be able to perform basic skills and movement patterns to effectively play the games that use those same skills. While it may be argued that some measure of skills must be acquired before children can play games, the level of skill competency necessary for game contexts is unclear and vastly debated. Robertson (1977) postulated that the skills of a child within physical education must be strong enough to offset possible regression in a more difficult game-like environment. More recently, Rovegno (2010) expanded Rink’s (2005) levels-based approach questioning the lower standard of learning basic movement patterns or skills before infusing them into a tactical game. More research is needed regarding progression and the targeting of specific skills in elementary settings and how quickly and successfully they can be applied to a games-based environment.

Each day of the block schedule below provides explicit examples of progressions of soccer-specific skills within an elementary TGfU unit. These skills are also measured in the pre and post-test assessment along with assessments 2 and 4 while connecting with objectives 1 and 12-20.

THEME 4: Relevance and Transfer

One of the main issues that Bunker and Thorpe, (1982) considered when devising the tenants of TGfU was that a large percentage of unmotivated and sedentary secondary students had poor game skills and could not transfer these skills to make high-order tactical decisions during organized play. To understand tactical elements within games and activities, students at the elementary level must recognize their own, their teammates’, and their opponents’ perspectives (Rovegno, 2010). Most readers of this blog have considerable experience teaching, coaching, or at least observing children play games and sports in various environments. Coming from a soccer background, it is frustrating to see U6 recreational soccer where the children chase after the ball like bees swarming around a hive to find their queen. One or two children are dominating this game based on their physical capabilities, not their skillful play. This type of game is not meaningful, relevant, and does not provide any sort of tactical knowledge or adaptability for transfer and development. Additionally, it is not appropriate to place elementary children into regulation-sized competition for the sake of experiencing the game. These two examples illustrate inappropriate applications of games, and our elementary students deserve better. Practitioners should instead engage students with new skills or activities presented with challenging tasks that require focus and exploration to cultivate a reasonable level of success (Sun et. al, 2008).

Relevancy and transfer for an elementary TGfU soccer unit are contained in assessments 1 and 3 in the below chart.

THEME 5: Appreciation of the Path Towards Physical Literacy

Games-based curriculum and pedalogical model researchers have also touted the importance of game appreciation. Connecting self-determination theory Ryan & Deci (2000) can help us better understand the implications of cultivating a student-centered learning environment for elementary school children in Physical Education. More specifically, early deliberate play in elementary physical education can increase a student’s intrinsic motivation leading to more appreciation for physical activities over time (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Physical educators can facilitate appreciation through their TGFU instructional practices utilizing co-created and child-designed games. Games-based approaches and co-created child-designed games in elementary physical education do not leave children to fend for themselves without the supervision and guidance of a qualified practitioner. Instead, however, teachers can pose challenges and problems for students to solve collaboratively in an inquiry-based climate. For example, an elementary teacher can provide specific tactical situations for players to solve within a modified soccer game such as numbers up/down situations. This effective practice can enhance social and emotional learning competencies, create a sense of ownership and autonomy, and most importantly, place the student at the center of the learning experience. While TGfU and other approaches alike may optimize psychomotor and tactical understanding of games and sport, the opportunity to address the affective domain and game appreciation cannot be overlooked. This will allow each student to learn and experience success in, through, and about movement to pursue their lifelong pathway towards physical literacy.

Developing student appreciation and personal/social behavior outcomes of the domain in elementary physical education are referenced below in objectives 4, 5, 8, 9, and 10.

Curriculum Foundation and Block Plan for a TGfU Elementary Soccer Unit

Unit: Soccer No. of Days: 10___ Name: Michael Ertel
Grade Level: 4th Grade Class Size: 24 Length of Class: 40 minutes
Special Considerations: There are no special considerations for this 4th or 5th-grade class.
Skills/Concepts to be taught: Dribbling, passing, shooting, receiving, combination play, spatial awareness, 1v1 attacking and defending
Facilities and Equipment needed: Large gymnasium, 24 soccer balls, cones, small soccer goals, large soccer goals, scrimmage vests, pedometers
Media or other equipment: Computer, projector, smartboard

