grade level chosen: 5th grade (5c-mrs. haywood's class) · wednesday, march 31, 2010 pe...

Roderick B. Stinson

KH7250

Instructional Models Project

Spring 2010


• Grade Level Chosen: 5th Grade (5C-Mrs. Haywood's Class) a. 24 Students (13 boys and 11 girls)

• Unit Scheduling Information

a. Instructional Model: Tactical Games Model

b. Unit Schedule: March 9th - April 13th

March/April

c. Unit Content: Basketball

d. Contextual Analysis

Teacher

i. What do I know about this content?

■ I have a strong knowledge about the offensive and defensive

strategy and skills needed to play the game. I spent 4 years in high

school as a basketball manager and I attended numerous basketball

camps growing up as a child.

ii. What experience do I have teaching the content to this grade level?

■ I have taught this content to 5 graders over the past two years

with my lead P.E. teacher at the school where I work. I also have

taught this content to this grade level at summer basketball camps.

iii. Where can I go to gain content knowledge?

■ I have access to textbooks used in previous college courses that I

can use to gain or supplement the content knowledge needed for

teaching this unit. I am able to call upon my high school coaches as

well as my uncle who coached high school girls' basketball. My

colleague and lead PE teacher where I work also as an extensive

playing background that I can draw on.

Students

Roderick B. Stinson Instructional Models Project

KH7250 Spring 2010

i. How many will be in this class each time?

■ 24 students (13 boys and 11 girls)

ii. How many and which students have special learning needs?

■ Not applicable

iii. What are those needs, and what do I know about teaching those

students?

■ Not applicable

iv. What is the typical developmental stage in the class?

■ Cognitively, all students are in the school age/latency stage. But as

it pertains to the psychomotor development, most all students

would typically be at the control level.

v. What is the students' motivation to learn this content?

■ The students' motivation for learning this content is that they are

getting a chance to learn the tactics and strategies involved for

successful play in the sport of basketball. The students are

motivated to learn the content because they are learning the sport

from a different perspective. The students' motivation also hinges

on the fact that they will be assessed on their knowledge of the

content.

Content

i. What is the expected range of ability and knowledge of this content?

■ Ability wise, I expect the abilities of the students to range from the

precontrol level of proficiency to the utilization level of

proficiency. As far as the knowledge of the content, I expect the

student's knowledge to range from a basic understanding of

terminology to a more intermediate understanding of the content

knowledge where they are at the point of being able to put this

knowledge into action during a game.

ii. What do students at this age/stage need to know about this content?

■ Coming into the unit, they need to know how to perform correctly

the basic skills associated with the content knowledge of basketball

such as dribbling, passing, shooting, and rebounding. Upon exiting

the unit they need to have a working knowledge of how to

successfully and tactically perform these skills in the game-like

context or situation.

iii. What specific content should be covered in this unit?

■ The content covered in this unit should focus on tactical problems

such as maintaining possession of the ball, attacking the basket,

creating space to attack, using space in attack, and defending space

(Defending space may or may not be covered in this unit, but will

definitely be planned for).

iv. In order what order should the content be learned? Does it matter?

■ The content should progress from simple to complex. In my

opinion, the content should be learned in this order: attacking the

basket; maintaining possession of the ball; creating space to attack,

using space in attack, and defending space. Yes order does matter


KH7250 Spring 2010

because you want the students to start out working on those things

they can have success with before moving on to more harder

tactical problems.

v. Will I need to modify the content to meet students' abilities?

■ Yes the content and terminology will need to be modified to meet

students' abilities both cognitively and physically (psychomotor).

vi. How long should it take most students to learn each part of the unit?

■ It should take most students at least 2-3 class sessions to learn each

part of the unit.

vii. What learning goals should students pursue?

■ Cognitive

o Students will score at least 80 percent on a basketball game

rules and strategy test at the end of the unit.

■ Psvchomotor

o Students will correctly demonstrate the ability to score the

basketball using a variety of basketball strategies in a

modified 4v4 half-court possession and scoring game at the

end of the unit.

viii. How can I assess that learning?

■ Cognitive: I can assess that type of learning by administering a

written rules and strategy test to students.

■ Psychomotor: I will use the Game Performance Assessment

Instrument to assess tactical decision making and skill execution to

see how well students made and carried out tactical decisions

during the game.

Available Resources

i. How many lessons will the unit include?

