Pedagogy in Coaching

From being a complete mystery within the coaching scene to be coming a dominating focus of coaching tools which has revolutionised the meaning of learning and player development. Pedagogy defined as ‘any conscious activity by one person, designed to enhance the learning in another’ (Watkins and Mortimer 1999). Pedagogy originated from the Greek word ‘pedagogue’ which was an educated servant who would focus on teaching and developing the children’s knowledge and education.

Coaching and teaching a-like purposefully designed to accommodate learning within our players or students to educate and develop knowledge. Learning has been defined as the acquisition of knowledge or skills through study, experience, or being taught. This definition highlights the importance of Leach and Moon (1999) work which found pedagogy to be the relationship of four elements:

• Teacher/Coach
• Learners (Students or Players)
• Learning task
• Learning environment

Ask yourself, do we as coaches focus too much on how we coach, in comparison to how our players learn?

In the most simplistic form, pedagogy and pedagogy theories can be categorised into Linear and Non-linear pedagogy. Chow et al (2014) explains linear pedagogy as ‘Traditional motor learning pedagogies involve instructions that are prescriptive, repetitive and drill-like with a strong focus on ‘criterion model’ technique. Whilst Chow et al (2014) explains non-linear pedagogy as’ the manipulation of key constraints that form boundaries for the learner to explore functional movement solution’. Linear Pedagogy has been described as ‘Coach focused’ and Non-linear as ‘Player centred’. 

Which type do you find yourself using most? 

Our focus within this article is to help you explore and understand new levels and areas of your coaching toolbox using non-linear pedagogical principles/theories to unlock player development. Which brings us to the idea of constructivism. Constructivism is a ‘umbrella’ term for a collective of non-linear pedagogical principles surrounding the idea of constructing knowledge and meaning from their experiences. 

Let’s talk about the two types of constructivism: Cognitive and Social. Cognitive constructivism focus on the emphasis of stages and set process in which people learn and with a real focus on supporting exploration and discovery of knowledge. Meanwhile social constructivism focusing on a strong emphasis on sociocultural context which establishes the creation of opportunities for learning. 

Vygotsky formed social constructivism with the premise of social interaction and the guiding individual to learn through discovery through the manipulation of experiences. Such theories as scaffolding, scenario/problem-based learning has allowed for coaches to create a multitude of experiences for players to learn from. 

So how does this relate to coaching? 

Coaches of any level or experience can manipulate and use these theories in combination with each other whilst maintain multiple different coaching styles. Take for an example, you are coaching foundation phase age players who are learning a new skill or component of the game. Using scaffolding theory, you would layer on layer the technical information (e.g passing). You might start with the following messages – plant non striking foot next the ball, lock ankle and strike through the middle of the ball). Next layer could include the positioning of body shape and hips to aim through the desired outcome, follow through to maintain ball striking. Additionally next layer could include the different ball striking methods to outcome different heights, weights and ball movements.

The use of Scenario and problem-based learning I have found to be more effective and enjoyable within matches and games-based sessions. I have frequently used Scenario based learning when faced with an odd group number (“You have had a player injured or sent off’ = Scenario) (“and you are faced with 6 minutes left and 2-1 down, how might you overcome the score line? How might you overcome the underload in the central areas? = Problem).

As you might have noticed the use of Question and answer with reflection for the players amends itself nicely to accommodate the SBL and PBL examples. The use of language and coaching styles certainly allow for you to change and adapt the learning outcomes and how the players receive the information. Kumar (2019) found that young athletes who were involved and made to feel involved within their own learning had a greater level of retention and quality of techniques. 

So, my question to you now is, how might you use pedagogy now more within your coaching? How might a session plan look when taking pedogeological principles into considerations?