Objective	Learning Domain	NYS/National Standards	Explanation
1) The students will correctly pass a soccer ball through a one-yard gate 7 out of 10 times while standing 10 yards away.	Psychomotor	NYS 1 and National 1	Due to the specificity of the instep drive during a modified soccer game, this objective aligns with anchor standard 1 and strand 1 of the NYS Learning Standards for 4th-grade outcomes. Also, physically literate soccer players need to perform the instep drive competently during a modified soccer game which connects SHAPE America standard 1 with this objective.
2) During a modified game of soccer, the students will effectively apply their knowledge of the offside rule by not receiving a pass in an offside position.	Cognitive	NYS 2 and National 2	The offside rule requires a mature knowledge of the tactics and strategies of soccer and therefore connects to anchor standard 2 and strand 2 of the NYS Learning Standards for 4th-grade outcomes. Additionally, SHAPE America standard 2 connects with the application of the offside during a modified game of soccer to become a physically literate performer.
3) The students will apply their knowledge of dribbling in soccer to evaluate their peers' dribbling skill competency during a slalom dribbling drill.	Cognitive	NYS 2 and National 2	NYS Learning standard 2 strand 1 aligns with this cognitive objective for students to apply their knowledge of dribbling a soccer ball to evaluate their partner. Also, SHAPE America standard 2 connects with this objective to use knowledge of concepts related to the performance of dribbling to effectively evaluate their peer.
4) The students will value a soccer game as an opportunity to use verbal and non-verbal communication skills that develop positive peer relationships.	Affective	NYS 4 and National 4	This effective objective is directly aligned to standard 4 strand 2 of the NYS Learning Standards by demonstrating civility, cooperation, and communication skills to develop peer relationships within a soccer game. Furthermore, this objective can apply to SHAPE America standard 4 to develop responsible and social behavior in communication and standard 5 to recognize the value of a soccer game for social interaction.
5) The students will respond positively following the conclusion of a modified soccer game, regardless of the result, by displaying positive sportsmanship towards their teammates and competitors.	Affective	NYS 4 and National 4	NYS Learning Standard 4 strand 2 directly links to this affective performance objective by using sportsmanship following a game to foster social awareness and relationship skills. Additionally, SHAPE America standard 4 applies to this objective as a physically literate individual must respond and exhibit social behavior that respects self and others after a game, regardless of the result.
6) The students will identify the health-related physical fitness components that contribute to success in soccer and benefits their health.	Cognitive	NYS 3 and National 3	This cognitive domain objective aligns with NYS and National Standard 3. Students must use their knowledge of health-related physical fitness components and connect them with successful performance in soccer while recognizing their application towards a health-enhancing level of physical activity and fitness.
7) The students will analyze and break down their own technical elements of a push pass during a passing exercise.	Cognitive	NYS 2 and National 2	NYS and National Standard 2 capture this cognitive domain objective by having students apply knowledge of previously learned skills towards a self-assessment to improve future performance. This objective explicitly interweaves physical literacy that is emphasized in the national standards.
8) The students will examine how receiving a pass with different surfaces impacts their next technical and tactical action during a game of soccer.	Cognitive	NYS 2 and National 2	This objective aligns with NYS Standard 2 and National Standard 2 by understanding how different surfaces of receiving a pass apply towards the next technical and tactical decision during a soccer game. These concepts as referenced in the standards directly correlate with an understanding of how technical skills relate to tactical decision making.
9) The students will accept responsibility for their interactions and behaviors with peers and teachers during the soccer unit.	Affective	NYS 4 and National 4	NYS and National Standard 4 connect with this objective by taking ownership of their behaviors that has an impact on their own performance and peers’ attitudes towards working with them during a soccer unit.
10) All students will use behaviors that involve others to contribute towards an inclusive and equitable learning environment during skill acquisition.	Affective	NYS 4 and National 4	This affective objective aligns with NYS and National Standard 4 by connecting positive inclusive behaviors that show respect for all classmates regardless of ability levels. By showing respect for others, you are exhibiting respect for yourself.
11) All students will demonstrate an appreciation for the benefits that playing soccer has on health-related physical fitness components and a personal physical fitness plan.	Affective	NYS 5 and National 5	NYS and National Standard 5 are most closely connected with this objective by students understanding and recognizing the healthy-enhancing benefits that soccer has. Furthermore, soccer can be incorporated into someone’s overall personal fitness plan to achieve physical literacy and lifelong movement.
12) The students will be able to effectively improvise 1v1 dribbling moves to beat a defender during a modified game of soccer.	Psychomotor	NYS 1 and National 1	This psychomotor objective directly relates to a difficult skill of 1v1 dribbling moves to achieve competency during a soccer game. NYS and National Standard 1 are most notably connected with the variety of motor skills and movement patterns that encompass dribbling moves.
13) After observing the demonstration, the students will perform a 20-yard lofted pass with their dominant foot to their teammates 6 out of 10 times.	Psychomotor	NYS 1 and National 1	NYS and National Standard 1 apply to this explicit psychomotor objective by utilizing observation and future performance of specific skills to gain minimum competency during skill acquisition.
14) All students will correctly execute an instep drive shot with both feet during a game situation in soccer.	Psychomotor	NYS 1 and National 1	NYS and National Standard 1 connect with this objective as correctly executing an instep drive shot with both feet correlates to a critical soccer competency for game situations.
15) The students will demonstrate proper receiving technique by trapping a pass with the inside of their foot from their teammate within a 3-yard box 8 out of 10 times.	Psychomotor	NYS 1 and National 1	This explicit psychomotor objective underscores the critical nature of a player's first touch while receiving a pass. Competency in motor skills and movement patterns as written in NYS and National Standard 1 connects directly to performing this skill in isolation and as a part of a soccer game.
16) The students will display effective ball manipulation skills to escape tight areas of congestion during a modified game of soccer.	Psychomotor	NYS 1 and National 1	NYS and National Standard 1 capture this psychomotor objective by connecting agility, coordination, and technical skills of soccer with competency in a variety of motor skills and movement patterns. The diversity of this skill lends itself to meeting the broad range of standard 1.
17) The students will demonstrate explosive agility, speed, and reaction time without the ball while engaged in a modified game of soccer.	Psychomotor	NYS 1 and National 1	This movement pattern of sprinting coupled with the skill-related components of agility and speed are critical in soccer and connects with NYS and National Standard 1. Competent players can quickly change direction and sprint after a given stimulus to positively impact the next action during the game.
18) The students will be able to correctly identify and execute a give-and-go combination with their teammate during a modified game of soccer.	Psychomotor	NYS 1, 2 and National 1, 2	This objective encompasses two standards as it uses skills and strategies to execute a specific combination play during a soccer game. NYS and National Standard 1 connect the skill of passing. NYS and National Standard 2 connects the concept of a give-and-go combination play.
19) The students will successfully perform the correct defending technique by stopping their partner from scoring 6 out of 10 times during a 1v1 challenge.	Psychomotor	NYS 1 and National 1	NYS and National Standard 1 connect with this explicit objective during a 1v1 challenge by integrating the competency of stopping their partner by using a specific defensive movement pattern.
20) During a soccer game, the students will recognize when and how to make a forward run with and without the ball using spatial awareness and cues.	Psychomotor	NYS 1, 2 and National 1, 2	NYS and National Standard 1 and 2 apply with this psychomotor objective. Understanding when to make a forward run directly relates to the concepts in standard 2 while the actual movement pattern of running connects with standard 1.

