How would the Spectrum explain Game Sense? Dr. Brendan SueSee A/Prof. Ken Edwards The University of Southern Queensland, AUSTRALIA.

How would the Spectrum explain Game Sense? TGFU/Game Sense placed on the Spectrum from the ‘non–versus’ perspective. No value judgements are made and the episodes are just positioned on the Spectrum. From the observation of practice identified as Game Sense the coding and referencing to the Spectrum indicate that episodes are mostly Practice Style – Style B, maybe Guided Discovery – Style F (for one student) and at times Convergent Discovery Style – Style G.

Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) and Game Sense (GS) Game Sense (GS): Described by Australian Olympian and elite field hockey coach Charlesworth (1993) as “the objective of player development at the elite level.” Idea developed during a series of visits by Rod Thorpe to Australia in mid-1990s and described by Thorpe (2006) as “incorporating more than the original TGfU model and can therefore be seen as a further refinement of the original TGfU model” (Stolz & Pill, 2014, p.40), The central focus of Game Sense is developing thinking players by coupling movement technique to game context as skilled performance.

Game Sense Game Sense (den Duyn, 1997)

AIM: Hit and trap the ball with control. Game Sense AIM: Hit and trap the ball with control. Two teams are trying to push the ball over the opponents’ goal line. The game will be confined to a small play space to encourage short ‘push’ passing. The game will be played in a small-sided game (e.g., 4 vs 4) format to maximise game engagement and thus learning – i.e., providing more opportunities for each player to make technical and tactical actions. The teacher may apply constraints such as no hitting the ball, or the stick head cannot leave the ball before it is pushed. Students then attempt to solve the problem while playing the game.

Given the constraints or rules of the game:  Spectrum Lens Pre-Impact – Teacher choses subject matter. Impact Set – Students practice pushing a ball the way they have before. They were not instructed by the teacher to ‘discover’ or ‘create’ a way to propel the ball which they have not done before. They were most likely told: “The aim of this game is to push the ball over your opponents line/goal.” Given the constraints or rules of the game:  The subject matter (?) is push the ball over the opponent’s line. Students may be stopped during the impact set and asked questions using a Guided Discovery approach to help students identify problems experienced.

Spectrum Lens Guided Discovery – Style F as “the logical and sequential design of questions that lead a person to discover a predetermined response” (Mosston & Ashworth, 2002, p. 212). This means that when the teacher asks a specific sequence of questions in a structured process, the student correspondingly responds until that student discovered the only correct answer for each of the questions asked by the teacher.

Spectrum Lens What is questionable is the ability to guarantee that in a class, all learners are starting from the [same] exact cognitive point or point of knowledge and are able to discover at the exact same moment. Sequential questions will not lead all learners along the path towards the predetermined response at the same time. Thus all learners will most likely not reach the same point due to different beginning points of knowledge or the fact they may require other questions along the way.

Questions presented during/after game How do you position your hands on the stick to control your strike on the ball? Do you have greater control with one hand or two hands? What do you look at when you hit the ball? The teacher can not know who is discovering and who is recalling? If the questions come after the event then they are review (recall) questions.

Spectrum Lens “There are cognitive liabilities when this style is used in a large group. The discovery process is interrupted per student in a group setting; therefore, the content acquisition cannot be guaranteed for each student” (Ashworth, 2014). When the Spectrum is used to view an episode such as this it could be considered that the one student who is engaged in answering the questions is the one producing, or discovering, new knowledge (Mosston & Ashworth, 2008). The other students (who are maybe listening to the teacher’s questions and students’ responses) learn by reproducing the new knowledge that was produced by the first student, and the overall teaching style is generally Practice Style – Style B.

So where would it be placed on the Spectrum….? Practice Style – Style B and maybe a specific student being taught using Guided Discovery – Style F.

Play a game and identify problems Play a modified game: Students are to “Identify the problems that face them and given time to arrive at appropriate solutions as a group. This is facilitated by the teacher encouraging and providing opportunities for them to formulate a strategy or action plan through group dialog that they test in the game” (Light, Curry & Mooney, 2014, p. 77).

Play a game and identify problems Pre-Impact set/Subject Matter – Teacher explains the game/rules etc. Subject Matter – Students play a game of 3 vs 3 ‘keep away’ game trying to do complete as many passes as possible within the defined area. Impact Set – Students play the game and afterwards identify problems. “I can’t score/keep possession of the ball.” Is this discovery for all? No – It cannot be guaranteed that: The teacher has not instructed students to discover but ‘identify’ problems. Some may be discovering while others may be recalling known solutions.

Play a game and identify problems – arrive at solutions Post Impact Set – Students recall what happened/ problems and are “given time to arrive at appropriate solutions as a group” (Light et al., 2014, p. 77). Non-specific cognitive instruction – Can they use a strategy previously known or do they have to create one new to them? Can it be guaranteed that it is new to all of them? Some students may recall and for others it may be new knowledge – but if they did not create then they are applying the knowledge/strategy of someone else.

