WAG Attn: IWC re: Good coaching

[cbone]

Your comments on the DD wants to do team! thread brought up a bunch of questions for me, but I didn't want to hijack that thread with them. I agree with your points about engaged coaching making a big difference in an athlete's development and goal-reaching potential. I have several questions for you, some for me and some that are more general that will help everyone. I've come to rely on your perspective and I think it your input here can help a lot of us if you're willing to make another marathon reply.

1. The type of coach you mentioned is what virtually everyone wants. How do we, as relatively unknowledgable parents of gymnasts, find that type of coach? What questions can be asked to determine this philosophy? What answers are red flags and which are green flags?

2. You mentioned being able to move a child a level a year through compulsories as a sign of a really good coach. Does this apply to any gymnast or do you have selection criteria for team that weeds out those who are physically or mentally incapable of this type of progress? If you use this type of criteria, what do you look for?

3. You spoke about unexpressed dreams for our gymnasts. Do you think that opening up lines of communication to make those dreams expressed is important between parents-coaches-gymnasts? If so, do you have techniques that work to get the athlete to open up about their dreams? How can we, as parents, best support our child's goal-chasing? What role does each group (parents-coaches-gymnasts) have in shaping and developing those goals over time?

4. What do you recommend as the standard for parent-coach interaction to best help an athlete's development (i.e. through what media do they communicate, how often should they talk, etc.)?

Thanks in advance for taking these on!

 

[Deleted member D3987]

what's IWC? stupid me...

 

[cbone]

I Wanna Coach. dunno, feel free to stab at this one, too.

 

[Quadqueen]

what's IWC? stupid me...

iwannacoach...

 

[iwannacoach]

I could swear there's an echo in here. I'd be glad to take on the task, but may divide the over-all response into 4 separate posts, because, well you know......I get a little wordy at times.

To distinguish one coach from another, you should watch them first, and ask questions later. Knowing what to watch for and understanding the significance of interactions isn't so easy, and even with the years I've spent there are times when my first impression formed through an entire day at a meet is off target. So while I think you can choose based on observation, you have to do it over a period of time, perhaps spread over three occasions.

I think many excellent and well intentioned coaches fail to get it when it comes to the coach-gymnast relationship, because they feel the kids are best served when led by a strong and unwavering coach who's so into leading and being followed they cast an aura of separates them from ordinary folk....including the kids. You'll pick this coachtype out of the crowd by how little time they spend with their gymnasts between rotations, the brevity of their contact time with them, and the near diety status accorded them by their gymnasts, who frequently avoid eye contact with their coach. Generally these coaches get a lot for a little, as their gymnasts waste no time asking questions or seeking reprieve for a slight cold. They know not to go there because the answers and the concessions granted never change, and are therefor a waste of time.

This coachtype often gets judged as either overbearing, egotistical, cold, angry, anal, or maniacal (or all of the above) for what seems almost apathy toward children. I think that judgement is too harsh, as I'd rather say they don't have the interpersonal skills, or the life experiences needed to do it in a child centric way.

So who's drawn to this type of coach.......kids who are somewhere between I wanna be a top(ish) L10 and I wanna go elite, because all they want is someone who can help them add another half twist or an extra six inches height. Anything else is baggage they can't afford to carry. So look for these coaches if your child gets impatient over all the superfluous happenings that seem rampant when she's at a gym with.....um, people who enjoy the sport for what it is, but get a boost of energy from interacting with people....you know, those pesky superfuous teammates that are always chatting and slowing the coaches down so they don't have enough time to get me to the ********.

Geez, I guess I haven't gotten to your answer, well not exactly. I decribed that coachtype prior to the "answer" because IMO many of the "best for all" coaches have evolved, or devolved depending on perspective, from the all-knowing, my way or the highway oracles decribed above. More so I believe than the other way around, as coaches who are child centric first tend to learn the technical aspects of the sport at a slower rate.

Ya see, knowing the skillcraft and how to train kids takes a deep and sustained commitment that usually begins as an accomplished gymnast, a slighted gymnast as coachmolly has noted, or a driven individual who has coached in another sport. I'm laying it out this way because these unique people understand the need to get it right, while the child centric side or the community understands the need to maintain a fun environment.

Most of my coaching has evolved from the coach centric style, but for most of those years I understood the importance of letting the kids know they were valued, and I guess that made it possible to devolve from a hotshot coaching hotshots, to a coach who understands that there's a bit of a twinkle in almost every child's eye that gets a little brighter when they get a correction that works for them, and receive praise for the majic moment that it was, even if it was just learning how to get all the way around on a backward roll.

