Read on Twitter
This is an interesting thread on a number of levels and will perhaps offer some thoughts
1. ‘It depends’ is again misrepresented - coaching is about making a difference in the real world and using theory/empirical evidence to inform it. Work from the athlete’s needs. https://twitter.com/psychscientists/status/1332361131684466690
1. ‘It depends’ is again misrepresented - coaching is about making a difference in the real world and using theory/empirical evidence to inform it. Work from the athlete’s needs. https://twitter.com/psychscientists/status/1332361131684466690
2. The idea that there are two approaches in coaching is news to me and likely anyone who coaches, researches or in education more broadly. Conceptualising one of these as ‘traditional' might also be a surprise to the Jim Greenwoods and Ric Charlesworths of the world.
The idea that we have such strong evidence to abandon entire fields of cognitive and neuroscience seems a little hasty
3. I don’t know what the new coaching methods are, the difference between eco approaches and all others appears to be the role played by understanding and cognition vs self organisation
4. I think I see different views of ED being used. Some grounded in real world coaching practice, others less so. People at the latter end of the spectrum have had a influence on my own coaching. Based on what I read here and from others, is this representative of ED?
5. I think @PsychScientists is right to point to the ontological split that sees human functioning in a completely different manner. This is why I find it hard to understand how some coaching methods (eg. demo, modelling or use of video analysis) can be explained in eco terms.
It is also why I cannot see how the ecological approach can be used to explain the entirety of coaching practice. It is a lot more than skill acquisition (or adaptation!)
6. Coaches can look at any variety of different pedagogical orientations and see validity. We operate in the real world, we want to make a difference and not justify a theoretical orientation
7. Finally, if we can help athletes improve, as coaches have done for a LONG time using cognitive approaches. Why would this be abandoned in favour of an approach that suggests self organisation is better? If so, where is the evidence for this?
