The Effect of Probe Thinking Strategy (Application of Principles) on Acquisition of Some Basic Offensive Skills in Handball
Abstract
Probe thinking is the structure that emerges from the interaction between the student and what he encounters, rather than what he is taught, and thinking that is focused on posing questions and coming up with solutions, the spark that keeps a learner interested. Therefore, the present study was an attempt to investigate the possible effect of probe thinking strategy on acquisition of some basic offensive skills in handball. A control group and an experimental group were utilized in a pre-post-test design. Following the pre-test, the experimental group received the treatment whereas the control group did not. For the analysis, 20 learners from Cihan University-Erbil, Iraq, were taken into consideration. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used in the statistical analysis (i.e., Independent samples t-test) in terms of how the two groups performed on the pre- and post-tests. The results revealed that the use of probe questions strategy is effective for the Sports Sciences students to get better results regarding pass-test, dribble-test, and shot-test. The findings of the present study can benefit all the educators and the students as well to have a better performance in practical courses. At the same time, these results can be double checked for the other sports so that they can be generalized to all the branches of Sports Sciences.
Downloads
References
Abdel Majeed, H.K. (2011). Probe Thinking and its Relationship to Multiple Intelligences Among University Students. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Baghdad: University of Baghdad, College of Education for Girls.
Al-Shehani, A.J.M.I. (2006). The Impact of Low-Intensity Circular Training on Learning Some Basic Handball Skills. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Al-Mustansiriya University, Iraq. p. 79.
Al-Shammari, M.F.M. (2006). The Effect of a Proposed Training Curriculum Using Aids to Develop Some Basic Skills in Handball. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Diyala University, Iraq. pp.62-63.
Al-Dulaimi, K.A.Z. (2006). The Effect of Different Times of Feedback on Learning the Shooting Skill from High Jumping in Handball. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Babylon University, Iraq. p.73.
Butler, J., & MaCahan, B.J. (2005). Teaching games for understanding as a curriculum model. In: Griffin, L.L., (ed.) Teaching Games for Understanding: Theory, Research, and Practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. p33-54.
Cazden, C.B. (2001). Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning. 2nd ed. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cotton, K. (2001). Classroom Questioning. From School Improvement Research Series. Available from: https://www.ioe-rdnetwork.com/uploads/2/1/6/3/21631832/k_cotton_classroom [Last accessed on 2023 Jan 01].
Cushion, C. (2011). Coach and athlete learning: A social approach. In: Jones, R.L., Potrac, P., & Ronglen, L.T., (eds.) The Sociology of Sports Coaching. London: Routledge. p166-178.
Cushion, C., Ford, P.R., & Williams, M.A. (2012). Coach behaviours and practice structures in youth soccer: Implications for talent development. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30(15), 1631-1641.
Daines, D. (1986). Are teachers asking higher level questions? Education,106(7), 368-374.
Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2003). Why aren’t they getting this? Working through the regressive myths of constructivist pedagogy. Teaching Education, 14(2), 123-140.
Douge, B., & Hastie, P. (1993). Coach effectiveness. Sport Science Review, 2(2), 14-29.
Evans, J.R. (2012). Elite rugby union coaches’ interpretation and use of game sense in New Zealand. The Asian Journal of Exercise and Sport Science, 9(1), 85-97.
Evans, J.R. (2014). The nature and importance of coach-player relationships in the uptake of game sense by elite rugby coaches in Australia and New Zealand. In: Light, R., Quay, J., Harvey, S., & Mooney, A. (eds.) Contemporary Developments in Games Teaching. London: Routledge. p133-146.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Ford, P.R., Yates, I., & Williams, A.M. (2010). An analysis of practice activities and instructional behaviors used by youth soccer coaches during practice: Exploring the link between science and application. Journal of Sports Sciences, 28(5), 483-495.
Gardner, H. (2004). Audiences for the theory of multiple intelligences. Teachers College Record, 106(1), 212-220.
Harvey, S., Cushion, C.J., Cope, E., & Muir, B. (2013). A season long investigation into coaching behaviours as a function of practice state: The case of three collegiate coaches. Sports Coaching Review, 2(5), 13-32.
Johnsen, D.C., Flick, K., Butali, A., Cunningham-Ford, M.A., Holloway, J.A., Mahrous, A., & Clancy, J.M. (2020). Two critical thinking modelsprobing questions and conceptualization-adding 4 skillsets to the teacher’s armamentarium. Journal of Dental Education, 84(7), 733-741.
