Supporting Coaches to Learn 2023 Muir and North copy 2 by leaguemanagers

SupportingCoachestoLearnThroughandFromTheirEveryday Experiences:A1:1CoachDevelopmentWorkﬂow forPerformanceSport

BobMuirandJulianNorth CentreforSportCoaching,CarnegieSchoolofSport,LeedsBeckettUniversity,Leeds,UnitedKingdom

Thispaperoverviewsanintensive1:1coachdevelopmentwork flowdevelopedandusedinU.K.performanceandhighperformancesport.Theworkflowhasbeen fieldtestedwithover60coachesinmainlyOlympicandParalympicsettingsina varietyofsports.Theworkflowproposessixmain stages: “beginningnewrelationships,”“seeking firsttounderstand,” “preparingforre flectiveconversations, ”“engaginginre flectiveconversations,”“workingwithdifference,” and “supporting change.” Thestagesaretailoredpragmaticallytocontext,andthework flowdoesnotsuggesta fixedsequence.Theapplicationof theworkflowrequiresadaptiveexpertisebasedonconsiderablecoachdevelopmentexperienceandabreadthanddepthof coachingandcoachdevelopmentknowledge.Thework flowsuggeststheneedforcoachdeveloperstobuildandsupporttrusting, collaborative,andsupportiverelationshipswiththecoach,asafoundationforthecoachdevelopmenttask.Coachdevelopment practicesandtheworkflowarecontinuallybeingdevelopedandre finedinaU.K.context,andfutureworkwillprovidecase studies,evidenceofoutcomes,andre finementstothework.

Keywords: experientiallearning,scaffolding,coachlearning,re ﬂectivepractice,relationalinquiry

Thispaperoverviewsanintensive1:1coachdevelopment workflowdevelopedandusedextensivelybythe firstauthor,andto adegreebythesecondauthorinaresearchanddevelopment context,inU.K.performanceandhigh-performancesport.The workflowhasbeendevelopedandutilizedinworkwithover60 coachesinassociationfootball,boxing,cricket,cycling,golf, hockey,kayakslalom,rugbyleague,rugbyunion,sailing,swimming,taekwondo,andtriathlonovera12-yearperiod.Thisincludesworkwith22Olympic,threeParalympic,17 “Podium Potential,” and23Englandnationalagegroupcoaches.The workflowhasbeendevelopedthroughpracticalandacademic engagement,application,andreflection,throughconsultancy commissionedbytheUnitedKingdom’sleadagenciesforhighperformanceandperformancedevelopmentsport UKSport,the EnglishInstituteofSport,SportScotland,SportNorthernIreland, andU.K.governingbodies.Theapproachiswellknownamongthe U.K.coachdevelopmentcommunitybuthasnotbeenformally published.Thefollowingpresentsinformationontheoriginand developmentofthework flow;itstheoretical,empirical,andpracticaljusti ficationthroughtheoverviewoftheunderpinningprinciples;andthe1:1coachdevelopmentwork flowitself.

OriginandDevelopmentoftheWorkﬂow

The ﬁrstandsecondauthorshavebeenprofessionalcolleagues sincethemid-to-late2000s.The ﬁrstauthorestablishedthesport coachingdegreeprogramatLeedsBeckettUniversity(thenLeeds MetropolitanUniversity).Thesecondauthorwasdirectorof ResearchatUKCoaching(thenSportsCoachUK,andalsobased

Muir https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9890-2317

North(j.north@leedsbeckett.ac.uk)iscorrespondingauthor, https://orcid.org/ 0000-0003-0660-1803

inLeeds).OurpathscrossedthroughthedevelopmentoftheUK CoachingFramework(SportsCoachUK,2008),andtheinitiation oftheUKCentreforCoachingExcellence(nowdisbanded),where the firstauthorwassecondedtoUKCoaching.Asaresultofwider stakeholderengagementthatresultedfromtheUKCentrefor CoachingExcellence,the firstauthorwasaskedtoundertake 1:1coachdevelopmentworkwithEnglandHockeyandUKSport attheturnofdecade2010.Thiswasnovelworkatthetimeand basedonusingaudio–videofeedbackasastimulusforreflection andtheapplicationoftwocoachingframeworks: “Aframeworkfor coachdecisionmaking” (Abrahametal.,2010; Muir,Morgan, Abraham,&Morley,2011)andthe “Coachingpractice:Planning andreflectiveframework” (CPPRF; Muir,2012; Muir,Morgan,& Abraham,2011; Muiretal.,2015).Theoriginalworkhasbeen developedconsiderablythroughiterativecyclesofdeploymentand reflectionacrossmultiplesportcoachingcontexts(Muir,2018). Thesecondauthor,amongmanytasksassociatedwithhis UKCoachingrole,wasexploringcriticalrealism( Bhaskar, 1978/1998 , 1975/2008 , 2012 )asameansofsynthesizingthe differentdisciplinarypositions(c ognitive,behavioral,strategic/ functional,complexity,social, andnormative)usedtodescribe, explain,andprescribesportcoaching,aswellasaddressing dif fi cultieslinkingresearchandpractice,tore fl ectthemultilayered,multifaceted,w orkofcoaches.The fi rstandsecondauthors beganworkingtogethertoexplorethesynergiesbetweentheir practicalandresearchendeavorsintheearly2010s,andajoint presentationonthisworkwasundertakenin2011( Northetal., 2011 )withfurtherworkpublishedin2013( North,2013a , 2013b ).Thecriticalrealistsynthesisevolvedintoan embedded, relationalandemergentframew orkof/forsportcoachingpractice ,whichwaspublishedasamonographin2017( North,2017 ). Thispractice-basedapproachwastakenonandadaptedtoshape an embedded,relationalandemer gentinterventionstrategyfor coachlearninganddevelopment ( Muir,2018 ).

Attheheartofbothpiecesofworkistheideathatsport coachingcanbeunderstoodasa goal-orientatedendeavor,where coachingstakeholdersattempttoachievegoalsthroughcommittingtoparticular actions,byadoptingparticular strategies,based onparticular reasons,andunderpinnedbyavailable resources Goals,actions,strategies,reasoning,andresourceswerearguedto beembeddedinasportcoachingecologyofindividuals,groups, institutions,andsocial–culturalarrangementswhichwereboth enablingandconstraining.Thisembedded,relational,andemergent(ERE)approachprovidesawayofthinkingabout,and exploringthecomplexityof,coachingpracticeandcoach development.

Thework flowisalsoinformedbyprinciplesderivedfrom contemporaryadultlearninganddevelopmentresearchandsubstantivelearningtheory(e.g., Boudetal.,1985; Brookfield,1995; Brown,2009; Dewey,1916, 1938; Engeström,2001; Eraut,1994; Freire,2006[1970]; Goodsonetal.,2010; Illeris,2003; Jarvis, 2006; Klein,2013; Knowles,1980; Mason,2002; Mezirow,1997; Moon,2004; Perry,1970; Rogers1969; Schön,1983; Scott& Bhaskar,2015; Weick,2003; Williams,2012).Therearefartoo manyprinciplestodetailhere,aswellastheunderpinningreferencesthatprovideorpromotethem.However,tounderstandthe workflowitisusefultogivethereaderasenseofsomeofthe details:

• Learningisshapedbytheinteractionoftheindividual,social, andpractical.

• Learningoccursbothnonconsciouslyandconsciously.

• Learningisshapedbyanindividual’sbiographyand motivations.

• Learningoccursthroughdirectengagementwith “livedexperience,” throughpracticaltasks,throughsocialengagement andinteraction,butalsowithreferencetoabstractconcepts andideas.

• Effectivelearningchallengesnonconsciousautomaticities/ habits,andunhelpfulconsciousideasandinclinations,often throughaprocessofexperientialaccommodationandconsciousreﬂection.

