Narrative as a learning tool for coaches of athletes with a disability: using stories to translate research into practice

ABSTRACTBackground: Within the context of sports coaching and coach education, formalised mentoring relationships are often depicted as a mentor–mentee dyad. Thus, mentoring within sports coaching is typically conceptualised as a one-dimensional relationship, where the mentor is seen as the powerful member of the dyad, with greater age and/or experience [Colley, H. (2003). Mentoring for Social Inclusion. London: Routledge].Aim: The aim of this study was to explore the concept of a multiple mentor system in an attempt to advance our theoretical and empirical understanding of sports coach mentoring. In doing so, this paper builds upon the suggestion of Jones, Harris, and Miles [(2009). “Mentoring in Sports Coaching: A Review of the Literature.” Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 14 (3): 267–284] who highlight the importance of generating empirical research to explore current mentoring approaches in sport, which in turn can inform meaningful formal coach education enhancement. The significance of this work therefore lies in opening up both a practical and a theoretical space for dialogue within sports coach education in order to challenge the traditional dyadic conceptualisation of mentoring and move towards an understanding of ‘mentoring in practice’.Method: Drawing upon Kram’s [(1985). Mentoring at Work: Developmental Relationships in Organisational Life. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman] foundational mentoring theory to underpin a multiple mentoring support system, 15 elite coach mentors across a range of sports were interviewed in an attempt to explore their mentoring experiences. Subsequently, an inductive thematic analysis endeavoured to further investigate the realities and practicalities of employing a multiple mentoring system in the context of elite coach development.Results: The participants advocated support for the utilisation of a multiple mentor system to address some of the inherent problems and complexities within elite sports coaching mentoring. Specifically, the results suggested that mentees sourced different mentors for specific knowledge acquisition, skills and attributes. For example, within a multiple mentor approach, mentors recommended that mentees use a variety of mentors, including cross-sports and non-sport mentors.Conclusion: Tentative recommendations for the future employment of a multiple mentoring framework were considered, with particular reference to cross-sports or non-sport mentoring experiences.

Sport coaching is embedded with ego and sociocentric beliefs which assumes that embodied experience as an elite athlete is necessary to become an effective coaching practitioner, at the expense of knowledge obtained via formal professional development opportunities. Problematically, national governing bodies have legitimised these beliefs by actively promoting the process of fast-tracking, which entitles elite athletes to accelerated progression through formal coach education courses, despite the potential issues this may cause. Consequently, the aim of this research was to understand and explore coaches’ and coach developers’ perspectives towards fast-tracking within British Orienteering’s formal coach education provision. Multiple qualitative data collection methods were employed, including virtual dyadic interviews (n = 2) and focus groups (n = 2) with coaches (n = 8) and coach developers (n = 3), in addition to the analysis of documents related to formal coach education courses. A phronetic iterative approach to data analysis was adopted, with three themes constructed: (1) knowing what good looks like: privileging practitioner experience and endorsing fast-track routes; (2) obtaining respect and coaches’ preference for fast-tracking; and (3) a flawed coach education system: creating a cottage industry and sympathising with coaches. The findings are critically discussed and situated within the specific sport coaching and broader professional learning literature.

Training of athletes with disabilities in various adaptive sports in recent years is an important area of research. However, the effectiveness of the process of training athletes depends not only on training programs, but also on the quality of training of coaches in adaptive sports, which play a key role in the socialization and integration of people with disabilities through the use of sports. The problem of training for the field of adaptive sports is relevant and needs to be addressed urgently. The purpose is to substantiate the structure and content of professional preparedness of coaches in adaptive sports. To solve this goal, we used the following research methods: analogy, analysis, synthesis, abstraction, induction, extrapolation, generalization of practical experience. As a result of the research the structure of professional preparedness of a coach in adaptive sports is substantiated, which includes general-theoretical preparedness, special- theoretical preparedness, professional-pedagogical preparedness and professional-practical preparedness. The content of the components of professional preparedness of a coach in adaptive sports has been supplemented on the basis of taking into account the ideological orientation of adaptive sports and the peculiarities of motor activity of athletes with disabilities. The components of professional and pedagogical preparedness and professional and applied preparedness should cover the specifics of the sport, so their content may differ in part in different adaptive sports. The special theoretical basic preparedness of a coach in adaptive sports, in addition to the available scientifically sound content, should include information content on the basics of sports biomechanics, rehabilitation, anti-doping legislation and classification.

The increasing participation in Para sport has created a demand for more qualified coaches, yet their development mainly depends on informal and experiential methods due to limited formal opportunities. Effective collaboration between sports organizations and governmental bodies is crucial to developing comprehensive coach development opportunities tailored to the specific needs of Para sports. Design Thinking offers a viable solution to bridge existing gaps by fostering innovative, human-centered approaches that lead to the development of solutions tailored to the evolving demands of Para sport coaching. The purpose of this study was to introduce and propose the utilization of Design Thinking to enhance coach development opportunities in Para sport, illustrated through a comprehensive analysis of a 2-day design challenge event based on the Hasso-Plattner Institute Model. The event brought together a varied group of stakeholders, including managers, coaches, coach developers, and athletes. Design Thinking, with its focus on empathy, iterative problem-solving, and collaboration, was instrumental in helping participants move beyond their individual biases. The study provided actionable strategies for implementing Design Thinking in the context of Para sports, contributing to improving the overall Para sport experience.

