Fencing Master Diploma – Need one?

[MdA]

A "course"....based on what criteria from the USFCA? Conforming to whose standards?

Don't get me wrong, Micheal is as good as they come, and I'[m sorry I missed the course in NC a few weeks ago. But an ad hoc approach to an educational goal is an example of exactly the sort of problems the USFCA creates for itself.

This is exactly why I think the USFCA needs to sit down and create specific criteria for each level of diploma that they offer. Not just "give a good lesson" but define what a good lesson is, what is the substance of each level of lesson, and how the levels are distinguished.

AE

Your right...I agree. But, I was thinking that if this program is up and running before the criteria is established....there would be a record of the hours and who presented the material...

[Phrogger]

Perhaps, Marx has the right price and the right material. So is the Marx clinic repeatable? Phrogger would you go to one every 6 months?

I would probably attend a 2 or 3-day coaching clinic annually in this price range, providing it was at a driveable location. Since this clinic was somewhat diluted as it mixed both fencers and coaches (both foil and epee), I would hope for something that was more specific to coaching, even better, epee coaching.

In an ideal situation I would hope for either a progressive coaching program, building up in stages, or at least a clinic with different material. I wouldn't pay to rehash the same information again. Name also has some draw, I admit, I don't know if everyone could charge the same as MM.

I may or may not be the best representative due to my time and budget constraints. A USFCA member survey might give you better information.

On another note, both Marx and Nazlymov have detailed bios on Wikipedia. Nazlymov's is a bit sparse on his coaching education, however. It might be a nice project to get more coaches into Wikipedia if anyone has some spare time.

[Allen Evans]

Right now, I think that there is a market for quality coaching education on a small scale. The producers of these clinics or workshops do have to be mindful that a larger lead time is usually needed since coaches often have busy weekends as well as weekdays, and don't always have the option to move their schedule around (I missed the Marx clinics because I needed more than a few weeks to set up my schedule). With plenty of notice, and a detailed discussion of what would be covered, I think any clinic by a current and competant coach could attract 10-20 people.

If I can spend $200 - $300 and get the same information I would get from traveling to Co. Springs (at a cost of two to three times that), it becomes a good bargin.

AE

[darius]

One of the failures of Coaches College is that it seems to make no attempt to track how their graduates eventually go on to perform. There seems to be no metric towards measuring success or failure, other than the ability to fill beds at the start of each session. There also seems to be no attempt to identify successful coaching canidates encourage their future attendance, or guide their training.

Which is a little silly. The FOC has a "push list", people they want to encourage and make sure they get hired. Why not encourage that dialog, especially from the higher-level classes? Now, granted, it happens informally, but why not make it easier?

darius

[jjefferies]

Hello all, And a happy post thanksgiving to you. Hope everyone is recovering from turkey day and following it up with some good exercise.

But with a bit of time on my hands I've been thinking about the original thrust of this thread which if I may paraphrase is that credentialing provides a coach with some proof of ability, i.e. bragging rights, that can be proffered to organizations for any number of reasons or to individuals interested in studying the art. For instance my daughter, living in Rome Ga., recently wrote me asking for input about my grandsons taking up fencing. Naturally I searched the internet to find that there was one club in Rome GA and from their website was able to determine that two of their coaches had attended USFA's coaches college. One was certified to level 1 in foil and the other in epee. So although I don't believe I had met either one I had some confidence that they had been through a training process known to me. Yeah for credentials!! But the fact that there was only one club probably mattered more.

But after the initial contact, what interest does the coach's credentials hold for the student? And although this may be of trivial importance compared to MdA's concerns, my first coach, Harold Hayes, in addition to going through several credentialing organizations including the Masters program at San Jose State (sadly no longer being offered) went to the trouble to research his fencing pedigree. Following somewhat meager resources he was able trace back his and therefore my heritage between 3 and 5 generations of coaches. No, it probably doesn't buy much or anything in the marketplace but it does provide the student with a sense place in this game. And no I certainly cannot rattle the pedigree off without going and looking it up, but then I couldn't do any better in tracing back the institutional history of the three university degrees I have either.

My point (if indeed I have one without confusing the argument) is credentialing is useful and desirable but we need to look at the whole picture. Results are the most important metric for fencers or coaches. Credentialing is a secondary metric. Pedigrees (if I might use this term so loosely) are another less important sort of tic that may be of interest/curiosity to the student.