• Theprocessofreﬂectionisasmuchaboutproblemframing andsettingasitisproblemsolving individualslearnbest when “questionscomebeforeanswers” and “problemscome beforesolutions.”

• Theopportunityforlearningisenhancedwhenthegap betweenindividualexpectationandrealityisrecognizable andsigniﬁcant,thatis,wherethelearnerexperiencescontradictionsanddisjuncture.

• Buildingonthepreviouspoint,learningdesignerscanplayan importantroleinco-creatingsituationsthatsupportlearnersto noticethingsthatmightotherwisegounnoticed,generating interalia: curiosity,puzzlement,surprise,anduncertainty.

• Inthissense,learningdesignersplayacollaborative,dialogical,andreciprocalrole,co-creatingmomentsofpotentialfor learning;theyarefacilitatorsnotteachers;theyarelisteners andobservers,ratherthaninstructors.

• Learningdesignerscandrawonarangeoftools,datagenerationapproaches,socialresources,narrative,andabstractconceptsandideastoexploreexperiences,differences,andso forth. “Itisinthemomentofinterruptionthattheoryrelates mostclearlytopracticeandpracticemostreadilyaccommodatestheabstractconceptsoftheory” (Weick,2003,p.470).

• Learningiseffortfulandcanbechallenging/uncomfortable forthelearner thisneedstobenavigatedwithcareand sensitivity.

• Learningdesignersshouldestablishapositivenormative ambitionforthelearnernotonlyhelpingtofacilitatethe developmentofknowledgeandskills,butalsoencouraging amotivationtolearn,ahabit(quality)ofmind,andcritical consciousness,totakeadvantageoflearningopportunities. Itshouldbenotedthatallorsomeoftheseprincipleshavebeen reiteratedorempiricallyexploredinasportcoachingcontext (e.g., Abrahametal.,2006; Cushion&Nelson,2013; Griffiths etal.,2016; Jones&Turner,2006; Muir,2018; Nelsonetal.,2013; North,2017; Piggott,2015; Werthner&Trudel,2006).TheERE approach,togetherwiththeapplicationofcontemporarylearning andlearningdesignprinciples,andconsiderablein-fieldexperience,ledtothedevelopmentofthe1:1coachdevelopmentworkflowwhichwewillnowoverview.

AnIntensive1:1CoachDevelopment Workﬂow

Therearemanydifferentwayswecouldhavepresentedthe workflowincludingthemoreacademicallyorientatedapproach detailedinMuir(2018).However,itwasdecided,asa “practical advances” paper,thatitwouldbeprudentandhelpfultopresentthe workasapracticallyorientated,illustrative, “workflow.” Thereare sixmainstagesofthe1:1coachdevelopmentworkflow: “beginningnewrelationships,”“seeking firsttounderstand,”“preparing forre flectiveconversations,”“engaginginreflectiveconversations,”“workingwithdifference,” and “supportingchange” (Figure 1).Someofthesestageshavesubcomponentswhichare introducedaspartoftheoverview.Forexample,wepresentthe “beginningnewcoachdevelopmentrelationships” stageas1,and itssubstagesas1.1and1.2.

Workflowimpliessequentialprocess,andwhiletheapproach offersindicationsofabeginning,middle,andend,itwouldbe misleadingandaconsiderableoversimpli ficationoftheworkto understanditashavingastrictsequence.Thenumberinginthe figureandtextisanelucidatory, not apracticalapplied,strategy. Theactualapplicationoftheworkflowishighlycontextual, dependentonthecoach,thecoachingenvironment,thecoach developer,thetasksfocusedon,andinitialandongoinginteractions.Thecoachdeveloperusesexperienceandexpertisetoadapt tothecontext.Insomecases,theworkflowmaystartatStage2,in otherinstancesatStages3or4.However,becauseitisanongoing dynamiccyclicalprocesseachstageisalmostalwaysvisitedat somepoint.Thestagesarenotmutuallyexclusive;theremaybe commonalitiesandoverlapsbetweenstages.Indeed,inthetext thereissomeduplicationofprocessbetweenstagestoshowhow theyoverlapandinterconnect.

Wesuggestthatpractitionerscapableofundertakingeffective coachdevelopmentcanappreciateasystematicapproachtoconcept/idea presentation ,withoutitbeinginanywayasequential straightjacketinpractice.Inotherwords,althoughtheapplication oftheprocessiscomplexanddifficult,wehaveconfidencein adaptiveexpertpractitionerstounderstandthedistinctionbetween conceptpresentationandtheirnuancedapplication.Anyreportage on,orapplicationof,theworkflowasstrictlysequential,we suggestwouldbehighlyinappropriate,andinbadfaith.Indeed, thiswouldundermineacentralprincipleofourwork, “tomeetthe learner(coach)wheretheyare” asopposedto “wherewe(thecoach developers)are.” Wemakethispointinstridenttermstoavoid inappropriatescholarlycritiqueandpractitionerapplication.

TaskandRelationship:Acentralprincipleunderpinningthe workflowisattentiontoboth(a)thecoachdevelopment tasks and (b)the relationships thatunderpinandsustainthem(North,2017). Theprocessisneithersolelyinstrumentalnorsolelyaboutrelationshipdevelopmentandmaintenance.Ratheritisabouttheir complementarity,interconnection,andinterdependence.Thereis theactive(task)principle(yang,white)andthereceptive(relationship)principle(yin,black).The tasks cannotbeachieved appropriatelyandethicallywithoutdevelopingandmaintaining therelationships. Relationships aremeaninglessinacoachdevelopmentcontextwithoutthetasks.Inthesubsectionsthatfollow, boththetaskandrelationshipdimensionsareconsidered.Theyare woventogetherwithinthepresentationofthestagesandsubstages. Thedetailsofcoursearenotexhaustivebutprovidea flavorofthe kindofissuesencounteredduringapplicationofthecoachdeveloperwork flow.

TheWorkﬂow

1.BeginningNewRelationships

Beginningnewcoachdevelopmentrelationshipscanbethought aboutintwosubstages:(1)exploringexpectations,initialcontracting,andrelationshipbuilding,and(2)understandingwhat coachingissuesthecoachwishestofocuson.

1.1.ExploringExpectations,InitialContracting, andRelationshipBuilding

Coachesmay,understandably,feelapprehensive/nervousabout engagementwithacoachdeveloperandthecoachdevelopment experience.Theearlystagesoftheprocessinvolvegettingtoknow thecoach(andthecoachgetstoknowthecoachdeveloper);their expectations,hopes,andfears;and,importantly,howtheyhave

beenformed(e.g.,previousexperience/sofcoachdevelopment/ mentoring).This,ofcourse,mayalsobeinfluencedbyhowthe relationshipcametobe.Forexample,didthecoachseekoutthe supportofthecoachdeveloper,werethecoachandcoachdeveloperpairedaspartofabroaderprogramofcontinuouslearningand professionaldevelopment(orquali fication),orwasthecoach developeremployedbythecoach’semployer(i.e.,sportgoverning bodyorclub)andassignedtoworkwiththecoach.Exploring expectationstogethercanbereassuring,helptoclarifywhatmight beinvolved,whattheprocessis,andwhatitisnot.Working throughthistogetherformspartofthe initial contracting,as contractingisconsideredtobeanongoing,ever-present,feature ofthecoachandcoachdeveloperrelationshipwithinthis workflow.

Animportantfeatureoftheseinitialconversationsistomodel oneofthecentralprinciplesofthecoachdevelopmentprocess groundedinexperientialandcollaborativelearning.Wecallthis workingwiththecoach “in-to-out ” ratherthan “out-to-in.” The coaches’ experiences,intentions,reasons,strategies,andactions provide the focalpointforthecoachdevelopmentexperience. Learninganddevelopmentarenotsomething “done” tocoachesby thecoachdeveloperwiththelatter,forexample,sharinghis/her ideasand “wisdom”;ratheritisaboutworkingalongsidecoaches, supportingthemtoidentifyandresolvequestionsmeaningfulto theirpracticethatgenerateopportunitiesforpersonalandprofessionalgrowth(Muir,2018).Byfocusingonthecoach’sexpectations,questions,andconcerns,thecoachdeveloperseekstobuild trustintheprocessandrelationshipbydemonstratingalowselforientation(Maisteretal.,2001).

1.2.UnderstandingWhatCoachingIssuestheCoach WishestoFocuson

Animportantearlydiscussionfocuseson ﬁndingoutwhatthe coachisinterestedinexploringthroughthecoachdevelopment experience.Modelingtheprincipleof “workingin-to-out,” the agendaemergesovertimethroughsharedexperiencesandinteraction,dialogue,andcollaboration.Thus,thecoachisatheartofthe coachdevelopmentprocess.Importantearlyquestionsforthe coachdeveloperincludethefollowing:Whatmotivatesthecoach? Whatprojects,cares,andconcernsdoess/hehave?Whatmightbe aproductiveissuetofocusonearlytobuildconﬁdenceinthe relationshipandtheprocess?

2.SeekingFirsttoUnderstand

Thisfamiliarizationstagecanbeconsideredinthreesubstages: (1)exploringthecoach’sday-to-daycoachingandher/hislived coachingexperience,(2)learningaboutthecoach,and(3) ﬁnding outaboutwhatthecoachistryingtoachievewithher/hiscoaching.

2.1.ExploringtheCoach’sDay-to-DayCoachingand Her/HisLivedCoachingExperience

Thecoach’spracticeisimportantlyunderstoodthroughexploring theirpositioningandactivitiesincontext.Thecoachdeveloper learnsaboutthecoach’sideasandpracticesthroughbuildingan understandingofthecoachintheirday-to-daycoaching.Important areasforexplorationincludethefollowing:Whatiscoachingin thiscontext?Wheredoescoachinghappen?Howdocoachesframe theirrole,andhowistheirroleframedbyothers?Whoarethe stakeholdersinvolved athletes,parents,othercoaches,sport sciencesupportpractitioners,andmanagers?Whatinﬂuencedo

theyhaveonthecoachingcontext?Whatotherimportantenablers andconstraintsexistwiththecoachingcontext,forexample,linked toresourcing?Howdotheaboveinﬂuencethecoaches’ reasoning, strategy,andactions?Thelatterisjustaninitialembryonicsketch atthisstagetobegraduallybuiltupon.

2.2.LearningAbouttheCoach

Acentralpartoftheworkflowisgettingtoknowthecoachtothe extentthatthecoachdevelopercan(inthelongerterm)share information,data,andobservationsthatthecoachthemselveswere unawareof.Thismeansspendingtimeexploringthecoaches’ backgroundandbiography/history.Itinvolvesaskingquestions suchas:Howdidthecoachdevelopandgrowintothepractitioner theyaretoday?Howdoeswhattheyhaveexperiencedandlearned shapetheircurrentpractice(forbetterandworse)?Creatingtime andspaceforacoachtosharestoriesofpastexperiences,events, actions,andoutcomesformsanimportantpartofmeaningmaking andbeginstorevealsomethingabouttheunderlyingresourcesthat anchortheirreasoning,reflecting,strategizing,andactions(Muir, 2018).Asacoachreplaysapastexperience,detailssometimes emergethatwerepreviouslynotrecognizedandthingsthatwere previouslyunseen,unresolved,oruntouched(Gillott,2016).By creatingopportunitiesfordialogue,thecoachandcoachdeveloper begintomakesenseofcoachingexperiences,and,importantly,that thenarrativedescriptionsthemselvesareasourceofre flection,an empiricalconstructionborneoutofinterpretations, not theactual eventitself(Bolton,2014; Moon,2004; North,2017).

Theseearlyinteractionsprovidevaluableopportunitiesto establishthebeginningsofameaningfulrelationship.Forsome, theseearlyinteractionscreateasparkofinsight,amomentof potentialforlearning.Forothers,theprocesssurfacescritical considerationoftheircoachingrole,goals,andhowtheyare formed(Muir,2018).

2.3.FindingOutAboutWhattheCoachIsTryingtoAchieve Coachinggoals,whetherwrittenorunwritten,explicitorimplied, frameandprovideanevaluatoryvantagepoint,or “pointofentry,” toexplorecoachingpractice.Thecoachdeveloperattemptsto identifythefollowing:(a)Whatthecoachistryingtoachievewith her/hisathletes,(b)whatstrategiesthecoachisusingtoachieve thesegoalsandforwhatreasons,and(c)howthecoach’sgoalsand strategiesareembeddedinexistingrelationshipsandthewider coachingcontext,forexample,theclub,academy,andcenter.This substageinvolvesdiscussionswithcoaches,assistantcoaches, sportsciencesupportstaff,programleads,andparents(ifappropriateinthecontext)beforeandaftercoachingsessions.Itmight involvesittinginplanningdiscussions,pretrainingorcompetition briefings,andperformancereviewmeetings,capturingthecoaches’ andwiderstakeholders’ intentionsandstrategies.Many discussionswillbefocusedonspecificdevelopmentsormoments, butalsowithasensethatthesearenestedorlayeredwithinthe widerever-evolvingspatiotemporal “coachingecology.” The coachdeveloperusescarefulquestioning.Someofthesequestions mightbedifficultorchallengingforthecoach,anditmightbe appropriatetouseminimalencouragementsanddeliberatepauses toholdspaceforthecoachtoreflectandrespond.Itisimportantfor thecoachdevelopertolistenwiththe “intenttounderstand” rather than “theintenttoreply” beforeattemptingtoinfluencepractice (Covey,2004).Itisalsoimportanttonoticelanguageuseand somaticinformation,forexample,intonation,emotion,excitement, hesitancies,andbodylanguage.

These ﬁrsttwostagesplayanimportantroleinlayingthe foundationforaclose,collaborative,andtrustingrelationship. Replacingjudgmentwithcuriosity,thecoachdeveloperseeksto explorethecoach’ssenseofwhythingshappenthewaythatthey doandhowtheycametobe.Beingempathetic,attentive,demonstratingpositiveregard,andshowinggenuineinterestforthecoach andthestoriestheyshare,thecoachisencouragedtoplayamore centralroleindeterminingwhichaspectsoftheirpracticeareof interestandconcern(Rogers,1969).

3.PreparingforReﬂectiveConversations

Preparingforareﬂectiveconversationcanbelooselyconsideredas comprisingfouroverlappingsubphases:(1)gatheringinformation (sometimesreferredtoas “data”)tocreateastimulusforgenerating feedback.Therearemanywaystogatherinformation,butvideo/ audiocapturecombinedwithdetailed ﬁeldnoteshashistorically beenusedwithintheprocess;(2)invitingthecoachtoreviewthe rawvideo/audiocapture;(3)codingvideo/audiofootage;and (4)identifyingtheories,concepts,andframeworktoscaffold thinking.

