Observational analysis of student activity modes,lesson contexts and teacher interactions during games classes in high school (11—16 years) physical education
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2011
Observational analysis of student activity modes,lesson contexts and teacher interactions during games classes in high school (11—16 years) physical education
This purpose of this study was to examine student activity, lesson contexts and teacher interactions during secondary school physical education, using a recently validated systematic observation instrument termed the System for Observing the Teaching of Games in Physical Education (SOTG-PE). Thirty, single-gender high school (11—16 years) physical education games lessons were systematically observed and recorded using SOTG-PE. Results showed the pupils were engaged in high levels of inactivity. The highest level of inactivity was recorded (52.8 percent) in the striking/fielding category. In the lesson context category general management was recorded highest (47.4 percent). The highest recorded teacher interactions across the three games categories were verbally promoting technical behaviour (40.9 percent).
Alexander K., Penney D. ( 2005) Teaching under the influence: Feeding Games for Understanding into the Sport Education development refinement cycle. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy10(3): 287-301.
2.
Allison S., Thorpe R. ( 1997) A comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches to teaching games within physical education. A skill approach versus a game for understanding approach. British Journal of Physical Education : Autumn.
3.
Becker AJ, Wrisberg CA ( 2008) Effective coaching in action: Observations of legendary collegiate basketball coach, Pat Summitt. The Sport Psychologist22(2): 197-211.
4.
Brewer JC, Jones LR ( 2002) A five-stage process for establishing contextually valid systematic observation instruments: The case of rugby union. The Sport Psychologist16(2): 138-159.
5.
Brooker R., Kirk D., Braiuka S., and Bransgrove A. ( 2000) Implementing a game sense approach to teaching junior high school basketball in a naturalistic setting. European Physical Education Review6(1): 7-26.
6.
Bunker D., Thorpe R. ( 1982) A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools . Bulletin of Physical Education18(1): 5-8.
7.
Butler IJ ( 2006) Curriculum constructions of ability: Enhancing learning through Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) as a curriculum model. Sport , Education and Society11(3): 243-258.
8.
Butler IJ ( 2005) TGfU pet-agogy: Old dogs, new tricks and puppy school . Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy10(3): 225-240.
9.
Chow BC, McKenzie TL, and Louie L. ( 2008) Children’s physical activity and environmental influences during elementary school physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education27(1): 38-50.
10.
Cobb P., Yackel E. ( 1996)Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychologist31(3-4):175-190.
11.
Cousineau WJ, Luke MD ( 1990) Relationship between teacher expectations and academic learning time in sixth grade physical education lessons. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education9(4): 262-271.
12.
Evans J., Clarke C. ( 1988) Changing the face of physical education. In: Evans J (ed.) Teachers, teaching and control . London: Falmer.
13.
Fairclough SJ, Stratton G., and Baldwin G. ( 2002) The contribution of secondary school physical education to lifetime physical activity. European Physical Education Review8(1): 69-84.
14.
Fairclough SJ, Stratton G. ( 2005) Physical activity levels in middle and high school physical education: A review. Pediatric Exercise Science17(3): 17-220.
15.
Fairclough SJ, Mersh R. ( 2010) Physical activity, lesson context, and teaching behaviours within the revised English National Curriculum for Physical Education: A case study of one school. European Physical Education Review16(1): 29-45.
16.
Ford PR, Yates I., and Williams M. ( 2010) An analysis of practice activities and instructional behaviours used by youth soccer coaches during practice: Exploring the link between science and application. Journal of Sports Sciences28(5): 483-495.
17.
Fosnot CT ( 1996) Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice . New York: Teachers College Press .
18.
French KE, Thomas JR ( 1987) The relation of knowledge development to children’s basketball performance. Journal of Sport Psychology9(1): 15-32.
19.
García López LM, Contreas Jordán OR, Penney D., and Chandler T. ( 2009) The role transfer in games teaching: Implications for the development of the sports curriculum. European Physical Education Review15(1): 47-63.
20.
Gordon M. ( 2009) Toward a pragmatic discourse of constructivism: Reflections on lessons from practice, Educational Studies , 45: 39-58.
21.
Gower C., Capel S. ( 2004) Newly qualified physical education teachers’ experiences of developing subject knowledge prior to, during and after a Postgraduate Certificate in Education course. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy9(2): 165-183.
22.
Gréhaigne JF, Richard JF, and Griffin LL ( 2005) Teaching and Learning Team Sports and Games. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
23.
Griffin L., Oslin JL, and Mitchell SA ( 1995) An analysis of two instructional approaches to teaching net games. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport66: A-64.
24.
Hastie PA ( 1994) Selected teacher behaviours and pupil ALT-PE in secondary school physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education13(3): 242-259.
25.
Holt EJ, Ward P., and Wallhead TL ( 2006) The transfer of learning from play practices to game play in young adult soccer players. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy11(2): 101-118.
26.
Holt NL, Strean WB, and Bengoechea EG ( 2002) Expanding the teaching games for understanding model: new avenues for future research and practice. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education21(2): 162-176.
27.
Kirk D., MacPhail A. ( 2002) Teaching games for understanding and situated learning: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe model. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education21(2): 177-192.
28.
