Notwithstanding the many forms of GBAs, Light ( 2013) suggests that all GBAs share four abiding features: (i) the design and manipulation of games, (ii) the use of questioning, (iii) the provision of opportunities for dialogue, and (iv) building a supportive sociomoral environment. Many cultural iterations of game-based instructional models (e.g., Game Sense, Teaching Games for Understanding) have been developed. GBAs contextualise learning within game-related practice activities and emphasise questioning to stimulate reflection and interaction (Light & Mooney, 2014). GBAs have emerged as prominent pedagogical approaches to the coaching of team-based sports. This article is concerned with the latter form of micro-level planning in team-based sports (i.e., the individual session plans), and the pedagogical implications of these planning practices with a particular focus on the Game-Based Approach (GBA) literature. Guided by the long-term plan, individual session plans for team sports are specific and detailed to account for the minute-by-minute running of the coaching session (Denison, 2010) whereby practice activities are identified and designed in the appropriate sequence to enhance player learning (Light, 2013). At a micro level, planning in team sports is primarily focused on individual session planning (Lyle, 2010). At a broader level, there is the long-term planning which considers the periodisation of the teamвЂ™s season the coach examines the teamвЂ™s overall season calendar to identify blocks for emphasising various physical, psychological, tactical, and technical goals (Abraham et al., 2014). Planning in team sports exists on two levels (Farrow & Robertson, 2017 Lyle, 2010 Otte, Millar, & Klatt, 2019). Given these missed opportunities, this paper illustrates how coaches can engage with research and theory to elevate the quality of their planning of coaching sessions. Despite strong indications of coach engagement with pedagogy in aspects of their session planning, the findings also revealed missed opportunities, with coaches failing to provide explicit learning intentions for session plans, inattention to session sequencing, and limited small-sided game designs. An iterative thematic analysis developed three major themes: (1) practice activity design, (2) sequencing of practice session content, and (3) contextual factors influencing planning. Coaches prepared two coaching session plans used as prompts within the interview. Twelve Gaelic football coaches operating in a high-performance setting were recruited to participate in semi-structured interviews. The aim of this study was to provide a rich description of team sport coachesвЂ™ planning practices and to evaluate these practices in light of the Game-Based Approach literature and Complex Learning Theory.

Rl stephens struggle session