Using the TGFU tactical hierarchy to enhance student understanding of game play. Expanding the Target Games category

• Antonio Méndez Giménez ^[1] ; Javier Fernández Río ^[1] ; Ashley Casey ^[2]
  1. [1] Universidad de Oviedo

     Universidad de Oviedo

     Oviedo, España

     
  2. [2] University of Bedfordshire

     University of Bedfordshire

     GB.ENG.I1.00KC039, Reino Unido

     
• Localización: Cultura, ciencia y deporte, ISSN 1696-5043, Vol. 7, Nº. 20, 2012, págs. 135-142
• Idioma: inglés
• DOI: 10.12800/ccd.v7i20.59
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Dialnet Métricas: 8 Citas
• Resumen
  • español

    Este artículo analiza las características estructurales y funcionales de un grupo de actividades denominadas juegos de diana móvil. También trata de mostrar cómo se puede implementar y promover su inclusión en los centros educativos en el marco de TGfU (Teaching Games for Understanding) como una nueva categoría táctica de juegos. Representa un intento de ampliar la taxonomía de Almond (1986) para hacer más suave la transición hacia los grupos de juegos más complejos.

    Además, proponemos modificar los elementos estructurales de estos juegos deportivos como estrategia para ayudar a los profesores a dar forma a actividades lúdicas que se ajusten mejor al nivel de desarrollo de todo el alumnado. Centrándonos en la modificación del equipamiento, defendemos el uso de material autoconstruido como una herramienta para mejorar las posibilidades educativas de este tipo de juegos. Los motivos son múltiples: es fácil de crear, reduce el riesgo de causar daño a un oponente, y ofrece a los estudiantes la oportunidad de inventar juegos

  • English

    This article reviews the structural and functional elements of a group of activities denominated moving target games, and promotes its inclusion in the Teaching Games for Understanding framework as a new game category. It represents an attempt to enlarge Almond¿s taxonomy (1986) to make the transition from one group to another smoother. The basic idea is to modify the structural elements of games to make them developmentally appropriate.

    Self-made equipment is also introduced as a tool to enhance the educational possibilities of these games. It is easy to make, it reduces the risk of causing damage to an opponent, and it gives students the opportunity to invent games. Finally, the article also tries to show how this approach can be implemented in schools

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Almond, L. (1986). Reflecting on themes: A games classification. In R. Thorpe, D. Bunker & L. Almond: Rethinking games teaching. Department...
  • Belka, D. (1999). Games to consider avoiding. Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 10(3), 12-14.
  • Belka, D. (2006). What do tag games teach?. Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 17(3), 35-36.
  • Bunker, D. & Thorpe, R. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in the secondary schools. The Bulletin of Physical Education, 18(1),...
  • Casey, A., & Hastie, P. (2011). Students and teacher responses to a unit of student-designed games. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy,...
  • Deutsch, J. (2007). From hall of shame to hall of fame: transforming traditional elementary activities. Missouri Journal of Health, Physical...
  • Ellis, M. (1983). Similarities and differences in games: a system for classification. Paper presented at the AIESEP Conference, Rome, Italy.
  • Fernández-Río, J. & Méndez-Giménez, A. (2012). Innovative practices through the use of self-made materials. The cooperative learning model...
  • Hanrahan, S.J. & Carlson, T.B. (2000). Games Skills. A Fun Approach to Learning Sport Skills. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
  • Hastie, P. A. (2010). Student designed games: Strategies for promoting creativity, cooperation, and skill development. Champaign, IL: Human...
  • Jackson, S.L. (2001). Dodge ball vs. dodge ball activities. SportaPolis. http://www.sports-media.org/Sportapolisnewsletter6.htm http://www.sportsmedia.org/Sportapolisnewsletter6.htm...
  • Kirk, D. (2010). Physical Education Futures, London: Routledge.
  • Lawson, H.A. (2009). Paradigms, exemplars and social change. Sport, Education and Society, 14, 77-100.
  • Locke, L. (1992). Changing secondary school physical education. Quest, 44, 361-372.
  • Maurer, M.R. (2006). What if dodgeball had its own national standard? Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 17(1), 6-7.
  • Méndez-Giménez, A. (2003). Nuevas propuestas lúdicas para el desarrollo curricular de Educación Física [New games proposal for the curricular...
  • Metzler, M. (1979). The measurement of Academic Learning Time in physical education. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University. Ann...
  • Mitchell, S., Oslin, J. & Griffin L. L. (2003). Sport foundations for elementary physical education: A Tactical Games Approach. Champaign,...
  • Navarro Adelantado, V. (2006). Del juego al deporte. Discusión estructural, antropológica y pedagógica, en Juego y deporte en el ámbito escolar:...
  • Siedentop, D. (2002). Content knowledge for physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 21, 368-377.
  • Tousignant, M., & Siedentop, D. (1983). A qualitative analysis of task structure in required secondary physical education classes. Journal...
  • Townsend, J. S., Mohr, D. J., Waronsky C. C., & Grana, M. M. (2006). Non-elimination tag: A multidisciplinary approach. Teaching Elementary...
  • Werner, P., Thorpe, R., & Bunker, D. (1996). Teaching games for understanding. Evolution of a model. The Journal of Physical Education,...
  • Williams, N.F. (1992). The physical education hall of shame, part I. The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 63(6), 57-60.
  • Williams, N.F. (1994). The physical education hall of shame, part II. The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 65(7), 17-20.