Badminton instructional in Malaysian schools: a comparative analysis of TGfU and SDT pedagogical models.

Sanmuga Nathan

doi:10.1186/s40064-016-2872-3

Abstract

Model based physical education curriculum of Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) is still at early stage of implementation in Malaysian schools whereby the technical or skill-led model continues to dominate the physical education curriculum. Implementing TGfU seems to be problematic and untested in this environment. Therefore, this study examined, the effects that a revised model of TGfU compared to Skill Drill Technical (SDT) a technical model had on learning movement skills in Badminton, including returning to base, decision making and skill execution whilst performing in a doubles game play and also explored teachers’ perceptions of navigating between the two models. Participants aged 15.5 ± 1.0 years, N = 32, school Badminton players were randomly selected and assigned equally into groups of TGfU and SDT. Reflective data was gathered from two experienced physical education teachers who were involved in this study. Findings indicated for movement to the base in doubles game play indicated significant improvement, after intervention via TGfU. As for decision-making and skill execution in doubles game play, analysis revealed no significant difference after intervention. Findings from teachers reflection, indicated the importance of mini game play in both TGfU and SDT models, as the students enjoyed, and built up positive attitudes for both winning or losing in game situations. However, when negotiating the TGfU model, the teacher found it difficult at times to execute the pedagogical model, as students needed guidance to discuss aspects related to tactics. However, to keep this pedagogical model viable further research findings ought to be circulated among teachers in Malaysia and similar Southeast Asian counties.

Highlights

Badminton is the national sport in Malaysia and an important game in that country’s physical education curriculum; it is still being taught using a skillbased approach based on the secondary schools (KPM 2002)
In the Malaysian context making comparisons between the tactical approach and technical approach is still a lively issue for debate, as the teachers who are accustomed to the “old fashioned” technical-skill based ways-of-doing are starting to be challenged by innovation (Nathan and Haynes 2013). In countries such as Malaysia, in order to disseminate information about a tactical pedagogical approach, such as the revised Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model in a physical education badminton game context, it is essential that some form of research needed to be undertaken especially to answer top ten research questions related to TGfU (Memert et al 2015)
Movement to base in doubles game play (2 vs. 2) Analysis of results indicated for the pretest, among school badminton players, there was no significant difference between TGfU and Skill Drill Technical (SDT) models on movement to base in 2 versus 2 doubles game play, F(1, 30) = 1.94, p > 0.05

Summary

Introduction

Badminton is the national sport in Malaysia and an important game in that country’s physical education curriculum; it is still being taught using a skillbased approach based on the secondary schools (KPM 2002). There has been a shift in the research paradigm amongst authors with the majority of In countries such as Malaysia, in order to disseminate information about a tactical pedagogical approach, such as the revised TGfU model in a physical education badminton game context, it is essential that some form of research needed to be undertaken especially to answer top ten research questions related to TGfU (Memert et al 2015). Much of the literature and research undertakings in badminton are based around physiological and bio-mechanical information (Phomsoupha and Laffaye 2015), and limited investigations have been carried out to examine evidence of the emotions, as observed through player expressions such as smiling (happiness) and other non-verbal expressions, such as those representing disappointment. The emotional experience of the losing team is often clearly expressed in their facial expressions

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion