Title

理解式球類教學法對中學生學習效果之探討

Translated Titles

Exploring the Instructional Effects of Teaching Games for Understanding Approach on Learning of Secondary School Students

DOI

10.6580/JTSP.2006.1(2).02

Authors

闕月清(Nyit-Chin Keh);鄭漢吾(Han-Wu Cheng)

Key Words

理解式球類教學法 ; 球類運動比賽表現評量 ; 羽球客觀技能 ; TGfU ; GPAI ; Badminton objective skill

PublicationName

臺灣運動教育學報

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

1卷2期(2006 / 12 / 01)

Page #

25 - 43

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

理解式球類教學法是針對遊戲或比賽進行修改及設計的教學,強調遊戲或比賽的情境學習當中的戰術及技能,使學習者透過個人的思考或團體的討論來理解整個遊戲或比賽之運動規則、戰術的應用,引導其個別運動技能之學習,加深其對遊戲或比賽所產生的樂趣。本研究目的在於探討學生在接受理解式球類教學法前後的認知、態度、技能與比賽表現之影響。本研究以多元及質量並重的研究方法,以立意取樣的六位體育教師(二位高中與四位國中體育教師)及其施教的213位學生為參與研究對象,採用問卷調查、參與觀察、文件蒐集、訪談、焦點團體訪談等研究方法,選擇理解式球類教學分類系統中的隔網項目-羽球,進行六週實地的教學研究。資料的分析,在量化部分採用球類運動比賽表現評量(GPAI)、百分比、平均數、標準差、單因子變異數分析和t考驗進行統計分析,而質性部分則採持續比較法,將參與觀察、文件蒐集、訪談、焦點團體訪談等資料進行分析。本研究發現可歸結如下三點:(一)研究參與學生在理解式球類教學後,認知表現有明顯的進步。學生對羽球學習效果的知覺情形,可從羽球規則等五方面得知,也肯定了理解式球類教學法在認知上的效果。(二)學生在理解式球類教學後,態度有明顯的正向變化。學生對認知學習效果的知覺情形可歸納為認知、情感與意向行動三方面,皆肯定了理解式球類教學法對學生態度的正面影響。(三)學生在接受理解式球類教學後,羽球的客觀技能與比賽表現皆有明顯的進步。從做決定、技能執行與回位還原等三方面,足以肯定技能與比賽表現的學習效果。本研究最後還針對結論提出四項具體建議,應能做為將來推展理解式球類教學實務及相關研究的參考。

English Abstract

The original Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model presented by Bunker and Throrpe (1986) focused on modified games and tactical strategies in game situations. Through individual thinking and group discussions, students discussed the applications of game rules, tactics and this lead to skill learning as well as enjoy the fun of game. This study attempted to adopt both qualitative and quantitative research methods, such as, questionnaires, Games performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI), self-Assessment Feedback Instrument (SAFI), participant observation, interview and documents. The purposes were to (1) Examine the understanding and attitude changes of participant PE teachers before and after the TGfU training course; (2) Examine the understanding and attitude changes of teachers and students before and after the TGfU teaching units; (3) Investigate the learning effects of TGfU PE teaching; and (4) Examine the teacher and student interaction during TGfU teaching units. The participants of the first phrase included 136 in-service PE teachers who attend the TGfU conference and workshop during the summer of 2004. Self-designed questionnaires were administered to the PE teachers before and after the TGfU training sessions. The second phase of the study involved 6 PE teachers (2 senior high and 4 junior high) and their PE class students. Each teacher planned and taught 12 classes in PE lessons using TGfU approach. Participant observation and interview were used to understand the teaching and learning process. Teacher-student and student-student interaction were coded using SAFI. The students also pretested and postested using GPAI. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics and constant comparison method. The results indicated that (1) The teachers had better knowledge about TGfU and were supportive and satisfied with the teaching approach after the training sessions. (2) After teaching with TGfU approach the teachers were more knowledgeable about TGfU but also more aware of the disadvantages about implementing TGfU. (3) After 4 weeks of TGfU teaching students showed improvement in cognitive, attitude, skill tests and games performance. This evidenced the effectiveness of the TGfU and it's value in PE teaching. Four suggestions were made to promote TGfU in schools in the future.

