TheVirginiaJournal_SpringSummer2024

Martínez & Calderón 2011). Prichard and McCollum (2009) explained the benefits combining SEM and TGA. Students can have more opportunity to learn sports by engaging in sports with prolonged time periods (seasons) instead of general PE unit (Sidentop, 2002). The SEM provides students opportunities to experience several different roles in a rotation like that of a coach, official and player. As a team, students have the specific roles such as captain, recorder, facilitator. Also, all the team members are required to share information such as progression of their teams through team journals. As described by Prichard & McCollum (2009), physical educators can combine these two approaches so that students can demonstrate their tactical understanding about sports by participating in PE with an increased level of excitement. Once students are familiar to the routine and lesson format of TGA (initial game playing – answer and question time - practice task - game playing) - they diminished off-task-time, and transition (Gubacs-Collins & Olsen, 2010). Furthermore, combining TGA with SEM enable teachers to reduce the pressure about class management and additional instructional time devotion (Gubacs Collins & Olsen, 2010). Especially, beginning in-service teachers can benefit more in that they are still developing their content knowledge more in depth as well as pedagogical content knowledge (Gubacs-Collins & Olsen, 2010). Conclusion There are diverse pedagogical practices and curriculum models to teach students in PE classes. Students will have different understanding and skill level in performing sports. Tactical Games Approach (TGA) is centered on tactical awareness which promote understanding in the context of gamy playing for students and research continuously reported the effectiveness of TGA to teach sports in PE across elementary to secondary level children. TGA is evidence-based curriculum and effective tool to instruct sports and game playing in PE for students. This paper summarized the basic components and framework of TGA, research evidence in relation to utilize TGA and then discussed several ideas to use TGA more practically. References Almond, L. (2015). Rethinking teaching games for understanding. Agora for PE and Sport, 1, 15-25. Butler, J. (1996). Teacher responses to teaching games for understanding. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 67 (9), 17–20. Carpenter, E. J. (2010). The tactical games model sport experience: An examination of student motivation and game performance during an ultimate frisbee unit (Doctoral dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Chatzipanteli, A., Digelidis, N., Karatzoglidis, C., & Dean, R. (2016). A tactical-game approach and enhancement of metacognitive behaviour in elementary school students. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 21 (2),169–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2014.931366

Dorak, F., Yildiz, L., Canpolat, A. M., YA., Yüzbasioglu, Y., & Vurgun, N (2018). A comparison of the tactical game approach and the direct teaching models in the teaching of handball: cognitive-psychomotor field and game performance. World Journal of Education , 8 (3),76-85. Gubacs-Collins, K. (2007). Implementing a tactical approach through action research. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 12 (2), 1-22. Gubacs-Collins, K. & Olsen, E.B. (2010). Implementing a tactical games approach with sport education a Chronicle. The sport education tactical model. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 81 (3), 36-42. Gouveia, É.R., Gouveia, B.R., Marques, A., Kliegel, M., Rodrigues, A. J., Prudente, J., Lopes, He., & Andreas, I. (2019). The effectiveness of a tactical games approach in the teaching of invasion games. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 19 , 962-970. 10.7752/jpes.2019.s3139 Grhaigne, J. F., Godbout, P., & Bouthier, D. (1999). The foundations of tactics and strategy in team sports. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 18 , 159-174. Haneishi, K. (2014). Impacts of the game-centered approach on cognitive learning of game play and game performance during 5-week of spring season with intercollegiate female soccer players (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Harvey, S., Gil-Arias, A., Smith, M. L., & Smith, L. R. (2017). Middle and elementary school students' changes in self determined motivation in a basketball unit taught using the tactical games model. Journal of human kinetics , 59 , 39–53. https://doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2017-0146 Hastie, P., Martínez, D., & Calderón, A. (2011). A review of research on Sport Education: 2004 to the present. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 16 (2), 103-132. Hodges, M., Wicke, J., and Flores-Marti, I. (2018). Tactical games model and its effects on student physical activity and gameplay performance in secondary physical education. Physical Educator, 75 (1), 99-115. Memmert, D., & Harvey, S. (2008). The game performance assessment instrument (GAPI): Some concerns and solutions for further development. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education , 27, 220-240. Mitchell, S. A., Oslin, J. L., & Griffin, L. L. (2021). Teaching Sport Concepts and Skills: A Tactical Games Approach for Ages 7 to 18 (4th ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Newell, K. M. (1986). Constraints on the development of coordination. In M. G. Wade & H. T. A. Whiting (Eds.), Motor development in children: Aspects of coordination and control (pp. 341-360). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Nijhoff. Pritchard, T., & McCollum, S. (2009). The sport education tactical model. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 80 (9), 31-37. Siedentop, D. (1994). Sport education: Quality PE through positive sport experiences . Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

SPRING-SUMMER 2024 • Virginia AHPERD • 15