Fostering Games Literacy
Students with games
literacy will be able to
engage with poise,
confidence, and enthusiasm
in a wide range of games
(Mandigo & Holt, 2004)
Background
The intention of games literacy is to foster the holistic notion of physical literacy through a specific context in PE; games play. In other words, games literacy is about students developing the necessary skills (i.e., the physical domain), knowledge (i.e., the cognitive domain) and attitudes (i.e., the affective domain) necessary to not only be successful when playing games, but to develop other important skills associated with active and healthy lifestyles.
The Link to Teaching Games for Understanding
One way to help facilitate the development of games literacy among students is the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) model. Steeped in constructivist approaches to teaching, the TGfU curricular model was originally introduced to address the concerns expressed by Bunker and Thorpe (1982) surrounding student illiteracy in games.
In this approach,
students learn about games by playing them rather than isolating skill
development and sport specific tactics. With the use of tactical problems and
solutions that transcend a variety of games as the backbone of this approach,
students not only understand what they need to know to be successful in games,
but perhaps more importantly, when and why to make certain decisions in dynamic
game contexts. The TGfU model is meant to not only create better and more
knowledgeable game players, but also to motivate participants while taking part
in a variety of games.
Related Articles (note: copyright held by
cited references)
Theoretical
Mandigo, J. L., &
Sheppard, J. (2003, December). Children’s affective experiences in TGfU game environments. Presentation
at the 2nd International Conference on Teaching Sport and Physical
Education for Understanding (December 12). 
Mandigo, J. L., &
Holt, N. L. (2003, October). A practitioners guide to Teaching Games for
Understanding. Oral presentation at the Ontario Physical
and Health Education Conference (October 17th).
Practical
General
Sheppard, J., &
Mandigo, J. L. (2003, December). Understanding
games by playing games: An illustrative example of 
Mandigo, J. L. &
Sheppard, J. (2003, October). Putting the “U” back into Games: Pedagogical
Principles in Teaching Games for Understanding. Oral presentation at the Canadian Association for Health, Physical
Education, Recreation, & Dance Conference (October 25th). 
Target Games:
Mandigo, J. L. (2003). Using problem based learning to enhance tactical awareness
in target games. Chapter in J. Butler, L. Griffin, B.
Lombardo, & R. Natasi (Eds.). Teaching games for understanding in physical
education and sport: An international perspective (pp. 15 – 28).
Net/Wall Games
Mandigo, J. L. & Anderson, A. T. (2003). Using the pedagogical principles in net/ wall
games to enhance teaching effectiveness. Teaching Elementary Physical Education, 14(1),
8 – 11. 
Invasion Games
Mandigo, J. L., &
Holt, N.L. (2000). The inclusion of optimal
challenge in teaching games for understanding. Physical and Health Education Journal, 66(3), 14-19.
Mandigo, J. L., & Sheppard, J. (2002
October). Learning
speedball through a tactical approach. Oral
presentation at the Ontario Physical and Health Education Conference (October
26th). 
Current Projects
Autonomy-Supportive
Environments in Physical Education (SSHRC Funded)
Developmental Coordination
Disorder (CIHR Funded)
Online Physical Education
Workshop
PlaySport (ophea.net)
Other Related Links
www.educ.uvic.ca/Faculty/thopper/
http://resources.emb.gov.hk/phyedu/
(Contains video clips)
www.mpeta.ca/ (see speaker notes from MPETA/
CAHPERD Conference)
Contact Information
James L. Mandigo,
Ph.D.
Brock University
spartan.ac.brocku.ca/~jmandigo/
Last revised: November 24, 2004