The impact of a hybrid Sport Education-Invasion Games Competence Model soccer unit on students' decision making, skill execution and overall game performance

European Physical Education Review

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 205-219

  Mesquita, Isabel ^a   Farias, Cláudio ^a   Hastie, Peter ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PORTO   (Portugal)

^b AUBURN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

game performance; hybrid unit; soccer teaching; teaching models

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861820532     PISSN: 1356336X     EISSN: 17412749     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1356336X12440027     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Allison S,Thorpe R.A comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches to teaching games within physical education. A skills approach versus a games for understanding approach.British Journal of Physical Education. 1997;28 (3): 9-13.
2. Belka DE.Combining and sequencing games skills.Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. 2004;75 (4): 23-27.
3. Blomqvist M,Vänttinen T,Luhtanen P.Assessment of secondary school students' decision-making and game-play ability in soccer.Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 2005;10(2):107-119.
4. Brown TBJ,Carlson TB,Hastie PA.A comparison of rugby seasons presented in traditional and sport education formats.European Physical Education Review. 2004;10(2):199-214.
5. Carlson TB,Hastie PA.The student social system within sport education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 1997;16(2):176-195.
6. Curtner-Smith MD.A hybrid sport education - Games for understanding striking/fielding unit for upper elementary pupils.Teaching Elementary Physical Education. 2004;15 (5): 7-16.
7. Fleiss JLStatistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: John Wiley; 1981:.
8. Graça A,Musch E,Mertens B, et al.,Il Congreso Ibérico De Baloncesto. Spain: Caceres; 2003:27-29.
9. Harrison JM,Blakemore CL,Richards RP, et al.The effects of two instructional models - tactical and skill teaching - on skill development and game play, knowledge, self-efficacy, and student perceptions in volleyball.The Physical Educator. 2004;61 (4): 186-199.
10. Hastie PA.Skill and tactical development during a sport education season.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1998;69 (4): 368-379.
11. Hastie PA,Curtner-Smith MD.Influence of a hybrid sport education - Teaching games for understanding unit on one teacher and his students.Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 2006;11 (4): 1-27.
12. Hastie PA,Martínez de Ojeda D,Calderón A.A review of research on sport Education: 2004 to the present.Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 2011;16 (2): 103-132.
13. Hastie PA,Sinelnikov OA,Guarino AJ.The development of skill and tactical competencies during a season of badminton.European Journal of Sport Science. 2009;9:133-140.
14. Kirk DTeaching Games for Understanding: Theory, Research and Practice. Griffin LLButler J, ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2005:213-226.
15. Light RTeaching Games for Understanding: Theory, Research and Practice. Griffin LLButler J, ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2005:169-182.
16. McPherson SL,Kernodle MWExpert Performance in Sports. Starkes JLEricsson KA, ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2003:137-168.
17. Mesquita I,Graça A,Gomes R, et al.,Examining the impact of a step game approach to teaching volleyball on student tactical decision making and skill execution during game play.Journal of Human Movement Studies. 2005;48 (6): 469-492.
18. Metzler MWInstructional Models for Physical Education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 2000:.
19. Mitchell SA,Oslin JL,Griffin LLTeaching Sport Concepts and Skills: A Tactical Games Approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2006:.
20. Musch E,Mertens B,Timmers E, et al,.the 7th annual congress of the European College of Sport Science. Greece: Athens; 2002:.
21. Oslin J,Mitchell S,Griffin L.The Game Performance Assessment instrument (GPAI): Development and preliminary validation.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 1998;17 (2): 231-243.
22. Placek J,Griffin L.The understanding and development of learners' domain-specific knowledge: Concluding comments.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 2001;20 (4): 401-406.
23. Pritchard T,Hawkins A,Wiegand R, et al.Effects of two instructional approaches on skill development, knowledge, and game performance.Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science. 2008;12 (4): 219-236.
24. Ricardo V,Graça Athe teaching games for understanding 2008 international conference. Canada: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia; 2008:.
25. Rink JTeaching Physical Educational for Learning. 1993) Teaching Physical Educational for Learning. 2nd ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby.St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1993:.
26. Siedentop DSport Education: Quality PE through Positive Sports Experiences. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1994:.
27. Tabachnick BG,Fidell LSUsing Multivariate Statistics. 2001) Using Multivariate Statistics. 4nd ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 2001:.
28. Tallir IB,Musch E,Valcke M, et al.Do alternative instructional approaches result in different game performance learning outcomes? Authentic assessment in varying game conditions.International Journal of Sport Psychology. 2007;38 (3): 263-282.
29. Thomas KT,Thomas JR.Developing expertise in sport: The relation of knowledge and performance.International Journal of Sport Psychology. 1994;25 (3): 295-312.
30. Turner AP2nd international conference: Teaching sport and physical education for understanding. Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne; 2003:11.
31. Turner AP,Martinek TJ.An investigation into teaching games for understanding: Effects on skill, knowledge, and game play.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 1999;70 (3): 286-296.
32. Wallhead TL,O'Sullivan M.Sport education: Physical education for the millennium?.Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 2005;10 (2): 181-210.