2. What is a Game Sense approach?
The Game Sense approach employs inquiry-based and student-centered teaching methods,
that provide students with an opportunity to actively engage in games whilst developing
their own skills and understanding (Curry & Light, 2006).
Game Sense is more focused on developing
an understanding of the game, so that players
know where, when and how to execute the
skills they have learned (Light, 2005). Curry
and Light (2006) suggest that the best way to
develop these decision-making skills and
game-specific skills is to involve learners in
modified, or game-like activities.
These activities can integrate the essential
tactical structures of the game being learned,
but can be adjusted to cater for different
ages, sizes, ability levels and motivation
(Curry & Light, 2006).
3. What is a Game Sense approach?
The Game Sense approach classifies all games into four categories based on their
common tactical components; target games, net and wall games, striking games and
invasion games (Evans, 2006).
Evans (2006) suggests that while games within each
category may not necessarily require the same
techniques, the games are likely to share common
tactical problems. Therefore, the tactical and
strategic knowledge gained in one game, can be
transferred to another game within the same
category (Evans, 2006).
For example, tennis, volleyball and squash are all classified as net and wall games,
meaning knowledge about tactics and strategies can be transferred across the three
games.
4. What is Game Sense approach?
Bourdieu (1990, as cited in Light, 2005) proposed that a “sense of the game” (p.
169) can be fostered by providing an authentic practice environment. Rather
than employing direct instruction methods, the teacher should act as a
facilitator (Curry & Light, 2006).
Forrest, Webb and Pearson (2006) advocate the use of good questioning in a
Game Sense approach to develop problem-solving skills. It is expected that a
Game Sense approach will promote social interaction, achievement and self-
direction and therefore enhance motivation to participate (Curry & Light, 2006).
The experiences and knowledge that the participants will develop from a Game
Sense approach are applicable beyond games and school (Curry & Light, 2006).
5. Why do I use a Game Sense approach?
My teaching philosophy values a students ability to develop a sense of
ownership of their learning, which is encouraged through the use of
constructivist methods.
Using a Game Sense approach when teaching physical education encourages the
students to explore and experiment, and then reflect on the experience to
cement their learning (Curry & Light, 2006).
As a teacher, I expect my students to
engage in verbal and non-verbal
dialogue during ‘team talks’ and during
the game (Curry and Light, 2006). These
tools help students to develop their own
understanding of the game.
6. Why do I use a Game Sense approach?
As Evans and Light (2008) have
identified, that unlike the
traditional approach to games, a
Game Sense approach to physical
education reduces the down-time
between students turns.
Participants become more motivated as they are challenged when faced with
more complex versions of modified games. Further, the intensity of the lessons
is generally increased as they flow more smoothly (Evans & Light, 2008).
Instead of relying heavily on skill-based drills, Evans and Light (2008) suggest
that using games will get students more excited and engaged.
7. Why do I use a Game Sense approach?
Light (2005) recognises that Game Sense coaching will develop highly
independent players. Participants become empowered to take control and
make decisions regarding their own actions during any game situation (Light,
2005).
Players are encouraged to find solutions to any problematic situations they may
encounter during a game. In order to develop players who are capable of
overcoming these situations, they must practice in game situations as much as
possible.
Employing a Game Sense approach to learning provides the most authentic
and realistic context for learning to occur (Evans, 2006).
8. Where does this link with the syllabus?
Taking a game sense approach to PDHPE allows teachers to work towards the
following Skills Outcomes (Board of Studies, 2012):
• Communicating – between one another and with the teacher whilst
working in a group.
• Decision Making – students are able to work together in order to make
decisions that work best for the group as a whole.
• Interacting – students are able to help one another and are engaged in
whole group activities.
• Moving – students are able to spend their lessons DOING, not watching.
• Problem Solving – the use of questioning in this approach allows students
to work on different strategies for more successful outcomes.
Furthermore, strands from the Knowledge
and Understanding Outcomes (Board of
Studies, 2012), most notably the Games
and Sports strand can be approached
used Game Sense.
9. References
Board of Studies, NSW (2013). NSW Personal Development, Health and Physical Education
(PDHPE) K-6 Syllabus.
Curry, C., & Light, R. L. (2006). Addressing the New South Wales quality teaching
framework in physical education: Is game sense the answer? Paper presented at
the Asia Pacific Conference on Teaching Sport and Physical Education for
Understanding.
Evans, J. R. (2006). Developing a sense of the game: Skill, specificity and game sense in
rugby coaching. Paper presented at the Asia Pacific Conference on Teaching Sport
and Physical Education for Understanding.
Evans, J.R., & Light, R.L. (2008). Coach development through collaborative action
research: A rugby coach’s implementation of game sense pedagogy. Asian Journal
of Exercise and Sport Science, 5(1), 31-37.
Forrest, G., Webb, P., & Pearson, P. (2006). Games for understanding in pre-service teacher
education: a ‘game for outcome’ approach for enhanced understanding of games.
Paper presented at the Asia Pacific Conference on Teaching Sport and Physical
Education for Understanding.
Light, R. L. (2005). Making sense of chaos: Australian coaches talk about Game Sense. In
L. Griffin & J. Butley (Eds.), Teaching Games for Understanding: Theory, Research and
Practice (pp. 169-182). South Australia, Australia: Human Kinetics.
