paper goes some way to addressing this by providing evidence for the multiple associated layers of learning in a formal coach education setting involved with the development of coach developers and coach development practices. Reflecting what is known about how coaches learn ( Cushion et al., 2010
Anna Stodter and Christopher J. Cushion
Bettina Callary, Scott Rathwell and Bradley W. Young
to coach MAs. Since coaching research has recognized formal coach education training as an important aspect of coach development (e.g., Côté & Gilbert, 2009 ; Nelson, Cushion, & Potrac, 2013 ), and since there is a seeming lack of information geared specifically towards coaching MAs, the purpose of
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.
Karl Erickson, Jean Côté and Jessica Fraser-Thomas
What experiences are needed to become a high-performance coach? The present study addressed this question through structured retrospective quantitative interviews with 10 team- and 9 individual-sport coaches at the Canadian interuniversity-sport level. Minimum amounts of certain experiences were deemed necessary but not sufficient to become a high-performance coach (e.g., playing the sport they now coach and interaction with a mentor coach for all coaches, leadership opportunities as athletes for team-sport coaches only). Although coaches reported varying amounts of these necessary experiences, general stages of high-performance coach development were traced. Findings serve to identify and support potential high-performance coaches and increase the effectiveness of formal coaching-education programs.
Wesley Meeter and Kristen Dieffenbach
Stone, Stone and Sands (2005) noted the critical lack of sport science and research based coaching practices in the United States. They noted that current practices are commonly not based on a systematic approach to coaching that allows for both intentionally applied evidence based scientific principles and valid and reliable evaluation methods. Coaching is a profession that requires strong decision making skills, constant assessment, and consistent integration of new information for successful talent development and performance management. Like athletic talent development, the development of these professional skills and the overall development of coaching expertise takes time and deliberate effort (Schempp, 2006). Unfortunately, while formal coaching education program and sport science studies emphasize the physiological, technical and tactical sides of preparing athletes, less attention is paid to the formal development of critical thinking and self-assessment necessary for professional growth and development as a coach. Further, the prevalent grass roots ‘athlete to coach’ and ‘assistant to head’ mentorship models of coach development provide even fewer opportunities for the systematic and deliberate development of these crucial skills.
Don Vinson, Polly Christian, Vanessa Jones, Craig Williams and Derek M. Peters
Inclusive and equitable processes are important to the development of sports coaching. The aim of this study was to explore how well UK coach education meets the needs of women sports coaches to make recommendations to further enhance the engagement of, and support for, aspiring and existing women coaches. The national governing bodies (NGBs) of four sports (Cycling, Equestrian, Gymnastics and Rowing) volunteered to participate and semistructured interviews using the tenants of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) within a Self Determination Theory (SDT) framework were undertaken with 23 coaches, eight coach educators and five NGB officers. The data themed into an analytic structure derived from SDT comprising ‘Autonomy: Freedom to coach’, ‘Coaching competence’, and ‘Relatedness and belonging’. The coaches perceived potential benefit from enhanced relatedness and belonging within their sport with the findings suggesting that NGBs should embrace coach-led decision making in terms of the developmental topics which are important and should adopt the development of competence, rather than assessing technical understanding, as the foundational principle of more inclusive coach education. Future research should investigate the impact of the inclusive practices which are recommended within this investigation such as the softening of the technocratic focus of formal coach education.
Julia Walsh and Fraser Carson
who deliver coach education. The coach developer must take into consideration the coach as learner, the design of safe, productive and challenging learning environments, and the sport ecosystem ( McQuade & Nash, 2015 ). Current delivery of formal coach education has received mixed reviews for its
DIGEST VOLUME 6, ISSUE #3
a year and a half. Using the Coach Analysis and Intervention System (CAIS) and associated video-stimulated recall interviews, changes in the practice behaviours and knowledge use of coaches completing a formal coach education course, and equivalent coaches not undertaking formal education, were
Fernando Santos, Daniel Gould and Leisha Strachan
deliver high quality PYD-focused coach education programs, as PYD-focused training for course instructors is needed. In order to investigate PYD-focused training for course instructors, it is necessary to consider how to explicitly integrate PYD in formal coach education programs and more precisely frame
Anne O’Dwyer and Richard Bowles
coaching is challenging, in part due to “the powerful influence of experience on coaches’ practice and the relative ineffectiveness of formal coach education” ( Light, Evans, Harvey, & Hassanin, 2015 , p. 53). The purpose of this paper is to advocate the use of self-study as a reliable and valid way of