An Exploration of Teaching Games for Understanding (Tgfu) Within Secondary Schools and Its Effects on Engagement Levels of Year 11 Students During Physical Education

Abstract

This research paper analyzes whether Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) is a suitable framework to enhance student engagement and increase motivation among secondary school children. There are other forms of teaching models that secondary school teachers use in physical education. Research shows that the instructional approach is the most common method where the teacher is the lesson manager and the sole instructor. The instructional approach is more traditional compared to the outcomes presented by TGfU. The paper has utilized a technique and design research approach by seeking answers on what effects the TGfU approach has on 11-year students and how their lessons differ from regular P.E classes. A positivist viewpoint was used to write this research paper and study design and methods. Qualitative and quantitative analysis were used in analyzing raw data. A group of 10 years 11 students and their teachers were subjected to a physical exercise where one used TGfU models and the other used the traditional method. Qualitative data was collected through interviews and focus groups, and quantitative data was through pre and post-test questionnaires. The research was conducted with ethical implications in mind by ensuring the identity of participants was secure.

Key Words: suitable framework, motivation and engagement, instructional approach, TGfU

Introduction

The pedagogical model of direct instruction has been used in physical education among secondary school students. In the instructional approach, the teacher is the definitive leader of the teaching process and is the sole decision-maker for all content and objectives of the physical education session. The teacher is also the lesson manager and caters to all student responsibilities (Metzler, 2021). The traditional direct instruction model is also considered to have the teacher utilizing blocks for a repetitive practice where students are engineered to reproduce movements instructed to them by the teacher. This model has received criticism because it decontextualizes teaching and engagement in sports because of the execution of technical practices in isolation from real and authentic game situations. Direct instruction also emphasizes a linear, mechanistic pedagogical model focusing on students’ psychomotor consequences but at the expense of social and cognitive abilities. (Light, 2003).

Metzler (2021) offers an alternative pedagogical model of physical education by proposing seven other pedagogical models for teachers to utilize in their training. Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) was one of the methods proposed. In this model, the pupil must be active, and their needs are considered before designing student tasks. The learner is placed central to the learning process and outcomes. One of the priorities of TGfU is its ability to prioritize cognitive ability in students, where students learn the game tactically through small-sided group plays and better-conditioned versions appropriate for the learner’s development. In this physical education model, the teacher prioritizes the decision-making first before how an action is executed. Student motivation and engagement are increased through the interaction of technical skills and pedagogical modification principles. The Self Determination Theory is an example of a theory that could help explain the process of student motivation among students in secondary school. (Deci El, 2000). Self Determination Theory involves three distinguished motivation levels—autonomous, controlled, and motivational. SDT also proposes to establish three basic psychological needs (BPNs). These three BPNs are autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The approach to physical education principally impacts BPN’s satisfaction, which then influences the effect of autonomous motivation. Levels of self-motivation can be used to envisage cognitive, behavioural, and affective outcomes either negatively or positively. Students who show positive outcomes of enjoyment and intention when engaging in physical education are more likely to be highly self and autonomously motivated (Gucciardi & Jackson, 2015; Sanchez et). The contrast can be said about students with lacklustre outcomes, such as boredom.

Scholars need to do further research on how different pedagogical models in teaching physical education affect motivation and foster engagement with fitness even after finishing school. There needs to be more research done on this subject matter comparing the effects of TGfU and direct instruction models. Research by (Mandingo et al., 2008; Moy & Davids, 2015) has proven that when tutors incorporate TGfU in physical education, learners show more autonomous determination than those taught via direct instruction. At the end of a sports unit, students who were more intrinsically motivated and recorded higher scores in enjoyment and sports competence were in the TGfU group (Jones et al., 2010). Gil-Arias et al. (2017) researched to establish the effects of combining TGfU and Sport Education on student motivation. Despite having the same objectives and concepts, there needs to be more research to show the outcome of a hybrid system. In their research, Curtner-Smith and Hastie (2006) allude that teaching through a hybrid system is challenging because of the complexity and technicalities involved. The teacher must show to possess high levels of pedagogical information. As pointed out in their research, Harriet & Jarret (2013) explain that there needs to be more research concerning the use of TGfU in specialized contexts. Teaching games for understanding counters the old narrative of traditional physical education models that involve how students should perform skills rather than a student-centred approach. A teacher-centred approach developed by Bunker and Thorpe (1982) was developed to offer more performance to alienate learners from a wide range of experiences but leave students with little information about games. There is also a strong dependency on teachers as they make all the decisions. It is this admission that led to the development of the TGfU model.

Literature Review

This paper aims to understand how teaching games for understanding help impact student motivation and engagement among year 11 students in the UK. This part discusses a brief history of TGfU to show how the model developed its significant repetitions that appear different but, on further investigation, are defined by outstanding individual changes. The part of the discussion in this section is that to verify these assumptions, a methodology similar to that of Wallhead and Sullivan is adopted, and a sum of seventy-six periodicals involving the TGfU model. Seventy-six publications were sampled and researched about the model, with 40 publications being theoretical and another 36 data-based empirical studies. This literature review focuses on the academic publications that explain TGfU as an improvement on traditional but, in some cases, standard technical and linear practice. Assumptions about TGfU in the theoretical literature and its comparison to traditional PE methods are explained in this section.

