Tactical volleyball sport education

Journal ofHuman Movement Studies, 2005, 48: 469-492

EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF A STEP ~LL, G.E. (1998).

simulateduphillbackpacking.

GAME APPROACH TO TEACHING VOLLEYBALL ON STUDENT TACTICAL DECISION MAKING AND SKILL EXECUTION DURING GAME PLAY

iiany.pp. 11-12.

1.

ROEGOLA G 1996) ~r to the editors). me, 3: 25&

MESQUITA,

A. GRAÇA, A. R. GOMES AND C. CRUZ

Faculry ofSport Sciences and Physical Education, Universiry of Porro, Porro, Portugal

NIESSEN, W. AND RASCHNER,

S UMMARY

king with hiking poles.

ALPINISTICHE (1994). icai Commission, Volume 3:

This study examines how a step-by-step game play approach to teaching volleyball affects the performance of junior high school students. An entire 7th grade class composed of 12 giris and 13 boys

emity gait mechanics.

(aged 12 15) from a northern Portugal public junior high schooi participated in a teaching experiment implemented during a 12-lesson unit. The program soug~ after technicai efficiency and efficacy, as weII as tactical adjustment and decision-making within simpiified game play contexts. The results indicated that the class as a whoie made

iman gait (2nd edition).

Canada. pp. 1-15.

significam improvements in severai measures of play performance either in technical or tacticai domains. Giris and low skiii levei students seemed to take more benefit from the program than boys or high skill levei students. The transition from a cooperative oriented to a more

~wirzerland. pp. 1 4.

M. J., KERN0zED, T.

AND

competitive-oriented game play will need more time to attain significam effects.

Publications ~scent 7TH, UK

0306-7297/0510600-0469S26.00

©2005 TEVIOTSCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS

470

MESQUITA

INTRODUCTION Team games occupy a prominent piace in middle and secondary schoois’ Physical Education (PE) curricula around the worid, being frequentiy the dominant theme of PE programs (Brooker et ai, 2000; Burgeson et ai. 2001). Notwithstanding some acknowledged shortcomings and even detrimentai side effects, such as segregatio~ and aiienation (Ennis et ai, 1997), team games seem to be the sort of activity the iarge majority of students prefer (Graça and Brandão, 2003; Luke and Cope, 1994; Strand and Scantiing, 1994).

The rationaie for including team games at the core of PE curricula revolves around a set of educational and instrumental ciaims, aiming at formative domains such as personai, morai and social deveiopment; heaith and fitness; motor coordination development and skiij proficiency; and the introduction to sociaiiy reievant forms of sport and body cultures (Graça, 2003). However, the strong reasons advanced to legitimise the integration of team games within schooi activities have not yet echoed indubitabie evidence of the attainment of such CORRESPONDENCE: Isabel Mesquita Faculdade de Ciências do Desporto e de Educação Fí sica Universidade do Porto R. Dr. Plácido Costa, n°91. 4200.450 Porto Portugal Email: imesquita@fcdef.up.pt Fax: (+351) 22 507 4776

KEY WORDS: volleyball teaching expirement tacticai approach

REPR1NTS:

promi may t Such incon.

1 assoe instru compc play o F compi the te compt isoiatt the co the na is soe in a di bore. game classi •earni appro ‘1 on gai has to is a ki conse

gender skili levei middie schooi

prices on requesifrom

Tevior-Kimpton Pubhcarions SA Randoiph Crescent Edinburgh EH3 777-!

United Kingdorn Fax: (÷44) 131 5382821 E-Mali: teviotscientiflc@aol.com

rule v

1 has si. even i childr

spoke

TEACHING VOLLEYBALL

ddie and secondary id the worid, being lrooker et ai, 2000; ne acknowiedged ~ucb as segregation ~m to be the sort of and Brand達o, 2003;

Dore ofPE curricula ntai claims, aiming ocial deveiopment; opment and skiil vant forms of sport reasons advanced in schooi activities attainment of such

471

promised outcomes. One of the factors contributing to this situation may be the large coliection of activities covered in very short units.

Such kinds of programs are iikeiy to produce inconsistent and inconsequential effects (Ennis, 2000; Siedentop, 1996).

Two contrasting didacticai views for teaching games have been associated with the multi-activity curriculum: one that prizes the instruction of isoiated skiils, taken as buiiding biocks of game competence; another one that gives preference to the (recreational) play of the fuii game, which brings together ali its inherent complexity.

For instance, a typicai unit dedicated lo volieyball used lo be composed by two disconnected moments: the first one comprehended the teaching of the singie skills in ciosed situations, and the second comprehended the piay of the fuli game (6 on 6). The abrupt ieap from isolated skiiis practice to fuli game piay is rather unapproachable, as the context of application of the skiils in fuli game exceeds tremendousiy the narrow frame of isoiated skiil practice. In fact the fuii game situation is so compiex that the piay of the game is most of the time transformed in a discontinuous and unheipfui succession of faiiure, frustration and bore. Within this scenario, skill practice has no discernible impact on game piay improvement, and so any gain it may produce is iikeiy to be classified as useiess rote Iearning. Absence of meaning and absence of iearning progression are at the core of the major flaws of the traditionai approaches to teaching games.

The claim for a turn to a tacticai focus on games teaching, grounded on game understanding and decision making, in the case ofvoileybaii, has to deai with the high status assigned to technique. In fact, voileybaii is a kind of sport in which technicai faults have immediate detrimentai consequences on game flow, which breaks either in consequence of rule vioiation or return failure (Mesquita, 1998).

The logical priority ascribed lo technique in voiieybaii teaching has supported lhe argument for perpetuating the traditionai approach, even if this approach has made voiieybail an unfriendiy sport for many chiidren in PE programs.

Nowadays, this kind of approach oniy has oid-fashioned spokespersons and is being repiaced by more feasibie approaches.

472

MESQUITA

Our proposal is concerned with the renewal of the teaching of volleyball in school settings. It aims at students’ successful involvemeflt and development by matching game complexity with purposeful action and players’ skill range.

The Step Gamefoundations The step game approach is a diclactical model to teach and Iean~ volleyball in school settings that is framed upon didactical ideas derjved from the Teaching Games for Understanding Model (Bunker & Thorpe, 1982), and the Skill Development Approach (Rink, 1993). The approach supports a progressive developmentof game play ability by subordinating the teaching of technical skills to the teaching of tactics, and by facing students with problems sought to challenge theircapacity for understanciing and performing game play.

The skill development approach proposed by Judith Rink (1993) is built upon the idea of Iearning skills in a step-by-step progression, in a step-by-step increment of integration complexity and contextualisation in a process of getting closer and closer to real game situation. As Rink (1993) states: Preparation for compiex games play requires that the individual be able to combine skills, use skills in more complex ways, and relate to others in both offensive and defensive relationships (...) Anyprogression ofteaching must involves moving from gradually increasing lhe levei of complexiiy ofpra ctice to game like conditions (p.224).