Laws C. ( 1994) Rhetorical justification for new approaches to teaching games: are teachers deluding themselves?Proceedings of the 10th Commonwealth and Scientific Congress, University of Victoria, Canada.
29.
Lee MA, Ward P. ( 2009) Generalization of tactics in tag rugby from practice to games in middle school physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy14(2): 189-207.
30.
Light R. ( 2002). The social nature of games: Pre-service primary teachers’ first experiences of TGfU, European Physical Education Review . 8(3): 291-310.
31.
Light R. ( 2004) Coaches’ experiences of Game Sense: Opportunities and challenges. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy9(2): 115-131.
32.
Light R., Fawns R. ( 2003) Knowing the game: Integrating speech and action through TGfU. Quest55(2): 161-176.
33.
Light R., Wallian N. ( 2008) A constructivist-informed approach to teaching swimming . Quest60(3): 387-404.
34.
Magill RA ( 1990) Motor Learning is meaningful for physical educators , Quest, 42(2): 126-133.
35.
McNeill MC, Fry JM, Wright SC, Tan CWK, and Rossi T. ( 2008) Structuring time and questioning to achieve tactical awareness in games lessons. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy13(3): 231-249.
36.
Mersh R.Fairclough SJ ( 2010) Physical activity, lesson context, and teaching behaviours within the revised English National Curriculum for Physical Education: A case study of one school. European Physical Education Review16(1): 29-45.
37.
Metzler MW ( 1989) A review of research on time in sport pedagogy . Journal of Teaching in Physical Education8(2): 87-103.
38.
Metzler MW ( 2005) Instructional Models for Physical Education. Michigan: Holcomb Hathaway Publishers, Inc.
39.
Mitchell SA, Griffin LL, and Oslin JL ( 1995) The effects of two instructional approaches on game performance . Pedagogy in Practice: Teaching and Coaching in Physical Education and Sports1(1): 36-48.
40.
QCA (2007a) Physical Education Programme of Study: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. URL: www.curriculum.qca.org.
41.
QCA (2007b) Physical Education: Programme of Study for Key Stage 3 and Attainment Target. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
42.
Oslin J., Mitchell S. ( 2006) Game-centred approaches to teaching physical education . In Kirk D, Macdonald D, and O’Sullivan M (ed.) The Handbook of Physical Education. Sage Publications: London, 627-651.
43.
Phillips DC ( 1995) The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism . Educational Researcher24(7): 5-12.
44.
Rink JE ( 1996) Tactical and skill approaches to teaching sport and games . Journal of Teaching in Physical Education15(4): 397-398.
45.
Roberts SJ ( 2011) Teaching games for understanding: The difficulties and challenges experienced by participation cricket coaches. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy16(1): 33-48.
46.
Roberts SJ, Fairclough SJ (in press) A five-stage process for the development and validation of a systematic observation instrument: The System for Observing the Teaching of Games in Physical Education (SOTG-PE). European Journal of Physical Education.
47.
Rovegno I. ( 1998) The development of in-service teachers’ knowledge of a constructivist approach to physical education: Teaching beyond activities . Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport69(2): 147-62.
48.
Rovegno I., Bandhauer D. ( 1997) Norms of the school culture that facilitated teacher adoption and learning of a constructivist approach to physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education16(4): 401-25.
49.
Siedentop D., Tousignant M., and Parker M. ( 1982) Academic learning time - Physical education, 1982 revision coding manual. Unpublished manuscript.
50.
Siedentop D., Tannehill D. ( 2000) Developing Teaching Skills in Physical Education , fourth edition. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.
51.
Silverman S. ( 1991) Research on teaching in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport62(4): 352-364.
52.
Sweeting T., Rink JE ( 1999) Effects of direct instruction and environmentally designed instruction on the process and product characteristics of a fundamental skill . Journal of Teaching in Physical Education18(2): 216-233.
53.
Tallir IB, Musch E., Valcke M., and Lenoir M. ( 2005) Effects of two instructional approaches for basketball on decision-making and recognition ability. International Journal of Sport Psychology36(2): 107-126.
54.
Tinning R. ( 2006) Theoretical orientations in physical education . In: Kirk D, Macdonald D, and O’Sullivan M (ed.), The Handbook of Physical Education. London: Sage Publications, 369-385.
55.
Turner AP, Martinek TJ ( 1999) An investigation into teaching games for understanding: Effects on skill, knowledge and game play. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport70(3): 286-296.
56.
Wallian N., Chang C-W. ( 2006) Development and learning of motor skill competencies . In: Kirk D, Macdonald D, and O’Sullivan M (ed.), The Handbook of Physical Education. London: Sage Publications, 292-311.
57.
Williams MA, Hodges NJ ( 2005) Practice, instruction and skill acquisition in soccer: Challenging tradition. Journal of Sports Sciences23(6): 637-650.
58.
Windschitl M. ( 2002) Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual pedagogical, cultural and political challenges facing teachers, Review of Educational Research , 72: 131-175.
59.
Wright J., Forrest G. ( 2007) A social semiotic analysis of knowledge construction and games centred approaches to teaching. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy12(3): 273-288.
60.
Wright S., McNeill M., Fry J., and Wang J. ( 2005) Teaching teachers to play and teach games. Physical Education and Sports Pedagogy10(1): 61-82.