Brief History of TGfU

A model shift to the approach of physical education led to the withdrawal of the dominant sport-related teaching of instructive directing to those sponsored by the pedagogical characteristics of TGfU. The history can be traced to Wade (1967), who proposed the framework of small sides games to combine teaching both technical and tactical attack in football. Wade’s small-sided game framework championed the few players in competitive small-sided games. The TGfU model has since adopted the small-sided modification in games. Moreover, in 1968, Mosston came up with the Spectrum of Teaching Styles, which led teachers to a focused choice of academic action to enhance specified teaching purposes. Unlike TGfU, the Mosston style does not emphasize the teacher’s questioning in areas of prompt examination in a target game concept but focuses on game understanding. Suggestions by Mauldon and Redfren (1969) to physical educators requesting that they were not mandated to refer to a person as ‘educated’ by simply mastering a skill but presented new approaches to teaching games. Mauldon and Redfren suggested an approach that contained three elements, namely, analysis of games by players for players to develop game appreciation and comprehension, categories of games to group games with a similar approach to effect transfer of conceptual skills, and organized situations to enhance player experimentation and the solving of problems (Stolz & Pill, 2013).

Mauldon and Redfren also suggested that it was mandatory to contain either of these three elements; throwing an object away, moving with it, or returning it. From these three elements, games would be grouped into the net, batting, and running games. The game organization was announced to help in the game analysis process to monitor player progress and game appreciation and to teach the transfer of skills and knowledge during a game. The description of TGfU emphasizes these features, as described by Bunker & Thorpe. Ellis (1994) later classified games into four categories and eight subcategories. Although there were developments in sports teaching across many secondary schools, Kirk (2010) notes that teaching PE continued with the traditional methods of sport-as-techniques done in highly structured lessons. Decontextualized ways of learning methods like motor patterns away from movement information meant that student sports experiences were inaccurate sentiments that many students completed their participation years in PE with little success and knowledge about games and sports.

An Overview of Literature Review

The study involved TGfU but with different authors, focus, data sources, and findings.

Butler (1996)—The focus was on teachers’ interviews to comment on the drawbacks and advantages of the tactical approach. Ten teachers were involved from year 3 to year 11 with vast teaching experience and choices. Individual, ratio gestalt, and performance criteria quantitatively provided the data source. In comparison, qualitative data were extracted from individual participant interviews. Turner (1996) examined the legitimacy of TGfU by its comparison to the technique approach. The participants were 24 years 11 students and another 24 years ten learners, each allotted to a teaching group of 12 students in a physical gaming exercise. The findings suggest no substantial variances in skill development among the TGfU students and the technique group regarding skill set. The TGfU group showed more improvement than the technique group regarding declarative knowledge. Significant improvements in decision-making and gameplay were evidenced by the improved engagement from the TGfU group more than the technique group. Harvey (2003) examined the probability that TGfU could improve specific involvement in the game, such as involvement and performance. Sixteen participants between 16 and 18 years were taken to the game soccer development squad. There was quantitative analysis from a video in a modified situation. There was excellent student improvement in student performance and involvement, suggesting that TGfU could increase involvement and team performance by increasing the decision-making capacity to execute practical skills.

Jones et al. (2010) compare the effect of TGfU and the old skills-based approaches on motivation. The participants were 52 high school students and two instructors. Qualitative data was collected using group interviews and post-intervention game video analysis and through questionnaires. The results indicate that TGfU is a meaningful game pedagogy, mainly among girls, and that affective experiences are enhanced through the model. Wallhed & Deglan (2004) investigate the impact of TGfU on the motivational response of students in years 10 to 16. Data was sourced from pre- and post-intervention measures and effort and learning. The findings show that the TGA model encourages a non-threatening challenge to learners so that they enjoy their experience of mastering tactical dimensions in the game. This boosts motivation and engagement in game-based physical education.

Gil-Arias et al. (2017) researched to investigate the effects of a hybrid TGfU-Sport Education course on student motivation when out for physical education. The number of participants for the case study was 55 students, with a mean age of 16 years and a maximum of 16 years. They were all in their fourth year of secondary school. Data was collected through autonomous motivation, basic psychological needs, and enjoyment/boredom on a sport scale. Qualitative data was collected with questionnaires on the Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. Two exercises were conducted using Direct instruction and a hybrid of Sport Education and TGfU. The findings showed that both groups significantly improved autonomy when taught using the hybrid system of SE/TGfU.

Nonetheless, students showed high competence scores upon completing the TGfU/SE course. The result was consistent with other studies that showed increased perceived competence among students who applied the TGfU pedagogy. The second group showed greater autonomous motivation than the direct instruction unit in the hybrid system. These results are parallel with previous studies showing that, compared to direct instruction, students who engaged in physical education through TGfU or a hybrid with SE experienced greater autonomous motivation (Jones et al., 2010). Increased autonomous motivation positively impacts physical education and breeds greater satisfaction and enjoyment, leading to more student engagement in physical education.

Development of TGfU globally

In addition to their research, the development of TGfU around the globe resulted from several iterations. The tactical games model has six steps of learning patterns developed by Griffin et al. (1997) and Mitchell et al. (2003). These researchers simplify the six-step process to three steps, simplifying it for teachers and students to appreciate the process of learning physical education. The tactical games approach brought forth an organized approach through layered learning of sports skills named the ‘complete package of teaching’ in middle secondary school physical education that was missing in the TGfU literature. For teachers, this approach is that they can rely on something other than developing specific sports domain knowledge in the broad range of sports.

