Teaching preservice teachers the teaching games for understanding approach : a proposed PETE program

Chatoupis Constantine,

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	L Education (General)
ISSN :	2232-0458
Main Author :	Chatoupis Constantine,
Title :	Teaching preservice teachers the teaching games for understanding approach : a proposed PETE program

Place of Production :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
Year of Publication :	2017

Full Text :

Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) is a curriculum model that empasizes a tactical approach to teaching games. Over the last decade there has been an international consensus on the need to incorporate this model into Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) programs. The present paper proposes a PETE program that employs TGfU as conceptual framework to encourage preservice teachers to use it for teaching games and sports at schools. Combining theory, observation of demonstration, practice, and feedback under protected conditions and in real school settings, the proposed program provides preservice teachers with adequate opportunities to develop familiarity and confidence with TGfU as well as to experience success in using it. A number of courses that are part of a PETE program, courses in which TGfU is integrated, are presented.

References

1. Ayers, S. F., & Housner, L. D. (2008). A descriptive analysis of undergraduate PETE programs. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 27, 51-67. 2. Borko, H., Liston, D., & Whitcomb, J. (2007). A conversation of many voices: Critiques and visions of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 199-204. 3. Bunker, D., & Thorpe, R. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education, 18(1), 5-8. 4. Butler, J. (1996). Teacher responses to teaching games for understanding. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 67(9), 17-20. 5. Byra, M. (2000). A coherent PETE program: Spectrum style. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 71(9), 40-43, 56. 6. Collier, C. (2006). Models and curricula of physical education teacher education. In D. Kirk, D. Macdonald, & M. O’Sullivan (Eds.), Handbook of physical education (pp.386-406). London: Sage Publications. 7. Cruickshank, V., & Swabey, K. (2013). Yes, we can play games differently: Socialisation of PETE teachers. Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 7(1), 1-7. 8. Curtner-Smith, M. D. (1996). Using games invention with elementary children. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 67(3), 33-37. 9. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314. 10. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 11. Griffin, L. L., Mitchell, S. A., & Oslin, J. L. (1997). Teaching sport concepts and skills: A tactical games approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. 12. Joyce, B., Weil. M., & Calhoun, E. (2014). Models of teaching (9th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 13. King, S. E. (2008). Inspiring critical reflection in preservice teachers. The Physical Educator, 65(1), 21-29. 14. Light, R. (2002). The social nature of games: Australian pre-sevice primary teachers’ first experiences of teaching games for understanding. European Physical Education Review, 8(3), 286-304. 15. Light, R., & Butler, J. (2005). A personal journey: TGfU teacher development in Australia and the USA. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10(3), 241-254. 16. Locke, L. (1992). Changing secondary school physical education. Quest, 44(3), 361-372. 17. MacPhail, A. (2011). Professional learning as a physical education teacher educator. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 16(4), 435-451. 18. MacPhail, A., & Tannehill, D. (2012). Helping pre-Service and beginning teachers examine and reframe assumptions about themselves as teachers and change agents: “Who is going to listen to you anyway?”, Quest, 64(4), 299-312. 19. Metzler, M. (1990). Instructional supervision for physical education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. 20. Moy, B., Renshaw, I., Davids, K., & Brymer, E. (2015). Overcoming acculturation: physical education recruits’ experience of an alternative pedagogical approach to games teaching. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/17408989.2015.1017455. 21. Siedentop, D., & Locke, L. (1997). Making a difference for physical education; What professors and practitioners must build together. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 68(4), 25-33. 22. Tsangaridou, N. (2009). Preparation of teachers for teaching physical education in schools: Research on teachers’ reflection, beliefs, and knowledge. In L. Housner, M. Metzler, P. Schempp, & T. Templin (Eds.), Historic tradition and future directions of research and teacher education in physical education (pp. 373-382). West Virginia: West Virginia University. 23. Verabioff, L. J. (1983). The five-to-one student teaching experience. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 2(2), 55-61. 24. Werner, P., Thorpe, R., & Bunker, D. (1996). Teaching games for understanding. Evolution of a model. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 67(3), 28-33. 25. Wright, S., McNeill, M., & Butler, J. (2004). The role that socialization can play in promoting teaching games for understanding. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 75(3), 46-52. 26. Wright, S., McNeill, M., Fry, J., & Wang, J. (2005). Teaching teachers to play and teach games. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, & Dance, 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.

Back to previous page