TGfU Assessments

CATEGORY	Objective	Assessments	Instrument	Domain
PRE-TEST	All students will correctly execute an instep drive shot with both feet during a game situation in soccer.	Using a gameplay rubric, students will be assessed by the teacher during a 4v4 modified soccer match on how they correctly execute an instep drive shot with both feet.	Rubric	Psychomotor
ASSESSMENT 1	All students will demonstrate an appreciation for the benefits that playing soccer has on health-related physical fitness components and a personal physical fitness plan.	All students will have pedometers tracking their steps for every class during the soccer unit. They will use the data they collect from their pedometers to write a journal entry using prompts that demonstrate their understanding of health-related physical fitness components, their soccer application, and the long-term health benefits of utilizing data as a part of a personal physical fitness plan.	Pedometer and Rubric	Affective
ASSESSMENT 2	The students will be able to correctly identify and execute a give-and-go combination with their teammate during a modified game of soccer.	Using a gameplay rubric, students will be assessed by the teacher during a 4v4 modified soccer match on how well they utilize proper techniques, tactics, and strategies to execute a give-and-go combination.	Rubric	Psychomotor
ASSESSMENT 3	The students will identify the health-related physical fitness components that contribute to success in soccer and benefits their health.	Following a modified soccer game, students will be handed an exit slip. The prompt will utilize their knowledge of health-related physical fitness components while connecting them to how successful they were during the game and how health-related components impact their overall health and well-being.	Exit Slip	Cognitive
ASSESSMENT 4	The students will be able to effectively improvise 1v1 dribbling moves to beat a defender during a modified game of soccer.	Using a gameplay rubric, students will be assessed by the teacher during a 4v4 modified soccer match on how well they utilize proper techniques of running with the ball to improvise and beat a defender 1v1 using a dribbling move.	Rubric	Psychomotor
ASSESSMENT 5	During a soccer game, the students will recognize when and how to make a forward run with and without the ball using spatial awareness and cues.	Using a gameplay rubric, students will be assessed by the teacher during a 4v4 modified soccer match on how well they recognize and execute cues to make a forward run into open space.	Rubric	Psychomotor
POST-TEST	All students will correctly execute an instep drive shot with both feet during a game situation in soccer.	Using a gameplay rubric, students will be assessed by the teacher during a 4v4 modified soccer match on how they correctly execute an instep drive shot with both feet.	Rubric	Psychomotor

