ON THE RIGHT TRACK?

ALIGNING CANADIAN SPEED SKATING COACH EDUCATION TO THE LONG TERM ATHLETE DEVELOPMENT MODEL
By Mathew Dowling Dr Ian Reade

Presentation Breakdown
Part # 1: A broader case for more organizationalpolicy research into CS4L and LTAD

Part # 2: Outline of our work with Speed Skating

Canada + overview of our findings:
a)Coaches demographics b)LTAD specific questions c)Other findings with LTAD implications

Part # 3: So what does this mean for LTAD?

Conclusions and future directions

Part #1
A broader case for more organizational-policy research into CS4L and LTAD
we need to focus more on the on the business of sporteveryone is responsible for the profits and losses Norris (CS4L Summit, 2012)

1) 10-Year Rule

The CS4L/LTAD Ten Commandments

2) FUNdamentals 3) Specialization 4) Developmental Age 5) Trainability 6) Physical, Mental, Cognitive and Emotional Development 7) Periodization 8) Competition Planning 9) System Alignment and Integration 10) Continuous Improvement

1) 10-Year Rule

The CS4L/LTAD Ten Commandments

2) FUNdamentals 3) Specialization 4) Developmental Age 5) Trainability 6) Physical, Mental, Cognitive and Emotional Development 7) Periodization 8) Competition Planning

9) System Alignment and Integration 10) Continuous Improvement

Empirical Research to Date

CS4L/LTAD is under researched. This is one of the reasons why it remains controversial. More clearly can be done to empirically test both the principles and the principles in practice.

More evaluation, monitoring, target setting and so on...

The Research Gaps

Primarily physiological (e.g. Bayli,1990; 2004 Bayli &
Hamilton, 2003; Bayli & Way, 2009; Ford et al, 2011).

Non-empirical (e.g. Bayli & Hamilton, 2004; Grange & Gordon,

2004; Stafford, 2005; Norris, 2010).

Other Empirical studies (e.g. Black & Holt, 2009; Frankish,

2011; Lang & Light, 2010).

The Research Gaps

CS4L Resource Paper, 2005

The Research Gaps

CS4L Resource Paper, 2005

The [physiology] thinking that got [CS4L/LTAD] here, is NOT going to get [CS4l/LTAD] there !!
Way (CS4L Summit, 2012)

Implementation Research
What are the ORGANIZATIONAL barriers to successful implementation of CS4L?

Canadian Sport Policy Renewal (SIRC, 2011)

Implementation Research
Overall do you agree or disagree that PSOs have aligned policies with the appropriate NSO LTAD model?

Organization implementation is clearly not so straight forward... CSP Evaluation (Sutcliffe, 2010)

Athlete-Centred Approach

Athlete

The Bigger Picture

Macro-environment

Federal Policy SC/OTP NSO T/PSO Club

Macro-environment

Coach
Macro-environment

Athlete

Macro-environment

Macro-environment

Macro-environment

One Underlying Assumption...

Athletes, Coaches, Administrators, Officials operate individually. They do NOT; they are all apart of an organization. That organization is a part of a larger policy system. How can we systematically develop LTAD/CS4L without talking about the organizational, managerial, policy environment of which they operate?

CS4L-LTAD Org Policy Research

LTAD/CS4L now integral part of federal policy making. CS4L/LTAD is now a cog in the machineso how do we turn the right levers?

Regardless of whether the principles are correct, it is organizations that still have to implement it.
If change comes through the organizational pathway, then policy/org research will help enable change, or at minimum, identify barriers to change. E.g. SPLISS (DeBosscher, 2006; 2010; 2011).

Org-Policy Research Example: SPLISS

Part #2
An outline of our work with Speed Skating Canada & presentation of our findings:
a) Coaches demographics

b) LTAD specific questions

c) Other findings with LTAD implications

Our Study: Introduction

Sport organizations should be collecting data in order to make well informed, evidence-based decisions.
In late 2010, Speed Skating Canada (SSC) and the University of Alberta teamed up to better understand the status of Speed Skating Coaches within Canada. Little was known about the contemporary environment that speed skating coaches operate.

