USFA vs USFCA membership for American Fencing Coaches

[Jason]

You know, it might be worth Someone (not going to opine as to whom) actually polling coaches and membership to see which organization they think sets that standard. I get the feeling there might be some surprises there on all sides.

It would be more than surprising if any organization in the US could be shown to set the standard for coaching competence.

[Allen Evans]

There's a standard?

[Maximus]

There's a standard?

Isn't it about time we had some standards?

[MdA]

Isn't it about time we had some standards?

There are standards. Like them or not.

http://usfca.org/Default.aspx?tabid=83

[VorpalCat]

There are standards. Like them or not.

http://usfca.org/Default.aspx?tabid=83

I'll stay away from 'levels' versus 'standards' since that's another sidetrack on a topic that's already rife with them. But even so, those are YOUR standards (where 'you' = 'USFCA'). That doesn't make them the INDUSTRY standards (as it were). You can pimp and promote and tout and yell about the USFCA standards all you want but that doesn't mean all, most, some, or any coaches will agree. Yes, I know several coaches DO agree. And I know getting ALL to agree is impossible. That being said, it's now ridiculous analogy time:

I set up a new fencer certification program in my club and decide that all fencers in my Division should follow it because it's just so darn spiffy. That doesn't mean that fellow-Divisioner C'ville's going to agree with certification point #4, the ability to burp 'A Modest Proposal' during an epee bout (fueled by drinking a bottle of grape soda before hand, no other kind acceptable). I can be as positive and perky and cheerful and assertive and pushy and 'like it or not' as I want to be about #4 but that doesn't mean it really is a good thing.

If I want the Division to adopt my standards, I have to convince them that said standards are the best for the Division's continued growth and strength. That won't happen by my repeating my belief in their excellence over and over again. It won't happen by my getting myself elected as the Division President and forcibly emplacing my standards on all Division clubs. The only way for it to happen and for it to happen successfully (i.e. in a lasting, useful and used manner) is for the standards to be pruned, honed, cussed, and discussed into a set that is generally felt to not only be a generally okay idea but a set that will actively benefit the majority in the Division. (By the way, the result regarding #4 would be, of course, the replacement of 'grape soda' with 'the soda of the fencer's choice.')

In other words, it seems to me like the standards are being set over here and over there and some over in that direction. Rather, successful standards would be developed from the overall body of coaches -- the industry. No, not everyone will agree or even want to participate. And yes, there will be hurt feelings and all that. But for a core set of standards to be accepted, they need to come from the inside out, not be pushed from the outside in. Yes, USFCA covers part of the inside. But it's not representative of the whole. (And before you say it, no, neither is Coaches College.)

Basically, USFCA is marketing a product: education. And like any product, the market has to want it, has to believe life will be better with it than without it, in order to be willing to buy it. Billy Mays and the Sham Wow guy yell(ed) a lot about the products but they also demonstrate the supposed benefits of their use. And it's the demonstration that does the selling, not the yelling. If the demonstration isn't selling, then perhaps the demonstration -- or even *gasp* the product itself -- needs to be reworked. Which applies in USFCA's case? Either? Both? Neither? That's not for me to decide since I'm not the one doing any selling. But it's probably something that someone should look at if 'sales' aren't at the desired mark.

[pjsise1]

The certification levels and (for the most part) the standards used to earn them that are used by the USFCA were not invented by the USFCA. Although the USFCA is largely autonomous, it follows recommendations by the AAI, as do all of the other national professional governing bodies of fencing coaching in other countries.

[keith]

There are standards. Like them or not.

http://usfca.org/Default.aspx?tabid=83

Standards, would, to my mind, include some commitment to ongoing development. Or at the very least, skills maintenance.

AIUI you could have passed any of these standards, spent the last 10 years marrooned on a ice flow with no company but polar bears and, on your escape reclaim your former standing?

[pjsise1]

Keith, I'm not sure if you recognize this or not, but the USFCA does encourage continued education, in fact, those attending the San Diego conference recieved continuing education credits for it. There are even requirements for continuing education for membership in the USFCA Guild Academies, for those who wish to demonstrate that they are in fact remaining current.

That being said, very few forms of academic certification expire. College degrees, for instance, are for life, whether you make use of them or not. There's little reason for coaching certifications of this sort to expire...after all, you do earn them.

["Fence like a Cat"]

I believe all people who fence, support fencing, coach/instruct should be members of the USFA (Many falling in these categories don't belong to the USFA and thus the membership totals don't reflect that true breadth of the sport.). Membership is important to financially support the organization's growth and development as well as promoting the demographic. Maintaining affiliation affirms you support the sport and ensures you receive communications and otherwise stay abreast of any information related to the sport. Membership provides certain entitlements but also responsibilities, and in my opinion one of the most important elements is American Fencing Magazine. This publication though not perfect has the potential to be much greater and is certainly affected by membership and participation by it's members which in turn affects the sport. The same could be said about The SwordMaster, effectively the professional journal of the USFCA.

Those who coach/instruct should be required to be members of the USFCA, the designated professional organization of fencing coaches/instructors in the US. This body should be the organization to set professional standards, promote development of the organization and it's membership for the betterment of the sport and profession regardless of whether the coach/instructor is paid or not. I don't understand the opinion stated that there are no professional standards, where clearly there are in regards to certification.

The resources, efforts and policies of the USFA related to or earmarked for coaching development, i.e. the Coaches College, code of conduct/ethics, etc. could be directed to and administered by the professional organization of coaches/instructors of fencing, the USFCA. If this requires some restructuring of either organization so be it.

As a club founder, executive director and coach I require all my coaching/instructor staff to belong to the USFA for sport affiliation purposes and the USFCA for professional organization affiliation purposes.

I could say more but these are some fundamental opinions that I have for whatever it's worth and for the sake of continuing an important discussion.

Marty Tetloff

[keith]

Keith, I'm not sure if you recognize this or not, but the USFCA does encourage continued education, in fact, those attending the San Diego conference recieved continuing education credits for it. There are even requirements for continuing education for membership in the USFCA Guild Academies, for those who wish to demonstrate that they are in fact remaining current.

I do recognise that there are opportunities for continued education, from the USFCA and otherwise, and that there are plenty of coaches who take advantage of them.

That being said, very few forms of academic certification expire. College degrees, for instance, are for life, whether you make use of them or not. There's little reason for coaching certifications of this sort to expire...after all, you do earn them.

Well the certificate may not expire, but why should the title 'qualified fencing coach' not expire? After all the certificate does, hopefully, directly relate to the skill that is sold to paying customers. On the other hand pretty much all college degrees are generally just about proving you are bright enough to survive and graduate. Once someone starts paying you, all that certificate is good for is covering a hole in the wall .

Now I am not arguing that it is necessarily a good idea, but coaching fencing strikes me as towards the end of the spectrum where ongoing education would be a requirement.

[hcm2009]

Interesting idea. But a good idea?

1. Who is responsible for sending out renewal reminders? And the overhead associated with tracking those members and their addresses?

2. Who is responsible for administering and reconciling the forwarding of fees to the USFCA?

3. Who is responsible for responding to membership inqueries? THe USFA or the USFCA?

4. In ten years time, who decides which organization eats the other?

I've had more than my share of complaints about the USFCA, but I don't think this is a wise path to move down if you wish to preserve USFCA independence. And I do think it's worth preserving.

Thanks for the post

[BenTheEMOP]

You know, it might be worth Someone (not going to opine as to whom) actually polling coaches and membership to see which organization they think sets that standard. I get the feeling there might be some surprises there on all sides.

It is the fencing students who are setting the standards right now. If they think somone is qualified and pay that person for fencing instruction, then they are setting the standard.

It may be a chicken and egg question, but these people will show up at tournaments and other clubs so they can't be ignored.

Part of the question may involve educating the consumer.