■ The unit will include a minimum of eight instructional lessons.

ii. How many actual minutes are available for instruction in each class?

■ 35-40 minutes

iii. How much content can students reasonably learn in that amount of

time?

■ Students could reasonably learn and solve at least one tactical

problem through modified games in that amount of time.

iv. What is my teaching area for the unit?

■ The school gymnasium.

v. How many stations, courts, fields, etc. can the area accommodate?

■ The area can actually accommodate 4 4v4 half-court games due to

baskets on the sides of the regular court baskets.

vi. What equipment do I have for this unit?

■ Basketballs, basketball goals, poly-spots, cones, red pennies, and

yellow pennies

vii. What is the ratio of equipment/implements/objects to students?

■ The ratio would be 2 to 1. There is 2 pieces of

equipment/implements/objects for every 1 student.

viii. Do I have to modify equipment for safe and effective usage?


KH7250 Spring 2010

■ No

ix. Will I have any assistance (e.g. team teacher, teacher's aide)?

■ Yes, the lead P.E. teacher will provide any assistance needed

during the course of this unit.

• Rationale for selecting the specific Instructional Model for this unit

I selected this particular instructional model for this unit for a number of reasons. I

initially selected this model because I know that students in PE enjoy playing games and look

forward to playing the game form of particular sports as opposed to learning the skills used in

playing the game. Students are always playing the game or some version of the game which will

keep students' interest and motivation high. Therefore, I thought that this particular instructional

model would be perfect in that students are still allowed to play games but this model gives them

the opportunity to develop or practice skill drills and then use what they learn in a modified

game.

I also selected this model because I liked the fact that the model focuses on cognitive

development of the students first and then motor skill performance. The model makes the

assumption that motor skill performance would be better if it follows cognitive learning.

Students are learning the game from a more cognitive perspective while still being engaged from

a psychomotor perspective. Therefore, students' increased cognitive understanding of the game

allows them to become better players and less dependent on the teacher for their participation

and decision making (unlike Direct Instruction).

Lastly I selected this model for the simple fact that students can transfer their

understanding of tactics and strategies across games, when applicable. Many of my students are

Hispanic and have a soccer background. Both basketball and soccer are classified as invasion

games in the games classification system. Since games with the same classification contain

many similar tactical problems, it might be possible to teach games and concepts that students

can transfer to other like games, possibly reducing the amount of time needed to become skillful

in new games.

• Explanation of planned student assessments for learning goals/objectives (pre)

My unit will consist of two student assessments, a_wriHen4est and a Gamg_£eribnnancfi

Assessment Instrument (GPAI), designed to meet my cognitive and psychomotor learning

goals/objectives respectively. The model's most basic assumption is that motor skill

performance will be more proficient if it follows cognitive learning. Since the first priority in this

model is cognitive learning, I created a written test on basketball for this tactical games unit

because I want to get a baseline indication of what the student's background knowledge was on

the history, rules, strategies, and concepts of the sport beginning of the unit. I felt that it was

important for me to have an idea of what the students knew about the history, rules, strategies

and concepts for the unit in order to work toward our end goal. Because the major learning

objective in the Tactical Games model is to get students to carry out tactical decisions in games

and game-like learning activities, I created a GPAI because I wanted to assess the students' -"""I

abilities to make and execute tactical decisions while playing a game. The tactical games modelj

places a considerable amount of emphasis on assessment being authentic or based on

observations made during game play. It only makes sense to correctly assess students' ability to

make and execute tactical decisions in the flow of game play.

5th Grade Physical Education 1:25-2:10pm Basketball-Tactical Games Model


L Friday, March 19,2010

^ Gymnasium

Equipment:

~4 Basketballs

~4 Basketball Goals

—Pinnies

—Poly-spots

—Tape

Length:45 mins

—Attendance

— 3 4v4 half-court, possession game

-Present TP #3: Maintaining Possession and Lesson Focus: Decision

making before passing.