3.1.GatheringInformationtoCreateaStimulus forGeneratingFeedback

Coachesaresometimesunawareoforhavefallibleideasabout how,inspeci fi cgoalcontexts,theirresourcesandreasoning in fl uencetheircoachingstrategies,aswellastheef fi cacyof thosestrategies,inin fluencingactionsandgeneratingspeci fi c outcomes.Inotherwords,becauseoftheirbackgroundexperiencesandideas,coachesmightnotbechoosingthemosteffective strategy,and/ortheymightnotbeexecutingthosestrategiesina waythatgeneratestheoutcomestheywant.Insuchcircumstances,understandingselfisapowerfulleverforchange. Thus,supportingcoachestoexploretherelationshipbetween theirintentionsandactions(whatissometimescalled “espoused theories” vs. “theoriesinuse” )andtoconsidermorebroadlywhy theydo,whattheydo,thewaythattheydoit,andwhatbenefi tthat bringsthemandothers(e.g.,athletes)areimportantstagesin raisingself-awareness.Itisalsohelpfulforcoachestobesupportedtoconsiderandexploreunintendedoutcomesthatemerge throughtheirpractice.

Thereisatension,however,betweendevelopingatrusting, close,exploratoryrelationship(Step1above),andnoticingthings thatsupportcoachestorecognizeinconsistenciesbetweentheir thinkingandpractice.Creatingexperiencesthatleadtocoaches questioningtheirself-understandingcanelicitstrongcognitiveand affectiveresponsesthatmaydamagetherelationship.Difference canfeelchallengingandbeinterpretedaspersonalattack.An importantstrategytoaddresstheseissuesistocreatetheconditions thatenablecoachestoseeinconsistenciesandproblemsforthemselves(capturedthroughtheaphorism “seeingisbelieving”)by gatheringinformationthatisnotthecoachdeveloper’sopinion,but isasclear,evident,andunambiguousaspossible.Therearemany waystodothis,forexample,more “low-tech ” methodssuchas observation,listening,noticing,andcapturingdetaileddescriptions usingpaperandpencil.However,video–audiocapturehasbeen foundtobeaveryhelpfultoolinthisregard.Thecoachdeveloper usesavideocameraandradiomicattachedtothecoach,torecord thecoach’sactionsandbehaviorsacrossvariouscoachingevents (e.g.,training,competition,andteam/athletemeetings).Anumber oflessonshavebeenlearnedformoreeffectivevideo–audio capture:

• Somecoachesareverynervousaboutbeingvideoed;therefore,differentinformation-gatheringmethodsmightbeused earlierintheprocesstobuildtrustandconﬁdence.

• Dependingonthenatureofthecoachingevent,movethe cameraaroundtocreateanglesthatmaintainthecoachin theframewhilepanningouttocapturethewidercoaching context,forexample,athleteinteractionsandbehaviors.

• Whilerecording,listentothecoachandathletesthroughthe cameraheadphonetogenerate ﬁeldnotesaboutspeci ﬁcbehaviors,interactions,andeventsandthetimetheyoccurinthe videotimeline.

• Intraining/brieﬁng/debrie ﬁngandreviewmeetings,payattentiontothewaylearningactivitiesarestructuredandbehavioral strategiesemployed,andwhethertheyappeartobeconsistent withthestatedintentions.

• Attentionisalsopaidtothenatureofthecoach–athlete interactionsandrelationships,andhowthecoachacts/interacts withinthebroadercoachingenvironment.

• Sensitivitytothecoaches’ andathletes ’ cognitiveandemotionalstatesduringtheobservation,respondingappropriately iftherearemomentsofdifﬁculty,thatis,turningthecameraoff.

• Awarenessthatthevideo–audiocanproduce “Hawthorne effects” althoughthismaydisappearovertimeastherelationshipbuildsandthecoachandathletebecomeaccustomed tobeingvideoed.

3.2.InvitingtheCoachtoReviewtheRawVideo/Audio Capture

Theprocessofsharinginformationwiththecoachwillvary dependingonhowitwasgathered/generated.Intermsofvideo–audiocapture,twofurthersubstagesarerecommended:(1)Share therawvideo/audiofootagewiththecoachandinvitethemto reviewitintheirowntime.(2)Later,explorefootagethatthe coachdeveloperhascodedorclippedtofacilitateare flective conversation.Intermsofsharingrawvideofootage,attheendof thesessionshareacopyofthevideo/audiocapturewiththecoach andinvitethemtohighlightmomentsthattheythoughtwent well,andtohighlightthecoachingtheywouldliketoexplore furtherinthenextmeeting.Aswiththe firstvideocapture,the firstviewingislikelytobeananxiousexperienceforthecoach. Beingsensitivetowardthecoachisanimportantprinciple throughouttheworkingrelationship,andparticularlyimportant duringthe firstvideo–audiocaptureeventgivenitspracticaland emotionalsigni ficance.Ashortfollow-upphonecall,text,or email,thankingthecoachfortheopportunitytoobservetheir practiceandacknowledginghowdifferentitmighthavefelt,may beappreciatedandreassuring.Inthesestillrelativelyearly interactions,itisimportanttoidentifyandappreciatestrengths. Thecoachisencouragedtorecognizeandunderstandwhats/he “alreadyhas,” toacknowledgeandbuildontheirexistingresources.This “strengthsbased,” ratherthan “ de ficitfocused,” approachseekstoamplifythecoach’ssenseofcompetence, nurturemotivation,andcontinuetobuildtrustintheprocessand relationship.Thecoachdeveloperisneverseenas “fi xing problems,” ratherthecoachandcoachdeveloperworktogether to “growinthedirectionoftheenquiry,” exploringthepossibilitiesof “whatcouldbe.” Finally,thecoachmayhavesomeearly ideasofissuesandareasthatshewouldliketoexploreinmore detailandthisshouldbeencouraged.

3.3.CodingVideo/AudioFootage

Ifthevideo–audiodatacaptureisusedasastimulusforgenerating feedback,therearearangeofcodingprotocolsavailableforcoding coachingbehaviors(e.g., Côtéetal.,1999; Cushionetal.,2012). Thesemightbeuseful,butadifferentapproachisofferedhere becausetheformerunderplaysthegoalcontextforthecoach’s actions,andhowtheyareembeddedinabroadercontextof practical,social,andhistoricalactivitiesandinteractions.Instead, codingisgenerallyframedthroughtheapplicationofTheCPPRF (Muir,2012, 2018;Figure 2).TheCPPRFwasdevelopedto supportcoachestoexploretherelationshipbetweentheirgoals (intentions),thewaytheystructurelearningactivities,andthe behavioralstrategiestheyemploy(actions)tosupportathlete engagementandlearning.Assuch,theCPPRFisstructuredaround thesefourinterdependentareas.AttheheartoftheCPPRFisthe premisethatcoachesareessentiallyequippedwithtwopedagogical strategiestosupportathletelearninganddevelopmentonandoff “thepitch”1:(a)thewaytheystructurethelearningexperiencefor theirathletes(e.g.,thestructureandtypeoflearningactivities2), and(b)thebehavioralstrategiestheyemploytosupportathletes before,during,andaftereachlearningactivity.Howcoaches’ use thesetwostrategieswillshapeandinﬂuencelearners’ engagement andtheiropportunitiesfortechnical,tactical,physical,psychological,personal,andsocialdevelopment(Muir,Morgan,& Abraham,2011).

Thisframeworkhasbeenprincipallyusedtoexploretraining andcompetitionbuthasalsobeenadaptedforothercoaching moments,forexample,coach–athletemeetingsandvideoreview sessions.Thecoachdeveloperusescodingsoftwaretoclipand codespeci ﬁcinteractionsandevents.Throughoutthecoding process, “live” notesandmemosrecordedduringthesessionare revisited.Particularattentionisfocusedupon:

• Thenatureofcoachinginteractionsbetweencoachandathlete(s):Whoisdoingthedoing,isthecoachtalkingand athlete(s)listening,ortheotherwayaround?Istherea distinctivepatternof “turn-taking”?Attentionisfocusedon

thecontentofwhatissaidandthenatureoftheinteraction,for example,pace,tone,facialexpressions,andbodylanguage.

• Problemsettingorproblemsolving:Thecoach’sbehaviors andinteractionsaregenerallycodedasproblemsetting/posing orsolving.Problemsettinginvolveschallengingathletesto identify,articulate,and ﬁndpotentialsolutionstotheirlearningproblems.Inotherinstances,coachesmaybemoredirect inhelpingathletestoidentifyandsolveproblems,forexample, proximaltoandduringcompetition.

• Timeontask:Althoughthecodesarenotusedtodetailor validatethetypeandfrequencyofdiscretebehaviors,acertain levelofanalysisoftimeontaskisuseful.Thisisusedto generatethecoach’scuriosityandstimulatereﬂectionabout typicalbehavioralpatternsandpriorities.Coachesareoften mistaken,forexample,abouthowfrequentlytheytalkor provideinstructioninsessionscomparedtoathleteengagementandpractice.

• Howlearningactivitiesarestructuredtomaximizeathletes’ opportunitiestolearnby “doing”:Adescriptivebreakdownof thestructure/form/typeoflearningactivitiesused,theirduration,andthenumberofopportunitiesathletesareafforded (e.g.,skillattemptsorphasesofplay).Thisoftengeneratesa powerfulstimulusforreﬂectionwhenconsideredagainst intendedgoals.

3.4.PreparingTheories,Concepts,andFrameworks toScaffoldThinking

Research-informedtheories,concepts,andframeworkscanbeused as thinkingtools toscaffoldandstimulatereflectivedialogue providingareferencepointagainstwhichthecoachandcoach developercanconsiderthecoachingexperiencesandepisodeswith aviewto:exploringconnectionsandcontradictions;examiningthe adequacyandrobustnessofthereasoning,re flecting,andstrategizingprocesses;andshiningalightonthecoach(andcoach developers)underpinningresources.Thissubstagereflectsa remindertothecoachdevelopertoconsiderwhatthinkingtools mightbeusefulandtohavethemprepared.Theuseoftheories, concepts,andframeworksisreturnedtoinSubstage5.2.

4.EngaginginReﬂectiveConversations

Engaginginre flectiveconversationscanbeconsideredthrough twosubstages:(1)creatingspaceforareflectiveconversationand (2)sharinginformation(e.g.,codedvideofootage/ fieldnotes)asa stimulusforreflection.

4.1.CreatingSpaceforaReﬂectiveConversation

Thisstagemanagesthebasiclogistics,diaries,andtime,tempered againstthepsychoemotionalandpracticalreadinessofthecoach,to engageinreflectiveconversationsthathavethepotentialtobe challenging.Reflectiveconversationsareusuallyscheduledaweek ortwoafterthecoachingeventtoprovidesuf ficient “soaktime” for coachestoexploreandconsolidatetheirexperiences,watchthe audio/videofootage,andgeneratesomereflectionstoshare. Reflectiveconversationscantakemanyhoursdependingonthe natureoftheeventscaptured,thatis,singletrainingsession,or seriesofeventsatatrainingcamp,orcompetition.Atthispointin theprocess,theaudio/videofootagenotonlyprovidesavaluable sourceoffeedbackforcoaches,butalsostimulatesrecalland providesacatalystforreflectiveconversations.Thenatureofthe coachingeventandtheimpactthatithasonthecoachinfluence

boththetimingandnatureofthereﬂectiveconversationsthatare undertaken.

4.2.SharingInformationasaStimulusforReﬂection

Asnotedabove,thecoachdevelopercansharearangeofinformation,evidence,andpersonalreflectionsatthisstageinthe workflow.However,forthemost,thefocuswillbeonthe video/audiocapturetoprovideastimulusforretrospectivereflectiveconversations.Time-linedcodedvideoprovidesefficient accesstospeci ficnotablecoachingepisodes/momentsasthey emergeinconversation.Thesharingisoftenanorganicprocess, withthe “data” providingacommonvantagepoint(Weick,2003), a “meetingplace” wherecoachandcoachdevelopercanexplore themeaningstheyattachtothefootage,andthepossibilitiesfor futureplanningandpractice.Descriptivedata(suchashowtime wasallocatedtoparticularactivities)provideapowerfulcatalyst forreflectivedialogue.Thisislikelytosurfacecontradictions betweenintentionsandactions,generatingalevelofdisjuncture anduncertainty.Disruptingthecoach’sthinkinginthiswayraises questionsaboutthestrategiestheyemploy(e.g.,thebalanceand blendoflearningactivitiesandaccompanyingbehavioralstrategies)andtheirunderpinningreasoning,relativetothegoalsofa particularcoachingcontext.Suchconversationsbegintoexpose thecoach’sbeliefsaboutlearnersandlearning,frequentlygeneratingcuriosity,providingavehicletoexplorealternativestrategies anddevelopnewresources.Thereisasensethatwe(coachand coachdeveloper)canonlybegintolearnwhenweknowwehave somethingtodiscover.

Aswehavesuggestedseveraltimesabove,coaches’ practiceis stronglyinfluencedbytheirpersonalresourcesthataretheproduct ofbothconscious,explicitcognitivedeliberationsandactivities, andunconscious,implicit,tacit,hiddenassumptions,andunarticulatedactivities.Asignificantfocuswithinthestrategy,therefore, istocreatelearningexperiencesthatprovokeacriticaldeliberative considerationofhowthosepersonalresourceshaveformedover timeandtheassumptionsthatunderpinthem.Questionshavebeen raisedaboutcoaches’ resources/capacityforcriticalreflectionand reasoning(e.g., Cushion,2016; Grecic&Collins,2013).Coaches canbeknowledgeableaboutthereasonsfortheirconductbutina waythatneversuggeststotalawarenessoftheentiresetof conditionsandconstraintsthatpromptanaction,oranappreciation ofthefullsetofpotentialconsequencesofthataction(North, 2017).Consequently,thework flowshouldacknowledgethepartial andfalliblenatureofthenarrativeaccountsthatareconstructedofa coachingeventfromindividualexperiences.Toconfrontthis problem,thedevelopmentstrategylookstodrawonavarietyof resources.Itisrecognizedthatthisisthestartofamoredifficult seriesofinteractionsbetweencoachandcoachdeveloperanddue careandsensitivitywiththecoachneedstobeemployed.

5.WorkingWithDifference

Attheheartofthework flowissupportingcoachestolearnthrough andfromtheireverydayexperiencesbynoticingthingsthat otherwisemightgounnoticed thatthereissomething different abouttheireverydaypracticesandwhattheyexperiencethrough workingwithacoachdeveloper.Thisdifferenceprovidesabasis forchange.Information/datagatheredcanrevealagreatdealabout thecoaches’ actions,reasoning,andtheresourcesthatunderpin them,providingabasisforreflectionandlearning.Thisprocesscan beconsideredby(1)exploringcoachingpracticeEREcomponents andtheirrelationships,(2)utilizingreflectivetools,(3)stimulating

andscaffoldingreﬂectionwithcareandconcern,and(4)working throughiterativecyclesofreﬂectivedialogue.

5.1.ExploringCoachingPracticeEREComponents andTheirRelationships

Thekeyfocusofthisstageistostimulatereﬂectionbyexploring (a)therelationshipbetweenactions/behaviors,throughdatacaptured,andintentions/goals,and(b)whyparticularaction/behaviors wereusedtoachievethegoals.Inotherwords,whatreasonsand strategiesweredrivingtheiractionsandbehavioursinrelationto thecoachinggoals.Thetensionsanddifferencesbetweenthese componentsprovideagreatdealofmaterialtostimulatere ﬂection. Theimportanceofthissubstageandpotentialreadercuriosity aboutitarerecognized,andfuturepublishedworkwillprovide examplesandcasestudiestoillustratefurther.