From the development skill approach we retain the idea of incremental steps but we are also more predisposed to take some sort of game form as a starting point. This is an idea we grasp from Teaching Games for Understanding model, the one of placing the tactical dimension and problem solving at the core of the approach. We take it along with a commitment not just to enhance game understanding but also to improve game play competence. We espouse the way Mitchell (1996) Iinks skills to tactics within a teaching games for understanding framework: The aim ofthis approach is to improve game performance by providing a concrete link between skills and taddcs, and to encourage skiiis praalce ata time when studenrs appreciate the value ofskillls wirhin the game context (p. 30) (...). By changing

TEACHING VOLLEYBALL

teaching of rlvolvement seful action

473

fite rules of the game, teachers can exaggerare playing conditions to ensure that every piayer must address the question: “What must 1 do to succeed in this situation?” (p.33).

h and iearn eas derived & Thorpe, le approach bordinating d by facing derstanding

The convergence of ideas extracted from Lhe two seminal approaches used Lo iliuminate our proposal intends Lo confer an open and student centred character Lo Lhe learning process.

-

ik (1993) is ession, in a .Lualisation, ‘n. As Rink

the more ~ and must ‘ei of it

Didacticai Framework In Lhe Step Game approach, skilis are Lo be introduced according Lo Lhe problems disclosed by Lhe game piay. The game form presented Lo Lhe students is modified and adjusted to their age and experience leveis, since IL is the student skill levei that determines Lhe gane form Lo be used (Kirk and MacPhail, 2002; Rink et ai, 1996). Students construct their iearning from Lhe situationai problems they are confronted with. Activity is designed Lo allow Lhe practice of probiem soiving situations, in which perception, understanding and decision making processes are highly valued.

Modifying Lhe game into Lhe most suitable form involves the adaptation of Lhe game play area, Lhe number of players, the sort of equipment (baIl size and height of the net) and the array of rules to be appiied (Harrison et ai, 1999).

The SLep Game approach comprehends 4 stages for iearning voiieybali aL eiementary and middie school. Content development is Lied by an unbroken compromise between a horizontal and a vertical axis resulLing in a spiral form progression (Vickers, 1990).

ncrementai me form as Games for ndproblem mmitment game piay 5 to LacLics

The sequence of game forms (lxi Lo 4x4) evoives in such a way Lhat both formal and funcLional structure complexity may remam aiigned with the students’ Lacticai understanding and skill levei (Chêne et ai, 1986).

The procedures for game modification combine representaLion and exaggeration modes (Thorpe eL ai, 1984). Modification by representaLion intends Lo make the gane lflow easier (sustaining Lhe baIl alive by reducing the size of the court, and increasing the number of touches per player and team).

Modification by exaggeraLion emphasises Lhe sLudents’ attention

474

MESQUITA

to weiI-chosen tacticai problems (chailenging tactical decisio~ making and or skill performance by changing the functional area of game play, restricting offensive and defensive zones, or manipulating criteria for tasks accomplishment).

Carne steps The 4 steps we propose for the deveiopment of game piay competence have different aims conceming the contents, the mies adaptation and the student skiil development.

0W

tak cor opt it h

First step game: The main goal is to understand the iogic of the simplest game form (lx 1). Students should acquire little by little the basic principies of attack and defense. By playing the ‘lxi’ game forrn is possible for students to sustain the bail on the air for more time as a consequence of the piayer-ball-target aiignment on the frontal pian.

att2 hitt cha spa

The first skill to be iearned is the overhead pass, for two reasons: (i) it is easier to touch the bali with efficacy; (ii) the player touches the bali while looking up and ahead, being aware of the piacement of the net. The second skili is the serve, because it is the skill for re-starting the game. The underhand serve is easier for beginners, both for serving and receiving. Applying both skilis in lxi game form, students may grasp the logic of the game at its simplest structure.

the net.

mec the witt spe(

Additionally mies must be adapted to ailow for students’ successful involvement: (i) one rebound is permitted (it helps player to place his/ herbody behind the bali; it provides more time to anaiyse the trajectory of the bail); (ii) double touch is permitted (it permits player to correct a previous defective contact).

atta we goo. the 1

Second step: The main goal is to achieve competence in cooperating with partners and opposing to opponents. We introduced the 2 x 2 game, for two reasons: (i) it is the simplest game form with a partner; (ii) it requires that players distinguish roles in attack organization (who made the first contact will make the third one, and the other partner makes the second). In order to accomplish these behaviours players need: (i) to watch the opponents’ placement; (ii) to distinguish the space needed for each other intervention; (iii) to develop verbal communication; (iv) to assign accountability zones. The fundamental skill to introduce is the forearm pass because after learning the overhead pass the player needs another skill for touching the bail

adju the accc as appr the c third

Lear contc

TEACHINO VOLLEYBALL

475

tical decision otional area of r manipulating

coming from different trajectories. The forearm pass complements the overhead pass, ailowing students to resolve more complex problems taking place during the game. The rebound is not permitted but double touch is permitted (it permits piayer to correct a previous defective contact, and increases the time to prepare the attack).

of game play ents, the mies

Third step: The main goal is to increase the number of tactical options in attack and defense. We introduced the game 3 x 3 because 1115 the simplest game form in which there is more than one option to attack finalisation (one piayer sets the balI for one of two potentiai hitters. In order to accomplish these behaviours players need: (i) to chain two tasks, receiving and attacking the balI; (ii) to identify the space where the player is going to set the bail; (iii) to distinguish the of~ensive and defensive space according to the game fiow and the postrion of the players on the court. The fundamental skill to learn is the spike, because it is the most appropriate to attack the bali near the net.

Fie logic of the tle by little the xi’ game form more time as a frontal plan. )r two reasons: yer touches the acement of the for re-starting oth for serving students may

mts’ successful er to place his/ e the trajectory ayer to correct

ompetence in We introduced ame form with oles in attack third one, and :omplish these acement; (ii) to (iii) to develop ty zones. The e after learning uching the bali

Additionally, the overhead serve can be introduced, as the mechanic of this skill is similar to spike. In this stage we recommend the formal rules for bali contact, because students are able to play without adaptations. If necessary the doubie touch may be allowed in specific situations.

Fourth step: The main goal is to adapt defensive organisation to attack type. The 4 x 4 game form is the simplest game form in which we have just a player who cannot attack and, at the same time, we have good conditions to organise defense concerning the player who made the biock. In order to accomplish these behaviours players need: (i) to adjust movements to ball trajectories; (ii) to identify the space where the player attack the bali; (iii) to distinguish back defense placement according to block action. The fundamental skill to iearn is the block, as 11 is the most appropriate to counter the spike. Also, the block is appropriate to learn first in order to organise defensive strategy when the opponents attack dose and above the net. As recommended for the third stage, the students are able to piay with the formal ruies for baIl contact.