Block Schedule

DAILY INSTRUCTION	DAY 1	DAY 2	DAY 3	DAY 4	DAY 5
PEDALOGICAL MODEL	TGFU	TGFU	TGFU	TGFU	TGFU
CONTENT (WHAT?)	Dribbling to Find Space and Ball Manipulation	Running with the ball and beating an opponent on the dribble	Executing short and intermediate passing	Executing longer distance passing	Receiving ground passes
LEARNING ACTIVITIES (HOW?)	Warm-up/Set: Free dribbling in space while teacher demonstrates and calls out ball manipulation and other locomotor movement patterns. Modify the number of patterns and dribbling techniques based on competency. Learning Activity 1: Non-elimination knock-out dribbling game. Modify space based on ability level. Question: How can you protect the ball from your opponent while you dribble in an open area? Learning Activity 2: 1v1 Endzone soccer game focusing on specific ball manipulation skills. Modify endzone size and activity time. Closure: Cooldown PNF stretching while teacher collects exit slips	Warm-up/Set: Cone speed dribbling competition. Modify distance based on skill level. Learning Activity 1: 1v1 Gauntlet Dribbling Progression. Modify defender's pressure based on ability level. Learning Activity 2: 4v4 Modified soccer game with dribbling endzones. Add neutral players to make it easier for the attacking team to score. Closure: Debrief about the most important aspects of dribbling a player in a 1v1 situation. Question: What is your favorite move to beat a defender 1v1? Why?	Warm-up/Set: Gates passing game. Modify the size of gates and time limit based on passing ability. Question: What is one strategy that you can your partner can use to increase your score for the next round? Learning Activity 1: 3v1 possession to cone goals. Modify the rules of the defender to make it more or less difficult for students Learning Activity 2: 2v2 game to gated goals. Modify field size and the time limit of matches Question: How do you know when to pass or dribble? Closure: Students provide one specific compliment to a peer on passing ability	Warm-up/Set: Ladders passing competition. Modify distance of passing based on ability level. Learning Activity 1: A long passing game in end zones with pressure defenders. Add or subtract the number of defenders to modify. Question: Do you think shorter or longer passes are easier to complete? Why? Learning Activity 2: Modified soccer game with 3 zones. Goals are worth two if the pass comes from the first zone. Modify the size of zones to match the ability level of long passes. Closure: Collect and discuss pedometer readings	Warm-up/Set: Partner touch box passing game. Increase or decrease the size of the box to modify for the first touch. Discuss rules of soccer. Learning Activity 1: 2v2 possession game with 4 outside bumpers. Restrict touches or change space to meet student’s needs. Learning Activity 2: 4v4 modified game with bumpers and four goals. Change conditions of bumper players to modify while bringing out the topic. Question: Is it easier or more difficult to take a clean first touch when space is smaller? Why? Closure: Cooldown stretching of major leg muscles
ASSESSMENTS	Exit Slip	Game Play Rubric focused on dribbling	Teacher Observation	Pedometer Reading	Teacher Observation

DAILY CONTENT	DAY 6	DAY 7	DAY 8	DAY 9	DAY 10
PEDALOGICAL MODEL	TGFU	TGFU	TGFU	TGFU	TGFU
CONTENT (WHAT?)	Receiving longer distance passes	Finishing in and around the penalty area	Small group attacking	Small group defending	4v4 Soccer Festival
LEARNING ACTIVITIES (HOW?)	Warm-up/Set: Large Dutch windows passing exercises. Modify the size of the windows to practice effective first touch. Learning Activity 1: Soccer horseshoes. The first touch who lands closest to the cone receives a point. Play for time, not points. Modify rules of different feet striking the ball or distance of cones. Question: What can you do before you touch the ball to touch the ball closer to your target? Learning Activity 2: 4v4 modified soccer game with 2 targets on each end. Modifications include space, number of targets, and time limit to score. Closure: Collect pedometer readings and explain pedometer journal assignment.	Warm-up/Set: Explain pre and post-test format. Marbles shooting game with a partner. Switch partners after each minute to gain repetition. Learning Activity 1: 3v3 penalty box shooting game with the goalkeeper. Coach switches players after 30 seconds. Modify the size of the grid based on ability level. Question: When you are in the penalty area, do you need more power or accuracy to score? Show me what that looks like. Learning Activity 2: 4v4 modified soccer match with goalkeepers in full-sized goals. Modify the size of the field for more shooting opportunities for players. Closure: Debrief on shooting pre-test results	Warm-up/Set: 2v2 game with endzones. Increase endzone size to meet skill level. Learning Activity 1: 2v2+2 game to small goals. Neutral players increase the attacking opportunities for combination play and movement off the ball. Learning Activity 2: 4v4 modified soccer match to small goals. Add neutral players if players need more attacking opportunities. Closure: Discuss with a partner how to complete a give-and-go combination. Teacher feedback on attacking gameplay rubric.	Warm-up/Set: 3v1 keep away. Modify the size of the grid to encourage many defensive opportunities and actions. Learning Activity 1: 2v1 break out transitions to small goals. Change defenders often to maximize intensity and technique of defending. Learning Activity 2: 3v2, 2v1 transition numbers down defending game to large goals. Modify the time limit for the attacking team to score based on the varying success of defensive players. Question: How do you create a numerical advantage when you are attacking during a soccer game? Closure: Stretching of major muscle groups with a partner	Warm-up/Set: Divide players up into pre-allotted teams and explain the post-test and 4v4 festival format. Review the rules of soccer. Learning Activity 1: 4v4 matches with goalkeepers. 3-minute games. Teams rotate so they can play each other at least once. All soccer rules for gameplay apply to this festival. No standings are kept. The focus for this culminating event is using past instruction to score as many goals as possible with your team. Question: What is one way to show appreciation for your opponent’s following a soccer game? Closure: Debrief on shooting post-test and provide feedback for future performance
ASSESSMENTS	Pedometer Reading and Journal	Pre-Test Game Play Rubric	Game Play Rubric focused on movement without the ball and combination play	Game Play Rubric Focused on defensive skills	Post-Test Game Play Rubric

