Steel on steel vs verbal or written advice

[MdA]

.... I'm happy that the USFCA is increasing their efforts to educate. The lack of quality coach eduation in the USA is, IMO, a big problem. It's difficult to set up a centralized academy or other institution in such a large country, so I think regional seminars and training sessions are definitely the way to go.

Just remember that not all education is formal training, and sometimes just advice given from one coach (or even fencer or ref) to another can sometimes be very valuable.

At the urging of other members of this forum...I have started this new thread. RITFencing has successfully deflected my attention to a coaching topic other than certification.

What do you think about formal coaches' training? Is it better to be face-to-face with a good coach...in your plastron and mask...or watching a good coach giving a a lesson...able to stop her/him and ask a question?

Or do you prefer written or verbal advice...or both?

[RITFencing]

At the urging of other members of this forum...I have started this new thread. RITFencing has successfully deflected my attention to a coaching topic other than certification.

What do you think about formal coaches' training? Is it better to be face-to-face with a good coach...in your plastron and mask...or watching a good coach giving a a lesson...able to stop her/him and ask a question?

Or do you prefer written or verbal advice...or both?

I think both, and more...

One of the most helpful things to date in my career has been Mike Pederson watching me give lessons and talking with me about it afterward, sometimes then giving them same lesson to the student, showing me ways to certain things better, things I'm doing well, things to watch for, things I shouldn't do and what the next step after that lesson might be.

Getting lessons has also been extremely helpful, especially when right after the lesson I am told how to turn around and give the same one.

If I were going to pick one thing, though...

I think coaches need to learn to have a plan to work towards and try to plan things out several lessons in advance, at least until they have a very good understanding of what they are doing. Most fencers don't learn to do something from just one lesson; it takes multiple lessons with time in between to experiment in bouts and other drills, as well as time to think and absorb the information presented before they really have a good command of the topic being taught.

I think it was Allen Evans on here who once told me that being a great coach isn't always about being able to give one good lesson, but a good set of lessons.

[Mr Epee]

I think it was Allen Evans on here who once told me that being a great coach isn't always about being able to give one good lesson, but a good set of lessons.

Ugh...

Improvisation is divine.

However, it takes a level of intelligence and skill that most people simply don't have, so it commonly marginalized.

This is a creative sport.

Planning is overrated.

[MdA]

I think both, and more...

One of the most helpful things to date in my career has been Mike Pederson watching me give lessons and talking with me about it afterward, sometimes then giving them same lesson to the student, showing me ways to certain things better, things I'm doing well, things to watch for, things I shouldn't do and what the next step after that lesson might be.

Getting lessons has also been extremely helpful, especially when right after the lesson I am told how to turn around and give the same one.

I think it was Allen Evans on here who once told me that being a great coach isn't always about being able to give one good lesson, but a good set of lessons.

When Mike is watching you give the lesson, is it one of your students? What you are describing here is more of an apprenticeship then a clinic or training course. Many FMs would agree that this is the best training environment for a young coach...unfortunately as you pointed out in one of your previous posts...we are spread out in the States....so we end up having these "cattle-calls" for coaches.

Planning is good...even more so with A-rated fencers. You can't just make stuff up!!!

[RITFencing]

When Mike is watching you give the lesson, is it one of your students? What you are describing here is more of an apprenticeship then a clinic or training course. Many FMs would agree that this is the best training environment for a young coach...unfortunately as you pointed out in one of your previous posts...we are spread out in the States....so we end up having these "cattle-calls" for coaches.

Planning is good...even more so with A-rated fencers. You can't just make stuff up!!!

Usually with my own, sometimes with his. I spent a bit over a year at GGFC and all of the coaches were extremely helpful to me. Just like learning to fence, prolonged exposure is better than one or two lessons here and there.

I think planning is generally crucial at all levels... or more accurately having a goal to work towards. If I want teach a specific concept to a fencer, it helps having a set of lessons to work through which are designed to focus around that concept. Writing down that plan is really very helpful, but there are some coaches who don't need to do it, and have a large enough repertoire and good enough abilities that they can just build lessons on the spot.

For the rest of us mortals, though, having a plan, written or otherwise, helps keep us focused on that goal, and will help the fencer very much.

[Epeemaster]

I can only say to alla who seeks more knowledge of fencing...
I have been to the week seminars given by British Academy of Fencing, I have never found a deeper source of knowledge to pour from. My highest respect to the coaches of BAF who give these courses.

[RITFencing]

Ugh...

Improvisation is divine.

However, it takes a level of intelligence and skill that most people simply don't have, so it commonly marginalized.

