A longitudinal investigation of coaching behaviours of professional top level youth football coaches

Coaches currently use behaviour and practice activities which have been learned from a combination of tradition, coaches’ intuition, and emulation of other coaches (Cushion, Armour & Jones, 2003). The purpose of this study is to identify these experiences that impact five English professional youth soccer coach’s cognitive processes for the choice of practice and behaviour. To fully understand the holistic nature of coaching, it has been argued that research focus should be given to the world of individual coaches, and how they operate within their given contexts (Potrac, Jones & Armour, 2002). This study addresses individual coaches’ interpretations of their experiences and the process by which meanings and knowledge are used to guide actions (Potrac et al., 2002; Smith & Cushion, 2006; Harvey, Cushion & Massa-Gonzalez, 2010). To expose the knowledge and strategies coaches’ use that underpin their behaviour and practice, while providing a deeper understanding of the factors that coaches’ believe explain their performance (Potrac et al., 2002; Smith & Cushion, 2006). In this study, to aid interpretation and understanding of coaches’ behaviour and practice, rigorous application of quantitative methods (e.g., observational techniques) complemented by sound interpretations of qualitative data have been recommended (Ford, Yates & Williams, 2010; Potrac et al., 2002; Smith & Cushion, 2006). Despite an accumulation of descriptive behavioural knowledge about youth coaches, and recently additional descriptive understanding of practice structures, the professional arena in general and professional soccer particularly remains under-researched, with limited mixed-methods research being applied to the coaching behaviour and practice structures of professional youth coaches. This study looked to go some way to addressing this issue by replicating and building on studies in similar contexts while using the sophisticated Coach Analysis Intervention System (see Cushion, Harvey, Muir & Nelson, 2012) combined with interpretive interviews to examine coaching behaviour and practice structures. It is this research that is essential since we need to firstly examine ‘how’ and ‘why’ coaches behave and structure practice before theorizing about how changes may be made (Potrac, Jones & Cushion, 2007)

Understanding coaching practice in professional youth football: deconstructing coaching philosophy

The purpose of this research was to understand the social construction of coaching philosophy and investigate how it articulated with, and impacted, coaching practice. Current understandings of coaching philosophy suffer from a lack of conceptual clarity and are often presented as coach centric ideals that are both disconnected from, and not reflected in, coaches’ practice (Lyle & Cushion, 2017). To further ‘muddy the water’ there remains an absence of philosophical thought employed in coaching philosophy, such as ontology, axiology, ethics (Hardman & Jones, 2013) and epistemology (Light, 2008). To address this gap, data were collected from a case study of one professional English youth male football Academy. The research lasted over fifteen months and during this time multiple interviews with coaches and field observations of their practice took place. In addition, observations of discussions were also undertaken with coach developers, first team and Academy staff. The data were analysed using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis. Subsequently, the themes were subjected to a higher level of theoretical abstraction using the work of Bourdieu. Here Bourdieu’s thinking tools of field, capital and habitus, were used to make connections between the themes and to increase the depth of the study’s explanatory outcomes. Analysis revealed that coaching philosophy was mainly associated with tactical and technical knowledge of the sport. Coaching philosophy also functioned as symbolic capital in power relations to rationalise practice rather than provide a clear guide to question and underpin coach’s individual practice. A coaching field existed and was influenced by a logic that valorised professional playing experience, National Governing Body coaching qualifications and social connections as symbolic capital. The symbolic capitals in the coaching field structured coach’s positions. Hence, coaches’ practice in this case was driven and misrecognised by the ‘rules of the game’ coupled with a desire to maintain or improve their position within the field. What resulted was an uncritical reproduction of established practice, ideology and power. Subsequently, the recommendations from this research proposes that coach education distinguishes between coaching philosophy, philosophical concepts and tactical and technical knowledge. In doing so, coaches need to be given support to identify a philosophy of coaching that includes epistemology, ontology, axiology and ethics. Coaches also need the reflexive tools and understanding to become aware of tradition, culture and relations of power inherent within social structures that can influence their practice

A Deconstruction of Coaching Philosophy

Coaching philosophy is positioned in the literature and practice as providing coaches with a clear guide for their coaching. Although, current understandings of coaching philosophy suffer from a lack of conceptual clarity and are usually decontextualised from practice. To address this gap, this research deconstructed ten professional football coaches’ understanding of coaching philosophy(ies) and explored what influenced their practice over eighteen months in one English football Academy using the methods of interviews and observations. The data were analysed abductively and included Bourdieu’s concepts of field, capital, and habitus to help make further sense of the data. The findings revealed that, in this football Academy, coaching philosophy was associated with a technical and tactical model of the sport and functioned as a symbolic device rather than being a guide to coaches’ practice