I have to yield the computer to my 16yo son, the one with the broken elbow......I think he's trying to convince me he needs it to distract his thought away from the post op pain....well that figures. So I'll get right back to this as soon as possible.......and cbone, to keep my thoughts as unvarnished as possible you could start another thread for discussion with some obvious title that let's me know not to look, as I really do want to share my impressions on this issue rather than reacting to what others say.

Later

 

[iwannacoach]

So hears what's probably a shortlist of what to look for when scouting about for the coachtype that cbone describes as the one everyone wants.

A lot of what you should see is the people scape around the coach. You should see kids that are working at an impressive rate without delays in getting on the equipment caused by chatting needing to be finished. You should be able to hear bits of conversation between the kids that are neither suppressed with hushed tone, or bursting at the seams at volumes that can be heard clearly out in the lobby, but an exception is normal to highlight a hillarious moment that includes everyone in the group, including...or not...the coach.

There should be eye contact when the coach give corrections beyond the general information type that are given as kids adjust bars, put on grips, begin running drillls, and the like......and for the most part the eye contact should be very engaged on the part of the coach who needs to see the spark of recognition and commitment to the correction as feedback. That wouldn't apply to correction given while on the fly during a skill or routine.

There should be feedback given the gymnast after they've worked with a correction, even if all is said is "keep trying". I've heard lots of people say that positive comments should be made publicly, the negative one in private, but how you define "negative" can change most of that guidline, because in my mind every comment is packed with guidiance that can benifit any child by reinforcing what they know or letting them hear it one more time in a different delivery whereupon it finally clicks. Public negatives placed with goals and good intentions help keep the entire team tuned to how to support their teamate, and having been done in the open acknowleges that we're all prone to mistakes and seen as able to get things like behavior, concentration, and attitutude heading in the right direction. The tone however, should seldom be harsh, nor should the things said place a label on the kid's forehead.

The positive feedback should range from nuetral information noting continuation of a good trend, to an over the top I can't believe such a big deal is being made of this. The over the top positives aren't easy to catch because majic moments that deserve over the top treatment are relatively few, and casting over the tops about freely diminishes their significant when they're due the recipient. Consider yourself lucky if you should happen to be at a gym when a true over the top event takes place, because they are that special.

You may find some coaches rant positive for what seem insignificant results from a gymnast, mainly because your background fails to allow for a complete understanding of things coaches view as significant, and not all coaches share the same opinion of what deserves a positive rant. Here's what I see as significant if that helps you understand.

I think one of the hardest things for any of us is to pursue or accept change at someone elses urging, because it requires travel outside our mental boundaries. For kids to progress through the gymnastics hierarchy of skills requires a constant effort to change the way they move through each skill until they get it right, and that is no easy task to embrace as it require breaking down a few barriers for each child. Those barriers are several and varied, such as accepting the need for a new skill suggested by the coach, overcoming fear of injury or inability, throwing away an in-correct mental model formed by the kid prior to beginning work on the skill, and one of the biggest bariers of all....is this the moment to do this.

So I tend to move in the direction of "over the top" when I see a change of any kind in an attempt to move a correction from the awareness stage to one of action. The visual results may look totally wrong, but the mental result, the one I appreciate most, is that the kid accepted and initiated the change, as the right results are fairly certain with enough attempts dedicated to change directed and corrected by the coach. So don't be too confused by over the tops that seem un-reasoned except when you hear them frequently through a practice session, because if they come that often the kid is going to be at the national level within a few months time.

Look for signs the coach is really into what's going on, and accept that this can show in a variety of ways. Coaches moods shouldn't swing wildly about, but there are several minor mood "wiggles" that you can look for, such as urgency, humor and fun, intensity and focus, and a general sense of caring.

Allow that coaches are individuals rather that professionals stamped out by a cookie cutter. Many of my "first wrong impressions" are those formed about ego. I think a coach should have one...a big one, but tempered with the understanding that it's a source of drive and energy to benifit those in their surroundings, and not a tool to marginalize others. Some coaches can't suppress their ego and it gets judged, and others suppress it beyond recognition. Some coaches are outgoing, others reserves, some studious and reflective, but if they end up showing the right attitude to the kids, know their skillcraft, and believe that kids have emotions that often their actions and responses.......they're probably a good choice for any child, but even more so for one exploring the depths of their gymnastics ability....and desire.

