Dr Bob Muir

We outline the evolution of a computerised systematic observation tool and describe the process for establishing the validity and reliability of this new instrument. The Coach Analysis and Interventions System (CAIS) has 23 primary behaviours related to physical behaviour, feedback/reinforcement, instruction, verbal/non-verbal, questioning and management. The instrument also analyses secondary coach behaviour related to performance states, recipient, timing, content and questioning/silence. The CAIS is a multi-dimensional and multi-level mechanism able to provide detailed and contextualised data about specific coaching behaviours occurring in complex and nuanced coaching interventions and environments that can be applied to both practice sessions and competition. © 2012 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Coach behaviour, practice activities and the relationship between the two are seen as essential components in athlete learning and development. This study examined the coaching intervention behaviours employed by three collegiate coaches as a function of ‘practice state’ over a season long period. Systematic observation of these coaches’ behaviour was conducted using the Coach Analysis Intervention System (CAIS). Coaches also participated in semi-structured interviews to explore how and why they used the intervention behaviours in the ways they did within the different practice states. Whilst the data from the systematic observation were analysed descriptively and inferentially, the interview data were analysed deductively. Although multivariate analysis of variance tests revealed significant differences for the practice state of two of the three coaches, follow-up analyses revealed that the main differences in coaching behaviour were between ‘other’ states when compared to ‘training’ and ‘playing’ states. The results demonstrated limited changes to coaching behaviour as a function of ‘practice state’ for the three coaches, intimating that the drivers of the coaches’ design and implementation of practice sessions and the delivery of instruction were their existing ‘folk pedagogies’ rather than scientifically-based evidence.

A defining element of coaching expertise is characterised by the coach’s ability to make decisions. Recent literature has explored the potential of Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM) as a useful framework for research into coaches’ in situ decision making behaviour. The purpose of this paper was to investigate whether the NDM paradigm offered a valid mechanism for exploring three high performance coaches’ decision-making behaviour in competition and training settings. The approach comprised three phases: 1) existing literature was synthesised to develop a conceptual framework of decision-making cues to guide and shape the explora- tion of empirical data; 2) data were generated from stimulated recall procedures to populate the framework; 3) existing theory was combined with empirical evidence to generate a set of concepts that offer explanations for the coaches’ decision-making behaviour. Findings revealed that NDM offered a suitable framework to apply to coaches’ decision-making behaviour. This behaviour was guided by the emergence of a slow, interac- tive script that evolves through a process of pattern recognition and/or problem framing. This revealed ‘key attractors’ that formed the initial catalyst and the potential necessity for the coach to make a decision through the breaching of a ‘threshold’. These were the critical factors for coaches’ interventions.

The chapter provides a top-level 2023 take on a, to date, decade-long UK programme of coach developer development for performance development and high-performance sport. It explores programme goals, resources, and activities. These are underpinned by ideational and practical ideas concerning practice, learning, content, and processes. The importance of the characteristics of the programme participants and programme designers and deliverers (PDDs) is also noted. The programmatic area is sophisticated and integrated and cannot be easily captured, explained, and indeed delivered. However, ideas around complexity, emergence, layeredness, depth, and contextual dependence are important to both practical and developmental understandings and processes. Considerable emphasis is placed on practical in situ and social learning (PSL), although the wider andragogical strategy is pluralistic. Ultimately, programme participants, PDDs, work together in varied practical and other contexts, to engage in, explore, and make sense of their individual and collective coach development and coaching experiences. This sense-making engages ideas about coach development and coaching captured through ideas such as ‘problems before solutions’ and ‘meeting the learner where they are at’. Future work will provide more detail on the programme as well as examples of lived experience and formal evaluation.

This paper overviews an intensive 1:1 coach development workflow developed and used in U.K. performance and high-performance sport. The workflow has been field tested with over 60 coaches in mainly Olympic and Paralympic settings in a variety of sports. The workflow proposes six main stages: “beginning new relationships,” “seeking first to understand,” “preparing for reflective conversations,” “engaging in reflective conversations,” “working with difference,” and “supporting change.” The stages are tailored pragmatically to context, and the workflow does not suggest a fixed sequence. The application of the workflow requires adaptive expertise based on considerable coach development experience and a breadth and depth of coaching and coach development knowledge. The workflow suggests the need for coach developers to build and support trusting, collaborative, and supportive relationships with the coach, as a foundation for the coach development task. Coach development practices and the workflow are continually being developed and refined in a U.K. context, and future work will provide case studies, evidence of outcomes, and refinements to the work.