ANCILLARIES AND SUPPLEMENTS

Pre and Post-Test Rubric for Gameplay

LEVEL	1. Basic Skills	2. Offensive Skills	3. Movement Without the Ball	4. Defensive Skills
4	Consistently uses effective passing, receiving, and shooting skills	The player initiating play effectively passes the ball and moves to open space to receive a pass 3 times.	Consistently moves to open space, with good timing and clear intent to create a passing lane.	Consistently moves to intercept the ball or make passing difficult for the offensive players.
3	Usually uses effective passing, receiving, and shooting skills.	The player initiating play effectively passes the ball and moves to open space to receive a pass 2 times.	Usually moves to open space to create a passing lane.	Usually moves to intercept the ball or make passing difficult for the offensive players.
2	Sometimes uses effective passing, receiving, and shooting skills.	The player initiating play passes the ball and moves to open space to receive a pass 1 time.	Sometimes moves to open space.	Sometimes moves to intercept the ball or make passing difficult for the offensive players
1	Seldom uses effective passing, receiving, and shooting skills	The player initiating play passes the ball and never moves to open space to receive a pass.	Seldom moves to open space	Seldom moves to intercept the ball or make passing difficult for the offensive players.

Modified Soccer Game Playing Scoring Guide

Consistently = 90% or above
Usually = 75% – 89%
Sometimes = 50% – 74%
Seldom = below 50%

Pedometer Journal Prompt and Rubric for Assessment 1

Using your pedometer readings during the soccer unit, create a journal entry that describes your reactions to how you interpreted your data throughout the unit. What health-related physical fitness components contributed to your variance of data on particular days of the unit? How do these health-related components contribute to your overall health and wellness? Additionally, how does your pedometer data contribute to your personal physical fitness plan?

Journal Rubric

Points	-
4	The physically literate student completed the entire journal entry. They accurately documented ALL the components, relevant feedback, and results in which they were able to achieve individually and collectively with their classmates. They wrote a thoughtful reflection. They speak about if they will continue to play soccer in the future. They have no grammatical errors in their writing.
3	The physically literate student completed the entire journal entry. They accurately documented MOST of the components, relevant feedback, and results in which they were able to achieve individually and collectively with their classmates. They wrote a thoughtful reflection. They speak about if they will continue to play soccer in the future. They have a few grammatical errors in their writing.
2	The physically literate student completed part of the journal entry. They accurately documented SOME of the skills components, relevant feedback, and results in which they were able to achieve individually and collectively with their classmates. They wrote a competent reflection. They do not speak about if they will continue to play soccer in the future. They have several grammatical errors in their writing
1	The physically literate student completed part of the journal entry. They accurately documented FEW of the skills components, relevant feedback, and results in which they were able to achieve individually and collectively with their classmates. They wrote a poor reflection. They do not speak about if they will continue to play soccer in the future. They have many grammatical errors in their writing.

Scoring Guide
4 – Exceptional
3 – Above Expectations
2 – Satisfactory
1 – Needs Improvement

Exit Slip Prompt for Assessment 3

What health-related physical fitness components contributed to your success during the modified game of soccer? How can these component(s) impact your performance during the game and overall health and well-being?

Modified Game Play Scoring Rubric for Assessments 2, 4, 5

Level	1. Basic Skills	2. Offensive Skills	3. Movement Without the Ball
4	Consistently uses effective dribbling passing, receiving, and shooting skills.	The player initiating play consistently effectively passes the ball and moves to open space to receive a pass.	Consistently moves to open space, with good timing and clear intent to create a passing lane.
3	Usually uses effective dribbling passing, receiving, and shooting skills	The player initiating play usually effectively passes the ball and moves to open space to receive a pass.	Usually moves to open space to create a passing lane.
2	Sometimes uses effective dribbling passing, receiving and shooting skills	The player initiating play sometimes passes the ball and moves to open space to receive a pass.	Sometimes moves to open space.
1	Seldom uses effective dribbling passing, receiving, and shooting skills.	The player initiating play seldom passes the ball and never moves to open space to receive a pass.	Seldom moves to open space.

Modified Soccer Game Playing Scoring Guide

Consistently = 90% or above
Usually = 75% – 89%
Sometimes = 50% – 74%
Seldom = below 50%

References

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

Grout, H. & Long, G. (2009) Improving Teaching & Learning in Physical Education. Berkshire: Open University Press

Memmert, D. & König, S. (2007). Teaching Games in Elementary Schools. International Journal of Physical Education.

