The Transferability of Sport Coaching Research: A Critical Commentary

Abstract

The Leeds Beckett repository holds a wide range of publications, each of which has been checked for copyright and the relevant embargo period has been applied by the Research Services team. We operate on a standard take-down policy. If you are the author or publisher of an output and you would like it removed from the repository, please contact us and we will investigate on a case-by-case basis.

Layers of Learning in Coach Developers’ Practice-Theories, Preparation and Delivery

“…While coach developers noted some aspects of coaches' learning relevant to this process, such as picking up 'bits and pieces' from a course, the two key areas of challenge experienced by coach developers also relate directly to the central 'double-loop' filter process. Such evidencebased frameworks could be used to enhance the impact of coach developers in overcoming these and other challenges, by making connections with practice and integration into coach developer training (Lyle, 2018;Cushion et al, 2006). Alongside this, if personal experiences and thus implicit learning theories or folk pedagogies remain unseen and unchallenged, it is likely that coach developers may never realise their influence and the ways in which powerful assumptions about what is best for learners guides what they do (Armour, 2010).…”

“…These ideas will remain speculative however until further research elucidates the specific needs and learning processes of coach developers themselves, in order to plan more useful professional preparation and ultimately improve impacts on coach learners. Indeed, a pertinent question that remains to be evidenced is whether 'better' coach developer preparation would have any greater impact on coaches and coaching (Lyle, 2018).…”

“…Fundamentally, in the absence of operationalised and easily measurable learning outcomes, it is extremely challenging to identify the impact of coach developer training and preparation, and likewise formal coach education courses. Indeed, investigating intended and observed outcomes may facilitate necessary pragmatism as to what can realistically be expected of short, initial training episodes (Lyle, 2018). Tracking coach developers longitudinally through such training as one likely small part of their wider development would provide more robust evidence upon which to draw more functional conclusions.…”

“…Layers of learning in coach developers' practice-theories, preparation and delivery Recent perspectives concerning the learning and professional development of sport coaches have underlined a need to investigate social, relational, contextual and theoretical issues in increasingly sophisticated and pragmatic empirical approaches (Lyle, 2018;Townsend, Cushion & Smith, 2017). These approaches are aimed to better capture the wellestablished multifaceted, relational nature of coaching and learning to coach (Cushion, Armour & Jones, 2003), with evidence suggesting quality professional development involves participatory, contextualised opportunities linked to practice and active knowledge construction through social interaction (Phelan & Griffiths, 2018;Stodter & Cushion, 2017).…”

“…Importantly, sport coaching scholarship is yet to scrutinise and evidence these ideas or link surface structure behaviours to deep structure 'practice-theories'. As in teaching, coaching not only needs to articulate and interpret accepted practice theories, but also to look at the nuance of how intentions connect to practices (Makopoulou, 2018), in order to find out how these factors might be positively influenced (Lyle, 2018). The reproduction of assumptions about learning apparent through surface, deep and implicit structures of signature pedagogies, through the layers of coach developer training, to coach developer, to coach (and then to athlete) are yet to be explored.…”