Implications of instructional strategies in sport teachinga nonlinear pedagogy-based approach

  1. Gil, Alexander
  2. Araujo, Duarte
  3. García-González, Luis
  4. Moreno, Maria Perla
  5. del Villar, Fernando
Revista:
European Journal of Human Movement

ISSN: 0214-0071,  2386-4095

Año de publicación: 2014

Número: 32

Páginas: 104-124

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: European Journal of Human Movement

Resumen

In this article, we have tried to establish the practical implications of instructional strategies in sport teaching.  Firstly, we have highlighted the importance of the Teaching Game for Understanding as a teaching model that is fundamentally based on the use of modified games, whose purpose is for students to learn the tactical aspects of a certain sport, by way of modified versions of the real game.  Later on, we have gone further into depth into a new way of understanding the teaching-learning process in sport, non-Linear Pedagogy, which is based on manipulating the relevant determining factors (task, environment and individual) to increase information sources and thus be able to guide students towards obtaining their objectives.  Within non-linear pedagogy, verbal instruction (e.g., questioning) is considered to be a determining factor that attempts to channel the search for tactical solutions within a learning environment.  Finally, we end the article with a section that refers to practical applications, where we purport to give a series of guidelines on how to implement questioning as a didactical resource whose aim is to improve students’ tactical action capacity.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Allison, S. & Thorpe, R. (1997). A comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches to teaching games within physical education. A skills approach versus a games for understanding approach. The British Journal of Education, 28 (3), 9-13.
  • Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
  • Araújo, D. (2009). O desenvolvimento da competencia táctica no desporto: o papel dos constrangimentos no comportamento decisional. Motriz, 15(3), 537-570.
  • Araújo, D. & Davids, K. (2009). Ecological approaches to cognition and action in sport and exercise: Ask not only what you do, but where you do it. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 40(1), 5-37.
  • Araújo, D., Davids, K., Bennett, S., Button, C., & Chapman, G. (2004). Emergence of Sport Skills under Constraints. In A. M. Williams & N. J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: Research, theory and practice (pp. 409–434). London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
  • Araujo, D., Davids, K., & Hristovski, R. (2006). The ecological dynamics of decision making in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 7, 653-676.
  • Araújo, D., Davids, K., & Serpa, S. (2003). Decision dynamics and intentional behaviour in one-on-one situations. Abstract Book Science and Football V. (p. 234-235). Madrid: Editorial Gymnos.
  • Arias, J. L., Argudo, F. M., & Alonso, J.I. (2011). Rules as didactical variables. an example in formative basketball. International Journal of Medicine and Science of Physical Activity and Sport, 43(11), 491-512
  • Batting, W. F. (1979). The flexibility of human memory. In L.S. Cermak and F.I.M. Craik (Eds.) Levels of processing in human memory (pp. 23-44) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Beaudet, B. & Grube, D. (2005). Simplifying volleying through modified game play. Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 16(4), 32-33
  • Blomqvist, M., Luhtanen, P., & Laakso, L. (2001). Comparison of two types of instruction in badminton. European Journal of Physical Education, 6, 139-155.
  • Bunker, D. & Thorpe, R. (1982) A model for the teaching of games in the secondary school. Bulletin of Physical Education, 10, 9–16.
  • Butler, J., Griffin, L., Lombardo, B., Nastasi, R., &Robson, C. (2003). Reflections and projections. In J. Butler, L. Griffin, B. Lombardo & R. Nastasi (Eds.), Teaching games for understanding in physical education and sport (pp. 213-221). Redmond, VA: NASPE Publications.
