Another important lesson near the end of the MHPC&TL is to use scientific evidence to inform coaching knowledge. In Kin 572 we were introduced to the methods of knowledge:
- Intuition
- Authority
- Rationalism
- Empiricism
- Scientific
Many coaches coach the way they were coached. Which is the method of authority rather than using the scientific method. Which is easier. It’s easy to say “we do things this way because Glenn Hoag or Carl McGown say so” because then it removes the responsibility from the coach and places it on the authority figure. This is the same as “this is what my coach did.”
I was lucky enough to have some pretty awful coaches that made me not want to coach like them. Fortunately I also have some pretty great coaching role models to fall back on as well.
As a coaching community we need to move away from intuition, rationalism, authority, empiricism and towards the scientific method. If we model this then eventually we can have new coaches who coach the way they were coached. Based on science. This is especially true in an academic setting where we are coaching student-athletes. This is a cultural shift in volleyball where the method of authority is omnipresent. Nonetheless, we should model the scientific method in our coaching practice so our athletes have faith in our methods. Not just faith in us as coaches.
Good blog. This is probably a good reason why we put an emphasis on research in the Masters program. In other words we are wanting to extend the continuum between the art and science of coaching by giving coaches the skills and confidence to use science to direct their decisions.