Referee exam vs Coach exam

[Hauptman]

Master candidates would pay tuition...something nominal per course. But funds could be generated from club classes taught by the candidates and supervised by the director. We did this at Palo Alto College in San Antonio...we also had a local sports foundation which provided scholarships for disadvantaged kids to get lessons...there are a variety of funding sources for communities interested in developing fencing.

Unfortunately, we lost our college administration support (new president) and also sports foundation funding dried up when grants from USOC ran out.

In the SJSU program the students were required to register and pay regular tuition like any other students based on the number of units they were taking. So the program was self-sustaining in that regard.

[Hauptman]

Yes. Gog - Ler. Gog as in Blog.

I've always heard it pronounced G-aw-gler.

[Hauptman]

Well, It seems that Mr E recognizes that the rise in US fencing is driven more by the exodus of talented coaches from overseas, particularly the former Soviet Block, rather than a conspiracy amongst NCAA schools to keep fencing down.

What we are seeing is market economics. The US is a lucrative market for foreign coaches of already established systems. While it does not drive a "National Program" in any coordinated sense, it does provide the US with a ready source of well trained fencing coaches.

Against that background, how successful would a newly instituted National Coaching program be?

I agree, although again, there wasn't a conspiracy per se. NCAA programs by nature can only accomodate a limited number of fencers. With those programs steadliy disappearing fencing has moved almost completely into the club setting, and clubs rely on large numbers and marketing to generate revenue.

It is the economic incentive of private clubs that is making the US the lucrative market as you state.

While it is not intuitive, training more instructors/masters of any level will help grow fencing. These newly trained coaches have every psychological motivation to go out and use the training in which they've invested so much, even if that was not their specific goal when starting.

By necessity, the vast majority of students in the SJSU Masters program are local; most with minimal fencing experience but with a strong interest in the sport. Nonetheless they are out there creating clubs, gathering students, and helping to grow the sport. Would they turn out better fencers if they were top-level fencers themselves? More than likely, but they contribute regardless. And no doubt a few will eventually (or already have) become top-quality coaches.

Personally I would rather see an "E" rated fencer get some formalized training to teach rather than the many coaches - learning as they go - that we see posting on these forums. At least you would know what kind of training they are providing.

[jBirch]

Seems to me that the crux of the problem resolves around 3 major issues:

1) No central school to create, discuss and disseminate fencing knowledge.
2) The resources are scattered all over the country, ad hoc, and are not easy to find.
3) Coaching is a subjective discipline. Certification is relatively meaningless for both master AND student.

A central school is a good idea, but feeds on money, which, obviously, is hard to come by. A better model would be one where the central body is responsible for disseminating knowledge to its members. A steady stream of sports medicine, nutrition and psych research papers plus the thesis examination papers of various masters would be a good place to start. Shouldn't cost much either. Think of it like a professional journal or a scientific journal.

The dissemination medium would, of course, be the internet. Including exams and continuing education. If you make a component of the Maitre examination the creation of a fencing thesis and (possibly) the creation of an instructional video, presto bango: you've got original material to disseminate.

Third, to make it valuable, there has to be some sort of forced scarcity. For example, only USFCA coaches can act as coaches at NACs (Yes, this will piss a lot of people off...until they get USFCA memberships) or can call themselves fencing masters (much like the word doctor and engineer are protected).

Finally, I would note that a "coach" is a role, not a job description or a profession. Whomever is fullfilling the coach role for a given student is, de facto, their coach. It is, in essense, defined by the STUDENT, not by anyone else. No certification required.

James.

[MdA]

Personally I would rather see an "E" rated fencer get some formalized training to teach rather than the many coaches - learning as they go - that we see posting on these forums. At least you would know what kind of training they are providing.

I agree with you Hauptman

[MdA]

Finally, I would note that a "coach" is a role, not a job description or a profession. Whomever is fullfilling the coach role for a given student is, de facto, their coach. It is, in essense, defined by the STUDENT, not by anyone else. No certification required.

James.

For youth fencers, the parent gets to vote with their dollars. So if I am a parent, and I am defining my kid's coach, I would pick a certified coach...with a background check.

[darius]

Mr E, I'll quote you out of context and then throw out some random thoughts:

As I'm sure you know, the level of fencing in the US has improved DRAMATICALLY over the past twenty years. Competitors feed off of each other and drive one another to higher levels. Even at the non-elite levels the majority of the US is headed in a very good direction in this regard.

Now, what I see is that most of the Eastern Bloc folks play their cards pretty close to their vest. Some of them are, definitely, great champions, and some of them have produced the same. But not all. The Soviet Bloc collapse was a one-time event, and the circumstances that brought many of those folks over may not always be the same.

