Terms of Reference for Coaches

[davebrads]

In another thread, Russ Smith linked to this document: BCU Terms of Reference for Coaches and Leaders
This document lists the discipline environments, and the requirements for boat based coaches. I am guessing that Advanced Water would mean sites where Premier division races are held? If so, this means that a coach would have to have raced in a Premier division race. To be honest, this seems a bit over the top. We are only talking about HPP/Grandtully/Tryweryn/Cardiff really, and I would expect that a suitably experienced division 1 paddler is more than capable of safely controlling a group on these sites. The only exception is Lee Valley, but boat-based coaching is probably impossible there anyway.

And again with Moderate White Water - since this is anything above Sheltered Water I would guess that it would mean sites such as Matlock/Sowerby Bridge/Fairnilee/Ironbridge and even Marple, and division 2 paddlers are more than capable of looking after themselves and others on these sites.

I am sure that the authors of this document were under some pressure from the professional recreational coaches not to set the bar too low, but in reality a competent division 2 paddler has much better boat skills than the average aspirant 5 star paddler.

[pas]

dave

although the div 2 paddlers may have better boat skills , way too many have little or no safety and hazard awareness skills (havnt read the document so dont know about that but have been on the receiving end of inept safety cover from some (not alll) prem/div 1 paddlers)

[boatmum]

Have to agree

It's not just good boat skills its about being able to assess the"abnormal" situation and then a) take appropriate action and b) have enough credibility and maturity so that the instructions are followed by others as appropriate

[davebrads]

I think we are all on the same wavelength here really. There is a significant number of div 1 and div 2 paddlers who have a lot of experience but through either lack of time or simply lack of ambition, don't train sufficiently to progress. These guys may have a tremendous amount of white water experience including rescue techniques, and may even have a lot to offer as coaches, but are excluded from coaching from their boat for no good reason apart from the fact they have never made premier. There are paddlers who have made prem at 12 with about 3 years paddling under their belt would you say they are able to

a) take appropriate action and b) have enough credibility and maturity so that the instructions are followed by others as appropriate

?

[boatmum]

Hi Dave,

No I think it highly unlikely Also pretty sure the average 12 year old wouldn't have enough strength to be able to carry out the physical side of rescues if called upon to do so

Sorry I am a bit confused by your point?

But maybe Im not being very articulate - sorry

I'm referring to the juniors in all the slalom competition divisions (the majority of paddlers in these divisions) mainly J16 and younger? I am sure there are very competent J18s and older and probably some very competent J16s - but statistically less likely??

Does that help?

[davebrads]

Yor point appears to be that the problem is the age of the paddler then, not the division they are in? Forgive me if I am wrong.

There are far less juniors in premier than the lower divisions, for obvious reasons, but that doesn't mean that everyone in the lower divisions are juniors. Looking at the ranking lists 37% of division 1 paddlers are seniors or masters, and 34% of division 2 paddlers, and conversely 36% of division 1 paddlers are J16 or younger, and 50% of division 2 paddlers.

The main issue is that by restricting coaches to premier paddlers we will be excluding some excellent and committed coaches. Racing in premier takes considerable time in training and preparation, and necesarily this will impact upon the amount of time the person can dedicate to coaching, whereas it is quite possible to retain one's status as a division 1 paddler without sacrificing too much time to one's personal training and fitness. The document requires that the coach show current competance at premier, i.e. they are continuing to race in premier races. I see a way out though - turn vet and you can continue to coach.

[boatmum]

I think we're saying the same thing

[Dee]

"current competency is evidenced from formal race results at an appropriate division competition, with at least one run completed with no 50-second penalties."

It doesn't say that the coach has to be ranked in prem, so I think that this clause could be met by completing a run as a judge or guest. Nothing is said about speed or how long ago the run was completed, just that the paddler has to get the gates!

[boatmum]

But under the Recommended ratios against Advanced water is says

Boat-based Coaches
need to show current
competency at Premier*)

What I struggle with is the terminology - I think I'm right in saying the UKCC level 2 and up qualifications are only available to 18 year old plus paddlers so the "junior" aspect doesn't really play a part in the debate and I'm assuming the same applies to the old scheme (but confess I don't know) so Dave's contention that there are very competent and able adult paddlers in Div 1 and 2 who could deliver coaching on advanced water is IMHO a correct one.

I'm assuming the reference to "competency" is not about racing competency (or is it?) but competency in coaching and Safety and Rescue?

If the competency does refer to personal racing competency, then I think there is an issue.

