UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)

The effectiveness of learning assessment instrument (LAI) based on teaching games for understanding (TGFU) for badminton games

LIMITED Article 1281 Views
Scan QR Code to share or view item link:

Digital Assets & Download Files
Only metadata is available for this item (LIMITED status).
General Information Cached
Title
The effectiveness of learning assessment instrument (LAI) based on teaching games for understanding (TGFU) for badminton games
Type
Article
Main Author
Mohd Izwan Shahril
Additional Authors
  • Julismah Jani
  • Norkhalid Salimin
  • Wawan Suherman
  • Guntur
Subject
GV Recreation Leisure
Language Code
eng
Bibliographic Details
Place of Production
Tanjong Malim
Publisher
Fakulti Sains Sukan dan Kejurulatihan
Year of publication
2019
Degree Type
Not related
Corporate Name
Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of Learning Assessment Instrument (LAI) for badminton games based on Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) in Physical Education (PE) subject. Present findings showed high validity and reliability of LAI when comparing students’ learning achievement. The students’ learning achievements of cognitive, psychomotor and affective aspects were performed very well at Band 5. This study also revealed there were no significant differences between boarding schools, religious schools and daily schools, but there was a strong relationship with students’ achievement. In conclusion, LAI was found to be very effective and can be used as a standard measurement in student’s reasoning activity and guide teachers in teaching and learning assessment. 

References

1. Anderson, Lorin W., Krathwohl, & David R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: a Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy. New York. Longman Publishing.

2. Araújo, D., Davids, K., Bennett, S., Button, C., & Chapman, G. (2004). Emergence of Sport 10 Skills Under Constraint. In A. M. Williams & N. J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill Acquisition In 11 Sport: Research, Theory and Practice (pp. 409-433). London:Routledge, Taylor & 12 Francis.

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. Gagne, R. M. (1985). The Condition of Learning and Theory of Instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc.

5. Griffin, L., Mitchell, S., & Oslin, J. (1997). Teaching Sport Concepts and Skills: A Tactical  Games Approach. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

6. Izwan, Norkhalid & Gunathevan a/l Elumalai (2015). The Validity and Realibility of ISO Test Toward The Performance Assessment of Future Physical Education Teachers in Teaching and Learning Process. Science Direct Procedia-Social and Behaviorial Sciences 00 (2015) 000-

7. Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York: David McKay Company, Inc.

8. Salimin, N., Jani, J., Ishak, N.A., & Hassan, S., Elumalai, G., Boon, O. K., & Shahril, M. I. (2014). Validity and Reliability of Comprehensive Assessment Instruments for Professional Skills in Field and Court Sport Among Major Students Coaching Based on Model K. International Journal of Humanities, Arts, Medicine and Sciences (BEST: IJHAMS) ISSN(E): 2348-0521 Vol. 2, Issue 4, Apr 2014, 37-44.

9. Rink, J. E. (2002). Teaching physical education for learning 4th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.

10. Robert Mills Gagné (1975). Essentials of Learning for Instruction: Principles of Educational PsychologySeries. Dryden Press.

 


Installed and configured by Bahagian Automasi, Perpustakaan Tuanku Bainun, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
If you have enquiries, kindly contact us at pustakasys@upsi.edu.my or 016-3630263. Office hours only.