Getting to Grips with Game Sense Paul Reid 5th International TGfU Conference, Loughborough University, 2012 edgehill.ac.uk My journey…. edgehill.ac.uk Practitioner…. Coach Player/Performer Teacher and Academic RFU CE and Trainer edgehill.ac.uk My study 1. How has the concept of Game Sense evolved in RFU coach education since 2002? 2. How has PR’s knowledge and practice evolved as a coach educator/trainer? 3. How does the concept of Game Sense get constructed in formal and informal coach education settings? edgehill.ac.uk RQ 2: Methods 1. Field journal 2. On course observations 3. Informal one-to-one conversations edgehill.ac.uk RQ 2: Three stories/themes 1. Conflict of interests between practitioners (coaches and players) and NGB coaching staff with regards to buy-in of GS approach; Differences existed in the perceived expectations between coaches’ practice and players’ involvement and accountability of their own learning. 2. The challenge of remaining impartial in my various roles; Often there were conflicts within the author’s own practice and that which was expected or demanded within certain contexts, mainly linked to lack of understanding or buy-in to the GS model from others (players, peers, coaches). 3. Conflicting terminology and practice demonstrated by RFU staff; Common at all levels within the RFU coach education workforce (managers, coach educators and trainers) due to lack of initial clarity of GS/TGfU models and vision of what they wanted their version to be. edgehill.ac.uk 1. Conflict of interest…Needs of the coach and players edgehill.ac.uk edgehill.ac.uk 2. The challenge of remaining impartial in my various roles edgehill.ac.uk 3. Conflicting terminology and practice demonstrated by RFU staff edgehill.ac.uk edgehill.ac.uk Reflections from Level 2 courses “I think we are winning in terms of process but not winning in terms of coaches using games” (Level 2 tutor) “It’s just good coaching…I get them (players) to think and work it out for themselves…I don’t know if that’s Game Sense but I always coach this way” (Level 2 tutor) “Game Sense…asking questions, getting players involved, challenging players, making practice relevant to the outcome, problem solving.” (Level 2 tutor) edgehill.ac.uk Game Sense…get them going quickly, short and sweet explanations.” (Level 2 coach) “There is a lack of consistency from the tutor and between the tutors…I don’t know if I’m coming or going so I’m going to stick with what I know!” (Level 2 coach) “Starts at a particular point then develops into a full blown game scenario.” (Level 2 coach) “Everyone being involved” (Level 2 coach) edgehill.ac.uk “The game is conditioned so you get what you want out of the players .” (Level 2 coach) “Make it so the players are thinking for themselves…taking ownership.” (Level 2 coach) edgehill.ac.uk “The game has several technical components some of which require years of deliberate practice to master…This and previous coach education regimes has led to several generations of coaches who learnt the game through repetitive/closed practice methods. Getting these coaches to change their coaching style and methods is a laborious and difficult process.” (RFU Coaching Manager, 2012) edgehill.ac.uk “It may clash with the many academic descriptors of Game Sense, this though, is unimportant. Once you have that statement, you have the challenges of communicating that message and identifying/up-skilling coach educators with the skills needed to deliver this Game Sense message.” RFU Coaching Manager 2012 edgehill.ac.uk • This pedagogical model faces challenges from more than just deliverers and learners (Roberts, 2011). • Light, (2010), neglect of pedagogical consideration in formal coach education and development programmes. • Chesterfield et al. (2010), coaches’ experiences of CE programmes, their structure, content and assessment. • Purdy et al. (2008) multifaceted, micro-level contested negotiations inherent in CE programmes. edgehill.ac.uk What does this mean for my future development?