IMPLICACIONES PARA LA INVESTIGACIÓN

Figure 3.10. The nature and spread of coaches epistemological positions. (Q11 -12)

Key: Dark line represents actual coaches responding to question. Light line represents actual coach’s perceptions of other coach’s responses at the same level.

Legend: Vertical axis’s – rider age groups and percentage of responses per age group relating to the five statements in the questionnaire and outlined above. Horizontal axis presents the answer choices regarding level of agreement or disagreement, i.e., Strongly Disagree (SD), Disagree (D), Not Sure(NS), Agree (A) and Strongly Agree (SA) relating to the five statement labels.

Note: The survey question asked coaches, “how much do you agree or disagree with the following five statements”: (1) the knowledge that underpins expert coaching today is different to what it was 20 years ago, (2) expert coaching is a simple process based on basic facts, (3) expert coaching is learned by carefully copying current experts, (4) expert coaches are made more than born, and (5) expert coaching is learned quickly or not at all. The coaches were then asked what do other coaches generally think about the same statements.

Rider age group

> 22 years

17 to 21 years

12 to 16 years

< 12 years

Expert coaches are made more than born Coaching is learned by carefully copying current experts

Expert coaching is a simple process

Coaching knowledge is different today from 20 years go Expert coaching is learned quickly or not at all

SD D NS A SA SD D NS A SA SD D NS A SA SD D NS A SA SD D NS A SA 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

75 3.4.4.1. Coaches Responses and Beliefs.

The coaches’ response to the first statement, Figure 3.10, column 1, appears to show that the majority of coaches at all age groups agree or strongly agree that the knowledge that underpins expert coaching today is different to what it was 20 years ago (as per the percentage of responses on the right of the NS split line). Interestingly, a small percentage of coaches working with riders in the >22-year group contrast this view point believing that coaching knowledge is not different today compared with 20 years ago (as per the percentage of responses on the left of the NS split line). An equally important result within column 1, is the overall percentage of coaches who responded, “not sure” to the statement, with a sizable percentage of coaches in the <12- year group being the largest responders, with the percentages reducing through to the < 22-year group coaches (as per the percentage of responses on the NS split line). Figure 3.10, column 2, results for the statement, “expert coaching is a simple process based on clear facts”, saw the majority of coaches through the age groups disagree or strongly disagree, with the highest clear percentage being in the 17-21-year group (as per the percentage of responses to the left of the NS split line). Whereas, a considerable percentage of coaches of three age groups (<12, 12 to 16 and >22) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, demonstrating a broader spread of beliefs and contrasts within those age groups (as per the percentage of responses to the right of the NS split line). Figure 3.10, column 3, results show similarity through the age groups with a considerable percentage of coaches disagreeing or strongly disagreeing in regard to the statement “coaching is learned by carefully copying current experts”, most noticeably the 17 to 21 years and > 22-year group, where the coaches overwhelmingly responded disagree /strongly disagree (as per the percentage of responses to the left of the NS split line). Furthermore, and contrastingly, a sizable percentage of the younger age groups (<12, 12 to 16) coaches agreed and strongly agreed to the statement (as per the

76

percentage of responses to the right of the NS split line) with a further sizable

percentage of coaches in these age groups responding not sure. Figure 3.10, column 4, also demonstrates similarity and a narrower spread of beliefs through the age groups with a considerable percentage of coaches agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement, “expert coaches are made more than born”, (as per the percentage of

responses to the right of the NS split line). Whereas, a sizable percentage of coaches in three age groups (<12, 12 to 16 and >22) disagree or strongly disagree with the

statement, suggesting a broader spread of beliefs within those age groups (as per the percentage of responses to the left of the NS split line). Noticeably, through all the age groups a sizable percentage of coaches responded, “not sure” with the 17-21-year group recording the highest percentage, followed by the >22-year group. Finally, of note in Figure 3.10, column 5, are the responses to the statement “expert coaching is learned quickly or not at all”, where the majority of coaches through the age groups disagreed or strongly disagreed suggesting a narrower spread of beliefs across the pathway and within the age groups (as per the percentage of responses to the left of the NS split line).

3.4.4.2. Coaches Responses and Beliefs Regarding Other Coaches.

Figure 3.10 also reports the coaches’ responses to what they believe “other” peer coaches would think regarding the same statements. The coaches’ responses are to some extent similar for column 1, where they agree or strongly agree that the

knowledge that underpins expert coaching today is different to what it was 20 years ago (as per the percentage of responses on the right of the NS split line). However, and interestingly, a significant number of coaches through the age groups reported not sure for this statement (as per the percentage of responses on the NS split line). This “not sure” pattern is seen across all the statements in Figure 3.10, and might suggest a lack of knowledge of what other coaches think or do at a practical level, and an epistemological level within the same level of the pathway. Whilst there is some similarity across the

77

patterns and shapes for a proportion of the columns in Figure 3.10, there is a notable difference in the pattern and shape for the 17 to 21-year group in column 2 (as per the percentage of responses to the right of the NS split line). This result has the possibility to suggest a considerable number of responding coaches think coaches at their level agree with the statement and therefore believe “expert coaching is a simple process”. The results in Figure 3.10, column 3, appear to suggest that a proportion of all age group coaches perceive their coaching peers to believe, “coaching is learned by

carefully copying current experts”, (as per the percentage of responses to the right of the NS split line).

3.5. Discussion

The purpose of this study was to critically explore the extent of vertical (i.e., age group focus) coherence within the BC talent pathway as measured through a set of practicing coaches’ perceptions. More specifically, my particular focus was on the extent of coherence amongst coaches on: (a) the overall goals and design of the pathway; (b) the goals at specific stages/phases and (c) coaching delivery at specific stages/phases of the pathway. Additionally, to offer a potential explanation for the levels of vertical coherence/incoherence found, the study also explored the nature and spread of the coaches’ epistemologies. To provide structure to the discussion of the main results, this section first presents the ‘take homes’ from the Results section and, secondly, the possible reasons for these findings; including those from the perspective of coaching epistemology. Pulling in relevant literature, I then consider what these messages may mean for developing riders, as well as for the BC pathway and coach development system. Importantly, the discussion and interpretation of the results will also be considered and potentially reinforced by my day-day professional practice. Specifically, I have commissioned three further studies running in parallel to my Professional Doctorate, two of which I hold a supervisory role. The studies were

78

commissioned based on the identification of the key principles and mechanisms for coherent pathways in Chapter 2. More specifically, Study 1 seeks to further

‘Understanding BC’s Coach Education Pathway’ in regard to washout and its “fit-for purpose” status; Study 2 explores the balance of alignment and role clarity of the athlete triad on the pathway; and finally, Study 3 explores the ‘Learning and Education of Coach Developers’ within BC, to gain further valuable insight into the BC tutor workforce, and to determine the balance of coherence/incoherence.

Chapter 6 of this thesis will explore the initial results of the three commissioned studies, against the overall findings of the three empirical studies in this thesis. Further information can be found in section 6.3. p190 and 6.3.1, p191, specifically sub-sections: 6.3.1.1, p191; 6.3.1.2, p192 and 6.3.1.3 p164.