March 2025 – coachdev.org

Coach Developer Profile

Toby Doyle

Toby Doyle, Community Cricket National Coach Development Manager, has played a key role in changing the way community coaches in New Zealand are prepared for their role. This includes receiving frequent personalised guidance from coach developers in real-world settings.

In this approach mastery is favoured over covering the curriculum. Observation, guidance, and support replace critique and ticking off a skills list. The learning coach’s context and their individual needs shape the support offered.

The NZ Cricket model of learning and development has been well received by coaches, the majority of whom have little interest in accreditation or being assessed. Quality is assured by the high level of personalised support that is afforded each coach.

Toby Doyle’s current role is the Community Cricket National Coach Development Manager at New Zealand Cricket. His path has included playing, coaching, developing coaches, and even training other coach developers.

Toby is deeply passionate about enabling quality coaching in community sports. His learning journey reflects a non-linear path, driven by a commitment and reflection to continuous improvement. Beyond his professional life, Toby is a father of three young children, and his fiancée, Hannah, shares his passion for coaching and sport. With his cricket playing days behind him, Toby now finds joy in playing the odd game of golf.

Toby has been fortunate to participate in the International Cricket Council’s Master Educator Program and has served as a trainer in the latest iteration of Sport New Zealand’s Coaching For Impact program.

How did you get into the Coach Development role?

I transitioned into a Coach Development (CD) role from my previous position as a Development Manager at Canterbury Country Cricket Association (which I was in for 7 years). This role required me to deliver key coach development initiatives for New Zealand Cricket, which involved engaging with the community to facilitate learning and support for community coaches.

CD philosophy

Empower individuals to become the best versions of themselves through a holistic and strength-based approach.

Best parts about the role

As the Community Coach Development Manager with New Zealand Cricket, I have the opportunity to nurture the potential in others—both coaches and coach developers. I am constantly seeking ways to improve and refine our coach development system and processes within New Zealand cricket.

Support for coaches

My work focuses on three key domains: the NZC Coach Learning System, the NZC Coach Developer Network, and Women in Coaching within Cricket.

Coach Learning System: Over the past decade, the NZC Coach Learning System has evolved from a linear, assessment-driven model to a modular system focused on ‘just in time’ learning. This shift recognizes that most of our coaching population consists of volunteer parents who seek practical information rather than formal qualifications.
Coach Developer Network: We currently have 90 active coach developers supporting approximately 3,000 coaches. My role involves providing leadership, mentorship, and ongoing professional development for these coach developers. This includes facilitating communities of practice and guiding them through a rigorous plan-do-review process centred around their regional coach development plans.
Women in Coaching: With 13% of our registered coaches being female, increasing this percentage is a major focus for New Zealand Cricket. We are working to create inclusive and safe spaces for female coaches at the grassroots level. Additionally, we offer a centralized program called ‘Pathway to Performance’ to equip aspiring female coaches with the skills, tools, and knowledge needed to advance in their coaching careers.

If I had more resources

I would place a coach developer in every club and secondary school across New Zealand.

Additionally, I would develop an AI-driven coaching app to provide individualized support to coaches in real-time.

Do you work in partnership with other coach developers?

Yes, I collaborate extensively with coach development leaders from other sports both within New Zealand and internationally. Currently, we are partnering with New Zealand Hockey to deliver a trainer program aimed at developing coach developer trainers.

My role as a Master Educator with the International Cricket Council has also allowed me to build valuable networks with global coach development leaders.

Recently, I have been involved as a trainer/facilitator in the Sport New Zealand Coaching for Impact program, which is designed to develop youth and secondary school coaches. I have also assisted New Zealand Rugby in facilitating a World Rugby Educator course to develop new coach developers in a rugby context.

Highlights and challenges

The most rewarding aspect of my role is seeing others thrive and grow. I learn a great deal from observing other coaches, coach developers, and trainers in action. Being part of the recent adaptations to our learning system, aligning it with 21st-century andragogy principles, has been a significant achievement.

A continual challenge is effectively communicating the impact of coach development work to decision-makers, ensuring they recognize its importance.

“The most rewarding aspect of my role is seeing others thrive and grow.

Do you have a mentor?

Yes, I have a mentor who helps me continue to learn, reflect, and grow in my leadership role.

TOP 4 COACH DEVELOPER TIPS

Discover the coach’s motivation or ‘why’ and link any learning and development back to this
Be your authentic self — skilfully
Focus on strengths rather than gaps
Reflection is the secret sauce to learning

NZ Cricket Toby Doyle

Coaching Practice in Coach Education

Former soccer National Coaching Director, Eric Worthington was a pioneer in Australian coach education. One of his laments was that coaching courses didn’t teach coaches HOW to coach and that there was no useful commitment to coaching practice and practical assessment. He saw an over emphasis on courses only teaching coaches WHAT to coach.

Guided coaching practice was at the centre of the coach education system that Eric developed for Australian soccer coaches. Coaches received dedicated guidance in practical coaching on multiple occasions.

This article was first published by the Australian Coaching Council over 30 years ago (1). He articulated ideas we are still catching up to, including his recognition of on-the-job learning being the gold standard for learning how to coach.

Design with the job of the coach in mind

Sport Specific Instructional courses for soccer coaches are designed with the job of the coach foremost in mind. The “subject” of the course is “The Job of the Coach”. All the elements of the course are selected with that in mind. This is as opposed to any other alternative.

For example, it might be argued and indeed be accepted by other sports that “the game” or “the sport” should be the subject or be the main knowledge content of a course. In that case, the sport may be “chopped” into three parts to form Level 1, 2 or 3 content.

Soccer course content at the three levels is selected according to what is known about the job of a coach working at three recognisably different phases in the development of a player.

The job of the coach

The job of the coach is seen to fall into four broad areas and appropriate assessments are made during a course. The following statements crystallise the main thoughts behind content selection and assessment.

What does the coach need to KNOW?
How well does the coach ORGANISE the players?
How good is the coach’s OBSERVATION skill?
Do the players improve by good COACHING?

Assessment and evaluation of how much a coach knows about his job is best done not by the traditional pen or pencil techniques but in tutorials or by other viva voce methods – a coach’s job is to talk and rarely to write.

However, the main purpose of this article is to stress the essential weighting that is given to evaluating and assessing the ability to coach.

The ability rests upon items 1, 2 and 3 mentioned above or, knowledge about the job, organising skill and observation skill.

Coaching practice - the key

Coaching Practice consumes more than 50% of the working time of the courses. It is the largest element of the courses. All candidates who pass in Coaching Practice may re-sit the other elements. All candidates who fail must register for another course.

Amongst the reasons for justifying its weighting, one is all important. That is while attending a course the candidate if afforded the luxury of absolute personal attention while coaching a group of players on far more than one occasion.

The coach is given a Coaching Topic well before each Coaching Practice (see Coaching Practice Assessment Sheet – PDF attachment). The coach’s knowledge of that topic is at test. The players must then be organised into working in an improving situation within the topic or phase of the game.

