:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:中學師生對理解式球類教學實施知覺之探討
書刊名:臺中教育大學學報. 教育類
作者:廖智倩闕月清 引用關係
作者(外文):Liao, Chih-chienKeh, Nyit Chin
出版日期:2008
卷期:22:1
頁次:頁1-20
主題關鍵詞:知覺理解式球類教學體育教師PerceptionTeaching games for understandingTGfUPhysical education teacher
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(15) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:15
  • 共同引用共同引用:55
  • 點閱點閱:79
理解式球類教學是國外學者Bunker和Thorpe(1986)以認知爲主的教學而發展的,在戰術理解與做決定能力方面對現今的體育教學有所啟發,本研究旨在探討中學師生對理解式球類教學實施情形的知覺。研究參與者爲三位中學體育教師,每一位教師選擇一個班級,進行六週的理解式羽球教學,研究者於研究期間,進行教學觀察、學生日誌的蒐集,並於教學後進行教師的正式、非正式訪談及學生的團體訪談,資料的分析是採持續比較,從資料中發現主題和概念。針對研究結果發現如下:(一)體育教師對理解式球類教學的知覺,可歸納爲三部分,包括發現別於傳統體育教學之處、實施上的限制與困境及可採折衷辦法進行教學。其中,六種別於傳統體育教學之處爲有助於學生思考、富有新鮮感且挑戰性較高、比賽時學生較能學以致用、師生間互動較爲頻繁、學生剛開始時較難進入狀況、實施起來費時費力等;(二)學生對理解式球類教學實施的知覺,可歸納爲四部分:包括增加師生互動、享受運動樂趣、戰術戰略與規則的瞭解、提升技能等。本研究發現可供師資培育機構與其他相關單位,做爲推展理解式球類教學的參考,且建議未來的研究可以針對其他運動項目進行研究,做進一步的探討。
Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) was developed by Bunker and Thorpe in 1986. It contributed to physical education teaching in tactical understanding and decision making. The purpose of this study was to examine secondary school teachers and students' perceptions on the TGfU. The study involved 3 secondary school PE teachers and their PE class students. Each teacher planned and taught 12 classes in PE lessons using TGfU approach on badminton. During the period of research, researchers made field notes through observation, and students' learning journals were collected. Both formal and informal interviews with the teachers after class, and students' group interviews were conducted to collect more information. The data were analyzed using constant comparison method. The results indicated that (1) Perception of PE teachers towards TGfU: Teachers found that TGfU was different from traditional teaching in many aspects. TGfU enhanced student thinking, the teaching was very refreshing and challenging. Students could apply what they learned in games and teacher-student interaction was improved. Students had to learn to adapt to TGfU and more time and effort was needed for teachers to implement TGfU. However, teachers could compromise to implement TGfU although there were some limitations. (2) Students' perception towards TGfU: They included the increase in the interactions among students and teachers, fun during class, the understanding of badminton tactics and rules, and badminton techniques improvement. The findings of this study have implications for the promotion of TGfU for teacher education institutions and other related units. It is suggested further study should consider examining other different game sports.
