Teaching games for understanding in American high-school soccer: A quantitative data analysis using the game performance assessment instrument

Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 29-54

  Harvey, Stephen ^a   Cushion, Christopher J ^b   Wegis, Heidi M ^c   Massa Gonzalez, Ada N ^c  

^a LEEDS METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Defending; Game play; Off the ball skills; Practice referenced; Soccer

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960627628     PISSN: 17408989     EISSN: 17425786     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17408980902729354     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Allison, S., and R. Thorpe. 1997. A comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches to teaching games within physical education. British Journal of Physical Education 28, no. 3: 9-13.
2. Australian Sports Commission. 1997. Games sense: Developing thinking players. Canberra, Australia: ASC.
3. Bunker, D., and R. Thorpe. 1982. A model for the teaching of games in the secondary school. Bulletin of Physical Education 10: 9-16.
4. Butler, J.I. 1997. How would Socrates teach games? A constructivist approach. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 68, no. 9: 42-7.
5. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
6. Côte, J., J. Baker, and B. Abernathy. 2003. From play to practice: A developmental framework for the acquisition of expertise in team sports. In Expert performance in sports: Advances in research in sports expertise, ed. J. Starkes and K.A. Ericsson, 89-114. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
7. Gréhaigne, J.-F., P. Godbout, and D. Bouthier. 1997. Performance assessment in team sports. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 16: 500-16.
8. Griffin, L.L., R. Brooker, and K. Patton. 2005. Working towards legitimacy: Two decades of teaching games for understanding. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 10, no. 3: 213-23.
9. Griffin, L.L., S.A. Mitchell, and J.L. Oslin. 1997. Teaching sport concepts and skills: A tactical games approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
10. Griffin, L.L., J.L. Oslin, and S.A. Mitchell. 1995. An analysis of two instructional approaches to teaching net games. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, Suppl.: A64.
11. Griffin, L.L., and J.-F. Richard. 2003. Using authentic assessment to improve students' net/wall game play. Teaching Elementary Physical Education 14, no. 2: 23-7.
12. Harvey, S. 2004. A study of U19 college soccer players' improvement in game performance using the Game Performance Assessment Instrument. In Proceedings of the 2nd International conference: Teaching sport and physical education for understanding, ed. R. Light, K. Swabey and R. Brooker, 11-25. Vic. University of Melbourne, 11-14 December 2003, Australia.
13. Hastie, P.A. 2003. Teaching sport within physical education. In Student learning in physical education: Applying research to enhance instruction, 2nd ed., ed. S.J. Silverman and C.D. Ennis, 227-40. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
14. Hastie, P.A., and M.D. Curtner-Smith. 2006. Influence of a hybrid sport education games for understanding model on one teacher and his students. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 11: 1-27.
15. Holt, J.E., P. Ward, and T.L. Wallhead. 2006. The transfer of learning from play practices to game play in young adult soccer players. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 11, no. 2: 101-18.
16. Hopper, T. 2002. Teaching games for understanding: The importance of student emphasis over content emphasis. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 73, no. 7: 44-8.
17. Hopper, T. 2003. Four r's for tactical awareness: Applying game performance assessment in net/wall games. Journal of Teaching Elementary Physical Education 4, no. 2: 16-21.
18. Kirk, D. 2005. Future prospects for teaching games for understanding. In Teaching games for understanding. Theory, research and practice, ed. J.I. Butler and L.L. Griffin, 213-27. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
19. Kirk, D., and D. Macdonald. 1998. Situated learning in physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 17: 376-87.
20. Kirk, D., and A. MacPhail. 2002. Teaching games for understanding and situated learning: Re-thinking the Bunker-Thorpe model. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 21: 177-92.
21. Launder, A.G. 2001. Play practice: The games approach to teaching and coaching sports. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
22. Lawton, J. 1989. Comparison of two teaching methods in games. Bulletin of Physical Education 25, no. 1: 35-8.
23. MacPhail, A., D. Kirk, and L.L. Griffin. 2008. Throwing and catching as relational skills in game play: Situated learning in a modified game unit. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 27: 100-15.
24. Mandigo, J.L., J.C. Spence, L.P. Thompson, N. Melnychuk, M. Schwartz, D. Marshall, and J.C. Dunn. 2004. Factors influencing the delivery and content of physical education classes in Alberta. Avante 10, no. 1: 1-15.