Based on what the coach sees to be necessary to raise the skill of the players so the coach will attempt to create learning situations.

The role of the coach educator - coach the coach to coach

Throughout the Coaching Practice the Instructor is evaluating performance and making a subjective assessment to be recorded on the Coaching Practice Assessment Sheet.

Of far more importance is the working principle of “Coach the coach to coach” is forever operative.

No opportunity must be overlooked to stop the coach while working and to offer advice. This might be related to one or more parts of a coach’s skill.

Coaching skill is largely a matter of experience and like most other practical skills the importance of immediate feed-back cannot be under-valued in the development of that skill.

Coaches as a group often find themselves in a “closed” environment where they perhaps talk rarely about their job. Far worse, there often is a “four walls of the classroom” attitude. This occurs where most of their coaching is unobserved other than by their charges or the occasional “intruder”.

"Coaching skill needs to be seen, shown and talked about for its best expression.

Coaching practice enables critical reflection

Coaches must work at their trade by being critical and open in their discussions about the fine points of the skill.

Needless to say that kind of activity is generated by Coaching Practice. It acts as a first-class motivator and the provider of endless topics for heated productive discussion.

A useful exercise for course planners is to itemise all of the course objectives (see Soccer Level 2 Objectives). These should be expressed in behavioural terms so that all may be seen to be achieved or not. Having done that, value each objective in terms of “To what extent could that part of the course be learned by the candidates by themselves?”

A large amount of knowledge can be gained by candidates organizing their own study followed by personal or in-course assessment.

Again, some skill elements might be practised away from the course.

The one element that is impossible to practice without guidance is coaching practice.

"Real" vs "artificial" learning

The skillful instructor will not only be able to lift the performance of most coaches but might also be able to reach a very accurate assessment of all parts of the skill of the coach.

If I am to plead for a substantial proportion of time devoted to Coaching Practice within all Coaching Instruction Courses, it would be, spend more time on “real” activities and less time on “artificial” activities.

Skill of all kinds is best learned by practising “real” activities rather than “artificial” ones – the greater the number of common elements contained within a practice situation the more chance of transfer of training from that activity. That argument supports the full use of Coaching Practice.

Using that argument, I would have to admit that my own views support the notion that coaching courses are themselves “artificial”.

"I would much rather train coaches in their working situation – the job of the coach is to best learn on the job. However, that is a problem that we are only working towards finding a solution.

Level 2 course objectives

The coach will be able to:

Differentiate between practice methods and demonstrate that knowledge by selecting appropriate methods in coaching practice.
Organise a group of players into a practice situation in less than two minutes.
Plan and conduct not less than three coaching sessions of between ten and fifteen minutes duration on given topics.
Recognise strengths and correct weaknesses in technique performance by giving specific instructions which describe what the player should do to improve the performance and how it should be done.
Participate in practical sessions and group discussions to acquire the knowledge and skill required to achieve objectives 1-4.
Demonstrate the techniques of the game to a standard comparable with the technical requirements to pass McDonalds Super Skills Red Award.
Correctly answer the question papers on ‘The Laws of the Game’ and the ‘Theory of Coaching’ to satisfy the established criteria of assessment.

Reference

Worthington, Eric (1984). Coaching Practice in Coach Education in Lawrie Woodman (ed.), The Coaching Director, Issue #2, Australian Coaching Council.

What does assessment look like in your sport?

This post accompanies a session on assessment at the Australian Sports Commission 2025 Coaching and Officiating Conference in Geelong that I had the pleasure in co-facilitating.

It was a team effort. A big thanks to Shaun McEachin from Squash, Sally Wiseman from Pony Club and Tom Finch from the ASC.

What follows are four questions for designers of learning and development programs to consider. Behind these questions is the assumption that assessment should be at the core of those design decisions and not an add on.

1. VOLUNTEERS

In Australia, as in a number of other countries, volunteers make up the majority of the coaching workforce. In Australia, entry level qualifications make up between 80 and 90% of the accreditations or other qualifications.

A smaller number of sports have a tradition of full-time and part-time paid coaches. This can influence the type of training offered to coaches. The risk profile of a sport can also influences the type of training required of coaches.

The ASC did some research (Community Coach Insights, 2015) that showed a cohort of volunteers (the ‘Happy Helpers’) do not believe they need general coaching principles, were not seeking accreditation and therefore were not in need of assessment.

Questions

1. What kind of assessment (if any) is appropriate for volunteers in your sport?

2. If your sport requires assessment of entry level coaches, what form should it take?

2. HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT TO ASSESS / TEACH?

When the course is crowded (with a lot to cover) everything is important, and nothing is important.

This is a classic case of never having enough time to consolidate the learning because we have to ‘cover the curriculum’.

So, what can we do?

Mastery vs Qualifications

One solution is to adopt a mastery approach as opposed to a ‘cover the curriculum approach’. In the former, covering fewer things in more depth takes precedence over covering everything superficially. A mastery approach is more concerned with giving the coach sufficient time and guidance to develop skills that last into the future.

A mastery approach is further enhanced when the learning is relevant to the coach and comes out of a practice context.

So, what content gets priority treatment?

What is covered can be prioritised in different ways. For example, what is NICE to know knowledge versus what is NEED to know knowledge? Nice to know information may be explored informally by the coach in their own time. Do you think that is true for need to know knowledge?

A more precise approach to classification is shown below:

Access the SOLO taxonomy here.

Course safety valves – Don’t cover everything during the course!

Many introductory and intermediate courses are a compromise between comprehensiveness and pragmatism. The time coaches are willing to spend at a course and the resources to deliver a course are two factors that influence design choices.

Alternatives for reducing the amount of content to cover include:

Making information available through the web
Allowing clubs to specify their own requirements. For example, clothing requirements. If there is a safety issue regarding clothing / jewellery etc., then this could be covered in the course.
Continuing professional development / updating requirements
Pre- or co-requisite courses. For example, a requirement to complete the ASC’s Community Coaching – Essential Skills course.

Question

What are your criteria for deciding what content to cover and assess?

3. ASSESSMENT CHECKLISTS: USEFUL OR NOT?

Courses based on a competency-based training (CBT) design break up coaching into about 4-6 large chunks (units of competency). Each of these units is further sub-divided into smaller bits (elements of competency).

This approach often leads to assessment with tedious checklists that require each item on the list to be ticked off.

For example, checklists for coaching behaviours such as demonstrations, instruction, observation, or feedback might be used.

The checklist approach can easily result in not paying sufficient attention to the coaching context. Another problem, even if the observation of a coach is taken in context, is that a narrow focus may miss the ‘big picture’. For example, a ‘perfect’ demonstration might have been presented, but we could ask was a demonstration the best option at that time?

In another post we have discussed how a narrow assessment focus can give us a reliable result but one that doesn’t inform us about the ability of a coach to coach. That is, the problem of reliable but not valid assessment inferences.