Learning Tasks The transition from one step to the next requires the mastery of contents of the precedent step, as assessed through the form game

476

MESQUITA

presented in that step, and the attainment of demands on criterion tasks seffl~j on the instructionai process.

In ali steps we used diffetent kinds of motor tasks sequenced in a pmgressjv~ way foiiowing the principies of continuity, complexity and gradual increment (Musch et ai, 2002).

Tasks are divided lii three categories: basic garne; thematic game; and game-iike tasks.

Basic gameforms Basic game forms provide students with friendiy game situations, which aiiow them to think about and explore authentic tacticai probiems; and also to test and improve their skill competence.

Modifying the game into the most suitabie form invoives the adaptation of the mies and formal st-ucture of the game. However, such modificaijons mustremain as much as possible faithfui to the basic tactical features ofvolieybail.

Hence, both goal and action structure must be identical to the fuil voileybaii game.

underta. scoring empioy 5h fom~ of volieyb (side-ou Game-t

wi

and then to impro in game. ac端ons e to Ir resi

Two kinds of tasks are considered: the cooperative game and the competitive game:

Teachjn~ Ro~ educatjot

Attl~e cooperative game, which emphasises play with, the main goal isto put the bail on the othercourt aiiowing for a safe reception and keeping the bali alive. To play cooperativeiy requires being abie to keep the bali on the air. This is crucial for voiieyball, but it is also the major difficuity for beginners, since the opportunity for iearning cannot occur uniess the bali is maintained on the ah-.

examine nawniist teaching unit of a cunicului to the exi

At the competitive game, which emphasises piay against, the aim isto put the opponent in difficulty to give the bail back. This sort of game particuiariy fosters anticipation, unpredictability, and strategy or inteiiigent tactical decision making.

Thematic gaine In order to improve the quality of game piaying it is not sufflcient to work directiy on basic game tasks. Specific action structures need to be emphasised in their own, without overlooking adherence to the goai of the game. You can do that by manipulating in altemation a scoring system that gives more points either to attack or to biock, and so exaggerating the attention on spike or block execution and decision-making under game situations. Thematic game

goais of progressic compare Participa1 An e participat oid, (Mag no one ind volleybaii.

The

TEACHINO VOLLEYBALL ion tasks settjetj 1 in a progressi~~ ~idua1 inCrement

iatic garne; and

477

undertakes different kinds of purposeful changes (fieid dimensions, targels, scoring systems) for promoting skill perfon~ance and the acquisition and employment of lactical concepls.

Similarly to basic garnes, thematic garnes could be settled both in the fomi of cooperative and opposition garnes. The goal is the sarne of lhe fuil volleyball garne, but specific action s~ructures or skilis are emphasised ata time (side-out; transition, spike; block, etc.).

ituations, which ~ms; and also to

s lhe adaptation 1 modificaflons ‘es ofvolleybaij.

MI volieybail

Qame-Ljke Tasks When students are not abie to control actions essenüal to piay basic game and thematic game lhe use of game-iike tasks affords students lhe opportunity to improve the quality of tacücal and technicai elements. The most importam in game-like tasks is to preserve lhe sequence of defensive and/or offensive actions even if lhe choice of possible solutions to lhe actual game problem has to be restricted.

METHODS

game and lhe

Teaching experimen: Rovegno et ai (2001) refer to a teaching experiment as a cuniculum or

main goal isto ceeping lhe bail on lhe air. This nners, since lhe ined on lhe air.

educationai environment purposefully designed by lhe researchers in order to examine content, curriculum, teaching and learning simultaneously and naturalisticaliy in a school context. The design of lhis study is shaped as a teaching experiment, projected to examine lhe impiementation of a 12 lesson unit of a step game approach to voileyball, by working wilh a teacher on cun-iculum deveiopment and by analysing lheir teaching and student responses to lhe experiment. Confining lhe focus on students’ achievement, lhe main

lhe aim isto put rue particuIarly vtical decision

‘ficient to work be emphasised ~ame. You can es more points spike or block lematic game

goais of lhe study are lo examine lhe effects of lhe program on students’ progression on decision-making and skiil execution during game pIay, and to compare students’ progression according to skiii levei and gender.

Participanis and setting An entire 7th-grade ciass composed of 25 students, 12 giris and 13 boys, participated in lhis study. The age of lhe students ranged from 12 to 15 years oid, (Mages— 12.92; SD=2. 12). Oniy 3 students were involved in extra-school sporls. The majority of students (18) eiected socceras lhe prefened sport, while no one indicated volleybail as such. Even so, only 2 students indicaled to dislike volleyball. Parents and school boaxd pmvidedconsentforsmden~’ participation.

The teacher who implemented lhe program integrated lhe research

478

MESQUITA

Leam. She is identified with Lhe research purpose and committed to student centred, tacticai approaches Lo Leaching volleybail. She is a young certificated PE teacher, having 6 years of PE teaching experience She has undergraduate specialisation in volieyball Lraining, and a Master’s Degree in Physical Education and Sport for children and youLIi. She is also a certificated coach by Lhe Volleybail Federation, having 6 years of coaching experience with chiidren volieybali Leams. She has continued to piay voiieybali aL competitive leagues for eleven years Given the reduced number of lessons composing Lhe experiment Lhe program was mostly focused on Lhe 2 on 2 game form, also iflciuding a preliminary passage by 1 on 1 game form Data coliection Data about Lhe piay performance at Lhe entry and exit of the program were gathered from systematic observation of video records of students’ behaviours whiie piaying a 2 on 2 volleybail game. The observation protocol was inspired on GPAI (Oslin et ai, 1998), and included tacticai (decision making and adjustment), and skill execution (efficiency and efficacy) behavioural dimensions for respectively serving, receiving, digging, setting, and atLack (Mesquita, 1998). A description of observationai items and composite categories were displayed respectively in Table 1 tactical dimension, and Table 2 skill execuLion dimension.

-

-

Every sLudent was individually evaiuated during play performance on a2 x 2 game form. The first four triais on each move were retained for purposes of coding. Two boys were excluded from analysis because of unreliable class aLtendance.

The objecLivity of the observations was assured by means of inter observers agreement over 120 cases appiying Lo 25% of Lhe sLudents.

