職前體育教師實施理解式教學之探討

The Literature Review of the Implementation of Teaching Games for Understanding by Pre-Service Physical Education Teachers

10.3966/102473002015122904002

陳萩慈(Chiu-Tsu Chen)；掌慶維(Ching-Wei Chang)

體育師資生 ； 戰術遊戲 ； 學生中心 ； 體育師資培育 ； pre-service teachers ； tactical games ； student center ； physical education teacher education

中華體育季刊

29卷4期（2015 / 12 / 01）

265 - 272

繁體中文

理解式教學法（Teaching Games for Understanding, TGfU）為國際上新興的教學模式，並逐漸成為國內外職前體育師資培育的課程內容。為能瞭解TGfU在職前體育師資培育之結果，本文蒐集相關的實證性之研究，採用內容分析法，針對結果歸納的類目主軸、次類目、文獻研究結果進行分析。結果:可歸納為三個主題，一、「成功經驗」：以學生學習成效、職前教師本身感受與教學設計為主；二、「限制因素」：場地／器材、時間、先備經驗與教師專業知能；三、「未來挑戰」：專業知能、同事支持、教學理念與實習輔導之看法，對TGfU的實施與品質有重要影響。建議：有效建立教師專業學習社群，以減少實施所遭遇之阻礙，共同提升體育課學習品質。

Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) has been recently recognized internationally as an innovative instruction model in physical education. The instruction model is also integrated into the Physical Education Teacher Education program framework. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to collect and analyze the relevant empirical articles extracted from the international journals in order to categorize the inductive results regarding to pre-service physical education teachers implementing TGfU model. Results: Three categories were induced from the results of the articles while pre-service teachers implementing TGfU: 1. ＂Successful experience＂, which included the outcomes of student learning, pre-service teachers' perception, and the learning environment design; 2. ＂Constraining factors＂, which comprised of the space/equipment, insufficient allocated time, receptions of students, and readiness of instructors; and 3. ＂Future challenges＂, which referred to teachers' professional knowledge and competency, support of colleagues, coherent conceptions of teaching and learning, and congruent mentoring process. Recommendation: It is crucial, in terms of the quality of TGfU, to establish effective teacher professional learning communities to reduce constrains while implementing TGfU. In this regard, the framework of the professional learning community of pre-service teachers will be needed in the future to ensure the high quality of physical education class.

1. 教育部 (2014)。十二年國民基本教育實施計畫。臺北市：教育部。
2. (2003).Teaching Games for Understanding in physical education and sport.
3. Alison, P. C.,Pissanos, P. W.,Turner, A. P.,Law, D. R.(2000).Pre-service physical educators' epistemologies of skillfulness.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,19,141-161.
4. Alison, S.,Thorpe, R.(1997).A comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches to teaching games within physical education: A skills approach versus a games for understanding approach.The British Journal of Physical Education,28(3),9-13.
5. Butler, J.(Ed.),Griffin, L.(Ed.),Lombardo, B.(Ed.),Nastasi, R.(Ed.)(2003).Teaching Games for Understanding in physical education and sport: An international perspective.Oxin Hill, MD:AAHPERD Publications.
6. Gubacs, K.(1999).Action research on a tactical approach to teaching a pre-service tennis class.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,70(1),82.
7. Kirk, D.,Macdonald, D.(1998).Situated learning in physical education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,17,376-387.
8. Li, C.,Cruz, A.(2008).Pre-service PE teachers' occupational socialization experiences on Teaching Games for Understanding.New Horizons in Education,56(3),20-30.
9. Light, R.(2003).The social nature of games: Australian pre-service primary teachers' first experiences of Teaching Games for Understanding.European Physical Education Review,8(3),286-304.
10. Mckeen, K.,Webb, P. I.,Pearson, P. J.(2007).Promoting physical activity through Teaching Games for Understanding in undergraduate teacher education.AIESEP 2005 World Congress Proceedings,Lisboa:
11. McNeill, M. C.,Fry, J. M.,Wright, S. C.,Tan, W. K. C.,Tan, K. S. S.,Schempp, P. G.(2004)."In the local context": Singaporean challenges to teaching games on practicum.Sport, Education and Society,9(1),3-32.
12. Mitchell, S. A.,Griffin, L. L.,Oslin, J. L.(1995).An analysis of two instructional approaches to teaching invasion games.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,66,31-65.
13. Mitchell, S. A.,Griffin, L. L.,Oslin, J. L.(1997).Teaching invasion games: A comparison of two instructional approaches.Teaching and Coach in Physical Education and Sports,3(2),56-69.
14. Nevett, M.,Rovegno, I.,Babiarz, M.,McCaughtry, N.(2001).Changes in basic tactics and motor skills in an invasion-type game after a 12-lesson unit of instruction.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,20(4),352-369.
15. Rossi, T.,Fry, J. M.,McNeill, M.,Tan, C. W.(2007).The Games Concept Approach (GCA) as a mandated practice: Views of Singaporean teachers.Sport, Education and Society,12(1),93-111.
16. Rovegno, I.,Nevett, M.,Brock, S.,Babiarz, M.(2001).Teaching and learning basic invasion-game tactics in 4th grade: A descriptive study from situated and constraints theoretical perspectives.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,20(4),370-388.
17. Turner, A. P.,Martinek, T. J.(1999).An investigation into Teaching Games for Understanding: Effects on skill, knowledge, and game play.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,70(3),286-296.
18. Wang, C. L.,Ha, A. S.(2013).The theory of planned behaviour: Predicting pre-service teachers' teaching behaviour towards a constructivist approach.Sport, Education and Society,18(2),222-242.
19. Wang, C. L.,Ha, A. S.(2012).Factors influencing pre-service teachers' perception of Teaching Games for Understanding: A constructivist perspective.Sport, Education and Society,17(2),261-280.
20. Wang, C. L.,Ha, A. S.(2012).Mentoring in TGfU teaching: Mutual engagement of pre-service teachers, cooperating teachers and university supervisors.European Physical Education Review,18(1),47-61.
21. Wright, S.,McNeill, M.,Fry, J. M.(2009).The tactical approach to teaching games from teaching, learning and mentoring perspectives.Sport, Education and Society,14(2),223-244.
22. 周宏室編(2002)。運動教育學。臺北:師大書苑。
23. 張世忠(2001)。協同教學模式之初探。教育研究資訊雙月刊，9(4)，66-82。
24. 陳則賢(1995)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學。
25. 掌慶維(2007)。理解式球類遊戲之設計原則─以侵入式遊戲為例。學校體育，16(6)，81-88。
26. 廖玉光(2002)。球類教學─領會教學法。香港:教育學院。
27. 闕月清(2008)。理解式球類教學法。臺北市:師大書苑。

1. 陳昭宇(2018)。素養導向的體育課程與教學：證據本位實務的思考。課程與教學，21(2)，111-140。
2. 徐偉庭,尚憶薇(2022)。學生設計遊戲模式之應用與研究展望。中華體育季刊，36(2)，109-116。
3. 掌慶維、吳采陵(2017)。中學體育教師之理解式教學專業發展—專業學習社群的支持。臺灣運動教育學報，12(1)，17-38。