  • Carvalho, J., Araújo, D., García-González, L., & Iglesias, D. (2011). Decision-making training in tennis: what scientific principles can be applied to training programmes? Revista de Psicología del Deporte, 20(2), 767-783.
  • Carvalho, J., Correia, V., & Araújo, D., (2013). A constraints-led approach to skill enhancement in tennis. ITF Coaching and Sport Science Review, 60(21), 10-11.
  • Chow, J. Y., Davids, K. Button, C., Shuttleworth, R., Renshaw,, I., & Araújo, D. (2006). Nonlinear pedagogy: A constrints-led framework for understanding emergence of game play and movement skills. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Science, 10(1), 71-103.
  • Chow, J.Y., Davids, K., Hristovski, R., Arauújo, D., & Passos, P. (2011). Nonlinear Pedagogy: Learning design for self-organizing neurobiological systems. New Ideas in Psychology, 29(2), 189–200.
  • Chow, J.Y., Davids, K, Button, C, Shuttleworth, R, Renshaw, I., & Araújo, D. (2007). The role of nonlinear pedagogy in physical education. Review of Educational Research, 77,251–78.
  • Chow, J.Y., Koh,M., Davids, K., Button, C., & Rein, R. (2013). Effects of different instructional constraints on task performance and emergence of coordination in children. European Journal of Sport Science, DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2013.780097
  • Clemente, F. M. (2012). Princípios pedagógicos dos teaching games for understanding e da pedagogia não-linear no ensino da educação física. Movimento, 18(2), 315-335.
  • Conte, L., Moreno-Murcia, J. A., Pérez, G., & Iglesias, D. (2013). Traditional and comprehensive comparison methodology in practice basketball. International Journal of Medicine and Science of Physical Activity and Sport, 13(51), 507-523.
  • Cordovil, R., Araújo, D., Davids, K., Gouvela, L., Barreiros, J., Fernandes, O., and Serpa, S. (2009). The influence of instructions and body-scaling as constraints on decisionmaking processes in team sports. European Journal of Sport Science, 9(3), 169-179.
  • Davids, K., Araújo, D., Correia, V., & Vilar, L. (2013). How small-sided and conditioned games enhance acquisition of movement and decision-making skills. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, 41(3), 154–161.
  • Davids, K., Araújo, D., Vilar, L., Renshaw, I., & Pinder, R. (2013). An Ecological Dynamics Approach to Skill Acquisition: Implications for Development of Talent in Sport. Talent Development & Excellence, 5(1), 21–34.
  • Davids, K., Button, C, & Bennett, S. J. (2008) Dynamics of skill acquisition : a constraints-led approach. Human Kinetics, Champaign, Illinois.
  • Díaz-Cueto, M. & Castejón, F. J. (2011). La enseñanza comprensiva del deporte: dificultades del profesorado en el diseño de tareas y en la estrategia de pregunta-respuesta. Tándem. Didáctica de la Educación Física, 37, 31-41.
  • Díaz-Cueto, M., Hernández-Álvarez, J. L., & Castejón, F. J. (2012). Question-answer strategy as key change of sports comprehensive teaching in Physical Education: Case studies. Cultura y Educación, 24(3), 279-288.
  • Dyson, B., Griffin, L.L., & Hastie, P. (2004). Sport Education, tactical game and cooperative learning: theoretical and pedagogical considerations. Quest, 56, 226-240.
  • Ford, P. R., Yates, I., & Williams, A. M. (2011). An analysis of practice activities and instructional behaviours used by youth soccer coaches during practice: Exploring the link between science and application. Journal of Sport Science, 28(5), 483-495.
  • García-Herrero, J. A. & Ruiz, L. M. (2003). Análisis comparativo de dos modelos de intervención en el aprendizaje del balonmano. Revista de Psicología del Deporte, 12(1), 55-66.
  • García-Herrero, J. A. & Ruiz, L. M. (2007). Knowledge and action in the first stages of learning of the handball. Apunts. Educación Física y Deportes, 89, 48-55.
  • Good, T. L. & Brophy, J. E. (200). Looking in classrooms. New York: Longman.
  • Gray, S. & Sproule, J. (2011). Developing Pupils' Performance in Team Invasion Games: a comparative study within a Scottish context. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 16 (1), 15-32.
  • Gréhaigne, J. F., Wallian, N., & Godbout, P. (2005). Tactical-decision learning model and students’ practices. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10, 255-269.
