A Comparative analysis of two Models for Teaching Games (Technique Approach and Game-Centered (Tactical Focus) Approach)

by A.P. Turner and J. Martinek –

SUMMARY by Kate Flemming

Focus The purpose of this article was to validate Bunker and Thorpe’s 6-Stage model for teaching games for understanding by comparing it to a technique approach to teaching. This comparison was done in a study where two teachers used both techniques to teach 4 groups of inexperienced students to play field hockey. The authors described the key problem as being a lack of research “in the area of student decision-making during the playing of games in physical education lessons”.

Reasoning The authors believe that the technique orientation that the teachers use to develop skills creates teacher dependant students. This happens because the students are constantly being guided and prompted instead of thinking critically about the game. One reason the authors give for the teachers’ skill based approach is that it is easier for them to evaluate the student’s performance in the PE class.

Assumptions The assumptions made in this study are that current games teaching neglects the decision making element in the early stages of learning. They are also assuming that the students have no prior experience with games or tactics.

Conclusion The finding of this study was that there were no significant differences between the technique and tactical approaches in the field hockey abilities (control, decision making and execution) that the students learnt. Despite this result, the students’ overall ability to execute field hockey skills in a game situation improved over time.

Significant Information -both teaching approaches “led to improvement in control and execution in games but did not effect decision making” -the goals of this study may have been unrealistic because the students only had 6 ´ 35 minute sessions in which to learn field hockey skills and tactics -this study shows that the development of skills will positively influence the same skill execution within a game situation despite a lack of tactical knowledge

Personal Comments I was quite disappointed to get to the end of this article only to discover that the study revealed nothing about the success of the two approaches to teaching. I thought that the way they pre- and post-tested the students, timed them at control, decision and execution of a skill, was not accurate of the student’s actual skill development. During the pre-test the students could not control the ball so there was no decision to make (less time was spent on the skill) but during the post-test they had large selection of options to chose from because they could now control the ball; therefore, the time it took to execute a skill increased because they were more skilled.

Kate Fleming