Renshaw, I., Araújo, D., Button, C., Chow, JY., Davids K., & Moy, B. (2016) Why the Constraints-Led Approach is not Teaching Games for Understanding: a clarification, Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 21:5, 459-480, DOI: 10.1080/17408989.2015.1095870

Rink, J. (2005). Teaching physical education for learning. McGraw-Hill Education.

Roberton, M. A. (1977). Developmental Implications for Games Teaching. Journal of Physical Education and Recreation, 48(7), 25–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00971170.1977.10621106

Rovegno, I. (2010). A Model for TGfU in Elementary-School Physical Education. More Teaching Games for Understanding. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781718208964.ch-012

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.

Sun, H., Chen, A., Ennis, C., Martin, R., Shen, B. (2008). An Examination of the Multidimensionality of Situational Interest in Elementary School Physical Education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 79(1), 62–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2008.10599461

Thorpe, R.D., Bunker, D. J. & Almond, L. (1986). Rethinking games teaching. Loughborough University of Technology.

3 Comments

Games-Based Goalkeeper Training: Using a TGfU model to optimise decision-making in developing football goalkeepers.

1/6/2021

1 Comment

By Andy Elleray
MSc Sports Coaching / UEFA A Goalkeeping / Author of 7 bestselling books

Twitter: @andyelleray
Instagram: andyelleray
LinkedIn: Andy Elleray
Website: www.andyelleray.com

Goalkeeping in football has long since championed a structured drill-based approach, where there is a large technical focus.
Over the years, more specially 2009 and since meeting Lynn Kidman at University who was my lecturer (she did the forwards for my first book!), I’ve pioneered an alternative methodology in goalkeeper training. This methodology took the principles of TGfU with focus on specifically designed games, constraints, and high-level questioning in order to enhance several key attributes that are deemed vital for a goalkeeper in football.

The idea stemmed from my observations around goalkeepers who were technically and physically proficient but lacked the decision-making capabilities to transfer their ‘football’ proficiency to the game as a whole.
Through initially trialling this approach in development centres and grassroots goalkeeping groups, I began to see goalkeepers who were not only making better decisions, but were able become more technically adaptable, psychological robust and socially aware of working with others.

After researching and testing the methodology more and more, I was able to promote this approach within a few my books and use at elite/international level environments with great success and this started back in 2013. The key for me, is to dip in and out with these games scenarios and combine them with specific goalkeeping ‘drill’ based practices for a holistic development.

Fast forward to the present day, I’m now seeing not only goalkeeping centres using this approach, but also elite level coaches who see the benefit of including the methodology in parts of their training sessions to groove and enhance decision making in many different situations.
I’m in the process finishing my 8th book which is based solely around the approach with a coaching focus on how to best implement the Games-Based methodology – this should be out later this year.

For more information on practices and the methodology, please visit www.bennionkearny.com/goalkeeping

Happy Coaching!
Andy

Example activity

1 Comment

Differentiating Instruction using TGfU: New Insights from Instructional Models in Physical Education (4th ed.)

1/5/2021

0 Comments

By Gavin Colquitt and Mike Metzler

Gavin Colquitt, EdD, CAPE, CSCS
Professor
Department of Health Sciences & Kinesiology
Center for Public Health Practice and Research Affiliate Faculty
Georgia Southern University
PO Box 8076
Statesboro, GA 30460

Phone: 912-478-0889
Fax: 912-478-0381
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gavin-Colquitt-2

Differentiated instruction has been a focus of classroom instruction in since the mid-1990s (Tomlinson, 1995). However, it has only recently been applied to teaching in physical education (Colquitt et al., 2017). Differentiating instruction for personalizing learning is a systematic approach that operates under the assumption that learning in physical education is personal. The breadth and depth of instructional approaches in model-based instruction gives physical education teachers the tools to systematically ensure that instruction can be tailored to each student based on their readiness (i.e., current skill level), interests, and learning profile (i.e., student learning preference, intelligence preference, and considerations of gender and culture). For a full discussion on differentiating instruction within instructional models, please see the new fourth edition of Instructional Models for Physical Education (Metzler & Colquitt, 2021).

For teachers who are familiar with a games-based approach, differentiating instruction can be relatively simple. The very nature of the model requires an initial assessment of students’ tactical awareness and skills. To further differentiate instruction, a comprehensive diagnostic assessment can be done by using either the Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI) or a modified version in rubric form such as a game-play assessment rubric (Mitchell et al., 2013). Based on the age and developmental level of the students, a game-play assessment rubric that assigns levels to performance in areas such as decision-making, support, passing, dribbling, and shooting may be appropriate and feasible. This process provides teachers with important information for planning future learning tasks as well as grouping, which will allow for varied pacing options within lessons. Throughout the unit, teachers will need to constantly observe and informally assess student progress of the same skills and tactics assessed at the beginning of the unit. Summary reports of game play can also provide students with important formative feedback of their in-game performance.

