Abstract

Research on coaching practice has mainly been undertaken through the disciplines of psychology and sociology. Very little scrutiny has been given to the philosophical underpinnings of these disciplinary positions and how they impact on research outputs in terms of descriptions and prescriptions. This article presents an overview of some of the most cited empirical research on coaching practice and shows how discipline and meta-theory have influenced a priori the results generated. Psychological approaches informed by scientism, and sociological approaches informed by interpretivism, present a dichotomized view of coaching practice, for example, concerning its relative simplicity and order. Yet these distinct disciplinary contributions remain important to the development of the field if it is understood that they contribute different layers of information and do different types of work. Once we have the meta-theoretical tools in place the results of this pluralism can be positioned and utilized. © 2013 Copyright National Association for Kinesiology in Higher Education (NAKHE)

    Similar works