14.6 Instructional Strategies, Models, and Teaching Resources
Key Takeaways
- Mosston's Spectrum of Teaching Styles arranges styles from command, in which the teacher makes all decisions, to self-teaching, in which the learner does, with the reproduction cluster preceding the production cluster.
- Strategy selection follows from content, student needs, safety concerns, facilities and equipment, and the instructional model in use -- the five criteria the ETS blueprint names.
- Major curriculum models include Sport Education, Tactical Games and Teaching Games for Understanding, Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility, Skill Themes, Fitness Education, and Adventure and Cooperative Learning, each aligned to different outcomes.
- Station and reciprocal formats increase practice trials per student and free the teacher to give individual feedback, which is why they suit large classes and limited equipment.
- Teaching resources -- task cards, video, published curricula, professional-association materials, and community expertise -- should be screened for accuracy, standards alignment, and developmental fit before use.
Mosston's Spectrum of Teaching Styles
The Spectrum classifies teaching by who makes which decisions before, during, and after a task. Its two clusters are divided by a discovery threshold: the reproduction styles reproduce known content; the production styles generate new-to-the-learner content.
| Style | Name | Who decides |
|---|---|---|
| A | Command | Teacher makes all decisions; students respond to a signal. Suits safety-critical situations, synchronized activity, large groups |
| B | Practice | Teacher sets the task; students decide pace, order, and starting point; teacher circulates giving individual feedback. The most common productive style in physical education |
| C | Reciprocal | Students work in pairs, alternating doer and observer; the observer gives feedback using a teacher-prepared criteria card |
| D | Self-check | The learner assesses their own performance against criteria |
| E | Inclusion | The teacher designs multiple difficulty levels within one task; the student selects their entry point |
| --- | Discovery threshold | --- |
| F | Guided discovery | Teacher sequences questions leading students to a single predetermined concept |
| G | Convergent discovery | Students solve a problem with one correct solution through reasoning |
| H | Divergent discovery | Students produce multiple valid solutions to a movement problem |
| I | Learner-designed individual program | The learner designs the program within a teacher-set subject area |
| J | Learner-initiated | The learner initiates the experience and asks the teacher for support |
| K | Self-teaching | The learner performs all roles |
No style is superior; each achieves different objectives. The professional skill is matching style to objective: command style for a safety briefing or a synchronized warm-up, inclusion style for a mixed-ability skill task, reciprocal for peer feedback and social responsibility, divergent discovery for a dance composition or a tactical problem with several answers.
The inclusion style (E) deserves particular attention because it solves the mixed-ability problem elegantly: a single task with a rope at four heights, or targets at four distances, lets every student choose an appropriate challenge without being assigned to a group by ability.
The Five Selection Criteria
The blueprint names them: selected content, student needs, safety concerns, facilities and equipment, and instructional models.
| Criterion | How it constrains strategy |
|---|---|
| Content | A closed skill tolerates blocked practice; an open skill needs game-like variability; a tactical objective needs a game form |
| Student needs | Wide skill spread points to inclusion style or stations; cognitive-stage learners need more direct instruction |
| Safety | High-risk activities require command-style control and specific supervision; divergent discovery in a weight room is inappropriate |
| Facilities and equipment | One ball per four students points to stations or reciprocal formats, not a single whole-class task |
| Instructional model | The model in use dictates the strategy -- Sport Education requires student roles and persistent teams; TGfU requires game-practice-game cycles |
Curriculum Models
| Model | Originator | Core outcome | Signature features |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sport Education | Siedentop | Competent, literate, enthusiastic sportspersons | Seasons rather than short units; persistent teams; student roles (coach, official, statistician, equipment manager); formal competition; records; a culminating event; festivity |
| Tactical Games / TGfU | Bunker and Thorpe; Mitchell, Oslin, and Griffin | Tactical understanding and transferable decision-making | Game-practice-game cycle; tactical problem first; game classification into invasion, net/wall, target, and striking/fielding |
| Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility | Hellison | Personal and social responsibility with transfer | Five levels; awareness talk, lesson, group meeting, reflection; student empowerment |
| Skill Themes | Graham, Holt/Hale, Parker | Fundamental movement competence | Skill themes and movement concepts; elementary focus; developmental levels rather than grade levels |
| Fitness Education | -- | Knowledge and habits for lifelong fitness | Health-related fitness concepts; personal program design; self-assessment and goal setting |
| Adventure / Cooperative Learning | -- | Trust, problem-solving, group cohesion | Challenge by choice; initiatives and group problem-solving; full-value contract; debriefing |
| Outdoor Education | -- | Environmental literacy and outdoor competence | Field-based; environmental ethics; risk management |
Models are chosen by outcome. A program that wants tactical transfer chooses TGfU; one that wants affective outcomes and student leadership chooses Sport Education or TPSR; an elementary program building fundamentals chooses Skill Themes. Most programs combine models across the year rather than committing to one.
Class Organization Formats
| Format | Structure | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Whole class, same task | Everyone does the same thing | Warm-ups, introducing a new skill, safety instruction |
| Stations | Several tasks running simultaneously with rotation | Limited equipment, differentiation, high activity time |
| Reciprocal pairs | Doer and observer alternate with a criteria card | Peer feedback, social responsibility, doubling feedback availability |
| Small groups | Three to five students on a task | Small-sided games, cooperative problems |
| Individual | Self-paced with task cards | Personal fitness, self-check, skill refinement |
| Contract or task sheets | Students work through a defined list at their own pace | High school independence, self-management |
Stations and reciprocal formats are the workhorses in real schools, because they solve the two most common constraints at once: not enough equipment, and one teacher for 35 students.
Teaching Resources
| Resource | Use | Screening question |
|---|---|---|
| Task cards and criteria sheets | Externalize instruction to stations | Do the cues match what I teach? |
| Video | Demonstration, self-analysis, assessment records | Is the technique shown correct and current? |
| Published curricula | Scope, sequence, and unit plans | Is it standards-aligned and developmentally appropriate? |
| Professional-association materials | SHAPE America and state affiliate resources, position statements, assessment tools | Is it current, and does it fit my context? |
| Government resources | CDC and health.gov guidance, CSPAP materials | Is this the current edition? |
| Community expertise | Guest instructors for specialized activities | Background check, alignment, supervision, no commercial content |
| Technology | Timers, heart rate monitors, apps, projected content | Does it add or subtract activity time? Is student data protected? |
The screening discipline matters because the internet supplies an unlimited quantity of physical education activity ideas of unknown quality, many of which are elimination games, human-target games, or activities with no standards connection.
Common Praxis Traps
- Trap 1: Treating command style as bad teaching. It is correct for safety and synchronized tasks.
- Trap 2: Confusing reciprocal and self-check. Reciprocal uses a partner observer; self-check is individual.
- Trap 3: Placing guided discovery before the discovery threshold. Styles A through E are reproduction; F and beyond are production.
- Trap 4: Divergent discovery in a safety-critical setting. Match style to risk.
- Trap 5: Committing to one model for the whole program. Models serve different outcomes.
- Trap 6: Using an activity found online without screening it. Check standards fit, safety, and inclusion.
A teacher sets up a jumping task with a rope at four different heights and lets each student choose the height they will attempt. Which Mosston teaching style is this?
A high school program wants students to develop leadership, officiating skills, and enthusiasm for sport alongside skill competence, using persistent teams over a six-week season with a culminating event. Which curriculum model fits?
A teacher has one racquet for every four students and a wide range of skill levels in the class. Which organizational format best addresses both constraints?
Which teaching style is most appropriate when giving safety instructions before a throwing unit?