Project CoachLearn Enhancing Coaches Learning, Mobility & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

project coachlearn enhancing coaches learning mobility
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Project CoachLearn Enhancing Coaches Learning, Mobility & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Project CoachLearn Enhancing Coaches Learning, Mobility & Employment within the context of a European Sport Coaching Framework Chapter 6 Coach Certification & Recognition Step by step guide to recognition of prior learning/work


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Project CoachLearn Enhancing Coaches’ Learning, Mobility & Employment within the context of a European Sport Coaching Framework

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Chapter 6 – Coach Certification & Recognition Step by step guide to recognition of prior learning/work based experience and coach assessment

Kirsi Hämäläinen, Finnish Olympic Committee Jan Minkhorst, Netherlands Olympic Committee

slide-3
SLIDE 3

http://www.coachlearn.eu/project-

  • bjectives.html

Already published:

  • Report #1 Qualifications Frameworks and

Employment and Mobility Tools in the European Union - March 2016

  • Report #2 Recognition of Prior Learning and

Work-Based Experience in Coach Development

  • Report #3 Sport Coaching Workforce Data

Collection in 5 Countries

CoachLearn

slide-4
SLIDE 4

To make a tool that helps a coach education organization to build a system for RPL and WBE.

Idea

slide-5
SLIDE 5

1) Map generally the way coach-education is organized in your country

  • a. Which different institutes/organizations are involved

(federations; VET-studies; Universities etc.)

  • a. Which frameworks are used as a reference point

(National Sport coaching framework; National Qualification Framework; EQF)

  • a. The background of your students entering a study on coach education
  • i. From “outside” (no Coach education)

ii.

  • ii. between the different institutes/organizations with coach education in the map
  • 2. Appoint your own institute in the map
  • 3. Try to determine the amount of students entering your studies both outside and from other

Coach educating institutes.

  • 4. Appoint where RPL-systems already exist
  • 5. Appoint where RPL-systems non-exist but are probably useful

What are your needs as an organization regarding to RPL

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Coach education (big picture)

X NQF EQF Y Z

Figure 1: X, Y, Z: Educational organizations using different Qualification structures/frameworks on sports Education. NQF: National Qualification Framework EQF: European Qualification Framework

1

2 3

1

2 2 3 3 6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Coach education (big picture)

X NSCF NQF EQF Y Z

Figure 2: X, Y, Z: Educational organizations using different Qualification structures/frameworks on sports Education. NSCF: National Sport Coaching Framework NQF: National Qualification Framework EQF: European Qualification Framework

1

2 4

1

2 2 4 4 6 5

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Coach Education and RPL in the Netherlands

X NSCF NQF EQF Y Z

  • figure. 3 : The Netherlands

N O C * N S F F E D V E T F E D

1

2 4

1

2 2 4 4 6 5

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Coach Education and RPL in Belgium (Flanders)

X NSCF NQF EQF Y

  • figure. 4 : Belgium (Flanders)

V K S V T S F E D

1

2 4 6 5

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Figure 1. Phases of RPL system building for the coach education organization

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Figure 2. The phases of RPL for Coach Developer

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Figure 3. RPL process for the coach

slide-13
SLIDE 13
  • Criteria for the assessment method:

– validity: the tool must measure what it is intended to measure; – reliability: the extent to which identical results would be achieved every time a candidate is assessed under the same conditions; – fairness: the extent to which an assessment decision is free from bias (context dependency, culture and assessor bias); – cognitive range: does the tool enable assessors to judge the breadth and depth of the candidate’slearning; – fitness for purpose of the assessment: ensuringthe purpose of the assessment tool matches the use for which it is intended. – safety, security and confidentiality: is the candidate protectedfrom abuse duringthe process? – standards/referential: are the benchmarks of content and level of learningwell defined? – sustainability: will the process operate over time within resources of the money and time required? – visibility/transparency: is the process of validation generally understoodand does it lead to wider recognition of the candidate’s learning? – cost-efficiency: can the process be modified so that the benefits (personal and financial) are in proportion to the cost? (European guidelines for validatingnon-formal and informal learning 2009)

Assessment

slide-14
SLIDE 14
  • debate: offers the candidate an opportunity to demonstrate depth of knowledge as

well as communicative skills

  • declarative methods: based on individuals’ own identification and recording of

their competences, normally signed by a third party, to verify the self-assessment

  • interviews can be used to clarify issues raised in documentary evidence presented

and/or to review scope and depth of learning

  • bservation: extracting evidence of competence from an individual while they are

performing everyday tasks at work

  • portfolio method: using a mix of methods and instruments employed in

consecutive stages to produce a coherent set of documents or work samples showing an individual’s skills and competences in different ways.

Assessment methods

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Figure 4. Building an individual learning path when the curriculum contains courses and modules.

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Questions raising… from Finnish workshop

  • How to make a system that is simple enough?
  • Workload (organizations): Could there be a

crieteria for entering RPL system?

  • Easier if the modules or courses are large

enough

  • How to make it work in a project based

curriculum?

  • Biggest issue are univerisity students entering

federations education and vice versa

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Other questions?

  • What other concerns there are?
  • What other tools are needed?
  • Good solutions?