Through the Spectrum lens … Conclusion: Practice Style - Style B. Some students are recalling known problems and strategies. They have not been directed to discover problems and many students may already know the problem. Not all (none?) students are directed to create solutions – nor can they all due to previous knowledge). Maybe Divergent Discovery Style – Style H for some students. Why? (“Identify problems … and come to solutions as a group”). Can more than one student discover the same strategy at the same time? More than one student may create strategies, but will they all? How would the teacher be able to identify who has created and who is recalling? Allowed to recall a strategy (coming to a solution is not ‘create.’)

Through the Spectrum lens … Finally, if the teacher has not directed the students to create/discover (and teaching is a chain of decision making) then the teacher can not claim they have taught this (creativity/discovery). Student(s) may have created out of own free-will and not due to teacher instruction/decision.

References Charlesworth R (1993) Discussion topic: Designer games. Paper presented at: The Hockey Level 3 National Coaching Accreditation Scheme (NCAS) Conference, Canberra, ACT: Australia. Thorpe, R. (2006) ‘Rod Thorpe on teaching games for understanding.’ In: Kidman, L. (ed.), Athlete-Centred Coaching: Developing and Inspiring People. Christchurch, NZ: Innovative Print Communications Ltd., pp. 229–244. Light, Richard, Christina Curry & Amanda Mooney. (2014) Game Sense as a model for delivering quality teaching in physical education, Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education, 5:1, 67-81, DOI: 10.1080/18377122.2014.868291

TGfU Emphasis placed on understanding the logic by the rules of the game and that the tactical structure of play be learnt before technique. Four guiding pedagogical principles: Sampling – modified games as way to experience adult version; 2. Exaggeration – change structure, rules, equipment and space etc. to control/eliminate game behaviours and allow teaching through the game; 3. Representation – Small sided games modified to suit age/experience; and 4. Questioning – prompting students thinking through questions of what, when and why leads students to think how to perform.

TGFU Model (Stolz & Pill, 2014, p. 41)

TGfU Game Appreciation and Game Awareness are about understanding rules/tactics. Awareness of strengths and weaknesses of opponents. Decision Making is the ‘what to do’ and the ‘how to do it’. The key requirements “include the need to recognise the cues and the selection of the most appropriate response” (Renshaw, Araujo, Button, Chow, Davids & Moy, 2015, p. 5). Skill Execution is seen as the “execution of the chosen movement pattern” (Renshaw et al., 2015, p.6).

Play a game and identify problems Play a modified game: Students are to “Identify the problems that face them and given time to arrive at appropriate solutions as a group. This is facilitated by the teacher encouraging and providing opportunities for them to formulate a strategy or action plan through group dialog that they test in the game” (Light, Curry & Mooney, 2014, p. 77). Pre-Impact set/Subject Matter – Teacher explains the game/rules etc. Subject Matter – Students play a game of 3 vs 3 ‘keep away’ game trying to do complete as many passes as possible within the defined area. Impact Set – Students play the game and afterwards identify problems. “I can’t score/keep possession of the ball.” Is this discovery for all? No – It cannot be guaranteed that: The teacher has not instructed students to discover but ‘identify’ problems. Some may be discovering while others may be recalling known solutions.

Spectrum Lens Guided Discovery – Style F as “the logical and sequential design of questions that lead a person to discover a predetermined response” (Mosston & Ashworth, 2002, p. 212). This means that when the teacher asks a specific sequence of questions in a structured process, the student correspondingly responds until that student discovered the only correct answer for each of the questions asked by the teacher. What is questionable is the ability to guarantee that in a class, all learners are starting from the [same] exact cognitive point or point of knowledge and are able to discover at the exact same moment. Sequential questions will not lead all learners along the path towards the predetermined response at the same time. Thus all learners will most likely not reach the same point due to different beginning points of knowledge or the fact they may require other questions along the way.

Through the Spectrum lens … Conclusion: Practice Style - Style B. Some students are recalling known problems and strategies. They have not been directed to discover problems and many students may already know the problem. Not all (none?) students are directed to create solutions – nor can they all due to previous knowledge). Maybe Divergent Discovery Style – Style H for some students. Why? (“Identify problems … and come to solutions as a group”). Can more than one student discover the same strategy at the same time? More than one student may create strategies, but will they all? How would the teacher be able to identify who has created and who is recalling? Allowed to recall a strategy (coming to a solution is not ‘create.’) Finally, if the teacher has not directed the students to create/discover (and teaching is a chain of decision making) then the teacher can not claim they have taught this (creativity/discovery). Student(s) created out of own free will and not due to teacher instruction/decision.