The Athlete-Centered Coach

BY GARRETT LUCASH

According to the International Olympic Committee, an effective sports program centers on the unique needs, qualities, and trajectories of each athlete- as a ‘whole person’- and nurtures them into a stronger, more capable individual (Bergeron et al. 2015). This ‘athletecentered’ approach adapts to the unique needs of each individual which transforms sports participation into a truly meaningful and life forming experience. This article describes what to expect from an athlete-centered coaching philosophy.

Athlete-centered coaches allow athletes to follow their own course and at their own unique pace.

However, it is the coach’s responsibility to illuminate obstacles that lie ahead and to ensure athletes stay on a pathway that suits their individual goals and needs. This means athlete-centered coaches provide structure, clear guidelines, and establish a high, yet attainable, level of quality within their program for athletes to reach for. However, champion athletes are not controlled, created, or molded. Champion athletes are nurtured, supported, and guided. Athlete-centered coaches recognize this distinction. They provide structure yet also consider the perspectives and feelings of their athletes. They encourage choice, share vital information, value self-initiation, independent problem-solving and decision making, and minimize pressures and demands. Athlete-centered coaches provide athletes rationale for tasks, rules, and regulations within the sport and training environment. Rationale allows athletes to value, integrate, take ownership, and feel in control of their behaviors and the ultimate choice to function within the sport and training structure (or not).

Research shows that giving learners choice boosts their sense of autonomy and self-motivation (Wulf and Lewthwaite 2016, Hagger and Chatzisarantis 2007). Athlete-centered coaches design ‘choice opportunities’ within their curriculum to greatly enhance athletes’ training experiences. Choice opportunities allow athletes to take part in a specific decision-making process and this transforms them into active agents of their own learning.

Choice gives athletes a sense of control and allows them to take ownership of tasks. They stick with tasks when provided free time.

Choice opportunities nurture deep thinking because athletes have to determine which option they will take. Coaches can adapt the bandwidth (e.g. the type and number of choices provided) from context to context and dependent on the unique needs of the athlete. For example, younger skaters might not know which skills are important to practice but older skaters probably will. Below is a list of sample choice opportunity situations. As the list progresses down, the choice opportunity bandwidth widens to allow more choice, and ultimately, more control for the athlete.

“What do you want to practice first- outside or inside three turns?”

“How many times do you want to rehearse this skill?”

“What exercises do you want to use to improve this jump today?”

“What are your goals for this lesson?”

Coaches can assess the interactions with their athletes to determine whether or not they are athlete-centered. Are the interactions ‘transmissive’ in that you, the coach, resort to lecturing and prescribing and your athletes stand quietly nodding their heads? Do you know exactly what each athlete understands or do you have to guess or imply that they understand? Do you give them time to answer questions, provide their own feedback back to you, or even self-correct?

Alternatively, are your coach-athlete interactions more ‘transactive’ or ‘dialogic’ in nature? This means you create conditions that require athletes’ participation in the exchange.

When the interaction is transformed into a two-way dialogue, you can observe what and how athletes are learning just by allowing the athletes to convey their inner voice. All you have to do is listen.

The pace and the details can be adjusted accordingly. Just as important, knowing they must contribute to the discussion means that athletes will feel accountable for learning. Athletes will realize that the coach requires their input so they have to stay focused. Feelings of accountability can be challenging for them at first, especially since each athlete is unique and responds differently. However, accountability also allows athletes to take ownership of their learning; to develop and project their inner voices and this is how they develop self-control and intrinsic motivation.

Another point about athlete-centered interactions is the function they serve. Are your coach-athlete interactions ‘controlling’ or ‘informational’, for example. When an interaction serves an informational function, the athlete maintains a sense of choice or control (think of the choice opportunities I described above). This makes the statement athlete-centered. They can choose to apply the information (or not) without risking their relationship with you. When the interaction serves a ‘controlling function’, the athlete must engage in a behavior to please the coach. This can be tricky because even statements made with positive intent can serve a controlling function. Below are several statements that coaches can make with an athlete. Which ones serve a controlling function? Which ones are informational and, therefore, athlete-centered?

a) “To be a part of my program, you must train five days per week.”

b) “If you work on your basics, your jumps will improve.”

c) “I saw you waste time on that last session. I am not happy.”

d) “You won the competition! I am so proud of you!”

Statements a) and b) are informational because they give the athlete choice. While statement a) might appear controlling, it simply states the structure and rules the athlete must accept should they choose to be a part of the program or not. Statements c) and d) are controlling because they imply that the athlete’s behaviors put their relationship with the coach at risk. The athlete might think, “To please my coach, I must win,” for example.

Coaches can observe and ask themselves questions to adapt their coach-athlete interactions. Is the athlete connecting the new skill with previously learned skills? Is the athlete drawn to irrelevant details or those that are pertinent to successful performance? Making such inferences can help the coach adapt feedback and discussion accordingly. This personalizes and paces the learning effectively to the unique needs and learning style of each individual.

Athletes either unfamiliar with athlete-centered discussions (this could be young children but also older athletes used to traditional exchanges) or challenged by new skills may require the coach to lead discussions more. In contrast, athletes familiar with athlete-centered discussions may be able to lead discussions themselves. Each athlete is different and coaches should assess an individualized starting point for each.

Athlete-centered coaches introduce athletes to diverse resources to facilitate their learning. Learning resources include an expanding repertoire of exercises; an endless assortment of feedback strategies and ‘games’ they can play with coaches and peers; devices that promote exploration; literature and media such as video archives to watch model performances and so on. Coaches can incorporate learning resources such as these to enrich their sports programs.

The resources should be diverse enough so that no two practice sessions are ever the same and this is what makes a potentially monotonous experience more stimulating and fun.

Ultimately, an athlete-centered philosophy vastly increases the value of sports participation because sport specific skills, such as an axel, are only relevant if an individual is figure skating. However, if a sports program teaches an athlete how to manage their own learning, then that athlete has developed transferable life skills. This means an athlete-centered figure skating program goes beyond triple jumps and level four spin technique and considers psychological abilities that make athletes better learners. These abilities are necessary for athletes to make accurate judgements about the quality of their work; to develop an understanding of the standards through which their skills are judged; to competently and effectively function in the absence of instruction; to know how to utilize available resources to improve efficiently and effectively.

References

Bergeron, Michael F, Margo Mountjoy, Neil Armstrong, Michael Chia, Jean Côté, Carolyn A Emery, Avery Faigenbaum, Gary Hall, Susi Kriemler, and Michel Léglise. 2015. "International Olympic Committee consensus statement on youth athletic development." Br J Sports Med 49 (13):843-851.

Hagger, Martin S, and Nikos LD Chatzisarantis. 2007. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in exercise and sport: Human Kinetics.

Wulf, Gabriele, and Rebecca Lewthwaite. 2016. "Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning." Psychonomic bulletin & review 23 (5):1382-1414.