Values of Cohen Kappa for agreement of two independent observers ranged from 0.76 Lo 0.88 averaging 0.84. Intra-observer consisLency was tested by calculating Cohen Kappa values for agreement ofrepeaLed observations of the same observer over 120 cases applying to 25% of Lhe sLudents. Vaiues of Cohen Kappa ranged from 0.79 to 0.95 with an average of 0.89

TEACHINO VOLLEYBALI. ind commjtted to Ileyball. She is a ching experience 1 training, and a hildren and youth. leration, having 6 LII teams. She has for eleven years. g the experiment rm, also including

and exit of the of video records ~yba1I game. The et ai, 1998), and nd skill execution for respectiveiy ‘squita, 1998). A categories were n, and Table 2

TABLE

Serving

SI

—

Throw lhe bali Lowards lhe open space

52

—

Throw lhe baIl between Lwo players

S3

—

Direct Lhe bail to te weak piayer

Receiving)Digging

RI

.

(First LOuch)

DI

—

SetLing

STI

Attacking

AI

-

PUL the baIl in the free space of Lhe opponenL court

A2

.

PUL the balI between two players

A3

.

Put Lhe baIl on Lhe weak pIayer

Send lhe bali to lhe partner who does 2nd iouch Send lhe balI Lo the partner who does 2nd touch Send the balI Lo te parlner who does 3rd touch

—

Acljusimeni Serving

SI

Receiving

R 1/01

—

Digging

R2/D2

—

R3/D3

-

Setting

,y means of inter b of the students. endent observers :rVer consistency ~ment of repeated plying to 25% of ‘9 to 0.95 with an

Tactical codes for computing decision-making and adjustment by play move.

Moves

-

play performance )ve were retained analysis because

1:

479

Allacking

After serving Lake place iii court and prepare to defend

—

STI

—

5T2

—

Move soas Lo take piace behind lhe probabie place of Lhe balIs fali AdjusI position accoi~ing Lo Lhe piayer who does 2nd Louch Afler receiving or digging move in order lo attack near lhe neL

Adjust body posí tí on Lo Lhe ana where Lhe baIl was senl in recepLion OrienLate and adjust body posilion Lo the rinalizalion arca

AI

—

Adjusted tolhe bail’s lrajectory in the 2nd iooch

A2

—

Correct posilion in relaLion LO Lhe opposing comi in order Lo aiiack

480

MESQUITA

TABLE

2:

SkiIl execution codes for computing efficiency and efficacy by piay move.

Ejflciency

Overhead pass

01

—

Raise and cup hands iii from and above lhe forehead in order to~eball

02— CoordinaLe Lhe bending-extending movement of lhe upper and inferior limbs 03 Underhand serve U 1

— -

Lock lhe feel into posiLion for conracting lhe bali Tum lhe feer Lo Lhe Larget

U2

—

Opposire fOOL lo striking anil sleps Loward lhe neL

U3

—

Keep sLriking ann straighL during lhe serve

A

o’

Efflcacy

Se

Serving

Enor- E

Receiving

Error - E

Attacking

Conlinuity - C

Digging

ContinuiLy.

Score - 5

SeLting

Data anaiysis Exploratory data analysis had disapproved the use of parametric statistics for testing differences between groups and changes within each group, as the condition of normality was not met for tlw distribution of severai game performance variabies. In consequence, nonparametric statistics for two independent sampies (Mann-Withney) were appiied to test between-group differences at the beginning, at the end of the program, and at the gain scores, contrasting independentiy by gender and skiil levei. Simiiarly, nonparametric statistics for two reiated sampies (Wiicoxon) were appiied to test within-group changes from the beginning to the end of the program. This test was appiied successively to the whole group, and each one of the gender and skili levei groups. While not using them for testing between or within group differences, means and standard deviations were dispiayed rather for descriptive purposes.

Data anaiysis was performed using SPSS for Windows 12.0. The aipha levei was set at 0.05 for ali analyses.

RESULTS Changes

iii

a 2 o,, 2 game piay performance

Class levei anaiysis The anaiysis of students’ pre and post-evaiuation scores makes apparent severai changes in students’ game performance variabies (see Tabie 3). Looking at the ciass as a whoie, students have made significant progress in both categories of tactical

Isi Se

0v Ser

SeL ALI. Ovc

Ist ALIa Ove PIay

TEACHING VOLLEYBALL cy and efficacy

TABLE

3:

Ciass changes from pre to posttest performance in a 2 on 2 voiieybaii game form.

Mpre tSD

Mpos ±.SD

Wilcoxon

,rder to touch the bail

Serve efficiency

3.4 ± 0.9

3.5 ± .07

0.277

~r and inferior limbs

Ist Toucb efficiency

2.5 ± 0.7

2.9 ± 0.6

0.002

Set efficiency

3.0 t0.7

3.1 ± 0.6

0.549

Atlack efticiency

2.6 ± 0.7

2.9 ± 0.7

0.062

Serve efficacy i si iouch efficacy

2.0 ±.0.6 2.8 ± 1.0

2.1 ± 0.5 3.5 ± 0.6

0.447 0.001

Sei efflcacy

3.3 ± 0.8

3.5 ± 0.7

0.439

Âciack efficacy

1.6 ± 0.6

1.6 ± 0.6

0.941

Eaor- E Continuity - C

metric statistics ± group, 2S the several game LtlStICS for two between—group the gain scores, noflparametslC st within-group ~st was appiied and skill levei ‘updifferences, ptive purposes.

J’he aipha levei

ation scores performance ole, students s of tacticai

481

Overail efí icacy

2.3 tO.6

2.5 ± 0.4

0.0 18

Serve decisian making

3.1 ±.0.8

3.4 ± 0.9

0.080

lst louch decision making

2.8 ± 1.0

3.4 ± 0.6

0.001

Set decision making

3.3 ± 0.8

3.5

0.7

0.439

Atiack decision making

2.5 ± 1.0

3.1 ± 1.1

0.082

+

—

Overail decision making

1.8 ± 0.4

1.9 ± 0.3

0.004

Serve adjusimeni

2.3 ± 1.6

2.2 ± 1.7

0.751

1 si iouch adjustment

2.1 ± 1.2

2.8 ± 1.0

0.000

Sei adjusimen,

2.7 ± 0.9

2.9 ± 1.0

0.152

Aitack adjusiment

2.9± 1.2

~ 1.0

0.010

Overali adjusimeni

2.3 ± 1.0

2.9 tO.9

0.000

PIay performance

2.3 tO.6

2.6 ± 0.5

0.001

482

MESQUITA

TABLE

4:

Giris and boys’ changes from pre-posttest performance ia a 2 on 2 volleyball game.

