Coaching Support
“A critical review of the role of coordinated sports science support and its importance to elite level performance.”
Introduction
As early as the 1970s, differences have been highlighted between coaching activities and the focus of sports science research. The difficulties in bringing together the different interests and perspectives of these two groups are discussed and debated by numerous researchers (Anshel, 1986; Blimkie, 1979; Campbell, 1978; Colvin, 1979; Elliot, 1997; Haag, 1994; Potrac, Brewer, Jones, Armour, & Hoff, 2000; Spinks, 1997; Taylor, 1983; Tinning, 1982).
As a result of sports science research coaches are the intended beneficiaries, yet, in the literature on coaching many claim that a “gap” exists between sports science research and coaching practice (Goldsmith, 2000). Spinks (1997) drew attention to the differences between the focus of sports science research and what coaches think they need to know to in order to develop. Despite this the application of research into practice is an essential part of coaching development.
Understanding how sports scientists’ research can be implemented to support the development of coaching practice is a task for both coaches and scientists. It is also important to acknowledge that sports science research is derived from multiple disciplines with each discipline having highly specialized knowledge (Luke, 1995).
Interdisciplinary
Interdisciplinary sciences can be represented as spaces where no single form of scientific topic enjoys independence, they are highly interrelated.
Within interdisciplinary science, there is a simultaneous struggle over the distribution and definition of field-specific scientific topics and their interrelations. There is also the further struggle with the exchange of information with non-scientific bodies such as the media (Panofsky, 2011).
Multidisciplinary
Whilst the concept of multidisciplinary is
Introduction
As early as the 1970s, differences have been highlighted between coaching activities and the focus of sports science research. The difficulties in bringing together the different interests and perspectives of these two groups are discussed and debated by numerous researchers (Anshel, 1986; Blimkie, 1979; Campbell, 1978; Colvin, 1979; Elliot, 1997; Haag, 1994; Potrac, Brewer, Jones, Armour, & Hoff, 2000; Spinks, 1997; Taylor, 1983; Tinning, 1982).
As a result of sports science research coaches are the intended beneficiaries, yet, in the literature on coaching many claim that a “gap” exists between sports science research and coaching practice (Goldsmith, 2000). Spinks (1997) drew attention to the differences between the focus of sports science research and what coaches think they need to know to in order to develop. Despite this the application of research into practice is an essential part of coaching development.
Understanding how sports scientists’ research can be implemented to support the development of coaching practice is a task for both coaches and scientists. It is also important to acknowledge that sports science research is derived from multiple disciplines with each discipline having highly specialized knowledge (Luke, 1995).
Interdisciplinary
Interdisciplinary sciences can be represented as spaces where no single form of scientific topic enjoys independence, they are highly interrelated.
Within interdisciplinary science, there is a simultaneous struggle over the distribution and definition of field-specific scientific topics and their interrelations. There is also the further struggle with the exchange of information with non-scientific bodies such as the media (Panofsky, 2011).
Multidisciplinary
Whilst the concept of multidisciplinary is
References: Blimkie, C. (1979). Sport and science- ever the twain shall meet? Coaching Review, 2, 18- 18, 21- 25. Brown, R Carpenter, S. K.-S. (1998). Counselors + educatiors + families as a transdisciplinary team= more effective inclusion for students with disabilities. Professional School Counselling, 2 , 1-9. Collins, D. M. (1999). Role Conflict and confidentiality in multidisciplinary athlete sipport programmes. Br F Sports Med , 208-211. Colvin, W. (1979). The void between the researcher and the coach,. Canadian Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (CAHPER), 41,18 . Goldsmith, W. (2000). Bridging the gap? Now there is a gap in the bridge! ASCA Newletter, 3, 2, 4 . Luke, A. (1995). Sport science support: Implications for the coach and performer. . Coaching Focus, 30 , 9-10. McConachie, H., Salt, A., Chadury, Y., McLachlan, A., & Longan, S. (1999). How do child development teams work? Findings from a UK national survey. . Child Care, Health and Development, 25 , 157-168. Panofsky, A. L. (2011). Field analysis and interdisciplinary science: scientific capital exchange in behavior genetics. 295-316. Potrac, P. B., Brewer, C., Jones, R., Armour, K., & Hoff, J. (2000). Towards an holistic understanding of the coaching process. Quest, 52 , 186- 199. Reid, C., Stewart, E., Thorne, G. (2004). Multidisciplinary sport science teams in elite sport: Comprehensive servicing or conflict and confusion? The sport psychologist , 204-217. Spinks, W. L. (1997). Sports research and the coach. Sports Coach, 19 , 18-19. Taylor, A. W. (1997). Sports research and the coach. Sport Coach, 19 , 18-19. Taylor, A. W. (1983). The relationship of coach and team to the exercise scientist or "bridging the gap" a misnomer or a possibility. Canadian Wrestle, 7, 6 . Tinning, R. (1982). Improving coaches ' instructional effectiveness. Sports Coach, 5 , 37-41.