Teaching Games for Understanding and Situated Learning: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe Model

By D. Kirk, A. MacPhail. 2002

451 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/16d557db5bd06021fa6975fc9313e2c5e6cd784e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Developing pupils’ performance in team invasion games (2011, background): “Kirk and MacPhail (2002) claim that learning in this type of environment enables pupils to develop ‘clusters of capabilities’, for example, perceptual, strategic and technical capabilities that are required to be successful during games play.”
Influence of a hybrid Sport Education—Teaching Games for Understanding unit on one teacher and his students (2006, background): “As implied by Kirk and MacPhail (2002) and Butler (1996), research which examines and describes exactly what accomplished instructors do when teaching for understanding, both in the pure form and when combined with SE, in terms of structure, organization and time frames, would be useful.”
Improving ‘at-action’ decision-making in team sports through a holistic coaching approach (2014, background): “This is what Launder (2001) considers with his ‘Action Fantasy Games’ where players are presented with an ‘Action Fantasy Game’ card that details the teams history such as winning record, position in the league, titles won and so on, as well as setting the specific game scenario (Figure 1).”
Positive Pedagogy for sport coaching (2016, background): “22, No. 2, 271–287, Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group making learning authentic and meaningful (Kirk & MacPhail, 2002).”
Why the Constraints-Led Approach is not Teaching Games for Understanding: a clarification (2016, background): “Interestingly, in their modified, more in-depth version of the original TGfU model, Kirk and MacPhail (2002) point out that whilst the model has the appearance of being a linear process, learning to play games is a complex medium and as such is not linear.”
Sport Education, Tactical Games, and Cooperative Learning: Theoretical and Pedagogical Considerations (2004, unknown): “…TG, and CL can provide structures or instructional models for situated learning to occur within a community of practice based on the meaningful, purposeful, and authentic learning activities presented and practiced by students (Kirk & Macdonald, 1998; Kirk & MacPhail, 2002; Lave & Wenger, 1991).”
The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on physical education teacher education students’ intrinsic motivation (2016, background): “…Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) and Sport Education (SE), a common criticism is that these approaches are largely operational and lack an empirically supported theoretical basis for the learning process and to develop principled practice (see Chow et al. 2007; Kirk and MacPhail 2002).”
The Role of Nonlinear Pedagogy in Physical Education (2007, background): “Specifically, a situated perspective assumes that learning incorporates the active engagement of learners with their environment (Kirk & MacPhail, 2002; Rovegno & Kirk, 1995).”