Despite the recognized benefits of cross-cultural learning in the globalized world of sports, transnational sports coaching education programs remain scarce and have yet to be widely implemented in Higher Education across Europe. In this practical advance paper, we present how Coach Developers from Malta, Denmark, Iceland, and Turkey, in cooperation with the International Council for Coaching Excellence, collaboratively designed and delivered CoachEd6, a coaching education program at the bachelor’s degree level. Utilizing the six phases of Wenger-Trayner et al.’s community of practice framework, we delve into the identity and dynamics of the group members and the community. We also examine the challenges encountered and how cross-cultural collaboration facilitated overcoming these obstacles, ultimately leading to the successful delivery of the program. We propose that forthcoming cross-national sports coaching programs should view the leading group as a communities of practice and consciously leverage the social dynamics inherent in both developing and delivering coach education to optimize outcomes. This becomes especially critical in the context of Higher Education Institutions within Europe. Moreover, fostering the growth of a communities of practice should be guided by a culturally sensitive leading partner, adopting a flat hierarchy and an ethos of “everyone contributes.”

Recent studies have provided important initial insights into the relational and micropolitical dimensions of coach educators’ and coach developers’ work. However, there remains a paucity of inquiry addressing how sporting organisations prepare these members of their workforce to achieve desired goals and objectives. This research uses realist evaluation and normalisation process theory to examine a bespoke ‘reality grounded’ learning initiative that targeted the professional judgements and decision making of experienced coach developers. This rigorous, longitudinal, and theoretically informed approach allowed for the generation of rich, causal, explanations of ‘what has worked within this learning initiative, for whom, and under what circumstances’. Specifically, the study provides original and significant insights into the interconnections between (a) new ways of thinking, organising and acting, (b) already existing, socially patterned, knowledge and practices, and (c) positive and sustainable changes in everyday professional practice; something that has been largely absent in the wider coach education literature base to date. The research concludes that the programme entails more a transfer of knowledge from tutors to coach developers. Importantly, this intervention also aided (a) the development of a coach developer community, (b) facilitated the exchange of information and ideas between peers and, ultimately, (c) impacted on coach development practices and behaviours.

Developing coaches as reflective practitioners is a key tenet of coach education frameworks, with coach developers playing a significant role in facilitating reflection. Consequently, the aim of this research was to explore the exercises, mechanisms, and challenges coach developers utilise and face when facilitating reflective practice within formal coach education. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with six active coach developers within an Irish sport governing body (SGB), with transcripts subject to a reflexive thematic analysis process. Findings indicated that while coach developers’ understanding and conceptualisation of reflective practice varied, they each attempted to facilitate reflection through similar pedagogical practices. Specifically, coach developers’ roles included adapting sessions to utilise learning opportunities, addressing the needs of coaches struggling with reflective practice mechanisms, and active engagement through prompts and feedback. While the relationship between the coach developer and coach was deemed significant in facilitating reflection, time constraints were highlighted as a major challenge when seeking to enable meaningful reflection. Furthermore, learners’ motivations for, and attitudes towards, coach education influenced their engagement in reflective discussions. This research adds to the growing body of literature on coach developers by specifically highlighting the practical demands they face in facilitating reflective practice.

The use and promotion of community sport is connected to various government priorities related to public health, social inclusion, integration, and community participation. Coaches are positioned as critical to inclusion in sport, mediating access, and equitable opportunities for disabled people to participate. However, we know very little about coaches in the community sport landscape as well as comparably little of their practice, roles, and the development opportunities available compared with elite disability sport contexts. This is concerning considering the patterns of exclusion disabled people face. Furthermore, the fractured nature of disability sport provision – characterised by multiple competing stakeholders – creates an uncertain contextual framework for coaches’ learning, development, and practice. The purpose of this chapter is to address this imbalance through a critical overview of social policy as it relates to coaching and coach education, before offering insight into the contribution of coaches to the delivery of community disability sport through a critical focus on Special Olympics New Zealand.

This chapter outlines how to use The Spectrum to analyse the pedagogical behaviour of coaches and explains how The Spectrum could be applied in coach education and development. It details how tools to assess coach self-awareness of teaching styles and alignment between perceived and actual pedagogical execution can be used as coach development instruments. Coach education that assists coaches to identify their perceived and actual teaching styles, in addition to exploring the underlying notions and explanations of such practice, is an avenue for coaches and coach developers open to self-reflection. Modifying, changing, or enhancing the practices of coaches requires recognition that the coach can identify their coaching behaviour and understand the assumptions that inform these behaviours. Hewitt’s investigation of tennis coaches teaching styles showed how to use The Spectrum as a survey tool for coaches to self-reflect on the use of teaching styles. The survey contained one question on each of The Spectrum styles.

