This paper provides a commentary on research on models-based practice within physical education and presents a tutorial that aims to guide the reporting of future research using pedagogical models. Three key elements are presented that could be considered as essential for inclusion in any methods section in order for readers to gain an accurate and complete understanding of the results of studies. These are (a) rich description of the curricular elements of the unit, (b) a detailed validation of model implementation, and (c) a detailed description of the program context that includes the previous experiences of the teacher and students with the model or with models-based practice. Examples of why these are particularly prudent are provided by reference to papers reporting the outcomes of several currently used models (e.g., Sport Education, Teaching Games for Understanding, and Cooperative Learning).

The purpose of this article is to present Sport Education, Tactical Games, and Cooperative Learning as valuable instructional models in physical education. Situated learning is used as a theoretical framework and connection between Sport Education, Tactical Games, and Cooperative Learning. The structures of Sport Education, Tactical Games, and Cooperative Learning allow for participation to occur in a student-centered learning curriculum as opposed to a teacher-centered teaching curriculum. The teacher facilitates learning activities that have the potential to provide students with a holistic education that promotes social, physical, and cognitive learning outcomes. The emphasis is on active learning that involves the processes of decision making, social interaction, and cognitive understanding for students.

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which newly qualified teachers employed the Sport Education (SE) model. In addition, we attempted to discover factors that led to and facilitated beginning teachers employing the model and those that did not. Participants were six American and four British beginning teachers. Data were collected by formally interviewing each teacher. Analysis procedures employed were analytic induction and constant comparison. Occupational socialization was the theoretical framework that guided data collection and analysis procedures. The results indicated that teachers interpreted and delivered SE in one of three different ways: full version, watered down version and cafeteria style. Moreover, the teachers’ acculturation, professional socialization and organizational socialization largely explained why teachers interpreted and delivered SE as they did.

Background: In 2005, Wallhead and O'Sullivan presented a review of research on the Sport Education model. In that review, the authors identified certain strengths of the model (particularly persistent team membership) in facilitating student engagement within student-centered learning tasks. Other areas (such as student leadership skills) were considered as potentially problematic. Suggestions were also made for future research. Purpose: The three purposes of this review were to conduct a review of research on Sport Education since the 2005 analysis, to identify any new trends in research since the original review, and to describe the extent to which the limitations and future research directions of Wallhead and O'Sullivan have been addressed. Data collection: Papers for analysis were selected through searches of EBSCO databases with the main identifier ‘sport education’. Further journal articles were then obtained through the citations and references in the original documents. Data analysis: Papers were initially categorized according to the following dimensions: country of origin, focus, participants, sport and length of season, data courses, analysis and results. They were then discussed in terms of the five common content standards and aims of physical education (e.g. skill and fitness development, personal and social responsibility) used in the 2005 review. Findings: Thirty-eight papers were identified that satisfied the selection criteria, with all content standards receiving attention. Since the 2005 review, there been not only an expansion in the number of studies relating to Sport Education, but also the initiation of research in a number of new contexts, as well as those focused on new research questions. An analytic induction of these papers has placed them into three categories: (1) expanded sites of implementation; (2) students' motivational responses; and (3) learning to teach Sport Education. Conclusions: Studies of Sport Education now take place in more diverse settings than before, and continue to progress with more sophisticated research designs and larger sample sizes. Still, more investigation is needed in the areas of peer instruction and the transfer of school-based learning to community sport.

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a hybrid Sport Education–Invasion Games Competence Model (SE-IGCM) unit application on students’ improvements in decision making, skill execution and overall game performance, during a soccer season. Twenty-six fifth-grade students from a Portuguese public elementary school participated in a 22-lesson season, in which pre-test, post-test and retention test measures were analyzed through the instrument developed by Blomqvist et al. (2005). Results showed that teaching a soccer unit in a SE environment sustained by the learning tasks structure provided by the IGCM offered students a chance to improve skill execution, as well their tactical decision making. The overall results showed a strong impact on students’ learning, especially for girls and low skill-level students, fostered by the equitable participation. The retention test was particularly important to assess gains of students of all skill levels, particularly the low-skilled students.