5.2.UtilizingReﬂectiveTools

Thecoachdeveloperhasaccesstoarangeoftoolstosupportthe reflectiveprocess.Thecodedvideo/audiocaptureandthedescriptivedatageneratedfromit, fieldnotes,theoreticalmemos,stories/ narrativespreviouslycapturedfromconversationswiththecoach, and/ortheirathletes/otherkeystakeholdersprovidevaluablematerialtoworkwith. “Greymaterials,” forexample,institutional sport-leveldocuments,andresourcessuchasathletedevelopment frameworks,curriculumdocuments,coachingpolicyandstrategy documents,andstrategicplansareveryuseful.Duringthereflectiveconversation,research-informedtheories,concepts,frameworks,andprinciplesofgoodpracticeareusedtoexplorethe originsandrobustnessofthecoach’sreasoning,reflections,and underpinningresources.Whichdata,notes,theories,andconversationsaremosthelpfulcannotbedeterminedaprioributemerge throughinteractionsovertime.AsWeick(2003)pointsout, “practitioners(coaches)arebestabletospotthosetheoriesthat mattermostwhentheirworldisinterrupted.Andtheorists(coach developers)arebestabletospotthesituatedactionthattheyshould bepuzzlingoverintheirworldoftheoryinthepresenceof interruptions” (p.469).Theresponsibilityforelectingtouse anytheoryorconceptinpracticebecomesanegotiationbetween coachandcoachdevelopertoreflect: “whatworks,forwhom,in whatcircumstances,andwhy” (North,2016).Throughiterative cyclesofwork,itbecomesevidentthatsomethinkingtoolsare morepracticallyrelevantthanothersinsupportingcoachestomake senseoftheiractions,andtogeneratenewstrategiesandthe reasonsforthem.

5.3.StimulatingandScaffoldingReﬂectionbutWithCare andConcern

Theaboveinteractionsandinterventionsprovidenew “framesof reference” toscaffoldreﬂectivedialogue,makingsenseofthe coach’sexperiences,andgeneratingnewstrategiesforfuture action.Indoingso,coachesaresupportedandencouragedtorevisit theirpracticewithinabroaderframeofreference,tothinkandact usingdifferentperspectives,andtoseeolderideasandpracticesina newlight.Workingthroughthecontradictionsthatemergebetween whatisknownandwhatisnewprovidesthepotentialtoaccommodatenewresourcesandinsomecasesgeneratetransformational shiftsinperspectiveandpractice.Insteadofdownplayingor critiquingcoaches’ experientialknowledgeandtheoriesofpractice, thereisanopportunitytoelevatethembyexploringconnections withexistingtheories,concepts,andframeworks.Theories,concepts,andframeworksarenotofferedasprescriptionsforpractice,

buttostimulatereflection,imagination,andcreativity,byasking coachesquestionssuchas “howmightthisconcepthelpustomake senseofthesituation?” or “usingthisconceptasathinkingtool, howmightwereconstructtheinteractiontogenerateadifferent outcome?” andsoforth.Workingthroughsuchquestionshelpsto scaffoldcoaches’ engagementwithnewconceptsandtobuild confidenceinthepotentialtousetheminmakingsenseoftheir experiencesand/orgeneratingnewstrategiesforaction.Assuch, theoriesandframeworksareusefultohelpcoachestomake connections, “tograsphold” oftheconcept,andtoexploreits potentialasaresourcetoinformtheirreflections,reasoning,and strategizing.Thismodelofresearchapplicationprovidesanadditionaltoolwithinthewiderresearch-practicedebate.

Reflectiveconversationsgenerallyemergethroughexploring thecoaches’ senseofhowthingsareprogressingrelativetotheir goals,expectations,concerns,orquestions.However,thecoach developeralsohasanactiverole.Importantprocessualissues includehowthecoachdeveloperselectsandutilisesinformation gathered/dataandotherresourcestoprovideasetofexperiences thatpromotecuriosityandstimulatereflection.Howthecoach developer,listens,asksquestions,andoffersobservationsinfluencesthenatureofthereflectiveconversation,wholeads,andwho follows,whatturnsaretaken,andwhataspectsofpracticearebeing privilegedandprioritised.Thereisaneedtobesensitivetothe challengesthatmayemerge:usingtoomuch,orthewrongtypeof, data,orpoorlyformedquestionsandjudgementalobservations may/islikelytogenerateadverseresponses.Coachesmayneed considerabletimetoprocesstheexperiencestheyareencountering. Thepotentialtolearnthroughtheseexperiencesisoftenareflection oftheinterpersonalresourcethatemerges/growsbetweencoach andcoachdeveloper(North,2017; Muir,2018).Consequently,the depthandbreadthofexperience,knowledge,andexpertisethata coachdeveloperbringsinevitablyinfluenceacoach’sexperiences andtheirpotentialforlearning.Weshouldnotbeshyofthisissue effectivecoachdevelopmentisnoteasy,itispragmatic,profound,andartful,andcertainly not aresultofthe mechanical applicationoftheworkflowoverviewedhere.

5.4.WorkingThroughIterativeCyclesofRe

ﬂective Dialogue

Bypayingparticularattentiontothesequencingandformofthe interactionsandinterventions,thecoachandcoachdevelopercan begintoexplorewhathappened(actions/behaviors),whythings happenedthatway(underpinningstrategiesandreasons),andhow theycametobe(resources).Makingthinkingvisibleinthismanner formsafundamentalpartofmeaningmaking.Thecyclesof reflectivedialogueprovidetheopportunitytoconsolidate,modify, andrefineexistingresourcesinawaythatmakesthemmore accessibleandretrievableinthefuture.Suchexperienceschallenge bothcoachandcoachdevelopertoconfrontthepartialandfallible natureoftheirexistingresources withtheAristotelianprinciple “themoreweknow,themoreweknowwedon’tknow” atthe forefrontofthinking.Paradoxically,thishasthepotentialto liberatetherelationship.Recognizingtheproblematicand “slippery” natureofexperienceandknowledgeprovidesalevelof reassuranceandconfidencetoembracedilemmas,uncertainty,and shadesofgreyasavehicleforlearning.Replacingfearofthe unknownwithcuriosityenablesbothcoachandcoachdeveloperto say “Idon’tknow,buttogetherlet’s findout.”

Workingthroughiterativecyclesofreflectivedialoguehasthe potentialtospiraloutward,speakinglessaboutthespeci ficconfigurationofactions/behaviorsatagivenpointintimetoreveal

moreaboutthebroaderconﬁgurationofindividual,interpersonal, andsocioculturalrelationships,reasons,andcausalresources.Itis importanttorecognizethatconditionsforchangeandactualchange willtaketime(Muir,2018).Thecoachdeveloperworkswiththe coachoveraconsiderabletimeperiod,investinginobservation, questioning,anditerationandreﬁnement,suchthatexperiences gaingreatermeaningandrelevancetothecoachandthatchange becomesagreaterpossibility.

6.SupportingChange

The finalstageislessaninterventionandmoreastatementand/or summaryofthedesirablelearningconditionsandprocesses involvedinthecoachdevelopmentwork flow.Wepositionitas a “stage” becauselearningshouldberecognizedassomething integralto,aswellasanoutcome,oftheprocess.Therearemany waysofframinglearning,butwehavechoseninthisinstanceto conceptualizecoachesasassemblers,bricoleurs,andappliersof “theories,” notnecessarilyinanacademicsense,butalsoin practice,andthatthesetheoriesaresubjecttochange(North, 2017).FollowingThompson(2000),wesuggestthereisno suchthingas “theorylesspractice”;rather,coach’sstrategies andactionsarebasedonideas,reasons, “theories,” whetherexplicit ortacit,informed,orexperiencebased.Thesemightalsobecalled cognitivemapsorschemas.Existingideas,beliefs,andtheoriesare theproductofexperience,assimilatedandcompiledthrough practiceandreflection.Thecoachdeveloperworkflowprovokes areflectiveprocessthatcanfacilitatechangetotheseunderpinning ideas,reasons,and “theories.”