Another development was Game Sense. This approach was first introduced by Thorpe & West (1969) to describe game intelligence and define game teaching performance measures. The method, however, has accredited its growth from Australia. Charlesworth defines Game Sense as an objective in player development at elite sports levels. Designer Games is a structure used to achieve a combination of subtle technical, fitness, and tactical training in physical game practice. The idea was modelled into a teaching sports method after regular visits to Australia by Thorpe in the 1990s on a trip to Australia (Thorpe, 2012). An approach centred on players was born to establish a tactical and technical foundation in sports through game-centred training mechanisms. In 2006, Thorpe agreed that the integration of the Game Sense model was more similar to TGfU’s first model.

Game Sense is part of Play Practice. This approach defines game sense as a requirement for successful involvement in sports. The pedagogy of Play Practice is shaping play to fix player experience, focus on acquiring sports skills, and encourage physical exercise by driving attention to all essentials of play required for perfection. Like TGfU and Game Sense, Play Practice encourages instructors to teach a breadth of instructional policies in their teachings to attain their objectives. Moreover, there is an emphasis on developing thinking players fueled by questioning as a dominant theoretical tool similar to the one in TGfU, Tactical Games, and Game Sense approaches. (Launder, 2001).

Tactical Decision learning model—exploration by students is the main focus of this model. There are explorations of gameplay possibilities and enough movement comebacks in small-sided attack-minded games. Once a group experiences a game, small-sided teams develop action plans finalized in actual play and then polished once players better understand the action plan/game rules relationship (Grehaigne & Godbout, 1995). The teacher will therefore make the game harder once a stabilized game understanding occurs. The teacher will then introduce another game, initiating generalization in comprehending the game across the sport.

TGfU has a distinct model, sometimes suggested to belong to its guiding principles: sampling, exaggeration, representation, and questioning. Thorpe et al. (1986) propose that these elements were already used in in-game teaching. However, what TGfU did was organize the pedagogy into a precise scheme.

Aim of the Research

In their research, Alcala & Garijo (2017) define Teaching Games for Understanding as a pedagogical framework that promotes sports education by prioritizing understanding tactics and plays but not technique. The model originated in the UK in the 1980s, with continued publications on how to implement this model across various sports. The preference for TGfU in Physical Education still needs to be explored because teachers quickly return to traditional methods once positive feedback is not achieved (Hooper, 2022). O’Leary, 2016 & Stolz and Pill, 2014 have researched and proven that TGfU positively impacts interference with other physical education content. Most published experiences focus on TGfU’s ability to help learners understand the gameplay. Few studies have shown how TGfU can lead to motivation and student achievement in sports. The bulk of this study is to examine the impact that TGfU has on student motivation and further engagement after school.

Phil & Webb outline that the concept of Teaching Games for Understanding has existed since the 1980s but was introduced in Australia in the 1990s by Rod Thorpe from the UK. The Sports Commission then tested the model and conducted workshops nationwide to test its competence. There needed to be more clarity across sports departments on the objective and how to apply the model. Hopper (2001) indicates that he was always asked by other teachers and students about what the TGfU approach meant then and whether there was anything wrong with teaching skills. Hooper always answered that there was nothing wrong with teaching skills but insisted that TGfU was aimed at more progression from tactics to skills and not vice versa. A common misconception is that in TGfU, students play games but with a teacher’s guide. Hooper (2001) refutes that it is not always the case. This research paper aims to help those with the wrong misinterpretation of what TGfU is all about and what it is aimed at. Understanding that TGfU is a model that appreciates the approach to skill and skill practice. The approach is also meant to help students understand how a skill is executed before knowing how to do it. This research paper is also aimed at showing the reader that TGfU is a model that is a tactic-to-skill approach to games and is anchored on a synthesis of tactical and technique perspectives. The word ‘games’ is commonly used in this paper and, in this context, means a collection of activities that use objects; and can culturally develop into valued adult games such as basketball, baseball, and tennis.

Knowing the difference between the skills and tactical approach to understanding how TGfU can help foster engagement in year 11 students in Physical Education is essential. (Silverman, 1997). TGfU is aimed at the progression of tactics to skills and tactics or skills; therefore, to understand the inner working of TGfU, it would be crucial to separate the two so that learners can understand its execution in actual games. Another critical aspect that must be addressed in this paper is the different considerations in the criteria for teaching TGfU. Teachers are responsible for understanding students concerning developmental layers in gameplay and their comprehension of the game.

Some teachers incorporate hybrid models, a combination of TGfU and Sport Education. The paper will also investigate whether the hybrid model is an improvement to TGfU or the fact that it is rarely in use because of limited research. The important aspect of ethics must be handled when doing research in a school setting. The researcher must get approval from the Ethics Committee of the educational centre and subsequently get consent from the participating children. The paper also gives some background history on the significant developments of TGfU and the theoretical framework used for the literature review. The paper aims to sample year 11 pupils and qualitatively obtain data through questionnaires before and after implementing sporting activities during a PE session. Qualitative analysis was also done through structured interviews with teachers in the research. The interview is meant to explore their thoughts and get a broader perspective concerning their practice. The interview questions are therefore developed considering the researcher’s knowledge and past research (Patton, 2002). The research also allowed room for the addition of more questions.