As stated previously, sport-related content is desirable for most students. Therefore, student interest can be increased by making connections to various game types. For example, students may have a well-established interest in basketball, and this can be used to foster increased interest in other invasion games such as team handball. Mitchell et al. (2013) also suggest that entire units of instruction can be developed based on game type to highlight similarities among games (i.e., a unit where basketball, football, soccer, and field hockey are combined). Because many students have an established interested in some form of sport, interest can be further refined in other ways such as in Table 1, showing an example of an Olympic athlete playing team handball. Because of the nature of learning tasks in Tactical Games, the model accounts for a variety of intelligence preferences as well.

The type of learning tasks—game forms, situated skill drills, modified games, and full games—provides teachers with a variety of access points regarding unit content. The teacher has a great deal of flexibility in presenting and structuring each of these tasks for students. While Tactical Games does require a high degree of teacher control, both units and lessons can account for personalized student progressions. Within the unit, the teacher will establish the content listing, learning sequence of tactics and skills, and progression within levels of task complexity (Mitchell et al., 2013). Within lessons, students can progress through the typical order of game forms, drills, and then modified games and/or full games. However, pacing can be varied for students by placing them in groups based on their current levels of understanding and skill (as in the example in Table 1, team handball). Students can then move together within the unit or lesson through the learning sequence established by the teacher. The learning process can be further differentiated by allowing student to make some decisions within game forms, as well as varied engagement patterns in situated skill drills.

Student learning can be further differentiated by assessing students and groups based on diagnostic assessment results. Flexible assessment schemes and goal-setting can allow students to achieve success based on individual improvement in tactics and skills. In this case, it is vital that teachers use highly authentic assessments at the beginning and end of the lesson. The learning environment can then be differentiated by using many of the same strategies applied in Direct Instruction to foster student support and develop self-direction. Visual aids can be very effective in teaching tactics and strategy as it related to unit content. Online videos can be used to display spacing and support in a team handball game. Additionally, common pedagogical modifications such as inter- and intra-task variation as well as various equipment options can further ensure that an environment is created that meets the developmental needs of individual students. Table 1. outlines the considerations for using Tactical Games to differentiate learning in a middle grades’ unit on team handball.

Table 1. KEY QUESTIONS FOR DIFFERENTIATING LEARNING USING TACTICAL GAME

References
Colquitt, G., Pritchard, T., Johnson, C., & McCollum, S. (2017). Differentiating instruction in physical education: Personalization of learning. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 88(7), 44–50.

Metzler, M., & Colquitt. G. (in press). Instructional models for physical education (4th ed.). Routledge.

Mitchell, S. A., Oslin, J. L., & Griffin, L. L. (2013). Teaching sport concepts and skills: A tactical games approach (3rd ed).

Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). Deciding to differentiate instruction in middle school: One school’s journey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 77–87.

0 Comments

Teaching Games for Understanding in the States

1/4/2021

0 Comments

By Neil Wallner
PE Teacher at Howard B. Thomas Grade School in Burlington, IL

Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @NeilWallner

My name is Neil Wallner and I teach grades Kindergarten through fifth grade (ages 5-10). I have been teaching physical education for 28 years at Howard B. Thomas Grade School in Burlington, IL. I’m always looking to improve upon my teaching, looking for best practices/methods in the physical education field.

I first came across Teaching Games for Understanding at a Physical Education workshop in St. Charles, Illinois, USA. I was intrigued by the speaker as he introduced a territorial/Invasion game involving offensive and defensive strategies. Upon further gameplay at the workshop and then researching the Teaching Games for Understanding website, I was able to incorporate the 6 basic pillars of TGfU. They include: Game form, game appreciation, tactical awareness, decision making, skill execution and performance.

TGfU Lesson Sequence

The lesson sequence for a typical tactical (TGfU) lesson is “(1) the initial game where students are exposed to a game that is based on specific objectives; (2) a student-centred Question and Answer (Q&A) session centred around the goal of the Game; (3) practice based on the Q&A and (4) the application of the skill in a game context” (Gubacs-Collins, 2007).

Below is a typical lesson sequence I present in a game involving offensive and defensive strategies. This game I named, INVASION (see video below):

After viewing INVASION video, I will have a brief talk with class going over as little rules as possible. This allows students (Ss) to jump right into TGfU gameplay and learn within the game itself. Ss are told we will meet at ‘Halftime’ to discuss the game further in detail and answer any questions.
Ss will now be instructed to go to an assigned court with their team OR choose an Ability level Court - Beginning, Developing or Secure.
After Ss put colored jerseys on, they now match up with a player on the other team. These 2 players from opposite teams will guard or ‘shadow’ each other.
INVASION gameplay begins after both teams have matched up.
I allow about 5 minutes of gameplay as I observe and take notes. When I call out ‘Halftime,’ all Ss sit together and we discuss what I observed and how to improve your quality of game. Some of my observations: What pass is more successful, a long pass or a short pass?, I noticed several Ss standing around and not moving (statues) on offense, what can you say to those teammates?, I noticed several Ss not shadowing their person, I saw Ss knocking the ball out of another player’s hands, is that allowed?, I noticed Ss shadowing other players, is that allowed?. I like to add the Turn And Talk method during these discussions as it engages & empowers the learner. Ss will talk to each other about various observations as stated above. I add a few more rules that were not covered in the beginning. Students may ask questions during this time.
Once the game resumes I notice a big improvement in the games. Ss are engaged, working together and improving their own independent gameplay. Now these strategies can be applied to other PE units as Ss understand INVASION terms.