-Drill #1

—Return to modified game form

-Review of TP #3

Tuesday, March 23,2010

PE Gymnasium

Equipment:

-12 Basketballs

-6 Basketball Goals

—Pinnies

—Poly-spots

—Tape

Length:45 mins

—Attendance

—3 4v4 half-court, 5-minute scoring game

—Present TP #4: Attacking the basket and Lesson Focus: Shooting within

the zone, which is 3 to 8 feet (1-2.4 meters) from the basket

-Drill #1

-Drill #2


-Review of TP #4

Thursday, March 25,2010

PE Gymnasium

Equipment:

-12 Basketballs

-6 Basketball Goals

—Pinnies

—Poly-spots

Length: 45 mins

—Attendance

—3 4v4 half-court, 5 minute scoring game

—Present TP #5: Attacking the basket and Lesson Focus: Identifying an

open lane to the basket and dribbling to drive and shoot

-Drill #1

-Drill #2

-Return to modified game form

—Review of TP

Monday, March 29,2010

PE Gymnasium

-6 Basketballs

-6 Basketball Goals

—Pinnies

—Tape

length: 45 mins

—Attendance

—3 4v4 half-court game

-Present TP#6: Attacking the basket and Lesson Focus: Using the give-and-

go to score.

-Drill #1

-Return to modified game form

—Review of TP


Wednesday, March 31,

2010

PE Gymnasium

--6 Basketballs

-6 Basketball Goals

—Pinnies

—Tape

Length: 45 mins

—Attendance


—Present TP#7: Using space in the attack and Lesson Focus: Use the dribble

for repositioning to make a pass.

-Drill #1


-Review of TP

Friday, April 2,2010

PE Gymnasium

-7 Basketballs

-6 Basketball Goals

—Pinnies

—Tape

Length: 45 mins

—Attendance


- Present TP#8: Creating space in the attack and Lesson Focus: Creating

passing lanes in the zone.

-Drill #1


—Review of TP

, April 13,2010

PE Gymnasium

Equipment:

-3 Basketball

-3 Basketball Goals

- Pinnies

-8 Pencils

—Tape

Length:45 mins

—Attendance

—Pre-assessment (only 8 students)

■ 1 4v4, half-court, possession game (10-15 mins)

■ Basketball Written Test (history, rules, and strategies)

—Administer Model Surveys

—3 4v4 half-court games (whole-class if time permits)

—Unit Review

Roderick B. Stinson

KH 7250


Spring 2010

Basketball Written Test

Raw Pre-and Post-Assessment Data Table

The cognitive learning goal was for the students that were sampled in the unit to score at

least 80% on ihe written test at the end of the unit. Unfortunately, the students did not come

close to achieving this and my goal was not met. The average score on the pre-assessment was

58%. and the average score on the post-assessment fell one point to 57%. The total of the scores

on the pre-assessment were overall eight points higher than the post assessment. The same test

was administered on both occasions. The highest score on the pre-assessment was 69% which

was earned by one individual. The highest score on the post-assessment was 69% as well and

that was earned by two individuals. Overall, three out of the eight students improved their scores

from the pre-assessment to the post-assessment. Chris and Miguel both increased their scores by

4 percentage points and Jocelyn increased her scores by 7 percentage points. Four out of the 8

had scores that decreased from the pre-assessment to the post-assessment. With the exception of

one student whose score dropped 12% points, the scores of the other three individuals only

dropped 3 to 4 percentage points. Only one student's score stayed the same on both exams and

did not increase or decrease.

From a teacher's standpoint, I could have changed the wording on the test to a certain

degree so that the students had a better understanding of the questions and what they asked.

Looking back. I maybe should have left certain questions out on the test. There was some

information that was confusing and it may have caused a few students to guess on some

questions or over think some of the answers.

1 personally thought that the student's guessed at many of the questions on the test botii at

the beginning and end of the unit. The students seemed to lack focus while taking the test. The

students did not appear to put forth a great deal of effort in thinking about the answers to the

questions. 1 noticed that most rushed through the lest in a hurried fashion and really didn't

carefully read each question and its answers. They knew that they weren't receiving a letter

grade that would affect their PE grade, and they didn't put forth the effort that might be seen on

tests in the general classroom. They didn't seem to take the test seriously in my opinion.

In addition to the reasons just mentioned, the model used in this unit didn't really allow

me to address the questions or material on the test in the way that I would have liked it to. The


KH7250 Spring 2010

material was broken up because students come every other day for only 45 minutes, and they

typically forget really quickly those things that we have just previously talked about. The class

period was not long enough to really get in many discussions about the test material because of

the way I had to structure class due to the model used. The unit also had a week's break between

the last lesson taught and the administering of the post-assessment which may have caused some

information to be forgotten.

