↓ Skip to main content

Badminton instructional in Malaysian schools: a comparative analysis of TGfU and SDT pedagogical models

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
144 Mendeley
Title
Badminton instructional in Malaysian schools: a comparative analysis of TGfU and SDT pedagogical models
Published in
SpringerPlus, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-2872-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sanmuga Nathan

Abstract

Model based physical education curriculum of Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) is still at early stage of implementation in Malaysian schools whereby the technical or skill-led model continues to dominate the physical education curriculum. Implementing TGfU seems to be problematic and untested in this environment. Therefore, this study examined, the effects that a revised model of TGfU compared to Skill Drill Technical (SDT) a technical model had on learning movement skills in Badminton, including returning to base, decision making and skill execution whilst performing in a doubles game play and also explored teachers' perceptions of navigating between the two models. Participants aged 15.5 ± 1.0 years, N = 32, school Badminton players were randomly selected and assigned equally into groups of TGfU and SDT. Reflective data was gathered from two experienced physical education teachers who were involved in this study. Findings indicated for movement to the base in doubles game play indicated significant improvement, after intervention via TGfU. As for decision-making and skill execution in doubles game play, analysis revealed no significant difference after intervention. Findings from teachers reflection, indicated the importance of mini game play in both TGfU and SDT models, as the students enjoyed, and built up positive attitudes for both winning or losing in game situations. However, when negotiating the TGfU model, the teacher found it difficult at times to execute the pedagogical model, as students needed guidance to discuss aspects related to tactics. However, to keep this pedagogical model viable further research findings ought to be circulated among teachers in Malaysia and similar Southeast Asian counties.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 143 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 27 19%
Student > Master 14 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Researcher 9 6%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 44 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 41 28%
Unspecified 27 19%
Psychology 10 7%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Arts and Humanities 4 3%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 47 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,451,618
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#941
of 1,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,379
of 366,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#132
of 250 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 366,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 250 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.