This is a creative sport.

Planning is overrated.

The ability to improvise well is indicative of a high level of skill... but thinking things out beforehand is generally beneficial as well, especially for those still developing those skills.

You don't have to have everything set in stone, but I think having some idea of what to do before you start the lesson, class or whatever is very helpful not only in improving the quality of that session but also in the whole set of classes/lessons you'll be doing over time.

[KD5MDK]

Probably about the same time as the British, going by the discussions on their forum.

[KD5MDK]

I was referring to the discussions on the British Forum. They seem to have the same divide between the coaches organization the BAF, British Fencing, and what looks like one or more local/regional "generic coaching" certifications, with minimal coordination or complementary work between them. In addition to a vast number of uncertified, untrained, unaffiliated coaches. It's just like the USFCA vs Coaches College, with an additional body in there as well.

[Jason]

When are American coaches going to wake up to the value of an accredited education, training and certification organization for fencing coaches?

You need to settle down, Wendell. You're undermining your own credibility.

[Allen Evans]

Ugh...

Improvisation is divine.

However, it takes a level of intelligence and skill that most people simply don't have, so it commonly marginalized.

This is a creative sport.

Planning is overrated.

I think my point at the time was that any coach can give one good lesson....when he or she is inspired. Giving a lot of good, solid lessons in sequence -- with a goal or unifying theme -- was the mark of a good coach.

I'm not a big fan of the "...if it's Tuesdays, we must be teaching parrys" approach. But nor am I a big fan of making the lesson up in the walk from the parking lot to the club....or giving the same lesson over and over again, waiting to be inspired to create the one lesson that's actually going to teach a student something.

I do think that knowing where a student should be going, and a rough idea of how to get there is important in order to keep some cohesion in the process. Otherwise you're being taught by your crazy aunt with a new "inspiration" every day. It may be a brilliant lesson, but is it good training?


Allen Evans

[DenverFencing]

Currently US Coaches are formally taught at Master/Apprentice situations or by coaches conferences. Both these process could have been around 500 years ago.

What, if USFCA or US Fencing, set up a group of mentors coaches with skype webcam connections to initiate paid web sessions. You ask them questions, show them your lessons, ask them for new actions, get answers on how to open a club, etc.

The understudy coaches could also pay to have their video taped work reviewed by the mentor coaches. This could be a profit center for professional coaches who could fill extra hours just talking about fencing.

I think it would be a win/win for both mentors and coaches.

I think fencing needs to look beyond what has worked in the past and incorporate new technologies in to teaching and expanding the sport. We need to grow this sport faster and get more people doing this sport.

[AdamH]

From the few coaching courses I've been on, any answer would be a variation on "it depends" . Much like the progression of a fencer, the skillset of a coach needs to be built up and the communication, in whatever manner it takes, needs to be appropriate for the level of the coach.

That may well mean standardising much of the work of the coach in the early stages so they can give good, solid and useful teaching/coaching to their newer students. A class environment with a number of coaches all learning the same ropes is possibly more beneficial at this stage than one-on-one time. This may help prevent potential drift by facilitating the reinforcement that each of the coach candidates are doing the right thing - often I've seen (been guilty) a newer coach stretching their little kingdom (with the best possible intentions) and skipping through various flights of fancy. Solid teaching skills, reference material, group lesson plans and activities, a method for delivery, a good, simple standard one-on-one lesson and as always, an emphasis on less talk more fence.

Once these kinds of basics are in play, (and these are breadwinning skills for most coaches) then the coaching-coaching is probably going to depend on the availability of the stronger coaches. If the aim is to coach in the similar manner to another coach, then take lesson, watch lesson, give lesson is probably going to be the best route. Time is often the deciding factor :/ Having a baseline (standard lesson, standard branches) to work from for deviation for individual fencers is again going to be useful. I've had the pleasure of watching and participating in the same group lesson presented variously over the years by one BAF prof and it just makes sense. The same applies for his standard one-on-one lesson; it's formulaic but time efficient and what goes in 'the middle bit' depends on what the fencer wants/is capable of and does not ever appear to be time wasted, whether it be choice-reaction exercises or... well, lots of choice-reaction exercises and lots of movement.

It should be that simple, I guess. Having fencing stories of derring-doing is great decoration, but the basics have got to be there so the fencers can learn early on it's simple stuff done well that wins fights.

[Allen Evans]

Shouldn't "formal coaching training" include written and verbal instruction? Why should coaching training be only limited to one form of communication at a time? Why treat educating coaches like it's alchemy? Why not treat educating coaches like what it is...education?

I gave a slightly advanced foil seminar for coaches in the area a few years ago. It was a mixture of demonstration, practical exercises, and questions and answer/discussion. I gave a written hand out of all of my notes to the coaches during the seminar.

In every educational process, it's a good idea to mix media/presentations for people who learn differently. Some read, some watch, some do, or a mixture of all three.

Allen Evans

[JEC]

I gave a slightly advanced foil seminar for coaches in the area a few years ago. It was a mixture of demonstration, practical exercises, and questions and answer/discussion. I gave a written hand out of all of my notes to the coaches during the seminar.

As a professional educator, I entirely agree. Med schools now have a potpourri of Professional Development Programs to improve teaching and learning. This is particularly important at the postgraduate level (ACGME programs), where education is almost an apprenticeship. The only thing that you missed, Allen, was measuring the education you provided. A quiz/test prior and after your seminar would have measured learning. It would also have been a tool to identify areas of need for future seminars.

[Allen Evans]

Actually, I did have a question/discussion segment at the end to measure feedback, and I got a few emails after the fact.

Somehow, making the coaches sit and take a multiple choice, short answer quiz after working for 6 hours didn't appeal to me. :-)

[JEC]

Ten questions at the beginning are enough, and that is before people are bored. They give you an idea, and particularly if they were about controversial issues that recently were settled. The problem with coaching in our sport is the lack of studies that have settled questions about fencing pedagogy.

[RITFencing]

Actually, I did have a question/discussion segment at the end to measure feedback, and I got a few emails after the fact.

Somehow, making the coaches sit and take a multiple choice, short answer quiz after working for 6 hours didn't appeal to me. :-)

You might have better luck if you have spaces in their handouts for them to fill out, to help them compare and contrast what they thought beforehand with what they thought afterwards, anything interesting they learned, or what they thought the most helpful things are.

[MdA]

.....
I do think that knowing where a student should be going, and a rough idea of how to get there is important in order to keep some cohesion in the process. Otherwise you're being taught by your crazy aunt with a new "inspiration" every day. It may be a brilliant lesson, but is it good training?

Allen Evans

I must be from the “crazy aunt” school of fencing coaches. Allen you may need to copyright this term or I may steal it from you and write a book. Two of my coaches were like this…one of them was in the early stages of Alzheimer’s….which is probably the reason. He was the product of a very good European coaching system.

Some of his lessons were brilliant…others were dysfunctional and confusing. There was no cohesion…you never knew what you were going to get…thankfully I am a foil fencer…it was worse for the saber guys.

He never said a word to me about coaching. I was a fencer at the time so his focus was on preparing me to fence and not to coach. I started to put some of it together years later as I got into coaching.

There are still a lot of these “crazy aunts” out there in American fencing today from my observation….I might be one of them….but I fight the urge to introduce unrelated material at the wrong time in a training program. I must admit I have learned these skills mostly from other types of education and training (non-fencing) and applied them to my coaching.

I like the idea of using multi-media to teach coaches. I like the mentor suggestions. I like the video/skype online mentor idea….like the yellow book commercial where the kid calls up the online karate coach. But, I don’t think any of this will replace the chance to cross blades with a Master. Some of my best learning experiences were one-on-one with great champions turned coach. Most importantly this was not a competitive situation...this was a great Master teaching me how to teach... right in front of me with his blade...watching how his hand moved....his feet...the tone and energy in his voice.

As was stated...everyone learns differently...this worked best for me...and inspired me!

[AaronK]

There is something to be said for each method of instruction (on coaching).
The most valuable coaching education I had was from practical experience being observed from a mentor (receiving feedback and having discussions).

However, some of the most valuable coaching INFORMATION I received didn't come from a face-to-face, it was from observation of a video of Robert Pangrazi a kinesiology professor at ASU working with elementary school children. Though I had discussed the information in a formal education setting, the information would have had little to no impact without seeing the practical application.
Though I might have had the opportunity to ask questions in person- the fact that it was a video recording made it possible to observe his class (I lived in San Diego at the time) and I don't feel that it would have been necessary to observe in person.

I agree with the sentiments that a mixed media approach (my term) would better attack the needs of coaches education. Some material is probably best written down, some video taped, some done in person in a class format, or worked one-on-one with a mentor. The more resources we can bring in, and the more approaches we can use the better.

I had discussed with a student of mine (who is a coach) the possibility of watching each others lessons on youtube. Considering he lives in NY and I live in OR it would be cost prohibitive to do it any other way- though I think that the work we have done face-to-face can be more productive, at least one of us looses time away from our club coaching by meeting (face-to-face).