Is TGFU Increasing Motivation?

According to a research study by Gasper et al. (2021), the TGfU approach encourages simultaneous cognitive, emotional, and physical development. Their study aimed to use a comprehensive teaching program anchored on the principles of the TGfU approach. Their study also assessed the model’s consequences on student motivation, satisfaction with basic psychological needs, and perceptions. A quasi-experimental design was developed, with 111 participants from two sixth and fifth-grader groups. These students were divided into control and experimental groups. The experimental group had a TGfU unit with questioning aligned on a small scale. The control group had a small side games squad but without questioning. Results among the within-group show that the experimental group had significantly high scores in both genders. Results in the control group were only high in the variable (intention to be physically variable). The outcome demonstrated the need to instrument didactic units guided by comprehensive pedagogical approaches to improve motivation and a healthy lifestyle in male and female learners. There still needs to be more research on this topic.

Conceptualizing TGfU and other approaches based on the game to be positive pedagogy has the impact of recognizing that game-based learning facilitates positive learning outcomes (Jarrett et al., 2014). TGfU seeks to provoke enjoyment in learning by having a positive environment for engagement experienced in the forms of games. There is leaner enjoyment when focused on active engagement and a holistic understanding. The learning process is more likely to be positive when holistic understanding originates from active engagement. In the traditional form of learning PE, there has been a focus on ‘how’ the skill should be done. This has been a recurring theme in most PE environments for many generations. TGfU as an approach to teaching understanding was developed by Thorpe, who argued that the traditional teaching method is skill focused/teacher-centred and puts more emphasis on performance. The emphasis on performance can isolate many students from experiences that bring achievement, thus leaving learners with little knowledge about games; There is also the element of poor decision-making and a dependency of students on their instructors. From these admissions, a global contextualized game-based approach, such as the Tactical Decision Model, was developed in France. Bunker and Thorpe developed a similar one in England—the TGfU model.

Four theoretical principles help conceptualize the TGfU model in shaping the game design (Jarret et al., 2014). The explanations were offered by Griffin & Patton for these principles. Sampling—is where learners transfer their learning from game to game and are caused by exposure to many forms of games. Representation—this is where a teacher uses condensed games with a similar structure to their advanced forms. Exaggeration—in cases where there is a need to overstate a tactical problem, changing specific rules is inevitable. Finally, tactical complexity is the application of developmentally suitable games that match the ability of learners (Griffin & Patton, 2005). Some scholars have tried to compare the TGfU model to the skills approach. Such comparison, they say, does not consider the complexities of learning by creating weak binaries that show one perspective to be better than the other (Hopper, 2001). As offered by TGfU, good teaching is focused on teaching the student only what they can do and then challenging the student with more advanced forms of those activities.

Bunker & Thorpe argue that focusing on techniques makes the teacher insist on teaching these techniques, ignoring that learning should have progression. There is the presentation of skills every week, which is then assessed to evaluate student performance. This is known as ‘skill non-learning progression,’ where covering content is insisted upon, but student learning is ignored. On paper, this approach is progressing, but in a real sense, the skill progression is covered, but only a few capable ones can move at the teacher’s pace. All these shortcomings point to the need for a TGfU approach.

Further, Buner & Thorpe (1986) noted that many teachers realized that students shun away from techniques and look to enjoy themselves with little or no interference from their trainers. A tactical approach is where the teacher gets away from the game by emphasizing rules such as positioning themselves on the pitch, but students need more tactical skills to execute what is being told to them. The teacher is happy with an organized structure but needs tactical execution. The issue with this approach is that there might be students who will get overwhelmed by the game’s complexity resulting in the wearing off of the game’s novelty, culminating in boredom and frustration among the children. TGfU creates a perspective that seeks to challenge physical education teachers to effectively understand deep, intelligent structures involved in playing and learning in teaching games.

Methodology

This chapter introduces the research approach, which includes a thorough justification of both the technique and the design. Additional discussion areas will consist of the study’s limitations and ethical implications. This section will also go into the methodology used to collect data for this study. This section will also give the foundation for the preferred approaches; it will assist the investigator in implementing the plan to acquire information for the research analysis. It also covers the research methodology, data gathering methodologies, participant recruitment and sample size, data analysis, and research ethics.

The Teaching Games for Understanding (TGFU) educational methodology emphasizes developing decision-making skills, tactical awareness, and problem-solving abilities through game-based activities. This research aims to investigate the effect of TGFU on year 11 students’ participation levels during physical education sessions in secondary schools. This research will utilize a quasi-experimental design, including a pre-test and post-test study with a control and intervention group. Traditional physical education classes will be given to the control group, whereas TGFU-based physical education classes will be given to the intervention group. This methodology provides a complete description of the research design, participants, data collection methods, and data analysis methodologies employed in this study. We want to acquire insights into the effectiveness of TGFU-based physical education lessons in enhancing year 11 students’ engagement levels by following this methodology and comparing this approach to formal physical education sessions. This study’s findings may help build more effective physical education teaching practices that boost student engagement and improve learning outcomes.