Question

Do you assess holistically (looking at the whole coaching process), or do you assess isolated individual parts?

4. DIFFERENT MODELS OF LEARNING & DEVELOPMENT

What are the principles that underpin your approach to coach learning and development?

Your choice of principles provides the building blocks of your MENTAL MODEL. It guides the way you deliver coach education. The mental model that underpins a course may be unique with a non-traditional approach to coach learning.

For example, Andy Rogers from Sport NZ along with two authors from NSOs have written (see drop down #3) about an approach that replaces assessment and critique with observation, support, and guidance. The NZ model is a highly personalised coach-centred approach to learning and development.

In this alternative approach, a coach developer observes, listens, questions, and draws inferences which form the basis of a dialogue between coach and CD.

The CD chooses a response that suits the context: a suggestion, a collaborative approach to problem solving, further questions, or a simple acknowledgement of progress. The coach in this model may initiate the conversation.

This ‘partnership’ in learning is frequent and ongoing throughout the course. Lots of ‘mini assessments’ replace an end of course summative assessment.

This is ASSESSMENT WITHOUT ASSESSMENT!

Question

What are the principles that form the basis of your mental model for designing and delivering courses?

PRINCIPLES OF ASSESSMENT

Liam McCarthy et al who has been leading some international work on assessment has proposed 5 principles of assessment. Four of them are shown here. The fifth is transparency.

1. DEEP INTEGRATION

Teaching, learning and assessment should be deeply integrated. As opposed to a period of learning that is followed by assessment.

2. AUTHENTIC

Assessment activities should be ‘authentic’. That is, related to what coaches actually do. The assessment should be:

Practice based
Take place in context that is relevant to the coach

3. COLLABORATIVE

CD and coaches work together. Peers are seen as a resource for each other.

4. METACOGNITIVE

Assessment plays a role in coaches developing their skills of reflection and the ability to self-monitor their thoughts, feelings, and behaviours.

Question

To what extent are these principles embedded into your course design?

REFERENCE

McCarthy, L., Vangrunderbeek, H., & Piggot, D. (2022). Principles of good assessment practice in coach education: An initial proposal. International Sports Coaching Journal, 9(2), 252-262.

Geelong Conference

My Brain is Full – How Memory Works

Learning takes place when information in our conscious thinking is transferred to long-term memory. Organising these memories, through a network of neural connections, builds our capacity to tackle novel and unpredictable situations.

These connections can be varied and may include visual, auditory, emotional, or kinaesthetic memories.

Understanding how our memories are formed helps us to understand the differences in performance between novices and experts. It also guides the coach and coach developer in designing instructional strategies. That is, how to be a more effective teacher.

My brain is full!

In a favourite Gary Larson cartoon, teacher Mr Osborne at the front of his class glances over his left shoulder. A student has his hand up. The student asks: “Mr Osborne, may I be excused? My brain is full.” You can see the cartoon by here.

Apart from being pretty funny, this cartoon is a good catalyst for a discussion about how CDs and coaches can effectively get the message across. It also invites us to challenge simplistic notions that teaching is just about transmitting information with the hope that is sticks. Telling is not teaching.

(BTW, telling is not the same as explicit instruction. But that is another article).

What are you thinking right now?

Back to the cartoon. The student’s long-term memory (LTM) has plenty of unused capacity. No problem there. The problem is most likely an overloaded working memory (WM).

Working memory is whatever is held in your consciousness at any given moment. Understanding working memory is the key to learning.

Working memory

This is your memory for the present moment. It is a limited and short-lived holding space in your prefrontal cortex for the sights, sounds, smells, tastes, emotions, and language of right now - working to keep whatever you just experienced and paid attention to only long enough to use it or not.

Lisa Genova, p38.

Pay attention!

When attention is narrowly focussed thinking is unlikely to be overwhelmed by extraneous things in the environment. (See the diagram below).

When too many distractions not relevant to the immediate learning are present, cognitive overload occurs. Too much mental effort is required to make sense of things. Working memory is ‘stretched’ beyond its limits – it becomes overloaded.

To learn something, we have to notice things. Noticing requires us to do something with all the sensory information the brain receives. This requires paying attention. That is, fine tuning our thinking to actively process specific information in the environment while ignoring other sensory input.

Apart from unimportant things in the environment, there is lots going on in our heads to ignore: self-talk, reliving conversations, to-do lists, random thoughts … the monkey mind.

The brain can receive and process sensory information, like watching an athlete perform a skill BUT unless there is a deliberate and focussed attention to what is being perceived “the activated neurons will not be linked, and memory will not be formed.” (1, p27).

“PAY ATTENTION!”. The command is a futile one unless the learner is receptive to whatever attention is being drawn to.

We are attentive to things that are meaningful and interesting. Something that is surprising, humorous or resonates with us emotionally will grab our attention and open the gate to learning.

Our brain’s default setting is not to be attentive. We have to work at it. This means the CD or coach needs to create an environment favourable to learning and to choose learning experiences that are interesting and meaningful to the learner.

Mr OSBORNE’S CLASS. So, even if Mr Osborne’s teaching practice is good, his student with a ‘full brain’ may have no interest in the topic and no interest in paying attention.

We have to know stuff to learn

“New knowledge can only be understood if it is linked to what the student already knows.”

Mike Bell

The more links the better. Using multiple senses (multi-sensory) and emotions makes the memories easier to recall and less likely to be forgotten.

When prior knowledge is retrieved, more than a single piece of information is accessed.

Information in the brain is not stored in an isolated manner, like a piece of information on a computer hard drive. It is stored along with other information and emotions from all the senses. A memory is a network of connections.

Back to Mr Osborne's class

Back to our student in Mr Osborne’s class. Numerous things could be interfering with the student’s ability to process what he is seeing and hearing from Mr Osborne.

A run-in with a peer may have led to our student dwelling on an earlier incident. The student may be dealing with something from home. Perhaps he didn’t complete his pre-class work. Essential prior knowledge may be absent. Or Mr Osborne, may be overwhelming the class with too much information and at the wrong level. Or maybe the class just needs a short brain break and the student with his hand up is expressing what others are feeling.

The student’s WM is working overtime, and nothing is making sense. Extraneous thoughts, some possibly emotionally charged, compete for WM space. We have all been there!

Coaching young participants

The example of Mr Osborne’s class is not uncommon in our everyday coaching.

We have all experienced working with young participants where one or more of them come to training frazzled. It may take us 10 or more minutes into our ‘perfect’ session plan before we realise things are not going to plan. Our strategies for getting participants to focus on what matters may be good.
But something in the lead up to training has emotionally charged one or more participants.

What we might want participants to hold in WM clashes with what is already there. ‘Reading the play’ and adapting is a key coaching skill. In our example, the change to the plan may have to be significant.

CD & Coach Take-outs

Here are some strategies adapted from Mike Bell (2):

Develop session routines and habits. For CDs teaching or coaches working with athletes, routines should be taught and practised to avoid wasting time and clogging up WM.
Convey information in smaller chunks.
Connect new information to prior knowledge by linking instructions and new information to things that are already part of the learner’s existing knowledge or everyday experience.

COACHES

Coaches should keep cues simple and short (KISS – keep it simple and short)
Use similes and analogies to help participants connect more complex ideas with things that are familiar in everyday life.
Arrange equipment and the playing / training area in ways that reduces the amount of cognitive processing that is required (constraints-based approach). This may reduce the need for verbal instruction or eliminate it altogether.

COACH DEVELOPERS

Use multi-sensory strategies (also relevant to coaching)
Focus attention with content that is interesting, meaningful, surprising, humorous or tugs at our emotional heart strings
Use active learning strategies (this will call on different sensory strategies such as talking with peers and physically moving – these have the potential to reduce cognitive load)
Link abstract ideas to concrete analogies.

FIG. HOW MEMORY WORKS

In this final figure more detail has been added. Procedural knowledge enables us to type, tie our shoe laces or execute a skill or activity in sport. Memory is not just about ‘book learning’ – it is also at the centre of doing things physically.

References

Genova, Lisa, (2021). Remember. The Science of Memory and the Art of Forgetting. Simon Schuster.
Bell, Mike. (2021). The Fundamentals of Teaching. Routledge.

A novice is not a little expert – Implications for coach developers

Introduction

The way information is organised in the brains of novices and experts is different. Expert coaches read situations at a deeper level than do novice coaches. Experts see the underlying structures. Novices see the superficial detail.

This has important implications for the way coach developers support the development of coaches in their early stages of learning.

The coach developer’s dilemma

Don’t expect novice coaches to learn by doing what expert coaches do.

It is popular to say coaching is complex, non-linear, and unpredictable. This requires coaches to exercise professional judgement and decision-making skills. Coaching requires the management of a range of emotional and physical states, participant skill levels, participant anxiety and team dynamics that may be less than ideal. All without simple stock remedies.

For the coach developer working with novice and intermediate coaches, this snapshot of coaching presents significant challenges. A more experienced coach when asked will this or that work, may well say, “it depends”, highlighting the unpredictable nature of coaching. Implying that no single piece of advice can be universally applied.
This creates a dilemma for the CD. Throwing coaches into complex decision making too early in their development may be counterproductive. We have to take a short detour to see why.

Novices are not little experts

The cognitive (thinking) processes that experts use are different from those used by novices. In short, experts think differently from novices. This means that developing skills and knowledge early in a coach’s development is fundamentally different from learning at a later stage of the coach’s development.

“It’s not just that students know less than experts, it’s also that what they know is organised differently in their memory.” (1, p128)

This fundamental difference between novice and expert coaches means that as CDs we have to be aware of the curse of knowledge – the idea that experts forget how difficult learning may be in the early stages, and what is required to effectively learn.

According to the cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham there are important novice / expert differences (1). Some of his points are reproduced here:

• Experts show better transfer to similar domains than novices do.
• Even if novices have the same knowledge as experts, experts can access the right information with greater speed and accuracy.
• Experts are better able to single out important details, produce sensible solutions, and transfer their knowledge to similar domains.
• The extensive experience (and knowledge) of experts means that they will be able to transfer information more efficiently from working memory to long-term memory. This includes deriving benefits from practice more efficiently than novices.
• The information in the memory of experts is organised differently from the information in a novice’s long-term memory.
• Novices think in terms of surface features, whereas experts think in terms of functions, or deep structure.

Strategies for novice / intermediate coaches

Armed with these insights from cognitive science, we can plan for the learning experiences that are likely to be more successful for coaches at the beginning of their learning journey. We have touched on some of these strategies above.
Here is a summary of strategies for novice and intermediate coach learning consistent with the insights above (2):

• Be clear about where coaches are starting from (prior knowledge and skills). Build from there.
• Use learning experiences that are consistent with the working memory capacities of the coaches.
• Use graphics or other visual techniques to show coaches the big picture – where they are going and how things connect to each other.
• Use multi-sensory teaching strategies (visual, auditory, kinaesthetic, tactile).
• Provide modelling / demonstrations and worked examples.
• Build on surface knowledge by challenging coaches with thinking tasks (problem solving, application etc).
• Provide opportunities for collaboration.
• Provide feedback / feed forward, ask questions, collaborate on next steps.
• Provide ample opportunities for spaced practice (practice in small doses spread out over time).

Scaffold support & fade guidance

A learner-centred approach is one where coaches are provided opportunities to take responsibility for their own learning.

Helping learners take more responsibility for their own learning can be developed over time. This approach is summarised in the graphic below (3,4)

The model in a nutshell:

I DO > WE DO > YOU DO

A closer look at the model

• The purpose of the model is to help CDs choose learning experiences that consider where coaches are on the novice – expert spectrum.
• Novices have less knowledge, skills & experience, so more guidance is required.
• Guidance is reduced as coaches develop more expertise (called the guidance fading effect).
• Too much information too early will confuse coaches (working memory overload), just as too little guidance will have the same effect.
• The model is not a recipe for CDs or coaches. That is, be prepared to go back a step or two to progress at a later date. Sometimes another tack altogether will be needed.
• Even experts are ‘novices’ for some of the time (e.g., learning a new technology). The difference compared with novices is the greater experience & knowledge of experts, means it will be easier for them to relate to information in long-term memory & to see how new knowledge can be applied.
• A community coach in their context can be just as ‘expert’ as a performance coach. Just different types of expertise.
• The model assumes there is a favourable climate for learning and the learners are sufficiently interested, motivated & have the required prior knowledge.

Take outs

• Coaching is often described as complex, non-linear, and unpredictable.
• This calls for coaches to have the skills to make decisions and exercise judgement in the face of uncertainty. These are higher-order thinking skills.
• These higher order skills need to be taught in a coaching context and not in isolation.
• So called twenty first century skills such as problem solving, critical thinking, creativity and communication skills are domain specific. That is, to solve a problem in coaching, the coach needs to build up mental models (schemata) through actual coaching experience.
• Until coaches have enough relevant foundational knowledge and skills it would be counter-productive to throw a coach in their early stages of learning into situations where difficult decision making is required.
• Experts think differently from novices. Experts are better able to single out important details, produce sensible solutions, and transfer their knowledge to similar domains.
• Some higher-level coaching exposure beyond the current capabilities of a coach may have some motivational value for coaches even if actual learning is minimal.
• Understanding novice / expert differences, and how they relate to the choice of learning experiences and instructional strategies is important for CDs to know.
• Giving coaches too much independence from the start is not a good way to develop independent coaches!

Editors: Lawrie Woodman, Andrea Woodburn, Melanie Schembri-Waite

References & notes

1. Willingham, Daniel T. (2009). Why Don’t Students Like School? (A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom), Jossey-Bass.