Bystartingwithacoachingevent,thequestions,dilemmas, anduncertaintiesthatemergethroughreflectivedialoguecanbe usedasacatalysttointroduce,link,andframenewconcepts, theories,andframeworksinamoremeaningfulway,supportingthe coachtoadaptexistingpracticesinresponsetorealand role-relateddemands.Recognizingmomentsofdisjuncture/uncertaintyallowscoachandcoachdevelopertoexploretherelationship betweenthepracticeandtheory,wherepracticemostreadily accommodatestheory,andtheorymighthelpnavigatethe “swampylowlands” ofpractice(Schön,1983; Weick,2003). Thus,uncertainty(ifembraced)supportscoachestoconsidertheir reasoningandunderpinningresources,atwhichpoint,data,concepts,andideascanbeusedtoconsolidate,modify,re fine,or discardandreplaceexistingstrategiestoaccommodatenewknowledge.However,itmustbeunderscoredthatthisisapotentially sensitiveanddifficultprocessforthecoachandcoachdeveloper, andtherefore,theprocessmustbeundertakenwithcare,sensitivity, andmutualtrust.AsBrookfieldpointsout(2017,p.5), “whowants toclarifyandquestionassumptionsthey’velivedbyforasubstantialperiodoftime,onlyto findoutthattheydon’tmakesense?” Cultivatingexperiencesthatsurfacequestionsaboutcoaches’ actionsandtheadequacyoftheirunderpinningreasoningand resourceshasthepotentialtogenerateabroadrangeofemotions andfeelingsof, interalia,anger,anxiety,conflict,discomfort, embarrassment,frustration,helplessness,insecurity,tension, threat,andresistance.Thesesymptomshavethepotentialtobe compoundedbytheemotion-laden,contestedwin/losenatureof sportandtherebyraisingimportantimplicationsfor “whenand where” reflectivedialoguecanmostsuccessfullybeundertaken.

Itshouldbecleartothereaderbynowthateffectivecoach developmentisslow,resourceintensive,andemergent.Thecoach developerandthecoachrequirepatienceandagoodunderstanding oftheprocess,whichtakesusbacktoearlystages clarityandcare

insettingupanappropriatedevelopmentenvironment,andfosteringatrustingrelationship.

Conclusion

Thepaperhasoverviewedtheprinciplesandpracticesthathave beenusedtosupportcoachestolearnthroughandfromtheir everydayexperiences.Thisisanintensive1:1coachdevelopment workflowusedextensivelyinU.K.-basedperformanceandhighperformancecoachdevelopmentsystem.Thedetailsprovidedare thebarebones,andthereismuchmoretosay.Yetwefeelthereis sufficienthereforotherinterestedcoachdevelopmentpractitioners togaininsightintotheprinciples,workflow,andpracticesdriving theU.K.work,asbasisfortheirownre flectionsandpotentialuse. Theviewofferedhereisthat,despiteamajorityofcoacheducation anddevelopmentworkbeingpiecemealandshortterm,effective processisexpertiseandresourceexpensive,including,notably,the lengthoftimeinvolved.Thereisa “slowbuild” withagreatdealof supportingandcirclingoftherelationshipandthetask.Assuch,we recognizeitmightnotbeanoptionforallwithinthesporting landscape.Indeed,intheUnitedKingdomthekindofresources involvedonlyappeartobeavailableintheperformanceandhighperformancedomains.However,wesuggestthattheprinciples underpinningthisworkaretransferableacrossdomains.

Spaceislimitedinpublishedarticles,weunderstandthat examplesandcasestudiesareuseful,andwewillendeavorto producetheminfuturework.Wealsounderstandadesireto evidencecoachingoutcomesresultingfromtheprocess,andthis willalsobeaddressedlater.Finally,theworkflowpresentedhere representsonetime-andcontext-basediterationofourcoach developmentwork.Theworkisbeingcontinuallydeveloped andre finedwithreferencetobothnewresearch(ornewlydiscoveredresearch)andexperiencewiththe field.Thesere finementswill besubjecttofuturepublishedwork.

Notes

1.Theexpression “onthepitch” isusedtorepresentthevariouslocations withinwhichathletestrainandcompete(e.g.,pool,court,sea,mat,ring, andtrack),while “offthepitch” isintendedtorepresentallotherlocations andspaceswithinwhichcoachesandathletesinteract(e.g.,meetingrooms, viathetelephone,emailorotherformsoftextmessaging,travelingtoand fromvenues,andinandaroundtheinstitutionalfacilitiesorotherpublic spaces cafes).

2.Theterm “learningactivity” hasbeenusedtoassumeeverytypeof “training,”“practice,”“educational,” and “development” activitythatcoachesorganize “onandoffthepitch” acrosseveryspatiotemporalcontext (i.e.,intraining,competition,planningmeetings,andperformancereview sessions).Insomesports,wechangethelanguagetoreﬂectthetermsof referenceinthesport,thatis, “practiceactivities” isacommonlyused expressionininvasionsports,whereas “trainingexercises” ismorecommon incombatsports,andsoforth.However,weprefertousetheterm “learning activity” aswe ﬁndthatprovidesahelpfulstimulustoconsiderthecoach’s roleinfacilitatinglearning howcoachesstructureparticularactivitiesto supportathletes’ (learners’)learningrelativetothedesiredobjective(s).

AuthorBiographies

BobMuirisareaderinsportcoachingintheCentreforSportCoachingand theCarnegieSchoolofSport,LeedsBeckettUniversity,UnitedKingdom. Aseniormen’sprofessionalbasketballcoachforover20years,Bobhas

spentthelast14yearsworkingasacoachdevelopmentconsultantwitha rangeofsportsorganizationsandgoverningbodiesincludingUKSport, theFootballAssociation,theBritishSailingTeam,andSportNorthern Ireland.HeleadstheUniversity’sM.Sc.CoachDevelopmentandteaches ontheDoctorofProfessionalPracticeinSportprogram.Hisresearch interestsareeffectiveandethicalcoachingandsupportingcoaches’ learningandprofessionaldevelopmentinperformancesport.

JulianNorthisthedirectoroftheCentreforSportCoachinganda professorinsportcoachingintheCarnegieSchoolofSportatLeeds BeckettUniversity.Hisotheractivitiesincludeworkingwithexternal clientssuchasUKSportandSportScotland,andwithPhD,professional doctorate,andmaster-levelstudents.Hismainresearchinterestsare effectiveandethicalcoaching,workforcelearninganddevelopment, andsportpolicyandsystems.

References

Abraham,A.,Collins,D.,&Martindale,R.(2006).Thecoaching schematic:Validationthroughexpertcoachconsensus. Journalof SportsScience,24(6),549–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410 500189173

Abraham,A.,Muir,B.,&Morgan,G.(2010). Nationalandinternational bestpracticeinlevel4coachdevelopment https://eprints.leeds beckett.ac.uk/id/eprint/601/ Bhaskar,R.(1998). Thepossibilityofnaturalism (3rded.).Routledge. (Originalworkpublished1978) Bhaskar,R.(2008). Arealisttheoryofscience (2nded.).Verso.(Original workpublished1975) Bhaskar,R.(2012). Criticalrealism,interdisciplinarityandwell-being. SocialTheory&Health2012AnnualLecture,London. Bolton,G.(2014). Reflectivepractice:Writingandprofessionaldevelopment (4thed.).Sage. Boud,D.,Keogh,R.,&Walker,D.(1985). Reflection:Turningexperience intolearning.OpenUniversity. Brookfield,S.D.(1995). Becomingacriticallyreflectiveteacher.JosseyBass. Brown,G.(2009).Theontologicalturnineducation. JournalofCritical Realism,8(1),5–34. https://doi.org/10.1558/jocr.v8i1.5 Côté,J.,Yardley,J.,Hay,J.,Sedgwick,W.,&Baker,J.(1999).An exploratoryexaminationofthecoachingbehaviorscaleforsport. Avante,5(2),82–92. Covey,S.(2004). The7habitsofhighlyeffectivepeople:Powerfullessons inpersonalchange.RosettaBooksLLC.