I know many, many coaches in many different sports who are amazingly superb coaches who get consistent top results from their trainees BUT would never attain themselves at that level - indeed some of the coaches I know have never "played" at a top level. So had they been judged as competent to coach based on their personal competition competency in a sport they would never have coached.

[jjayes]

It seems that by complicating what is required of coaches we may well be putting potential coaches off coaching slalom and that is the last thing the sport needs. It would be far better to put in place a effective and high standard of coach education that teaches potential coaches how to coach and how to run training sessions in a safe and constructive way. We really do need all the coaches we can get! Anybody who wants to help or coach in any way should be welcomed with open arms.

Anybody who thinks the sport in this country is a good state really does need to look at the numbers competing in the divisions and compare them to how high they have been in the past. They also need to look at the overall performance of our international teams, both senior and junior and also compare them to past results. There is a lot to do despite the C2 Olympic medals which certainly are a fantastic spring board to expand the sport, it certainly seems the C2 guys are really doing there bit in this respect. Strength in depth is a term banded about a lot, but we certainly do not have that at the moment and putting coaches off by overly regulating them and not providing a high standard of coach education will not help in any way.

[roodthomas]

Dave,

I'm not sure I'm quite following where you are going with this..?

As we all know, coaches have a lot of hoops to jump through... For WWSR I personally feel (having come from a recreational background before starting slalom) it is quite essential for any paddler to be going to do an appropriate level course.


Whilst a lot of slalom paddlers have a lot of river experience, a lot of them don't have a good enough river safety awareness.
Would a solution to this to be for a club to put on a site specific WWSR course for their club paddlers and then if they have coaching aspirations, to then work towards that.


The coaching system may be a bit complicated, but at the moment we just have to accept that as for volunteers its basically the same as having to pay for your car insurance.

With regard to person competency for coaching, I think you've got to take it on the level of award attempted. You can't simply go from being a prem paddler one day to being a L3 coach the next as the recommendation suggests.


But the recommendations do show a good progression or incremental progression across a range of abilities.


You mentioned the likes of HPP, Tully (div 2 sites as well as Prem) and Tryweryn (div 1). Realistically this only leaves Cardiff and LV; both of which aren't div one courses because of cost!

I would interpret that as meaning that only LV and Cardiff are venues that boat based coaches would have to show any sort of competency. Would you not get around that by bank based coaching!? You could always do a 4* leaders training course for competent paddlers to get around some of the other issues. Club funded??


If that all makes sense?

[roodthomas]

Just to add to what I wrote...

If you read further down the document, it does say in the small print on the "grades" page

Please note - Manmade artificial courses are normally under the jurisdiction of the facility
management. However, we advise that it can be appropriate to classify the man-made facilities of
Holme Pierrepont, Lee Valley (excluding the Olympic Channel), Teesside and Cardiff as Moderate
White Water when seeking guidance for appropriate qualifications to coach and/or lead.

Therefore implying that only the Olympic Channel would require a Prem level 'boat based' coach, and as Dave already suggested, you would be most likely bank based coaching slalom.

[slink]

but in reality a competent division 2 paddler has much better boat skills than the average aspirant 5 star paddler

True in terms of pure boat skills, but I have watched a div 3 paddler (who happens to be an experienced white water recreational paddler) pull a slalomist and their kit out in the same pool in which they capsized at HPP (above looping pool), whilst a div 1 ranked "coach" couldn't get a 12 year old out from the same point, on the same day until they reached the Daleks. I have seen the same at 'Tully, where a prem paddler tried unsuccessfully from top drop to the bridge to pull a youngster out. Competence at slalom does not make competence at rescues. Of course, competence at white water does not make competence at rescues either, but training goes a long way to achieving it. The BCU ToR only refers to current divisional competence for a slalom coach as you don't have to jump through so many hoops in training - if you hold a recreational award for that water, you do not need any divisional competence, and nor do you need to only use existing slalom courses (Interesting point, if a slalom coach wants to try out a new venue for slalom with a group, by the ToR, they can't, as it's not yet a recognised slalom facility!).

As Jim pointed out, our strength is not, at the moment, in numbers. Forcing competent slalom paddlers though 18 months of L3 training is perhaps not the way forward. If they're employed coaches, then a whole new world comes into play, but for club coaches, supported rescue training, possibly even site specific, shouldn't be viewed by the club or them as over burdening our coaching workforce...after all, it may be your child that they're failing to rescue.

