A qualitative investigation of elite golf coaches' knowledge and the epistemological chain

The aim of the study was to explore the existence and application of the epistemological chain (EC) construct in the decision making of elite golf coaches. Eight male expert golf coaches were recruited for the study. Employing a qualitative methodology, semi-structured interviews were conducted to gain understanding of the participants‟ perceptions and application of the EC and to determine its overall effect on their knowledge development. Data were analysed to identify themes using interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA). Results indicate the EC is indeed present in the coaching of elite golfers and implemented in a structured and coherent form. This raises a number of interesting issues regarding coach and player development that may impact upon future pedagogical provision

What Happens During Language and Literacy Coaching? Coaches’ Reports of Their Interactions With Educators

Research Findings: This study investigated coaches’ interactions with educators in the context of a large-scale, state-implemented literacy professional development (PD). We examined log data and open-comment reports to understand what coaches found salient about their interactions with educators as well as how those reports aligned with the initial design of the PD. Coaches reported spending a large proportion of their interactions with educators completing administrative tasks. Our findings also indicate that coaches disproportionally targeted instructional content from the PD while also adding unrelated instructional content to their coaching. Although coaches reported focusing on relationship building, they reported using less efficacious coaching strategies (e.g., observation and discussion) more frequently than coaching strategies demonstrated to be more efficacious (e.g., modeling and co-teaching). Practice or Policy: Our findings suggest an explanation for the mixed evidence around coaching, as coaches in the study seemed to move beyond the specifications of the PD in their coaching interactions. This work has implications for the design of PD for both improving coach training and allowing some flexibility to meet educators’ learning needs that may be secondary to the content of the PD. Findings also support the need for more nuanced mechanisms for investing in coaching and coaching outcomes

What Happens During Language and Literacy Coaching? Coaches’ Reports of Their Interactions With Educators

Research Findings: This study investigated coaches’ interactions with educators in the context of a large-scale, state-implemented literacy professional development (PD). We examined log data and open-comment reports to understand what coaches found salient about their interactions with educators as well as how those reports aligned with the initial design of the PD. Coaches reported spending a large proportion of their interactions with educators completing administrative tasks. Our findings also indicate that coaches disproportionally targeted instructional content from the PD while also adding unrelated instructional content to their coaching. Although coaches reported focusing on relationship building, they reported using less efficacious coaching strategies (e.g., observation and discussion) more frequently than coaching strategies demonstrated to be more efficacious (e.g., modeling and co-teaching). Practice or Policy: Our findings suggest an explanation for the mixed evidence around coaching, as coaches in the study seemed to move beyond the specifications of the PD in their coaching interactions. This work has implications for the design of PD for both improving coach training and allowing some flexibility to meet educators’ learning needs that may be secondary to the content of the PD. Findings also support the need for more nuanced mechanisms for investing in coaching and coaching outcomes

What Happens During Language and Literacy Coaching? Coaches’ Reports of Their Interactions With Educators

Research Findings: This study investigated coaches’ interactions with educators in the context of a large-scale, state-implemented literacy professional development (PD). We examined log data and open-comment reports to understand what coaches found salient about their interactions with educators as well as how those reports aligned with the initial design of the PD. Coaches reported spending a large proportion of their interactions with educators completing administrative tasks. Our findings also indicate that coaches disproportionally targeted instructional content from the PD while also adding unrelated instructional content to their coaching. Although coaches reported focusing on relationship building, they reported using less efficacious coaching strategies (e.g., observation and discussion) more frequently than coaching strategies demonstrated to be more efficacious (e.g., modeling and co-teaching). Practice or Policy: Our findings suggest an explanation for the mixed evidence around coaching, as coaches in the study seemed to move beyond the specifications of the PD in their coaching interactions. This work has implications for the design of PD for both improving coach training and allowing some flexibility to meet educators’ learning needs that may be secondary to the content of the PD. Findings also support the need for more nuanced mechanisms for investing in coaching and coaching outcomes