Kagan, S. (2005). Rethinking thinking. Does bloom’s taxonomy align with brain science? Kagan Online Magazine, 8(3), 28-49.
Karim, M.H.A., & Joudeh, Y.K. (2022). The effect of SAQ training in developing some offensive skills for advanced handball players. Karbala Journal of Physical Education Sciences, 7(1), 23-46.
Kirk, D., & MacPhail, A. (2002). Teaching games for understanding and situated learning: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe model. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 21(2), 177-192.
Kracl, C.L. (2012). Review or true? Using higher-level thinking questions in social studies instruction. The Social Studies, 103(2), 57-60.
Light, R. (2005). Making sense of the chaos: Games sense coaching in Australia. In: Butler, J.I., & Griffin, L.L., (eds.) Teaching Games for Understanding: Theory, Research, and Practice. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. p169-182.
Light, R. (2014a). Learner-centred pedagogy for swim coaching: A complex learning theory-informed approach. Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education, 5(2), 167-180.
Light, R. (2014b). Positive pedagogy for physical education and sport: Game sense as an example. In: Quay, J., Harvey, S., & Mooney, A., (eds.) Contemporary Developments in Games Teaching. London: Routledge. p29-42.
Light, R., & Fawns, R. (2003). Knowing the game: Integrating speech and action in games teaching through TGfU. Quest, 55(2), 161-176.
Light, R.L., & Kentel, J.A. (2013). Mushin: Learning in technique-intensive sports as a process of uniting mind and body through complex learning theory. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 20(4), 381-396.
Light, R.L., Harvey, S., & Mouchet, A. (2014). Improving ‘at-action’ decision-making in team sports through a holistic coaching approach. Sport, Education and Society, 19(3), 258-275.
Lyons, N. (2010). Handbook of Reflection and Reflective Inquiry: Mapping a Way of Knowing for Professional Reflective Inquiry. U.S.A: Springer.
MacPhail, A., Kirk, D., & Griffin, L.L. (2008). Throwing and catching as relational skills in game play: Situated learning in a modified game unit. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 27(1), 100-115.
McNeill, M.C., Fry, J.M., Wright, S.C., Tan, C.W.K., & Rossi, T. (2008). Structuring time and questioning to achieve tactical awareness in games lessons. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 13(3), 231-249.
Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2013). Learning through the affordances of representation construction. In: Tytler, R., Hubber, P., & Waldrip, B. (eds.) Constructing Representations to Learn in Science. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. p67-82.
Rosenshine, B. (1997). Advances in research on instruction. In: Lloyd, J.W., Kameanui, E.J., & Chard, D.J., (eds.) Issues in Educating Students with Disabilities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. p197-221.
Rosenshine, B. (2010). Principles of Instruction, Educational Practices Series. Vol. 21. Oxford: The International Academy of Education. p23-53.
Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 36(1), 12-39.
Rovegno, I., & Dolly, P. (2006). Constructivist perspectives on learning. In: Kirk, D., MacDonald, D., & O’Sullivan, M., (eds.) Handbook of Physical Education. London: Sage. p242-261.
Sahin, A., & Kulm, G. (2008). Sixth grade mathematics teachers’ intentions and use of probing, guiding, and factual questions. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(3), 221-241.
Sellappah, S., Hussey, T., Blackmore, A.M., & McMurray, A. (1998). The use of questioning strategies by clinical teachers. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28(1), 142-148.
Sullivan, P., & Clarke, D.J. (1991). Communication in the Classroom: The Importance of Good Questioning. Geelong: Deakin University.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Walsh, J.A., & Sattes, B.D. (2005). Quality Questioning: Research-based Practice to Engage Every Learner. California: Sage Publications.
Williams, M.A., & Hodges, N.J. (2005). Practice, instruction and skill acquisition in soccer: Challenging tradition. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(6), 637-650.
Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(7), 131-175.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.
Wright, J., & Forrest, G. (2007). A social semiotic analysis of knowledge construction and games centered approaches to teaching. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 12(3), 273-287.
Yang, Y.T.C., Newby, T.J., & Bill, R.L. (2005). Using Socratic questioning to promote critical thinking skills through asynchronous discussion forums in distance learning environments. American Journal of Distance Education,
(2), 163-181.
Copyright (c) 2024 Dana A. Mohammed
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License [CC BY-NC-ND 4.0] that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
