“By exposing students to the primary rules, fundamental skills, and tactical problems associated with the games in each category, students become able to participate in a variety of games, not just the ones chosen by the teacher.” (Mandigo, Butler, & Hopper, 2007, p. 17)

Summary of the model:

     Many students and athletes complain over derogative drills which, in all honesty, do not do much to aid their development. This results in a lack of physical competence, and the ability to transfer elementary skills to various activities. The TGfU model aims to break away from these trends, and shift towards a more practical approach. Centered on the learner, rather than a desired performance, the model adresses a student's needs first. (Mandigo, Butler, & Hopper, 2007)

     The basic format for the TGfU model has six stages: Game, Game Appreciation, Tactical Awareness, Making Appropriate Decisions, Skills Execution, Performance. This model also incorporates four types of games including target, striking, net/wall, and invasion. This article also includes four pedagogical principles to aid the TGfU model: sampling, game representation, exaggeration, and tactical complexity. (Mandigo, Butler, & Hopper, 2007)

     Essentially, the model develops games and/or a unit in which games are used to emphasize skills. For example, in badminton, establishing a game with a skinny and long boundary, allows the learner to discover when to use a long or short shot. This approach gives students an environment that promotes learning, allowing them to play and have fun discovering and developing skills. A drill offers reptition and practice of a skill, while a game designed for a specific skill set offers dynamic adjustments, game situations, competition (or cooperation), and above all, fun. Students and athletes are far more likely to give their all in a game, not a drill.

      How does this relate to quidditch? After enrolling in EPHE 452, I was exposed to the TGfU model. Seeing its applicability and success in the class, I was inspired to test it out with my team. Incorporation of class material began at practice session #11. I noticed several chasers struggling with picking up the quaffle on the fly. Therefore, I created the 'Pickup Game'. Chasers were forced to pass by rolling the ball on the ground, emphasizing the skill of picking it up. Since they cannot move with the ball, this game also promotes moving into positions to support or get open for teammates. The team really got into the game as well. Another example was the 'Tri-Hoop Game'. I created a medium-sized grid, and place three hoops against each other to form a triangle. Two teams of three were placed in the grid. Teams had to complete x amount of passes before able to try and score. To progress this game, or make it more challenging, I included beaters on the outside of the grid. Each team had one beater that could hit players on the opposite team, in order to free up time and space for their team. I used several more games like these, in order to emphasize certain skills or strategies. First-hand I witnessed the TGfU model working with my team. They were motivated, and wanted to play the game, as opposed to times in the past, where a pickup drill would have been passing the ball on the ground to a partner (not very exciting, is it?). This model allowed the players to develop their skills in a game environment, and have fun while doing it.

Article Reference:

Mandigo, J., Butler, J., & Hopper, T. (2007). What is teaching games for understanding? A Canadian perspective. Physical and Health Education Journal, 73(2), 14–20.

     “Sport Education is a curriculum and instruction model designed to provide authentic, educationally rich sport experiences for boys and girls in the context of school physical education.” (Siedentop, 2002, p. 409) 

     “This vignette shows a different mode of operation than is true of most physical education classes.  Students occupy responsible roles.  There is an extended season with ample opportunity to improve.  Affiliation with a team (which has a name and somewhat of a uniform) creates a stronger sense of team/class membership.” (Siedentop, 2002, p. 410)

Summary of the model:

     The Sports Education model introduces more group work, accountability, and problem-solving into a P.E. environment. It divides students into teams (or groups) for a unit/semester/season. In their teams, students take on specific roles: coach, referee, equipment manager, and team spirit. Roles can be firm, or rotated through to give everyone a chance in each role. Throughout the season, students work together in their teams, eventually ending with a culminating activity, such as a tournament. The assignments, or activities during the season can count as points towards standings, to create a friendly competition between teams. This establishes accountability within a team, as most students do not want to let their team down. It also motivates students to participate in a competitive environment. One can even set up classes that allow teams freedom of choice, to work on what they think they need to. (Seidentop, 2002)

     By the time I had heard about this model, it was too far in the season to have split the team up and develop a proper Sports Ed strucutre. However, I did what I could. I informed the team that the last practice of the season would be a mini tournament between 4 mini teams: Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, Hufflepuff, and Slytherin. Immediately, they were motivated. I split them up into their teams, and whenever the opportunity rose in practice during a game or drill, they would complete the task in their teams. This created some new bonding on the team, and got them working together. The practice before the tournament I left open for them to do as they please with their team. I watched several teams reuse drills/games I had done this semester, while others started to create their own, to practice what they wanted to. It was incredible to see things come together. When the time came for the tournament, teams showed up in their house colours, and everyone was smiling. It was clear the were having fun. The tournament aspect really brought the team together, and made players open to try new strategies, as well as compete with 110%.

Reference:

Siedentop, D. (2002). Sport education: A retrospective. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 21, 409-418. 

     “We believe that traditional games teaching in schools has done little to educate students about games playing. The tactical approach we advocate […] promotes interest in learning games, understanding of game play, and ability to play games.” (Mitchell, Griffin, & Olsen, 2006, p. 8)

      “Transfer may be positive when the learning of one skill or concepts aids the learning of another. […]. Conversely, transfer might be negative when learning of one skill or concept that interferes with the learning of another.” (Mitchell, Griffin, & Olsen, 2006, p. 20)

Summary of the Approach:

     This approach argues against the way games are traditionally taught in a school environment. There are four essential points of tactical approach to games teaching:

1. Consider the tactical problems to address during your unit and decide on the complexity of the solutions to these problems.
2. Within each lesson, students practice skills after they have experienced a game form that presents a tactical problem requiring that skill.
3. Link the initial modified game and the skill practice through your questions. The quality of these questions is critical.
4. Having practiced skills, students have the opportunity to apply their improved skills and tactical understanding in game play. (Mitchell, Griffin, & Olsen, 2006, p. 15)

This format essentially creates a loop of game form through representation and exaggeration, tactical awareness, and skill execution.

     Looking back on this quidditch season, there were a lot of things that I could have done better. One of which was showing practical application in a game before practicing a certain skill, and then relating it back to the game. In some cases I did this, but definitely not enough. An example of incorporating a 'tactical approach' can be seen from practice session #11 onwards. I developed mini games between teams that emphasized key strategies in quidditch, relating them to tigers, geese, and fish. Tigers charge the hoops, and use brute force to score, while geese move as a unit up and down the field and use short shots, while fish do not take risks, and are more defensive than anything, only taking long shorts. Now the games themselves worked perfectly, and got the team thinking about different strategies to use against opponents. I even brought them in after playing to discuss these conclusions, but I did not give them context before going into this mini game. This might have promoted learning even more, fitting in with the tactical approach.

    Reference:

Mitchell, S., Griffin, L., & Olsen, J. (2006). Teaching sport concepts and skills: A tactical games approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. CH 2 and 3.

     The basic task model includes four main components: Simplifying, Refining, Extending, and Application. Upon introduction to a task, one may need to modify it by simplifying it, making it more complicated, or adjusting the task itself to fit desired needs. Once the task has met its goal, it can then be applied to a bigger picture.

     An example of this was seen with my 'Tri-Hoop' game. The basic skill practiced is passing. I can simplify the game by lowering the amount of passes necessary to score. I can extend the game by raising the amount of passes, or by limiting the number of steps a player has. This makes it more challenging for the players, but should only be done once they are ready for the challenge. They can then apply what they've learned from passing under pressure into a game situation later in the practice.