Research Questions

This research study aims to determine whether the TGFU can help keep year 11 students engaged in physical education so that after they leave secondary school and physical education is no longer required, they will still be committed enough to continue participating in some form of physical exercise. Under the scope of this study’s investigation, three major research questions have been developed. They are as follows:

1. What effect does the TGFU pedagogical approach have on year 11 students’ involvement levels in physical education classrooms in secondary schools?
2. How do TGFU-based physical education lessons differ from regular physical education classes regarding year 11 student engagement?
3. What are students’ and teachers’ assessments of the success of TGFU-based physical education sessions compared to regular physical education classes?

Research Philosophy and Perspective

The dissertation’s research philosophy viewpoint is positivist. Positivism is a philosophy of study that uses empirical methods to evaluate hypotheses and find the underlying laws that control social processes. This viewpoint holds that the world is objective and independent of the researcher and that knowledge may be gained by accurate and systematic observation and experimentation.

The positivist approach will drive the study design and methods in this dissertation. The purpose is to collect and evaluate quantitative data to test the hypothesis that TGFU-based physical education lessons improve year 11 students’ involvement levels. Implementing a pre-test and post-test study with a control group and an intervention group is consistent with the positivist approach since it allows for a controlled comparison of two groups. The positivist perspective is also compatible with emphasizing empirical data collection through questionnaires and evaluations.

Research Participants

Selecting suitable participants for a research study is essential to ensuring the validity and reliability of the research findings. Participants in this study will be ten year 11 students from one or more secondary schools. Year 11 is essential for students preparing for their final exams and making career options. As a result, it is critical that the participants in this study are typical of this population and that their levels of participation are appropriately recorded.

The sample size is an essential factor to consider when selecting participants. The sample size should be sufficient to guarantee that the study has enough statistical power to identify differences in engagement levels between the control and intervention groups. A sample size calculation was utilized to calculate the sample size, which considers aspects including the desired level of statistical significance, the effect size, and the variability of the end measure. A higher sample size often results in greater statistical power, although this must be balanced with cost, time, and feasibility factors. Other considerations to consider when selecting volunteers, besides sample size, include demographic features, physical ability, and prior experience with TGFU. It is critical to ensure that the sample is representative of the target population, in this case, year 11 secondary school pupils. This may entail selecting participants from schools with diverse socioeconomic, cultural, and academic attainment levels.

Another factor to consider is the individual’s physical ability. Physical education classes based on TGFU may involve more physical activity and higher levels of competence than typical physical education classes, which may decrease student participation. As a result, it is critical to verify that all participants have a comparable level of physical ability, which can be tested through measures such as fitness tests or skill assessments. Furthermore, prior TGFU experience may influence involvement levels. Some kids may have been exposed to TGFU in earlier physical education sessions, while others may not have. The intervention and control groups must have comparable degrees of experience with TGFU, which surveys or interviews can determine.

Data Collection

Triangulation uses various methods or data sources to create a more comprehensive knowledge of a phenomenon. Triangulation will be employed in this study to improve the validity and reliability of the findings. The study will get a complete picture of the effects of TGFU on engagement levels among year 11 students in secondary schools by employing both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. The quantitative data collected during the pre-and post-test questionnaires will give numerical data that may be examined statistically. This type of information helps compare the control and intervention groups and establish whether there is a substantial difference in engagement levels between the two groups. However, more than quantitative statistics is required as quantitative data alone may provide an inaccurate picture of the students’ and teachers’ experiences in the study.

Qualitative data gathered through interviews or focus group discussions will provide more detailed insights into the participants’ experiences. These methods will enable the examination of participants’ attitudes, opinions, and perceptions and provide rich data that may be utilized to supplement the quantitative data gained via surveys. Qualitative data can provide a more nuanced view of students’ and teachers’ perspectives and aid in explaining any unforeseen findings from quantitative data. The study will be able to triangulate the data gathered by employing both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, improving the findings’ validity and reliability. Triangulation enables cross-validation of conclusions, boosting confidence in the results. The mix of approaches utilized in this study will provide a more thorough knowledge of the impacts of TGFU on engagement levels among year 11 students in secondary schools, allowing for more accurate and trustworthy findings to be generated.

To provide a more comprehensive knowledge of the effects of TGFU on engagement levels among year 11 students, this study must include both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Quantitative data from pre- and post-test surveys will provide numerical data that may be evaluated statistically. This type of data will enable comparisons between the control and intervention groups. It will aid in determining whether there is a substantial difference in engagement levels between the two groups. A validated questionnaire, such as the MES or SIS, ensures that the information gathered is reliable and valid. These surveys have been used widely in prior studies and have been proven helpful in gauging student involvement levels. The online administration of the surveys will give participants anonymity, which is vital to encourage honest responses and limit the danger of response bias.

Qualitative data from interviews and focus group discussions will provide more in-depth knowledge of students’ and teachers’ experiences in TGFU-based and traditional physical education classrooms. These methods will enable the examination of participants’ attitudes, opinions, and perceptions and provide rich data that may be utilized to supplement the quantitative data gained via surveys. Semi-structured interviews allow for greater flexibility in questions and allow participants to express their perspectives in their own words. The interview recordings will enable a complete examination of the data obtained and allow for additional study of themes and patterns arising from the data.

