Situating learning : (re)examining the notion of apprenticeship in coach education

The last two decades has seen a proliferation in the provision of, and importance attached to, coach education in many Western countries [1]. Pivotal to many coach education programmes is the notion of apprenticeship [2,3,4]. Increasingly, mentoring is being positioned as a possible tool for enhancing coach education and consequently professional expertise [5]. However, there is a paucity of empirical data on interventions in, and evaluations of, coach education programmes. In their recent evaluation of a coach education programme Cassidy, Potrac & McKenzie [6] conclude that the situated learning literature could provide coach educators with a generative platform for the (re)examinationof apprenticeships and mentoring in a coach education context. This paper consequently discusses the merits of using situated learning theory [7] and the associated concept of Communities of Practice (CoP) [8] to stimulate discussion on developing new understandings of the practices of apprenticeship and mentoring in coach education.

Reflections on a novel coach education program: A narrative analysis

This paper reports on a collaborative research project between the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Ottawa, Triathlon Canada, and the Coaching Association of Canada (CAC). It was designed around a lifelong learner perspective and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) qualifications system. In this paper, we first review the coach learning literature as it pertains to the CAC. We then highlight the background and perspective of a high performance director’s experience in designing and attempting to implement a novel coach education training program. In doing so we uncover the frustrations and tensions in trying to balance innovation with prescribed process and policy. We conclude by making suggestions for further research specifically focused on the background of the key agents involved with the design, implementation and administration of coach education training programs in the competition-development context of the NCCP.

New directions in coach education research

There has been substantial growth in the provision of, and importance attached to, coach education in many Western countries in particular, but there is also an emerging interest in the developing world (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999; Lyle, 2002). Yet this growth in interest has not resulted in a corresponding increase in research activity. Much of the focus of the existing coach education literature has been on coach development and learning (Cushion, Armour,& Jones, 2003; Malete et al, 2000; Sage, 1989; Weiss et al, 1991), coaching behavior and coach effectiveness training in the context of youth sports (Smith & Smoll, 1990; Smith, Smoll, & Barnett, 1995; Smoll et al.,1993) and the problems associated with the privileging of technical, tactical, and bio-scientific knowledges that have been characteristic features of much coach education provision (Abraham & Collins, 1998; Campbell, 1993; Potrac et al, 2000; Schempp, 2000). While this scholarship has provided valuable insights into some aspects of coach education, it underlines the absence of research addressing a range of topics such as the development of coach education curricula, the structures for coach learning, coaches’ learning processes and coach certification (Gilbert & Trudel, 2000). In this paper we discuss a new theoretical frame for coach education research centered on the idea of communities of practice.

Rural sports and recreational injuries in Australia: what do we know?

Objective: It is widely recognised that individuals residing in regional or rural areas have poorer health outcomes than those from metropolitan areas. Factors associated with these poorer health outcomes include geographical isolation, population declines, limited health care provision and higher levels of inactivity compared to urban areas. The mental, social and physical health of individuals and communities in rural areas can be improved through active participation in sport and recreation activities. Unfortunately, participation in such activities can potentially lead to injury. There is a suggestion that there is an increased risk of sports injuries in rural areas due to the lack of health professionals and coaching personnel, fewer available volunteers to organise and deliver sport, and the general attitude towards injuries in rural settings.

Results: There is very limited information about the number and types of injuries sustained during participation in sports activities in rural and regional settings. This is largely related to a lack of formal sporting structures and support mechanisms including research funding and trained personnel.

Conclusion: A range of factors need to be implemented to improve safety for sporting and recreational participants in these areas. These include improved monitoring of injury occurrence, stronger promotion of safety initiatives and wider implementation of education strategies.

Gaining Insight into Actual and Preferred Sources of Coaching Knowledge

Previous research has suggested that current formal coach education programs do not fully meet the learning needs of coaches. The purpose of the present study was to examine actual and preferred sources of coaching knowledge for developmental-level coaches. Structured quantitative interviews were conducted with coaches (N = 44) from a variety of sports. Learning by doing, interaction with coaching peers, and formal coach education were the top actual sources of coaching knowledge. Discrepancies were found between actual and preferred usage of learning by doing, formal coach education, and mentoring. Coaches indicated they would prefer more guided learning and less self-directed learning by doing. Further, differences in preferred sources were identified between coaches wishing to move to an elite level versus coaches wishing to stay at a developmental level. Findings highlight the importance of both experiential and formally guided sources of coaching knowledge and the context-specific nature of coach learning.

Four year course in physical education and athletic coaching.

"Amended curriculum. Approved by Board of Trustees, Dec. 4, 1929."

