Applied Coaching Research Journal Research Journal 4 | Page 36

APPLIED COACHING RESEARCH JOURNAL 2019, Vol. 4
APPLIED COACHING RESEARCH JOURNAL 2019, Vol. 4
Rethinking coach learning and development
in the UK
A way to provide some insight into a possible
framework is to look at the largest scale learning
and assessment system in most countries: the
driving test.
The UK driving test is a literal illustration of an
accessible, flexible and robust approach to learning
and assessment (see ‘Becoming a licensed driver’
box). It is the accessibility and personal choice of
how individuals construct their learning for the
final two assessments (theory and practical) that is
of interest here.
36
Figure 1 represents an outcomes model of learning
and assessment applied to coaching and is based
on re-visiting some of the underlying philosophical
ideas that lay behind the introduction of NVQs. The
model is founded on the principles that:
1) C
 oaches learn from a wide variety of
opportunities and experiences, many of which
are increasingly online and digital.
Figure 1 depicts the progression of a coach from
one level or stage to another. In this sense there
is still a commitment to a ‘staged system’ with
summative assessment ‘gateways’ except that the
process through which a coach moves from one
stage to another is very different to the current
system. These stages are not necessarily numbered,
but each stage could represent the different roles
and contexts that coaches work within and named
accordingly.
Optional Learning
Context-specific
Focused support
Recommended Learning
Context-specific
Focused support
Core Learning and Training
Support from mentors, colleagues, peers providing
continuous formative feedback
Unmediated and social learning alongside reflecting on the
experience of coaching
Collecting evidence towards summative assessment
Figure 1: An Outcomes Model of Learning and Assessment
The model in figure 1 has five main elements:
2) L
 earning is a personal process and each
coach has their own circumstances and prior
experiences that influence what they want to
learn, how they will learn and why they want to
learn.
3) C
 oaching is relational and context specific, any
system needs to cater for coaches working in
different contexts with different people.
4) A
 ccess to learning should be open, flexible
and accessible to all coaches; as should any
assessment of competence.
In summary, the current landscape appears to be
one in which a transformative shift from coach
education towards coach learning and development
is being recognised. The challenge is how a system
change can be achieved across the 150+ recognised
sports without fragmented approaches, different
ideas and inconsistent practices emerging. There
is arguably a need for system developers to be
able to refer to a common coach learning and
development framework that is flexible, offers the
scope for innovation, and captures the progressive
spirit that is now gathering momentum. The model
explained below may contribute to a debate about
what a future framework might look like.
The approach to becoming a licensed driver is
an example of an ‘outcomes’ based approach to
learning and assessment because it is the outcome
of learning that matters not necessarily the learning
itself. Learning and assessment are consequently
separated and distinct from each other, with the
learning component being specific to the individual
and constructed through drawing on different forms
of learning. How an individual learns to drive is
not the primary focus of the process, what matters
is that they learn to drive safely, they are able to
demonstrate this in real conditions and satisfy an
assessor that they are not a danger to themselves
and other road users.
5) T
 he outcomes and mode of summative
assessment should be transparent, robust and
quality assured and consistent across sports.
The approaches that are now being promoted and
adopted are not new. They have been evident
within the underlying educational philosophy
of vocational education and training since the
early 1990s. Where the NVQ system arguably
failed, particularly in coaching, was overlaying
the philosophical approach with a rigid, linear
system that incorporated the assessment of very
prescriptive functional competencies, which
do not always reflect the complex judgements
and decisions coaches make in practice (Collins
et al, 2015). The educational principles were
sound enough, but they were distorted during
implementation and the design of the system
around them.
Becoming a licensed driver
A learner driver can be taught by a driving
instructor, a friend or self-taught through
experience (with a qualified driver accompanying).
They then organise a test and demonstrate to a
driving examiner, who is independent of their
learning, that they can perform to the required
standard. It may take 10 or 100s of hours of
driving experience and learning and/or being
examined multiple times: the learning is implied
and assumed by the capability to perform in real
conditions and meeting the required standard.
There is no prescribed ‘course’ that a learner must
attend. Successful drivers draw on all their learning
experiences. In most cases their learning includes
input from a qualified driving instructor alongside
the experience they have gained with those
accompanying them. An online theory test is taken
separately to the practical driving test.
Jessup (1991) also argued that learning takes
many forms which range from the formal to the
informal, and only the learner can make coherent
sense of what they have learnt from these different
experiences. He also proposed that learners should
be assessed by way of accumulating evidence
from across all their learning experiences and the
various opportunities they have engaged with.
Jessup (1990) also suggested that assessment
should be “more friendly and facilitate learning
rather than acting as a deterrent or just an obstacle
to be overcome.” A process that he envisaged
would require new, more imaginative and
alternative forms of assessment.
1. Initial compulsory registration and guidance
Coaches at each stage are informed and
understand the process that lies ahead and how
they progress towards the ‘gateway’ summative
assessment. This is the start of the journey
within each stage and an initial form of action
planning may take place here and, if possible,
some one-to-one guidance is provided.
2. L
 earning is separated from
summative assessment
The summative assessment process (the
gateway) is still owned by NGBs and a future
UKCC endorsement process or similar might
endorse this process to ensure consistency and
quality assurance across and within sports.
An assessment should enable coaches to
demonstrate what they have learnt and how this
has impacted their practice and the experience
of the people they coach rather than repeating
or remembering what they have been taught
on a course. A focus on safe practice would
be maintained and the CIMSPA professional
standards would underpin the skills, knowledge
and behaviours being assessed.
37