The Transfer of Learning From Play Practises to Game Play in Young Adult Soccer Players

8/6/2019 The Transfer of Learning From Play Practises to Game Play in Young Adult Soccer Players

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-transfer-of-learning-from-play-practises-to-game-play-in-young-adult-soccer 1/19

The transfer of learning from play

practices to game play in young adult

soccer players

Josh E. HoltaÃ, Phillip Wardb and Tristan L. Wallheadc

aUniversity of Southampton, UK; bThe Ohio State University, USA; cUniversity of

Wyoming, USA

Background: Physical educators and coaches face an ongoing problem of presenting fun and

enjoyable practices that also provide efficient learning of technical and tactical sports skills.

Effective instruction also promotes the transfer of learning from practice tasks to the real game.

Play Practice (PP) describes a structure for teaching sports that addresses these problems

through the development of closely aligned practice tasks that replicate the demands of the game

while maintaining the critical aspect of play. Similarities exist between PP and the widely

researched Teaching Games for Understanding approach, but PP proposes teaching technique

and tactics simultaneously. This study was the first to examine the assumptions of PP as a

holistic approach to sport instruction.

Purpose: To examine the transfer of learning from closely aligned practices to game play in soccer.

More specifically, one purpose was to measure the learning of specific tactical responses from

participation and instruction in play practices. A second purpose was to measure the transfer of

learning from practice to game play. Finally, this study measured the effect of the sequence of

presentation of two closely aligned practices on learning and performance in soccer.

Setting: Two coeducational soccer classes in the Basic Instruction Program at a large University in

the Midwest United States. Each class met once or twice a week during the spring term for a total of

14 sessions.

Participants: Six participants; one male and two female students were selected from each class on the

basis of their low to moderate soccer playing ability.Intervention: An experienced teacher and soccer coach instructed both classes on how to perform

effectively in attacking situations with more attackers than defenders (attacking overloads). The

same 2v1 and 3v2 play practices were used in both classes to provide opportunities to learn the

appropriate tactical responses. In each class session, the 2v1 or 3v2 practice was immediately

followed by a 4v4 game to assess the transfer of learning from practice to game. Class One

participated in 2v1 practices prior to the 3v2, while Class Two participated in the reverse sequence.

Research design: A multiple treatment, single subject design was used to assess the effect of the Play

Practices and their sequence on the learning and performance of each participant in the two soccer

Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy

Vol. 11, No. 2, June 2006, pp. 101–118

ÃCorresponding author. University of Southampton, School of Education, Building 34, Highfield,

Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK. Email: [email protected]



classes. This design allows sequence effects on the learning of participants to be both demonstrated

and explained. A-B-C-A and A-C-B-A designs were used in Class One and Class Two respectively.

Data collection and analysis: All overload play practices and 4v4 games were videotaped and each

participant’s percentage of correct responses was recorded. Baseline (condition A) for both

classes consisted of 4v4 games prior to any overload practice and instruction. In Class One,baseline was followed by the 2v1 (B) and then the 3v2 (C) conditions. For Class Two, the

baseline was followed by the 3v2 (C) and then the 2v1 (B) conditions. Each condition comprised

four sessions. The final A condition consisted of two games in each class, which provided a

measure of the maintenance of learning. As a single subject design study, data were analysed

from their graphical representation and visual inspection.

Findings: Instruction via these play practices was successful for the most able participants, who

learnt to perform the appropriate tactical responses consistently in practice, which transferred

effectively to the game. While the instructor was confident that all participants knew the

appropriate responses, the less able participants were unable to perform these with consistency

during practice, hence minimal transfer to the game occurred. Data from three participants

indicated that the 3v2 practice tended to produce a greater transfer to the game but the sequenceof practice presentation did not appear to impact learning.

Conclusions: Findings suggested that practice performance beyond 70% correct was required before

learning would transfer to other settings. Launder’s notion of alignment was extended to include

subtle variations within a practice task to replicate the full range of situations that arise in a game.

The need for timely and accurate feedback for the efficient learning of each novice performer was

highlighted from video replay. Research to address this common problem of group instruction to

prevent the practising of small but significant mistakes is needed.

Considerable debate and research has occurred in the past two decades regarding the

most effective way to teach games in physical education settings (e.g., Bunker &Thorpe, 1982; Chandler & Mitchell, 1990; Turner & Martinek, 1995, 1999; Rink

et al., 1996; Mitchell & Oslin, 1999; Holt et al., 2002). An apparent dichotomy has

evolved that has compared the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model

proposed by Bunker and Thorpe, and similar tactical approaches (e.g., Griffin et al.,

1997), with traditional technique-based approaches to games teaching. Advocates of

the TGfU approach suggest teaching tactical decision making (i.e., ‘what to do’)

before attempting to improve technique. Those who practise the technique-based

approach teach skill execution (i.e., ‘how to do it’) first before addressing the tactical

elements of the game. Both models include the instruction of ‘what to do’ and ‘how to

do it’. However, the models differ in their emphasis on decision-making and execution.Bunker and Thorpe (1982) developed the TGfU approach in response to their

observation of the technical model of games teaching, where criticisms included:

(a) the emphasis on performance, which resulted in low achievement in the majority

of children; and (b) the techniques learned were inflexible and often did not transfer

to the game. Bunker and Thorpe concluded that technique-based approaches to the

teaching of games did not achieve some fundamental aims of physical education for

both improved game play and lifelong participation. The stated objectives of TGfU

are to develop appreciation and understanding of games that would help young

people become competent and confident performers. Hence, the primary goalof the TGfU approach is not necessarily skillfulness, but understanding and

appreciation (Rink et al 1996)

102 J. E. Holt et al.



Despite the widespread attraction of TGfU, Rink et al. (1996) reported that

research had not provided convincing support for this model over technique-based

approaches. McMorris (1998) suggested that results from research could be summa-

rized as a matching pattern. In short, students will generally learn what you teach.Teaching tactics leads to an improvement in tactical performance, while teaching tech-

nique leads to an improvement in technique. McMorris (1998) reported that research

suggests the teaching of technique can lead to improvement in decision-making, and

some evidence, although equivocal, that teaching tactics might aid technical perform-

ance. For example, French et al . (1996) examined the effects of tactical, skill and

combined tactical and skill instruction on novice student performance in a six-week

badminton unit. All instructional groups in their study achieved higher levels of cogni-

tive and skill performance than the control group, although the technique groups per-

formed better, but not significantly better than other treatment groups during game

execution. More recently, Turner and Martinek (1999) specifically examined the val-

idity of the TGfU approach by comparing it to the technique approach to teaching

field hockey. Their findings provided partial support for the TGfU approach in

improving cognitive outcomes (i.e. decision-making, declarative and procedural

knowledge) and skill outcomes in game play (e.g., control and passing execution).

Central to the criticisms of the technique-based approach by Bunker and Thorpe

(1982) was the development of inflexible techniques that did not enable the performer

to adapt effectively to meet the changing demands of the game. A lack of transfer of

learning from practice to the game existed. Rink et al . (1996) identified two assump-

tions of the TGfU approach and similar tactical approaches related to the principle of transfer of learning. First, ‘skill substitution’ involved the substitution of one skill for

another in order to reduce the technical demands of the game—the assumption being

that this process would aid the learning of game strategies that would eventually make

players better at the original game; for example, learning to play field hockey using

hands to control and pass the ball instead of sticks. McMorris (1998) expressed

concern that this would violate the need for specificity of practice and suggested

that skill substitution could lead to negative transfer of training when the real game

was introduced. Thu, practising field hockey without sticks might interfere and not

enhance the learning when sticks were used. The TGfU assumption of skill substi-

tution to enhance game performance is yet to be validated by research.

The second assumption of TGfU identified by Rink et al. (1996) is the ‘transfer of

general strategies’. This assumption hypothesizes that general strategies developed in

one game will transfer to other games in the same category. Werner and Almond

(1990) articulated this concept as one of the many advantages of teaching games

from a tactical perspective. Mitchell and Oslin (1999) investigated the transfer of

decision-making from badminton to pickleball. A statistically significant improve-

ment in decision-making following badminton instruction was maintained during

pickleball instruction using tactical teaching methods on low-ability, novice perfor-

mers. Students’ written responses to open-ended questions provided an indicationthat some understanding had been gained that the tactical goal to attack open

space was common to both activities

Play Practice 103



The aspect of transfer of learning that is arguably the most relevant to teaching and

coaching practices and was at the core of the TGfU evolution, is concerned with the

transfer from a learning task to performance in the game. Teachers and researchers

seem to be in agreement that performers will not improve at a satisfactory rate justby playing the recognized, or even a scaled-down version of the game. Launder

(2001) introduced a new dimension into the games teaching debate with the concep-

tualization of Play Practice. He stated that Play Practice ‘provides a framework for

development of a vast range of realistic practice scenarios that can simulate the

demands of high-level competition while retaining the crucial element of play’ (p. xi).

Many similarities and differences exist between the TGfU and Play Practice

approaches. Notably, both have an emphasis on enhancing the learner’s under-

standing to improve game play. While TGfU asserts that technical practice should

not occur until the learner appreciates the need for improved technique in order for

more effective performance, Play Practice advocates the development of game sense

and technical ability in parallel, in play practice scenarios with the distinct purpose

of progressing to the fully recognized version of the activity. Carefully structured

games replace drills in order to eliminate the notion that play must become work if

children are to progress (p. 45). Launder’s example in soccer describes the use of

4v1, 3v1 and then 5v2 possession games to develop the learner’s ability to read

play, make decisions and execute accurate passing and receiving skills in contexts

that gradually increase in pressure from opponents and complexity (p. 95). Both

Play Practice and TGfU grew out of the need to improve the sport education experi-

ence for lower ability performers and both make reference to philosophies of student-centred and game-centred learning. However, Bunker and Thorpe’s (1982) TGfU

specifically relates to the teaching of game activities, while Launder demonstrates

the application of Play Practice principles to other sports such as track and field,

swimming and skiing.

Launder (2001) observed that in many organized sport-learning environments,

drills are often not aligned with the real game. He encouraged coaches to move

quickly from drills to Play Practices to increase the likelihood that transferable learn-

ing would occur. Launder clarified the notion of alignment, which occurs when

numerous similarities exist between consecutive practices and between practice scen-

arios and the real game or sport. The greater these similarities, the more likely it is that

new learning will transfer from practice to game. Furthermore, it is in the interests of

teachers to know which practices contribute most to the learning of the desired skills

and if any practices can be omitted from a closely aligned sequence without the loss of

critical learning experiences. While Launder (2001) admits that many sport educators

will recognize their current practices in his conceptualization of Play Practice, his

assertion that there continues to exist a lack of understanding of transfer of training

in sport education is the major reason that instructors continue to use mindless,

unconnected minor games and dead-end drills in the teaching of games.

Launder (2001) sums up the notion of alignment and other theoretical concepts hediscussed with a rationale for Play Practice. He suggests that for learners to become

successful they need plenty of ‘perfect practice’ under conditions as similar as possible




to the final performance environment to become an effective performer. He also

emphasizes the maxim that you ‘train as you play and play as you train’. Several

recent studies support this assumption (Ward et al., 1997; Brobst & Ward, 2002;

Ward & Carnes, 2002). These studies reported the effectiveness of publicly postingpractice and game performance scores of collegiate football players and female high

school soccer players on improving practice performance and the subsequent

performance in games. The results of these studies suggest that if players improve

their performance in practice, they will perform better in games, again supporting

the adage that ‘you play as you practice’ (Ward & Carnes, 2002).

To date, no studies have assessed the assumptions of Play Practice (Launder,

2001). The goal of this study was to investigate whether closely aligned practices

could provide an effective means of transfer of learning from practice to game.

More specifically, one purpose was to measure the effect of Play Practices on a specific

tactical performance of low to moderate ability young adult soccer players. A second

purpose was to measure the transfer affect of practice to game play. Finally, this study

measured the effect of the sequence of presentation of two closely aligned practices on

learning and performance in soccer.

Method

Participants and setting

The participants were four male and four female undergraduate students enrolled intwo, one-credit coeducational soccer classes in the Basic Instruction Program at a

large University in the Midwest United States. Two female and two male students

were selected from each class. Two male subjects, one from each class, were absent

on several occasions so their data were not reported in the study. Class members con-

sisted of undergraduate students from a wide range of academic disciplines, who had

chosen the class as an elective. Playing ability ranged from novice players to able

players who had several years of club and high school varsity playing experience.

Class One consisted of 26 students (F ¼ 12, M ¼ 14) and Class Two consisted of

23 students (F ¼ 9, M ¼ 14). Initial assessment during the first two class sessions

was used to select the participants based on their low to moderate soccer playing

ability. At the start of the class, players with low ability were able to pass, receive

and dribble the ball, but these skills tended to break down when confronted with

opposition. Those with moderate ability were able to pass, receive and dribble the

ball effectively in competitive situations, but lacked the ability to consistently domi-

nate their opponents’ play. Participants in this study had previous soccer playing

experience up to intramural level. The instructor and first author was an experienced

high school physical education teacher. He was a holder of the English Football

Association’s Advanced Coaching Licence and the Union of European Football

Association’s ‘A’ Coaching Award. He had many years of experience coachingchildren and adult players from recreation to elite academy level in England and

the United States

Play Practice 105





pitch were used to help assess this distance accurately. The percentage of OTRs that

were appropriate responses was used as a measure of the player’s learning. An

appropriate response did not have to be successful. If the response selected was the

best response at the right time it was coded as appropriate.

Data were collected by videotape for all practice and game sessions. Video record-

ings were made from a position level with the halfway line so that the player on the ball

and all other surrounding players were in view at all times.

Experimental conditions and procedure

A number of learning tasks were undertaken during two class meetings prior to the

start of the study. These learning tasks involved passing and control, moving withthe ball, turning, and incorporated the rules of the game with the major objectives

of attack and defence Tasks involved a range of technique based practices and tactical

Figure 1. Example overload situations in a 4v4 game: (a) 3v2; (b) 2v1; (c) 2v1 with D2 an inactive

defender

Play Practice 107



‘game’ practices such as various 1v1 contests and 4v2 possession games, and other

small-sided games. In addition to teaching, the instructor used this time to observe

all players in practice and game play and to select equal teams of four for the

games in the future class sessions.Each class meeting consisted of the following organization comprising two separate

class sessions: a ten-minute warm up that included activity with and without soccer

balls started each meeting. This was followed by game-like practices. A 12-minute

4v4 game occurred immediately after the practices to conclude session one.

A technical or tactical practice on an unrelated aspect of the game followed and sep-

arated the two sessions. This sequence was repeated up to a second 4v4 game as

session two of the class meeting before the cool down at the end. All participants

played in goal for three minutes during the 4v4 games, during which time data

were not recorded.

Baseline. During baseline data collection the players were instructed on fundamental

aspects of the game during the first part of the class session. The teams of four then

played in small-sided games. The players were instructed to try to incorporate the

things they had practised into their game play. Players were praised during the

game for their hard work and corrective feedback was given during the 4v4 games

that related to the fundamentals practised previously, such as supporting positions

off the ball and making a positive and protective first touch when receiving the ball.

Intervention. The intervention consisted of two conditions, a 2v1 and a 3v2. In PlayPractice 1 each team of four played 2v2 in a 25 Â 15 yard playing area with five-yard

goals made using small cones. At any time, the team defending had to play one of their

players in goal making a continuous 2v1 game. Players were encouraged to alternate

the goalkeeper at every opportunity. Upon regaining possession, the ball had to be

passed back to the goalkeeper to start the attack by dribbling the ball into play.

These games lasted for six minutes. Play Practice 2 involved 3v3 games played on a

35 Â 20 yard area. The same conditions applied as the 2v1 to create a continuous

3v2 game. The practices lasted for eight minutes to account for the decreased

OTRs due to the greater number of players.

The students were told at the start of the intervention that the overall objective of

the class was to improve their effectiveness when in possession of the ball in situations

with a numerical tactical advantage. Each Play Practice task was introduced with a

clear demonstration of how to play the ‘game’ (i.e. the nature and conditions of the

task). Initial instruction was also given both verbally and through demonstration,

which clarified when to dribble, when to pass, what to do to support the player

with ball when not in possession and the cues that determined each response. In

the 3v2 condition a demonstration was played in slow motion and ‘frozen’ to highlight

the optimum attacking situation where a player had a support player on either side

of the ball carrier and that the best pass was to the open support player. This wasthe player who was not covered, or the least covered by the second defender. No

instruction on defending was given except to defend to the best of your ability




Correct responses from numerous students to such questions as: ‘When should you

dribble?’ Or ‘What should you do now?’ having frozen a demonstration reassured

the instructor that students had learned what to do.

During Play Practices, the instructor endeavoured to divide his attention equallyamong all groups. Observed errors in performance were corrected by having the

player either copy a demonstration of the appropriate response or, for minor errors,

to describe the appropriate response. Correct responses observed by the instructor

were reinforced with positive and informative statements, such as: ‘Well done

Sarah, you waited until you had fixed Brad before you made that accurate pass.’

Common or repeated errors were corrected with further whole-group demonstration.

Students were encouraged to offer advice to each other during practice to correct

mistakes and improve performance.

A 4v4 game immediately followed each Play Practice to apply Launder’s assump-

tion that transfer is most likely when the time between practice and application is

minimized (Launder, 2001). Prior to every game, students were reminded that

their objective was to recognize whenever they had an overload and to use the

appropriate response swiftly to create goal-scoring chances (i.e. one-on-ones with

the goalkeeper). No significant instruction related to the performance in overload

situations was provided during the 4v4 games except to occasionally prompt a

player that an OTR existed.

Maintenance. Two days after the second practice condition, two class sessions

assessed whether skills would maintain after the intervention was withdrawn inboth classes. Experimental conditions during maintenance were the same as those

during baseline.

Experimental design

A multiple treatment design was used to assess the effectiveness of the Play Practices

and their sequence on the learning and performance of participants in the two soccer

classes (Cooper et al., 1987). A-B-C-A and A-C-B-A designs were used in Class One

and Class Two respectively. All players in each class were intervened on simul-

taneously throughout the investigation. For Class One, data were collected on four

4v4 games as baseline (i.e. condition A). This was followed by the 2v1 (B) and

then the 3v2 (C) conditions. For Class Two, the baseline was followed by the 3v2

(C) and then the 2v1 (B) conditions. Each condition was comprised of four sessions.

Data were collected during the play practice and the subsequent 4v4 game in every

session. The final A condition consisted of two games in each class, which represented

a measure of the maintenance of learning. A baseline between conditions was not

appropriate for this study because it would be incorrect to assume that performances

would have been unaffected by the two conditions. Thus it would not be possible to

achieve a return to baseline. The essential question in this study was not one of comparing effects to baseline, but examining sequence effects. This design allows

sequence effects to be both demonstrated and explained

Play Practice 109



Interobserver agreement

An independent observer recorded each player’s total number of possessions. The

occurrence of overloads, the type of response, appropriateness and execution were

also recorded. Interobserver agreement measures were assessed on 69% of the prac-

tice sessions and 40% of the games. Agreement was computed by dividing the number

of agreements by the number of agreements plus disagreements and multiplying

by 100%. The overall mean interobserver agreement was 88.5%. The mean for the

practice data was 87.5% (range ¼ 73–100%) and the mean for the game data was

89.4% (range ¼ 72–100%).

Results

Results are organized by class and participant. Figure 2 shows the data for class onewhere the order of presentation was 2v1 followed by 3v2 followed by maintenance.

Class One

Alice. Alice’s practice data in the 2v1 condition were stable, ranging between 67%

and 80% (M ¼ 72%) appropriate responses. During the 3v2 condition they ranged

between 67% and 100% (M¼ 80%). Alice’s game performance during baseline

was variable and ranged from 0–50% (M ¼ 18%). During the 2v1 condition it was

highly variable, ranging from 0–100% (M ¼ 50%). During 3v2 it was variable with

an ascending trend, and ranged between 33% and 100% (M¼ 58%). Alice

performed 100% of OTRs appropriately during one game in maintenance. Alice

did not participate in game 13 due to injury.

Kevin. Kevin’s practice data during the 2v1 condition were variable, ranging

between 50% and 100% (M ¼ 69%). During the 3v2 condition they again ranged

between 50% and 100% (M ¼ 66%). Kevin’s game performance during baseline

was highly variable and ranged between 0% and 100% (M ¼ 33%). During the 2v1

condition it was again highly variable with a descending trend, ranging between 0%

and 100% (M ¼ 54%). During the 3v2 condition it was variable with an ascendingtrend and again ranged between 0% and 100% (M ¼ 50%). During maintenance

Kevin’s performance declined, and ranged between 0% and 33% (M¼ 17%).

Kevin did not have any OTRs during game one.

Laura. Laura’s practice data during the 2v1 condition were variable, ranging from

33% to 100% (M ¼ 63%). During the 3v2 condition they ranged between 50%

and 100% (M ¼ 75%). Laura’s game performance during baseline was highly vari-

able and ranged between 0% and 100% (M ¼ 25%). During the 2v1 condition it

was variable, ranging between 0% and 60% (M¼

30%). During the 3v2 conditionit was low and ranged between 0% and 40% (M ¼ 18%). During maintenance,

Laura performed 100% of OTRs appropriately during one game Laura’s data for




game eight were void as she rested an injury during the game, and she did not have any

OTRs during game 13.

For Class One participants, OTRs during both practice conditions ranged from 1 to

7, with a mean of 4.5. During games OTRs ranged from 0 to 7, with a mean of 2.2.

Class Two

Figure 3 shows the data for class two where the order of presentation was 3v2 followed

by 2v1 followed by maintenance.

Bev. Bev’s practice data in the 3v2 condition were variable, ranging between 33%and 100% (M¼ 55%). During the 2v1 condition they were variable and low,

ranging between 0% and 50% (M ¼ 35%) Bev’s game performance during baseline

Figure 2. Practice and game data for Alice, Kevin and Laura

Play Practice 111



was low and ranged between 0% and 50% (M ¼ 13%). During the 3v2 condition it

was again low and variable, ranging between 0% and 60% (M ¼ 20%). During the

2v1 condition Bev failed to perform any OTRs appropriately. During maintenance,

Bev only had OTRs during one game, where she performed 50% of them with the

appropriate response. Bev did not have any OTRs during games 5 and 13, and her

OTRs during practice session five were coded as ‘no opportunity to respond’.

Eli . Eli’s practice data in the 3v2 condition were variable and ranged between 50%and 100% (M ¼ 78%). During the 2v1 condition they were variable and lower,

ranging between 0% and 53% (M ¼ 33%) Eli’s game performance during baseline

Figure 3. Practice and game data for Bev, Eli and Lance




was variable and ranged between 0% and 50% (M ¼ 27%). During the 3v2 condition

it had noticeably improved and was moderately stable, ranging between 33% and 67%

(M ¼ 50%). During the 2v1 condition, Eli’s game performance was highly variable

and ranged between 0% and 100% (M¼

33%). During maintenance, Eli only hadOTRs during one game, where she failed to perform the skill appropriately. Eli was

absent on session 9 and did not have any OTRs during game 13.

Lance. Lance’s practice data in the 3v2 condition were stable and high, ranging

between 71% and 100% (M ¼ 93%). During the 2v1 condition they were stable

and remained high, ranging between 71% and 100% (M ¼ 82%). Lance’s game per-

formance during baseline was variable and ranged between 0% and 57% (M ¼ 34%).

During the 3v2 condition it was stable and markedly higher, ranging between 80%

and 100% (M ¼ 95%). During the 2v1 condition it was stable and remained high,

ranging between 67% and 100% (M ¼ 81%). Lance’s game performance during

maintenance was variable and ranged between 40% and 100% (M ¼ 70%) and con-

tinued to show a marked improvement from baseline. Lance was absent in session 12.

For Class Two participants, OTRs during both practice conditions ranged from 0

to 7, with a mean of 4.1. During games, OTRs ranged from 0 to 7, with a mean of 2.6.

Discussion

In the present investigation, two sequences of play practices were used to teach young

adult soccer players how to play effectively in overload situations that occur in small-sided games. The first purpose of the study was to measure the effects of the play

practices on the tactical performance of the participants in practice. The two most

able players, who had moderate ability, were Lance in Class Two and Alice in Class

One. Lance consistently performed above 75% of OTRs in practice appropriately.

In four out of seven practice sessions he performed 100% of OTRs correctly. Alice

generally performed between 70% and 80% of OTRs correctly in both practice

scenarios and maintained a stable and high practice performance throughout both

conditions. Lance and Alice’s practice performances demonstrated sound learning

of the range of appropriate tactical on the ball responses in an overload situation.

The performance in practice of the other four players who had low to moderate

ability was variable and at times highly variable. There was no clear improvement

in performance during each condition or from the first to second condition in

either order of presentation. There was no obvious difference in the practice perform-

ances between the two conditions for either class. The practice performance of these

lower ability players showed that they were unable to perform the appropriate

responses to the variable nature of overload situations. Repeated participation in

the overload practices had not improved the skill of these players sufficiently to

enable them to position the ball so that the appropriate response could be made

immediately and at all times when required.The second, and major purpose of this study, was to assess the effect of play

practices on the subsequent performance in small sided games (i e to measure the

Play Practice 113



transfer of learning form practice to games). The intervention was effective for Lance,

the most skilled of all six participants, who performed markedly better than baseline

in the games, following the first condition of play practices. He sustained an improved

performance throughout the second condition of games and showed a good level of performance maintenance. Alice was the next most able player and her performance

of the appropriate tactical responses in games showed some moderate improvement

following play practices and was high during maintenance.

The practice performance of the lower ability participants did not appear to be

successful enough for it to transfer to the 4v4 game. After the first two practice ses-

sions, the instructor identified the need for a proportion of students to practice the

skill of making a well-timed and accurate pass while dribbling the ball without the

pressure of an active defender. The research design and methodology that compared

the practice sequences of the two classes prevented this practice from occurring. In

addition it would have more closely resembled a drill practice and not a Play Practice

as conceptualized by Launder (2001). In order to develop effective execution in

games, Turner and Martinek (1999) repeated the contention made by French and

Nevett (1993), that students must practice tactical and skill combinations during

game play. The present study revealed that for these participants, if the underlying

skills were not initially present in the performer’s repertoire, then participation in

these play practice tasks was not sufficient to improve performance in practice, or

to make the skills effective in the game.

The third objective of this study assessed the effect of the sequence of the play prac-

tices on learning. The findings are equivocal for the rationale for sequencing the 2v1practice before the 3v2. There is some evidence in this study (e.g., the performances

of Alice, Bev and Eli) to suggest that the 3v2 practice produced better subsequent per-

formances of overload occurrences in games than the 2v1, regardless of the order of

presentation. Theoretically, the 3v2 condition places greater demand on the perfor-

mers response selection due to the increased variability present, with more players

involved and the increased number of possible responses (e.g., more than one possible

passing option). There are a number of potential reasons for this finding. First, the

3v2 more closely resembled the occurrence of overload situations in the 4v4 game,

which made the transfer to the game more likely. Second, each class consisted of

nine practice days in which there were 14 sessions. If mistakes were not corrected

on the first practice, they might also have been performed on the second session

that day (i.e. half of that condition).

Several implications of these findings can be made with regard to the transfer of

learning from practice to game. Launder (2001) refers to the need for ‘perfect

practice’, which we interpret as referring to the quality of practice performance and

the provision of corrective feedback. In general during the present study, whenever

the players performed above 70% appropriate responses in practice, their perform-

ance in the games tended to improve, as shown by Lance and Alice, and Eli in the

3v2 condition. This suggests that participants have to perform to a certain level inpractice scenarios before the skill will successfully transfer to game play. This

finding is analogous to one reported by Rosenshine and Stevens (1986) for reading




and maths. In their review of literature from general education they concluded that in

classroom settings the percentage of correct responses should be 80% when practising

new material. Similarly, the ALT-PE literature has used a criterion of 85% in

determining success in physical education settings (Siedentop et al., 1982).Heward (1994) discussed teaching and learning in classroom settings and

suggested that perfect practice during the acquisition of a new skill requires frequent

and appropriate feedback on performance, which would ideally follow every trial

during the early stages of learning to avoid students practising mistakes. Heward

(1994) suggested that corrective feedback should then be given following multiple

student responses as increased fluency of performance ensues, in order not to inter-

fere with the learning process. Motor learning research supports this suggestion

and states that for effective motor skill acquisition, extrinsic feedback should be

precise enough to make the learner clear about what to do to enhance future perform-

ance (Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2000). In the present study it was evident from video

replay that participants repeatedly practised small, but significant, errors while the

instructor was working with other groups. For example, Bev and Eli repeatedly

dribbled away from the support player in order to create space in the 2v1 practice,

which resulted in reducing the availability of the pass. This provides a possible

explanation for the decrease in the percentage of appropriate responses for these parti-

cipants in this condition. Research on the efficacy of strategies (e.g., peer tutoring) to

increase the provision of accurate and timely corrective feedback on the acquisition

and performance of complex sports skills in group settings is required.

