Decision Training: An Innovative Approach to Coaching

DT is taught through a 3 Step Planning Process.

In Step 1, the coach is asked to define the decisions the athlete has to make while performing. Each decision is described within the context of a cognitive skill important in the sport - for example, to increase attention to specific cues, to anticipate a specific event, to retrieve from memory the correct solution, to solve a problem under time constraints.

The decisions to be trained are derived from three sources. One source is from motor learning and control research that defines the cognitive, temporal, and spatial constraints under which all athletes perform such as reaction time (auditory, visual, and haptic).

A second source is gaze control research, which describes the attentional cues used by athletes when they perform at a high level (Adolphe, Vickers & LaPlante, 1997; Harle & Vickers, 2002; Holland, Patla & Vickers, 2002; Janelle, Hillman, Apparies, Murray, Meili & Hatfield, 2001; Martell, 2002; Patla & Vickers, 1997; Patla & Vickers, in press; Rodrigues, Vickers & Williams, 2002; Vickers & Patla, 1999; Vickers, 1992; Vickers, 1996; Vickers & Crews, 2002; Vickers & Williams, 2002; Williams, Singer & Frehlich, 2002; Vickers, Rodrigues & Williams, 2002). Gaze behaviour research is a new area of motor learning and control, and provides a unique insight into how athletes attend to cues when performing. For example, one finding is that of a "quiet eye" (Vickers, 1996; Janelle et al., 2001; Williams et al., 2002), which occurs when the gaze is directed to a specific location in the sports environment prior to the execution of a skill. Research by Wulf, McConnell, Gartner & Schwarz (2002) follows on this theme and provides direction in terms of coaching athletes to use an internal versus external attentional focus. Since we are beginning to understand what athletes see when they perform well, this new knowledge makes the defining of decisions a more objective process.

The final source of the decisions trained is derived from the knowledge that has been developed in each sport by coaches, technical directors, and sport scientists. This type of knowledge is commonly reflected in technical, certification, and other materials associated with coach education. Much of this knowledge is passed down anecdotally from coach to coach over the years. Step 1 is the most challenging of the three steps as it is requires that the coach understand how the athlete thinks when performing. Anecdotally, we have found that elite athletes who are now coaching find this step much easier than coaches who have not had a similar high level of athletic experience.

In Step 2, the coach selects a drill or sequence of drills that best trains the decision in the context of simulated competition. This step tends to be easier for coaches as they adapt existing drills and activities, or develop completely new training activities they feel will be more effective in training specific decisions.

Step 3 requires the decisions to be trained using one or more of the seven decision training tools (variable practice, random practice, bandwidth feedback, questioning, video feedback, hard-first tactical instruction, and modelling). Each of these tools has its own research base and thus provides a solid foundation for the entire method as they each promote a higher level of cognitive effort during training while at the same time maintaining a high level of physiological and technical and tactical performance. The seven decision training tools also provide coaches with a wide range of methods they can use. Each tool, when used in the context of daily practice, increases the mental workload of your athletes - and is a key to successful coaching. A similar amount of physical work is therefore maintained, but the cognitive effort expended in each practice is greatly increased.

The 7 DT Tools

Each of the DT tools is now explained. Collectively they expand the repertoire of skills used by the coach.

DT Tool 1 - Variable Practice: Variable practice occurs when a single class of skills is trained using variations typically found in competition (Shea and Morgan, 1979; Hall, Domingues, and Cavazos, 1994; Ota & Vickers, 1999). A single class of skills is defined using the biomechanical characteristics of the skills and tactics in each sport. We call these "smart-variations" (Vickers, 2000) as they are specific to the sport and appropriate for the athletes involved and competitive challenges present.

DT Tool 2 - Random Practice: Random practice occurs when different classes of skills are combined that simulate the tactical conditions found in the sport (Magill and Hall, 1990; Lee & Magill, 1983). The objective is to practise biomechanically different skills in simulated drills that simulate the events of competition. These are called "smart-combinations" (Vickers, 2000) as they take into account the tactical requirements of the sport, the characteristics of the athletes, and competitive requirements of the season. Rather than following a simple to complex progression of isolated skills, the key to implementing random practice is to combine different skills in meaningful contexts. Two and three skills are combined in tactical settings without, and then with, defence or other contextual elements. In this way, your athletes have the opportunity to learn DT under increasing levels of pressure.

