The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical discussion on the role of the coach developer. The discussion is framed within the context of the roles coach developers play within coach education and sport in the UK. We conclude with some reflective questions designed to promote discussion and debate on how to optimize the central role of the coach developer in shaping quality coach education and ongoing coach development.
Search Results
Sarah McQuade and Christine Nash
Sara M. Campbell, Ashley Fallaize, and Paul Schempp
Formal Preparation for Coach Developers The International Council for Coaching Excellence ( 2014 ) defines coach developers as those who are, “trained to develop, support and challenge coaches to go on honing and improving their knowledge and skills” (p. 8). As such, coach developers take on one or
Bettina Callary and Brian Gearity
In our special issue, we are very pleased to publish the work of fellow researchers around the world, but we also note that while there is work being done by coach developers worldwide, the authors in our special issue are concentrated in only five countries (Canada, USA, United Kingdom, Australia
Anna Stodter and Christopher J. Cushion
active knowledge construction through social interaction ( Phelan & Griffiths, 2018 ; Stodter & Cushion, 2017 ). Perceptibly, if the role of impactful coach development is to accelerate learning processes ( Lyle, 2007 ), coach developers play a notable yet often overlooked part in this sociocultural and
James Davidson and Robert C. Townsend
Recent shifts internationally in coach education and development research have led to a distinct focus on the professional identity and practice of coach developers ( Allanson et al., 2021 ; Leeder & Cushion, 2020 ; Stodter & Cushion, 2019b ). Positioned either as knowledgeable experts in
Erin Kraft, Diane M. Culver, and Cari Din
initiative. The aim of this practice paper is to provide a snapshot of the program from the perspectives of two coach developers (CDs), as well as the two leads who promoted this initiative in the organization. This snapshot illuminates the potential of executing a WOTP for CDs when the appropriate supports
Lauren Downham and Christopher Cushion
Reflection and reflective practice have become conspicuous parts of coach education and the terms ensconced in the vocabulary of coach developers ( Cushion, 2016 ; Cushion, Griffiths, & Armour, 2019 ). To be “reflective” is seen as an essential part of coach learning (e.g., Cassidy, Jones
Vitor Ciampolini, Martin Camiré, William das Neves Salles, Juarez Vieira do Nascimento, and Michel Milistetd
variables must be considered in the successful application of LCT, such as changing the instructor-centered teaching (ICT) mindset often taken for granted by learners, in the last few years, some coach developers (i.e., CEP instructors) have ventured to implement LCT principles to better train coaches (e
Mark Partington, Jimmy O’Gorman, Kenny Greenough, and Ed Cope
The coach developer, the umbrella term (e.g., Cushion, Griffiths & Armour, 2019 ; Stodter & Cushion, 2019 ) for a number of associated roles such as coach educator, tutor, facilitator, and trainer ( International Council for Coaching Excellence, 2014 ; Trudel, Culver & Werthner, 2013 ), has a
Kate Kloos and Jonathon Edwards
In Canada, the National Coaching Certification Program (NCCP) is the standardized national coach education program which provides sport-specific training in 66 sports and additional multisport courses. To achieve certification in the NCCP, both coaches and coach developers (CDs), as the leaders of