In summary, I think that the material covered on the test combined with the lack of focus

and effort from the students in answering the questions, the instructional model used in the unit,

the schedule/time given for each PE class period, and the scheduling of the unit attributed to the

change in the average scores from pre-assessment to post-assessment. As a result of these

factors, the average score on the post -assessment written test dropped compared to the average

score on the pre-assessment written test.

Roderick B. Stinson

KM 7250


Spring 2010

Basketball GPAI

Raw Pre-and-Post Assessment Data

The psychomotor goal was for students to correctly demonstrate the ability to score the

basketball using a variety of basketball strategies in a modified 4v4 half-court possession and

scoring game at the end of Ihe unit. Based on the increase in the average (mean) score from the

beginning of the unit to the end of the unit, il is safe to say that I met my intended goal for this

learning domain. The average score of students on the GPAI administered at the beginning of

the unit was 8 which placed the students in the "veteran" category. By that particular

classification. I meant that students were average in their tactical decision making and tactical

skill proficiency. The students were making the correct tactical decisions some of the lime and

exhibiting a high level of tactical skill proficiency some of Ihe time. The average score of

students on the GPAI administered at the end of the unit was 13 which placed the students in the

"MVP" category. This meant that the students were well above average in their tactical decision

making and tactical skill proficiency. The students were always making the correct tactical

decisions and always exhibiting a high level of tactical skill proficiency during the game.

I think thai the increase in the average score on the GPAI administered at the beginning

of the unit and the GPAI administered at the end of the unit may be attributed to several reasons.

From a teacher's standpoint I tried to present students each day with tactical problems and skills

that were challenging and would ensure offensive success for the students either individually or

as a team. The students got the chance to learn and explore tactical skills that were proven vital

to their offensive success in basketball. As a result of having been exposed to these tactical

problems and skills, it made the students better players in the modified game forms that we

played and this success translated to the results seen on the last GPAI administered in the unit.

A second reason for the improvement in the average GPAI scores might be attributed to

the feedback received during the unit. I Iried to make it a point to always point out the positive

things that students were doing in the game forms or in the practice drills. I also made it a point

to try and point out those things students maybe were not doing that could help them be more

successful in the unit. 1 didn't always give a lot of feedback during the practice drills but I did

try and point out things after the games and after the drills so that students could make the


KH7250 Spring 2010

necessary adjustments later. Because they received both positive and constructive feedback, I

think they were able to reflect on this and put it in to play during the last game and it resulted in a

higher average score the last GPAI administered.

Another reason that I thought the GPAI scores of the students improved from the

beginning to the end is because the students paid attention during the teaching for understanding

portion of the lesson each day. Overall, the students appeared to be really engaged in the

questioning process to solve the tactical problem for that day. They answered the questions

whether right or wrong and you could tell that they were thinking about the questions being

presented to them. They showed great understanding of the lesson focus for each day so they

understood the strategy and the skill that we would be working on for that day. Again, this

translated into a higher average score at the end of unit than it did at the beginning of the unit.

The last reason why I think the average score increased from the first GPAI administered

to the last would be due in part to the fact that students had plenty of opportunities to practice or

increase their skill proficiency and tactical decision making with situated learning drills and

modified game forms. There maybe could have been more drills, but the ones used I thought

were effective. The drills were designed to simulate real-life situations during a game and the

modified game forms were designed to highlight the skills or tactics that we had discussed in the

lesson earlier. I think that the students took this information from the drills and game forms and

transferred it to the game played during the GPAI assessment at the end. This in turn caused an

increase in the average score earned on the GPAI assessment administered at unit's end.

Name Date_

Basketball Written Test

Multiple Choice-Circle the correct answer choice.

1. Basketball was invented in 1891 by :

a. Dr. James A. Naismith

b. Mr. Stinson

c. John C. Smith

d. Joel Pritchard

2. Basketball was invented in what country?

a. Norway

b. Canada

c. United States

d. England

3. Officially, a basketball team is composed of players.

a. 2

b. 5

c. 3

d. 4

4. The playing area of basketball is called the:

a. net

b. field

c. court

d. none of the above

5. The basketball game is divided into two halves for college and university teams.

a. 20 minute

b. 10 minute

c. 12 minute

d. 15 minute

6. In high school, the game is divided into minute quarters for basketball teams.

a. 6

b. 8

c. 12

d. 15

7. The rectangular court in basketball measures feet long and feet wide at

maximum.