The quote at the top of the post is adapted from a heading on p143.

2. Bell, Mike. (2021). The Fundamentals of Teaching. (A five-step model to put the research evidence into practice). London and New York: Routledge.

Mike Bell reviewed several lists of effective teaching methods including those that use the new understandings of the ‘brain and learning’. He developed his own list based on identifying the common elements of good teaching practices. I have adapted his final list.

3. Busch, Bradley, Watson, Edward, Bogatchek, Ludmila. (2023). Teaching and Learning Illuminated. London and New York: Routledge.

The graphic depicting guidance fading is based on what is technically known as the expertise reversal effect. That is giving an expert too much information when ideas and motor patterns are well developed is counterproductive. The ideas captured in the graphic are based on concepts from cognitive psychology.

A SCHEMA is a network of neurons in long-term memory. Schemata are available for understanding the environment and new ideas.

4. Fisher, Douglas, Frey, Nancy (2013). Engaging the Adolescent Learner, Gradual Release of Responsibility Instructional Framework. International Reading Association. See HERE.

Cognitive load Guidance fading Novice-Expert Working memory

Coach Developer Profile

Joan Yuliani

Joan Yuliani wears many hats—a netball player, an international official, a coach, and a coach developer. These roles reflect her deep passion and love for netball.

With over 20 years of coaching experience, she works with Singapore’s sports governing body, Sport Singapore, focusing on coaching development within CoachSG. In her free time, she volunteers with Netball Singapore as a coach developer. She feels blessed to be able to do what she loves.

HOW DID YOU GET INTO THE CD ROLE?

I got into the CD role by accident! I came across a course for coaching course presenters and decided to give it a try. I gained as much experience as I could, and eventually, my association, Netball Singapore, nominated me for an ICCE course. It’s been an incredible experience so far!

CD PHILOSOPHY

My philosophy is to always be open to challenges and to being challenged.

I love creating and being part of the process, as it fosters growth opportunities. I’m constantly asking, ‘Is there a way to do this better?’ and responding with, ‘Yeah, let’s talk about it!’ or ‘I bet we can learn more if we try it this way.’ I really enjoy this kind of engagement, where we push ourselves to improve.

BEST PARTS ABOUT THE ROLE

I love meeting people and hearing their stories about why they’re passionate about sport. Everyone’s personal experiences offer so much to learn from, and it really fuels my own passion for what I do.

SUPPORT FOR COACHES

My support for coaches operates on a couple of layers.

First, I work with my national sports association to organize workshops aimed at further developing coaches’ skills.

On another layer, I support a group of coaches who are learning to become Coach Developers (CDs). I help them develop their skills in facilitation and coaching conversations. I’m currently supporting their overseas learning journey – mainly for them to hear other perspectives, to explore and to come back refreshed and inspired. I often use the word ‘stretch’ to describe my approach, where I nudge them to engage in cross-sport sharing and workshops to further develop their presentation skills and being comfortable engaging with different people.

My goal is to help them provide an all-round experience that helps being a Coach Developer and provide platforms for them to share their experiences. These coaches have so much to offer, but often not enough opportunities to do so.

IF YOU HAD MORE RESOURCES

If I had more resources, I’d probably take a step back to assess the broader needs of coaches and coach developers. I’d spend more time on the ground, really understanding their development needs, and then create something specifically tailored for them.

DO YOU WORK IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHER CDS?

I often do! Whether it’s within the same sport or across different ones, I think it’s valuable to have a sounding board with someone from another sport. Hearing about their experiences, challenges, and learnings is incredibly insightful.

Nothing beats getting advice from peers as well. I often reach out to them, and they do the same with me. Sometimes, I invite them to my workshops and courses to hear their feedback on what I can do better, and I make time to do the same for them.

Over time, we’ve built a supportive network of like-minded individuals who are deeply passionate about sports, and I find that to be a huge relief.

HIGHLIGHTS AND CHALLENGES

I’m always on the lookout for people who are eager to be stretched and get involved in facilitating and learning. When I see the coaches I support speaking the same language— with the same vigor and passion—as they pass it on to other coaches, I’m incredibly proud of them. They start talking about how rewarding it is to be part of a beginner coach’s journey, mentoring others, and seeing those coaches get excited and eager to learn more.

That’s where the value truly multiplies. Coach Developers (CDs) are multipliers. What we advocate, our values, and the hours we put in all multiply across so many others.

DO YOU HAVE A MENTOR?

I don’t have a mentor, though I wish I did. However, we do have a strong support network. We help each other by offering advice, providing a listening ear, sharing new perspectives, and being there as friends to grab drinks with or bounce ideas off of. .

TOP 4 COACH DEV TIPS

Listen to understand.
Always be people-centric
Be keen to learn (even from the person you’re mentoring)
Have fun and be yourself
Get to know the person not the profession.

Joan Yuliani

An inconvenient proposition about learning: IT’S OK to TELL PEOPLE STUFF

The push – pull continuum

A pillar of many coach developer courses is the PUSH – PULL continuum – a way of characterising a range of different teaching approaches1. A similar idea is the TELL – ASK continuum. An Australian Sports Commission video 2 about the TELL – ASK continuum can be accessed HERE.

Pushing or telling is characterised as a traditional information-driven approach where the teacher curates, translates and communicates information (3). The responsibility for learning resides with the learner (athlete or coach).

In a learner-centred approach, learner and teacher work together. The teacher engineers an environment to promote learning. The emphasis is squarely on learning. High-level questions help to make thinking visible and make sense of learning. They help the learner to connect to prior knowledge and cluster new knowledge into larger concepts. Student explanations provide a similar role.

An additional potential advantage to the push-pull approach is that it reminds the CD or coach that they will need to adapt their teaching to the context and the needs of the learners.

Push – Pull Limitations

The push-pull or tell-ask concepts are useful provided it is understood that there is no right or wrong teaching approach that can be explained by the idea of a push-pull continuum. It is also important to not see push-pull as binaries. They are simply teaching approaches to be used in a flexible way along with other teaching strategies.

• Pushing or telling are imprecise terms often confused with the idea of someone talking for 40 minutes or more while the audience remains passive – possibly asleep (didactic lecturing). A didactic approach is not the same as explicit or direct teaching.
• Explicit (or direct) teaching includes some telling but in the context of setting clear learning intentions, indicating what ‘good looks like’, modelling, checking for understanding, guiding the practice and so on.
• The push-pull continuum is a useful reminder that different learning situations require solutions that are relevant to the moment. However, push-pull is not a precise guide for telling you when to push or pull. For example, it is not useful to say that pushing should never be used with an expert learner or an exploratory learning strategy or questioning approach should never be used with a novice learner.
• Push-pull is also not a useful tool for categorising different teaching roles such as instructor, teacher, facilitator, mentor etc. What these titles mean is arbitrary and imprecise and assumes that the roles can be accurately placed on the push-pull continuum. They can’t.

Addressing the limitations

Push – Pull shows us that there are different ways a coach or CD can offer guidance to a learner. The type of guidance offered depends on the context and the learner. The push – pull continuum is limited in informing us of the choices available for guidance. It is difficult to match a point on the push – pull continuum with a learner’s needs and use that to prescribe how much pushing, pulling or something else should be done.

In an earlier post, we looked at the Gradual Release of Responsibility model (GRR) – (ref 4) summarised by the graphic below. The graphic conveys the multiple ways a teacher and learner can work together. Guidance fades from top to bottom. GRR is not meant to convey a linear process – the amount of guidance may fluctuate depending on the circumstance.

A complementary approach to managing instructional guidance is to base the guidance on the following three factors shown in the graphic and explained below. The three factors help in the choice of the optimal guidance for different contexts.

• The TASK. Is the focus on surface knowledge such as knowing the three energy systems or knowing what emotional intelligence means? Or is it about the deep knowledge that is required to apply knowledge and skills and solve problems.

• The LEVEL of LEARNER EXPERTISE. What prior knowledge and skills does the learner possess?

• The INSTRUCTIONAL GOAL. This is an important factor in deciding whether there should be no guidance or minimal guidance versus a high level of guidance as in explicit instruction. Two instructional goals have been identified:

o Pre-instructional goals. Priming the learner for what is to come. Activating prior learning. Identifying knowledge gaps. Motivating the learner.
o Problem solving. For this goal, the aim is to enhance problem solving skills so the learner can apply knowledge and transfer it to new and unfamiliar situations. This requires the acquisition of more comprehensive mental models.

Slava Kalyuga (5) has developed the idea of these three factors as a basis for managing instructional guidance in an article in an open access book, In Their Own Words. The e-book is available here and is highly recommended. See page 122 for Slava’s informative article.

Whether instructor, teacher, or mentor, these three factors come into play. A word of caution though. Coaching is complex with many ‘moving parts’. Any prescriptive advice should be tempered with the coach’s (or CD’s) own judgement. This may mean doing something that doesn’t neatly fit a ‘textbook prescription’.

Take outs

• The Push – Pull continuum is shorthand for indicating there are different ways to offer guidance to learners.
• Implicit in the idea is that more pulling or asking is better because it is consistent with the idea of a more learner-centred approach to teaching.

• Use push – pull as a reminder to employ a variety of teaching/coaching approaches.

• Avoid black and white binary labelling. Pushing or telling can mean many things and can serve many useful purposes. At the wrong time or if overused, pushing can be counterproductive. Pulling or asking, likewise comes in many forms. There are pros and cons for this strategy too.

• Rather than putting teachers and learners into categories, understanding how to best manage guidance is a more productive approach.

• More and more emphasis in coaching and coach development is being placed on learner-centred approaches. More asking. More learner-voice. Opportunities for more learner choice when working with learners (coaches or athletes). These are aimed at producing greater learner independence and autonomy.

• There is no right way to teach or coach. What works in the researcher’s laboratory might not work in your ‘laboratory’ of the real world. This calls for understanding and empathy for different points of view and teaching/coaching styles. This idea is developed in an excellent podcast on The Sport Pysch Show (6).

• Avoid putting labels on teachers/coaches and learners or putting them on a continuum. A more useful approach starts with the learner’s needs and asking the following questions:

o What is the learning intention and what does ‘good’ look like?

o Is the learner a novice or an expert on the task at hand? What is their prior achievement?

o What is the nature of the task? (Task complexity – high or low or in between)

o What is the instructional goal – to prime and motivate prior to deeper learning or is it to develop problem solving skills?

Asking these questions is a reminder that CDs and coaches may play multiple roles ranging from providing explicit instruction, to being a mentor or supportive friend.

Context as always is important. Remember, it too can vary.

The coach or CD’s ‘override’ button is to be used when gut feeling indicates the learner may need something that fits the moment better than a more prescriptive approach.

Editors: Lawrie Woodman, Andrea Woodburn and Melanie Schembri-Waite.

References

Crisfield, P., Bales, J. (2024). International Coach Developer Framework, International Council for Coaching Excellence. Page 42.
Australian Sports Commission. Supporting Others Video Series.
Chew, S., (2023). The Culture of Teaching We Have Versus the Culture of Teaching We Need. In In Their Own Words (What Scholars and Teachers Want You to Know About Why and How to Apply the Science of Learning in Your Academic Setting. Division 2, American Psychological Association. Page 32.
Fisher, D. Effective Use of the Gradual Release of Responsibility Model.
Kalyuga, Slava. (2023). Task Complexity, Learner Expertise, and Instructional Goals in Managing Instructional Guidance. In In Their Own Words. Page 122-131. (See reference #3 above for access).
Cushion, C., Harvey, S. Cope, E. Sport Psych Show, Episode #227. (2023). A Flexible Approach to Coaching. Highly recommended for its common sense to approach to how learning works and its relevance to coaching.

Explicit instruction

Coach Developer Profile

Lawrie Woodman

Lawrie has been at the forefront of coach development in Australia. He played a major role in the roll out of the internationally recognised National Coaching Accreditation Scheme (NCAS).

As director of the Australian Coaching Council, Lawrie saw the implementation of major programs to assist NSOs in their development. These included: coaching athletes with a disability, the national officiating program, a coach scholarship program for emerging performance coaches, and elite coach conferences.

In 1994, Lawrie drove a year of coach recognition and celebration with the Year of the Coach initiative.

A hallmark of Lawrie’s directorship was the provision of a high level of support to NSOs in all facets of the design and delivery of courses.

CURRENT ROLE

Freelance coach developer mentoring some individual community coaches. Chair of the Australian Coaching Council.

Experience relevant to coach development

50 years as a teacher, coach and coach educator, including 35 years developing and delivering national level coaching development programs. Formal positions included Director of the Australian Coaching Council, Performance Coordinator at the AIS, High Performance Manager at Athletics Australia and Coaching Manager at the Australian Football League.

Awarded an OAM in 2021 for services to sport coaching and development.

PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY

I am a physical educator by profession and an experienced teacher. My philosophy can be summed up as working to inspire lifelong enjoyment of sport and physical activity. Coaches, and the way they deliver sport experiences, are the main influencers of that outcome.

Developing and delivering appropriate coach education and development is therefore crucial.

BELIEFS ABOUT COACHING

Coaching is a combination of connected endeavours, including:

Preparing athletes/participants for competition. Helping people get better. Creating a learning environment to assist people to improve and master the skills and tactics of their sport.
The quality of the participants’ experiences is directly dependent on the quality of coaching.
The coach is the shop front of a sport. Providing a positive experience is critical so participants will come back – next practice session, next week, next season.
Coaches are very influential in the quality of the club environment, determining whether it is a welcoming, enjoyable, learning environment – “A place where people want to be.”

“The coach is the shop front of a sport.