Girls

Boys

Mpre±SD Mpos±

Wilcoxon

Giris vs. Boys M~~y~ne

MpretSD Mpos±SD

Wiicoxon Pre ~ ~

3.5 ± 0.8

3.8 ± 0.4

0.197

0.589

0.367

SI)

Pos ~._jQ)______

domaji and efi Rc regard signific In O~p(

Efficiency

Serve

3.3 tO.9

3.3 ± 0.9

.000

Isi iouch

2.3 ± 0.7

2.9 ±.0.7

0.003

2.7 ± 0.7

2.9 ± 0.5

0.181

0.274

0.894

Sei

2.9± 0.8

3.3±0.7

0.044)

3.1 ± 0.7

2.8 ± 0.5

0.282

0.570

0.088

Aiiack

2.4±0.8

2.8j0.8

0.051

2.8±0.5

3.1±0.6

0.438

0.217

0.269

putin execut attack alpha i skill e

Overall

2.7±0.7

3.0±0.7

0.003

3.0±0.6

3.! ±0.3

0.507

0.306

0.895

signific

Serve

2.0 ± 0.8

2.0± 0.5

0.762

2.0 ± 0.4

2.2 ± 0.6

0.084

0.755

0.192

(pcO.O~ well as

isi louch

2.5 ± 1.0

3.3j0.6

0.007

3.1 ± 1.0

3.7± 0.4

0.042

0.180

0.067

Sei

3.! ± 1.0

34±0.8

0.157

3.6±0.5

3.5÷0.5

0.705

0.218

.000

Efflcacy

Aiiack

1.5 ±0.8

.5±0.6

0.792

I.8j0.3

1.8±0.7

0.739

0.604

0.176

Overail

2.2 ± 0.7

2.4 ± 0.5

0.208

2.4± 0,4

2.7 ± 0.3

0.074

0.530

0.136

2.8 ± 0.8

3.4± 0.7

0.056

3.3 ± 0.8

3.3 ± 1.1

0.582

0.129

0.750

Decision Making

Serve Isi iooçh

2.5 ± .0

3.3±0.6

0.007

3.1 ± .0

3.6 ±0.4

0.040

0.180

0.168

Sei

3.1 ± .0

3.4± 0.8

0.157

3.6 ±0.5

3.5±0.5

0.705

0.2i8

.000

Auack

2.2 ± 1.1

3.0 ± 1.1

0.082

3.0± 0.6

3.2 ± 1.3

0.398

0.027

0.429

Overali

.6 ±0.4

.9±0.4

0.004

.9±0.3

2.0±0.2

0.234

0.164

0.542

2.2± .7

1.9± .8

0.496

2.4±1.6

2.6±1.7

0.914

0.785

0.389

Isi iouch

1.7± 1.2

2.3 ± 1.1

0.003

2.5 ± 1.1

3.3 ±0.5

0.022

0.074

0.051

Sei

2.4± 1.0

2.8± 1.2

0.075

3.0±0.6

3.! ±0.6

0.903

0.098

0.786

Adjusimeni

Serve

Anack

2.6 ± .4

3.2 ± 1.2

0.057

3.2 ± 0.9

3.8 ± 0.4

0.08

0.329

0.248

Overail

2.0± 1.1

2.5 ± .0

0.003

2.7 ±0.9

3.3 ±0.3

0.025

0.175

0.106

PIay

2.1 ± 0.7

2.5 ± 0.6

0.004

2.5 ± 0.5

2.8 ± 0.2

0.093

0.235

0.356

Perfonnance

Analys Ar impact~ descrip a 2 on es ti m at the p v~ pre and than gir the diff reached Oh categor com pos making apart fr efficac3 efficien they ha; and ov efficien

TEACHINO VOLLEYBALL ~rformance in a

domam

483

(decision making and adjustmenfl, and also in efficiency

and efficacy categories of skill execution domam.

Pre

Pos

Remarkable is the improvement observed in ali categories regarding the first touch, as au of them attained statisticaiiy significam differences from the beginning to the end of the program.

0589

0.367

0.274

0S94

0.570

0.088

0.217

0.269

0.306

0.895

In opposition, statistical tests on serve and setting variabies did not put in evidence any apparent change both in tactical and skili execution dimensions. Besides, tests to changes concerning the attack, with exception of attack adjustment (pO.Ol), faii to reach alpha ievel. Noteworthy are the resuits of composite measures of skili execution and tactical dimensions. Students improved significantly their composite scores on efficiency (p<O.05), efficacy

0.755

oJr

weil as on overali play performance (pc0.O1)

0.180

0.067

0.218

.000

0.604

0.76

~

~

0.129

0.750

0.180

0168

Analysis by Gender Analysis by gender suggests that the program had different impacts on students according to this factor. Table 4 displays the descriptive statistics for giris and boys pre and post evaluations in a 2 on 2 game form, the significance levei of the observed changes estimated by means of nonparametric statistics (Wilcoxon test); and the p values for groups comparison (Mann Wythney test) either at pre and posttest.

0.218

1.000

0.027

0.429

0.164

0.542

While at first look it may seem that boys exhibit better scores

0.785

0.389

0.074

0.051

than giris at the entry moment, the fact is that in only one occasion the difference in game performance between giris and boys had reached significant levei decision making in attack (p.cO.O5).

0.098

0.786

0.329

0.244

0.75

0.06

0.235

0.356

-

Girls seemed to take more benefit from the program. Their scores significantly improved in ali tacticai and skiii execution categories reiated with the first touch. They had improved in both composite categories of tactical dimensions: in overail decision making (p< 0.01), and in overail adjustment (p<O.Oi). However, apart from the first touch, girls did not improve their scores in efficacy categories. On the contrary, regarding the changes in efficiency categories, besides the significant changes in first touch, they have also improved their scores in setting efficiency (p<O.O5) and overali efficiency (p<0.Oi), whiie the p-value for attack efficiency is dose to 0.05 alpha thresholds.

484

MESQUITA

TABLE

5:

Low and high skill levei students’ changes in pre te posttest in a 2 on 2 volieyball game.

Low Levei

High Levei

Low vs. Higb

Mpre ± SD

Mpes ± SD Wilcoxon (p)

Mpre ± Sf3

Mpos ± SD

Wiieoxon Mann W (p) pie (p)

Marrei w pos (p)