I believe you also need to be realistic about the group. A group of prem paddlers on the site being coached is rather different to a group of brand new div 2 paddlers who have only ever raced at Alva before turning up at 'Tully! Of course, anyone can swim, but the likelihood of it happening is higher with less experience. So there's actually an argument that our world class coaches need no competence in rescues, but our club coaches need to be very good! The ToR (which are here http://www.canoescotland.org/Portals/0/ ... 20V4-0.pdf) make a good attempt at keeping things safe, but there is nothing to say that a club or centre cannot deploy an unqualified individual - in that case the deployer (e.g. the club committee) takes on the responsibility for the competence of the individual, rather than the BCU through a recognised qualification.

Steve

[John Sturgess]

Steve

This arises from preconceived ideas within BCU Coaching of what Coaching is, and what attributes a Coach requires. When I was first involved in recreational coaching (in the late 1970's) it seemed to me that the most important thing a coach was meant to do was to rescue paddlers, and the second was to teach specific techniques. At the time we were called Instructors: and in my view people who operate like that should still be called Instructors (as in swimming there is a distinction between Swimming Teachers and Coaches). Coaches are people who operate long-term with individuals (in groups) to help them improve (Jean-Pierre Villepreux: in England you teach techniques, in France we teach children).

Before UKCC there was a Slalom Coaching Scheme which started from the position that Slalom Coaching is best done from the bank; that it is likely to be done by non-paddlers, mainly parents; that coaches can take responsibility for safety without themselves being on the water, or having to rescue from the bank. It took me years on the UK Coaching Management Committee to get the following Terms of Reference accepted:

Coaches and safety:
At Level 1 all Coaches are trained in risk assessment and management, manual handling and injury prevention, and child protection requirements. They are assessed on these areas at Level 2.
Qualification as a Level 3 Coach requires attendance at a BCU Injury Prevention course, and a scUK Child protection workshop. Level 3 Coaches are further assessed on their ability to assess and manage risk under a wide variety of circumstances.
All qualified Slalom Coaches are therefore qualified to coach slalom from the bank on whatever water is appropriate to their paddlers, making whatever arrangements for safety cover they deem to be necessary as a result of their risk assessment process. This may involve paddler-to-paddler cover, as at races; the use of throw-lines and similar bank-support safety; and the use of safety boats. Bankside rescuers and safety boat paddlers then operate under the direction of the Coach: they do not require to be qualified.

With that out of the way we could focus, not on who would make the ideal coaches, but on who is available to coach: and as sports overall recognise, that will usually mean parents (75% of all coaches in British sport). Sports that do not approach it from that angle end up with stunted participation: tennis being one glaring example.

In fact research says that top performers in sport as a whole do not necessarily make the best coaches because:
They tend to coach in the way they were coached, which delays technical progress, particularly on ways of training
They try to get young paddlers to paddle the way they paddle. But a paddler does not necessarily know how he/she paddles or used to paddle
Current or recent paddlers who become coaches sometimes at least subconsciously try to prove that they are better than the paddlers they coach

I experienced all of these during my relatively short time as a professional coach with World Class Start.

[slink]

Hi John,

Thanks for your reply, and absolutely agree that Instructors are instructors, not coaches, and that the BCU renaming of everyone to coaches belittled the efforts and additional expertise of those who really were coaching, rather than instructing. You will however find plenty of people that disagree and regard instructors and coaches as one and the same thing, but as I think you demonstrated with your links to weight training for Peter, coaching goes somewhat further than instructing...

But there is a blurring here, not at elite level (or even the top few divisions), but for beginners. Just because we put a beginner in a slalom boat doesn't mean they won't swim, and would maybe benefit more from an "instructor" than a "coach". At what level a paddler becomes competent to receive "coaching" rather than "instructing" will to a large degree depend on the environment and the paddler - I have seen plenty of div 2 paddlers who cannot roll and would benefit from on-water rescue cover and instruction, but equally there are div 3 paddlers that can roll with the best of them and are ready to receive coaching! This is part of the issue - with the litigious landscape that we find ourselves in, we have to try to come up with a framework that fits all. I think that the slalom group have done a great job trying to adapt the UKCC framework to fit the slalom requirements, I know it took a lot of effort, and will continue to do so to get it accepted.

Just to cross between a couple of threads of yours, when the current batch of Div 1 CR CATS paddlers were at div 4/3/2, I often sat on the water in a plastic boat and drysuit to do the "instructing" (and rescuing) bit, whilst Johnny stood on the bank to do the "coaching" bit...maybe the best compromise, certainly when they progressed from Alva to 'Tully!

Steve