Evaluation of Elite Sports Program - Literature review Example

Running Header: Evaluation of Elite Sports Program Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code & Name: Date of Submission: Development Model of Sports Participation DMSP Framework According to Holt (2008), the theory of Development Model of Sports Participation (DMSP) proves that youth participation in sport provides them with an opportunity to be physically active and this plays an important role in enhancing their psychological development. Additionally, youth sports programs are essential in promoting motor skills learning which form the foundations for future sports stars and recreational adult sports participation. Therefore, the DMSP provides an outline with pathways that are aimed at providing continued support for youth participation, psychosocial development and health benefits through sports. The model proposes three phrases in relation to sports participation and they include: the sampling phrase which is done between 6 to 12 years of age, the specialization phrase and the investment phrase. At the sampling stage children are given an opportunity to sample different sports hence at this phrase emphasis should be made on how exciting it is to participate in sports. In the specialization phrase which is done between the ages of 13 to 15 years the number of sports that children participate in are reduced and this enables children to develop specific skills required in a given sport. Finally, the investment stage occurs when children attain the age of 16 years. In this phrase, children focus and become committed to a single sport Training injuries According to Hackfort and Tenenbaum (2006), early specialization can have negative consequences on the athlete physical health. The excessive training during specialization and investment stage can increase the athlete risk to over-training injuries. Gould (2006) emphasizes that early specialization in sport increases burnout and this has a long term negative effects on the athlete physical health. According to his study findings youth athletes who specialized in a specific sport had a higher probability of suffering from physical injures as compared to those who didn’t specialize in any sport. His study was composed of 154 athletes who were on average aged 13 years. Gould noted that those athletes who had specialized in specific sport reported more physical injuries in comparison the unspecialized ones. Slobounov (2008) argues that injuries are common for athletes who begin to participate in a given sport at a tender age. According to him, young people are more likely to suffer from injuries as compared to adults and this can have serious consequences when they are fully matured. Youths have a weak body and this means that they are weak and less prepared in strenuous conditions involved by specializing and investing in a particular sport. Additionally, the intense exercises associated with focusing on one sport increases the number of injuries sustained by them. The physical exercises create imbalance in the amount of pressure applied on the knees and connective tissues and this increases the risk of physical injury. Therefore, excessive training associated with specializing in a given sport coupled with rapid growth creates high prevalence for injuries in youth athletes. Short sport Careers Early specialization has been associated with shorter careers in sports (Harkfort & Tenenbaum, 2006). According to a study conducted by Baker (2006), athletes who specialized between the ages of 12 to 15 years had a shorter career in sports as compared to those athletes who specialized in later stages. Early specialization has an effect of creating negative psychological effects on the athletes and this leads to inconsistent performance hence shortening their sports careers. Additionally, specializing makes the athletes to develop boredom and this is due of performing excessive movements repeatedly. This in turn makes them to reduce their careers in their respective sports. According to Murphy (2007) the physical training that youths are exposed to as a result of specialization reduces their sport enjoyment hence this lowers their morale and thus they opt to reduce their sports career. Holt (2008) argues that early specialization in a given sport is occasionally accompanied by high expectations to succeed. Parents and coaches place high expectations on the athlete due to time, efforts and resources that have been used and this increases pressure on them. Furthermore, early specialization makes the athlete to reduce the amount of time devoted to other activities which are essential in early life development. Thus, increased pressure coupled with reduced time makes the athlete to suffer from psychological distress and this makes the sport to become less enjoyable. This can in turn contribute to physical and emotional exhaustion making the athlete to opt for early withdrawal from the sport. Social isolation Early specialization can have negative social effects in relation to the social life of the young athletes. The athletes are required to be totally committed to the sport in which they specialize in and this adversely reduces their social time due to limited opportunities for interacting with others (Hackfort & Tenenbaum, 2006). Additionally, specializing at early stages requires intense participation and this can hamper the athlete identity development. The young athlete may view his or her life as totally dependent on the sport hence be at a risk of becoming a one dimensional person. According to Rowland (2011), early careers of by many young athletes are characterized by social isolation because of doing too many activities which are related to their sport when they are still young. Studies conducted by Stafford (2010) indicated that early specialization and investment in a given sport reduces the athlete’s time which is dedicated to class work, family and friends by a large extent. This in turn leads to early social isolation hence this has a negative implication