期刊論文
1.Lee, A. M.(1997)。Contributions of research on student thinking in physical education。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,16(3),262-277。  new window
2.Turner, A. P.、Martinek, T. J.(1992)。A comparative analysis of two models for teaching games。International Journal of Physical Education,29(4),15-31。  new window
3.Sanders, S.、Graham, G.(1995)。Kindergarten children's initial experiences in physical education: The relentless persistence for play clashes with the zone of acceptable responses。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,14(4),372-383。  new window
4.Lee, A. M.、Landin, D. K.、Carter, J. A.(1992)。Student thoughts during tennis instruction。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,11(3),256-267。  new window
5.Bunker, D.、Thorpe, R.(1982)。A model for the teaching of games in secondary school。Bulletin of Physical Education,18(1),5-8。  new window
6.Kirk, D.、MacPhail, A.(2002)。Teaching Games for Understanding and situated learning: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe Model。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,21(2),177-192。  new window
7.Solmon, M. A.、Carter, J. O.(1995)。Kindergarten and first-grade students' perceptions of physical education in one teachers' classes。The Elementary School Journal,95,354-365。  new window
8.Timothy, C.(1996)。Reflections and further questions。Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance,67(4),49-52。  new window
9.Holt, Nicholas L.、Strean, William B.、Bengoechea, Enrique Garcia(2002)。Expanding the Teaching Games for Understanding Model: New avenues for future research and practice。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,21(2),162-176。  new window
10.Light, R.(2003)。The joy of learning: Emotion and learning in games through TGfU。Journal of Physical Education New Zealand,36(1),93-108。  new window
11.Nevett, M.、Rovengo, I.、Babiarz, M.(2001)。Fourth-grade children's knowledge of cutting, passing and tactics in invasion games after a 12-lesson unit of instruction。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,20(4),389-401。  new window
會議論文
1.Keh, N. C.、Tsai, T. D.、Huang, C. C.(2003)。Teachers' perceptions of and attitudes towards Teaching Games for Understanding。The 2nd International Conference: Teaching Sport and Physical Education for Understanding。Melbourne。  new window
學位論文
1.邱奕銓(2005)。傳統與理解式教學法對高職學生籃球學習效果比較之研究(碩士論文)。國立體育學院。  延伸查詢new window
2.游淑霞(2006)。理解式球類教學法對高中生合球學習效果之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
3.黃志成(2004)。理解式球類教學對國小六年級學生羽球學習效果之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
4.郭世德(2000)。理解式教學在國小五年級學生足球學習效果的研究(碩士論文)。國立體育學院。  延伸查詢new window
5.蔡宗達(2004)。理解式球類教學法與技能取向球類教學法比較研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
6.Turner, A. P.(1995)。An Investigation into teaching games for understanding(博士論文)。North. Carolina University,Greensboro。  new window
圖書
1.廖玉光(2002)。球類教學--領會教學法。香港:香港教育學院。  延伸查詢new window
2.Butler, J.、Griffin, L.、Lombardo, B.、Nastasi, R.(2003)。Teaching Games for Understanding in physical education and sport: An international perspective。Reston, Virginia:National Association of Sport and Physical Education。  new window
3.Mitchell, S. A.、Oslin, J. L.、Griffin, L. L.(2003)。Sport Foundations for Elementary Physical Education: A Tactical Games Approach。Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics。  new window
4.Siedentop, Daryl(1994)。Sport Education: Quality PE Through Positive Sport Experiences。Human Kinetics。  new window
5.簡紅珠(19920000)。教學研究的主要派典及其啟示之探析。高雄:復文圖書出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.張春興(1991)。張氏心理學辭典。台北:東華書局。  延伸查詢new window
7.Wittrock, M. C.(1986)。Handbook of research on teaching。New York, NY:Macmillan。  new window
8.鍾聖校(1993)。認知心理學。臺北:心理出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.黃天中、洪英正(1992)。心理學。臺北市:桂冠。  延伸查詢new window
10.葉重新(2004)。心理學。臺北:心理。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Thorpe, R.、Bunker, D.、Almond, L.(1986)。Modification of games。Rethinking games teaching。Loughborough, England:University of Technology。  new window
2.Almond, L.(1986)。Reflecting on themes: A games classification。Rethinking games teaching。University of Technology。  new window
3.Light, R.(2003)。Pre-service teachers' perceptions to TGfU in Australian University: "No Room for Heroes"。Teaching Games for Understanding in physical education and sport: An international perspective。Reston, VA:National Association of Sport and Physical Education。  new window
4.Mesquita, I.、Graça, A.(2003)。Physical education teachers' conceptions about teaching TGfU in Portuguese School。Teaching Games for Understanding in physical education and sport: An international perspective。Reston, VA:National Association of Sport and Physical Education。  new window
5.Sullivan, E.、Swabey, K.(2003)。Comparing assessment of preservice teaching using traditional and TGfU instructional models: Data from Australia and the United States。Teaching Games for Understanding in physical education and sport: An international perspective。Reston, VA:National Association of Sport and Physical Education。  new window
6.闕月清、蔡宗達(2003)。體育教學的新概念--遊戲比賽理解式教學法(TGfU)。體育課程教學設計理論與實務。臺北市:國家教育研究院。  延伸查詢new window
7.Bunker, D.、Thorpe, R.(1986)。The curriculum model。Rethinking games teaching。University of Technology。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE