A systematic review of teaching games for understanding intervention studies from a practice-referenced perspective

Morales-Belando, María T. and Kirk, David and Arias-Estero, José L. (2022) A systematic review of teaching games for understanding intervention studies from a practice-referenced perspective. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 93 (4). pp. 670-681. ISSN 0270-1367 (https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2021.1897066)

[thumbnail of Morales-Belando-etal-RQES-2021-A-systematic-review-of-teaching-games-for-understanding-intervention]
Text. Filename: Morales_Belando_etal_RQES_2021_A_systematic_review_of_teaching_games_for_understanding_intervention.pdf
Accepted Author Manuscript
License: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 logo

Download (981kB)| Preview


According to the theory of practice architecture, every practice enacted in classrooms is a result of interaction between social, physical and spatial elements. In relation, from a practice-referenced perspective, it is necessary to know which teaching-learning implementation features could help teachers/coaches/researchers to assemble Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) interventions in relation to the institutional environment. Purpose: This review aimed to explore from a practice-referenced perspective how TGfU researchers reported their interventions based on the teaching-learning implementation features (intervention design as a function of the context, intervention length, lesson content, basic lesson elements, lesson alignment, teacher/coach experience with the approach, and lesson validation and treatment verification) and their association with learners’ outcomes. Results: We found 20 studies that included some of the teaching-learning implementation features, but none of the studies included all of these features. We also found that studies of TGfU measured and reported learners’ outcomes in a variety of ways. This creates difficulties for drawing conclusions about the relationships between the presence of teaching-learning implementation features and student learning outcomes. Conclusion: Further TGfU interventions should be planned to consider the following: (a) that lessons need to be designed as a function of the context; (b) the number of intervention lessons, their duration and the duration of each lesson task; (c) the concrete tactical and technique contents and goals per lesson; (d) the modified games, questions and achievable challenges as basic lesson elements; (e) the alignment between the basic lesson elements and the structure of lessons, based on the goals of each lesson; (f) that teachers/coaches need to have previous experience in TGfU and be trained on the specific study purpose; (g) that lessons should be validated before implementation and verified during intervention; (h) researchers should regulate the ways in which learners’ outcomes are measured and reported within TGfU studies.