a. 53; 100

b. 74; 42

c. 94; 50

d. 66; 33

8. The diameter of the basket used in basketball is:

a. 18 inches

b. 20 inches

c. 22 inches

d. 24 inches

9. The regulation height of a basketball rim is feet off the ground.

a. 6

b. 8

c. 10

d. 14

10. The distance from the endline to the three point field goal line is:

a. 15 feet 5 inches

b. 14 feet 8 inches

c. 18 feet 6 inches

d. 19 feet 9 inches

11. The distance from the endline to the free throw line in basketball is:

a. 15 feet

b. 13 feet

c. 10 feet

d. 20 feet

12. Which of the following is not a basic skill technique of basketball?

a. Passing

b. Dribbling

c. Shooting

d. Kicking

13. Dribbling should be used only to :

a. penetrate or drive toward the basket

b. create a better passing lane

c. get out of a crowd

d. bring the ball down

e. all of the above

14. A goal made from the field by a player behind the 3-point line is worth:

a. 2 points

b. 3 points

c. 1 point

d. 4 points

True or False-Circle the correct answer.

15. T or F The purpose of the game is to score a smaller total number of points than the

opponent.

16. T or F A goal made from the field by a player inside the 3-point line is worth 2 points.

17. T or F When a free throw is awarded for fouls, each successful free throw counts 1 point.

18. T or F If the score is tied at the end of regulation time, the game ends in a tie.

19. T or F The ball is put into play at the beginning of the game and any overtime period by

a jump ball in the center circle.

20. T or F A player is not considered out-of-bounds when touching the floor on or outside

the boundary line.

21. T or F A player is disqualified after being charged with their fifth personal foul.

22. T or F Pivoting is the only legal maneuvering a player standing and holding the ball is

allowed.

Short answer

23. Name the four types of passes used in basketball.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Bonus Question

24. Name three types of individual offense.

1.

2.

3.

GPAI Basketball: Offensive Skills

lass_

Date

Evaluator Team Game

Scoring Key

5= Very effective performance (Always)

4= Effective performance (Usually)

3= Moderately effective performance (Sometimes)

2= Weak performance (Rarely)

1= Very weak performance (Never)

Components and Criteria

1. Skill Execution Criteria:

2. Decision Making Criteria:

3. Support Criteria:

Reception- Player controls the ball from a pass (Clear signal for ball then controls

pass with the ball set up for dribble, pass, or shot.)

Passing- Player passes accurately to an open player (Ball reaches target with the

appropriate weight).

Shooting- Player shoots on target (when opportunity is available)

Player attempts to pass to an open teammate.

Player attempts to shoot (score) when appropriate.

Player attempts to move into position to receive a pass from teammates (i.e. Player

responds to other players by effectively positioning herself to receive the ball in an

area where she has the opportunity to score, dribble to space, or pass to an open

teammate).

Skill and Knowledge Classification

Rookie: 1-4 Veteran: 5-8 All-Star: 9-12 MVP: 13-15

over

GPAI Basketball: Offensive Skills

Rookie: Still developing tactical decision making and tactical skill proficiency

Veteran: Average tactical decision making and tactical skill proficiency

All Stan Slightly above average tactical decision making and tactical skill proficiency

MVP: Well above average tactical decision making and tactical skill proficiency

Names: Roderick B, Stinson

Lesson and content: Lesson #4-Attacking the basket/Basketball

Tactical Games Model Benchmarks

Date: 3/23/10

Tac games bcncltdocx


KH7250 Spring 2010

Reflective Analysis-Lesson #4

My fourth lesson in the Basketball Tactical Games unit was set up to solve the tactical

problem of attacking the basket. The focus of the lesson was: shooting within the zone, which is

3 to 8 feet (1-2.4 meters) from the basket. The lesson included drills designed to target the

tactical problem and the lesson focus for this particular lesson.

I felt that this particular model, the Tactical Games Model, was very appropriate for the

type of content that was being taught in the lesson. The book states that the model can be used

with Team Sports physical education content. In this lesson, I followed the Tactical Games

instructional sequence: 1) I started off with a modified game form, 2) I identified the needed skill

and tactical knowledge from the game form, 3) I used questions to get students to solve the

tactical problem, 4) I used situated learning tasks for skill and tactical development, and 5) I put

students back in the modified game form to observe if there was improvement on the tactical

problem.

