Search

Background: Provided that coaches play a key role in shaping the sport experiences of athletes with a disability, they represent an important point of intervention for enhancing the quality of athletes' participation in disability sport. Despite the importance of their role, few evidence-informed learning resources are available to support the development of disability sport coaches. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to produce a novel evidence-informed learning tool for disability sport coaches in entry level and developmental coaching domains. The goal of this tool was to demonstrate and provide information about coach behaviours that facilitate quality experiences for athletes with disabilities. Methodology: The format selected for this tool was a creative nonfiction (i.e. an evidence-informed story). Using the Knowledge to Action Framework as a guide, the tool was developed through a four-stage process: (1) identifying and creating primary sources of knowledge through a literature review and original research; (2) synthesizing primary sources of knowledge to select target behaviours and behavioural determinants; (3) crafting the story to demonstrate and provide information about target behaviours and related outcomes; and (4) obtaining feedback from stakeholders (i.e. disability sport athletes, coaches, and administrators) to tailor the knowledge included in the story to the appropriate context. Findings: In the first stage, 23 studies focused on quality experiences and/or coaches in disability sport were identified through a review of the literature. The findings of these studies were combined with the results of three original studies conducted by the research team. A synthesis of these findings resulted in the selection of two behavioural determinants (confidence and attitudes) and 13 coach behaviours (aligning with transformational leadership theory) for inclusion in the tool (Stage 2). The story that formed the basis for the tool was crafted in Stage 3, which combined the behaviours and behavioural determinants identified in Stage 2 with a plotline, setting, and characters based on the experience of the first author and stakeholder input. The tool was revised several times to incorporate stakeholder feedback in Stage 4. Implications: This paper describes the development of a practical resource for coaches and coach educators in disability sport. As such, we provide a detailed and rigorous procedure for translating evidence into a narrative format with the potential for application in diverse learning contexts. In addition, we reviewed and synthesized evidence that may contribute to enhanced theoretical understandings of coaching effectiveness in disability sport. Taken together, the information presented in this paper offers important theoretical, methodological, and practical implications for researchers, coaches, and coach developers in disability sport.

Be empowering. Be athlete-centered. Be autonomy supportive. These are three related topics currently being promoted by sport psychologists and sport pedagogists in an effort to recognize athletes' unique qualities and developmental differences and make coaching more holistic and coaches more considerate. This has led us to ask, how likely are such initiatives to lead to coaches putting their athletes at the center of the coaching process given that coaches' practices have largely been formed through relations of power that subordinate and objectify athletes' bodies through the regular application of a range of disciplinary techniques and instruments [e.g. Barker-Ruchti, N., & Tinning, R. (2010). Foucault in leotards: Corporeal discipline in women's artistic gymnastics. "Sociology of Sport Journal", 27, 229-250; Heikkala, J. (1993). Discipline and excel: Techniques of the self and body and the logic of competing. "Sociology of Sport Journal", 10, 397-412; Gearity, B., & Mills, J. P. (2012). Discipline and punish in the weight room. "Sports Coaching Review", 1, 124-134]? In other words, to try to develop athlete-centered coaches capable of coaching in ways that will empower their athletes without also problematizing the discursive formation of coaches' practices concerns us [Denison, J., & Mills, J. P. (2014). Planning for distance running: Coaching with Foucault. "Sports Coaching Review", 3, 1-16]. Put differently: how can athlete empowerment initiatives be anything more than rhetoric within a disciplinary framework that normalizes maximum coach control? It is this question that we intend to explore in this paper. More specifically, as Foucauldians, we will argue that coaching with greater consideration for athletes' unique qualities and developmental differences needs to entail coaching in a less disciplinary way and with an awareness and appreciation of the many unseen effects that disciplinary power can have on coaches' practices and athletes' bodies.

Be empowering. Be athlete-centered. Be autonomy supportive. These are three related topics currently being promoted by sport psychologists and sport pedagogists in an effort to recognize athletes’ unique qualities and developmental differences and make coaching more holistic and coaches more considerate. This has led us to ask, how likely are such initiatives to lead to coaches putting their athletes at the center of the coaching process given that coaches’ practices have largely been formed through relations of power that subordinate and objectify athletes’ bodies through the regular application of a range of disciplinary techniques and instruments [e.g. Barker-Ruchti, N., & Tinning, R. (2010). Foucault in leotards: Corporeal discipline in women's artistic gymnastics.Sociology of Sport Journal,27, 229–250; Heikkala, J. (1993). Discipline and excel: Techniques of the self and body and the logic of competing.Sociology of Sport Journal,10, 397–412; Gearity, B., & Mills, J. P. (2012). Discipline and punish in the weight room.Sports Coaching Review,1, 124–134]? In other words, to try to develop athlete-centered coaches capable of coaching in ways that will empower their athletes without also problematizing the discursive formation of coaches’ practices concerns us [Denison, J., & Mills, J. P. (2014). Planning for distance running: Coaching with Foucault.Sports Coaching Review,3, 1–16]. Put differently: how can athlete empowerment initiatives be anything more than rhetoric within a disciplinary framework that normalizes maximum coach control? It is this question that we intend to explore in this paper. More specifically, as Foucauldians, we will argue that coaching with greater consideration for athletes’ unique qualities and developmental differences needs to entail coaching in a less disciplinary way and with an awareness and appreciation of the many unseen effects that disciplinary power can have on coaches’ practices and athletes’ bodies. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]