Ability grouping

As an alternative to regular team gameplay, I allow several days within each PE unit for Ability grouping. We allow the students (Ss) to decide which ability level they want to participate in, Beginner, Developing, Secure. These ability levels look familiar to Ss as they are associated with their report card grades. The three terms imply as much about the attitude of play as well as ability. During PE class we discuss the following:

I ask the students to try to have almost equal numbers in each game. The vast majority of the students end up in the proper group based on ability and attitude without me having to intervene. This self-selection process allows them to play at the level they feel most comfortable for that particular game that day. It definitely helps to get the students “more touches” and higher time-on-task.

Pedagogical Principles of TGfU

Principles of play are particularly useful in shaping the progressive development of modified games within each game category (Hopper, 1998). Thorpe and Bunker (1989) introduced four pedagogical principles associated with TGfU that helped further define the model for teachers namely; Sampling, Representation, Exaggeration and Tactical Complexity (Thorpe & Bunker, 1989; Griffin & Patton, 2005).

I will touch on some Pedagogical Principles that I incorporate into my PE curriculum below:

Exaggeration - Involves changing the rules of the official game to emphasize a particular tactical objective. In our game INVASION, we introduce a defensive strategy called, Shadowing. This involves one player from each team of similar ability level to guard or play defence on each other. These two players can only shadow/guard each other. They cannot shadow/guard any other player.

Representation – Since modified games are derived from the official full sided game and tactics can be transferred between games within the same category, similar tactics can be taught once for entire game categories than teaching them in each game. This allows for quick progression within units with references made to previous units of the same category. In our game INVASION, I will introduce Ss to these basic offensive/defensive strategies in the beginning of the year so that these strategies can be applied to future units such as basketball, football, soccer, Ultimate Frisbee, etc….Ss for example, will understand the importance of moving to open space when their team has the ball and trying to score points for their team. Ss will also understand the basic concepts of playing defence and guarding your person, making it difficult for the other team to score. As the teacher, I can reference several key terms when presenting multiple Physical Education units involving offensive and defensive strategies. Some terms include: Guarding/Shadowing your person, Wall Up (putting your arms up on defence to make it difficult for the offensive player to pass the ball), Moving without the ball on offense, pass to open player, etc….

In closing, Teaching Games for Understanding can be beneficial to students of all ages. If students are given time to learn through lesson sequence, discuss observations and allowed time to play then student ability levels will increase, boosting student confidence as game enjoyment will skyrocket.

Spotify Podcast The 301, S2:E3 October 16, 2019,
Start at 16:34 Click here

0 Comments

<<Previous

Forward>>

An experience with the game-based approach in teaching sports to children in an extension project at a Brazilian university

Game Contribution Assessment Instrument (GCAI)

Engaging 100 pupils in a games based approach using Horst Wein's Game Model

Developing Game Sense in Physical Education and Sport

Special Edition: Global Lesson Study for a Better Game-Based Approach

Resources

Teaching games within preschool physical education programs

Themes and Application for TGfU in Elementary Physical Education: Insights from a Practitioners Perspective

Curriculum Foundation and Block Plan for a TGfU Elementary Soccer Unit

TGfU Assessments

Block Schedule

ANCILLARIES AND SUPPLEMENTS

Pre and Post-Test Rubric for Gameplay

Games-Based Goalkeeper Training: Using a TGfU model to optimise decision-making in developing football goalkeepers.

Differentiating Instruction using TGfU: New Insights from Instructional Models in Physical Education (4th ed.)

Teaching Games for Understanding in the States

TGfU Lesson Sequence

Ability grouping

Pedagogical Principles of TGfU

Guest Blogs

A complete database of our blog archives can be explored here

Archives

Resources

Curriculum Foundation and Block Plan for a TGfU Elementary Soccer Unit

TGfU Assessments

Block Schedule

ANCILLARIES AND SUPPLEMENTS​Pre and Post-Test Rubric for Gameplay

TGfU Lesson Sequence ​

Ability grouping

Pedagogical Principles of TGfU

Guest Blogs

A complete database of our blog archives can be explored here​

Archives

ANCILLARIES AND SUPPLEMENTS

Pre and Post-Test Rubric for Gameplay

TGfU Lesson Sequence

A complete database of our blog archives can be explored here