Overall, the combination of quantitative and qualitative methodologies in this study will provide a more thorough knowledge of the effects of TGFU on engagement levels among secondary school year 11 students. Combining these methodologies will enable data triangulation, which is necessary to improve the validity and dependability of the findings. The researcher performed in-depth interviews and focus groups to gather information on participants’ perspectives on the impact of social media influencer marketing on purchasing decisions in the fashion industry. An assistant moderator was present to guarantee a smooth and constructive debate. A limited question guide was produced based on the literature review, methodology, and specific issues such as millennials, social media influencers, source credibility, trust, and attractiveness.

Three academic leaders, including the dissertation supervisor, examined and approved the questions to guarantee their acceptability for the research. An observer took notes during the interviews, documenting every detail, including the participants’ sentiments and reactions, to ensure descriptive validity. The interviews were audio recorded using the Otter voice recorder, a mobile app that transcribes extensive talks. Participants were told of the recording and consented. The moderator promised participants that all recordings and material gathered would be erased as soon as the research was over. The appendix contains an example of the question guide. The researcher used these metrics to ensure formal logic, which is required for qualitative analysis, and to ensure that the data collected accurately represented the respondents’ comments.

Table 1: The data collected during the study

Table 2: Studies used in the Literatur review

Data Analysis

Data analysis is a vital component of every research study because it helps the researcher to gain valuable insights from the data collected. Data analysis may uncover the relationships and differences between variables using strategies such as anticipating outcomes, comparing variables, and describing and summarizing data. This provides a better understanding of the research issue. The data analysis is critical for the study in the context of this passage, and the researcher has taken necessary precautions to guarantee that the data collection process is thorough.

A grounded method must be used to undertake a complete data analysis. Rather than testing a preexisting theory, a wrecked process entails building an approach based on collected evidence. The inductive method is a grounded method often employed in qualitative research. It involves examining the acquired data and formulating a theory based on the observations made throughout the research process. Because it is related to the qualitative method, the inductive approach is ideal for this investigation. The qualitative method seeks to uncover the underlying meanings and reasons behind human behaviour and experience. Using an inductive process, data analysis can find underlying themes and patterns in the data obtained, allowing for a more in-depth understanding of the research issue.

This study’s data analysis technique will include quantitative and qualitative analysis methods. The quantitative data from the pre-and post-test surveys will be evaluated statistically, while the qualitative data from interviews or focus group discussions will be thematically analyzed. The quantitative survey data will be evaluated using descriptive statistics such as means and standard deviations to offer a summary of the engagement levels of the control and intervention groups at both the pre-test and post-test stages. To evaluate whether there is a significant difference in involvement levels between the control and intervention groups after the intervention, inferential statistics such as t-tests or ANOVA will be utilized. Thematic analysis will be performed on the qualitative data collected through interviews or focus group discussions. This entails identifying and interpreting patterns and themes in the data to understand the participants’ experiences better. The thematic analysis consists of various stages: data familiarization, coding, theme identification, and interpretation.

The data analysis approach will include triangulation of the gathered data, which will merge both quantitative and qualitative data to create a more comprehensive knowledge of the impacts of TGFU on engagement levels. This will help to validate the findings and provide a more thorough understanding of the participants’ experiences. The study’s findings will be presented clearly and concisely, including tables, graphs, and charts to demonstrate the results. The survey and interview data will be examined individually, and the results will be combined to explain how TGFU affects participation levels thoroughly.

Ethical Considerations

Ethical issues are critical in any research involving human participation because it includes dealing with human subjects and their rights. Ethical considerations are required in this study to preserve the participants’ rights and avoid any potential harm or danger to them. Informed consent is critical to ethical concerns in research involving human subjects. The study’s goal, the methods involved, and the potential dangers and advantages must all be explained to the participants. Participants in this study will be told about the study’s objective, procedures, and potential risks and benefits. Participants will have the option to withdraw from the study at any time and without penalty. Moreover, parental approval will be required for pupils under 18.

Anonymity and confidentiality are also crucial ethical factors in human-participant research. Personal information about the participants, such as their names and identifying information, will be kept private.

To secure their identities, participants will be given unique identifiers. The data will be accessible only to the research team and safely saved on a password-protected computer or file. Also, there would be no physical or psychological dangers to the participants in the study. Some participants, however, may feel uneasy answering some of the questions in the surveys or during interviews, and they will be reminded that they have the option to avoid any questions they do not feel like answering. Finally, the study will follow the ethical rules established by professional organizations. These principles aim to preserve participants’ rights and assure ethical practice in human-participant research. To summarize, ethical considerations are crucial to any research involving human participants. This study will ensure that ethical considerations are satisfied to respect the participants’ rights and assure ethical practice.

Research Limitations

The concept of research limitations is significant in any research study. Limits influence the accuracy and reliability of study findings and conclusions. They refer to conditions or factors outside the researcher’s control, such as a lack of resources, time constraints, or the inability to acquire specific data or information. Research also defines limitations as factors outside a researcher’s or writer’s control, such as restricting deficiencies or lacking capacity. Meanwhile, researchers can avoid certain constraints through careful preparation, the use of appropriate procedures, and the use of dependable and valid research tools. However, some limitations are unavoidable, such as longitudinal effects, a lack of data accessibility, or untrustworthy data sources. As a result, the researcher acknowledges that some research constraints are inescapable, while others can be addressed by proper research study conception, design, and execution. These constraints must be recognized in the research report and discussed regarding their potential impact on the research findings. As a result, the reader will better understand the research study’s strengths and shortcomings and be able to make educated conclusions about the findings’ application to their research or practice.