The work is therefore both relational and developmental. Coach and coach developer both bring something to the working relationship, which in turn shapes and influences the nature of the work undertaken.

Talent scouts are an essential part of talent identification and development systems in all sports though their effectiveness has often been questioned by academics. In asking talent reporters to write summarised holistic judgements about players, they interfere with the selector’s ability to come to informed judgements themselves. In club scouting, this is often necessary given the large number of players they will have under consideration. As the flow of player data into and through the department began to increase, the live game reporting was still deemed to be of central importance to the decision-making process. Coaches were keen to know how players were performing week to week, and keen to pick up on ‘soft intelligence’ that a talent reporter may have gleaned from being present at the game. The framework was developed through a 2-day consultation with the group of talent reporters who developed drafts and experimented with it in a live reporting setting.

Written by a team of leading international scholars and researchers from the UK, US, Canada and Australia, and bridging the gap between theory and practice, this book is an essential course text for any research methods course taken as part ...

The creation of a legacy from the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games has been articulated by government in the form of five promises, some of which have implications for coaching (Department of Culture, Media and Sport 2008, Before, during and after: making the most of the London 2012 Games. London: Department of Culture, Media and Sport). The UK Coaching Framework (sports coach UK 2008a, The UK Coaching Framework: a 3-7-11 year action plan. Leeds: Coachwise) makes the case that sport coaching has a role to play in delivering legacy and policy objectives through the systemic development of active, skilled and qualified coaches. The status of the UK Coaching Framework as a complex intervention to support policy and legacy objectives is addressed in this article. The analysis is referenced against seven criteria derived from the realist approach to impact evaluation (Pawson et al. 2005, Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of health services research and policy, 10 (1), 21-34; Pawson 2006, Evidence based policy: a realist perspective. London: Sage), with an emphasis on programme theories. The programme theories of the Framework position sport coaching as a generative mechanism for outcome patterns in participation and performance sport. In order to maximize the impact of this mechanism, the Framework proposes strategic action areas that include participant and coach modelling; workforce analysis, recruitment and deployment; support and education; regulation as well as research. The Framework proposes to integrate these action areas into implementation chains throughout the United Kingdom, supported by the progressive alignment of resources. The programme theories recognize the agency and responsibility of the coach, as well as the volition of participants in different contexts, with implications for the way in which coaching roles are defined. It is concluded that the UK Coaching Framework is a complex intervention, which is amenable to realist impact evaluation. It is suggested that such evaluation will provide a more robust basis to understand the impact of sport coaching on legacy. © 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

Introduction: This study attempts to understand the work of coach developers in the development of coaches. There is currently little understanding of what people in these roles do and, therefore, what their professional development needs are. Method: A total of 15 coach developer professionals were engaged in data collection. Data was collected through one or more of; interview, observation in one to one sessions, observation in workshop settings. Results and discussion: Using theoretical models to analyze data, an expert coach developer was defined through requisite professional skills, knowledge and typical behaviors in 6 domains. While this definition was achieved, caution is suggested since this definition is reflective of ‘Frankenstein’s monster’ rather than reality. Due to the ill defined nature of the role ‘coach educator’, the defined domains should be used as benchmarks to measure personal practice against alongside the goals of the role and the context within which the role is undertaken.