As far as questions go. Ask them how they became interested and started in the sport......what coaching stages have they passed through, because if they say they got it right from the "git go" they're likely un-aware of their own ignorance....but a got it right from day one coach is possible...just not likely. Ask them about communication to see if you can accept or live with the answer, because aside from the short term logistical stuff there's very little need for communication beyond "Susie hamster found it's way into the laundry hamper last night...and well, she's pretty shaken by the whole thing".....Asking when will Susie kip...a waste of both party's time, and it limits the priorities and strategies that the coach wants to use to help Susie grow as a complete gymnast.

You could ask a little more to get a feeling for the depths of their convictions toward helping the kids. My first and still driving force resulted from not having a gymnastics able coach during my three years of highschool participation. I ended up doing fairly well, and remarkably well in my collegiate years, so in a sense it all worked out, but still wondered after competing at nationals my freshman year, how far along would I be right now if I'd been able to use those high school years to get where I am a couple of years earlier. That's what drives me to help kids learn, to give them chances blossom earlier in their experience rather than later.

Theres too much to edit and too little time, so forgive me any spelling errors and such. I'll get to the next question later.

 

[iwannacoach]

One year per level?........did I really say that!!!

Sure why not. I wanna start out with a few clarifications for any readers who've recently joined chalkbucket or who've missed many of the threads I've participated in. I started coaching in college circa mid 70's and transitioned to coaching when the pain from the after affect of two non gymnastics injuries limited my training and ability to do what I wanted in the sport. That transition led to a nearly 10 year stretch of 24/7 style coaching in the private gym club world. During those years I taught everything from pre-school to kids with reasonably set goals that could led to some pretty interesting contrasts in my work day, and allowed me a view into child development few people get the chance to benifit from.

I left the sport when I realised I'd met the "right gal" and would need time, and the income, to share with the family we both intended upon. I've been back to the sport four times over the years when some of my friends asked for help with their teams, and will, I hope semi-retire as a full(ish) time coach. Many of my posts skim over this for the pupose of continuity and focus with regard to the thread. Fortunately the only changes in the sport are the equipment standards, and be thankful for that cuz it ain't easy to teach, and endure as an athlete, double backs on a 2" system spring floor.

Other than that, it's all remained the same in the context that the skills get a little easier for us to wrap our minds around each year as new version are introduced to replace them, and the parents still come from all philosophical directions. The kids have been unchanged, and the laws of gravity, momentum, acceleration, and inertia that the kids work with have remained the same since Newton took that bump on his head.

There has been a slight "adjustment" in the sport with respect to the level system of compulsories growing from a three level journey to the top of the Junior Olympic program to the current 10 level system. The change has created a path for coaches and kids to follow that provides the option of competing at very early stages of participation. I suppose that could be a good thing....or not, as many in the sport feel compelled to spend time preparing for competitions.......and that starts to muddy some things up in how fast or slow children move through the early levels.

Kids only stay kids for a pretty short period of time, and it's been a long held presumption that skill progression comes more easily within the "tween" and early teen years, and once into the mid to late teen period the new skills are harder to come by, but the bright side is that mature kids have a better sense of presentation and polish. I kinda agree with those notions if we speak in generalities only, but have seen several exceptions over the years, including a 11+yo girl who walked into a gym with absolutly no gym (or related) training, no athletic or dance background, and was so suited to the sport she was quickly put into a 10 1/2 hour program with quite unremarkable coaches, and worked up to level 5/6ish right about the time she turned 12.

So you could say an exceptional kid could move through the first five levels with a so so coach in about a year. Most kids aren't as fortunate (as this example) in the "ableness" department, and at the other end of the spectrum are kids who seem cursed with little to no "ableness". With-out covering every exception at each end of the scale, unless you've lined up a publisher who wants to sign me to a book deal, I'll try to generalize it for the average kid.

If I were to define "ability" as a total package of physical, mental, and emotional tools and position 300 kids age 7 to 11 in a line with the least able kid at one end and the most able kid at the other. I could point to the entire middle third as examples of kids with aveage ability who should be able to progress safely and happily up to level 6 using an average weekly schedule of hours at each level.

If a coach was able (and should) to assign gym homework of the most simple sort that required 15 minutes of time daily, and it was getting done as asked.......I think it's fair to expect kids in this group to move through level 1 and 2 in 6 months or less in a 2 day week totaling 2 1/2 to 3 hours, and through level 3 in 6 months in a two day week of 4 hours. Things begin to slow down at this point, but hours are usually increased to compensate for that. So lets figure a three day week of 7 1/2 to 9 hours over a year to get through level 4, and a minimum of 10 1/2 hours to get through level five.

