UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Perpustakaan Tuanku Bainun |
| This study is to track the subject matter knowledge of and misconception about Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) of fourth year undergraduate preservice teachers_ physical education majors at an Australian university. The test of reliability on misconception scale are subjected to a Rasch analysis (KR-20 = .52) which consists of 20 dichotomous questions with true/false answers. Analyses of the data reveal that students achieve a credit on subject matter knowledge and attain four misconceptions about TGfU. There is a significant (p < 0.05) difference in the scores for subject matter knowledge and concepts of TGfU through paired samples t test. These results imply that subject matter knowledge does have an effect on students_ concepts of TGfU but with very low relationship (r(53 = .19, p < 0.05). The implication of content knowledge to teaching is to resist the pre-concept or misconception of the subject matter. If pre-service teachers are to improve the quality of teaching and learning in content areas, he or she needs to possess a deep understanding of games both within and across categories in TGfU. Misconceptions tend to be very resistant to instruction because learning entails replacing or radically reorganizing student knowledge. This puts teachers in the very challenging position of needing to bring about significant conceptual change in student knowledge. Therefore preservice teachers must know the subject matter they teach and their performance will be determined by the depth of their content knowledge in relation to teaching, making this an essential component to their teaching practice. Teachers must know the subject they teach and this is important to teacher competency.
Key words: Teaching games; content knowledge; subject matter knowledge; misconception; teaching practice. |
| References |
Adams, D. (20ll). Scholarly summary. Retrieved September 19, 2011, from http:// education2.uvic.ca/Faculty/thopper/tactic/Annotations/Theoretical/Hopper %2003.
Almond, L. (1986). Asking teacher to research (35-44). In R. Thorpe, D. Bunker, & L. Almond, (Eds.). Rethinking games teaching. Loughborough: University of Technology, Loughborough.
Ayvazo, S., Ward, P., & Stuhr, P. T. (2010). Teaching and assessing content knowledge in Pre service Physical Education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 81(4), 40-44.
Bell, R., & Hopper, T. (2003). Space the first frontier: Tactical awareness in teaching games for understanding. Physical and Health Education Journal, 69(1), 4-7.
Bond, C. & Fox, M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences, (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers: Mahwah, New Jersey London.
Bunker, D. J. & Thorpe, R. D. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education, 18(1), 1-10.
Bunker, D. J. & Thorpe, R. D. (1986). From theory to practice (11-16). In R. Thorpe, D. Bunker, & L. Almond, (Eds.). Rethinking games teaching. Loughborough: University of Technology, Loughborough.
Butler, J. I., & McCahan, B. J. (2005). Teaching Games for Understanding as a curriculum model (32-54). In L. L. Griffin, & J. I. Butler (Eds.). Teaching games for understanding: Theory, research, and practice. Windsor, ON: Human Kinetics.
Chow, J, I., Davids, Button, C., K., Shutleworth, R., Renshaw, I., & Araújo., D. (2007). The role of nonlinear pedagogy in physical education. Review of Educational Research, 77(3), 251-278.
Edwards, K., & Brooker, R. (2000). Teaching with a 'dimensions of learning' framework to promote intelligent performance in high school physical education. Paper presented at: 2000 Pre-Olympic Congress: Sports Medicine and Physical Education International Congress on Sport Science. Brisbane, Queensland 7-13 September 2000.
Even, R., & Tirosh, D. (1995). Subject-matter knowledge and knowledge about students as sources of teacher presentations of the subject matter. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29(1), 1-20.
Faculty of Education (2011). Final grades of performance for undergraduate. Faculty of Education Handbook 2011, p. 41.
Forrest, G., Webb, P., & Pearson, P. (2006). Teaching games for understanding (TGfU): A model for pre service teachers. Asia Pacific Conference on Teaching Sport and Physical Education for Understanding. University of Sydney 14-15 December 2006.
Goulding, M., Rowland, T., & Barber, P. (2002). Does it matter? Primary teacher trainees‟ subject knowledge in mathematics. British Educational Research Journal, 28(5), 689-704.
Griffin, L., & Butler, J. (Eds.). (2005). Teaching games for understanding: Theory, research, and practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Grossman, P. L., & Richert, A. E. (1988). Unacknowledged knowledge growth: A reexamination of the effects of teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(1),53–62.
Hopper, T. (2001). What is a TGfU approach to games teaching and what's wrong with teaching skills? Tactic-to-skill games teaching. JOPERD, July 2001. Revised November, 2001.
Hopper, T. (2002). Teaching games for understanding: The importance of student emphasis over content emphasis. JOPERD, 73(7), 44-48.
Hopper, T. (2009). Game-as-teacher in TGfU and Video-games: Enabling constraints in learning through game-play. Extended paper based on Keynote address, ACHPER 2009 Brisbane, Australia.
Hopper, T., & Kruisselbrink, D. (2002). Teaching games for understanding: What does it look like and how does it influence student skill learning and game performance? AVANTE, July 2002.
Kandel, I. L. (2002). Knowledge bases of teaching. Gale Encyclopaedia of Education. The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Retrieved September 9, 2011 from http://www.answers.com/library/Education%20Encyclopedia-cid-13576171
Light, R. (2006). Game sense: Innovation or just good coaching? Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 39(1), 8- 19.
Lucariello, J. (2011). How do I get my students over their alternative conceptions (misconceptions) for learning? Teacher’s Modules. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Orphanos, S. A. (2008). Do good grades make a good teacher? An investigation of the relationship between teachers’ academic performance and perceived teacher effectiveness in Cyprus. Ph D Dissertation. UMI Microform 3332998 ProQuest LCC: Ann Abor, MI.
Pearson, P. & Webb, P. (2008). Developing effective questioning in teaching games for understanding (TGfU). A paper presented at the 1st Asia Pacific Sport in Education Conference, Adelaide, 2008.
Reany, P. (1988). What is knowledge? Arizona Journal of Natural Philosophy, Vol. 2, March 1988, pp. 7-14. Retrieved October 3, 2011 from http://www.worldmysteries. com/sci_knowledge.htm.
Rice, J. (2003). Teacher quality: Understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes. Washington DC: Economic Policy Institue.
Robinson, D. (2011). Possibilities for physical education teacher education: Service learning and TGfU. PHENex Journal 3(1),1-16.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review.57(1), 1-22.
Subject outline: EDPM202: Teaching and learning net court, striking and target games. Undergraduate Education, Faculty of Education. Springs Session 2009.
Subject outline: EDPM301: Teaching and learning invasion games. Undergraduate Education, Faculty of Education. Autumn Session 2010.
Turner, A. (2005). Teaching and learning games at the secondary level (71-90). In L. L. Griffin, & J. I. Butler (Eds.). Teaching games for understanding: Theory, research, and practice. Windsor, ON: Human Kinetics.
Ward, P. (2009). Content matters: Knowledge that alters teaching (345-356). In L. D. Housner, M. W. Metzler, P. G. Schempp, & T. J. Templin (Eds.), Historic traditions and future directions of research on teaching and teacher education in physical education. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
Webb, P. I., & Pearson, P. J. (2008). An integrated approach to teaching games for understanding (TGfU). Retrieved September 19, 2011, from http://ro.uow.edu.au/edupapers/52.
Wright, S., McNeill, M., Fry, J., & Wang, J. (2005). Teaching teachers to play and teach games. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10(1), 61-82. |
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |