task analysis of coach developers: applications to the fa...

International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making 2013, Marseille, France

Authors retain copyright

of their work

H. Chaudet, L. Pellegrin & N. Bonnardel (Eds.). Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM 2013), Marseille, France, 21-24 May 2013. Paris, France: Arpege Science Publishing. ISBN 979-10-92329-00-1

Task Analysis of Coach Developers: Applications to The FA Youth Coach Educator Role

Andy ABRAHAMa, Gareth MORGANa, Julian NORTHa, Bob MUIRa, Pat DUFFYa Wayne ALLISONb, Andy CALEb and Richard HODGSONb

aCarnegie School of Sport, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK bFootball Development Division, The (English) Football Association, Burton-upon-Trent, UK

ABSTRACT Introduction: This study attempts to understand the work of coach developers in the development of coaches. There is currently little understanding of what people in these roles do and, therefore, what their professional development needs are. Method: A total of 15 coach developer professionals were engaged in data collection. Data was collected through one or more of; interview, observation in one to one sessions, observation in workshop settings. Results and discussion: Using theoretical models to analyze data, an expert coach developer was defined through requisite professional skills, knowledge and typical behaviors in 6 domains. While this definition was achieved, caution is suggested since this definition is reflective of ‘Frankenstein’s monster’ rather than reality. Due to the ill defined nature of the role ‘coach educator’, the defined domains should be used as benchmarks to measure personal practice against alongside the goals of the role and the context within which the role is undertaken.

KEYWORDS Professional Judgment, Decision Making, Coaching, Coach Education, Coach Development, Professional Development.

INTRODUCTION The work reported here reflects three separate but linked consultancy projects we were engaged in by Sports Coach UK, UK Sport and The (English) Football Association (The FA). The backdrop to this work in the UK is the emergence of the need to examine coaching as a profession both at a governmental level (Sports Coach UK, 2008) and sport federation level (The FA, 2010). While research in coaching has been around for about 40 years now, it has often only focused on identifying why expert coaches are expert or what makes an effective volunteer coach. This is not altogether surprising considering how relatively few well paid roles that there are in coaching, especially in comparison the huge numbers of voluntary coaches. As such, while there is a desire to improve the quality and professionalism of coaching there is relatively little research (especially in comparison to other similar domains such as teaching) to work from, however this is improving (e.g. Abraham & Collins, 2011; Côté, & Gilbert, 2009). However, despite this apparent change in capacity to understand coaching, there is virtually no research examining the role of the coach developer/educator. As such while research examining coaching expertise now exists, there isn’t any evidence that this work is being delivered by coach educators to coaches. The context of these projects therefore (drawn from the specific remits identified by the commissioning bodies) was to identify the demands of coach educators operating at a management and leadership level of coach development (the Sports Coach UK remit) and at the programme delivery and mentoring level (the FA Remit). The goal of both projects was to develop an informed view on the knowledge, skills and typical behaviors required to perform these roles. In addition to these core ideas this project reports back on how the differing roles within coach development may require differing application of skills and knowledge in actual behaviors.

Theoretical Framework – Professional Judgment and Decision Making (PJDM) While there may be an argument to suggest that, with the relative immaturity of the coaching domain as a research milieu, especially in the area of coach education/development, a grounded approach may be necessary. However, given the demands of the commissioning bodies and the need for robust yet timely advice there was a clear need to avoid this long drawn out process and to borrow from existing theory. It is useful therefore that research in a broad range of occupations such as military, medicine and, importantly, sport (Abraham & Collins, 2011; Kahneman & Klein, 2009; Lipshitz, Klein, Orasanu, & Salas, 2001; Vickers, Reeves, Chambers, & Martell, 2004), has already highlighted that where judgment and decision making are crucial for effective performance, the key components of expertise are generally the same. Broadly speaking this research displays

Abraham A. et al. – Task Analysis of Coach Developers

176

that professionals make judgments that are rapid, intuitive and naturalistic in nature, often dictated by the time frame in which decisions have to be made, i.e. Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM). Furthermore the same research has shown that other judgments are slower, made with greater thought and deliberation and take a ‘classical’ approach to problem solving, i.e. Classical Decision Making (CDM). As such our assumption was that this theory of PJDM was relevant in this setting. Supplementing the PJDM theories, other cognitive-behavioral and educational research has also been shown to fit this type of professional practice. Research from these areas has displayed that expertise is arrived at through the consistent application of metacognitive skills (i.e. thinking about how to think and learn more efficiently and effectively, Entwistle and Peterson, 2004) and mental skills (MacNamara, Button, and Collins, 2010). The broad theories of PJDM, metacognition and mental skills bring a useful lens against which the role of the coach educator can be analyzed. However, providing greater definition is important if the work is to inform critical thought about coach development and professional development of coach developers. In order to bring greater definition to viewing the role of an expert coach developer, a model of coach development decision making (figure 1.) was developed by Abraham, Collins, Morgan & Muir (2009) that drew on similar work in coach decision making (e.g. Abraham, Collins & Martindale, 2006).

Figure 1. The Coach Development Decision Making Model (Abraham, et al 2009)

This model was developed based on a review of available evidence and literature and summarized six broad domains of understanding (i.e. the declarative knowledge) that should influence the decision making of coach developers. These six domains are summarized as:

1. DOMAIN - UNDERSTANDING CLUB AND FA CONTEXT, STRATEGY AND POLITICS – Understanding the culture of the situation that is being worked in and adapting behavior

2. DOMAIN - UNDERSTANDING THE COACH – Understanding the coach(es)’s motivations, needs and wants

3. DOMAIN - UNDERSTANDING ADULT LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT – Understanding how to most effectively develop learning environments to support adult learning

4. DOMAIN - UNDERSTANDING COACHING CURRICULUM – Understanding the curriculum that will need to be delivered to support coaches in their development

5. DOMAIN – UNDERSTANDS SELF – Understanding own goals, strengths and limitations striving to improve when the opportunity exist

6. DOMAIN - PROCESS AND PRACTICE – Understanding the process and practice of coach development

Taken in combination these theories and ideas provide a solid foundation against which coach education practice could be unpacked, explored and therefore defined. As such this was the aim of the studies undertaken here. Ultimately, improving a professional’s ability to make and reflect on professional judgments is the overall goal of professional development, where professionalism is based in being able ground judgments in extensive theoretical, personal and practical expertise. Crucially this is true for both naturalistic and classical judgments. In essence, expertise in a professional judgment that is made in classical manner must be a result of much critical, often peer reviewed/informed thinking and planning emanating from a broad and deep knowledge base. If a professional judgment needs to be made intuitively and in a naturalistic setting then it must come from extensive practice that allows swift situational analysis, with the ability to pick up key cues in the environment (i.e. facial expressions, subtle changes in body language, subtle changes in performance) that align with ready made decisions. In both case expertise is informed by hours of previous critical thinking and reflection which will more often that not differentiate the lucky or recipe from the intuitive and adaptable professional.

GOAL%DEMAND%

Macro Example VALIDATION DOCUMENT

Meso Example ANNUAL REVIEW

AND SCORING CARD

Micro Example PBL WORKSHOP

Responsive Example

ORCHESTRATED LEARNING

ENVIRONMENTS

GOAL%OUTCOME%

Macro Example L4

DEVELOPMENT

Meso Example COACH

SELECTION & TRACKING

Micro Example FORMAL CONTACT METHOD

Responsive Example

COPING WITH INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AS

THEY ARISE

WITHIN%&%BETWEEN%DOMAIN%DECISION%MAKING%PROCESS%@%%MACRO,%MESO%&%MICRO%LEVELS%

Subject%%Ma@er%Domain%

Coach%Needs%%&%Wants%Domain%

OUTPUT%

Coach Developer Decision Making Model

(Abraham,%Collins,%Morgan%&%Muir,%2009)%

ALT%Domain%


177

METHOD

Participants Three sets of related data from 3 different sets of participants were collected in this study. Participant group 1 were 8 (7 were male and 1 female) sport federation coach education managers drawn form a range of team and individual sports. All were experienced coach developers with responsibility for the development of coach education programmes for volunteer through to employed coaches. The second group were 3 (all male) coach developers engaged in formal mentoring roles in one to one development programmes with coaches from various sports. The third group were 5 (4 male 1 female) coach educators engaged in delivering workshops as part of overall programmes of coach development.

