Value of the USFCA / Coaches College

[Mr Epee]

Certification vs. Competency

Do you feel that the USFCA requirements/curriculum provide a sufficient barrier to entry to the ranks of fencing instructor.

Should there be a stronger emphasis in any area?

Do the current requirements provide a false sense of security for students?

If knowledge of anatomy, kinetics, sports psychology, sports management, etc... are just as important to the success of a coach as fencing knowledge, then should these aspects receive an equal share of the required proficency elements?

[dekko]

Not sure why you chose one versus the other but one must show both to become USFCA certified.

I have asked many very experienced coaches around the country which would be better to give resources, time and effort to and was told USFCA almost everytime. USFCA does give certification that many parents and older students look to as being 'accredited', not as sure coaches college does that for a coach, it may but....

Seems to me there is no real difference and both seem to be very useful. Bottom line, you either know how to coach and teach fencing or you don't. If you do the results and students will be there. However, if you don't, eventually, the student's will leave and your situation will fail.

[keith]

Certification vs. Competency

Do you feel that the USFCA requirements/curriculum provide a sufficient barrier to entry to the ranks of fencing instructor.

compared to the effort required to get coaching instruction, No.

Should there be a stronger emphasis in any area?

Consistent access to 'coaches training', and appraisal of coaches by the awarding bodies, similar to the monitoring/classification of referees?

Do the current requirements provide a false sense of security for students? If knowledge of anatomy, kinetics, sports psychology, sports management, etc... are just as important to the success of a coach, then shouldn't these aspects receive an equal share of the required proficency elements?

Some of these are obviously invaluable to the coach who intends to set up and run their own salle. Ideally every salle should have at least one coach/master who his able to observe and manage other coaches/fencers for any activities that may increase the risk of injury in pupils, or step in to prevent the development of technical/tactical/psychological problems.

As to ability, never entirely trust a coaches own opinion of their merits, or at least take it with a wagon load of salt. What a coach does for your fencing is far more important than what they did for Joe Bloggs.


....something for everyone to disagree with in there I think.

[Mr Epee]

Dekko,

I'm sorry, I didn't mean that Certification and Competency are mutually exclusive.

I've seen coaches who were Certified and Competent

I've seen coaches who were Certified and Incompetent

I've seen coaches who were Uncertified and Competent

I've seen coaches who were Uncertified and Incompetent

[oiuyt]

Certification vs. Competency

Do you feel that the USFCA requirements/curriculum provide a sufficient barrier to entry to the ranks of fencing instructor.

Should there be a stronger emphasis in any area?

Do the current requirements provide a false sense of security for students?

If knowledge of anatomy, kinetics, sports psychology, sports management, etc... are just as important to the success of a coach as fencing knowledge, then should these aspects receive an equal share of the required proficency elements?

Why include Coaches College in the thread title and then not in either the poll OR the header post?

The USFCA provides no barrier to entry. How would they (other than lobbying for legislative protectionism or something similar)?

For the record, I have attended 2 sessions each of the past 3 summers that Coaches College has been run (01, 02, 03). I plan to attend 2 sessions this coming summer and subsequent summers beyond that. I was a member of the USFCA for 1 year but did not test for any of their certifications. At some point I intend to rejoin and work through their certification process, possibly starting in the next year or two.

I very much like the Coaches College experience. I think the system and manner of teaching there, as well as the material, is valuable. The tiering of the levels seems to work well.

I think that USFCA certifications have value as a marketing device. I think that, run differently, the USFCA could also have significant value, but that with a couple of exceptions this is not currently the case. If you live near the very active centers in Palo Alto or Oklahoma City it's easy to get high quality clinics. A few other parts of the country have random, rare clinics. In the year I was in the USFCA my region (Northeast) held 0 clinics. Not much training going on there. Training and education is where the value comes in. Without that you just have the certifications.

That said, I have seen what I view as positive signs for the direction the USFCA is taking. Hopefully training will gain a larger role in the future.

