Top 10 Research Questions Related to Teaching Games for Understanding

Figures & data

Table 1 Selected Overview Textbooks, Conference Books, and Significant Events in the Area of Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) and Subsequent Games Concept Approaches

Year	Authors	Content
1982	Bunker & Thorpe	Landmark article: a model for the teaching of games in secondary schools.
1986	Thorpe, Bunker, & Almond	Launches the TGfU approach into the physical education community with this book as the first TGfU resource.
1997	den Duyn	Emphasizes game sense and initial sport-specific movement skill development through the context of game play.
1997	Mitchell, Oslin, & Griffin	Teaches with the tactics of the tactical games model, skills, and off-the-ball movements to achieve greater flexibility for the teacher.
1999	Curriculum Planning and Development Division	The games concept approach became part of the National Curriculum. Revised physical education syllabus for primary, secondary, and preservice levels. Longitudinal study by researchers at Nanyang University followed.
2000	Metzler	Describes a variety of instructional models appropriate for TGfU and other physical education curriculum models.
2001	Launder	Uses the play practice approach to teaching and coaching sports to focus on teaching game play first instead of technique and skill.
2003	Butler, Griffin, Lombardo, & Nastasi	Presents selected quality representative papers from the First International TGfU Conference 2001.
2003	Mitchell, Oslin, & Griffin	Covers the elementary level as well as middle and secondary levels to show teachers how to move from a traditional approach to a tactical games teaching approach.
2003	Thorpe	Rod Thorpe presented TGfU to the Australian National Conference of Coaches and Officials. He subsequently worked with the Australian Sports Commission and the Australian Coaching Council to adapt TGfU for a broader range of sports deliverers (beyond teachers). The group decided Games Sense is a more attractive term for the modified approach, particularly for coaches.
2004	Light	Introduces Games Sense as an exciting and innovative approach to coaching and physical education that places the game at the heart of the session and explores key concepts as well as essential pedagogical theory.
2005	Griffin & Butler	Represents theory, research, and practice of TGfU through a comprehensive perspective, the latest research, the TGfU model, and tips to apply the TGfU approach.
2005	Grehaigne, Wallian, & Godbout	Focuses on the foundations and applications of constructivism for the teaching and learning of invasion sports and games with the tactical-decision learning model.
2006	Liu, Li, & Cruz	Proceedings for the Third TGfU International Conference: A Global Perspective of Physical Education and Sport, Hong Kong.
2006	Light, Webb, Piltz, Georgakis, & Brooker	Proceedings for the Asia Pacific Conference on Teaching Sport and Physical Education for Understanding.
2006	Mitchell, Oslin, & Griffin	Using the tactical games model, helps students to expand their ability to perform specific skills through modified game play in which they apply specific tactics.
2007	Rossi, Fry, McNeill, & Tan	Reports on the views of Singaporean teachers of a mandated curriculum innovation aimed at changing the nature of games pedagogy within the physical education curriculum framework in Singapore.
2007	Tallir, Lenoir, Valcke, & Musch	Introduction of the invasion games competence model.
2009	Hopper, Butler & Storey	Combines the ideas and perspectives of the Fourth International TGfU Conference in 2008 and highlights the current research and practice around the world in TGfU.
2010	Butler & Griffin	Brings the TGfU approach to life. This book is not a rehash or a revision of the 2005 `book; it presents all-new material on TGfU.
2010	Hastie	Introduction of the student-designed games—making games for learning.
2010	Slade	Presents how to use games to keep kids active and involved and how to teach them fundamental movement skills and game sense that will help them develop a lifelong love of activity.
2012	Butler	A collection of research studies written by practicing physical educators with a focus on reconceptualizing physical education through TGfU.
2012	Pill	Focuses on Australian football sport teaching and how to bridge the gap between the game sense theory and practical application of game-centered skill teaching.
2013	Mitchell, Oslin, & Griffin	An integrative comprehensive textbook covering early grades to secondary grades for a tactical model that helps students to expand their ability to perform specific skills through modified game play in which they apply specific tactics.
2013	Ovens, Hopper, & Butler	Focuses on complexity thinking in the context of physical education and enables fresh ways of thinking about research, teaching, curriculum, and learning.
2013	Pill	Introduces ideas and activities of working with a game-centered Game Sense and sport education approach to physical education games and sport teaching.
2014	Light, Quay, Harvey, & Mooney	Examines new approaches in games teaching and team sport coaching that are player/student-centered and inquiry-based.
2014	Pill	With the game sense theory, develops a teaching guide for early-years and primary school educators for physical education.
2015	Memmert	Introduces tactical creativity in the field of TGfU and discusses on the basis of a new theoretical framework (tactical creativity approach) new rules for training conditions for teaching and coaching tactical creativity to children and young people.

Figure 1 “Teaching games for understanding” (TGfU) Conferences impact on scholarly output: Articles (Butler & Ovens, 2015). © Agora for Physical Education and Sport. Reproduced by permission of Agora for Physical Education and Sport. Permission to reuse must be obtained from the rightsholder.