Process Group 1 were engaged in an interview that 60 – 90 minutes. The questions used in these interviews focused on determining the goals of their role, how they defined coaches worth investing in, what factors impacted on capacity to support the development of coaches, what they thought a high performing coach was, what developmental practices are required to support coaches, what role assessment plays in the development of high performing coaches, how they know if their coach development practices are ‘correct’, and where has their knowledge of developing high performing coaches came from. Both group 2 and 3 were observed in practice and field notes were made. The focus of the field notes was developed around the 6 domains (both individually and integratively) referred to earlier. For example, when observing the coach developers in mentoring roles, given that the coach educator would work with the coach during a coaching session it was interesting to watch when the coach educator chose to engage with coach and when they stood back. Similarly, when observing a coach educator leading a workshop, it was interesting to observe what prompted the coach educator to go ‘off script’ and when they chose to stay on script. Three members of group 2 and two members of group 3 were engaged in post session discussions to draw out reasoning for their behavior where possible. Whilst not initially intended, the approach taken has much in common with the ACTA methodology described by Gore and McAndrew (2009).

Data Analysis Interview data from group 1 were content analysed using inductive and follow up deductive techniques as described by (Abraham et al., 2006). This approach allowed for all interviews to be analysed for statements that offer an insight or opinion regardless of underpinning theory. Follow up deductive techniques assigned these statements to categories based on the PJDM, metacognitive, and mental skills frameworks and the coach development model presented earlier. Field notes taken from groups 2 and 3 were deductively content analysed with particular emphasis paid to naturalistic responses againsts the six domains of the coach development model. Additional explicit explanations for behaviour were used to add context and meaning to field notes. This was also used to confirm (or otherwise) interpretation of field notes.

RESULTS In keeping with the suggestions of Gore and McAndrew (2009) the analysed data were written up as cognitive demands tables. In order to achieve this as meaningfully as possible for the final client (The FA) these tables were constructed around the two main concepts of CDM (identified as thoughtful mode in the table) and NDM (identified as intuitive mode). These concepts were then subdivided into professional skills and required knowledge. Further to this, due to the multiple demands placed on coach educators and the lack of consistency of how these roles are applied in different sports, additional suggestions for how these knowledge and skills could be applied based on the type of role being undertaken were added as ‘typical behaviors’ in three different yet connected roles. Finally, in keeping with the six domains identified earlier, six tables were constructed. Due to issues of space, edited versions of the full tables are shown below:


178

Table 1. Understanding the context

Coach Developer - Thoughtful Mode Coach Developer – Intuitive Mode Professional Skills

Actively engages in working with relevant FA policy when implementing role. Conducts an informed analysis of organizational, group and individual strategy, politics and behavior.

Has a strong situational awareness of goings on in working environment Proactively and reactively recognizes and responds to opportunities to support and progress stakeholders toward achievement of nested goal

Required Knowledge

Works to an integrated mental model that encompasses a broad and deep knowledge base around relevant policy, strategic, emotional and political intelligence.

Has recourse to a rich set of critiqued experiences of working within complex relationship situations

Typical Leadership Behaviors

Actively engages and respects the opinions of key stakeholders in planning coach development programmes and interventions Defines boundaries and expectancies of coach development programme

Quickly identifies who main power brokers are and what their goals are Recognizes when the remit or position is being overstepped and withdraws to a ‘safe’ position

Typical Management Behaviors

Creates saleable message that can be delivered coherently and quickly Builds on relationships in order to sell more insightful and potentially complex ideas to increase shared understanding

Recognizes opportunities to reinforce message and sell ideas

Typical Coaching Behaviors

Develops plans for gaining trust and buy in with coaches and coach managers Plans how to respectfully challenge behavior and beliefs that are perceived as needing change.

Recognizes when coach is being threatened too much and backs off Recognizes when trust is being given in order to exploit opportunities offered.

Table 2. Understanding the coach


Work with the coach to review current capabilities, set personalized goals and monitor, review and regulate progress toward set goals Build and maintain effective relationships with the coach

Has strong situational awareness of coaches’ working environment and its demands Proactively and reactively recognizes and responds appropriately to moments of coach worry and/or stress when working with the coach

Required Knowledge

Draw on connections between life experiences and contemporary applied theories from social psychology, performance psychology and sociology to critically evaluate, understand and plan for changing coaches’ behavior. Draw on rich mental model of what coaching is and how it changes at different levels of competence to facilitate goal setting and coach tracking

Has recourse to a rich set of critiqued experiences of working with coaches where cues in the environment are accurately connected to a limited set of ‘correct’ solutions


Creates clear vision of what good coaching is Ensures the coach is making the required performance improvements and is displaying evidence of applying techniques independently

Quickly adapts predetermined developmental tasks to fit the performance of coaches Uses relevant verbal and non verbal interventions at relevant times in coach development activities


Develops selection criteria for recruiting coaches into coach development Organizes regular updates to track progress

Where possible adapts formal course demands to in line with demands being placed on the coach Is flexible in application of formal recruitment methods on a case by case basis


Shows empathy with and understanding of the change that coaches are going through Creates a personal connection or common ground with the coach to make coaching conversations more successful and able to overcome any barriers to having critical discussions

Recognizes when to push and when to support coach Recognizes the need for coach to put forward own opinions Keeps coaches focused on achieving developmental goals


179

Table 3. Understanding the adult learning


Develop and monitor relevant learning environments, tasks and communication strategies to meet learning goals Design, deliver and evaluate meaningful learning opportunities and environments that meet the long-, medium-, and short-term learning needs of coaches

Has strong situational awareness of the quality of learning environments Recognizes uncertainty in everyday practice and selects relevant coping strategy

Required Knowledge

Works to an integrated mental model that encompasses a broad and deep knowledge base of learning theories and their application to classroom, workshop, on line, work-based, community and assessment learning opportunities.

Has recourse to a rich set of critiqued experiences within the domains of operation where cues in the environment are accurately connected to a limited set of correct solutions


Works with a group of informed critical friends to develop constructively aligned learning programmes Identifies most effective learning strategies for achieving goals of coach development in line with available resources

Can offer justification for coach development programmes if challenged Foresees issues with coach development ideas in meetings


Plans programmes of learning in line with available human, physical, financial, and learning resources and coach availability

Quickly identifies potential problems in programme delivery and identifies relevant solutions


Plans development sessions with learning objectives that link to bigger development picture plan Creates a culture of coaches innovating, risk taking and developing new ideas

Responds to questions with insight using stories, analogies and examples Models risk taking and innovation in practice

Table 4. Understanding the coaching curriculum


Design and/or understand developed coach development curricula that is aligned to FA coach development pathways/FA courses and to the needs of individual coaches Analyze best practice coaching to maintain currency in coaching curriculum

Has strong situational awareness of how well curriculum is being delivered. Also a strong awareness of how well curriculum is being received and work with by coaches Recognizes uncertainty in coaches relating to content to be learned and responds appropriately

Required Knowledge

Works to an integrated mental model that encompasses a broad and deep knowledge base relating to what good coaching is Draw on connections between life experiences and contemporary applied theories from coaching science, developmental psychology and performance psychology to form clear rationale for coach curriculum



Works with coach developers and other relevant stakeholders to critique coach development plans Offers informed professional opinion on the development of curriculum

Provides a thorough rationale for all elements of practice when challenged Offers links between curriculum delivered and required improvements in practice


Creates curriculum relevant to level of coach development Recruits and assigns relevant tutors to deliver Creates relevant documentation to support formal coach development programmes

Recognizes logistical and personnel issues and responds with quick and accurate solutions Provides a thorough rationale for all elements of practice when challenged


Sets meaningful learning objectives for development sessions Plans tasks that are relevant to achieving learning objectives Sets progressive curricula that relates at macro, meso and micro levels of nested plan

Deliver verbal interventions with accurate information Quickly adapts predetermined curriculum to fit the performance of coaches


180

Table 5. Understanding of self


Conducts critically informed, evidence-based self-analysis in order to examine, expose and challenge the congruence of intentions, assumptions and beliefs with practice. Works toward professional standards and values

Strives to recognize opportunities for self development and to work towards personal goals

Required Knowledge

Draw on contemporary concepts and applied theories of coaching expertise, reflection, social psychology, performance psychology and sociology to critically evaluate the reasoning and resources of own behavior and practice in order to generate development goals and action plans.