I felt like my communication skills were clear when I explained to the students the basics

of the modified game form and the situated learning tasks. Students seemed to be engaged

correctly in the learning tasks. However there was some confusion during the modified game

form about how to defend the opponent with or without the ball. That in my opinion is attributed

to some students talking and not paying attention during the game instructions.

My management system could have been better in my opinion. I tried to gather the kids

in a centralized location each time for directions or instructions. However, I still to address

students who were talking or whispering while I spoke. I felt I could have maybe required them

to sit in a certain spot when coming to the circle. I didn't use a whistle during the lesson or unit

and that contributed to confusion or people continuing after I had given the order to stop a task or

game.

I felt that the students did have trouble restating the tactical problem at the end, but I

could tell by their responses during questioning that they understood the focus of the lesson. In

the modified game form at the end, I could see the teams communicating and working harder to

get shots within the zone or close to the basket.

In the lesson, I felt that it went well during the questioning portion to solve the TP. The

students were actively engaged and were really thinking about the answers to the questions. The

drill I thought went well although a few people got off task near the end.


KH7250 Spring 2010

I thought that the pacing of the lesson could be improved so that I could have gotten the

other drill into the lesson. I need to be more concise with my wording and directions. And I need

to be mindful of the age group that I am working with so that I use words that are more age

appropriate (words they understand).

Names: Roderick B. Stinson

Lesson and content Lesson #8-Creating space to attack/Basketball

Tactical Games Model Benchmarks

Date: 4/2/10

Tac games bench.docx


KH7250 Spring 2010

Reflective Analysis-Lesson #8

My eighth lesson in the Basketball Tactical Games unit was set up to solve the tactical

problem of creating space in the attack. The focus of the lesson was: creating space in the attack.

The lesson included 2 modified games designed to assess student tactical skills and knowledge as

well as a drill designed to practice situated tactical skills.

I thought that this particular model was appropriate for teaching the content which was

using L-and-V cuts to elude defenders and get open in the zone. The model allowed me to

present a skill used in basketball through modified games and practice drills that got the students

really engaged in the learning process. The deductive questioning used in the model allowed me

to engage students cognitively, and it got them to think hard about the tactical problem we were

working to solve.

I tried to keep the language to a level where the students would understand the content

being presented. I felt that I did a pretty good job for the most part in explaining the material, the

drill and the modified games, to the students. I tried to be as clear as possible when explaining

things to the students during the lesson, but I still observed students not on task at times. I had to

do a lot of guiding during the practice drill which makes me feel as though my directions weren't

clear as I thought. I did have to address behavioral issues throughout the lesson especially during

the questioning and instructional time which might explain why I had to guide students more

through the drills.

I personally felt I did a great job addressing the talking and off-task behavior that I

observed during the lesson. There were several occasions where I had to speak to individuals by

name for doing things that my take away from their learning or the learning of others in the class.

This particular class is a talkative class and there is a lot of immature behavior among the

students that has to be addressed. I spent too much time during the lesson and the unit talking to

students who were whining about a decision I made in the class. The transitions could have been

better between activities. I didn't feel I did a great job stopping the students after activities. I

have tried to get away from using a whistle in class, but that might have helped to get students to

stop once the activity was over. I had to speak to one student off camera who constantly shot the

ball after I told the students to stop.

The students seemed to be more focused during the questioning portion of the class

where we were to trying to solve the tactical problem for today. The students seemed to be


KH7250 Spring 2010

engaged in the learning process and they did a great job thinking and answering the questions

presented to them during that time. They were able to identify the lesson focus with relative ease

at the beginning of class and during the review at the end of class. With a little guidance, the

students were able to clearly state the tactical problem. They definitely remembered the skills

that were used in the lesson, but didn't necessarily use them in the games nor did they effectively

practice them in my opinion during the drill. I observed a few students moving during the games

but for the most part students did a lot of standing instead of making cuts to get open.

As I stated before, I thought it went well during the questioning to solve the tactical

problem and in the review of the tactical problem during class. The students seemed to be

listening and focusing on the information being presented. They did not seem to be hesitant or

shy in stating their answers rather right or wrong. I could tell that they were thinking about the

information that was being covered, and they were making serious attempts to answer the

questions and solve the tactical problem.

