 |
|
FEBRUARY 2003
FEATURE Decision
Training: An Innovative Approach To Coaching
By Dr. Joan N. Vickers
What Are The Roots Of Decision Training?
Decision Training (DT) is a new, research-based approach to coaching that increases the
opportunities your athletes have to make decisions in training similar to those
encountered in competition. DT takes its impetus from changes in research emanating from
cognition and motor learning. From the early 1990s, a number of researchers began to
report a paradoxical reversal that occurred when certain types of practice and feedback
conditions were used (Christina & Bjork, 1991; Farr, 1987; Lee, Swinnen & Serrien,
1994; Schmidt, 1991; Vickers, 1994). Figure 1 presents an overview of these findings and
compares the effects of using primarily behavioural methods and those reflective of the
newer literatures. Within these studies, behavioural methods included blocked practice
where the same skills were practised over and over in order to create automaticity, high
levels of direct feedback, and instruction delivered and drilled through the use of simple
to complex progressions. In contrast, the newer methods included the use of variable and
random practice, delayed and reduced feedback, and the use of top-down, tactically
oriented instruction.

Figure 1. An overview of research findings from cognition and motor learning showing a
reversal in long-term performance when behavioural (BT) and decision training (DT) methods
are used in training motor skills.
Figure 1 shows that when behavioural methods are used, gains in performance do occur in
the short term; however, these do not transfer later on to the competitive setting as well
as the newer methods, which collectively we call DT. Behavioural training does work in the
short term, and this is one of the reasons these methods are attractive to coaches and
athletes - the immediate experience within the practice environment is that of success.
But Figure 1 shows that when athletes are trained exclusively with these methods, they are
unable to maintain or improve their performance in the long term, especially under
conditions of competition and stress. In contrast, when using the newer DT methods of
random and/or variable practice, delayed and/or reduced feedback, and whole instruction, a
reversal occurs. Progress may be slower at first, but in the long term, athletes achieve a
higher level of performance. As Schmidt and Lee (1999, p. 274) state, it is important for
coaches to know that "a practice variable can have opposite effects on temporary
performance levels versus the relatively permanent levels that must be assessed." In
other words, what you see in practice is not necessarily what you get later on. A deeper
understanding of how athletes optimally acquire skills is necessary to avoid the reversal
in performance that occurs when too much behavioural training is used.
How Did DT Evolve?
In the early 1990s, experienced coaches at the NCIC were introduced to the DT techniques.
To date, over 150 high-level coaches have been involved, either NCI students or their
master coaches. DT is also an integral part of the training of coaches at the NCIs in
Vancouver, Victoria, and Montreal. Through a process of praxis, where researchers,
coaches, and sport leaders work together, DT has evolved to include the necessary research
foundations, but also the insights needed to apply these new methods in the field. At the
same time, a number of studies, theses, and developmental projects were carried out that
support the overall thesis of the methods used (Chambers, 2001; Morey Sorrentino &
Vickers, 1998, in press; Ota & Vickers, 1999; Reeves, 1999; Vickers, 1990; Vickers,
Livingston, Umeris, Holden, 1999; Vickers & Bales et al., 1996 a, b, c; Vickers, 1999;
Vickers, 2000; Vickers, 2001).
At the heart of DT is an extensive research base that, when applied to coaching, leads to
a change in the coach's behaviour. This, in turn, creates practice environments where
athletes learn to make decisions under conditions very like those experienced in
competition. Instead of leaving the training of critical decision-making skills to the
unpredictable events of competition, DT moves this aspect of athlete preparation overtly
into the daily practice setting. When coaches, athletes, and sport leaders adopt DT,
positive gains appear to occur not only in athletic performance, but also in the training
environment itself. Collectively, DT brings the athlete into the training process through
changes in how practices are run, and this process creates a more dynamic and effective
coaching environment. The underlying assumption is that effective decisions can be trained
within the practice environment in much the same way as technical and tactical skilled are
developed.
How Is DT Taught?
The content of DT (Vickers, 2000; Vickers, in press) is taught during a one-week 40-hour
micro-coaching course. The first two days are spent covering the research underlying DT in
a workshop setting, followed by micro-coaching sessions where each coach assumes three
roles: as the coach (on one occasion), as an athlete (on two occasions), and as an
observer/adviser of peer coaches (on two occasions). By experiencing these three critical
roles, coaches are provided with the opportunity to 1) learn to implement DT as a coach,
2) experience the reception of DT as an athlete, and 3) interact with peer coaches as an
observer and adviser providing feedback and guidance.
continue>>> |
|
 |
|
le Journal en français
FEBRUARY 2003
Vol. 3, No. 3
Front Page
CONTENTS
Decision Training: An Innovative
Approach To Coaching
What Are The Roots Of Decision Training?
How Did DT Evolve?
How Is DT Taught?
The 7 DT Tools
When Is DT Needed?
Does DT Create A Different
Coaching Environment?
Do Coaches Use DT?
Bibliography
Download a PDF of this article
(9 pages, 179 KB)
Print version of this article

Search the Journal
PAST ISSUES
COMING TOPICS
About the Journal
Get on the email circulation list click here
Publisher: Cyndie
Flett, Program Manager, Women in Coaching, Coaching Association of Canada
Editor: Sheila
Robertson
Editorial Board:
Guylaine Demers
Cyndie Flett
Dru Marshall
Rose Mercier
Sheila Robertson
Penny Werthner
Copy Editor: Joan
Salton
Translator:
MATRA gs Inc.
© 2002 Coaching Association of Canada,
ISSN 1496-1539
Coaching Association of
Canada
www.coach.ca
|