What Happens During Language and Literacy Coaching? Coaches’ Reports of Their Interactions With Educators

Research Findings: This study investigated coaches’ interactions with educators in the context of a large-scale, state-implemented literacy professional development (PD). We examined log data and open-comment reports to understand what coaches found salient about their interactions with educators as well as how those reports aligned with the initial design of the PD. Coaches reported spending a large proportion of their interactions with educators completing administrative tasks. Our findings also indicate that coaches disproportionally targeted instructional content from the PD while also adding unrelated instructional content to their coaching. Although coaches reported focusing on relationship building, they reported using less efficacious coaching strategies (e.g., observation and discussion) more frequently than coaching strategies demonstrated to be more efficacious (e.g., modeling and co-teaching). Practice or Policy: Our findings suggest an explanation for the mixed evidence around coaching, as coaches in the study seemed to move beyond the specifications of the PD in their coaching interactions. This work has implications for the design of PD for both improving coach training and allowing some flexibility to meet educators’ learning needs that may be secondary to the content of the PD. Findings also support the need for more nuanced mechanisms for investing in coaching and coaching outcomes

What Is the Landscape of Early Childhood Coaching in Nebraska?

Background on Early Childhood Coaching in Nebraska Coaches have become an integral component of supporting teachers and adults working with young children and families nationally (Schachter, 2015). In the state of Nebraska, early childhood (EC) coaching has increasingly become important for this type of work (Jayaraman, Knoche, Marvin, & Bainter, 2014). Indeed, multiple initiatives within the state utilize coaches as a mechanism for supporting change in adult learners that leads to positive outcomes for young children and families. In general, coaching is a unique form of professional development that is relationship-based, whereby coaches work one-on-one or in small groups with adult learners to improve knowledge, skills, and dispositions (Aikens & Akers, 2011). Coaching can take place in adults’ immediate context and tends to be ongoing rather than a single, one-time training (Joyce & Showers, 1980; Rush & Shelden, 2005). As such, coaching has the potential to provide high-quality learning experiences for adults to support high-quality experiences in EC. Based on this growing use of coaching across the state, key stakeholders have collaborated to develop mechanisms that support coach training and development. Since this collaborative work began in 2009–10, a semiannual coach training was developed to provide foundational coaching skills and competencies relevant for all coaching initiatives, such as developing relationships and facilitating coaching conversations. The collaborative group also came to understand that coaches needed ongoing support and initiated the offering of regular “booster” sessions to support coaches’ professional development once they are in the field and actively serving coachees. In efforts to better understand who was coaching and perceptions of the training coaches received, stakeholders conducted an initial survey in 2014 (Jayaraman et al. 2014). Results of this survey (n = 35) revealed that coaches liked the work of coaching and, in particular, coaches commented that they enjoyed building relationships with coachees and observing positive changes. Although these coaches were generally positive about the training they received, myriad challenges were also reported, particularly with regards to the coaching process and their own training and professional development needs. Present Study Since the 2014 study, coaching in various EC initiatives has grown across the state. In 2018, the Nebraska Early Childhood Coach Collaboration team was interested in reassessing the process of coaching in Nebraska. This included understanding who is doing the work of coaching, what constitutes the coaching process, how coaches perceive their work, and how coaches were prepared to do their work. Thus, a new survey was created to understand more about coaching in the state of Nebraska. It contained a variety of questions consisting of both fixed-choice and open-response comments. Data collection was led by Dr. Schachter from the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and was reviewed by the Institutional Review Board. Participants were invited by email to complete an online survey that took approximately 20 minutes to complete. The survey was emailed to key stakeholders in the Spring of 2018 with requests that the survey be forwarded to anyone doing the work of EC coaching in Nebraska. In total, 101 individuals completed the survey. Importantly, all participants self-identified as a “coach.” Participants were able to enter into a raffle to win one of five iPad minis. Survey responses were analyzed descriptively. Next, we present our findings regarding who are the coaches, what is the content of coaching, how coaches perceive their work, how coaches know that coaching is working, and how coaches were prepared. We conclude with recommendations for advancing the work of coaching in the state of Nebraska