A further consideration, as previously mentioned, is the extent to which the playpractices replicated the overload scenarios in the 4v4 game. Launder’s rationale for

Play Practice emphasizes the need for plenty of perfect practice in conditions as

similar as possible to the real game (Launder, 2001). Each practice presented only

one variation of the 2v1 or 3v2 overload situation, which did not reflect the full

range of stimulus conditions that occurred in the game. Examples of overloads in

the game included receiving the ball with your back to goal, having both support

players on the same side of the player on the ball, or having the defender approach

from different angles in overload situations. Practising against numerous opponents

provided some variation of practice conditions, but was not sufficient to replicate

the range of overload occurrences in the 4v4 game.

The behaviour analysis literature recommends the need to teach enough examples

that represent the full range of stimulus variations and response requirements that

exist in the real world settings, to increase the likelihood that learning will transfer

(Englemann & Carnine, 1982). This is one example of a number of systematic

approaches used in behaviour analysis research to program instruction for the

direct transfer of learning to the target context. One might conclude from the

present study that Launder’s notion of alignment of play practices is highly

complex and requires a high degree of content knowledge on the part of the instruc-

tor. For example, this study indicated that while the successful execution of a 2v1practice has similar principles across invasion games, it is inherently different and

more challenging in soccer than in catching sports such as rugby or basketball

Play Practice 115



Alignment should also involve both the appropriate progression from one practice to

the next and the use of numerous subtle variations within a single practice, to present

the learner with enough examples that replicate game conditions for learning to

transfer.Some limitations of the present study are apparent. The investigation did not

include any participants of high ability, which might have supported the positive

finding for Lance. A further limitation of the study might have been the decision

not to teach or provide corrective feedback during the 4v4 games. It was initially

thought this would undermine the effect of the play practices. The low number of

OTRs for the participants in the game was problematic. It was anticipated that the

4v4 format would have provided an increased number of OTRs, which was a signifi-

cant reason for selecting the 4v4 game as opposed to the 11-a-side game as a measure

of the transfer of learning. The low frequency might have been due to the generally

low ability of the players. More able players might have naturally progressed the learn-

ing from the practices to actively create overload situations in the game as an effective

tactic. The study only reported on the selection of the appropriate response in practice

and game play, which did not portray the full picture of effective performance that

includes the successful execution of that response. Finally, only two play practices

and two sequences of practices were used.

The raison d’etre of sport educators is to improve the performance of their learners

in the context of the real game, and as efficiently as possible. Previous research and

discourse has centred on ‘understanding’ versus ‘technique’ approaches to games

teaching, with mixed findings (e.g., Rink et al., 1996; Turner & Martinek, 1999).The research suggests that the isolated practice of techniques and the subsequent

huge leap to game play with no apparent relevance of the practices made is not an

effective means to produce competent performers. It is therefore possible that the cri-

ticisms of Bunker and Thorpe (1982) were of poor teaching and not the appropriate

application of the technique model, as has been suggested previously (McMorris,

1998; Holt et al ., 2002). In reality, good teaching of game activities involves the

ongoing identification of the most limiting performance factors. Instruction then

isolates these key performance requirements and uses logical progressive steps to

draw connections to their application in game situations via pertinent practice

(Launder, 2001). The nature and capability of the learners is also a significant

factor in the selection of the appropriate content and pedagogical approach.

Knowing ‘what to do’ and being ‘able to do it’ are both necessary requirements of

skilful performance, and Play Practice asserts that it might be best to improve both in

closely aligned tactical scenarios. The present study made the first attempt to investi-

gate the effect of Play Practice on the transfer of learning from practice to games.

Direct measurement and recordings of performances in both practice and games

were made to assess the learning outcomes of the intervention. The results suggest

the need for very close analysis of invasion games like soccer in order to replicate

the full range of stimulus variations and response requirements in play practicescenarios to make the transfer of learning from practice to game more likely. A per-

formance criterion in terms of the percentage of appropriate responses needed for




the successful application in game play is worth exploring in future research. This has

implications for practitioners to determine the moment to progress from one practice

to the next more by accurately assessed learning outcomes rather than other variables,

such as for variety or to maintain the level of interest of their students. These factorscan be accommodated by subtle intra-task alterations such as changing opponents or

assigning a context to the scenario.

The rationale for preceding a 3v2 practice with a 2v1 was not supported by the

findings. Future research might investigate the effect of a greater number of closely

aligned practices that also incorporate game related variations within each practice.

We recommend that future studies adhere to the full recommendation of the Play

Practice approach and identify and use teaching moments in the target setting (i.e.

game) to ensure the connection from practice to game is made.

