Motor Behavior

The Effect of Game-Based Pedagogy on Performance, Decision Making and Meta-cognitive Behavior: Play Practice Approach

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

sahar beik 1
Jalal Dehghanizade 2

1 Urmia University

2 Assistant Professor in Motor Behavior/ Faculty of sport sciences/ Department of Motor Behavior and Sport Management/ University of Urmia, Urmia, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22089/mbj.2020.8764.1878
Abstract
This study aimed to identify the importance of the play practice approach in decision making, metacognitive behavior and futsal skills. The sample included 30 female students who were divided into two groups (traditional training: n=15 and play practice: n=15). The samples had no history of futsal training and were randomly selected. The futsal skill test was used to evaluate performance in decision making on decision-making software, and for metacognitive behavior from the metacognitive behavior questionnaire. Training protocols were implemented separately for each group for over 12 weeks. The results showed significant differences between traditional and play practice groups in the pass, shoot and dribble skills. The analyses also showed significant differences between the two groups in decision making and metacognitive behavior. These differences were in favor of the play practice group. Based on the result, it can be concluded that the use of game-based pedagogy can improve futsal basic technique skills and cognition function simultaneously. The study suggests that in addition to motor skills coaches can improve players' metacognitive behavior in educational strategies by implementing the tactical-game approach, which allows players to acquire the ability to successfully solve problems for themselves in a game situation.

Keywords

Play Practice
Decision Making
Metacognitive Behavior
Futsal
  1. Moy B, Renshaw I, Davids K. The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on physical education teacher education students’ intrinsic motivation. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 2016;21(5):517-38.
  2. Mitchell SA, Oslin JL, Griffin LL. Teaching sport concepts and skills: a tactical games approach for ages 7 to 18. : Human Kinetics; 2013.
  3. Allison S, Thorpe R. A comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches to teaching games within physical education: a skills approach versus a games for understanding approach. British Journal of Physical Education. 1997;28(3):9-13.
  4. Metzler M. Instructional models in physical education. : Taylor & Francis; 2017.
  5. Hopper T. Teaching games for understanding: the importance of student emphasis over content emphasis. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 2002;73(7):44-8.
  6. Mandigo J, Holt NL, Mandigo J. The inclusion of optimal challenge in teaching games for understanding. Physical and Health Education Journal. 2000;66(3):14-21.
  7. Strean W, Bengoechea E. Beyond technical vs tactical: extending the games-teaching debate. In: Teaching games for understanding in physical education and sport. :    ; 2003:181-8.
  8. Dania A, Kossyva I, Zounhia K. effects of a teaching games for understanding program on primary school students’physical activity patterns. European Journal of Physical Education and Sport Science. 2017.
  9. Chow JY, Davids K, Button C, Rein R, Hristovski R, Koh M. Dynamics of multi-articular coordination in neurobiological systems. Nonlinear Dynamics Psychology and Life Sciences. 2009;13(1):27-52.
  10. Butler J, Griffin LL. More teaching games for understanding: moving globally. : Human Kinetics; 2010.
  11. Bunker D, Thorpe R. A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education. 1982;18(1):5-8.
  12. Kirk D, MacPhail A. Teaching games for understanding and situated learning: rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe model. Journal of teaching in Physical Education. 2002;21(2):177-92.
  13. Launder AG, Piltz W. Play practice: Engaging and developing skilled players from beginner to elite. : Human Kinetics; 2013.
  14. McPherson SL, French KE. Changes in Cognitive Strategies and Motor Skill in Tennis. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 1991;13(1): .
  15. Ghari Ba-D, Mohammad Zadeh H, Ahmadi M. The Effects of Three Instructional Approaches on Basketball Game Performance in University Students. Motor Behavior. 2019;11(35):63-84.
  16. Mandigo J, Holt N, Anderson A, Sheppard J. Children’s motivational experiences following autonomy-supportive games lessons. European Physical Education Review. 2008;14(3):407-25.
  17. Mitchell S. Teaching and learning games at the elementary level. In: Teaching games for understanding: theory, research, and practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2005. pp: 55-70.
  18. Ruban L. Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Roeper Review. 2003;25(2):89.
  19. Schoenfeld AH. What’s all the fuss about metacognition. Cognitive Science and Mathematics Education. 1987;189:215.
  20. Schraw G. Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In: Metacognition in learning and instruction. Cham: Springer; 2001. pp. 3-16.
  21. Alexander JM, Fabricius WV, Fleming VM, Zwahr M, Brown SA. The development of metacognitive causal explanations. Learning and Individual Differences. 2003;13(3):227-38.
  22. Hartman HJ. Metacognition in learning and instruction: theory, research and practice. Cham: Springer Science & Business Media; 2001.
  23. Cheng M-T, Chen J-H, Chu S-J, Chen S-Y. The use of serious games in science education: a review of selected empirical research from 2002 to 2013. Journal of Computers in Education. 2015;2(3):353-75.
  24. Hardy C, Mawer M. Pupils’ Metacognition and Learning. In: Learning and teaching in physical education. London: Routledge; 2012. pp. 46-66.
  25. Lidor R, Arnon M, Bornstein A. The effectiveness of a learning (cognitive) strategy on free-throw performance in basketball. Applied Research in Coaching and Athletics Annual. 1999; :59-72.
  26. Chatzipanteli A, Digelidis N, Karatzoglidis C, Dean R. A tactical-game approach and enhancement of metacognitive behaviour in elementary school students. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy. 2016;21(2):169-84.
  27. Pizarro D, Práxedes A, Travassos B, del Villar F, Moreno A. The effects of a nonlinear pedagogy training program in the technical-tactical behaviour of youth futsal players. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching. 2019;14(1):15-23.
  28. Chatzipanteli A, Digelidis N, Karatzoglidis C, Dean R. Promoting students’ metocognitive behavior in physical education through TGfU. American Journal of Educational Science. 2015;1(2):28-36.
  29. Zhang P, Ward P, Li W, Sutherland S, Goodway J. Effects of play practice on teaching table tennis skills. Journal of teaching in Physical Education. 2012;31(1):71-85.
  30. Miller A. Games centered approaches in teaching children & adolescents: systematic review of associated student outcomes. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education. 2015;34(1):36-58.
  31. Davids K, Araújo D, Correia V, Vilar L. How small-sided and conditioned games enhance acquisition of movement and decision-making skills. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews. 2013;41(3):154-61.
  32. Masters R, Poolton JM, Maxwell JP, Raab M. Implicit motor learning and complex decision making in time-constrained environments. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2008;40(1):71-9.
  33. Chatzipanteli A, Digelidis N. The influence of metacognitive prompting on students’ performance in a motor skills test in physical education. International Journal of Sports Science and Engineering. 2011;5(2):093-8.
  34. Breed R, Spittle M. Developing game sense through tactical learning: a resource for teachers and coache. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.
  35. Lin X, Schwartz DL, Hatano G. Toward teachers’ adaptive metacognition. Educational Psychologist. 2005;40(4):245-55.
  36. Zoudji B, Thon B, Debû B. Efficiency of the mnemonic system of expert soccer players under overload of the working memory in a simulated decision-making task. Psychology of sport and Exercise. 2010;11(1):18-26.
  37. Papaioannou A, Theodosiou A, Pashali M, Digelidis N. Advancing task involvement, intrinsic motivation and metacognitive regulation in physical education classes: the self-check style of teaching makes a difference. Advances in Physical Education. 2012;3(2):110-8.
  38. Marhaendro ASD. editor. Validity and reliability of Futsal Skill Test. International Seminar of Sport Culture and Achievement; 2014.
  39. Liu S, Liu M. The impact of learner metacognition and goal orientation on problem-solving in a serious game environment. Computers in Human Behavior. 2020;102:151-65.
  40. Oppici L, Panchuk D, Serpiello FR, Farrow D. Long-term practice with domain-specific task constraints influences perceptual skills. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;8:1387.
  41. Caserta RJ, Young J, Janelle CM. Old dogs, new tricks: training the perceptual skills of senior tennis players. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2007;29(4):479-97.
  42. Farrow D, Reid M. The effect of equipment scaling on the skill acquisition of beginning tennis players. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2010;28(7):723-32.
  43. Hagemann N, Strauss B, Cañal-Bruland R. Training perceptual skill by orienting visual attention. Journal of Sport and exercise Psychology. 2006;28(2):143-58.
  44. Vickers JN, Livingston LF, Umeris-Bohnert S, Holden D. Decision training: the effects of complex instruction, variable practice and reduced delayed feedback on the acquisition and transfer of a motor skill. Journal of Sports Sciences. 1999;17(5):357-67.
  45. Moradi J, Movahedi A, Salehi H. Specificity of learning a sport skill to the visual condition of acquisition. Journal of Motor Behavior. 2014;46(1):17-23.
  46. Williams AM, Ward P, Smeeton NJ, Allen D. Developing anticipation skills in tennis using on-court instruction: Perception versus perception and action. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 2004;16(4):350-60.
  47. Newell K. Constraints on the development of coordination. In Wade MG, Whiting HTA, eds. Motor development in children: aspects of coordination and control. : ; 1986.
  48. Haro GV, Ortega JP, Cerezo CR, Contreras MIM. Propuesta de valoración técnico-táctica mediante una situación de juego colectivo básico en el fútbol de iniciación. Retos: Nuevas Tendencias en Educación Física, Deporte y Recreación. 2007(12):29-35.
  49. Práxedes A, Del Villar F, Pizarro D, Moreno A. The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on decision-making and execution in youth soccer players according to game actions. Journal of Human Kinetics. 2018;62(1):185-98.
  50. Taras H. Physical activity and student performance at school. Journal of School Health. 2005;75(6):214-8.
  51. Sheppard J. Personal and social responsibility through game play: utilizing the teaching games for understanding instructional model. [PhD dissertation]. [Canada]: University of Toronto; 2014.
  52. Jamon KGG, Lusung-Oyzon MVP. Utilizing teaching games for understanding in physical education: effects on primary students’ metacognition. Alipato: A Journal of Basic Education. 2019.
Motor Behavior
Volume 13, Issue 44
September 2021
Pages 17-42

  • Receive Date 17 April 2020
  • Revise Date 29 September 2020
  • Accept Date 31 October 2020

Home

Reviewers

Submit Manuscript

Publication Ethics

news

Journal Metrics

Contact Us