<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026from its inception, the interpretation of TGfU has been through the prism of discovery learning (Cobb and Yackel 1996; Phillips 1995). It was only in the 1990s that PE pedagogues later ascribed TGfU to a constructivist approach (see, for example, Kirk and Macdonald 1998).\u201d (p.10, Old wine in new bottles, Harvey, Pill & Almond, 2017)<\/b><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This week I will do my best to bring to light some of the Learning Theories that underpin this, i.e. TGfU\/Game Sense\/Constraints-based teaching\/coaching approach\u2026 in essence a Games Based Approach (GBA). It has been a real challenge over the last 3 weeks to put these thoughts into a way that make sense and to do all the research that has taken place already justice. It is probably one of the hardest Blogs I have tried to write as I do not want to do the topic area an injustice. I am no expert in this, but when I read the various books and research that talk about Learning Theories I connect very quickly to the practical applications that I have done throughout the years and therefore the theories make sense to me and make sense of what I have been doing through the ART of Coaching and continual self-reflection.<\/p>\n

In my true Growth Mindset approach this journey helped me to discover this research article whilst writing for this Blog\u2026<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cTheir [Physical Education teachers\u2019] practice is typically based upon assumptions about learning that are deeply embedded in Western culture\u2026In physical education, this is evident in the teaching of predetermined \u201cfundamental\u201d motor skills seen as being a prerequisite for playing games and sport.\u201d (p.22, Complex Learning Theory, Richard Light, 2008)<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

At times it is important to put things in perspective with a contrasting view. Here is what the \u201ctraditional\u201d approach to teaching\/coaching is based upon and still continues to be present in today\u2019s teaching\/coaching where teachers\/coaches use verbal feedback and rewards, quite often negative ones, e.g. \u201cstart again\u201d when a group drops a ball, \u201cdo 10 press-ups\u201d when a group knock the ball on, i.e. Negative Pedagogy, to change behaviour.<\/p>\n

\u2026the learning involved [in the traditional approach] is not necessarily positive because it can promote a fear of failure that limits their capacity to learn from mistakes (Partington et al., 2014).\u201d (p.13, Positive Pedagogy for Sport Coaching, Richard Light, 2017)<\/b><\/em><\/p>\n

Behaviorists conceive of cognition and learning as being mechanical processes and strive to understand learning by reducing it to its simplest components. (p.23, Complex Learning Theory, Richard Light, 2008)<\/i><\/p>\n

\u201cThe traditional approach to teaching is guided by the principles of behaviourism, a mechanism that involves the \u2018manipulation of students toward predetermined ends and ignores the experience of the students themselves\u2026\u201d (p.4, Positive Pedagogy for Sport Coaching, Richard Light, 2017)<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

<\/a>