I hate to leave it at this point but have to get to bed. I'll get to some additioal thoughts and circumstances later....

 

[OzZee]

If a coach was able (and should) to assign gym homework of the most simple sort that required 15 minutes of time daily, and it was getting done as asked.......I think it's fair to expect kids in this group to move through level 1 and 2 in 6 months or less in a 2 day week totaling 2 1/2 to 3 hours, and through level 3 in 6 months in a two day week of 4 hours.

iwc, thanks for the time you have put into your posts, very interesting.

Aussiecoach - OK I'm now wondering (yes once again re the differences between the countries) why nearly all the Australian kids compete a year per level from level 1 with a couple of pre level years as well.
If the average US kid can do levels 1-3 on 4 hours per week for one year then why are ours training more hours for 3-5 years to get the same results. Is it just preparing the routines for competition? Different training?

Do we get any advantages from competing so early (and not necessarily so young, as in the US you have to be 4 compete and here turning 6, so then holding back talented kids from even starting till they are older).

 

[Deleted member D3987]

i'm just observing so far, but want to state that competing early ^^^ has NO advantages at all. the sport is driven by money. it needs the money to be supported. and since all other activities (most are not sports) start kids right outta diapers, you've got parents wanting their kids in competition. a ribbon, a medal, 15 minutes of fame. but competing at to young an age is, and at times when the body is unstable and not fully developed to handle the rigors and demands of what we do, detrimental to their physical health and to their future development. that's all at this juncture.

 

[iwannacoach]

I don't know if you got the impression I'm an advocate for early age competition when I mentioned gains come more readily at younger ages. I didn't mean to have have kids start earl in the freakish sense, only that there's a consequence for repeating levels, slowing down level ups to wait for comp season to catch up with the kids, and stuff like that. That's why my sample of are from ages 7 to 11 at the time they begin L1....even the youngest fo these will be 9 yo during the year they pass through L4.

So........Maybe I gotta stop with the references in other posts about my fictional and sometimes ridiculously advanced pre- preschool junior elite shooting star D.E.V.O. prep squad who need a supply of pampers in the nurse...err locker room.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

no. that was not my impression. it was my response to the post above mine by OzZee. no matter the country or system, 4 & 6 are much to young to start the competitive cycle. yet we do it. to get the money. and satisfy the appetite of the parents for competition. for 15 minutes of fame. and to keep supporting our national teams...cause that's where the money goes. follow the money...in every country.

 

[GymGirl's Mom]

So........Maybe I gotta stop with the references in other posts about my fictional and sometimes ridiculously advanced pre- preschool junior elite shooting star D.E.V.O. prep squad who need a supply of pampers in the nurse...err locker room.

Don't forget GIFTED! Lord knows the kid NEEDS to be determined gifted while in diapers!

 

[iwannacoach]

No! it needs to be earlier than that.......did someone call for womb service?

 

[iwannacoach]

So can you use my model as a barometer of whether there's a good coach leading a group. The answer really depends on the total of factors good or bad the coach has to accept as part of the experience. Some credit needs given to dis-advantages like the equipment to gymnast ratio, coach to gymnast ratio. Other less obvious challenges to progress are over all room conditions with respect to lighting, distractions, group behaviors of all classes in attendance, and noise making it difficult to communicate.

Most compulsory coaches have no control over these things, so the best they can do is get the kids to use every available resource to the fullest extent possible, and to stay focused on the coaches corrections. That task is one the coach must take on if they want to put the kids in a position to learn at a rate that suits them rather than their surroundings.

Equipment ratio, lighting, and personnel are thing the owner is responsible for, and some of you may want to address any of those in private. Some fairly economical and suitable "fixes" can be used for lighting and equipment, but personnel changes get a little trickier, so be prepared to hear "it is what it is".

It may seem I'm looking for "outs" that validate stagnation....nope, just trying to be fair to the good coaches who are trying to make a bad situation work for the kids. A well intentioned coach will rally the kids to do more, and they should be respected for that, as they'll get the kids to do more for themselves than would otherwise happen. You can place the well intentioned coach in a category of "has potential", but they may need a few more years, and independant study backed up by chat time with a coach who informally mentors coaches in the gym or around the town.

