Should ex athletes be able to short cut coach education?

It is a sporting story as old as time...the legend of the game that gets a job as head coach in a prestigious elite role... or the ex elite athlete that gets the job in the academy role, or as the school Director of Sport... While the dedicated lifelong coach that has spent decades honing their craft and skill never gets a look in.

And yet, more often than not, the ex player / athlete fails in the role...but the cycle keeps repeating itself. The question is...why do employers keep thinking that being an elite athlete means that that you will be impactful as a coach?

But equally, the question should also be asked... Do high level athletes have qualities, attributes and skills that are beneficial in a coaching role and how can organisations ensure that these skills are taken into account when thinking how they can be supported to succeed in a coaching role? In a revealing new study published in Professional Development in Education, Dr Thomas Leeder examines the practice of fast-tracking former athletes through coaching qualifications. As someone deeply invested in coaching development, I find the implications fascinating from a policy, practical and ethical standpoint.

The research, focused on British Orienteering, examines a widespread issue in coach education and development...whether those with athletic experience should be given a priority over those with formal education and fast tracked through the various levels. Experiential knowledge vs formal education While elite athletes undoubtedly possess valuable experiential knowledge, the assumption that this automatically translates into effective coaching practice is troubling. As one coach developer in the study pointedly observed: "I know quite a lot of people who are and have been elite athletes who I wouldn't trust with a random collection of 10 people." This points to the suggestion that being a high performer as a participant requires different qualities and skills than being a high performer as a coach. The assumption that the skills and knowledge gleaned in one domain transfers to another domain is not supported in the literature and any workforce development leader should be mindful of this if they are condoning the practice of fast tracking.

Impact on coaching as a profession

Fast-tracking fundamentally challenges the notion of coaching as a profession with rigorous standards. When we allow shortcuts based on athletic achievement, we implicitly devalue the complex pedagogical skills that formal education aims to develop. As one contributor observes...

"Sport coaching is embedded with ego and sociocentric beliefs which assumes that embodied experience as an elite athlete is necessary to become an effective coaching practitioner, at the expense of knowledge obtained via formal professional development opportunities."

This observation reveals a cultural bias that pervades coaching development. The implicit devaluation of formal education undermines the very professionalisation that sports coaching aspires to achieve. Impact on the perception of the value of coach education

Coaches who work hard on their craft and commit diligently to professional development could well find themselves frustrated that their energy and commitment seems to count for less than an individual who is a high level performer being given a privileged route to progression. This could then lead to more and more coaches opting out of coach education as they feel that it is perceived as being low value by employers and the NGBs themselves.

Systemic inequalities

The research reveals an uncomfortable truth: fast-tracking potentially marginalises excellent coaching candidates who lack elite playing/participation experience. It also serves to create an 'old boys club' ('boys' is chosen deliberately!) where those that have been involved can progress more easily than those who haven't been involved previously which serves to continue the lack of diversity in the coaching community.

Fast tracking is risky...for the participant and the coach

Perhaps most concerningly, fast-tracking may actually disadvantage the very coaches it aims to help. By bypassing fundamental learning experiences, these coaches miss crucial opportunities to develop pedagogical skills, reflect on practice, and build a comprehensive model of participant development. This point is illustrated by this quote... "There are some ways to put things over that an elite sportsperson wouldn't necessarily know about unless they had some form of training... coaching is about changing behaviour, changing the way people do things to make them better."

This insight illustrates the concern that coaching excellence requires specific pedagogical skills that athletic experience alone may not provide. There are dangers in putting participants in the hands of inexperienced pedagogues and it is ethically problematic to allow individuals with limited training to be placed into these positions of responsibility with limited training, support or supervision. Fast tracking is a symptom of an overly rigid system

On the other hand, the quote above does point to the fact that those with significant experience as athletes or participants probably do have experiences and knowledge that would be really valuable in a coaching role. The fact that they don't have some of the coaching skills shouldn't mean that they have to start at the bottom and start learning about coaching with people who are less experienced or accomplished. The paper points to the fact that the system is a big part of the problem as it is too linear and rigid and doesn't enable people to enter coaching at a point that is relevant for them based on their previous knowledge. Equally, there seems to be an overconfidence in the role that formal coach education plays in developing coaching practice. People might have attended all of the courses and collected all of the badges and certifications but this formal learning is no more of a guarantee of high quality coaching practice than someone with practical experience. Practical reflections / suggestions

The research suggests a more nuanced approach is needed. Rather than enabling fast-tracking by the back door, we might consider:

• Recognising the knowledge and skills that someone brings to coaching in more sophisticated ways while maintaining core educational requirements. Just because someone hasn't done the course doesn't mean that they haven't developed the ability by other means.

• Developing flexible and individualised learning pathways that don't compromise on quality. In a digital age, learning is everywhere...if someone has found information that helps them practice we should be able to recognise that.

• Creating practical, on the job, 'in situ' mentorship style learning programmes that bridge experiential and formal learning.

As coach education grapples with professionalisation, we must ask ourselves: what truly makes an effective coach? The answer lies not in shortcuts but in meaningful engagement with both theoretical understanding and practical experience.

#CoachEducation #SportsDevelopment #ProfessionalStandards #Ethics