“Learners Learn, Coaches only help the process sometimes”.

Rod Thorpe
In last weeks session as a class, we were all given an interesting lecture about, “questioning as a coaching approach”, and looked at the idea of helping to learn, rather than teaching. As a coach it raises the question of, how do you know that the participants in your session are learning?
When coaching sessions, I usually use a question and answer technique, when doing further research into this area I discovered That researcher Bloom 1956, brought forward the Blooms taxonomy pyramid which demonstrates the levels or stages of putting different techniques to make sure participants understand what is being taught (Krathwohl, D. R. 2002). Bloom, 1956 Highlights key areas for effective questioning, for example, ask your question, then listen to their response and then observe to see if the participant has understood the skill being taught. Another useful technique suggested is to hold back your knowledge as a coach because patience is key. I found that holding back maybe key when coaching younger age groups. This further raises the question of whether or not our coaching methods are correct and up to date? Governing bodies such as the F.A, who award coaching badges to aspiring grass roots coaches, whereby these coaches must participate in a course teaching coaching technique. However, who is to say that these methods used by governing bodies is a “correct”, or the “right way” to coach?
If an athlete at an early age is performing a skill successfully but is using a different technique and achieving the same results. As a coach would I intervene and stop the participants or let the participants carry on doing what they are doing? As a coach do we teach how to think not what to think? However, when using questioning as a coaching technique, there can be potential issues surrounding this area. As I discovered while doing further reading I managed to find a YouTube video, whereby a news reporter managed to interview former government minister, Chloe Smith in 2012 and highlights issues around using questioning as a learning technique. Furthermore, it is harder to do, it is far easier to give out simple information or instructions, moreover, you can’t prepare for the answers to be questions and sometimes telling could be more beneficial to the learner or participant. The skill of the coach comes into effect when knowing when and why that is.
When going deeper to look for further information about this area of study, I found that author and researcher Sylvia Duckworth, had written two books surrounding this area which are Sketchnotes for educators, 2016, and How to Sketchnote: A step by step manual for teachers and students, 2019 (Duckworth, 2019) and (Duckworth, 2016). These books offer two different modes of thinking, which are divergent thinking (using imagination) and convergent thinking (using logic). The author stats that, convergent thinking, also described as critical/ vertical analytical/ linear thinking, uses facts to conclude what the answer is. Whereas divergent thinking, also described as, creative/ horizontal thinking, uses a question and then has ideas to answer that question. Duckworth goes further by giving examples, such as convergent questions could be, where? Why?, who?, and how?, all leading to one answer. When relating this to coaching, a coach may use, as mentioned earlier, question and answer to determine weather or not participants have understanding, it may only lead to participants giving you the answer you want to hear rather than showing understanding of the skill.

However, from personal experience of coaching I can understand the difficulties of just letting participants do what they want and use trial and error during a session, as the environment can become unsafe as participants may injure themselves, especially when dealing with younger age groups. However, having looked at the evidence and reading, I have concluded that it may be a good method of coaching to explain to the participants of the session what you intend on delivering and then simply let the participants have ago and let them use their own methods to achieve the skill or session objective. When going further, if this method does not work at first it may not be a bad thing, as a coach you can have a backup plan or a backup session ready to intervene for example, adding a few rules into the session to avoid losing control or injury may calm the session down and add refocus on what you want the participants to achieve. Instead of using question and answer method of coaching you will be able to see the outcome for yourself whether the participants are being successful.
When relating back to a topic mentioned previously, governing bodies do not recognise this type of method of coaching and rely on coaches having previous experience in the sport and assess coaches on coaching methods governing bodies have previously taught them throughout the course to achieve a qualification in coaching. (F.A, 2018)
This is not necessarily a good way into coaching, for example, Richard Williams, who coaches Serena Williams, has had no previous experience in coach’s tennis but managed to coach Serena Williams to become world champion using trail and error methods of coaching. A second sporting example could be boxing coach Enzo Calzaghe, who is trainer and manager of five-time world champion, Joe Calzaghe. Enzo Calzaghe had no previous experience in boxing or coaching until his son Joe Calzaghe starting boxing at a young age. Enzo Calzaghe went on to win “Coach of the year” at the BBC sport personality of the year and the Ring magazine trainer of the year in 2007 (The Ring, trainer of the year Archives, 2019).

Another theory I found when doing further reading was the complex learning theory. The complex learning theory was first brought forward by David and Sumara 2003, and proposes that learning is a complex process of adaption that is interpretative and social. Cushion 2011, who did research regarding complex learning theory and stats that re – positioning of the coach may help the learners could make their own choices independently from the coach. This could include the opportunity to reflect on their experience, making meaning of it and then start to reconstruct what they have learnt through manipulations of the “story of self” (Cushion, 2011.p. 175).
I feel that this is a good idea to let the participant have ago at doing the skill as mentioned earlier in the blog. However, if a participant doesn’t achieve the objective of the skill, as a coach it maybe a good idea to step back instead of intervening and let the athlete figure out for themselves another way of achieving the objective, using trail and error process and learning from their mistakes.
In conclusion, when coaching I understand the difficulties of letting the athletes, especially young athletes perform skills using trial and error and only using questions during the session, it could lead to the session becoming unmanageable and unsafe. However, there is benefits of having a less structured session only revolving around questions this will avoid athlete’s giving what they believe is the “correct” answer to you as a coach and not really understanding what was going on and how to perform the skill you are coaching correctly. I feel that governing bodies in sport should use this approach when assessing coaches for their coaching qualifications, I feel that governing bodies should take into account that the role of a coach is changing and having produced evidence of coaches who have had no previous experience in their field of coaching and go on to be successful, it may show they use trial and error and using questions is a possible way forward.

Reference:
• Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(4), 212-218.

• Duckworth, S. (2019). How to Sketchnote: A Step-by-Step Manual for Teachers and Students (pp. 1, 7, 32, 33). EdTechTeam, 2018.

• Duckworth,S. (2016). Sketchnotesfor educators (1sted.,pp. 1,126,127,128). Edtechteam press, 7 Dec 2016.

• F.A (2018) F.A Coaching badges, Level 1 Coaching Badge

• The Ring. (2019). trainer of the year Archives – The Ring. Retrieved from https://www.ringtv.com/tag/trainer-of-the-year/

• Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2003). Why aren’t they getting this? Working through the regressive myths of constructivist pedagogy. Teaching Education, 14, 123–140. doi:10.1080/1047621032000092922

• Cushion, C. (2011). Coach and athlete learning: A social approach. In R. L. Jones, P. Potrac, C. Cushion, & L. T. Ronglen (Eds.), The sociology of sports coaching (pp. 166–178).