Cushion,C.J.(2016).Reﬂectionandreﬂectivepracticediscoursesin coaching:Acriticalanalysis. Sport,EducationandSociety,23(1), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2016.1142961

Cushion,C.J.,Harvey,S.,Muir,B.,&Nelson,L.(2012).Developingthe CoachAnalysisandInterventionSystem(CAIS):Establishingvalidityandreliabilityofacomputerisedsystematicobservationinstrument. JournalofSportsSciences,30(2),201–216. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02640414.2011.635310

Cushion,C.J.,&Nelson,L.(2013).Coacheducationandlearning:Developingthe ﬁeld.InP.Potrac,W.D.Gilbert,&J.Dennison(Eds.), The Routledgehandbookofsportscoaching (pp.359–374).Routledge. Dewey,J.(1916). Democracyandeducation.Macmillan. Dewey,J.(1938). Experienceandeducation.Collier. Engeström,Y.(2001).Expansivelearningatwork:Towardanactivity theoreticalreconceptualization. JournalofEducationandWork, 14(1),133–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747 Eraut,M.(1994). Developingprofessionalknowledgeandcompetence RoutledgeFalmer.

Freire,P.(2006[1970]). Pedagogyoftheoppressed30thanniversaryed Continuum. Gillott,A.(2016). Theovervieweffect. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ overview-effect-andrew-gillott/ Goodson,I.F.,Biesta,G.,Tedder,M.,&Adair,N.(2010). Narrative learning.Routledge.

Grecic,D.,&Collins,D.(2013).Theepistemologicalchain:Practical applicationsinsports. Quest,65(2),151–168. https://doi.org/10. 1080/00336297.2013.773525

Grifﬁths,M.A.,Armour,K.M.,&Cushion,C.J.(2016). ‘Tryingtogetour messageacross’:Successesandchallengesinanevidence-based professionaldevelopmentprogrammeforsportcoaches. Sport, EducationandSociety,23(3),283–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13573322.2016.1182014

Illeris,K.(2003).Towardsacontemporaryandcomprehensivetheory oflearning. InternationalJournalofLifelongEducation,22(4), 396–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370304837

Jarvis,P.(2006). Towardsacomprehensivetheoryofhumanlearning Routledge.

Jones,R.L.,&Turner,P.(2006).Teachingcoachestocoachholistically: Canproblem-basedlearning(PBL)help? PhysicalEducationand SportPedagogy,11(2),181–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/174089806 00708429

Klein,G.(2013). Seeingwhatothersdon’t:Theremarkablewayswegain insights.NicholasBrealeyPublishing.

Knowles,M.(1980). Themodernpracticeofadulteducation:From pedagogytoandragogy (2nded.).CambridgeBooks.

Maister,D.H.,Galford,R.,&Green,C.(2001). Thetrustedadvisor.Simon &Schuster.

Mason,J.(2002). Researchingyourownpractice:Thedisciplineof noticing.Routledge.

Mezirow,J.(1997).Transformativelearning:Theorytopractice.In P.Cranton(Ed.), Transformativelearninginaction:Insightsfrom practice (pp.5–12).Jossey-Bass.

Moon,J.A.(2004). Ahandbookofreﬂectiveandexperientiallearning: Theoryandpractice.RoutledgeFarmer.

Muir,B.(2012,November26–28). Usingvideoandthecoachingpractice planningandreﬂectiveframeworktofacilitatehighperformance coaches’ development [Conferencepresentation].UKSportWorld ClassPerformanceConference,Leeds,UK.

Muir,B.(2018). Coachlearninganddevelopmentintheperformance domain:Anembedded,relationalandemergentinterventionstrategy.LeedsBeckettUniversity.

Muir,B.,Morgan,G.,&Abraham,A.(2011). Playerlearning:Implicationsforstructuringpracticeactivitiesandcoachbehaviour.Football Association.

Muir,B.,Morgan,G.,Abraham,A.,&Morley,D.(2011).Developmentallyappropriateapproachestocoachingchildren.InI.Stafford(Ed.), Coachingchildreninsport (pp.17–37).Routledge.

Muir,B.,Till,K.,Abraham,A.,&Morgan,G.(2015).Aframeworkfor planningyourpractice:Acoach’sperspective.InK.Till&B.Jones (Eds.), Thescienceofrugby (pp.161–172).CrowoodPress. Nelson,L.J.,Cushion,C.,&Potrac,P.(2013).Enhancingtheprovision ofcoacheducation:TherecommendationsofUKcoachingpractitioners. PhysicalEducationandSportPedagogy,18(2),204–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2011.649725

North,J.(2013a).Acriticalrealistapproachtotheorisingcoaching practice.InP.Potrac,W.D.Gilbert,&J.Dennison(Eds.), The Routledgehandbookofsportscoaching (pp.133–144).Routledge. North,J.(2013b).Philosophicalunderpinningsofcoachingpractice research. Quest,65(3),278–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297. 2013.773524

North,J.(2016).Benchmarkingsportcoacheducationanddevelopment: Usingprogrammetheoriestoexamineandevolvecurrentpractice. InW.Allison,A.Abraham,&A.Cale(Eds.), Advancesincoach educationanddevelopment:Fromresearchtopractice (pp.17–29). Routledge. North,J.(2017). Sportcoachingresearchandpractice:Ontology,interdisciplinarity,andcriticalrealism.Routledge. North,J.,Muir,B.,Duffy,P.,&Lyle,J.(2011,August28).Anewresearch approachforunderstandingandevaluatingcoachingpractice[Conferencepresentation].ICCEGlobalCoachingConference,Paris, France. Perry,W.G.(1970). Formsofintellectualandethicaldevelopmentinthe collegeyears:Ascheme.Holt,Rinehart,andWinston. Piggott,D.(2015).TheOpenSocietyandcoacheducation:Aphilosophicalagendaforpolicyreformandfuturesociologicalresearch. PhysicalEducationandSportPedagogy,20(3),283–298. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/17408989.2013.837435

Rogers,C.R.(1969). Freedomtolearn.CharlesE.Merrill. Schön,D.A.(1983). Thereﬂectivepractitioner.AshgateArena. Scott,D.,&Bhaskar,R.(2015). Atheoryofeducation.Springer. SportsCoachUK.(2008). TheUKcoachingframework:A3-7-11years actionplan.Coachwise. Thompson,N.(2000). Theoryandpracticeinhumanservices.Open UniversityPress. Weick,K.(2003).Theoryandpracticeintherealworld.InH.Tsoukas& C.Knudsen(Eds.), TheOxfordhandbookoforganizationtheory: Meta-theoreticalperspectives (pp.453–475).OxfordUniversity Press. Werthner,P.,&Trudel,P.(2006).Anewtheoreticalperspectivefor understandinghowcoacheslearntocoach. SportPsychologist,20(2), Article198. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.20.2.198 Williams,K.(2012).Rethinking ‘learning’ inhighereducation. Journal ofCriticalRealism,11(3),296–323. https://doi.org/10.1558/jcr. v11i3.296