تأثیر روش‌های آموزشی بازی برای درک، آموزش ورزش، ترکیبی (بازی برای درک+ آموزش بازی) و خطی بر خلاقیت کودکان در فوتسال

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه رفتار حرکتی، دانشکدۀ تربیت ‌بدنی و علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه خوارزمی تهران، ایران

2 استادیار، گروه رفتار حرکتی، دانشکدۀ تربیت‌ بدنی، دانشگاه خوارزمی تهران، ایران

3 استاد، گروه رفتار حرکتی، دانشکدۀ تربیت ‌بدنی، دانشگاه خوارزمی تهران، ایران

چکیده

یافتن بهترین شیوۀ آموزشی مسئله‌ای است که امروزه توجه بسیاری از محققان، پژوهشگران علوم رفتاری و ورزش را به خود جلب کرده است. در راستای این بحث هدف این تحقیق بررسی تأثیر بازی‌های ترکیبی، آموزش بازی برای درک و آموزش ورزش بر خلاقیت فردی و تیمی در مقایسه با روش خطی در بازی‌های فوتسال است. جامعۀ آماری تحقیق همۀ کودکان 9-12 سال شهر اهواز بودند (میانگین سن 74/10 سال و انحراف استاندارد=42/1). مداخلات برای مهارت‌های فوتسال طراحی ‌شده بود، ازاین‌رو چهار گروه مشارکت‌کنندگان (20 نفر در هر گروه) به روش آموزش بازی برای درک، آموزش ورزش، ترکیبی و خطی تمرین کردند. خلاقیت تیمی و فردی با استفاده از تحلیل فیلم ارزیابی ‌شد. تمرینات به مدت دو ماه طی 16 جلسه و هر جلسه یک‌ونیم ساعت ارائه شد. نتایج نشان داد در خلاقیت فردی در پس‌آزمون اختلاف بین گروه‌ها برای اعمال نامناسب معنادار نیست، ولی برای اعمال مناسب معنادار است. همچنین برای اعمال خلاق و اصیل و همچنین خلاقیت تیمی گروه آموزش بازی برای درک، ترکیبی، آموزش ورزش و خطی به‌ترتیب بیشترین پیشرفت را داشتند. در همۀ متغیرها اختلاف بین آموزش بازی برای درک و خطی (05/0>P) و ترکیبی و خطی (05/0>P) معنادار بود. نتایج این تحقیق مؤثر بودن روش آموزش بازی برای درک و ترکیبی نسبت به روش خطی را نمایان کرده است که می‌تواند در مدارس و مهدکودک‌ها کاربرد داشته باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The effect of TGFU, SE, combination (TGFU+SE) and linear training on children's creativity in futsal

نویسندگان [English]

  • Maryam Davoodi 1
  • Rasoul Yaali 2
  • Farhad Ghadiri 2
  • aabas Bahram 3
1 PhD Student, Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of Physical Education, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
3 Professor, Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of Physical Education, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Finding the best teaching method is an issue that has attracted the attention of many researchers, researchers in behavioral sciences and sports today.. In order to discuss this, the aim of this study was to investigate the effect of TGFU, combination, and SE on individual and team creativity in comparison with the traditional method in futsal games. The statistical population of this study was all children aged 9-12 years in Ahvaz (M age= 10.74 and SD= 1.42). The interventions were designed for futsal skills, so four groups of Participants (20 people in each group) practiced SE, TGFU, combination and linear methods. The test of team and individual creativity was performed using film analysis. Exercises were presented for two months in 16 sessions, one and a half hours each. The results showed that for individual creativity in the post-test, differences between groups were not significant for inappropriate actions but significant for appropriate actions. Also for creative and original actions as well as team creativity TGFU, combination, SE and linear groups had the most progress, respectively. In all variables, the difference between TGFU and linear (p <0.05) and combination and linear (p <0.05) was significant. The results of this study showed the effectiveness of the TFGU and combined methods compared to the linear method, which can be used in schools and kindergartens..

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Creativity"
  • Education "
  • SE
  • TGFU
  • "
  • Traditional"
  • Method "
  1. منابع و مآخذ

