Developing strength and conditioning coaches: a case for cognitive apprenticeship

Abstract

Traditionally Strength and Conditioning Coaches have been prepared for their roles through development of a strong theoretical knowledge base and demonstrating proficiency across a range of technical frameworks. Importantly, however, recent research within Strength and Conditioning (S & C) has argued for a focus on cognitive skills and processes to support the comprehensive and established bio-physical educational materials available to learners. Accordingly, an area of growing interest within S & C is how to most appropriately prepare coaches for the authentic demands of the workplace. In other professional domains, Cognitive Apprenticeship (CA) methods have been researched and adopted to enhance the effectiveness of workers.This article provides an overview of the characteristics of CA and how these pedagogical tools could be applied across different S & C learning environments. The approaches discussed, and conceptually modelled, offer a practical and feasible solution for future coach preparation methods. Such an approach would focus on developing more contextually aware and impactful coaches and improve the services provided to an organisation. Implications for Practitioners• This article highlights the principles of Cognitive Apprenticeship methods to support future design and delivery of situational learning experiences in the workplace.• Applications of Cognitive Apprenticeship methods in various learning environments are presented offering application in both face-to-face and simulated contexts.• The importance of teachers providing authentic, workplace situations to learners to develop their contextual decision making is emphasised.

Coaching player decision making in rugby union: exploring coaches espoused theories and theories in use as an indicator of effective coaching practice

“…However, we suggest that coaches be sceptical of and reflect on what is it that they do, what they're trying to achieve and why are they doing it (Abraham and Collins 2011b;Collins, Collins, and Carson 2022). Thus, coaches should be supported by coach developers to engage in a cognitive apprenticeship to understand theoretical concepts as tools available for hire within their coaching (Downes and Collins 2022). Coaches can then be better supported to make pragmatic judgments on what intentions for impact are appropriate and what learning activities and coach behaviours are suitable to shape an effective learning environment for their players decision making (Cruickshank and Collins 2013;Abraham and Collins 2011b).…”

“…Cushion et al's (2011) coach analysis and intervention system (CAIS) is the most up-to date validated method of systematically observing coaching methods, inclusive of categories of specific learning activities and coach behaviours. If the epistemological gap is to be explored, employing a systematic observational tool such as the CAIS alone, fails to explore the reasoning behind why coaching methods have been employed and why others haven't been (Downes and Collins 2022;Martindale and Collins 2010). It is also necessary to consider whether specific learning activities and coach behaviours, have rightly or wrongly, been aligned and/or misaligned to each theoretical approach.…”