I feel that I still need to work on my pacing during the lesson. I need to cut down on the

amount of time that I spend talking or telling students about a particular game or drill. I spent

too much time explaining things to the students which takes away from practice time. This class,

in particular, gets really fidgety after long amounts of time sitting down. My explanations or

directions need to be thorough enough to where students can engage in the activity without

difficulty but concise enough to get students working in relatively short amount of time.


KH7250 Spring 2010

Report on Final Assessments of Major

Learning Goals/Obiectives

For my particular unit, I had two learning goals/objectives: a cognitive goal and a

psychomotor goal. The cognitive learning goal was for the students that were sampled in the unit

to score at least 80% on the written test at the end of the unit. Unfortunately, the students did not

achieve this mark and my goal was not met. Two individuals from the group sampled did score

69% which was the highest score on the written post assessment out of the eight students

sampled. However, the score placed them 11 percentage points lower than the mark I had

previously set for the students to achieve. Two other individuals scored above 60% on the

written post assessment which still meant that they did not achieve the goal set forth at the

beginning of the unit for the students. The remaining four students involved in taking the written

post-assessment fell beneath the 60% mark with three of these four students scoring between

42% and 46%. All together, the average score on the cognitive post-assessment for these students

was 57%. This was well below the 80% mark I initially wanted students to obtain. This meant

that my students did not meet the goal that I had desired for them to meet before the unit began.

The psychomotor goal I had for the unit was for students to correctly demonstrate the

ability to score the basketball using a variety of basketball strategies in a modified 4v4 half-court

possession and scoring game at the end of the unit. None of the students began the unit always

making the correct tactical decisions or exhibiting a high level of skill proficiency. To measure

this goal, I designed a GPAI that the other students in the class used to rate the sampled students'

tactical decision making and skill proficiency during the game. Students were placed in one of

four categories based on their point total from the game: 1) Rookie: 1-4 total points; 2) Veteran:

5-8 total points; 3) Ail-Star: 9-12 total points; and 4) MVP: 13-15 total points. The average score

on the first GPAI was 8 which meant that the students were making the correct tactical decisions

some of the time and exhibiting a high level of tactical skill proficiency some of the time when

attempting to score the basketball. At the end of the unit, the average score for the sampled

group on the GPAI was 13. This meant that students were always making the correct tactical

decisions and always exhibiting a high level of skill proficiency when attempting to score the

basketball. As a group, my learning goal for this domain was achieved. The students started out

doing the things that would allow them to be effective in scoring the ball only some of the time.

However by the end of the unit, they had progressed on the final GPAI to achieve a level where

they were always making the right tactical decision and exhibiting a high level of skill

proficiency. Individually all the students except one saw their score increase from the first GPAI

to the second GPAI. The increase in scores tells me that I met my psychomotor goal for the unit,

learning took place, and the students became more proficient in their tactical decision making

and skill execution.

Roderick B. Stinson

KH7250


Spring 2010

Tactical Games Model Survey (3-5) Results

Basketball

Note: This table contains the total number of students who responded positively, neutrally, and negatively to each

of the questions presented in the survey along with the percentages. The total number of students in the class is 24.

At the end of the unit, I handed out a Tactical Games model survey to gauge the students'

perception of the model used to teach the unit. Slightly over a third of the students agreed that

they liked learning skills from the games played, a third of the students didn't know and less than

a third of the students disagreed with that statement. Almost 42% of the class disagreed with the

statement that the games we played did not help them learn skills compared to almost 17% who

agreed with that statement. However, there was another 42% who did not know if the games did

or not help them learn skills. Half the class disagreed with the statement about the games played

being too difficult. 12.5% of the class (3 students) agreed and thought the games we played were

too difficult and slightly over a third of class didn't know or remained neutral on the statement.

Again, half the class disagreed with the statement "I did not like playing the games". 37.5% did

agree that they did not like playing the games only 3 people (12.5%) responded neutrally to that

statement. Almost 42% (10 students) agreed that the games played helped them learn skills. This

corresponded with the 42% who disagreed with the statement in number 2. A fourth of the

students disagreed with the statement: "The games we played helped me learn skills". And a

third of the students in the class did not agree or disagree with the statement. 25% of the class

agreed that the games we played were challenging. Another 25% did not respond positively or

negatively to the statement. And 50% of the students disagreed and thought that the games we

played were challenging.