DT Tool 3 - Bandwidth Feedback: Instead of providing feedback at every opportunity, it is important to reduce and delay feedback or bandwidth feedback as skill develops. Bandwidth feedback (Lavery, 1962; Sherwood, 1988; Weeks & Kordus, 1998) means you intentionally leave your athletes to solve problems on their own when their performance falls within a bandwidth of acceptable performance as set by you. Feedback is always provided when performance falls outside this area and is based on the science of the sport, your own experience, objective standards, and other criteria. In order to make the bandwidth concept work, it is beneficial to tell the athletes, in advance, that an absence of feedback means their performance is near to what is expected. Gradually delaying and reducing feedback promotes self-reliance and lower levels of dependency on the coach.

DT Tool 4 - Questioning: Questioning probes the athletes' understanding of the decisions being trained and the physical skills that enact them. Questioning fills the feedback delay that is created when bandwidth feedback is used and is essential in maintaining effective coach - athlete communication (Chambers, 2001; Knight, Gunze, and Feel, 1997). Because coaches are verbal people, they often find it difficult to withdraw, delay, and reduce feedback; therefore, the use of questioning maintains a level of communication that is more comfortable for most coaches. Questions should be asked that probe the athlete's understanding of the drill, tactic, and skills being trained. This is one of the most rewarding of the DT tools and opens new and rewarding communication channels between the coach and athlete.

DT Tool 5 - Video Feedback: Video feedback occurs when the athletes view their performance on videotape and engage in a self-analysis and correction of their performance. Video feedback allows athletes to view, analyse, interpret, and evaluate their own performance as well as that of teammates and opponents (Rothstein and Arnold, 1979; Janelle, Barba, Frehlich, Tennant and Cauraugh, 1997). Video feedback is first and foremost feedback, so everything said above about reduced delayed bandwidth feedback applies. In the beginning, video feedback should be led by the coach, who identifies critical cues and makes suggestions for improvement. Within a session or two, the athletes should be asked to do this more and more on their own. They should learn to respond to the coach's questions about their own, teammates', and opponents' performance. Finally, athletes should learn to analyse their own performance and that of their peers without the coach being present.

DT Tool 6 - "Hard-First" Tactical Instruction: This form of instruction requires the technical and tactical concepts of the sport be taught early in the season rather than later, as is often the case in traditional coaching (Ausubel, 1968; Doane, Alderton, Sohn, and Pelligrino, 1996). Doane et al. showed that participants who received "easy first" visual discrimination training (where they learn to discriminate "easy" visual information before complex information) performed at a lower level than those who experienced "hard-first" training from the outset. During hard-first training, your athletes are taught how to see complex skills and formations right from the start using video models, on field demonstrations, live models, simulations, lead-up games, and small sided and full games. Hard-first instruction should be conceptual more than physical when lower skilled performers are involved. Even though their bodies cannot perform hard-first skills, there is no reason their minds cannot appreciate what is involved as early as possible in training.

DT Tool 7 - Modelling: Modelling occurs when the coach demonstrates a skill or tactic using a live demonstrator, a video of an elite or peer performer, or other model derived from a textbook, photograph, computer, kinematic, or other illustration. Modelling is used as a method of developing analytical and cognitive skills that are sport-specific (Morey Sorrentino and Vickers, 2001; McCullaugh & Caird, 1990; McCullaugh & Meyer, 1997; Sidaway and Hand, 1993; Vickers, Livingston, Umeris, and Holden, 1999). It is important for your athletes to learn how to analyse the performance of not only the best athletes in their sport, but also those who are not as highly skilled, such as teammates and competitors. They should know how to detect what is good and not so good in all levels of performance. Video models used continually, first by the coach and later independently by the athlete, are a critical coaching aid.