To begin with, the study is constrained by self-report measures to determine involvement levels, which may be influenced by social desirability bias or other biases. Second, the study’s sample size may need to be increased to identify minor but significant differences between the control and intervention groups. Although the sample size calculation will be performed to ensure enough statistical power, it may only account for some potential sources of variation. Third, the study’s findings may need to be revised in their generalizability. The study only included year 11 students in secondary schools. Therefore, the results may not apply to other age groups or educational environments. Furthermore, the research is restricted to a single pedagogical model (TGFU) and may not apply to different types of physical education instruction.

Furthermore, potential biases or confounding variables need to be adequately controlled, for they may limit the study. For example, there may be disparities in the quality or experience of teachers offering TGFU-based physical education sessions vs traditional physical education classes, which may affect student involvement levels. Furthermore, individual variables in pupils, such as prior experience with TGFU-based instruction or individual variances in motivation or interest in physical education, may be unaccounted for. Therefore, while every attempt will be taken to reduce the study’s shortcomings, it is critical to recognize these potential limits and interpret the data cautiously.

Findings Discussion

Alcala and Garijo (2017) and Gasper et al. (2021) conducted studies that revealed the favourable influence of the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGFU) strategy on student motivation and participation in physical education. The findings show that TGFU promotes understanding tactics and plays over technique, which helps learners engage. The method also encourages concurrent cognitive, emotional, and physical growth, which results in high scores in both genders. These findings indicate that TGFU is an excellent strategy for teaching sports education and can improve students’ enjoyment of physical activity.

Furthermore, the study emphasizes the significance of recognizing the distinction between skill and tactical approaches to learning and how TGFU might aid in integrating both viewpoints. TGFU promotes a tactic-to-skill strategy, in which learners learn how to execute tactics in the game and then advance to learning the skills needed to achieve those tactics well. According to the research, this strategy increases motivation and satisfaction with basic psychological demands in both male and female learners.

However, research on the effectiveness of hybrid models integrating TGFU and Sport Education is relatively scarce, and ethical considerations must be considered when conducting research. To achieve a more comprehensive picture of the impact of TGFU, qualitative research methodologies can be employed to collect data through questionnaires before and after athletic activities are implemented during a physical education session. Structured interviews with instructors can also provide a more comprehensive view of their beliefs and practices. Teachers can better customize their teaching approaches to improve student engagement and motivation by learning about the success of TGFU.

Conclusion

This study aimed to investigate the effects of Teaching Games for Understanding (TGFU) in secondary schools on the levels of involvement of year 11 students in physical education. A pre-test and post-test study comprising a control group and an intervention group was used in a quasi-experimental design. Pre- and post-test surveys were used to collect quantitative data, while interviews and focus group discussions with students and teachers were used to acquire qualitative data. The findings of this study revealed that the TGFU pedagogical approach might have a good effect on year 11 students’ engagement levels during physical education. Compared to the control group, the intervention group that received standard physical education programs significantly improved engagement levels. The qualitative data also provided valuable insights into students’ and teachers’ experiences with TGFU-based physical education sessions and regular physical education classes. Interviews and focus group discussions emphasized the relevance of improving decision-making skills, tactical awareness, and problem-solving abilities in game-based activities.

However, it is vital to recognize the study’s limitations, which include the relatively small sample size and the possibility of biases in the data-gathering procedures. Furthermore, the generalizability of these findings may be restricted to specific circumstances and populations. Overall, this study adds to our understanding of the effectiveness of TGFU in increasing year 11 students’ engagement levels during physical education. More research with bigger sample sizes and various demographics is required to validate and elaborate on these findings. These findings could influence the development of physical education curricula and instructional approaches that prioritize the development of decision-making skills, tactical awareness, and problem-solving abilities in game-based activities.

References

Alarcon F, Cardenas D, Miranda MT, et al. (2009) Effect of a training program on improving basketball players’ decision making. Revista de Psicologia del Deporte 18: 403–407.

Arau’jo R, Mesquita I, Hastie P, Pereira C (2016) Students’ game performance improvements during a hybrid sport education–step-game approach volleyball unit. Eur Phys Educ Rev 22(2): 185–200

Bunker D and Thorpe R (1982) A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education 18(1): 5–8.

Bunker D and Thorpe R (1983) Games teaching revisited. Bulletin of Physical Education, Themed Edition 19(1).

Bunker D and Thorpe R (1986) The curriculum model. In: Thorpe R, Bunker D and Almond L (eds) Rethinking Games Teaching. Loughborough, UK: Loughborough University of Technology, pp. 7–10.

Bunker D, Thorpe R (1982) A model for the teaching of games in the secondary school. B Phys Educ 10: 9–16.

Bunker, D., & Thorpe, R. (1986). The curriculum model. Rethinking games teaching, 7-10.

Butler J (1996) Teacher responses to teaching games for understanding. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance 67(9): 17–20.

Butler J and Griffin L (2010) Introduction. In: Griffin L and Butler J (eds) Teaching Games for Understanding: Theory Research and Practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, pp. 3–14.

