Interesting take on coaching from a cognitive psychology perspective. But I would like to offer an alternate view from a different skill acquisition perspective. 🧵
First of all I think for a relatively new manager Kompany is doing a fantastic job at Burnley (keeping my @SheffieldUnited at bay!). He has clearly mastered a key component of coaching - developing and maintaining relationships - hence buy in.
1. Knowledge(K) of v Knowledge about
A lot of the info given is related to K-about. This can be useful, but the K used to control actions is knowledge of - so the def needs to develop that through repetition (w/o repetition) and exposure to those situations.
2. Skill is Information-driven
A key point is for the def to maintain an advantageous distance between him and the Att 👀ing to go in behind. That can be best achieved by attuning to specifying info e.g. movement of forward, position on field, passer behavior. It’s contextual.
3. Do, don’t tell
Experiencing the problem is best to learn effective functional solutions - K-of
Representative design can help here, create slice of the game to practice this scenario with functional variability. He can still instruct,but has to guide def to own ind solutions
4. Not convinced abt memory
The 💡 that we store programs to recall later being better than attuning to real-time info offered in context (which gets better with practice) is strange.
We respond by perceiving affordances, interacting w/ LTM in the moment seems cumbersome.
5. Action control laws will help maintain distance effectively - education of intention, attention, calibration.
Birds maintain distance really successfully without detailed mental representations.
6. Good design shapes behavior @markstkhlm “first feedback comes from the design”
Contextual “in the game”knowledge (K-of) is more powerful for players than K-about (descriptive - how to do it) podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sve…
7. Verbal report vs actions
Verbal reports of knowledge does not demonstrate an ability to do. “Arms length, match run”, recalling those cues, does not mean you can defend. Create activities that require a distance to be maintained - that is where best learning occurs.
8. Skill is a relationship
Detailed K-about in head is not skill. Perceiving info and acting upon it effectively is skill. It’s a functional fit @markstkhlm between ind and env. Attunement to info, coupling it to actions is more beneficial than memorizing instructions.
9. Own biography can skew view
I am sure Kompany was coached this exact way - we become married to methods. It just doesn’t seem feasible that we use memories to control action, when better info is available. That’s a hard shift though when surrounded by & exposed to cog psych.
10. Depends on the lens
Dan’s approach is grounded in cog psych, there are other viewpoints, such as ecological psych that look at skill acq very differently. This approach (tell) is common but doesn’t mean it’s right. Evaluate theoretical approaches beyond your personal exposure
What have I learned from soccer practice over the past few weeks? A 🧵
CONTEXT
Group is a trap team - middle school girls in HS age group of mixed ability (3 levels). Most played for min 3-4 years.
Practice 3xpw 90mins
TECHNICAL DRILLS DON’T WORK
Players said they have done a lot of technical passing A-B-C in the past (2-3 years), but many do not have technical proficiency.
This alludes to decomposed technical skill practice isn’t effective AND doesn’t transfer well.
UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES IN SOCCER - A 🧵 on why they need to be taught at ALL levels.
Universal principles are consistent across all levels of performance from u8 to Pro. They are just introduced and implemented in different ways. These are:
Task Goal
Intentions
Space
Relationships
Transition
GOAL OF SOCCER
ATT - score goals.
DEF - stop opponent from scoring goals.
Simple. How this is done depends, there is not one “correct” way. Performance level, developmental level of participants, style of play or game model etc all influence this.
After some good feedback and interactions on my coaching thread, I wanted to have a deeper dive into some of the ideas. Join in, add your Q’s and thoughts, LET’S GO!
#1 - METHODS ARE DRIVEN BY YOUR BELIEFS AND ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT SKILL LEARNING
RATIONALE
We all have rationale for how we coach, BUT, therein lies the problem, what is that rationale?
Whether openly articulated or not, you do what you do based on your beliefs about learning. We are just trying to find out what they are and the implications for coaching.
WHY IS A THEORETICAL RATIONALE IMPORTANT?
It provides an overall framework for your methods (activity design and instruction), so you are consistent and evidence-based in your approach to skill acquisition.
This emphasizes the power your beliefs have on your chosen methods.
THOUGHTS ON COACHING -
a thread 🧵
Having participated in several 140 character back and forths with coaches, I thought I would post my thoughts on coaching, skill and learning, to get a conversation going, so here goes!
METHODS ARE DRIVEN BY YOUR BELIEFS AND ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT SKILL LEARNING
Therefore, understanding how people learn and perform movement skills is the foundation to your coaching and should be thoroughly explored. Basing your activities/drills on faulty beliefs is a problem.
SKILL IS EMBODIED AND EMBEDDED
Skill is unique to each individual’s organismic constraints (embodied).
Skill is embedded in the performance environment.
Therefore, performers must be afforded the opportunity to explore their own way to solve the movement problem.