This file was dowloaded from the institutional repository Brage NIH -brage.bibsys.no/nih Jones, R. L., Edwards, C., Tuim Viotto Filho, I. A. (2014 AbstractThe aim of this article is two-fold. Firstly, it is to advance the case for Activity Theory (AT)as a credible and alternative lens to view and research sports coaching. Secondly, it is to position this assertion within the wider debate about the epistemology of coaching. Following a framing introduction, a more comprehensive review of the development and current conceptualisation of AT is given. Here, AT's evolution through three distinct phases and related theorists, namely Vygotsky, Leont'ev and Engeström, is initially traced. This gives way to a more detailed explanation of AT's principal conceptual components, including 'object', 'subject', 'tools' (mediating artefacts), 'rules', a 'community' and a 'division of labour'. An example is then presented from empirical work illustrating how AT can be used as a means to research sports coaching. The penultimate section locates such thinking within coaching's current 'epistemological debate; arguing that the coaching 'self' is not an autonomous individual, but a relative part of social and cultural arrangements. Finally, a conclusion summarises the main points made, particularly in terms in presenting the grounding constructivist epistemology of AT as a potential way forward for sports coaching.

The primary purpose of this paper was to investigate the use and manifestation of humour within sports coaching. This was particularly in light of the social significance of humour as a critical component in cultural creation and negotiation. Data were gathered from a ten-month ethnographic study that tracked the players and coaches of Senghenydd City Football Club (a pseudonym) over the course of a full season. Precise methods of data collection included participant observation, reflective personal field notes, and ethnographic film. The results demonstrated the dominating presence of both 'inclusionary putdowns' and 'disciplinary humour', particularly in relation to how they contributed to the production and maintenance of the social order. Finally, a reflective conclusion discusses the temporal nature of the collective understanding evident amongst the group at Senghenydd, and its effect on the humour evident. In doing so, the work contributes to the body of knowledge regarding the social role of humour within sports coaching.

The significance of this article lies in examining how sports coaches construct and negotiate their professional sense making; what Goffman described as the practices engaged in to manage ‘ugly’ interpretations. Using the work of Garfinkel and Goffman, the article pays attention to coaches’ ‘ethno-methods’; that is, the background knowledge and practical competency employed in forming and maintaining social order. In doing so, the explanatory accounts of Christian, a coach and author who supported the co-construction of this work, were collected via recorded interviews over the course of a 3-month period during a competitive season. The analysis explores the procedures used to ‘achieve coherence’ in what he did. The analysis employed Garfinkel’s description of ‘artful practices’ and related concepts of ‘self repair’ to demonstrate the fundamental interactional ‘work’ done by Christian, not only to understand why he did what he did, but also how he would ‘get things done’ in future. Such analysis highlights the mundane routines of coaching in particular, and work settings in general, to reveal the backstage manufacturing individuals ‘do’ to maintain a sense of ‘practical objectivity’ to their continual inferences, judgements, and justifications of practice.

No abstract

No abstract