Has recourse to a rich understanding of self that recognizes strength and weaknesses in knowledge, skills and personal effectiveness Works to a mental model of personal effectiveness, excellence, professional values and ethics


Plans for putting self improvement goals into practice Models expectancies in decision making integrity, honesty, sincerity, respect, risk taking and deprecating behaviors to break down barriers

Recognizes opportunities to model expectations in decision making, integrity, honesty, sincerity, respect, risk taking and deprecating behaviors


Plans deliberately and objectively Keeps working towards plans

Ensures everyday practice stays to plan Recognizes and actions opportunities to work towards own management goals


Respects and trusts the opinion of coaches Models integrity, honesty, sincerity risk taking and deprecating behaviors to break down barriers

Recognizes opportunities to model integrity, honesty, sincerity, respect, risk taking and deprecating behaviors Recognizes and actions opportunities to work towards own coaching goals

Table 6. Understanding process and practice


Makes effective and informed decisions that reflect the big picture of coach development relating to the planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and regulation of nested goals and programmes of development Recognize and resolve problematic and atypical issues through the generation innovative strategies and solutions

Is aware of goings on in working environment Proactively and reactively recognizes and responds to opportunities in everyday work to support and progress stakeholders toward achievement of nested goal

Required Knowledge

Works to an integrated and explicit mental model of coach development that encompasses a breadth and depth of knowledge in the domains of; understanding process and practice of coach development, understanding the coach, understanding coaching, understanding adult learning and development, understanding context, strategy and politics, understanding self



Negotiates goals with the coach and key stakeholders to create and manage expectations Develops constructively aligned learning programmes

Provides a thorough rationale for all elements of practice when challenged Uses relevant verbal and non verbal interventions at relevant times in leadership activities


Develops plans that make most effective use of available resources Develops a milestoned tactical plan with built in contingency

Uses relevant verbal and non verbal interventions at relevant times in management activities Models integrity, honesty, sincerity risk taking and deprecating behaviors to set expectations


Plans development sessions that link to bigger development picture plan Works to align needs established by benchmarking and wants established by coach

Quickly adapts predetermined developmental tasks to fit the performance of coaches Uses relevant verbal and non verbal interventions at relevant times in coach development activities

DISCUSSION A cursory glance through the (few) job descriptions that appear for coach developers in job adverts suggests that the results presented in Tables 1 - 6 have gone much further to defining the role of coach developers. Typically these job descriptions display a lack of differentiation between knowledge, skills and typical behaviors. This leads to nebulous statements, often lacking definition with their focus being around experience, leadership and operational factors. Whilst not surprising or unusual in poorly defined/immature professional vocations, this does limit the capacity to recruit and/or develop emerging and even established professionals in this domain. Deductively analyzing the coach developer role through the lens of PJDM and the coach development model has offered a thorough insight into the role of a coach developer. Developing cognitive demands tables (Gore and McAndrew, 2009) has served a relevant and meaningful purpose by offering (relatively) a precise and concise


181

overview of the role against which professional development approaches could be developed. As such, greater definition now exists. Further examination of the results in Tables 1 – 6 does however, reveal a level of replication in the tables. This is not surprising as the tables (and the domains they reflect) are not meant to be orthogonal. They represent parts of one big picture of being a coach developer. Furthermore, creating the tables through multiple sources of ‘data’ means that they are informed through a wide peer group thus removing the chance of bias and ideas being missed. Creating tables from multiple sources also means that the tables are probably not reflective of reality, i.e., it is unlikely that coach developers exist that 100% reflect the skills and knowledge identified in all of the tables. In other words the tables created above are aspirational in nature. This is an important distinction if the tables are to be used to support the creation of professional development opportunities for coach developers. Given that coach developers are typically drawn from a pool of experienced coaches each coach educator/developer will have their own strengths and weaknesses across the six domains. Taking this approach therefore, the tables offer an initial benchmarking exercise against which the practice of recently employed and experienced coach developers can be mapped. In association with the goals these coach developers are working towards their professional development requirements can be critiqued and programmes created. While progress has been made in defining the coach developer role, we do not claim to have a created a set of cognitive demands that is ‘complete’ and definitive. The tables above are intended to be neither – they are a well informed (i.e. informed by theory and practice) and succinct summary of the demands of a coach developer role. Sport coaching as a domain has previously been, and continues to be drawn to the behavioral competency approach to defining vocational roles because of the apparent control and objectivity that it offers (Thompson, 2000). However, as Thompson (2000) states, this approach has often only led to skilled robots rather than knowledgeable doers. Consequently, this has not been a competencising exercise; rather the tables display a set of ideas that attempt to capture the essence and complexity of coach development roles. Further to these tables not being complete, we believe there remains much work that could and should be done within this domain. We are confident that the application of PJDM has brought much needed to focus to the role of coach developers. Indeed the explicit recognition of the thoughtful and intuitive demands of this role allows for more informed debate about the connection between theory and practice, thinking and doing, academic worlds and applied worlds. In short this sort of work allows artificial barriers to be broken down as it recognizes the skills and knowledge that all involved have. However, PJDM also strongly highlights the role of; perception, mental models, shared mental models, routines and recognition primed decision making in determining how people perform their roles. The content in the tables makes specific reference to all of these ideas however, it doesn’t really unpack them, and viewed from this perspective we may have only scratched the surface. For example, gaining trust (of the coach but also the club officials) was seen as being crucial for the coach developers within the FA. As such the statement ‘Recognizes when trust is being given in order to exploit opportunities offered’ was included in Table 1. However, we were not able to spend enough time with the coach developers on this specific topic so that we could unpack what perceptual markers were being identified that led to the coach developers feeling like they were being trusted. Indeed across all 6 tables, ‘recognizes’ ‘perceives’ ‘identifies’ are used frequently to express the importance of perception in making judgments. In most of these cases more work is required to unpack what these perceptual markers are. Indeed routines, mental models etc used in these roles all need further investigation.

