Game performance assessment instrument in physical education: a systematic review from 2015 to 2024

Background The use of the Game Performance Assessment Instrument (GPAI) in schools has increased in recent years. Other instruments have been employed to measure tactical-technical components in sports such as the Game Performance Evaluation Tool. However, it is necessary to consider the context for employing each instrument because it is important to consider learners’ skill level to adjust the criteria definitions for evaluation.Purpose The objective of this systematic review was to review interventions using the GPAI instrument in the physical education educational field (2015-2024), and to deepen how the instrument has been used and how it has been attended to some critical issues related to this implementation. This study updates the Aguilar, Martín and Chirosa’s (2016, “The Assessment in Physical Education through the “Game Perfomance Assessment Instrument” (GPAI).” Estudios Pedagógicos 42 (2): 7–19) systematic review.Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted across 5 databases (WoS, ERIC, ProQuest, SPORTDiscus, SciELO) using key words related to the Game Performance Assessment Instrument, Physical Education (Spanish or English), and the Boolean operators ‘OR’ and ‘AND’. The authors conducted a manual search of reviews including instruments evaluating game performance in young people. All searches were exported to Mendeley®, and duplicated documents were removed. The first level of exclusion criteria was to remove not original articles reading titles and abstracts. The second exclusion criteria were: (1) using GPAI out of PE lessons/fields (i.e. sports training), (2) articles not applying intervention on PE (i.e. theoretical articles or data collection only), and (3) interventions on PE but not using GPAI. The PRISMA guidelines was followed during the process. Finally, the quality of the included articles was measured using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.Results 27 papers were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. The results showed most of the included articles analysed the influence of pedagogical models on the students’ learning. In comparison to previous reviews, there was greater use of this instrument along with the implementation of the models’ hybridization that seemed to have better results than the application of one model. Conversely, invasion or net games were evaluated while previous reviews included more sport categories. The most analysed game components were Decision-Making and Skill execution and most researchers employed indexes of these components despite it could mask the nature of the students’ learning. 23 papers used video recordings to evaluate the GPAI but only 12 studies detailed the training time received by expert coders. Only one paper used the GPAI in live situations by students, and explained they received a previous training session. Knowledge tests were linked to the GPAI to measure cognitive/physical learning among students.Conclusions The evaluation of game performance and its components has been linked to the application of pedagogical models and within the school context. It is suggested that the GPAI be used teaching-learning by involving the student in the peer evaluation process and with knowledge tests to confirm learning acquisition. The benefits of using technology can facilitate the implementation of GPAI through standardized software by students and teachers. Future studies should explore the involvement of students in their assessment, use of technology, and different games.