Topic Category 社會科學 > 體育學
Reference
  1. Almond, L.(Ed.)(1997).Physical education in schools.London:Kogan Page.
  2. Bell, T.(2003).An investigation into the use of thinking skills to understanding and employ tactical knowledge in the context of a practical team problem solving activity.2nd International Conference: Teaching Sport and Physical Education for Understanding,Melbourne, Australia:
  3. Bloom, B. S.(1956).Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I : Cognitive Domain.N. Y:Mckay Co. Inc..
  4. Bogdan, Robert C.,Biklen, S. K.(1992).Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods.Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
  5. Butler, J.,Griffin, L.,Lombardo, B.,Nastasi, R.(2003).Teaching games for understanding in physical education and sport: An international perspective.Reston, VA:National Association of Sport and Physical Education.
  6. French, K. E.,Werner, P. H.,Taylor, K.,Hussey, K.,Jones. J.(1996).The effects of a 6-Week unit of tactical, skill, or combined tactical and skill instruction on badminton performance of ninth-grade students.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,15(4),439-463.
  7. Glaser, B.(1978).Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory.Mill Valley, CA:Sociology Press.
  8. Griffin, L. L.(Ed.),Butler, I. J.(Ed.)(2005).Teaching games for understanding.Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics.
  9. Griffin, L. L.,Mitchell, S. A.,Oslin, J. L.(1997).Teaching sport concepts and skills: A tactical games approach.Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics.
  10. Jordán, O. R. C.,López. L. M. G.,Pérez, L. M. R.(2003).Transfer of procedural knowledge: from invasion games to hockey.2nd International Conference: Teaching Sport and Physical Education for Understanding,Melbourne, Australia:
  11. Keh, N. C.,Tsai, T. D.,Huang, C. C.(2003).Teachers' perceptions of and attitudes towards Teaching Games for Understanding.2nd International Conference: Teaching Sport and Physical Education for Understanding,Melboum, Australia:
  12. Light, R.(2003).The joy of learning: Emotion and learning in games through TGfU.Journal of Physical Education New Zealand,36(1),93-108.
  13. Mcpherson, S. L.,French, K. E.(1991).Changes in cognitive strategies and motor skill in tennis.Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,13,26-41.
  14. Nevett, M.,Rovengo, I.,Babiarz, M.(2001).Fourth-grade children's knowledge of cutting, passing and tactics in invasion games after a 12-lesson unit of instruction.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,20(4),389-401.
  15. Siedentop, D.(2000).Developing teaching skill in physical education.Mountain View, CA:Mayfield.
  16. Timothy, C.(1996).Reflections and further questions.Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance,67(4),49-52.
  17. Turner, A. P.(2003).A comparative analysis of two approaches for teaching tennis: Games for understanding approach versus the Technique approach.2nd International Conference: Teaching Sport and Physical Education for Understanding,Melbourne, Australia:
  18. Turner, A. P.(1995).Greensboro,North.Carolina University.
  19. Turner, A. P.,Martinek, T. J.(1992).A comparative analysis of two models for teaching games: Technique approach and game-centered (tactical focus) approach.International Journal of Physical Education,29(4),15-31.
  20. 林本源(2002)。桃園縣,國立體育學院。
  21. 紀世清(2002)。羽球階段性教學內容及其評量方法之研究。台北:師大書苑。
  22. 郭世德(2000)。桃園縣,國立體育學院。
  23. 黃志成(2004)。台北市,國立台灣師範大學。
  24. 黃金柱編(2003)。體育課程教學設計理論與實務。台北縣:國立教育研究院。
  25. 黃瑞琴(1991)。質的教育研究方法。台北市:心理出版社。
  26. 廖玉光(2002)。球類教學-領會教學法。香港:香港教育學院。
  27. 蔡宗達(2004)。台北市,國立台灣師範大學。
  28. 鄭漢吾、闕月清(2005)。TGfU 對台灣中區中小學健體教師的影響。TheⅢInternational TGfU Conference,Hong Kong, China:
Times Cited
  1. 鍾畯豐(2011)。理解式球類訓練法(Game Sense)應用於國小足球隊訓練之行動研究。臺東大學進修部暑期體育碩士班學位論文。2011。1-170。 
  2. 陳建宏(2009)。理解式球類教學法應用於國小四年級羽球教學之行動研究。臺東大學體育學系碩士班學位論文。2009。1-126。 
  3. 陳星如(2008)。Mosston練習式與理解式球類教學在國小籃球教學效果之比較研究。臺東大學體育學系碩士班學位論文。2008。1-128。 
  4. 張簡振豐(2008)。理解式球類教學對國小六年級學生學習效果之研究。臺東大學進修部暑期體育碩士班學位論文。2008。1-129。 
  5. 許睿元(Ruei-Yuan Hsu);掌慶維(Ching-Wei Chang)(2012)。國小學童樂樂足球遊戲型式之探討。中華體育季刊。26(3)。361-369。 
  6. 黃品瑞(2006)。理解式球類訓練法於國小籃球校隊訓練之研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系學位論文。2006。1-120。
  7. 葉人豪(2006)。國小五年級理解式巧固球教學之行動研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2006。1-142。
  8. 簡銘成(2006)。理解式球類教學法對國中生排球學習效果之研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2006。1-132。
  9. 吳其達(2006)。理解式球類教學對國小五年級學生排球學習效果之研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2006。1-123。
  10. 施登堯(2006)。建構主義應用在高中武術教學之研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系學位論文。2006。1-380。
  11. 李靜宜(2010)。理解式球類教學法教師發問技巧之行動研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2010。1-111。
  12. 邱茂盛(2010)。合作學習模式融入理解式球類教學法對國中生巧固球學習成效之研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2010。1-166。
  13. 廖智倩(2010)。國小六年級學生對體育教師教學策略知覺之研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系學位論文。2010。1-317。
  14. 馬良睿(2010)。理解式球類訓練法應用於高中棒球校隊訓練之行動研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2010。1-137。
  15. 夏文龍(2011)。理解式球類教學法應用於國中學生羽球學習之行動研究。臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2011。1-122。