Comparative Study between Teaching Football with Oral and Oral/Graphic Verbalization
- 1 LASELDI, University of Franche-Comté, Besan?on, France
- 2 Higher Institute of Sports and Physical Education, Kef, Tunisia
- 3 Higher Institute of Education and Training Contained, Tunis, Tunisia
- 4 Research Laboratory, “Sports Performance Optimization” National Center of Medicine and Science in Sports (CNMSS), Tunis, Tunisia
- 5 Higher Institute of Sports and Physical Education, Kef, Tunisia
- 6 Higher Institute of Sports and Physical Education, Kef, Tunisia
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare two methods of teaching using two different modalities of verbali zation: oral and oral/graphic. We opted for a quantitative-comparative analysis of the pupils’ language typologies taken from oral and written productions of third secondary grade pupils who play football in a professional club (juniors of Olympic Kef, IInd league, 18 years old on average). The comparisons be tween the group proceeding to an oral verbalization versus the group using an oral/graphic one as well as intra-groups’ comparisons did not show clear significant differences. Despite of a statistical signification absence, we note that the two teams made a progress (increase in the number of played and conquered balls and the shots on target) especially during the last three sessions. Indeed, the debate of ideas is a process. It is relevant that the interaction between learning oral and graphic verbalization is more dynamic, whenever pupils verbalize orally and graphically, they are more motivated to learn.
- De Landsheere V. (1992). Education and formation. Paris: University Press
- De Landsheere G. (1972). Experimental comparative education. In Dictionary of Evaluation and Research in Education. Paris: France University Press.
- Gréhaigne, J. F. (1992). Game organasation in football. Paris : ACTIO.
- Gréhaigne, J. F. (2009). Around time. Spaces, learning, projects in team sports. Besancon: University Press of Franche-Comté.
- Gréhaigne, J. F., & Godbout, P. (1998). Formative assessment in team sports with a tactical approach. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 69, 46-51. doi:10.1080/07303084.1998.10605048
- Gréhaigne, J. F., Billard, M., & Laroche, J. Y. (1999). Collective sports teaching at school. Paris: Bruxelles.
- Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Cambridge: University Press.
- Lê Thanh Khoi (1995). Education and Civilisations. Yesterday’s Societies. Paris: UNESCO, BlE, Nathan.
- Nachon, M. (2004). Interaction on physical and sportive education: The case of Basketball. Semio-linguistics kills approachand knowledge construction. Besancon: University of Franche-Comté.
- Pieron, M. (2000). Sport and teaching. Liège: King Baudouin Foundation’s edition.
- Roulet, E., Auchlin, A., Moeschler, J., Rubattel, C., & Schelling, M. (1985). The articulation of discourse on contemporary French. Berne: Lang.
- Van Daele H. (1993). Comparative education. Paris: France University Press.
- Wallian, N., & Chang, C. W. (2007). Semiotics of motor action and language activities: to an epistemology of the co-constructed team sports knowledge. In J. F. Gréhaigne (Ed.), Game configurations. Debate of ideas and learning in football and team sports (pp. 145 164). Besancon: PUFC.
- Wallian, N., & Gréhaigne, J.F. (2004). To a semio-constructivist approach in motor learning. In G. Carlier (Ed.), If we spoke about the pleasure of physical education teaching (pp. 167-179). Montpellier: AFRAPS.
- Zghibi, M. (2012). Semio-constructivist approached learning in Foot ball. Berlin: European University Editions.
- Zghibi, M., Sahli, H., Bennour, N., Guinoubi, Ch., Guerchi, M., & Hamdi, M. (2013b). The Pupil’s discourse and action projects: The case of third year high school pupils in Tunisia. Creative Education, 4, 165-171.