Serve

3.0±,0.9

3.2 ± 0.8

0.263

3.9 ± 0.3

lsi rocei,

2.1 ± 0.5

2.7+0.6

0.003

3.0± 0.6

3.9 ± 0.2

1.000

0.005

0.016

3.2 ± 0.6

0.170

0.003

0.052

Sei

2.7 ± 0.8

3.0± 0.6

0.153

Aiiack

2.3 ± 0.6

2.7 ± 0.9

0.133

3.4± 0.5

3.2 ± 0.7

0.443

0.032

0.343

3.0 ± 0.6

3.2 ± 0.5

0.332

0.021

Overali

2.4 ± 0.5

2.9j 0.5

0.132

0.013

3.2 ± 0.4

3.3 ± 0.3

0.443

0.002

0,021

Serve

1.8 ± 0.6

2.0 ± 0.6

0,141

2.3 ± 0.5

2.2± 0.4

0.671

0.035

0.095

Isi rouch

2.3 ± 1.0

3.3 ± 0.7

0.004

3.4 ± 0.7

3.7 ± 0.3

0.059

0.023

0.189

Sei

3.0 ± 1.0

3.3 ± 0.8

0.206

3.7 ± 0.5

3.6 ± 0.5

0.655

0.055

0.458

Efficiency

Skill

F,fl?cacy

Ariack

.4±0.5

1.3±0.7

1.000

2.0± 0.6

2.0± 0.3

1.000

0.017

0.015

Overali

2.0±0.6

2.4±0.5

0.004

2.7±0.4

2.7±0.2

0.919

0.003

0(96

Serve

2.9 ± 0.8

3.4± 0.7

0.030

3.3 ± 0.8

3.3 ± 1.1

0.714

0.23$

0.832

iii iooch

2.2 ± 0.9

3.2 ± 0.6

0.003

3.4 ± 0.7

3.7 ± 0.3

0.157

0.009

0.063

Ser

3.0± 1.0

3.3 ± 0.8

0.206

3.7 ± 0.5

3.6 ± 0.5

0.655

0.055

0.458

Airack

2.5 ± 0.9

2.6 ± 1.4

0.682

2.6 ± 1.0

3.6± 0.5

0.031

0.738

0.092

Overali

1.5 ± 0.3

1.8 ± 0.3

0.004

2.0 ± 0.3

3.1 ± 0.8

0.429

0.003

0.067

1.3 ± 1.6

1.8 ± 1.8

0.395

3.4 ± 0.8

2.8 ± 1.6

0.131

0.418

0.821

Adjusimeni

ler bode

1.4 ± 0.8

2.5 ± 1.0

0.002

2.9 ± 1.0

3.2± 0.9

0.111

0.002

0.059

Sei

2.3 ± 0.8

2.6 ± 1.1

0.174

3.2 ± 0.8

3.3 ± 0.7

0.558

0.012

0.154

Aiiack

2.4± 1.2

3.1 ± 1.2

0.040

3.4± 0.9

19± 0.3

0.131

0.034

0.048

Overail

1.7± 0.8

2.5 ± 1.0

0.002

2.1 ± 0.1

13±0.6

0.136

0.001

0.029

Play

1.9 ± 0.5

2.4 ± 0.5

0.002

2.8 ± 0.4

2.9 ± 0.3

0.445

0.001

0.025

Performance

divid distir in ali mdiv adjus

Decision Making

Serve

of th of ti breu flrst that, (p<( and both effic

categ differ ineff signil existi Simii becar levei,

levei, The s. and s Ineas, also i group makir signif levei i score~ adjust

TEACHINO VOLLEYBALL to POSttest

High W â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;)

MapjiW POS (p)

0.015 0.05 2 0.348 0.132

485

The results of the boys seem rather iess expressive than those obtained ofthe giris. At odds with giris, the scores of boys have not improved in any of the efficiency variables. However, it is the first touch again that has brought to attention more changes. Boys have reached significam gains in first touch efficacy, decision-maicing, and adjustment (pcO.05). Besides that, boys have only changed significantiy in the overali adjustment category (p.cO.05). Nevertheless, the differences of program effects between boys and giris were not so large; when comparing directiy the gain scores of both groups, they do not reach statistical differences, except for set efficiency (p<O.05).

0.021

0.095 0.189 0.458 0,0 5 0.196

0.832 0.068 0.458 0.092 0.067

0.821

Skiil levei anaiysis Based on pretest scores in overali game piay performance, students were divided into two skiii levei groups. Ai that moment the skilis levei groups distinguished significantiy not only in overail game piay performance, but also in ali composite categories of skill execution and tactical dimensions, in ali individual categories of efficiency, in ali but one category of efficacy and adjustment. In conlrast, differences were not so spread ou in decision-making categories (see Table 5). At the end of the program the significance levei ofthe diffemnces between groups tendeci to anenuate, oreven withdraw. For instance, in efficiency categories diffeitnces for serve and overali efficiency remained significam but no more for first touch, set, and attack. lii efficacy scores, the existing differences in the first touch and composite efficacy faded away.

Similarly, the prior differences in first touch and set adjustment scores aiso became non-significant. In decision making scores no significam between skill levei groups difference persisted at the posttest.

0.05 9 0.154 0.048 0.029 0.025

The results of the repeated measures tests uphold that the low skiii levei group took more benefit from the program than high skili levei group.

The scores of the low ski!l levei group improved significantiy in au tacticai and skill executions measures related to the first touch; in ali composite measures of efficiency, efficacy, decision making, and adjustment, and also in overail game play performance. Conversely, the high skill levei group almost failed to improve their scores. Uniqueiy in attack decision making the gains of high skill levei students have reached statistical significance. Even so, differential effects of program according to skill leve! must be kept in perspective because significant differences for gain scores only appeared in first touch efficacy, decision-making and adjustment (pcO.Oi).

486

MESQUITA

DIscussioN flfls study examined the effect of a step game approach to teaching volleyball on students piay performance. Measures of tactical performance ~ well as efficiency and efficacy of execution were taken from studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; behaviors while playing using a 2 on 2 volleyball game form. Even lhough lhe experiment only included 12 lessons, several changes had occurred from lhe beginning to lhe end of the program both in tactical and in execution dimensions.

Jn comparing lhe effects of 3 inMructional approaches (skill, tactical, and skiii and tactical combined) to badminton singles with units of a similar ienglh to this one, French et ai (1996) reported significant improvements for alI experimental groups on tactical decision making and skill execution during game play. No clear piay performance advantage emerged from any lreatment group. An important conclusion of the study is that both skill execution and decision-maicing happen to be achievable from leaming environments without being explicitly instructed.

Similarly, Hanison et ai (1999), while comparing a tactical approach and skiil-based approach to teaching volleyball, in an experiment involving 82 players, during 16 weeks, 2 sessions per week did not find any significam difference between both approaches, excepting an advantage for skill approach at the scores in reception.

fac ilitate ba and by cons balI recovei subsequent Being first touch si and strategi Above ali, between cc inseparabil The s (decision ir holistic grc tactic duali~ et ai, 1996; tacticai cor within gam

an lei fa ch ac

In lhe present study some skills appear to be rather resilient to change. For instance, students were not abie to improve lhe scores of either the efficiency or lhe efficacy of their serve execution. An explanation may be lhe low priority ascribed to this skiil. As lhe focus was on fulfiliing a 3 touches sequence, only lhe underhand serve was impiemented, because it is easierforstudents lo execute it, and also to receive it. So undeÂąand serve supports play continuity. Conversely, at lhe beginning of lhe program, lhe majority of students exhibited high scores on serve efficiency, and average scores on serve efficacy. li would be difficult, in these circumstances to improve serve efficiency scores, especiaiiy for higher skill levei students, or boys. On lhe olher side, a better positioning for reception and a better reception execution constrained lhe improvement of serve efficacy further lhan restarting lhe piay. Equally, lhe low efficacy in attack deprived of significam progresses from instruction allowed for lhe success ofdefense.