Even if those guys remain the top coaches, you still want as large of a feeder pool as possible.

What's important is that coaches have a basis for education. When we started, we just taught how we had been taught. At some point (for most), you reach a place where you want to understand more, and seek out more information. That information isn't particularly forthcoming in any organized fashion (with the notable exception of Coaches College, or ZC's book). As such, anybody who wants to learn to coach fencing has to learn things piecemeal.

The fencing book I'd most like to read; I'd love to see a national system (from a nation with a deep fencing tradition) broken down into the How and Why. It wouldn't have to be 100% accurate, but a book/paper detailing the thinking behind how the Russian, Italian, Hungarian, or French create fencers would provide an interesting start for somebody trying to find their own path as a coach.

A bunch of younger American coaches had a little shindig at Nationals; we didn't talk much in the way of methodologies, but talked about the nature of the American student. We also agreed in theory to try to do that at NACs throughout the season, sharing our playbooks, to some extent. This group is under no illusions that there are any great secrets in the sport...the real trick (assuming you're not giving WRONG information) is motivation. As such, I might not be able to use the exact same tools that ouiyt does and get the same results. That said, if we share ideas, we will be able to make each other stronger, through the marketplace of competition.

I'm fortunate to be working at a club where coach education is prized. I'd like to try to spread that knowledge beyond my club, but gotta get through my wedding first.

darius

[MdA]

I'm fortunate to be working at a club where coach education is prized. I'd like to try to spread that knowledge beyond my club, but gotta get through my wedding first.

darius

Enjoi life. Treasure your Bride. We will work together on this later. Family first...then fencing. wjk

[darius]

Family first...then fencing.

As you well know, it's good to have both in the same place!

darius

[jBirch]

For youth fencers, the parent gets to vote with their dollars. So if I am a parent, and I am defining my kid's coach, I would pick a certified coach...with a background check.

The market would disagree with you.

James.

[MdA]

The market would disagree with you.

James.

The market is so wrong!

[HDG]

The market is so wrong!

We'll have none of that Bolshevik talk here.

[Durando]

The fencing book I'd most like to read; I'd love to see a national system (from a nation with a deep fencing tradition) broken down into the How and Why. It wouldn't have to be 100% accurate, but a book/paper detailing the thinking behind how the Russian, Italian, Hungarian, or French create fencers would provide an interesting start for somebody trying to find their own path as a coach.

These books tend to remain ideals. A whole national system broken down? Good luck. But this book is very interesting for what it reveals about how fencing is taught in France. There's plenty I'm surprised by and resistant to but it's never uninteresting. Perhaps some other Francophone can suggest a better title...

[IvorDarcy]

I think that certification of coaches is an excellent idea. However, I coach at a very small club, on a voluntary basis, and due to work commitments and a tight budget there is no way I can afford to travel out of state to attend seminars and workshops, especially for a hobby. I have fenced on and off for 30 years and believe I am quite capable of getting students to a point of having never fenced, to a point where they have a good grounding on the En Guard position, footwork and basic bladework (parries,disengages, beats, coupes etc..) without having a certificate to say I can do so. Yes, I would like to be certified but cannot afford to travel to where I would need to to do so, for a certificate to say I am capable of doing something I believe I can already do!
I am a current member of USFCA and would love to go to their seminars/workshops simply to better educate myself in any rule changes/new techniques but so far there have not been any that would not require me to travel out of state. It is possible that I might get the time off and have sufficient funds to attend the USFA coaching college in Colorado next year and will do so if I can. I am sure there must be many other coaches who have a similar predicament. If a law suddenly passed stating that fencing coaches had to be certified then I am willing to bet that a huge amount of small clubs would need to close and I dare say a few large ones too. There is more to coaching than just knowing how to teach the techniques. I make my classes fun and informal. I have never had a student or parent complain about my abilities to coach and have actually had compliments from parents after their kids told them how much fun they had fencing.
I still think certification is an excellent idea, I just don't see how it is feasible for volunteer coaches/small clubs/clubs in isolated areas.
Sorry about some of the grammar, it is 4.30 am and I am a little tired.

[MdA]

I still think certification is an excellent idea, I just don't see how it is feasible for volunteer coaches/small clubs/clubs in isolated areas.
Sorry about some of the grammar, it is 4.30 am and I am a little tired.

I don't think we will ever see licensing of coaches in every state. The point here is to encourage as many coaches to seek education and training...and then obtain certification to document that training.

It sounds like you have taken the first steps...you support an association of your peers and you are seeking training to upgrade your skills. Where do you live? Send me a PM. The VP in your region should be hosting a regional clinic. I will call him.

[tbryan]

I suggest we go with Gillet and Gaugler programs as models.
1. National School will need a full-time director.
2. $1.5M endowment....

Wow, this discussion really ranges all over the place.

If you actually want to get something done, MdA, you're going to have to help focus the discussion in these threads. There have been multiple threads, and the discussion in each thread has really wandered (as it normally does).

At this point, I can't tell whether you're still just brainstorming or not.

I think that the discussion could benefit from a brainstorming phase. In that phase, you just get a lot of ideas out in the open, no matter how crazy or impractical. Everyone should be encouraged to participate in brainstorming. Any idea or input is valuable.

At some point, someone needs to catalog the ideas generated in brainstorming, and then everyone can discuss these ideas in more depth. Some of them will be incredibly impractical, especially at this point in time. (I would include a college-based fencing degree with a multi-million dollar endowment in the "impractical at this point in time" bucket.) That discussion hopefully points you to what coaches want and what is possible and useful in the short term.

Note that even the impractical ideas may provide some useful inspiration or guidelines. For example, it sounds like IvorDarcy would love some training to become a better coach if only the USFCA would send a coach to his club for free. OK, so that's not going to happen. But if the USFCA is involved in developing a standard coaching training program in a specific methodology for teaching fencing, perhaps it could also publish a list of qualified instructors who are willing to travel to give the 10 day moniteur training class somewhere else. It's cheaper for 10 coaches to band together and fly one trainer to their area than it is for those 10 coaches to travel to a remote location to receive training.

At some point, the discussions need to move off of fencing.net, or they need to remain on fencing.net but ignore the attempts from those of us who don't know anything about coaching at pulling the thread off topic. That is, if you're trying to get anything real accomplished, you will need coaches who really know what they're talking about and who have agreed to work together to produce something concrete, like a written curriculum outline. One thing that the USFCA may be able to provide is a little structure so that it's not just a bunch of random coaches having a chat. That's a great place to start, but if it never moves beyond that, I don't think that you'll ever produce anything concrete.

Personally, I'd like to see the discussion get back to the type of training program that Jason mentioned. I think that his idea sounds challenging but possible for the USFCA to accomplish. While a sound draft could maybe be done by a small group in a day or two, it would probably take at least a year to figure out the details (e.g., who may give this coaches training class? how does the curriculum get updated?), get the program approved by the appropriate USFCA committees, etc. Even after that, I'm sure that it would still take a few years to iron out some of the kinks through the first few attempts to give the class.

I'd love to see the USFCA push forward with something concrete like that and maybe have a moniteur training program that they could actually start offering next year.

[jBirch]

The market is so wrong!

LOL!

See P.T. Barnum...

But I hope I've made my point. As Allen alluded to earlier, what YOU may do as a highly educated consumer searching for a quality product is different from what a relatively clueless consumer interested in the value-oriented market position might decide.

Unless you want to put a real barrier in place that will distort the bottom end of the market, you're going to have to figure out how to deal with horribly incompetent fencing instructors. Ignoring them or shaming them isn't going to make them go away, unfortunately.

James.

[MdA]

But I hope I've made my point. As Allen alluded to earlier, what YOU may do as a highly educated consumer searching for a quality product is different from what a relatively clueless consumer interested in the value-oriented market position might decide.
James.

I think you have made my point. Consumers are getting smarter everyday.

[MdA]

Wow, this discussion really ranges all over the place.

If you actually want to get something done, MdA, you're going to have to help focus the discussion in these threads. There have been multiple threads, and the discussion in each thread has really wandered (as it normally does).

At this point, I can't tell whether you're still just brainstorming or not.

Thanks. I think we have been brainstorming and just raising awareness. The USFCA has its Annual General Meeting in two weeks at the Conference at Bucks County Fencing Academy in Lambertsville, NJ. 29 coaches registered.

http://askfred.net/Clinics/moreInfo.php?clinic_id=6009

We are electing new officers and activating the Professional Development Committee and appointing a chair. Any members interested in joining the committee can contact me by PM.

[IvorDarcy]

tbryan. Yes, I would love some training to become a better coach but I do not expect anything for free. However, it would be nice if USFCA had a larger membership or was more widespread so that perhaps there might be a clinic/workshop a little closer to me.
I think everyone would benefit from training to be a coach and a referee. I don't see any downside to learning. If more people join USFCA and get certified, those people can certify others, who can certify others until we eventually have a good spread of certified coaches across the country and people like myself might then have less distance to travel to receive assistance/training to be better coaches.