    1. Mohammadi Oranghi B, Yaali R, Bahram A, Aghdasi M. Investigating the role of motor learning strategies on improving team creativity in beginner soccer’s. Mot Behav. 2020;under press.
    2. Kempe M, Memmert D. “Good, better, creative”: the influence of creativity on goal scoring in elite soccer. J Sports Sci. 2018;36(21):2419–23.
    3. Orth D, van der Kamp J, Memmert D, Savelsbergh GJ. Creative motor actions as emerging from movement variability. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1903.
    4. Haywood K, Getchell N. Life Span Motor Development. Hum Kinet. 2014;6:89–189.
    5. Memmert D. Tactical creativity in sport. In J. Kaufman, V. Glăveanu, & J. Baer (Eds.). The Cambridge handbook of creativity across domains (pp. 479–491). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2017;
    6. Kari T, Siutila M, Karhulahti V-M. An Extended Study on Training and Physical Exercise in Esports. In: Exploring the Cognitive, Social, Cultural, and Psychological Aspects of Gaming and Simulations. IGI Global; 2019. p. 270–92.
    7. Supriadi D. Implementasi Model Teaching Game for Understanding terhadap Keterampilan Bermain dalam Strike and Fielding Games. J Penelit Pendidik. 2019;18(3):270–5.
    8. Crespo M, Reid MM, Miley D. Tennis: Applied examples of a game-based teaching approach. Strategies. 2004;17(4):27–30.
    9. Schmidt RA, Lee T, Winstein C, Wulf G, Zelaznik H. Motor Control and Learning‏. Hum Kinet. 2018;6E.
    10. Renshaw I, Davids K, Savelsbergh G. Motor Learning in Practice: A Constraints-led Approach. London: Routledge. 2010;
    11. Williams AM, Hodges NJ. Practice, Instruction and Skill Acquisition: Challenging Tradition. J Sports Sci. 2005;23(6):637–650.
    12. Smith A, Parr M. Young People’s Views on the Nature and Purposes of Physical Education: A Sociological Analysis. Sport Educ Soc. 2007;12(1):37–58.
    13. Orangi BM, Yaali R, Bahram A, van der Kamp J, Aghdasi MT. The effects of linear, nonlinear, and differential motor learning methods on the emergence of creative action in individual soccer players. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2021;102009.
    14. Moy B, Renshaw I, Davids K. The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on physical education teacher education students’ intrinsic motivation. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog. 2016;21(5):517–38.
    15. Susanto B, Wibowo WS, Harjani C. Bible Learning with Board Game for Children. In: 2nd International Media Conference 2019 (IMC 2019). Atlantis Press; 2020. p. 48–59.
    16. Wang Y, Yatim MHM. A Framework of Childhood Obesity Prevention Through Game-Based Learning. In: Design, Motivation, and Frameworks in Game-Based Learning. IGI Global; 2019. p. 154–83.
    17. Santos S, Coutinho D, Gonçalves B, Schöllhorn W, Sampaio J, Leite N. Differential learning as a key training approach to improve creative and tactical behavior in soccer‏. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2018;89(1):11–24.
    18. Syamsuar S, Zen Z. Teaching game for understanding model: increasing motivation and students’ physical fitness. JPPI (Jurnal Penelit Pendidik Indones. 2021;7(1):128–36.
    19. Artha AA, Priambodo A. The Application of Teams Games Tournament (TGT) and Teaching Game for Understanding (TGfU) Learning Models on Learning Motivation and Volley Ball Passing Skills. Budapest Int Res Critics Linguist Educ J. 2020;3(1):46–53.
    20. Tan WH. A Coaching Framework for Meta-Games: A Case Study of FPS Trainer. In: Design, Motivation, and Frameworks in Game-Based Learning. IGI Global; 2019. p. 184–212.
    21. Ríos JVS, Guijarro E, Rocamora I, Marinho JLC. Teaching Games for Understandings vs Direct Instruction: levels of physical activity on football U-12. Educ Sport Heal Phys Act Int J. 2019;3(1):46–55.
    22. Rinaldo R, Tarigan B, Juliantine T. The Effect of the Teaching Game For Understanding Model on Cognitive Ability. Kinestetik J Ilm Pendidik Jasm. 2021;5(2):375–80.
    23. Bessa C, Hastie P, Araújo R, Mesquita I. What Do We Know About the Development of Personal and Social Skills within the Sport Education Model: A Systematic. Dev Pers Soc Ski within Tradit Teach Sport Educ a study with Preserv Teach Phys Educ.:57.
    24. Harvey S, Pill S, Hastie P, Wallhead T. Physical education teachers’ perceptions of the successes, constraints, and possibilities associated with implementing the sport education model. Phys Educ Sport Pedagog. 2020;25(5):555–66.
    25. Gil-Arias A, Harvey S, Cárceles A, Práxedes A, Del Villar F. Impact of a hybrid TGfU-Sport Education unit on student motivation in physical education. PLoS One. 2017;12(6):e0179876.
    26. Zhen-Rong JIA. Effects of Teaching Games for Understanding Integrated Sport Education Model on College Students’ Football Cognitive Performance and Motor Skills. Rev Cercet si Interv Soc. 2021;72.
    27. Orangi BM, Yaali R, Bahram A, Aghdasi MT, van der Kamp J, Vanrenterghem J, et al. Motor learning methods that induce high practice variability reduce kinematic and kinetic risk factors of non-contact ACL injury. Hum Mov Sci. 2021;78:102805.
    28. Caso S, van der Kamp J. Variability and creativity in small-sided conditioned games among elite soccer players. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2020;101645.
    29. Santos S, Jiménez S, Sampaio J, Leite N. Effects of the Skills4Genius sports-based training program in creative behavior. PLoS One, 12, e0172520. 2017;
    30. E N seyed hossieni., R N i seyed hossieni. Effects of TGFU Teaching Method on Self-Determine Motivation and Learning of Volleyball Serve in Adolescent Students. Mot Behav. 2017;9(29):17–34.
    31. Hopper T, Butler J, Storey B. TGfU – Simply Good Pedagogy: Understanding a Complex Challenge. Ottawa, Ontario: PHE-Canada. 2009;
    32. Stodden DF, Goodway JD, Langendorfer SJ, Roberton MA, Rudisill ME, Garcia C, et al. A developmental perspective on the role of motor skill competence in physical activity: An emergent relationship. Quest. 2008;60(2):290–306.
    33. Bernstein N. The coordination and regulation of movements. Pergamon Press London. 1967;
    34. Raiola G. Motor learning and teaching method. J Phys Educ Sport. 2017;17:2239–43.
    35. Renshaw I, Chow JY, Davids K, Button C. Nonlinear pedagogy in skill acquisition: An introduction. Routledge; 2015.