A factc was lhe perâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; leveis of ph

The remarkabie results observed in ali measures reiated with lhe first touch may be explained by lhe emphasis put on keeping lhe balI in lhe air by means of a cooperative piay orienlation and lhe measures implemented to

attention frc provided m closely thei ev ident supe

Our re In contrast~ forms adopi not confine benefited ol piay.

TEACHINO VOLLEYBALL

~h to teaching erformance as ~nts’ behaviors he experirne~~ e beginning to ;ions.

1, tactical, and similar length ments for ali cution during any fl~eatment ~xecution and nents without

approach and involving 82 ~y significant ;kiii approach

Dchange. For he efficiency e low priority quence, only nisto execute Converseiy, d high scores 3 be difficuit, ily for higher for reception erve efficacy c deprived of F defense. vith lhe first intheairby ‘iemented to

487

facilitate bali conirol. Tbe cooperative game fosters uphoiding the bail in the air and by consequence increases lhe numberofgame play actions. Succeeding in bail recoveiy is a critical condition for lhe opportunity of appiying skilis in lhe subsequent game momenis (Maxwell, 2003).

Being extended to decision-making and adjustment lhe progresses ii, lhe first touch supports lhe effectiveness of lhe program in pmmoting an intentional and strategically oriented behaviour regarding lhe organisatjon of the attack.

Above ali, these results reinforce lhe idea of an intimate relationship between cognitive function and physical action or, in olher words, the inseparability of technique and tactics.

The significant gains observed in both overail tactical dimension (decision making and adjustment) or in technicai dimension adhere tolhe holistic ground of the program and concur to invalidate the technique/ tactic dualism previousiy found almost useless by olher researchers (French etai, 1996; Tumer and Martinek, 1992). The integration of technical and tactical components assumed in this approach, may be easier to achieve within games iike voiieybail. As Maxwell (2003) asserts: Net/Wallgames are tactically simpler than invasion games, and generaiiy includefewerpiayers, resuiting iii reduced leveis ofcompiexity and decision option possibiiities. These factors combine ia creare a direci link between the tacticai chosen, the execution of the skill and the results of 1/tese actions” (p. 41).

Our results suggest lhat giris take more advantage from the program.

In contrast wilh other ganes, voiieyball, and particuiariy lhe kind ofgame forms adopted in lhe program encourage equitabie participation, Giris are not confined to secondary roles as observed by Hastie (1998). They benefited of equai opportunity to play lhe most relevant roles during game play A factor lhat may account for lhe differences in lhe profile ofchanges was lhe perception, not confirmed in pretest scores, that giris had lower leveis of play performance. This presumption had induced an increased attention from lhe teacher upon lhe giris’ first touch. In consequence she provided more time for giris in 1 on 1 piay situations, and scaffoided more closeiy their work on bail controi, which in turn may expiam lhe more evident superiority ofgirls’ progression in efficiency scores. Stili the better

488

MESQUITA

profile of girisâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; changes does not transiate in significantiy superior gains scores, with the exception of set efficiency.

The effectiveness of the program on first touch lmprovement applies broadiy to boys and giris. As the partial game forms and game-like tasks introduced during instruction were more concerned with bali recover and game continuity (by aiiowing rebound and double touch), within a cooperative focus rather than a competitive undertaking, the absence of significant improvement in the second and third touches may reflect the insufficient coverage of those areas.

Surely both boys and girls wouid need much more time to extend and refine their learning through tasks more focused on second and third touches and more competitive channeied (constraining by exaggeration the space for attack).

Comparing the evolution of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; scores from the perspective of distinct skiii levei groups we couid disciose a clear trend for a reduction on the contrasts between groups. The magnitude ofchanges was iarger in iow skiii group, which is strikingly diverse from findings ofGraham et ai (1996) in a 6 week badminton unit.

Resuits reveai that changes along skill levei do not proceed in a straight-line fashion; students with higher leveis at the beginning of the experiment had more difficulty in improving their seores, suggesting that the iearning curve is bounded by a ceiiing effect.

Interesting to note that whiie iow skiiied students progressed in ali composite measures of skili and tactics, owing to large improvement in seores reiated to first touch and to smaii, non-significant increments in the remaining scores, high skiii students only improved significantiy in decision-making in attack. This picture may denote that high skilled students were in a process of transition to a more competitive-oriented play. For Graham et ai (1996) the problem of a play being more cooperative or more competitive-oriented is not reduced to a matter of intent but it is aiso dependent on the skiil aptitude of piayers.

chai ore gam piac

chal skili orie

REI BRo

CONCLUSION Approaching the game in a step-by-step game piay environment compiemented with partiai game forms and game like tasks provided an opportunity to improve skili execution and tacticai response, particuiariy for giris and iow skiii levei students.

FREN

TEACHINO VOLLEYBALL ntiy superior

mprovement ie forms and re concerned rebound and competitive in the second fthose areas. rue to extend n second and straining by

489

The 1 on 1 and 2 on 2 game forms aiiowed for significant changes in play performance factors more reiated to game continuity or cooperative play. The transition for a more competitive-oriented game was not so evident, suggesting the need of more time to take piace.

The introduction of 3 on 3 and 4 on 4 game forms could perhaps chailenge the more skiiled students to learn and apply the sort of skills (forearm pass, spike, block) more connected with a competitive orientatjon.

REFERENCES from the dose a clear he magnitude ingly diverse Iminton unit. proceed in a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;te beginning their scores, eiling effect. gressed in ali improvement i-significant nly improved e may denote on to a more e problem of -iented is not 1 on the skill ~s

R., KIRK, D., BRAIUKA, 5. AND BRANSOROVE, A. (2000).

Implementing a game sense approach to teaching junior high school basketball in a naturalistic setting.

Eur. Phys. Ed. Review, 6: 7-25.

BUNKER, a AND THORPE, R. (1982).

A Modei for the Teaching of Games in Secondary Schools.

Buil. Phys. Educ., 18 (1): 5-8.

BURGESON, C. R., WECHSLER, H., BRENER, N. D., YOUNG, J. C. AND SPAIN, C. G. (2001).

Physical education and activity: Results from the school health policies and programs study 2000.

J. School 1-lealth, 71(7): 279-293.

CHĂ&#x2030;NE,E., LAMOUCHE, C. AND PETIT, D. (1986).

Volley-Ball, De l Ecole...Aux Associations.

Revue Education Physique et Sport. Paris ENNIS, C. D. (2000).

Canaries in the coal mine: Responding to disengaged students using theme-based curricula.