  • Griffin, L. L., Brooker, R., & Patton, K. (2005). Working towards legitimacy: Two decades of Teaching Games for Understanding. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10, 213-223.
  • Griffin, L. L. & Patton, K. (2005). Two decades of Teaching Games for Understanding: Looking at the past, present, and future. In L. L. Griffin & J. Butler (Eds.). Teaching Games for Understanding: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 1-17). Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics.
  • Harvey, S., Cushion, C. J., & Mass-Gonzalez, M. (2010). Learning a new method: Teaching Games for Understanding in the coaches’ eyes. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 15(4), 361-382.
  • Herbert, E., Landin D., & Solmon, M. (2000). The Impact of Task Progressions on Students’ Practice, Quality and Task-Related Thoughts. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 19, 338-354.
  • Hodges, N. J. & Franks, I. M. (2003). Modelling coaching practice: the role of instruction and demonstration. Journal of Sports Sciences, 20, 793- 811.
  • Holt, N. L. Strean, W. B., & García, E. (2002). Expanding the teaching games for understanding model: New avenues for future research and practice. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 21, 162–76.
  • Hopper, T. (2002). Teaching games for understanding: The importance of student emphasis over content emphasis. Journal of Physical Education Recreation and Dance, 73, 44-48.
  • Iglesias, D., Cárdenas, D., & Alarcón, F. (2007). Communication during the didactic intervention of the coach considerations for the development of tactial knowledge and the improvement in decision making in basketball. Culture, Science and Sport, 7(3), 43-50.
  • Ismail, H. & Alexander, J. M. (2005). Learning within scripted and non-scripted peer tutoring sessions: The Malaysian context. Journal of Educational Research, 99, 67-77.
  • King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368.
  • Kirk, D. & MacPhail, A. (2002). Teaching Games for Understanding and situated learning: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe model. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 21, 177-192.
  • Light, R. (2003). The joy of learning: Emotion and learning in games through TGfU. Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 36 (1), 93-99.
  • Light, R. & Fawns, R. (2003). Knowing the game: Integrating speech and action through TGfU. Quest, 55, 161-177.
  • Lopes, J. E., Araújo, D., Duarte, R., Davids, K., and Fernandes, O. (2012). Instructional constraints on movement and performance of players in the penalty kick. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 12, 311-345.
  • Mitchell, S. A., Griffin, L. L., & Oslin, J. L. (1995). An analysis of two instructional approaches to teaching invasion games. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, March Supplement: A-65-66.
  • Mitchell, S. A., Oslin, J. L., & Griffin, L. L. (2003). Sport Foundations for Elementary Physical Education: A Tactical Games Approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  • Mitchell, S. A., Oslin, J. L., & Griffin, L. L. (2006). Teaching sport concepts and skill. A tactical games approach (2ª ed.). Champaign: Human Kinetics.
  • Newell KM (1986). Constraints on the development of coordination. In M. Wade, H.T.A. Whiting (Eds): Motor Development in Children: Aspects of Coordination and Control (pages 341-360). Dordrecht, Germany: Martinus Nijhoff.
  • Newell, K. M. (1996). Change in movement and skill: learning, retention and transfer. En M, Latash, & M. Turvey (Eds.). Desterity and its development (pp. 393-429). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
  • Newell, K. M. & McDonald, P. V. (1994). Learning to coordinate redundant biomechanical degrees of freedom. In S. Winne, H. Heuer, J. Massion, Casaer, P. (Eds.). Interlimb coordination: neural, dynamical, and cognitive constraints (pp. 515-536). New York: Academic Press.
  • Newell, K. M., & Ranganathan, R. (2010). Instructions as constraints in motor skill acquisition. In I. Renshaw, K. Davids, & G. J. P. Savelsbergh (Eds.), Motor Learning in Practice: A constraints-led approach (pp. 17-32).London: Routledge.
