Applied Coaching Research Journal Research Journal Volume 2 | Page 25

APPLIED COACHING RESEARCH JOURNAL 2018, Vol. 2
of the learning that takes place between levels
of certification. Furthermore, in a survey of
322 UK coaches across 52 sports/activities,
Thompson (2018) suggested that while the most
popular learning environment is face-to-face
interaction, such as workshops and tutorials (82%
of respondents), surprisingly, online learning
(66%) featured ahead of one-to-one coaching
or mentoring (56%). When the main challenges
and barriers to learning were explored the most
common response was the cost of training, cited by
54% of respo ndents, followed by the inconvenience
of the locations and timings. Consequently there
does appear to be a role for technology-enhanced
learning, since both cost and accessibility can be
significantly offset through online delivery. Yet, as
Cushion and Townsend (2018) report: “There is a
pressing need for an evidence base concerning how
technology is currently used in coach learning.” That
includes its impact and how it might be integrated
with formal and informal learning opportunities in
periods between qualification levels.
Recognising this opportunity there have been calls
from UK Coaching (2017) and Sport England to
embrace technology and to foster an improvement
culture which provides, “high quality, ‘on demand’
digital learning and development solutions for
coaches so that they can learn and improve
more easily.” There is also a growing recognition
that it should be easier for people from a more
diverse range of backgrounds to become coaches
and develop their talent and potential to coach.
Arguably online delivery may help achieve both
more accessible forms of coach learning and open
up opportunities to develop a wider coaching
community that is more representative of society
in general.
The aim of this article is therefore to discuss how a
popular, free, online distance learning course, called
Exploring Sports Coaching and Psychology, might
contribute to the development of coaches when set
in the context of what is known about their learning.
The aims of the study were to:
i) identify the demographic characteristics of
participants attracted to this course,
ii) explore evidence of what topics and online
functions engaged participants the most,
iii) discuss how participant’s learning experience
contributed to their development as a coach.
Drawing on this research, the paper discusses
effective online learning design and the place that
online distance learning might play in the wider
landscape of coach learning.
What is known about technology-enhanced coach
learning?
It is now widely recognised that informal learning
experiences, including some provided online,
contribute more to the development of coaching
knowledge and practice than formal coach education
courses. However, a challenge in reviewing what is
known about technology-enhanced coach learning
is the range of tools and modes it encompasses
(eg podcasts, wikis, blogs, virtual learning
environments, social media). The term ‘blended
learning’ is often used to describe a mix of learning
opportunities in which face-to-face interaction and
online material are mixed. A common finding of
those promoting blended learning are the reported
increased accessibility of online course materials,
enabling users to access resources multiple times
and at their own pace or time. A further learning
design observation in Kori et al’s (2014) review
is that the use of prompts, guiding questions, and
comment gives structure and sets limits to
learning, helping critical thinking and reinforcing
new knowledge.
Despite the promise of technology-enhanced
learning there has been minimal research that
explores the impact this mode of delivery might
have on a sport coaches’ development and why it
might usefully enhance their learning. Stodter and
Cushion’s (2016) research into face-to-face coach
learning illuminates the potential mechanisms
through which learning takes place in an online
environment. Their framework describes the
filtering processes coaches use whereby “individuals
adopted, adapted and rejected elements of
their experiences, leading to uneven learning in
apparently similar situations.” They describe that
coaches “cherry pick” certain aspects of their
learning to apply to their practice. Since coaches are
different, the same coach development opportunity
is likely to have a different impact on the individual
coaches that experience it.
Their framework views coach learning as an
individual as well as a social process in which
relationships such as working with other coaches
are an important influence. They suggest that
coaches construct revised knowledge through two
main filter mechanisms.
25