This topic has been previously discussed (for reference, not to shut down this thread, this topic comes up infrequently enough that new threads are completely appropriate).

Former threads:
http://www.fencing101.com/vb/showthr...&threadid=6290
http://www.fencing101.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13594
http://www.fencing101.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10309

-B :)

[fence1848]

I don't have direct experience with USFCA's certification, but I do not fully trust ANY certification program that is not accompanied by a training program. I have much more respect for the referee's certification because testing must be accompanied by a seminar. Even if the USFCA certification test is rigorous, there is only so much that an examiner can find out about what a candidate knows unless they try to teach him/her what they need to know.

[oiuyt]

I don't have direct experience with USFCA's certification, but I do not fully trust ANY certification program that is not accompanied by a training program. I have much more respect for the referee's certification because testing must be accompanied by a seminar. Even if the USFCA certification test is rigorous, there is only so much that an examiner can find out about what a candidate knows unless they try to teach him/her what they need to know.

The respect that I have for the referee certification comes not so much from the official clinics, but rather from the less official training that one gets working up the ranks, and from the extended period of evaluation that is required to earn higher classifications.

The clinics are great. Most of the training of referees in this country comes from the feedback and comments from FOC members and other advanced referees (and the glares and complaints of fencers and coaches :) ). Mid-level referees with promise get pushed. They get feedback about what they need to work on. They get advice and support. This is the real training for the referees. The clinic is merely a starting point to get everyone pointed in the right direction when first starting out.

-B :)

[Mr Epee]

Why include Coaches College in the thread title and then not in either the poll OR the header post?

Because when I realized the restrictions of polling options, it was already too late to change the thread title.

The USFCA provides no barrier to entry. How would they (other than lobbying for legislative protectionism or something similar)?

Good point, and True!

But the USFCA does issue the most widely recognizable certifications for coaches. To most advanced fencers the title of Fencing Master means very little, because success is its own measure. But, to the general population this is a pretty big deal, and lends a certain amount of instant credibility. So in this sense, the certification provides credibility, and that credibility creates an initial competetive advantage, because it may be a factor in helping fencers decide to invest their time with an instructor. The ability to create, in the student, a willingness to invest their time is very important.

With certification comes a certain amount of initial trust. This is certainly at least competetive advantage.

[keith]

So is there anyone who is willing to offer, from experience, a comparison of Coaches College trained vs USFCA trained coaches.

Or a description of any of the differences in examination/assessment that might be helpful?

From what I can see the only difference is that for the week prior to the examination at Coaches College the students have worked with the examiners, but is the exam on a broader set of abilities than that for USFCA awards?

[fence1848]

The respect that I have for the referee certification comes not so much from the official clinics, but rather from the less official training that one gets working up the ranks, and from the extended period of evaluation that is required to earn higher classifications.

The clinics are great. Most of the training of referees in this country comes from the feedback and comments from FOC members and other advanced referees (and the glares and complaints of fencers and coaches ). Mid-level referees with promise get pushed. They get feedback about what they need to work on. They get advice and support. This is the real training for the referees. The clinic is merely a starting point to get everyone pointed in the right direction when first starting out.

-B

Couldn't agree more! What I was really getting at, however, is that the USFCA does not offer their members this type of support anywhere near the level that the FOC offers its members.

[Mr Epee]

Although, the duties/skills/knowledge required of a referee a are pretty standard, and lend themselves very easily to being taught in a standardized way.

The duties/skills/knowledge of a coach can be very different.

[keith]

The duties/skills/knowledge of a coach can be very different.

Many developing coaches are monitored for maintenance & development of their skills in the same way referees are; they attend training courses as they can and work through the levels USFA/USFCA etc. Although it does appear that the USFA is the only regular forum for coaches training, which is pretty dire - I haven't found anything formal in the northeast.

The people who fall between the cracks are those who pass a minimum level qualification and then make no further effort to develop their skills. It would perhaps be reasonable to put an expiration date on the lower levels - so you either keep climbing the ladder or show you are still competent at the point you have decided to stop.

[MikeHarm]

What they could do is make it so that if the coaches running the club passed the tests you could say that it was a USFA certified club or such and met the USFA's coaching standards, and have the USFA touting the benefits of meeting the standard.

They could also do something like make sure certification was always displayed in the USFA club listings, and encouraged to be also in the divisions and sections. To add value in addition to marking it as certified in the listing it should have a listing for foil, epee and sabre and put stars next to it, the higher number of stars meaning a higher level of certification passed by a coach there.

Possibly they could also nudge towards the idea of wanting the bigger vents run by certified clubs..

Those could all be done without anything done by legislature and work to improve coaching standards.

The USFCA provides no barrier to entry. How would they (other than lobbying for legislative protectionism or something similar)?

[grotto]

Certification vs. Competency

Do you feel that the USFCA requirements/curriculum provide a sufficient barrier to entry to the ranks of fencing instructor.

Barrier to entry, no I would guess that a great majority of fencing instructors (DFP included) have never been to the coaches college or would ever be required to.

Should there be a stronger emphasis in any area?

Yes, it can only help fencing in general if there is some sort of standard for coaches and what they teach.

Do the current requirements provide a false sense of security for students?

I would not think so. anyone coming out of the coaches college has at least minimal proficiency.

If knowledge of anatomy, kinetics, sports psychology, sports management, etc... are just as important to the success of a coach as fencing knowledge, then should these aspects receive an equal share of the required proficency elements?

Good question! I would say a good grounding in proper sport training is essential. but I would not say equal as much of can be rolled into the training technique lessons. I guess it should be a integral part of the "coaches" training.

[oiuyt]

Barrier to entry, no I would guess that a great majority of fencing instructors (DFP included) have never been to the coaches college or would ever be required to.

Coaches College is NOT run by the USFCA. The USFCA does not acknowledge the testing or certifications earned at Coaches College, which is run and administered by the USFA. The USFCA does, in places, include it among a list of ways to learn to coach better and to prepare for USFCA examinations.

-B :)

[grotto]

Coaches College is NOT run by the USFCA. The USFCA does not acknowledge the testing or certifications earned at Coaches College, which is run and administered by the USFA. The USFCA does, in places, include it among a list of ways to learn to coach better and to prepare for USFCA examinations.

-B

yes, I knew that, my head ran ran the two together this morning.... oops ahh well

[Mr Epee]

yes, I knew that, my head ran ran the two together this morning.... oops ahh well

And certainly not helped by my running them together in the subject heading.

Interesting results so far.

Not many votes, but it looks as though it's pretty lopsided.

[keith]

shame we don't know whether it is a distrust of all coaching qualifications or just a poor reflection on the USFCA certification process. I suspect the former, but yet another poorly designed poll adds more confusion than clarity.

[Mr Epee]

HOW DARE YOU

Shame on you for being critical of my online poll, in which I attempt to uncover the beliefs of fencers, who own computers, have the internet, frequent this site, have signed up for accounts with this site, have been online in the past 48 hrs, have an opinion on the subject, and care to take the poll. What a great sub-set for study.

Seriously though, My thoughts are that it is poor reflection on the USFCA certification process.

[keith]

glad to see you deal well with mindless criticism.

I had a look at the USFCA process, and it looks alot like the BAF exams I did a long while back - emphasis on technical correctness rather than more tricky concepts like tempo. Since testing a coach for an ability to teach tempo is far harder than making sure they can do all the blade action stuff I suppose.

Now there are a fair few decent coaches in the UK who went through the BAF system and I assume a few good USFCA system coaches as well - I am not actually sure its the process that's the problem, providing a coach completes it. Frankly I would be very surprised if the USFA examination was greatly superior to the USFCA ones - demonstrate, teach, improve, explain tactical use, add in a dash of tempo talk - there are only so many ways a practical fencing exam can be run.

It could be argued that the USFA coaches college and USFCA are now pointless since coaches with a specialist university education in fencing may now be imported from overseas - do we really need to keep these antiquated industries when it would be easier to outsource the work?