After a long stagnant period, coach education has recently received an input of some theory driven progression ( Cushion et al., 2010 ). For example, the recognition of coach development as an aspect of adult learning has led to greater consideration of andragogy (the art and science of adult
John Stoszkowski and Dave Collins
Judith L. Smith and Dina M. Hayduk
This paper follows a coaching education program at a four-year institution from its inception to NCACE accreditation in 2005 and looks forward to reaccreditation and examines how the program changed to meet the National Standards of Sport Coaches. Along with curriculum changes, the major of the students selecting the coaching program has also changed. Lastly, the attainment of this national accreditation certification has influenced this coaching education program in terms of benefits, challenges, accountability and marketability.
Scott Douglas, William R. Falcão and Gordon A. Bloom
through three pathways: formal, nonformal, and informal. These pathways offer benefits and drawbacks for coaches of athletes with disabilities, as demonstrated within the literature. First, formal learning pathways are mostly represented by coach education courses and certifications developed and
Lawrence W. Judge, Kimberly J. Bodey, David Bellar, Christine Brooks and Terry Crawford
In recent years, large scale sport organizations and national governing bodies have produced coaching education programs to prepare coaches to teach and mentor athletes. The purpose of this study was to examine: a) track & field coaches’ familiarity with the National Standards for Sport Coaches, b) the alignment of United States Track & Field (USATF) Developmental, Level I, and Level II coaching education programs with the National Standards for Sport Coaches, and c) the alignment of USATF Developmental, Level I, and Level II coaching education programs with coaches’ perceived needs for subject matter training. A 39-item survey was administered during a USATF certification course to measure coaches’ familiarity and perceptions. The results showed the vast majority of coaches (75.2%) were not familiar with the National Standards. At the time of assessment, the Developmental, Level I, and Level II courses were partially aligned with 25 of 40 standards at the Level 1, Level 3, or Level 5 accreditation levels. The courses were not aligned with 15 of 40 standards at any accreditation level. The majority of deficiencies existed in Domain 2: Safety and Injury Prevention, Domain 7: Organization and Administration, and Domain 8: Evaluation. While the USATF coaching education curriculum is partially aligned with many, but not all, of the national standards, the curriculum appears to contain subject matter training that coaches perceived as needed. Curricular revisions, including future directions of the USATF coaching education program, such as new courses and innovative use of technology, are presented.
Jamie Araya, Andrew Bennie and Donna O’Connor
The purpose of this study was to enrich our understanding of formal coach education settings. We investigated how coaches developed knowledge during a postgraduate tertiary coach education course. We also explored coaches’ perceptions of changes they made to their coaching attitudes, behaviours, skills, and practices as a result of their studies. Semistructured interviews1 were conducted with 17 performance coaches. Results revealed that coaches developed knowledge through rich learning situations that were relevant to their coaching context. Furthermore, the three types of knowledge (professional, interpersonal and intrapersonal; Côté & Gilbert, 2009) were fostered in an environment that was socially constructed through a Community of Practice. Coaches felt they were better equipped to develop athlete performance as a result of the knowledge gained through the course. The findings reinforce the importance of developing formal coach education that is learner-centred, provides diverse learning experiences, and embraces informal learning concepts when embedded in formal learning contexts.
Lee J. Nelson and Christopher J. Cushion
Research frequently demonstrates that coaches learn by reflecting on practical coaching experience (Gilbert & Trudel, 2001), hence both reflection and experience have been identified as essential elements of coach education (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003). The case being studied was a United Kingdom (UK) National Governing Body (NGB) in the process of developing a coach education program. The purpose of this study was to empirically explore the use of reflection as a conceptual underpinning to connect and understand coach education, theory, and practice. Findings suggest that the curriculum could promote reflective practice, albeit in a largely decontextualized learning environment. Future research should attempt to directly measure, in situ, the impact of such courses on coaching knowledge and coaching practice.
Tiffanye M. Vargas, Margaret M. Flores and Robbi Beyer
Athletes with high incidence disabilities (specific learning disabilities, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, emotional behavioral disorders, mild intellectual disabilities and speech/language disabilities) make up 10% of the population of children in kindergarten through twelfth grade. Since these disabilities are not physically apparent, there difficulties may be overlooked or athletes may be mistakenly labeled as unmotivated, lazy, oppositional or defiant. These deficits can be remediated and compensated through the use of research-validated strategies and instructional methods. However, while these methods and strategies are often included in teacher preparation, they rarely, if ever, are included in coaching-preparation. Therefore, the purpose of this hour long interactive lecture is twofold and 1) seeks to review the coaching education research on hidden disabilities, including coaches’ attitudes and efficacy towards working with athletes with hidden disabilities, coaching educators attitudes towards the inclusion of such content within coaching education, and coaches’ preferences for how to receive this information, and 2) to illustrate teaching strategies and techniques that can successfully be incorporated into coaching education. Presenters will use discussion, activities, and research to introduce this new area to coaching education to coach educators and sport scientists/high performance directors.
Justine B. Allen and Colleen Reid
direction for change that can enhance the experiences and provisions of coach education and development for women coaches. Coach Learning and Development Coaches’ learning situations have been described as formal, involving structured programs that require participants to achieve certain standards and
Tania Cassidy, Paul Potrac and Alex McKenzie
The aim of this paper is twofold. The first purpose is to report on participant coaches’ perceptions of a theory-based coach education program (known as the CoDe program). The second purpose is to discuss how we, as coach educators, reflected on the initiation of the CoDe program. In evaluating the coach education program, semistructured interviews were conducted with eight rugby union coaches. Three themes emerged from the interviews: (a) thinking about athletes as learners, (b) focusing on the process of coaching, and (c) the value of talking with other coaches. Fullan’s (1991a) notion of curriculum change frames our discussion of the participant coaches’ evaluations and our reflections on the initiation of the CoDe program.
Margaret L. Søvik, Torill Larsen, Hege Eikeland Tjomsland, Oddrun Samdal and Bente Wold
This study explores grassroots coaches’ (GCs’) perceptions of the content of a one-day coach education workshop, the programme’s applicability, their use of the content, and the perceived barriers to implementing the programme in their coaching practice. One hundred and thirteen GCs completed follow-up questionnaires, while 12 of them were also interviewed. Descriptive statistics and qualitative analyses were conducted. The quantitative results indicate that the GCs were mainly positive about the programme content and found it easy to apply and adapt to. However, few GCs seemed to apply the programme principles to a great extent. The qualitative results illustrate that the GCs reported barriers that seem to relate to programme characteristics, in particular a lack of follow-up; individual factors, such as a lack of time; and organizational factors, like the lack of a shared understanding of the programme with their co-coaches, and lack of support from club officials. Thus, the findings imply that there is a need for an extended focus on organisational factors, especially support by club officials, when implementing coach education content in youth sports. Future recommendations for implementation of coach education workshops for youth grassroots coaches have been suggested, where support for the coaches is a key issue.