There has been recent critique of strength and conditioning (S&C) education for preparing individuals for the interdisciplinary nature of the S&C coaching role. Although recommendations have been provided, conceptualising and creating a framework for designing, delivering and developing theoretical, applied and experiential knowledge domains for the S&C coach is limited. This paper aims to present a conceptual framework for professional judgement and decision-making within S&C coaching. The framework involves six interrelated knowledge domains, based upon coaches understanding of 1) the ‘WHO’ (i.e., their participant); 2) the ‘WHAT’ (i.e., the principles of S&C and the demands of the sport / discipline within which their participant competes); 3) the ‘HOW’ (i.e., principles of learning and skill acquisition); 4) the ‘COACHING PROCESS’ (i.e., their planning, delivering and reflecting [P-D-R] practices); 5) the ‘CONTEXT’ (i.e., the context, culture and politics within which they operate); and 6) their ‘SELF’ (i.e., their own existing knowledge, beliefs, values and behaviours). This framework could be used for aligning S&C coach education with the requirements of the S&C coach role alongside being a useful framework for continued professional development within the industry.

Chapter 2 discusses the planning process and the various approaches to planning a coaching programme specifically designed for the youth performer. Many of these principles will hold true for other performers as planning, like coaching, is a process that can be both short and long terms. Some coaches plan on a session-by-session basis whereas others can work on a four-year programme. This chapter highlights the nested planning principles, applicable to all sports, that lead to expertise in coaching. This chapter discusses the planning process and the various approaches to planning a coaching programme specifically designed for the youth performer. It highlights the nested planning principles, applicable to all sports that lead to expertise in coaching. The macro, meso and micro terms introduced earlier identify that short-term cycles of development should set in the context of medium-term cycles, which are in turn set in the context of longer-term development cycles. In coaching terms, this would mean that a single coaching session was guided by the longer-term goals. Abraham and Collins identified the type of thinking changes with the planning stage. Educational psychologist John Biggs developed the concept of constructive alignment as a method to develop, and achieve, specific learning objectives in adult education. The most common terms describing movement are ‘fundamental movement skills’ (FMS). FMS have been described as the building blocks that enable young and more mature participants to take part in most sports and games successfully.

Decision-making is a key factor in developing coach expertise and effectiveness. This article presents a framework for enhancing coach decision-making within strength and conditioning (S&C). Based on theoretical understanding of the athlete (the ‘who’), S&C training principles and sport demands (the ‘what’) and learning theories and behavior (the ‘how’), coaches can enhance S&C practice (‘planning, delivering and reflecting’). In addition, understanding contextual challenges (‘context, culture & politics’) and own beliefs, values and behaviors (‘self’) must be considered. Recommendations are presented for implementing constructively aligned learning programs based on the decision-making framework for enhancing coach learning and professional development within S&C.

Over the course of the last two decades, coach education programmes have become a globally recognised mechanism for improving the quality of coaching practice (International Council for Coaching Excellence, 2013). As a result, they have attracted attention from sport coaching researchers who have examined different aspects of coach education programmes, in different ways (Gilbert & Trudel, 2004; Rangeon et al., 2012). However, it is argued that there has been a failure to adequately consider two important issues. First, assessment as a feature of coach education programmes has been overlooked in the peer-reviewed literature (Hay et al., 2012; McCarthy et al., 2021). Second, despite the well-resourced (relative to sport coaching more generally) nature of coach education programmes (and the systems within which they function) they are often subject to little meaningful evaluation.  Responding to both issues, the present study represents a critical realist informed evaluation of project-based assessment as a feature of the FA Level 3 (UEFA B) in coaching football programme. Drawing on realist evaluation (Pawson & Tilley, 1997), the ERE model (North, 2017), and adaptive theory (Layder, 1998) to form a hybrid research methodology, the study was undertaken in two phases. First, theories were generated to establish the intentions of project-based assessment; this involved a review of appropriate grey literature, a series of realist interviews with individuals who had influence on and/or designed the programme, and a review of the academic literature. Second, the resultant theories were explored in the field over nine months, across three programme delivery sites, working with 16 stakeholders (full-time coaching leads, coach educators, and coaches). Three findings are discussed, which each partially explain how and why projectbased assessment as a feature of the FA Level 3 (UEFA B) in coaching football 3 programme worked for specific coaches in certain circumstances. These include: the importance of establishing what is required and what ‘good’ looks like, the role of metacognitive skills, and access to networks of support. These are presented as an integrative framework for assessment in coach education which offers some important principles to be considered when designing and implementing assessment in coach education.