Our Study: Introduction

Practical Purpose: To help the SSC improve and enhance the national co-ordination and organizational delivery of speed skating coaching and coach education by improving SSCs understanding of speed skating coaches job expectations, satisfaction and working environment. NOT LTAD/CS4L specific; however the two surveys both contained LTAD specific questions as well as having implications for CS4L/LTAD implementation.

Our Study: Methods

Two surveys: Status of the Coach (30 items) Status of the Organization (44 items) Topic areas addressed within the survey include the following:
1) Coach and Organizational Demographics 2) Coach Education 3) Long Term Athlete & Participant Development (LTPAD) 4) Success Measurement 5) Organizational and Coach Expectations 6) Coaches Working Environments

Our Study: The Surveys

Adapted from a high performance coach survey Status of the Coach Employer i.e. terminology, question suitability, length, predominantly volunteer, more open responses and so on. Questions were a combination of both dichotomous and nominal response formatted questions. Typically multiple row matrices, formatted using a 7 point Likert scale design.
Iterative Survey Drafting; a) U of A SSC, b) between researchers, c) practical vs. theoretical interests. Developed using online software tool Survey Monkey

Our Study: Sampling

Status of the Organization survey distributed using SSC organization (Clubs, T/PSOs, & NTCs) contact lists.
Status of the Coach survey was distributed using an open web link via SSCs website as the population was uncertain i.e. we simply were not sure how many speed skating coaches were currently active at the time. Both the Status of the Coach and Organization surveys were bilingual (French and English). Reminders where also send by the U of A research team and SSC to provincial branches to enhance the response rate.

Sampling: Survey Responses

English French Coaches Survey* Organization Survey** 128 54 68 20 Totals 199 74

* Coaches Survey Completion rate 143/199 (72% completion) ** Organization Survey Completion rate 44/74 (60% completion)

Sampling: Regional Distribution

Status of the Coach
Nova Scotia PEI Yukon 2% New0% 1% Brunswick 5%

Status of the Organization*

New-Brunswick Nova Scotia Yukon 0% 2% 2% Saskatchewan 0% PEI 0%

Saskatchewan 6%

Alberta 14%

Alberta 10% British Columbia 7%

Ontario 28%

British Columbia 17%

Ontario 25% Qubec 33% NWT 0% Nunavut 0% NFL + Lab 0% Manitoba 8% Qubec 33%

NWT 3% NFL & Labrador Nunavut 0% 1%

Manitoba 3%

*In addition to 8 responses from provincial organizations omitted for comparative reasons

a) Coaches Demographics
Salary/Honararia Range Cumulative Percent 2.2 60.2 87.3 92.8 95.0 98.3 100.0 Frequency Unknown Volunteer (No Salary) 1-4999 5000-14999 15000-29000 30000-49999 50000-80000 Total 4 105 49 10 4 6 3 181 Percent Valid Percent 2.2 2.2 58.0 58.0 27.1 27.1 5.5 5.5 2.2 2.2 3.3 3.3 1.7 1.7 100.0 100.0 Sex

Years Coaching

Female 81(45%)

Male 100(55%)

Age of Coaches

Range: 16-83 years old Mean= 1973 (39 years old) Mode = 1967 (33 years old)
Mean RangeMin RangeMax

French

English

1980 1941 1995

1970 1929 1996

Quebec Salary/Honoraria
$15,000 to $29,999 $5,000 to $14,999 $30,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $80,000

$1 to $ 4,999

No Salary

No Salary

$1 $4,999

a) Coaches Demographics
Education of Coaches PhD Degree in PE/Kin/Sport Studies 0% Master's Degree in Master's PE/Kin/Sport Degree in Studies another field 1% 15% Do Coaches Have... Don't Know 10 (5.6%) 0 (0%) Bachelor's Degree in another field 28% College or Certificate 22% PhD Degree in another field 3%

