1 / 20

By: Catherine Fortin

Explore the Tactical Games Approach grounded in constructivist learning, focusing on psychomotor, cognitive, and social/personal domains, with various game classifications and implementation examples.

rheather
Download Presentation

By: Catherine Fortin

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tactical Games “Tell me, I forget… show me, I understand…. Involve me, I remember.” By: Catherine Fortin

  2. History • 1960's Loughborough University, England • 1982 Teaching for Understanding Bunker and Thorpe • 1986 Bunker, Thorpe, and Almond • 1996 Werner, Bunker, and Thorpe – TGFUStudents at Central Washington University 

  3. Timeline

  4. Timeline Badminton was created in the 16th century and Billiard and Squash in 19th century.

  5. What is Tactical games? • The tactical games approach is grounded in a constructivist learning perspective that recognizes the centrality of the learner to the construction of meaning across the psychomotor, cognitive, and social/personal domains.

  6. Invasion games In invasion games teams score by moving a ball or other projectile into another team’s territory and either shooting into a fixed target like a goal or a basket or moving the projectile across an open-ended target like in hockey where the puck need to cross the line to score a goal. Net/Wall games In net/wall games, teams or individual players score by hitting a ball into a court space with sufficient accuracy and power so that opponents cannot hit it back before it bounces once like in volleyball or badminton or twice as in tennis or racquetball.

  7. Striking/ Fielding games In striking/fielding games such as baseball, softball, and cricket, players on the batting team must strike a ball with sufficient accuracy and power so that it eludes players on the fielding team and gives the hitter time to run between two destinations. Target games In target games, players score by throwing or striking a ball to a target. The target can be either opposed like in shuffleboard or croquet or unopposed like in golf and bowling.

  8. GAMES CLASSIFICATION FT= Focused Target ; OET=open-ended target; I= implement; H= hand Adapted, by permission,. From L. Almond, 1986, Reflection on themes: A games classification. In Rethinking games teaching, edited by R. Thorpe, D. Bunker, and L. Almond (Loughborough University), 71-72.

  9. Use of model for different grade levels: Elementary school Middle school Secondary school

  10. Games Education program (time allocation: one period per week)

  11. Foundation course- sport education

  12. Implementation of tactical games Elementary Level I example for Net/Wall games Level 1

  13. Implementation of tactical games Elementary Level II example for Striking/Fielding games Level 2

  14. Implementation of tactical games Elementary Level III example for Target games Level 3

  15. Implementation of tactical games Example of Invasion games

  16. Implementation of tactical games Example of Target games

  17. Pros • Cognitive skills • Forces organization • Play games early on • Decision making • Can move at your own rhythm for some sports

  18. Cons • Needs a lot of time to be effective • Suitable for older students • Limited creativity • Cognitive over physical

  19. Resources • Brian Sather, PhD - Eastern Oregon University. (n.d.). Retrieved May 22, 2008, from http://www2.eou.edu/~bsather. (http://www.eou.edu/~bsather/pes270_history_philosophy_sport/timeline.pdf) • Griffin, L., Mitchell, S., & Oslin, J. (2003). Sport Foundations for Elementary Physical Education: A Tactical Games Approach. Champaign, ILHuman Kinetics Publishers: Human Kinetics Publishers. • Griffin, L., L., J., Mitchell, S., & Oslin, P. (2005). Teaching Sport Concepts And Skills: A Tactical Games Approach. Champaign, ILHuman Kinetics Publishers: Human Kinetics Publishers. • Pagnano-Richardson, K., & Henninger, M. (). A model for developing and assessing tactical decision-making competency in game play: this framework will help teachers develop age-appropriate instruction and assessment tools.. JOPERD--The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 26. • Werner, Peter, Rod Thorpe, and David Bunker. "Teaching games for understanding: evolution of a model." JOPERD--The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 67.n1 (Jan 1996): 28(6). General OneFile. Gale. Eastern Michigan University. 22 May 2008 <http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.emich.edu/ips/start.do?prodId=IPS> • Wikipedia. (n.d.). Retrieved May 19, 2008, from http://wikipedia.com. • (2005). Teaching Games For Understanding: Theory, Research, And Practice. Champaign, ILHuman Kinetics Publishers: Human Kinetics Publishers.

More Related