High performance sport coaching: Institutes of sport as sites for learning

There has been a marked increase in the number of government-funded, high performance institutes and academies of sport within Australia. Given that these organisations employ significant numbers of full-time performance sport coaches, they may be accurately characterised as workplaces. Performance sport coaches have underscored the importance of experience in developing their coaching skill. However, despite wide acceptance of the view that learning occurs everywhere but to different extents and with different efficiency, and the acknowledgement of current national coach education programs as insufficient, no sport coaching research has focused specifically on sport workplaces as sites for learning. This paper will review the current nature of coach development with a view to examining the interaction between what the workplace (institute/academy) affords the individual and the personal agency of the individual (high performance sports coaches).

MODERN SPORT COACHING AND THE LAW: IMPLICATIONS FOR COACH EDUCATION

Introduction
The intersection between the law of negligence and sport coaching in the UK is a developing area (Partington, 2014; Kevan, 2005). Crucially, since the law of negligence may be regarded as generally similar everywhere (Magnus, 2006), with the predominance of volunteer coaches in the UK reflective of the majority of countries in the world (Duffy et al., 2011), a detailed scrutiny of this relationship from the perspective of the coach uncovers important implications for coach education beyond this jurisdiction.  
Argumentation
Fulfilment of the legal duty of discharging reasonable care may be regarded as consistent with the ethical obligation not to expose athletes to unreasonable risks of injury (Mitten, 2013). More specifically, any ‘profession’ requiring ‘special skill or competence’ (Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582), including the coaching of sport (e.g., Davenport v Farrow [2010] EWHC 550), requires a higher standard of care to be displayed than would be expected of the ordinary reasonable person (Lunney & Oliphant, 2013; Jones & Dugdale, 2010). For instance, volunteer coaches with no formal qualifications (e.g., Fowles v Bedfordshire County Council [1996] ELR 51) would be judged by this benchmark of professional liability (Powell & Stewart, 2012). Further, as the principles of coaching are constantly assessed and revised (Cassidy et al., 2009; Taylor & Garratt, 2010), so too is the legal standard of care required of coaches (Powell & Stewart, 2012). Problematically, ethical concerns may include coaches being unwilling to increase knowledge, abusive treatment of players and incompetence/inexperience (Haney et al., 1998). These factors accentuate coaches’ exposure to civil liability.
Implications
It is imperative that coaches have an awareness of this emerging intersection and develop a ‘proactive risk assessment lens’ (Hartley, 2010). In addition to supporting the professionalisation of sport coaching, coach education/CPD focused on the legal and ethical aspects of coaching (Duffy et al., 2011; Telfer, 2010; Haney et al., 1998) would enhance the safety and welfare of performers, safeguard coaches from litigation risk, and potentially improve all levels of coaching (Partington, 2014). Interestingly, there is evidence to suggest a demand from coaches for more training on health and safety issues, including risk management and (ir)responsible coaching (Stirling et al., 2012). Accordingly, critical examination of the issue of negligent coaching would inform coach education by: enabling the modelling and sharing of best practice; unpacking important ethical concerns; and, further informing the classification of coaching as a ‘profession’.

Are coach education programmes the most effective method for coach development?

The purpose of this study is to establish whether coaches from a multi-sport context develop most effectively through coach education programmes and whether formal learning is fostering coach effectiveness. A sample of eight qualified male multi-sports’ coaches participated with an age range of 24 to 52 years (M = 32.6, ± = 8.9) and 9 to 18 years coaching experience (M = 12.6, ± = 3.8). Qualitative semi structured interviews were employed, lasting approximately 30 to 60 minutes. The data then underwent a thematic analysis process reducing the data into six overarching themes: values of the coach; the coach’s role on athlete development; forms of learning; barriers regarding coach education; role of governing bodies; coaches career pathway. The findings of the study indicated coaches access a wide range of sources to enhance their practice, but informal learning was preferred (interacting with other coaches and learning by doing). This resulted from numerous barriers experienced surrounding the delivery, cost and access to coach education programmes preventing coaches from progressing through the pathway. However, coaches in the study feel coach education should be a mandatory process for every coach. The findings have implications for policymakers and sport organisations in developing their coach education structure.

Discovering, applying and integrating: The process of learning in coaching

Professional coaching is a rapidly expanding field with interdisciplinary roots and broad application. However, despite abundant prescriptive literature, research into the process of coaching is minimal. Similarly, although learning is inherently recognised in the process of coaching, the process of learning in coaching is little understood and learning theory makes up only a small part of the evidence-based coaching literature. In this grounded theory study of coaches and their clients, the process of learning in coaching across a range of coaching models is examined and discussed. The findings demonstrate how learning in coaching emerged as a process of discovering, applying and integrating new knowledge, which culminated in a process of developing. This process occurred through eight key coaching processes shared between coaches and clients and combined a multitude of learning theories.