High School 21%

n= A formal written job description A contract A formal written coach evaluation A formal verbal coach evaluation A formal coaching mentor

Yes

No 126 (70%)

44 180 (24.4%)

26 152 178 (14.6%) (85.4%)

18 151 8 177 (10.2%) (85.3%) (4.5%) 30 138 10 178 (16.9%) (77.5%) (5.6%) 36 135 178 (20.2%) (75.8%) 7 (3.9%) Bachelor's Degree in PE/Kin/Sport Studies 10%

a) Coaches Demographics
Hours Worked/ Week
1-4 hours ON ice OFF ice Prep 92 (54%) 104 (74%) 122 (78%) 5-10 hours 59 (35%) 19 (14%) 19 (12%) 11-20 hours 15 (9%) 2 (1%) 4 (3%) 21-31 hours 1 (1%) 1 (1%) 1 (1%) 31+ hours 1 (1%) 1 (1%) 1 (1%) Don't Know 1 (1%) 14 (10%) 9 (6%)

Certification
35

Competition Attendance/ Year

33%

NCCP Level 0 1 2 3 4 5

# coaches 33 62 39 40 4 2 n= Mean Mode

Percentage Cumulative 18% 18% 34% 52% 21% 73% 22% 95% 4% 99% 1% 100% 181 1.6 1

30
25 20 15 10 6% 5 0 22% 19%

N=118

61% (between 1-5)

9%

11%

None

one-three four-five six-seven eight-nine

ten+

b) LTAD Specific Questions

In which of the following Long Term Participant and Athlete Development (LTPAD) stages do you primarily coach?* (Status of the Coach)
35.0 30.0 32.7% 26.5% 21.6%

25.0
20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 1.9%

81% of speed skating coaches within FUN, L to T & T to T stages !!!!

11.7%

1.9%

3.7%

Active

FUN

L to T

T to T

L to C

T to C L to W T to W A for L

*speed skating is a late-specialization sport (9 stages)

b) LTAD Specific Questions

No, you have no highly qualified coaches because you have no high level athletes

You have no high level athletes because you have no highly qualified coaches!

b) LTAD Specific Questions

What is your organizational need for coaches by LTPAD stages (Status of the Org)
N Active Start Fundamental Learning to Train Training to Train Learning to Compete Training to Compete Mean Std. Deviation

61 61 61 61 59 56

3.5 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.3 3.4

1.5 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.5

Learning to Win
Training to Win Active for Life

52
51 49

2.7
2.6 3.3

1.5
1.5 1.4

b) LTAD Specific Questions

How satisfied are you with the current QUALITY of/ACCESS to coach education in the following LTPAD stages? (Status of the Coach)
6.0 Mean Organization Satisfaction

ACCESS Series1
5.0
4.0 3.0 Series2 QUALITY

2.0
1.0 0.0 1. Active 2. FUN 3. L to T 4. T to T 5. L to C 6. T to C LTPAD Stage 7. L to W 8. T to W 9. A for L

c) Other findings with LTAD implications

Please rate the importance of the following measures of coaching success (7 point Likert)
Skater Satisfaction Willingness to Learn Relationships within the organization Long Term Skater Performance/Results Mentoring other coaches Parent Satisfaction Sport Organizations growth and development Contribution to the Sport Community Short Term Skater Performance/Results Performance of Administrative Tasks Skater Recruitment Management of Budget Fundraising/Revenue generation

n=
151 151 151 151 151 151 151 151 151 151 151 151 151

MEAN
6.7 6.4 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.3 5.3 5.1 4.7 4.3 4.2 3.8 3.5

SD
0.5 0.8 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.7 1.7 2.3 2.3

*accurate to 1.d.p

Please rate the importance of each of these tasks for coaches:

Supervising technical practice sessions Coaching skaters at competitions Upgrading coaching knowledge (workshops) Updating coaching knowledge (literature) Teaching developmental skaters Attending meetings of your organization Teaching recreational skaters Mentoring other coaches Creating physical conditioning programs Promoting your sport organization Evaluating the physical condition of athletes Supervising physical conditioning programs Reviewing video and competition preparation Preparing skaters for life after their career Registering athletes for competitions Media/Public relations Purchasing equipment Writing reports Organizing training workshops Organizing competitions Recruiting skaters Recruiting/Supervising support staff/personnel Arranging for facilities Planning budgets/financial management Teaching classes at college/university Fundraising / revenue generation Organization Survey 4.1 4.1 4 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.1 3 3 2.9 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.3 2.2 2.1 Coach Survey 6.4 6.2 6 5.9 6 4.7 5.5 5.3 5.4 4.5 5.1 5.2 5.1 4.6 3.1 3.8 3 3.6 4.3 2.6 3 3.2 3 2.3 2.2 2.1

c) Other findings with LTAD implications

Do you agree that your organization is actively striving to create full-time coaching positions?
25 20 15 10 5 0 Strongly Disagree 2 3 4 5 6 Strongly Agree

c) Other findings with LTAD implications

Unease about the implementation of the LTPAD
SSC needs to take a more active role in coach engagement especially at the
grassroots level. In my opinion, the implementation of LTPAD was extremely frustrating and has tainted my view of how SSC implements change.

The provincial organization should be required to have a LTAD model in place

and have an implementation plan in place to receive any funding from the province. There should be a check that money being delivered is fulfilling the mandate.

Better attention to the early stages of the LTAD. Less worry and resources to

[competitions] and the politics of [competitions] where it pertains to children 12 and under.

Part # 3
So what does this mean for LTAD? The conclusions and future directions

What does this mean for LTAD?

Presented is empirical evidence/data for SSC to:

Focus its efforts on certain parts of its coach education program (e.g. access, specific stages, capacity).
To better understand its coaches to produce more tailored coach education programs

A number of other relevant findings for SSC not mentioned here.

What does this mean for LTAD?

Coaches are primarily prepared for, and expected to do, basic technical and physical training. Not necessarily what is required by LTAD. Organizations are not concerned with the creation of full-time coaching positions, yet full-time coaches are a consistent predictor of sporting success!! A lack of full-time coaches, and coach education, would predict problems in the long term athlete development of this sport. Mismatch between coach preparation and LTAD.

Conclusion
Athlete Centeredness is important, BUT we cannot ignore the context in which our athletes, coaches and officials operate. SPLISS model argues the need for financial and policy support, coach education, etc. Other than coach education, what other barriers to implementation can we find in other areas?

Research Limitations
Not an LTAD specific study.
Cautious generalizations. Not necessarily conclusive of the broader experiences of LTAD/Coach Education. Those who completed the organization survey may themselves be coaches.

Future Avenues for LTAD...!!!

Do coaches/ administrators value CS4L/LTAD? Do coaches/administrators understand the principles of CS4L/LTAD correctly? How (if at all) are administrators translating LTAD to their coaches/athletes? How is CS4L/LTAD influencing policy/decision making within organizations? How is CS4L/LTAD influencing other programs: talent ID/development? Selection? Scientific research? Facility development? Organizational structure? Participation, and so on...

The Future for this Research!!!

Final Reports to Speed Skating within the next couple of months
Further survey refinement Sport Expansion- do we find the same coaching and organizational concerns in different sports? Open to suggestions on how we might conduct similar research with your organization !!

The Future Research (PhD):

Why has LTAD become such a prominent development model within Canada and the UK? An examination of the emergence and implementation of LTAD/CS4L as a social movement and significant policy agenda. a) The reframing of LTAD from a high performance model towards a broader CS4L social movement.
b) Examination of the current implementation of the LTAD within NSOs/PSOs/Clubs within Canada. c) Examination of the policy transfer from Canada to the UK.

Questions?
msdowlin@ualberta.ca
+1 (780) 266 2219