So my definition of a good coach at the compulsory levels would be a person who started with a keen interest in the sport, has a year or more of distinguished (like people rave about them) part time of lots of hours, experience as a rec coach or as an assistant team(ish) coach.....who has more than anything else, a focused desire to get it right for the kids. Adding more to experience or any other attribute makes them a slightly better coach upon each addition of the things we want to see. If coaches who fit this profile get together with a group of your average kids in an average setting, they should be able to get kids through those levels, especially 4 & 5 in the year allowed. I remember the post that cbone is referring to, and I don't know if I said L6 may need to be repeated for some kids, but I wouldn't consider kids in a 12 hour a week L6 program who move up to L7 as exceptions either.......I'm thinking more like half or more, provided each child has reasonable parental support, wants to be there to learn first and have fun second, and is willing to go home tired at the end of the day.

At the "end of the day" it falls to the gymnast and their parents to determine how quickly she can progress by supporting the notion of setting goals, working hard, putting in the time, respecting the coach and the role played by the coach......and to find a setting that supports the over all goal of the child and parents, as the coach can't "do it all" no matter how capable. But then again it might be an interesting experiment.........

 

[Deleted member D3987]

So can you use my model as a barometer of whether there's a good coach leading a group. The answer really depends on the total of factors good or bad the coach has to accept as part of the experience. Some credit needs given to dis-advantages like the equipment to gymnast ratio, coach to gymnast ratio. Other less obvious challenges to progress are over all room conditions with respect to lighting, distractions, group behaviors of all classes in attendance, and noise making it difficult to communicate.

Most compulsory coaches have no control over these things, so the best they can do is get the kids to use every available resource to the fullest extent possible, and to stay focused on the coaches corrections. That task is one the coach must take on if they want to put the kids in a position to learn at a rate that suits them rather than their surroundings.

Equipment ratio, lighting, and personnel are thing the owner is responsible for, and some of you may want to address any of those in private. Some fairly economical and suitable "fixes" can be used for lighting and equipment, but personnel changes get a little trickier, so be prepared to hear "it is what it is".

It may seem I'm looking for "outs" that validate stagnation....nope, just trying to be fair to the good coaches who are trying to make a bad situation work for the kids. A well intentioned coach will rally the kids to do more, and they should be respected for that, as they'll get the kids to do more for themselves than would otherwise happen. You can place the well intentioned coach in a category of "has potential", but they may need a few more years, and independant study backed up by chat time with a coach who informally mentors coaches in the gym or around the town.

So my definition of a good coach at the compulsory levels would be a person who started with a keen interest in the sport, has a year or more of distinguished (like people rave about them) part time of lots of hours, experience as a rec coach or as an assistant team(ish) coach.....who has more than anything else, a focused desire to get it right for the kids. Adding more to experience or any other attribute makes them a slightly better coach upon each addition of the things we want to see. If coaches who fit this profile get together with a group of your average kids in an average setting, they should be able to get kids through those levels, especially 4 & 5 in the year allowed. I remember the post that cbone is referring to, and I don't know if I said L6 may need to be repeated for some kids, but I wouldn't consider kids in a 12 hour a week L6 program who move up to L7 as exceptions either.......I'm thinking more like half or more, provided each child has reasonable parental support, wants to be there to learn first and have fun second, and is willing to go home tired at the end of the day.

At the "end of the day" it falls to the gymnast and their parents to determine how quickly she can progress by supporting the notion of setting goals, working hard, putting in the time, respecting the coach and the role played by the coach......and to find a setting that supports the over all goal of the child and parents, as the coach can't "do it all" no matter how capable. But then again it might be an interesting experiment.........

i'm responsible for a TAD more than that...

 

[iwannacoach]

And it's a good thing you are!

 

[iwannacoach]

I'm trying to post the next part but it isn't working, but the notice about a service error is working great.

 

[iwannacoach]

I just tried to post for the third time on this thread, and each time I've lost everything I put together. Is there a reason I keep geting an internal server error anytime I try and post a lengthy (and epic) piece.

I guess I'll just wait a few days to see if the problem goes away, and I'm thinking if anybody wants to throw out opinions and discuss what's been written so far, now would be as good a time as any.

 

[Pineapple_Lump]

Type large posts on your computer document program, then copy and paste in your post. That way if something crashes you don't have to deal with that feeling of loosing 15 minutes of typed effort and thought with one click.

 

[bogwoppit]

If you are using Internet Explorer as your web browser try a different one. It is notorious for the error message.