THE KEYS TO SUCCESSFUL COACHING

Forming relationships and teaching.
Understanding motivations:

Your own motivation – why are you coaching?
Knowing your athletes’ motivations for participating – why are they here?”. Then meeting their motivations (and your own). This will include fun and enjoyment, mastery of skills, social – being with others and a feeling of belonging, competition, and success.

Teaching – utilising a structured coaching process to deliver your craft – planning, goal setting, implementation, observation, analysis, feedback, and review.
Patience and resilience.
Curiosity – being a long-term active learner, evidence seeker, and getting better.
Values and beliefs – standing for something

TAKING COACH DEVELOPMENT TO THE NEXT LEVEL

The underlying theme is assisting people to become better coaches – ensuring they have up-to-date coaching skills.

There is a wide “matrix” of learning and development opportunities available at all levels today. Coach development can be much more individualised. Attending courses, either face to face or on-line, provided by sporting organisations and other educational agencies, and gaining formal qualifications will remain a major element. Seeking out on-going development opportunities is crucial to continued improvement.

The starting point for a coach development program is the coach knowing where they want to get to as a coach and understanding their starting point – “Where are you now?” What do they believe they need to bridge the gap? What is their next step? This where coach developers can play a crucial role in helping the coach with these questions and facilitating an environment which assists them along the way.

Continuous reflection on their coaching activities and progress with a view to ongoing improvement is a key to progress. Like athletic performance, this will not be a linear experience.

Ongoing coach support at club or association level will be a critical factor of future effectiveness. This can be delivered in different ways – mentors, coach developers, club development programs with components that include the coaches. Clubs may rely on their coaches to deliver expected major outcomes of these programs to their athletes.

TOP TIPS FOR COACH DEVELOPERS

Coach Development has a lot in common with coaching – “coaching the coaches”. Many of methods and skills used by coach developers will be the same as those used in effective coaching.
It starts with the qualities of being persistently curious and an active learner. The first step is to get involved – gaining experience; practicing coach development.
Seek out formal and informal opportunities to deliver coach development activities, including presenting at courses within sporting organisations, clubs and leagues.
Start building relationship with coaches you are working with and determine what they are expecting from the relationship. Initially offer what the coach is seeking and then broaden their mindset to explore other elements.
Facilitate the implementation of a community of practice with other coach developers to share ideas, provide motivation and offer support. Do something similar with the coaches you are developing.

Lawrie Woodman

Assessment FAQs – Part 2

IS RELIABILITY THE SAME AS VALIDITY?

Assessment involves trade-offs no matter how you cut the cake. More reliability and less validity. More validity and less reliability.

ASSESSMENT: The big RELIABILITY – VALIDITY trade-off

It’s common to hear definitions of reliability and validity (see graphic above) when discussing assessment. Most times they leave me thinking, Well, so what! What are the implications of this?

Not familiar with the terms? Have a look at this.

So, let’s dig a little deeper. What does it mean for the coach developer and how we go about assessment?

All assessment involves trade-offs (1,2). Too much time on summative assessments (3) robs the coach of practice time. If we assess one area of a course, we forgo the opportunity to assess another area in more depth. Aim for a more rigorous assessment and there is a danger of making it all too complicated and time consuming and costly.

The nature of assessment forces the coach developer to accept a trade-off of some kind. No matter what assessment path they take. There are no solutions, only trade-offs. (1).

MENTAL MODELS TO THE RESCUE

Given this dilemma (only trade-offs available), it’s important that we revisit our mental models (MM) that underpin coach learning. These models are based on the observations, beliefs, and values we have about the kind of learning experiences and outcomes for our coaches.

For example, our mental models might be underpinned by:

A desire for simplicity
An understanding of how volunteers would like to receive their training and their attitude towards being assessed.
A consideration of whether summative assessments add value for particular groups of coaches.
The time available and the suitability of the CD workforce.
The opportunity cost of one method over another. Where do we focus to get the biggest bang for the buck?
Beliefs about the importance of coaches learning in a practical context with an emphasis on ‘whole coaching’.

A theme running through these points is summed up by the saying: Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Be open to balancing competing forces regarding the choice of assessment.
The mental models you choose might be underpinned by different assumptions, beliefs, and values to those in the example above. Particularly as you take your context into consideration.

What would you include in your list of MM attributes?

THE TENSION BETWEEN RELIABILITY & VALIDITY

The graphic below draws together some of the ideas outlined above.

Multiple combinations of reliability and validity are possible. In the graphic all four arrows are within striking distance of the bull’s eye. That is, relatively high validity. But notice the spread is broad, leading to relatively low reliability.

“The key thing in assessment is being clear about why you are assessing, what conclusions you want to draw and how well the evidence supports the conclusions.” Dylan Wiliam

TAKE OUTS

Reliability is a pre-requisite of validity.
There is always a tension between reliability and validity.
Trade-offs between the two are commonplace.
More reliability is not necessarily better!
There is no such thing as a valid assessment task. Validity is a property of inferences based on the assessment outcomes, just as a picture cannot tell the whole story of an event. (2)
A lot of what we do in coach development involves outcomes that are not specific, measurable, or easily observable.
Coaching is a people business, and this calls for CDs and coaches to exercise their professional judgement. This often means making judgements by stepping back to look at the big picture – as ‘fuzzy’ as it may be.
The context and prior achievements of the coaches will determine the type of assessment adopted.
In some instances (e.g., volunteers, advanced coaches), the assessment might be embedded (3) into the learning with no formal summative assessments.

References

Christodoulou, Daisy. (2024) Designing the Perfect Assessment System, Part 3, The are no solutions, only trade-offs. The expression was originally used by the writer and critic Thomas Sowell. Daisy’s article is available here.
Wiliam, Dylan. (2020) How to Think About Assessment, in Donarski, Sarah, and Bennett, Tom, Assessment: An Evidence-Informed Guide for Teachers, John Catt.
Northern Illinois University, Formative and Summative Assessment. Available here.
Bjerede, Marie (2015). Embedded Formative Assessment: Tests without Stress. Available here.

Acknowledgments: Thanks to reviewers Lawrie Woodman, Andrea Woodburn, Melanie Schembri Waite, and Dawn Ho.

Part 2 Reliability Validity

Plain Speaking: Coaching in an Evolving Sports Landscape

“It’s about communication and relationships. Understanding how a coach’s ideas, through their words, turns into an athlete’s movements.”

Nick Winkelman, in The Language of Coaching.

Last year, to keep current in advances in coaching, I invested some time into exploring recent research into coaching, skill acquisition and coach development – podcasts, research papers, articles, books and social media leads.

Recent podcasts featuring Stuart Armstrong, Chris Cushion, Dan Abrahams, Vern Gambetta, Cody Royle, Stuart McMillan and Rob Gray got me thinking more deeply about my own paths in coaching and coach education and some of the factors I believe are important for effectiveness.