Butler J and McCahan B (2005) Teaching games for understanding as a curriculum model. In: Griffin L and Butler J (eds) Teaching Games for Understanding: Theory Research and Practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, pp. 33–54.

Charlesworth R (1993) Discussion topic: Designer games. Paper presented at: The Hockey Level 3 National Coaching Accreditation Scheme (NCAS) Conference, Canberra, ACT: Australia

Cruz A (2004) Teachers’ and students’ perception of teaching game for understanding approach in physical education lessons. Journal of Physical Education and Recreation 10(2): 57–66.

Deci EL, Ryan RM (2002) Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, New York: University of Rochester Press 20.

Gaspar, V., Gil-Arias, A., Del Villar, F., Práxedes, A. and Moreno, A., 2021. How TGfU influence on students’ motivational outcomes in physical education? A study in elementary school context. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(10), p.5407.

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

Gucciardi DF, Jackson B (2015) Understanding sport continuation: An integration of the theories of planned behaviour and basic psychological needs. J Sci Med Sport 18(1): 31–36. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jsams.2013.11.011 PMID: 24378719

Harvey S (2003) Teaching games for understanding: A study of U19 college soccer players improvement in game performance using the game performance assessment instrument. Paper presented at: The Sport and Physical Education for Understanding Conference, University of Melbourne, Melbourne

Harvey S, Jarrett K (2014) A review of the game-centred approaches to teaching and coaching literature since 2006. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog 19(3): 278–300

Hastie PA, Curtner-Smith MD (2006) Influence of a hybrid sport education–teaching games for understanding unit on one teacher and his students. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog 11(1): 1–27. 28.

Hopper T (1998) Teaching games for understanding using progressive principles of play. CAPHERD/ ACSEPLD 64(3): 4–7

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of teaching in

in physical education. Journal of Teaching in

Jarrett, K., Eloi, S. and Harvey, S., 2014. Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) as a positive and versatile approach to teaching adapted games. European Journal of Adapted Physical Activity, 7(1), pp.6-20.

Jones R, Marshall S and Peters D (2010) Can we play games now? The intrinsic benefits of TGfU. European Journal of Physical and Health Education 42(2): 57–63.

Kirk D (2013) Educational value and models-based practice in physical education. Educ Phil Theory 45: 973–986.

Kirk, D. & Macdonald, D. (1998). Situated learning

Launder A (2001) Play Practice: The Games Approach to Teaching and Coaching Sport. Adelaide: Human Kinetics

Light R and Tan S (2006) Culture, embodied understandings and primary school teachers’ development of TGfU in Singapore and Australia. European Physical Education Review 12(1): 100–117.

Light R, Butler J and Patton KT (2005) A personal journey: TGfU teacher development in Australia and the USA. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 10(3): 241–254.

Light R, Fawns R (2003) Knowing the game: Integrating speech and action in games teaching through TGfU. Quest 55(2): 161–176. 4.

Mandigo J, Holt N, Anderson A, Sheppard J (2008) Children’s motivational experiences following autonomy supportive games lessons. Eur Phys Educ Rev 14(3): 407–425.

Mauldon E and Redfern H (1969) Games Teaching: A New Approach for the Primary School. London: MacDonald and Evans.

Metzler M (2011) Instructional models for physical education. Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb Hathaway Publishing.

Mitchell S (2005) Different paths up the same mountain: Global perspectives on Teaching Games for Understanding. Keynote address presented at: The 3rd International Teaching Games for Understanding Conference, Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong

Mosston M (1981) Teaching Physical Education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Mosston M and Ashworth S (2002) Teaching Physical Education. San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.

Moy B, Renshaw I, Davids K (2015) The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on physical education teacher education students’ intrinsic motivation. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog 21(5):517–538. https://doi.org/10. 1080/17408989.2015.1072506 24.

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Physical Education, 17, 376–387

Stolz, S. and Pill, S., 2014. Teaching games and sport for understanding: Exploring and reconsidering its relevance in physical education. European Physical Education Review, 20(1), pp.36-71.

Thorpe R (2012) Winston Churchill Memorial Trust. Available at: http://www.wcmt.org.uk/fellows-today/ rod-thorpe.html (accessed 30 July 2012).

Thorpe R and Bunker D (2010) Preface. In: Butler J and Griffin L (eds) More Teaching Games for Understanding: Moving Globally. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, pp. vii-xv.

Thorpe R, Bunker D and Almond L (1984) Chapter 21: A change in focus for the teaching of games. In: Pieron M and Graham G (eds) Sport Pedagogy. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, pp. 163–169.

Thorpe R, Bunker D and Almond L (1986) Rethinking Games Teaching. Loughborough, UK: Loughborough University of Technology.

Wade A (1967) The FA Guide to Training and Coaching. London: Heinemann.

Wallhead T and Deglan D (2004) Effect of a tactical games approach on student motivation in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 75(1: March Supplement): A83–A84.

Wallhead T and O’Sullivan M (2005) Sport education: Physical education for the new millennium. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 10(2): 181–210.

Wallhead TL, Garn AC, Vidoni C (2014) Effect of a sport education program on motivation for physical education and leisure-time physical activity. Res Quart Exerc Sport 85(4): 478–487. 27.