The worthwhile quest for the most efficient methods of instruction to enhance the

learning of the many tactical and technical responses required in game activities is

shared by reflective teachers, coaches and researchers. Competent and not merely

knowledgeable performers should be the objective of this endeavour. In investigating

Launder’s Play Practice approach, the central concept of alignment of practice scen-

arios was examined and results suggest that repetition of drill practices are needed

alongside Play Practices to elicit the technical learning required to perform tactical

responses consistently and for this to transfer to the game. Findings also suggest

the use of subtle intra-task variations to replicate the variety of situations that occur

in the game in ways that are pertinent to the learners’ capabilities. The significance

of the provision of individual feedback was highlighted as a major issue in the learningprocess to prevent learners practising mistakes and the need for manageable assess-

ment tools for instructors to gain accurate information of the performance of their

learners at specific skills for the purposes of when and how to progress. These

issues suggest that researchers need to move on from the debate on understanding

versus technique models of instruction and address such problems that challenge

the teaching and learning process in game activities, to better support the practices

of teachers and coaches.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Carla Vidoni for her valued assistance with filming and Ray

Depiro for his time spent on assisting with the coding.

References

Bunker, D. & Thorpe, R. (1982) A model for the teaching games in secondary schools, Bulletin of

Physical Education, 18(1), 5 –8.

Brobst, B. & Ward, P. (2002) Effects of public posting, goal setting, and oral feedback on the skills of

female soccer players, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35(3), 247–257.

Chandler, T. J. L. & Mitchell, S. A. (1990) Reflections on ‘models of games education’, Journal of

Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 61(8), 19–21.Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E. & Heward, W. L. (1987) Applied behavior analysis (Columbus, OH,

Merrill)

Play Practice 117



Englemann, S. & Carnine, D. (1982) Theory of instruction: principles and applications (New York,

Irvington).

French, K. E. & Nevett, M. E. (1993) The development of expertise in youth sport, in: J. L. Starkes

& F. Allard (Eds) Cognitive issues in motor expertise (Amsterdam, Elsevier).

French, K. E., Werner, P. H., Taylor, K., Hussey, K. & Jones, J. (1996) The effects of a 6-week unitof tactical, skill, or combined tactical and skill instruction on badminton performance of ninth

grade students, Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 15, 439–463.

Griffin, L. L., Mitchell, S. A. & Oslin, J. L. (1997) Teaching sport concepts and skills: a tactical games

approach (Champaign, IL, Human Kinetics).

Heward, W. L. (1994) Three ‘low-tech’ strategies for increasing the frequency of active student

response during group instruction, in: R. Gardner, III, D. M. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, T. E.

Heron, W. L. Heward, J. W. Eshleman & T. A. Grossi (Eds) Behavior analysis in education;

focus on measurably superior instruction (Pacific Grove, CA, Brooks/Cole).

Holt, N. L., Stream, W. B. & Garcı́a Bengoechea, E. G. (2002) Expanding the teaching games for

understanding model: new avenues for future research and practice, Journal of Teaching in

Physical Education, 21, 162–176.Launder, A. G. (2001) Play practice: the games approach to teaching and coaching sports (Champaign,

IL, Human Kinetics).

McMorris, T. (1998) Teaching games for understanding: its contribution to the knowledge of

skill acquisition from a motor learning perspective, European Journal of Physical Education,

3, 65–74.

Mitchell, S. A. & Oslin, J. L. (1999) An investigation of tactical transfer in net games, European

Physical Education Review, 4, 162– 172.

Rink, J. E., French, K. E. & Tjeerdsma, B. L. (1996) Foundations for the learning and instruction of

sport and games, Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 15, 399– 417.

Rosenshine, B. & Stevens, R. (1986) Teaching functions, in: M. C. Wittrock (Ed.) Handbook of

research on teaching (3rd edn) (New York, Macmillan).Schmidt, R. A. & Wrisberg, C. A. (2000) Motor learning and performance: a problem based approach

(Champaign, IL, Human Kinetic).

Siedentop, D., Tousignant, M. & Parker, M. (1982) Academic learning time-physical education coding

manual (rev edn) (Columbus, OH, The Ohio State University, School of Health, Physical

Education, and Recreation).

Turner, A. P. & Martinek, T. J. (1995) Teaching for understanding: a model for improving decision

making during game play, Quest , 47, 44–63.

Turner, A. P. & Martinek, T. J. (1999) An investigation into teaching games for understanding:

effects on skill, knowledge, and game play, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport , 70(3),

286–296.

Ward, P. & Carnes, M. (2002) Effects of posting self-set goals on collegiate football players’ skill

execution during practice and games, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35(1), 1–12.

Ward, P., Smith, S. & Sharpe, T. (1997) The effects of accountability on task accomplishment in

collegiate football, Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 17, 40–51.

Werner, P. & Almond, L. (1990) Models of games education, Journal of Physical Education,

Recreation and Dance, 61(4), 23–27.




Documents

The Transfer of Learning From Play Practises to Game Play in Young Adult Soccer Players