Some of the major changes in recent years have been in the language of coaching. As well as novel approaches, these changes include some re-labelling, presenting older concepts in new light, and a change in focus from coach “education” to coach “development”. In any case, plain language use has taken a hit.

In 2025, I am (half) expecting to see a headline or advertisement, which reads something like this.

While these phrases and concepts are well covered and the value of each approach or element is explained in the literature and in podcasts, I wonder how it all resonates with community coaches? They might recognise the phrases “coaching”, “game sense activities” and “athlete-centred”. After that, who knows?

As a long-time physical educator, coach and coach educator, I have learnt much along the way and been influenced by many innovative pioneers in these fields. I have had the privilege of learning directly from many early innovators in teaching and coaching in Australia, particularly in the 1970s and 80s, including:

Bert Willee (University of Melbourne) – group and activity organisation and management, and the use of direct instruction, including command style

Brian Nettleton (University of Melbourne) and Eric Worthington (Australian Soccer Federation) – learning outcomes, principles of play, small-sided games, conditioned games, “freeze-replay”, challenging players to find solutions.

David Parkin, Brian Douge & David Wheadon, (VFL/AFL), Rick Charlesworth (Hockey Australia), Patrick Hunt (AIS Basketball), – wholistic approach to coaching, relationship building, setting and demanding standards and expectations, a strong coaching philosophy.

Frank Pyke (University of WA) and Dick Telford (AIS) – practical application of science to coaching

Rod Thorpe – Game-sense approach

Damian Farrow (AIS/Victoria University) – constraints-led approach, perception-action coupling.

They, and many others, influenced my approach to the art and science, or craft, of coaching in various ways.

Over time, compounding of education courses, learning from others, trial and error and a lot of practical coaching has led me to absorb some critical principles for coaching effectiveness. I have taken a team sport, invasion games perspective in outlining these principles.

PRINCIPLES FOR SUCCESS

There is no one way to coach which guarantees success. Regardless of the terminology you use, whatever underlying theory, philosophy, system, or coaching style, there are some key considerations underpinning effectiveness.

Basic requirements – you must have:

• Knowledge of the sport and movement
• Understanding of motivations – knowing your players, yourself and your WHY? Clarifying what is important to you (your values) helps you frame your coaching philosophy which guides your decision making
• Capacity to establish and nurture relationships
• An environment (organisation and set up) that drives learning and skill acquisition
• A coaching process
• A coaching style

ALL COACHING ENVIRONMENTS ARE DIFFERENT

Apart from the individual characteristics you, as a coach, bring to the task, the first principle is that all coaching environments are different – unique teams, specific environments, individual differences in players and staff. Every practice activity will therefore be different, each challenge presented to players will differ, every decision is unique, and every skill repetition will vary, at least slightly, and may deliberately be vastly different.

USE A CLEAR COACHING PROCESS

The key to success, whatever coaching style you use, is to have a clear coaching process.

The coaching process is used to create an environment where players learn to play to the game plan and eventually to be able to perform it at a consistently high level. The coach, with input from the players, determines what is required of the players to execute the game plan successfully. Understanding this and the current ability of each player allows the coach to plan practice activities to develop the players’ abilities to deliver individually, as specific groups, and as a total team.

So as a coach, what do you do?

Firstly, plan your practices. Plan them according to your game plan and long term strategy, the time of the season and the next game or competition. Include each practice activity, its purpose and specific learning outcomes.

Organise the activity with appropriate rules and conditions (constraints), so players (and staff) can perform the required actions or achieve specific outcomes, and the coaches can easily observe what is occurring.

Initiate the activity, then observe and coach.

Observation – is the key coaching skill in the process. It allows the coach to see, analyse and evaluate the players’ performances in the practice. This where the real teaching element of coaching begins. A common call is to “coach what is front of you”. You have to see something to coach to do this effectively. It depends on the quality of your observation and analysis – what are you seeing? Does it require change or some other intervention? If yes, what do you do – stop the activity or keep it going, change the activity in some way, provide individual or group feedback, pull one or more players out for specific individual attention? It depends on what you see and what you can do about it. And, if something is not working as planned or achieving its purpose, change it.

Coaches should also assist players to become good observers looking to see critical features and cues of movement or game play evolving in front of them. Developing these attentional skills will also assist players to be better at driving their own learning.

All these steps must be in place – knowledge of the game and (your) game plan, the level of your players, planning of practice, organisation of the activities, observation and analysis of performance – for effective teaching and learning to occur. Every element of the process is underpinned by effective communication.

FITTING IT ALL TOGETHER

Following is an example for team invasion games of how it can all fit together.
Game-based activities have always been central to my approach to coaching, initially learnt from my PE courses and observing soccer coaching practices and applying it to Australian Football – for example Pyke & Woodman – The Grid System for Skill Practice Australian Football. I believe players come to practice “to play the game”, so activities should be as related and representative as possible. I have continually looked for opportunities to incorporate games into all elements of practice sessions – warm ups, skill (technical activities), style of play, tactics, conditioning activities-

USING GAMES IN PRACTICE

If you have a good understanding of your sport and the level of your players, there are potentially hundreds of game-related activities, variations and progressions available to you – limited only by your imagination.

What is a game?

The basic elements of a game are:

1. A target or goal of some kind; and essential rules (may be only two or three) to define how it is, or can be played by an individual
2. Add an opponent – can be played by two or more
3. Add a team mate (to one or both sides) – can be played by three or more

Each step increases the “representativeness” of the game to the sport

Starting with a ball, a target, an opponent and a team mate, you open the possibility of dozens of activities which allow the practice of all the elements of a sport and its principles of play.

Overlay this with conditions, or “constraints”, and you multiply the number of available activities for your sessions.

A game-based practice session might include some or all of:

1. Pre-session technique practices
2. Warm-up game
3. Shooting game
4. Skill games
5. Style of play games: Focusing on attack, defence or transition – coaching both sides of the ball.
6. conditioning circuit
7. Skill game under fatigue
8. Post session reflection on the overall session and each activity – What worked well? What did you have to change? What would you do differently when using the same activity next time?

In coaching games, you can use multiple teaching styles or approaches – command, direct instruction, demonstrate and practice, peer feedback, guided discovery – the whole Mosston Spectrum if you want to. All styles have their uses and benefits, and effective coaches use a range of them over the duration of a session, practice block or season. With experience, coaches can choose what is most appropriate for a particular activity at that time.

Current research shows there is a lot developing around skill acquisition, coaching styles and methods, and coach development. A new language, perhaps jargon, is growing around it, at the expense of plain language. These developments have important implications for coaching, including coach education and development. Getting people started is one thing, helping them to a high level of competence in their specific coaching role is another.

Lawrie Woodman

Lawrie Woodman has a broad background in coaching development and high performance sport management. He was the inaugural director of the Australian Coaching Council, then joined the Australian Institute of Sport high performance team. Lawrie has also worked for the Australian Football League and Athletics Australia. He is currently an independent coach developer consultant.

Jargon