Sports coaches have an important role to play in the development of their participants. One way that coaches can do this effectively is to ensure their behavior is appropriate for the people they coach. Previous research has highlighted that coaches are unaware of their behavior and how this impacts their participants. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of technology on reflection in sports coaches and explore the influence of enhanced critical reflection on coaching behavior. The study was underpinned by theoretical frameworks on reflection. In this study, experienced and qualified tennis coaches (n=3) were video- and audio-recorded three times over nine weeks delivering sessions to youth participants (n=7). Coaches had their behavior coded using the Arizona State University Observation Inventory. After each session, coaches reflected on recordings and sent reflections to researchers. Follow-up interviews were conducted with each coach. The results showed increased self-awareness of behavior, increased quality of reflection, and enhanced coaching behavior. The study findings suggest that technology is effective in aiding reflection and coaching behavior in youth tennis coaches. From this, it is recommended that National Governing Bodies, clubs and coach developers use similar interventions to enhance the quality of coaching.

Literature discussing youth sport coaching indicates the importance of a holistic coaching approach, particularly related to the use of positive youth development (PYD) approaches promoting the development and transfer of life skills. However, in the shadow of recent sociopolitical movements such as Black Lives Matter and Me Too, raised awareness of mental health concerns and an ongoing global pandemic, there are calls for a reimagined perspective of PYD through a social justice worldview. The purpose of the current article is to posit how coach education programs and coach development systems can inclusively meet the diverse needs of coaches, youth athletes, and society alike. Specifically, two questions guided the development of this article: 1) Why should coach education and coach development integrate social justice life skills? and 2) How may social justice life skills be integrated into coach education and coach development? Ultimately, as researchers and coach developers, we must not only be advocates for social justice in youth sports, but critically engaged activists who progress youth – and societal – development forward.

Coach developers (CDs) are an integral aspect of the coaching education system in Canada, as they are responsible for the delivery of the National Coaching Certification Program (NCCP) to coaches. A means of understanding the role of CDs within the Canadian coaching education system is to gain insight into the enablers and challenges of the interorganizational relationships (IORs) between the stakeholders (e.g., organizations, CDs, and coaches). The purpose of this insights paper was to use IORs to understand the CD relationship with other stakeholders in the coach education system as they pertain to enablers and challenges. The use of IORs is a relatively new theoretical concept within the field of coaching and coach education as it pertains to CDs. Through the empirical evidence of three sports—hockey, soccer, and baseball—there were three key themes that were indicative of IORs:the NCCP delivery, communications,andmonitoring/evaluating for effectiveness. On the basis of the findings from this current study, the intended system design of the Canadian coaching education system, which is based on role-set IOR, is a vertical model of top-down governance model. On the basis of the findings from this current study, the intended system design of the Canadian coaching education system, which is based on role-set IOR, is a vertical model of top-down governance, where one decision from the top impacts all the other stakeholders within the system.

The chapter considers how the university sector as a key stakeholder in the promotion of an inclusive physical culture can contribute to the development of disability (including para) sport. It focuses on two perspectives. The first considers universities as not just centres for knowledge production but also as focal points for promoting a critical pedagogy, forming the basis for developing disability sports coaches, scientists and administrators as critically reflective practitioners. The second relates to ways in which university portfolios can contribute to disabled athlete development through, for example, expanding the disability sport coaching base, adaptive strength and conditioning programmes, supporting the work of federations and engagement with research and development. The chapter closes by arguing that if universities are to serve the public good locally, regionally and globally, challenging neoliberal individualism at an institutional level and sharing information and expertise across the sector is necessary to provide the basis for a more accessible disability sport environment.

In the sports coaching field, learner-centered teaching (LCT) has been advocated as a viable approach to increasing learners’ involvement in the learning process. However, implementing LCT is not a simple undertaking as coach developers, and coaches have encountered dilemmas when it comes to shifting to LCT in coach education. This study aimed to investigate how LCT principles were implemented in a rugby coach education program through the perspectives of the researcher, the coach developer, and coaches. Participants included the researcher (i.e., first author), a coach developer, and 10 rugby coaches. The researcher observed three coach education courses, gathered descriptive and reflective field notes, and conducted individual semistructured interviews with both the coach developer and the 10 coaches. Findings shed light on the strategies adopted by the coach developer and the extent to which these strategies aligned with LCT principles. Coaches discussed how they enjoyed their active role in the courses and the approaches used by the coach developer to leverage learning. The discussion highlights the importance of coach developers in facilitating a learning process that is challenging, motivating, and supports coaches throughout the courses.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of coaching and coaching education in Portugal. In Portugal, sport coaching is traditionally considered a part-time vocation. There has been a growing concern of the Portuguese authorities to increase the standards of quality for sport coaching. Following the 1974 revolution there were profound alterations in how coaching and coach education are regulated. The legislative changes in coach education occurred mainly due to the harmonisation of the qualifications in the European Union. More recently, the responsibility for coach certification has moved from the different sports federations to a national sports organization that has created four grades of coach education. Coach education in all grades requires a general and a specific curricular component as well as an internship supervised by an accredited mentor. The academic formation is now well regulated. However, some sport federations are resistant to this academic certification process because they fear losing their exclusive control of their coach certification.