BR00KER,

Quest, 52: 119-130 C. O., COTHRAN, O. J., DAVIDSON, K. 5., LOFTUS, 5.3., OWENS, L., SWANSON, L. AND H0P5IcKER, P. (1997).

Implementing curriculum within a context of fear and disengagement.

J~ Teach. Phys. Ed., 17: 52-71.

FRENCH, K., WERNER, P., RINK, J., TAYLOR, K. AND HUSSEY, K. (1996).

ENNIS,

environment asks provided :al response,

The effects of a 3

-

week unit of tactical; skili; or combined

490

MESQUITA

tactical and skill instruction on badminton performance ofninth.. grade students.

J. Teach. Phys. Ed., 15: 418-438.

GRAÇA, A. (2003).

Para uma renovação das concepções de ensino dos jogos desportivos na escola.

In Actividade fisica e desporto: Fundamentos e contextos.

Universidade Pedagógica de Moçambique and Universidade do Porto, (EditedbyA. Prista, A. Marques, A. Madeira andS. Saranga), Porto,pp.

177-188.

GRAÇA, A. AND BRANDÃO, D. (2003).

I4ow do year- 12 secondary school students appreciate physical education pmgrams?

In Proceedings of 8th Annual Congress of the Eumpean Coliege ofSport Science.

University ofSalzburg, (Edited byE. Muiler, 11. Schwanzeder, (3. Zallinger and V. Fastenbauer), Salzburg, Austria.

Grtnin,i, K., ELLIS, IX, WILLIAMS, C., KwAJC, E. AND WERNER, P. (1996).

High and low-skilled target students’ academic achievement and instructional performance in a 6 week badminton unit.

J. Teach. Phys. Ed., 15: 477489.

HARRISON, J. M., PREECE, L. A., BLAKEMORE, C. L., RICHARDS, R. P., WILKINS0N, C. AND FELLINGHAM, G. W. (1999).

Effects of two instructional models skill teaching and mastery learning on skill development, knowledge, self-efficacy, and game play in volleyball.

J. Teach. Phys. Ed., 19: 3457.

HASTIE, P. (1998). ‘flie participation and perception of giris within a unit of sport education.

J. Teach. Phys. Ed., 17:157-171.

KIRK, D. AND MACPHAIL, A. (2002).

Teaching games for understanding and situated Ieaming: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe model.

J. Teach. Phys. Ed., 21: 177-1 92.

LUKE, MD. AND COPE, L. D. (1994).

Student attitudes toward teacher behavior and program content in school physical education.

Phys. Educator, 51(2): 5 7-66.

MAXWELL, T. (2003).

The progressive games appitach to teaching expertise in volleyball. iii Teaching Games for understanding in Physical Education and Sport.

-

-

-

NASPI ~J-52.

1.

Oensjr !nOen Univer~ 200.

MnnmLL, S. Tactica Perfom JOPER MUSCH, E., r~ ~ ~ ~.n innc handbaj Paperp Sport Sc OSLIN, J., Mii The Gai and prel J. Teaci RINK J. (199: Teachjn Mosby, RINK 3., FREN Foundat j Teach ROVEGNO, 1.,!

MESQUITA,

and’nie.

J. Teach SIEDENmP, O. Physicai In Stude Humani pp. 247-, STRAND, B. AN Aii analy Phys. Ed THo~E, R., Bi A Chang

TEACHINO VOLLEYBALL

of n inth

491

NASPE, (Edited by L. Gr(ffln, B. Lombard and R. Nastasi), Reston., pp.

41-52.

MESQUITA, 1. (1998).

os jogos

do Poria, Pano, pp.

O ensino do Voleibol.

In O ensino dosjogos desportivos.

Universidade do Pano, (EditedbyA. Graça andJ. Oliveira), Pono,pp.153200.

Mrromu., S. (1996).

Tactical Approaches to Teaching Games: Improving Invasion Game Performance.

JOPERD, 67(2):30-33.

educaflon

MUSCH, E., MERTENS, B., TIMMERS, E,, MERTENS, T., GRAÇA, A., TABORSKY, F.,

;e ofSport

REMy, C., DE CLERCQ, D., MULTAEL, M. ~u VONDERLYNCK, V. (2002).

An innovative didactical invasion games model to teach basketball and

‘.Zallinger

handball, presented on CD. Paperpresenied ai the 7th Annual Congress ofthe European Cotiege af

996). ment and

Spon Science, Athens.

3., MITCHELL, S. AND GRIFFIN, L. (1998).

The Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI): Development

OSLIN,

VILKINSON,

and preliminary validation.

J. Teach. Phys. Ed., 17: 231-243.

RJNK, 3. (1993).

learning ~e play in

Teaching physical education for Iearning (2nd ed.).

Mosby, 5:. Louis, Missouri, USA RINK,J., FRENCH, K. AND TrnERDSMA, 8. (1996).

education.

Foundations for the leaming and instruction of sport games.

J. Teach. Phys. Ed. • 15:399-447.

ROVEGNO, 1., NEVE1i’, N. AND BABIARZ, N. (2001).

Leaming and Teaching Invasion-Game Tactics in 4th Grade: Iniroduction

iinking the

and Theoretical Perspective.

J. Teach. Phys. Ed., 20: 341-351 SIEDENTOP, D. (1996).

~‘

in school

Physical education and educational reform: The case of sport education.

Iii Student leanting in physical education.

Human Kinetics, (Edited by 5. Silvennan anti C. Ennis), Champaign, IL. pp. 247-267.

STRAND, B. AND SCAN1UNG, E. (1994).

eyball. and Sport.

An analysis of secondary studentpreferences towards physical education.

Phys. Educator, 51(3): 119-129.

TI-ioRpE, R., BUNKER, D. AND ALMOND, L. (1984).

A Change in focus for the teaching of games.

492

MESQUITA

Journ,

Iii Sport Pedagogy: Olympic Scientific Congress.

Human Kinefics, (Edited by M. Piéron andG. Graham), Chanzpaign, IL., Vol. 6,pp. 163 -1 69.

TURNER, A. P. AND MARTTNEK, T. J. (1992).

A compasaüve analysis of two models for teaching games (technique approach and game centered (tactical focus) approach).

Ineernaüonalj. Phys. Ed. 29(4): 15-31.

Vickers, J. (1990).

Instructional Design for Teaching Physical Education.

Human Kinetics, Champaign IL.

T

‘WA

SFI( REI VIS RO’ ATE

s. p~ ‘Phy.

8A Randolph Crescent Edinburgh EH3 7TH, UK Teviot-Kimpton Publications

2Phy~ ~ Insi, Spo1

Spo,

SUIV T propri ifltegn purpos 9yrs o adults. athlete (novic, athlete~ hadtoi six con and a ci reprodi visual (bilatei differer and he: gymna differer specific and spc pre-put 0306-729