Anxiety, stress and perceived workload during the command and control of computer simulated fire service training environments

Purpose – Incidents requiring command and control require all personnel from firefighters (FFs) to the incident commander (IC) to make continuous decisions often with limited information and under acute time-pressure. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to explore the stress reactivity of specific roles during the command and control of an immersive, computer-based incident. Design/methodology/approach – Experienced firefighting personnel undergoing incident command training participated in this study. Participants completed measures of state anxiety and stress immediately before and after taking part in a computer-based simulation of a large-scale incident run in real time. During the simulation personnel assumed one of four roles: IC, sector commander, entry control officer (ECO), and command support officer. Following the simulation personnel then completed measures of perceived workload. Findings – No significant changes in state anxiety were observed, but levels of stress and perceived workload were related to task roles. Specifically, ICs reported the greatest levels of mental and temporal demands and stress when compared with ECOs. Research limitations/implications – Limitations include the lack of environmental factors (such as rain, darkness, and noise), a relatively small sample size, and the use of self-reported questionnaires. Practical implications – The application of immersive training environments as a method of developing FFs experience of incident command roles and skills pertinent to high-acuity, low-frequency events. Originality/value – The paper represents one of the first attempts to identify the self-reported anxiety, stress, and perceived workload of specific role demands during the command and control of simulated incidents

A review of the use of a systematic observation method in coaching research between 1997-2016

© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. A systematic observation method has been one of the most popularly employed methods in coaching research. Kahan’s review of this method conducted between 1975 and 1997 highlighted the key trends in this research, and offered methodological guidance for researchers wishing to use this method in their research. The purpose of this review was to provide an update of the use of a systematic observation method in coaching research and assess the extent to which the calls made by Kahan have been addressed. While in some respect this field of study has progressed (i.e., the introduction of qualitative methods), researchers adopting this method have failed to attend to many of the issues Kahan raised. For this method to continue to make a positive contribution towards the coaching research literature, researchers need to more critically reflect on how and why they are employing this method. At present, some of the decisions made by researchers who have conducted work in this area are not justified with a rationale. It is our intention that this review will serve as guidance for researchers and practitioners, and editors and reviewers of journals when attempting to assess the quality of this type of work

An investigation of professional top-level youth football coaches’ questioning practice

To position learners as more central components in the coaching process, scholars suggested that coaches should employ a questioning approach, which may lead to the development of desirable learner outcomes (i.e. increased problem solving and decision-making skills). Studies, however, indicate that coaches rarely employ questions within their practice. When questions are asked, these questions rarely move beyond lower-order or ‘fact seeking’ enquiries. While this research provides information concerning the frequency and in some cases, the type of questions coaches asks, it fails to report the more discursive nature of coaches’ questioning approaches. In order to address such limitations, the purpose of this study was to investigate coach questioning practices (CQPs). We recorded the practices of five academy youth level football coaches’ and subjected the data to conversational analysis (CA), This enabled the analysis of interaction between coach and player(s). Findings revealed that CQPs, regardless of coach or context followed similar discursive patterns. In particular, three themes presented themselves in each CQP: (1) coaches’ requirements for an immediate player response, (2) leading questions for a desired response, (3) monologist nature of coach/player interaction. This showed that the coach positioned themselves as the gatekeeper of knowledge and learners as passive recipients. This reinforces the messages from previous work that has suggested coaches’ ideologies inform their practice, and are stable structures that are difficult to change. We concur with other researchers that there is a need for further investigation in this area to better understand how dominant discourse can be challenged

The impact of video feedback on professional youth football coaches’ reflection and practice behaviour: a longitudinal investigation of behaviour change

© 2015 Taylor & Francis. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of video feedback on five English youth football coaches’ reflection and practice behaviours over a three-season period. First, quantitative data were collected using the Coach Analysis and Intervention System (CAIS) during season one and season three. Data from CAIS results showed that over the three seasons the coaches decreased their total instruction and total feedback and increased silence ‘on-task’. Four out of the five coaches also increased the use of total questioning behaviour. Second, interviews revealed how video feedback gave structure to reflective conversations that improved self-awareness and provided a trigger for behaviour change. The coaches highlighted how video-based reflection challenged their current understanding and enabled a range of learning sources to support and inform changed coach behaviour