The unit featured modified games which were designed to address a particular tactical

problem that had been created for the day. The games we played also had goals that focused on

a particular skill that was being covered in each lesson (e.g. L-and V-cuts, dribbling to reposition

to make a pass, or passing using the different types of passing). The games contained directions


KH7250 Spring 2010

different from the original setup of a basketball game and many of these individuals did not like

the setup of the games. Many of the students just wanted to get out on the court and play the

games without any structure. And even though you would state that the focus of the games was

to work on solving the tactical problem using the skills covered that day, I don't think they

thought to highly of the games because of the structure of the games. Therefore, I think this is

why there is not much disparity between the answers on the first question. Despite more people

agreeing with the statement, the closeness of the number of responses in each category tells me

that they did not really enjoy learning skills from the game.

The second statement, which said "The games we played did NOT help me learn skills",

had less people who agreed to it. But there was an equal split between students who were unsure

and the students who disagreed with it. Again, I think the setup of the games really drove then-

responses to this question as well. I think that many, if not all, of the students were aware that

our games focused on isolating a particular skill that was being covered during class. Because

many of them didn't like the format of the games, they chose to respond that they were unsure

about this statement. The games did contain changes different from an ordinary game. However,

an equal amount of students disagreed with this statement which indicates they felt that the

games did help them learn skills. I think those who disagreed were the ones who had greater

understanding of the purpose of the game and were also the ones who had an overall enjoyment

for the game and what were trying to accomplish by playing the game.

Half of the class disagreed with statement three and did not feel that the games we played

were too difficult. The directions for the games were designed to isolate or highlight a tactical

skill, but they were clear and explicit enough for everyone to understand. Therefore, you have a

larger number of students respond in disagreement to the statement versus three students who

agreed with the statement. Maybe confusion about the games' conditions or a lack of confidence

in their skill ability when playing the game drove nine students to mark that they didn't know on

this question.

Half of the class disagreed with statement four and stated that they did like playing the

games. I think a greater understanding of the games, its concepts, and its purposes drove more

people in the class to disagree with this statement. Slightly over a third of the students disagreed

with this statement A lack of confidence in the skills needed to play the game, a weaker

understanding of the concepts of the game and its purposes might have made it harder for these

students to enjoy the games.

More people agreed that the games helped them learn skills which is the same as the

number of people who disagreed with statement two (The games we played did NOT help me

learn skills.). Again I think those who agreed with statement five were also the ones who had an

overall enjoyment for the game and what were trying to accomplish by playing the game.

Dislike of the game format and what the game was trying to accomplish may have caused some

individuals to disagree with the statement. Those students who were unsure about the statement

were torn because they probably enjoyed playing the games but disliked how the games were

formatted in order to learn the skills presented in the unit.

Half of the students in the class disagreed with the statement that the games played were

challenging. This might be due to a perceived greater understanding of the games, its concepts,

and its purposes. I also feel that a greater level of confidence in both their cognitive and physical

abilities drove their answers on this question as well. These individuals maybe didn't feel that the

games pushed them beyond their physical and mental capabilities and therefore they needed

more stimulation. The other half of the class was split equally with 25% of students agreeing


KH7250 Spring 2010

with the statement and 25% of students not sure about the statement. The students who agreed

that the games we played were challenging probably had their cognitive and physical abilities

pushed beyond what they already knew about the sport. As a result of this, they felt challenged.

Those students who stated they were unsure as to whether the games we played were challenging

maybe were pushed enough cognitively but not enough physically through the games or vice

versa. Either way, these students felt that they were not pushed hard in one area but definitely

pushed hard in the other area.

Based on the survey results, it appears that the kids enjoyed playing the games in the unit

and learning skills from the game. Most disagreed that the games were challenging but I think

they all were challenged in some way to think more critically when playing basketball.

Tactical Games model (grades 3-5): Teaching games for understanding

Name: Grade:

Teacher's name: Date:

Directions: If you agree with the sentence, circle the

If you don't know, circle the

If you disagree, circle the

Example:

I like coming to P.E

1. I liked learning skills from games.

2. The games we played did NOT help me learn skills.

3. The games we played were too difficult.

Over

4. I did not like playing the games.

5. The games we played helped me learn skills.

6. The games we played were challenging.

7. One thing I learned in this unit was

grade level chosen: 5th grade (5c-mrs. haywood's class) · wednesday, march 31, 2010 pe...

Documents