  • Nicholls, J. G. (1989). The competitive ethos and democratic education. Cambridge, MA, US: Harvard University Press.
  • Passos, P., Araújo, D., Davids, K., & Shuttleworth, R. (2008). Manipulating constraints to train decision making in Rugby Union. Interntional Journal of Sport Science and Coaching, 3(1), 125-140.
  • Raab, M. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning of decision making in sports is affected by complexity of situation. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 34, 273-288.
  • Renshaw, I. J. Y. Chow, K. Davids, & Hammond, J. (2010). A constraints-led perspective to understanding skill acquisition and game play: A basis for integration of motor learning theory and physical education praxis? Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 15, 117–37.
  • Renshaw, I., K. Davids, R. Shuttleworth, & Chow, J. (2009). Insights from ecological psychology and dynamical systems theory can underpin a philosophy of coaching. International Journal of SportnPsychology 40, 540–602.
  • Rink, J. (1993). Teaching physical education for learning. St. Louis: Mosby
  • Rink, J. E., French, K. E., & Tjeerdsma (1996). Foundations for the learning and instruction of sport and games. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 15, 399-417.
  • Roberts, G., Treasure, D. & Conroy, D. (2007). Understanding the dynamics of motivation in sport and physical activity: an achievement goal interpretation. En G. Tenenbaum y R. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of Sport Psychology (3rd ed., pp. 3-30). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
  • Rovegno, I., M. Nevett, M. & Babiarz, M. (2001). Learning and teaching invasion-game tactics in 4th grade: Introduction and theoretical perspective. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 20, 341–351.
  • Strean, W. B. & Bengoechea, E. G. (2003). Beyond technical vs tactical: Extending the games-teaching debate. In J. Butler, L. Griffin, B. Lombardo & R. Nastasi (Eds.), Teaching games for understanding in physical education and sport (pp. 181-188). Redmond, VA: NASPE Publications.
  • Tan, C. W. K. , Chow, J. , & Davids, K. (2011) 'How does TGfU work?': examining the relationship between learning design in TGfU and a nonlinear pedagogy. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, DOI: 10.1080/17408989.2011.582486
  • Tallir, I., Musch, E., Valcke, M., & Lenoir, M. (2005). Effects of two instructional approaches for basketball on decision-making and recognition ability. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 36, 107-126.
  • Thorpe, R., Bunker, D., & Almond, L. (1986). Rethinking games teaching. Loughborough: University of Technology.
  • Turner, A. P. & Martinek, T. J. (1995). Teaching for understanding: a model for improving decision making during game play. Quest, 47(1), 44-63.
  • Van Acker, R., Carreiro da Costa, F., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., Cardon, G. & Haerens, L. (2010). Sex equity and physical activity levels in coeducational Physical Education: exploring the potential of modified game forms. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 15, 159-173.
  • Vilar, L., Duarte, R., Silva, P., Chow, J.Y., & Davids, K. (2014). The influence of pitch dimensions on performance during small-sided and conditioned soccer games. Journal of Sports Sciences, DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2014.918640.
  • Vickers, J. N. (2007). Perception, Cognition, and Decision Training. The Quiet Eye in Action. Human Kinetics.
  • Williams, A. M. & Hodges, N. J. (2005). Practice, instruction and skill acquisition in soccer: challenging tradition. Journal of Sport Science, 23(6), 637-650.
  • Williams, A. M. & Ward, P. (2007). Anticipation and decision making: exploring new horizons. In G. Tenembaum, y H. C. Eklund (Eds). Handbook of Sport Psychology (pp. 203-223). Wiley.
  • Wulf G., Töllner T., & Shea H. (2007) Attentional focus effects as a function of task complexity. Research Quartely Exercise Sport, 78, 257–64.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet