Game centred approaches in PE and Sport

The title is more of a procedural issue - the teacher or coach chooses a specific form of practice. Whether there are pedagogies associated with them is far from clear. With the exception of Play Practice, all the other are variations on a theme. What we need to do is to clarify what each brand name means - what are the similarities and differences between them?

In the same way we tend to use words like pedagogies in so many different ways to the point where they are too far removed from being a guide to informed and intelligent practice. For me pedagogy is the art and science of engaging with students for productive learning. This stipulative statement focuses on engagement with learners, establishing relationships and giving students a voice in the learning process. The next step is to identify what capabilities and competences need to acquired, refined and shaped by experience of what works well (using an informed eye of course). This leads me to say that the art and science of practising (in the learning process) needs to be revived. What are developmental appropriate practices in teaching games? What practices lead to progression and development? What is the role of personal practice by the student in their own time? These are simply a few that I would address first.

Back to the title of the blog. Since TGFU emerged as a brand name with a number of different models there is one factor that has largely been ignored. What is its conceptual framework? Why did it develop in the way it did? Do we need a different TGFU for the 21st century? My emphasis would be on understanding - what does it entail? I don't mean a model just a return to re-building a conceptual framework that becomes a real guide to practice.

There are lots of exciting things happening within the teaching of games so can we harness this goodwill, intellectual rigour and enthusiasm for the subject through this blog.

Len