Shaping play from simple to complex game form by progressive conditioning of the rules of the game
When I went through teachers college 30+ years ago, we were taught that quality PE and sport coaching involved conditioning the game form to meet the developmental readiness of the players. In what what was then referred to as a 'modified games approach', but now might be recognised by the labels 'representative task design' and 'constraints-led approach', the conditions of the game (or if you prefer: the task, environment and performer constraints) are purposefully manipulated with intent so as to gradually increase the challenge complexity of the play until eventaully players are ready for the challenge of the 'full rules' game form. There are I believe parallels with this idea for progressive game form development and the idea of initially making learning coherent to the student before increasing complexity progressively that comes from the science of learning literature (see for example, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School here ). The idea of progressive increase in game form complexity is seen in some sport's curriculum, like the Australian Football Match Policy and the 2009 FFA Curriculum.
At the recent Asia Pacifc Physical Education Conference at Hong Kong International School I attempted to demonstrate the idea of making learning coherent to the student before increasing complexity progressively using Australian football as an example. As an invasion game, Australian football like all invasion games, is essentially a complex and complicated game of 'keeping-off'. By starting with a game of 'keeping off', I was able to show that by changing one rule at a time, the starting game was conditioned into a version of Australian football - tag contact AFLX /AFL9s. I was also able to demonstrate that far from being 'play only', there are moments when player development could be accelerated by stopping the play and initiating appropriate teacher/coach intervention. When I deliver this workshop, one such moment is inevitably when the game is conditioned to no longer allow a throw pass, but passing by hand is allowed providing a clenched fist is used to strike the ball. One could let the game go on and hope that the players eventually figure out how to pass using a 'handball' action without throwing the ball. However, physical education (and sport coaching) is a time restricted context, and so it is often appropriate for the teacher to shape and/or focus player movement ability using direct instruction and practice style tasks to accelerate the development (and not leave development to chance) of a movement competency outside of game play, before returning players to game play.
One other advantage of teaching games by initially making learning coherent to the learners using a simple game form or a familar game form (like 'keeping off') before increasing complexity progressively is that students can be guided to understand the reason for the rules - and perhaps why the rules as they are now came into existance. This is especially so if one allows a problem to occur as a player/s or team/s has worked out how to manipulate the rules to gain an 'unsporting' advantage, or a strategy alters the 'look and feel' of the game - at this point a new rule needs to be initiated to make the game a fair contest again or to keep the look of the game appealing. [For example, Australian football has developed significantly from the ten initally rules (See here for the list of the1858 ten rules of Australian football: initially Melbourne/Victorian rules football)]. This is pedagogically consistent with the first of the 6 step cycle of Teaching games for Understnding: Develop game appreciation.
In the workshop, I also used key pedagogical features of the Game Sense approach (modify with purpose, ask questions in preference to telling, use small sided game versions to maximise engagement and game learning via greater potential for game involvement) to show how a contemporary PE curricula emphasis on inquiry focussed teaching can be used to encourage 'thinking players' consistent with tenets of quality teaching frameworks.
For more detail on the Game Sense approch as a model for quality teaching of the PE focus area: Games and Sport, see Seizing the moment
At the recent Asia Pacifc Physical Education Conference at Hong Kong International School I attempted to demonstrate the idea of making learning coherent to the student before increasing complexity progressively using Australian football as an example. As an invasion game, Australian football like all invasion games, is essentially a complex and complicated game of 'keeping-off'. By starting with a game of 'keeping off', I was able to show that by changing one rule at a time, the starting game was conditioned into a version of Australian football - tag contact AFLX /AFL9s. I was also able to demonstrate that far from being 'play only', there are moments when player development could be accelerated by stopping the play and initiating appropriate teacher/coach intervention. When I deliver this workshop, one such moment is inevitably when the game is conditioned to no longer allow a throw pass, but passing by hand is allowed providing a clenched fist is used to strike the ball. One could let the game go on and hope that the players eventually figure out how to pass using a 'handball' action without throwing the ball. However, physical education (and sport coaching) is a time restricted context, and so it is often appropriate for the teacher to shape and/or focus player movement ability using direct instruction and practice style tasks to accelerate the development (and not leave development to chance) of a movement competency outside of game play, before returning players to game play.
One other advantage of teaching games by initially making learning coherent to the learners using a simple game form or a familar game form (like 'keeping off') before increasing complexity progressively is that students can be guided to understand the reason for the rules - and perhaps why the rules as they are now came into existance. This is especially so if one allows a problem to occur as a player/s or team/s has worked out how to manipulate the rules to gain an 'unsporting' advantage, or a strategy alters the 'look and feel' of the game - at this point a new rule needs to be initiated to make the game a fair contest again or to keep the look of the game appealing. [For example, Australian football has developed significantly from the ten initally rules (See here for the list of the1858 ten rules of Australian football: initially Melbourne/Victorian rules football)]. This is pedagogically consistent with the first of the 6 step cycle of Teaching games for Understnding: Develop game appreciation.
In the workshop, I also used key pedagogical features of the Game Sense approach (modify with purpose, ask questions in preference to telling, use small sided game versions to maximise engagement and game learning via greater potential for game involvement) to show how a contemporary PE curricula emphasis on inquiry focussed teaching can be used to encourage 'thinking players' consistent with tenets of quality teaching frameworks.
Comments
Post a Comment