Trevor Wright

Bio: Trevor Wright is an academic researcher from University of Ottawa. The author has contributed to research in topics: Ice hockey & Coaching. The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 2 publications receiving 252 citations.

Learning how to coach: the different learning situations reported by youth ice hockey coaches.

Abstract: Background: Large-scale coach education programs have been developed in many countries around the world to help prepare coaches for their important role. Coaches have said that they also learn to coach from experience, starting from when they were young athletes until their current coaching positions. Finally, in the last decade, Internet resources have begun to be promoted as valuable tools for learning. Most of the studies on coaches' development have focused on only one of these three ways of learning how to coach. Purpose: To explore the different learning situations in which youth ice hockey coaches learn to coach. Participants: 35 volunteer youth ice hockey coaches from five minor hockey associations in the province of Ontario, Canada. Data collection: Coaches were interviewed individually using a semi-structured interview guide. The questions asked to coaches were about their learning through formal large-scale coach education programs, their learning experiences outside of these programs starting ...

Learning how to coach: the different learning situations reported by coaches

Abstract: This chapter aims to identify and describe the different learning situations reported by coaches, and to gain some insight into their preferred sources of knowledge. It starts by outlining the background to classifying sources of coach learning as formal, non-formal and informal (Nelson et al.,2006). The chapter then moves onto the main section which identifies the range of learning situations experienced by coaches. This section of the chapter draws heavily on a study that used 35 interviews of community youth ice hockey coaches in Canada (Wright et al., 2007); the main issues identified in the Canadian study are transferable to other sports and settings. Quotes have been used from Wright et al.'s (2007) interviews for coaches to explain, in their own words, how they perceive their learning; in addition, edited sections of their explanatory text have been utilised and referenced throughout. The chapter concludes by considering the learning preferences of coaches from a variety of sports (Erickson et al., 2009).

The adult learner.

Abstract: 3. Do I use effective communication strategies? Is there always “time just to talk”? Do I seek family observations/information in assessment? In monitoring? Do family members have opportunities to ask questions or seek clarification? Do I present information at a time and in a format preferred by the family members? Do I keep my work with family members respectful, yet informal, and free of professionally precious jargon?

Formal, Nonformal and Informal Coach Learning: A Holistic Conceptualisation

Abstract: Using Coombs and Ahmed's framework of formal, non-formal, and informal learning as the analytical framework, this paper aims to review and conceptually locate literature exploring how sports coaches acquire the knowledge that underpins their professional practice. Furthermore, in an attempt to develop a robust set of accessible terms and concepts this paper identifies, explores and positions various terminologies under the broader heading of coach learning. It was hoped that this conceptual review would not only stimulate discussion and research into coach learning, but that it would also promote the construction of models of how coaches currently learn, as well as models for enhancing coach learning. The paper concludes that coaches learn from a wide range of sources, but formalised (i.e., formal and nonformal) learning episodes were found to be relatively low impact endeavours when compared to informal, self-directed modes of learning.

A New Theoretical Perspective for Understanding How Coaches Learn to Coach

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to present, using Moon’s (1999, 2004) generic view of learning, a new theoretical perspective in order to understand how coaches learn to coach. After presenting her main concepts, a case study of an elite Canadian coach is used to illustrate the different learning processes in three types of learning situations: mediated, unmediated, and internal. We believe this new view of how coaches learn provides a way to see coach development from the coach’s perspective and helps us understand why the path to becoming a coach is often idiosyncratic. Finally, the potential of this conceptual research framework for the study of coaches’ development, specifically at the elite/expert level, is discussed.

How Youth-Sport Coaches Learn to Coach

Abstract: Researchers have investigated how elite or expert coaches learn to coach, but very few have investigated this process with coaches at the recreational or developmental-performance levels. Thirty-six youth-sport coaches (ice hockey, soccer, and baseball) were each interviewed twice to document their learning situations. Results indicate that (a) formal programs are only one of the many opportunities to learn how to coach; (b) coaches’ prior experiences as players, assistant coaches, or instructors provide them with some sport-specific knowledge and allow them to initiate socialization within the subculture of their respective sports; (c) coaches rarely interact with rival coaches; and (d) there are differences in coaches’ learning situations between sports. Reflections on who could help coaches get the most out of their learning situations are provided. In an attempt to prepare coaches for their important role in sport settings, many countries have developed their own coach-education or -certification programs. The national representative bodies or international federations in these countries can now join the International Council for Coach Education, which “believes that international collaboration and exchange can accelerate positive change in the realm of coaching development and help these coaches give athletes around the world a chance to pursue excellence” (www.icce.ws). Researchers have recently investigated how elite or expert 1 coaches develop their knowledge. Using interviews, Fleurance and Cotteaux (1999) studied 10 coaches from different disciplines in France; Irwin, Hanton, and Kerwin (2004) looked at 16 gymnastics coaches in England; Jones, Armour, and Potrac (2004) interviewed 8 coaches from different sports in England, Australia, and New Zealand; Salmela (1996) studied 22 coaches from team sports in Canada; and Gould, Giannini, Krane, and Hodge (1990) surveyed 130 coaches in the United States. A common finding in these studies is the disparity among the coaches as to the perceived importance of formal coach-education programs in their development of knowledge. There is an agreement, however, that other learning opportunities that stem from playing experience, mentoring, and discussions with foreign coaches play a significant role. The perceived importance of each of these less formal learning situations varies from coach to coach. Overall, these studies have shown that learning to coach at the elite level is a complex process that does not follow one specific pattern, and, therefore, coach education should not

Formal vs. Informal Coach Education

Abstract: The training of coaches is considered central to sustaining and improving the quality of sports coaching and the ongoing process of professionalisation. Sports coaches participate in a range of learning opportunities (informal to formal) that contribute to their development to varying degrees. In this article, we present our collective understanding on the varying types of learning opportunities and their contribution to coach accreditation and development. The authors presented these views (from a sports pedagogy perspective) as part of a workshop entitled "Formal vs. Informal Coach Education" at the 2007 International Council of Coach Education Master Class in Beijing. These reflections seek to stimulate the on-going, and often sterile, debate about formal versus informal coach education/learning in order to progress scholarship in coaching.