Abstract
Introduction
I’ve only known Andy for a few years and one thing I’ve come to appreciate with him is that you know you’re going to get his frank, informed, and good-intention style of communication. Reading over the interview, I hear quintessential Andy; a provocative storyteller sharing morality and purpose. As a consultant, Andy navigates the realities of many and varying theoretical frameworks, personnel, and contexts. He has experience as a coach, coach developer, researcher, and mental skills trainer for athletes. He’s able to blend in on the bench or in the stands, change his communication style based on the audience, and recognizes that real-life problem-solving requires critical thinking that can draw upon, but also extend and diverge from, existing theory or research. I’m housed in a graduate school of professional psychology and one of the concepts my colleagues here introduced to me is the “scholar-practitioner model,” which means we employ scholar-psychologists, somebody who is well versed theoretically and skilled practically. 1 The scholar-practitioner model also means our students are immediately immersed in clinical training while taking courses and receiving extensive mentoring from faculty. Without the same model so well established in sport training programs, Andy’s development nonetheless led him to, and his current practices exemplify, the scholar-practitioner model. I want to elaborate on this interesting point within the context of sport in American (USA) society, and secondarily internationally.
Ethics, values, and the scholar-practitioner model
Andy identifies the implicit and explicit values he observed as a young athlete from his youth coaches. From tobacco use to the norm of degrading language, his testimony reminds us that our social worlds are very much value-laden. Andy shared his struggles with protecting multiple stakeholders’ confidentiality, when to disclose information, and how to handle entering the women’s locker room. These are value, ethical-laden decisions and an objective, value-free science will not sufficiently prepare any of us for these situations. 2 Value-laden scholarship is accepted in the arts and humanities, sociology, and philosophy, but too often physical and social scientists extol the value of objectivity and value-free science. Our social world, imbued with physical and social science, is inherently value-laden and political. I’m reminded that practitioners, like Andy, are constantly negotiating these tensions, where at times scientists, especially those in lab coats or crunching numbers to develop equations to predict how to identify talent or maximize human motivation, forgo serious consideration of the ethics and politics of their work. All forms of knowledge, their ethics and effects, are a part of the scholar-practitioner model. Let us, then, take up these issues in our scholarship and science, as we look to develop ways to enhance the preparation of sport scientists, coaches, and psychologists, and coach developers.
Gender, sexuality and diverse social identities
Exactly to this point, I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention a bit of heterosexual biased language in the interview that was mentioned in the context of an early coaching experience, “Boys wanted to hang out with the girls, the girls wanted to hang out with the boys.” It wouldn’t be uncommon to hear a coach say this sort of “off the cuff” remark, but it doesn’t accurately reflect the reality of varying sexual identities and practices and how these sort of microaggressions can have unintended, negative consequences.3,4 Indeed, much has changed in our understanding of gender and sexuality, and this quote from a young coach 20 years ago, and the absence of any guidance or supervision from a quality coach mentor, furthers the need to be engaged in ongoing professional development across a variety of social and ethical domains, not merely the often seen technical and tactical sport skills. We’re right to want coaches to abstain from tobacco in front of (youth) athletes and to not refer to athletes with degrading terms, no matter how affectionate some misguided coach opines. As scholar-practitioners, we must model this critical awareness, change our own behavior and curriculums to reduce harm, and engage in calling out these truths to one another, especially when we are aware of the harm it can produce. Within the literature in sport psychology and sport coaching, we’re only beginning to understand microaggressions, multiculturalism, and the interaction among diverse social identities. Much like clinical and counseling psychology have done in recent years, we need to grow our awareness of these issues to better prepare scholar-practitioners. 5 International collaborations in coaching science, along with the sport for development and peace movement, seem well suited to fostering new understandings and skills on sociocultural awareness, justice, and the coach’s role in serving all human rights.
Professional development
In the U.S., there are often none to minimal formal requirements to coach.6,7 To my knowledge, there is no state that licenses coaches, although some do require basic first aid or background checks. As such, we have many coaches who are not prepared to coach, and Andy’s perspective shows how even licensed teachers are sorely lacking in sport coaching-specific knowledge and skills. We have many volunteer and unprepared coaches making the first, and often wrong, impression on young athletes. We also have collegiate and professional coaches, skeptical of scholars and consultants, protecting their organizations, egos, and dominant norms to avoid individual or cultural change; leery to relinquish control. Yet, through his own interests and initiatives, Andy shows how to bring together theory and practice and how to engage in professional development. How do we move past using only winning as a measure of coach effectiveness? How do we improve the communication, and thus performance, of softball players? What insights can be gained from the perspectives of experienced and well-respected strength and conditioning coaches? He doesn’t just pose these questions; he tries to advance the field through scholarship and society through consulting. Perhaps most importantly to these questions, Andy spoke to understanding why we do what we do, and in this way, demonstrates the necessity of theory and practice. It’s not enough to just do, but to understand why we do what we do, and if I may take it a step further, to understand the (un)intended effects. We need scholars addressing practical problems, and we need practitioners to understand “why” and to make sense of (i.e., theorize) practice. As a consultant, a scholar-practitioner consultant, Andy reminds us how to bring these worlds together. Although sport in the U.S. ranks high in cultural capital, American exceptionalism does not extend to rigorous and exceptional coach preparation and regulation. In this regard, it would be fruitful to have international scholars and governments provide the U.S.-based coach educators with their insights and practices.
Conclusion
Andy’s consulting is symptomatic of the lack of scholar-practitioner models and lax regulation of sport coaches in the U.S. It is truly mind boggling, and nearly numbing, to consider that from teachers to hair dressers to electricians to childcare workers to physicians, nearly every job in the U.S. requires a common educational pathway, rigorous certification or the more laudable licensure, and minor to modest regulation. Andy’s case study provides evidence of the urgent need to act now to fix our broken (or non-existent) coach education system. Like we all know, and as Andy has jokingly put to me, there is no magical answer or secret sauce. There are problems and we do our best to solve them, knowing that new personal problems and social issues will emerge. It is precisely by illuminating this shadow of a doubt that we see why we need to produce more scholar-practitioners; people who will help advance our field through praxis. Naturally, as a consultant, Andy is a problem solver, a fixer, a go-to resource with tools, and cognitive skills like critical thinking and dialogue to help enhance coach, athlete, and team outcomes. I want to honor Andy’s case study by extending it. I want to draw upon existing professional standards and guidelines, research, and the voices of scholar-practitioners to advance sport science and coaching. If we’re successful, we won’t put Andy out of business. Hardly. Rather, we will challenge him with new problems and issues worthy of his attention because we will have changed our society by producing more and better scholar-practitioners. This is a progressive vision for the professional preparation of sport coaches in the U.S.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.