25. McMorris, T. 1998. Teaching games for understanding: Its contribution to the knowledge of skill acquisition from a motor learning perspective. European Journal of Physical Education 3, no. 1: 65-74.
26. McPherson, S.L. 1994. The development of sport expertise: Mapping the tactical domain. Quest 46: 223-40.
27. Memmert, D., and S. Harvey. 2008. The Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI): Some concerns and solutions for further development. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 27, no. 2: 220-40.
28. Metzler, M.W. 2000. Tactical games: Teaching games for understanding. In Instructional models for physical education, ed. M.W. Metzler, 339-79. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
29. Metzler, M.W. 2005a. Tactical games: Teaching games for understanding. In Instructional models for physical education, 2nd ed., ed. M.W. Metzler, 401-38. Scottsdale, AZ: Halcomb Hathaway.
30. Metzler, M.W. 2005b. Implications of models-based research for research on teaching: A focus on teaching games for understanding. In Teaching games for understanding. Theory, research and practice, ed. L.L. Griffin and J.I. Butler, 183-97. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
31. Mitchell, S.A., L.L. Griffin, and J.L. Oslin. 1995. An analysis of two instructional approaches to teaching invasion games. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport Suppl.: A65-A66.
32. Mitchell, S.A., and J.L. Oslin. 1999. An investigation of tactical transfer in net games. European Journal of Physical Education 4, no. 2: 162-72.
33. Mitchell, S.A., J.L. Oslin, and L.L. Griffin. 2006. Teaching sport concepts and skills: A tactical games approach, 2nd ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
34. Oslin, J.L., S.A. Mitchell, and L.L. Griffin. 1998. The Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI): Development and preliminary validation. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 17, no. 2: 231-43.
35. Pope, C.C. 2005. Once more with feeling: Affect and playing with the TGfU model. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 10, no. 3: 271-86.
36. Richard, J.-F., P. Godbout, and L.L. Griffin. 2002. Assessing game performance: An introduction to the Team SportAssessment Procedure (TSAP). Physical andHealth Education Journal 68, no. 1: 12-18.
37. Rink, J.E., K.E. French, and K.C. Graham. 1996. Implications for practice and research. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 15: 490-502.
38. Rovegno, I., M. Nevett, S. Brock, and M. Babiarz. 2001. Teaching and learning basic invasion-game tactics in 4th grade: A descriptive study from situated and constraints theoretical perspectives. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 20, no. 4: 370-88.
39. Stratton, G., T. Reilly, A.M. Williams, and D. Richardson. 2004. Youth soccer: From science to performance. London: Routledge.
40. Tallir, I., E. Musch, M. Lenoir, and M. Valcke. 2004. Assessment of game play in basketball. In Proceedings of the 2nd International conference: Teaching sport and physical education for understanding, ed. R. Light, K. Swabey and R. Brooker, 99-107. Vic. University of Melbourne, 11-14 December 2003, Australia.
41. Thomas, J.R., W. Salazar, and D.M. Landers. 1991. What is missing in p,.05? Effect size. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 62, no. 3: 344-48.
42. Turner, A.P. 1996. Teachers' perceptions of technical and tactical models of instruction. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport Suppl.: A90.
43. Turner, A.P. 2003. A comparative analysis of two approaches for teaching tennis: Games for understanding approach versus the technique approach [abstract]. Paper presented at the 2nd International conference: Teaching sport and physical education for understanding, 11-14 December, Melbourne, Vic. University of Melbourne, Australia.
44. Turner, A.P., and T.J. Martinek. 1992. A comparative analysis of two models for teaching games (technique approach and game centered (tactical focus) approach). International Journal of Physical Education 29, no. 4: 15-31.
45. Turner, A.P., and T.J. Martinek. 1995. Teaching for understanding: A model for improving decision making during game play. Quest 47: 44-63.
46. Turner, A.P., and T.J. Martinek. 1999. An investigation into teaching games for understanding: Effects on skill, knowledge, and game play. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 70, no. 3: 286-96.
47. van der Mars, H. 1989. Observer reliability: Issues and procedures. In Analyzing physical education and sport instruction, 2nd ed., ed. P. Darst, D. Zakrajsek and V. Mancini, 53-80. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
48. Werner, P., R. Thorpe, and D. Bunker. 1996. Teaching games for understanding: Evolution of a model. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 67, no. 1: 28-33.
49. Williams, A.M., K. Davids, L. Burwitz, and J.G. Williams. 1994. Visual search strategies in experienced and inexperienced soccer players. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 65, no. 2: 127-35.