Enhancing design learning using a digital repository

The process of design is context dependent and open-ended, and therefore does not revolve around a specific body of information or knowledge. The educational paradigm shift in the area of engineering design from teaching to coaching and the increased use of social constructivist learning ideals requires students to have access to as wide a range of information as possible. Digital resources provide an excellent opportunity for extending the range of information available to design students and to this end, as part of a joint research program with Stanford University, the University of Strathclyde has developed a groupware product called LauLima to provide students with a collaborative environment which allows them to gather, organise, store and share information. This paper describes the improvement to design learning, based on a Design Knowledge Framework, in a 3rd year product design engineering project from session 03/04 to 04/05 which has been facilitated by the implementation of this technology

Degrees of Coaching: Success Boston's Transition Coaching Model, Highlights Brief

SBC coaches engage in providing the general kinds of supports proven helpful in research about beginning college outcomes for students. Connecting students to resources, helping them plan their coursework and identify a major, and developing a positive relationship with coaches have all been identified as mechanisms by which supports may improve outcomes for community college students in particular. Two-thirds of SBC coaches reported that connecting students to resources on and off campus is an important component of transition coaching. Coaches and students communicated with one another through a variety of methods; generally, coaches relied upon the modes students most preferred—text, email and in-person.In 2014-2015 the SBC program, as a whole, was providing support services on those topics aligned with prior research findings about the specific factors linked with college persistence and graduation, including financial aid support, course selection, time management, connecting students to resources, setting goals, and selecting a course of study. Importantly, students concurred that their coaches were most helpful when providing support about these same topics. Coaches described two other central components of their work with students, including helping students learn to advocate for themselves, and developing the confidence to succeed, through encouraging students to meet with professors to discuss course requirements, seek out support services, and identify and apply for internships.Prior research also suggests that the amount of communication and contact coaches have with students may contribute to improved college-related outcomes.ix SBC coaches and students communicate frequently, as evidenced by the nearly 9,000 transition support interactions recorded for the 2014-2015 school year. Yet these same data suggest variability in nonprofit organizations' expectations about how often coaches should engage with students each semester. To ensure that all students receive a consistent threshold of coaching support, perhaps stakeholders could consider whether to establish a minimum number of interactions between coaches and their students or minimum amount of one-on-one coaching each semester.The findings summarized in this brief illustrate how the SBC program has continued to help collegeentering students navigate their first years in college. They also suggest possible connections between aspects of program implementation and later accomplishments—connections to be explored in subsequent reports about key student outcomes. The findings also point to some challenges faced by the nonprofit organizations, especially in terms of managing large and sometimes widely dispersed caseloads of students. Those coaches with caseloads of 60-plus students lamented the lack of adequate time with individual students, and coaches whose caseloads were distributed across multiple campuses faced logistical hurdles in managing multiple college calendars and spending valuable time traveling between campuses. These impediments hindered coaches' capacity to support students effectively. Over the coming years, as SBC triples the number of students to be served, helping coaches and organizations manage these barriers will be even more critical

The Impact of Coaching Styles on the Motivation and Performance of Athletes

Abstract Previous research has been conducted on the concept of coaching styles and their impact on the motivation and performance of athletes, with results suggesting that the impact can be extremely significant. Through the different styles of coaching, coaches impact the athletes with whom they associate in different ways, while also fulfilling or neglecting the athletes’ psychological needs. Through recent research, it has been suggested that coaches who exhibit the most autonomy supportive behaviors tend to fulfill the psychological needs of athletes, resulting in the development of self-determined forms of motivation. When autonomy is supported and athletes become self-determined in their motivation, research shows that these athletes achieve greater success in their overall improvement and performance when participating in their respective activity or sport. The purpose of this synthesis project is to review the literature regarding coaching styles and their impact on the motivation and performance of athletes. More specifically, to establish an understanding of what coaching style has the most positive impact on an athlete\u27s motivation and performance