Dispositions and coaching theories: understanding the impact of coach education on novice coaches’ learning

Abstract

Whilst coach education has been the subject of much critique, it is often the first opportunity for novice coaches to be formally taught how to coach. Nevertheless, novice coaches arrive at coach education courses with an array of pre-existing dispositions and coaching theories, referring to naturalised and self-referenced approaches towards coaching practice, which can be resistant to change. Consequently, the aim of this research was to explore the construction and development of four novice coaches' dispositions and coaching theories, and whether they were either confirmed, developed, challenged, or changed by a Level 1 sport-specific coaching course. Following an instrumental case study design, four novice coaches were each interviewed before, during, and after their engagement with a Level 1 sport-specific course. Data were analysed thematically, informed by Phil Hodkinson and colleagues' theory of 'learning cultures' and the metaphor of learning as becoming, which draws upon Pierre Bourdieu's concepts of habitus, field, and capital. Three themes were developed which are representative of the three interview phases: (1) Pre-course: The development of coaches' dispositions towards practice; (2) During course: Challenging coaches' dispositions and coaching theories; and (3) Post-course: Future learning and critical reflections. The findings demonstrated that the four novice coaches' dispositions and coaching theories were largely underpinned by behaviourist assumptions, which were developed experientially. These dispositions and coaching theories were challenged and subsequently showed signs of transformation both during and after the Level 1 course, which promoted a constructionist games-based approach to coaching. Recognising the significance of novice coaches' dispositions and coaching theories may help governing bodies to support learners with understanding and engaging with constructionist informed coaching approaches, whilst appreciating coach learning as a social, embodied, and on-going process of dispositional re-construction.

Experiences of Student Coaches in Brazilians University Teams: a possibility for the coach education process

“…Allied to personal motivations, students, even in a scenario of institutional education, negotiate the importance of learning certain contents considering the environment involved (e.g., the complexity of a sports team) (Jarvis, 2011). The student coaches in this study found in university teams an alternative for personal progress that made them more secure in their learning about coaching (De Martin-Silva et al, 2015), despite acknowledging the following: (1) university-based coach education programs in Brazil do not provide adequate preparation for students to engage in performance contexts (Milistetd et al, 2014); (2) coach education programs are limited in helping students understand their current and future coaching practice (Webb & Leeder, 2021) ; (3) despite their potential, internships still present weaknesses (Dieffenbach et al, 2011;Gomes et al, 2018;Milistetd, Ciampolini, et al, Research, Society and Development, v. 11, n. 9, e43911932001, 2022 (CC BY 4.0) | ISSN 2525-3409 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i9.32001 13 2018; Zakrajsek et al, 2015).…”

Coaches’ acquisition of sport science knowledge and the role of education providers

“…Much of the research on sport coaching to-date has focused on how coaches learn, by either examining sources of knowledge or the life history of coaches, with eight sources of knowledge being identified within this review, namely formal education, workshops, experience, interactions with other coaches and athletes, observation, resource materials, mentoring and reflection. What is less clear, however, is an understanding of how these sources interact with contextual factors, such as the coaches' own circumstances and the learning context (e.g., Deek et al, 2013;Watts & Cushion, 2017;Stodter & Cushion, 2019;Cope et al, 2021), in what Webb and Leeder (2021) describe as a 'somewhat sobering picture' (pg. 2).…”

“…In contrast to the studies discussed above, who conducted studies with sports coaches with previous experience, Webb and Leeder ( 2021) sought to better understand the impact of an entry level sport-specific coaching course on novice coaches' disposition and learning. Drawing on Hodkinson and colleagues' (e.g., Hager learning, and how this affects cultural and social capital as coaches develop over time (e.g., Watts & Cushion, 2017), Webb and Leeder (2021) interviewed four novice sport coaches before, during and after they completed their course. Findings suggested that coaches' dispositions and coaching theories were largely determined prior to the course beginning, but that these evolved over the course of completing the qualification and continued to change afterwards.…”

“…Given the observation that coaches' dispositions and philosophies of practice are often stable structures that are difficult to change (Cope et al, 2016;Leeder et al, 2021;Webb & Leeder, 2021), it is concerning to think that a coaches first exposure to the sport sciences is after they have already evolved as a coach (notwithstanding the irony that athletes have reached this level of performance without the input of sport science). Given recognition earlier in this thesis that the amount of sport science content on coaching courses is small, particularly at the lower levels, it could be inferred that much of the scepticism surrounding sport science by coaches (though not those participating in this study) is as a direct result of a lack of opportunity to be informed rather than any other reasons.…”

“…Dispositions to coaching have been shown to be stable and difficult to change regardless of training (e.g., Webb & Leeder, 2021) and the same is true of coach developers (Paquette & Trudel, 2018b), inferring that there may be coach developers…”