Table 2 Top 10 Research Questions Related to Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU)

1. How can existing scientific approaches from different disciplines (e.g., pedagogy, psychology) be used to enhance game play for beginners and proficient players?

2. How can state-of-the-art technology be integrated to game-play evaluations of beginners and proficient players by employing corresponding assessments?

3. Can complexity thinking be considered a suitable theoretical background for teaching and learning in sports-related games?

4. How can complexity thinking be utilized to shape day-to-day physical education and coaching practices?

5. How can game making/designing be helpfully utilized for emergent learning (i.e., enabling young people to design, create, or invent their own games)?

6. How could purposeful game design create the constraints that enable tactical understanding and skill development through adaptive learning and distributed cognition?

7. How can teacher/coach development programs benefit from game-centered approaches?

8. How can TGfU-related approaches be implemented in teacher or coach education with the goal of facilitating preservice and in-service teachers/coaches’ learning to teach and thereby foster their professional development from novices to experienced practitioners?

9. Can the TGfU approach be considered a helpful model across different cultures?

10. Can physical/psychomotor, cognitive, affective/social, and cultural development be fostered via TGfU approaches?

Thorpe, R., Bunker, D., & Almond, L. (1986). Rethinking games teaching. Loughborough, England: Department of Physical Education and Sports Science, University of Technology.

 Google Scholar

den Duyn, N. (1997). Game sense: Developing thinking players. Belconnen, ACT, Australia: Australian Sports Commission.

 Google Scholar

Mitchell, S. A., Oslin, J. L., & Griffin, L. L. (1997). Teaching sport concepts and skills: A tactical games approach (Vol. 1). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

 Google Scholar

Curriculum Planning and Development Division. (1999). physical education syllabus for primary, secondary, pre-university levels. Singapore: Ministry of Education.

 Google Scholar

Metzler, M. W. (2000). Instructional models for physical education. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

 Google Scholar

Launder, A. G. (2001). Play practice: The games approach to teaching and coaching sports. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

 Google Scholar

Butler, J. I., Griffin, L. L., Lombardo, B., & Nastasi, R. (2003). Teaching games for understanding in physical education and sport: An international perspective. Oxon Hill, MD: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance Publication.

 Google Scholar

Mitchell, S. A., Oslin, J. L., & Griffin, L. L. (2003). Sport foundations for elementary physical education: A tactical games approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

 Google Scholar

Thorpe, R.  Teaching games for understanding: Does it meet your needs? Paper presented at the Second International Conference: Teaching Sport and Education for Understanding, Melbourne, Australia (2003, December)

 Google Scholar

Light, R. (2004). Coaches’ experiences of games sense: Opportunities and challenges. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 9, 115–131.

 Google Scholar

Grehaigne, J. F., Wallian, N., & Godbout, P. (2005). Tactical-decision learning model and students’ practices. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 10, 255–269.

 Google Scholar

Liu, R., Li, C., & Cruz, A. (Eds.). (2006). Teaching games for understanding in the Asia-Pacific region. Hong Kong: Department of Creative Arts and Physical Education, The Hong Kong Institute of Education.

 Google Scholar

Light, R., Webb, P., Piltz, W., Georgakis, A., & Brooker, R. (Eds.). (2006). Proceedings for the Asia Pacific Conference on Teaching Sport and Physical Education for Understanding. Sydney, Australia: University Press.

 Google Scholar

Mitchell, S. A., Oslin, J. L., & Griffin, L. L. (2006). Teaching sport concepts and skills: A tactical games approach (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

 Google Scholar

Rossi, T., Fry, J. M., McNeill, M., & Tan, C. W. K. (2007). The games concept approach (GCA) as a mandated practice: Views of Singaporean teachers. Sport, Education and Society, 12, 93–111.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hopper, T., Butler, J., & Storey, B. (Eds.). (2009). TGfU—Simply good pedagogy: Understanding a complex challenge. Ottawa, Ontario: Physical & Health Education, Canada.

 Google Scholar

Butler, J., & Griffin, L. L. (2010). More teaching games for understanding: Moving globally. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

 Google Scholar

Slade, D. (2010). Transforming play: Teaching tactics and game sense. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

 Google Scholar

Butler, J. (2012). Reconceptualizing physical education through teaching games for understanding. Morrisville, NC: Lulu.

 Google Scholar

Pill, S. A. (2012). Play with Purpose: Developing game sense in AFL footballers. HindmarshSA, Australia: Australian Council for Health, Physical Education and Recreation.

 Google Scholar

Light, R., Quay, J., Harvey, S., & Mooney, A. (2014). Contemporary developments in games teaching. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

 Google Scholar

Butler, J., & Ovens, A. (2015). The TGfU governance networks: From conception to special interest group. Agora for Physical Education and Sport, 17, 77–92.

 Google Scholar