Background: In 2006, Oslin and Mitchell published a review of the game-centred approaches (GCAs) to teaching and coaching literature highlighting a number of core concepts thought to provide justification for the use of GCAs including (a) its potential to enhance participant motivation, (b) potential for tactical transfer, and (c) development of decision-making skills and effective decision-makers. Oslin and Mitchell also suggested recommendations for future GCA research. Purpose: The purpose of this paper was threefold: (a) to present a review of Anglophone research into GCAs building on the previous review of Oslin and Mitchell published in 2006; (b) to identify new trends in research since 2006; and (c) to investigate the extent to which the initial suggestions and future research directions suggested by Oslin and Mitchell have been addressed. Data collection: GCA literature since 2006 was searched systematically using a three-phase approach. Phase 1 included initial searches of the EBSCO database using terms associated with GCAs and their acronyms (e.g. TGfU (teaching games for understanding), GS (Game Sense), etc.). Phase 2 expanded the search adopting more generic terms from keywords located in the recent literature (e.g. teaching games, tactical development, game performance, etc.). Multiple searches through the EBSCO database were conducted, whereby key terms were cross-referenced until a saturation point was reached. Phase 3 involved removing those publications that were not empirical, peer reviewed, intervention studies or published in English. Findings: Forty-four studies on GCA implementation were identified and the methodological and substantive nature of these studies was examined. The review noted two positive trends: (a) the expansion of research which included the growth of research on GCAs in Europe and Southeast Asia and (b) an increased amount of research in the affective domain. The review found, however, that a number of key challenges remain within GCA research, which include (a) the need for improved articulation of GCA verification procedures; (b) further assessment of tactical awareness development; (c) extended inquiry about GCAs in coaching contexts; (d) more research into ‘newer’ GCAs (i.e. PP (play practice), IGCM (invasion game competence model) and TDLM (tactical decision learning model)); (e) use of longitudinal research designs; (f) inadequate length of GCA induction and training for teachers and coaches, and (g) examination of GCAs in terms of fitness and special populations. Conclusions: GCA pedagogies are of significant importance as they have the potential to promote change within current adult-centric cultures of youth sport and encourage engagement in physical activity over the life course. To meet these needs, it is recommended that GCA research undergo continued expansion with the use of research designs and data collection techniques that aid the examination of different philosophical understandings of GCAs (e.g. ethnographic, phenomenological and psycho-phenomenological). These are paramount to the exploration of ‘who the individual is’ and ‘how the learner is motivated to continue to participate’ and further permit the in-depth, contextual and ecological analysis of GCA interventions that Oslin and Mitchell recommended in their previous review.

We outline the evolution of a computerised systematic observation tool and describe the process for establishing the validity and reliability of this new instrument. The Coach Analysis and Interventions System (CAIS) has 23 primary behaviours related to physical behaviour, feedback/reinforcement, instruction, verbal/non-verbal, questioning and management. The instrument also analyses secondary coach behaviour related to performance states, recipient, timing, content and questioning/silence. The CAIS is a multi-dimensional and multi-level mechanism able to provide detailed and contextualised data about specific coaching behaviours occurring in complex and nuanced coaching interventions and environments that can be applied to both practice sessions and competition.

The purpose of this article is to discuss some concerns with the Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI). This review of the GPAI includes five perceived problems with the GPAI scoring and coding system: (1) calculation of individual and overall game performance indices, (2) use of game involvement versus game performance index to analyze game performance, (3) observer reliability, (4) nonlinearity, and (5) usefulness of action. In this article, we suggest a reexamination of the GPAI scoring and coding system that will lead to more efficient use of this game performance instrument. Some of the suggested modifications can be implemented quickly, whereas others need further research.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the impact of a hybrid teaching games for understanding (TGfU) and sport education (SE) physical education unit on autonomy support, perceived motivational climate, enjoyment and perceived competence, in comparison to a unit delivered via a traditional direct instruction model. A crossover design was utilized. Participants were 55 students divided into two groups. One group experienced a hybrid TGfU/SE unit first, followed by a unit of direct instruction. A second group experienced the units in the opposite order. The hybrid unit was designed according to the characteristics of SE (e.g. formal competition, seasons, team identity, roles, etc.) and learning tasks were designed to integrate the pedagogical principles of TGfU. Dependent variables were measured using validated questionnaires. Results showed that regardless of the order of intervention, students in the two groups reported significantly higher mean scores in interest in athletes’ input, praise for autonomous behavior, perceived competence, and enjoyment when they were taught using the hybrid TGfU/SE unit. The results demonstrate some initial evidence that a teacher’s employment of a hybrid TGfU/SE unit can encourage students to assume responsibilities and make independent decisions, which leads to them reporting greater enjoyment and perceived competence when compared to physical education lessons delivered via a traditional direct instruction model.

Game-Based Approaches (GBAs) have been advocated as a pedagogy to improve decision-making, skill execution, and physical fitness in physical education teaching and sports coaching. To date, no review paper has reported on the use of GBAs in competitive team sport settings. The purpose of this article was to review the research evidence conducted on GBAs specifically within competitive team sport settings and discuss the implications of these findings for sports coaching researchers and practitioners. The current review identified 23 articles investigating GBAs in competitive team sport settings. The review supports the efficacy of GBAs in the development of athlete decision-making and tactical awareness. GBAs promote personal and social development (e.g. player responsibility) along with positive affective outcomes for athletes (i.e. motivation, enjoyment). There was less support for the development of technical skill through GBAs. The review concludes by identifying future research directions and implications for competitive team sport coaches’ practice.

The Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) and Sport Education (SE) pedagogical models share several objectives and pedagogical processes. Despite this seemingly uncanny relationship, few studies have examined the efficacy of a hybrid TGfU/SE pedagogical model, particularly how a teacher’s utilization of such a model impacts on student motivation. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the effect a hybrid TGfU/SE unit, in comparison to direct instruction, on students’ perceptions of various aspects of their motivation to engage in physical education (autonomous motivation, basic psychological needs, enjoyment and intention to be physically active). A crossover design was utilized, using the technique of counterbalancing. One group experienced a hybrid SE/TGfU unit first, followed by a unit of direct instruction. A second group experienced the units in the opposite order. Participants were 55 students. The intervention was conducted over a total of 16 lessons. The hybrid unit was designed according to the characteristics of SE by using seasons, roles, persistent teams, etc. Learning tasks set by the teacher during individual lessons, however, were designed according to the pedagogical principles of TGfU. Student motivation data was generated using validated questionnaires. Results showed that regardless of the order of intervention, the two groups showed significant improvements in autonomy, competence and enjoyment when they were taught using the hybrid model. Instead, in the variables autonomous motivation, relatedness and intention to be physically active there were no significant improvements in one group. These results demonstrate that it is possible to design varied learning situations in which affiliation, leadership and trust are fostered, while tasks are adapted to the characteristics of the students. All this can cause greater autonomous motivation, and consequently, perceived competence in the student, a positive image of the sport to practice, and therefore greater enjoyment and to be physically active.