CONCLUSION The overall goal of any professional development must to improve practice in order to become more efficient and more effective in achieving goals. For coach developers therefore, any professional development should lead to them being better at developing better coaches. In order to do this work has identified that a, personalized, deepening of knowledge across the six domains should lead to improved awareness. However, both the deepening and awareness raising of knowledge must also lead to enhanced practical skills if there is to be an impact on practice and this must be obvious to the coach educators if they are to buy into the professional development. The completion of this work has allowed us to develop a bespoke postgraduate diploma course for the FA in order to facilitate the professional development of a selection of their coach education staff. Using the PJDM framework and aligning (even approximately) with the ACTA methodology has allowed this course to be evidence based and aligned with the needs and wants of the coach educators.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work has been made possible through the funding of Sports Coach UK, UK Sport and The Football Association.

REFERENCES Abraham, A., Collins, D., & Martindale, R. (2006). The coaching schematic: Validation through expert coach

consensus. Journal of Sport Sciences, 24(6), 549-564.


182

Abraham, A., Collins, D., Morgan, G., & Muir, B. (2009). Developing expert coaches requires expert coach development: Replacing serendipity with orchestration. In A. Lorenzo, S. J. Ibanez & E. Ortega (Eds.), Aportaciones Teoricas Y Practicas Para El Baloncesto Del Futuro. Sevilla: Wanceulen Editorial Deportiva.

Abraham, A., & Collins, D. (2011). Taking the Next Step: Ways Forward for Coaching Science. Quest, 63(4), 366-384.

Côté, J., & Gilbert, W. (2009). An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and expertise. International Journal of Sport Science and Coaching, 4(3), 307-232.

Entwistle, N. J., & Peterson, E. R. (2004). Conceptions of learning and knowledge in higher education: Relationships with study behavior and influences of learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41, 407–428.

Gore, J., & McAndrew, C. (2009). Accessing expert cognition. The Psychologist, 22 (3), 218-219. Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. A. (2009). Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree. American

Psychologist, 64(6), 515-526. Klein, G., & Militello, L. (2005). The knowledge audit as a method for cognitive task analysis. In H.

Montgomery, R. Lipsitz & B. Brehmer (Eds.), How professionals make decisions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lipshitz, R., Klein, G., Orasanu, J., & Salas, E. (2001). Focus article: Taking stock of naturalistic decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14, 331-352.

MacNamara, Á., Button, A., & Collins, D. (2010). The role of psychological characteristics in facilitating the pathway to elite performance: Part I: Identifying mental skills and behaviors. The Sport Psychologist, 24(1), 52-73.

Thompson, N. (2000). Theory and practice in the human services. Buckingham: Open University Press. Vickers, J. N., Reeves, M.-A., Chambers, K. L., & Martell, S. (2004). Decision training: Cognitive strategies for

enhancing motor performance. In A. M. Williams & N. J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: Research theory and practice (pp. 103-120). London: Routledge

task analysis of coach developers: applications to the fa...

Documents