on the life of the athlete. Furthermore, when the young athletes are made to specialize and consequently invest in a single sport they meet older players who do not share similar social and emotional maturity. Lack of players in the same age group can adversely hinder their social maturity. Limited social interaction that the athletes face during their adolescence and childhood as well as lack of self identity can make it difficult for them to handle new social experiences after they retire (Holt, 2008). Therefore, early specialization and investment forces the athlete to spend a lot of time training and this leads to social isolation hence hindering their psychological and sociological development Risk of diseases According to Micheli and Purcell (2007), early specialization exposes athletes to risks of suffering from cardiac and musculoskeletal diseases. To be successful, the children are required to undertake high level training. In addition, the young athletes are pressurized to train harder, intelligently and for longer periods of time. The fact that children have low tolerance to high level training means that the intense exercises can have negative consequences on the health of young athletes. Extreme exercise leads to the development of transient disease which occurs in the left part of ventricular contractility (Garrett and Kirkendall, 2007). High level training exercises can injure the heart by affecting cardiac ventricular contractility in young athletes. Furthermore, intensive physical exercises can overload musculoskeletal structures in the body hence this can lead to breakdown of tissues. Nonetheless, excessive training by child athletes can cause injuries to developing parts of their bodies including their immature spinal codes and thus cause musculoskeletal diseases. According to Backer (2006) children are vulnerable to epiphysis injuries in their growing bones due to extensive physical exercises. This can in turn affect their growth rates. Moreover, child athletes have low thermoregulatory responses as compared to adults and this means that they sweat less hence they acclimatize at a slower rate to warm environments. Therefore, young athletes are at a higher risk of incurring heat related injuries in comparison to adult athletes. Deliberate Practice and Deliberate Play Preamble Deliberate play involves sporting activities which are regulated by rules adopted from standardized sport and are implemented and monitored by an adult or the children. According to Hackfort and Tenenbaum (2006), deliberate play allows children to practice different sporting tactics and movements and at the same time it provides them with an opportunity to innovate, learn and improvise their skills. Additionally, it assists children to perfect their skills due to the fact that it takes place in a natural and informal playing surface. The children are also able to enhance their skills because they are of similar size and age group. Thus, deliberate play acts as a means through which the youths can explore their sporting capabilities in a various situations and at a low cost in relation to resources. This method equips children with flexible and creative strategies that are important in the development of successful athletes particularly in sports that involve teams. On the other hand, deliberate practice is not so enjoyable and it is undertaken in a serious manner with an aim of achieving a future goal (Murphy, 2012). It is carried out in specialized facilities and under the supervision of an adult. The amount of time that youth spend in deliberate play is different from the amount they spend in deliberate practice. In addition, in deliberate play the youth engage themselves physical activities unlike in deliberate practice. Effect on Learning and Motivation Starkes and Ericksson (2006) argue that involving children in deliberate practice activities can create negative effects on their motivation and learning. Deliberate practice is done under set rules and under the supervision of an adult. The rules can reduce motivation of children to participate in sporting activities. Additionally, rules can interfere with the children learning process. The rules can limit the children ability to enhance their skills hence this can greatly affect their development. According to Alexamnder and Winnie (2006), forcing athletes to play in a certain way during their early years can reduce their willingness to play and diminish their motivation as well as their enthusiasm for the sport. This can in turn eliminate their learning opportunities in relation to the sport. Huber (2012) emphasizes that the rules involved in deliberate practice reduce children commitment and at the same time it reduces their engagement towards the sport. A study conducted by Hackfort and Tenenbaum (2006) indicated that motivation and passion for the sport plays an important role in talented youth learning and development process. In addition, the study indicated that youths learn and develop their skills more rapidly when they are left to play freely under no specified rules and regulations. Therefore, deliberate practice can hinder learning and motivation of young athletes hence this can reduce their commitment and interest in the sport. Development of Expertise Alexander and Winnie (2006) note that the deliberate practice theory proposes that an expertise is developed through deliberate practice. However, Jekins (2005) argues that talent and ability to play as well as deliberate practice play an important role in developing high level sporting expertise. According to him deliberate practice alone cannot provide an assurance in developing a sporting expertise. Absence of talent and ability eludes expertise hence this means that the three are collectively sufficient in order to build high level expertise. According to Gill and Lavon (2008) deliberate practice is highly structured with an aim of improving performance. However, some elite athletes require a considerable amount of practice in order to acquire the required experience and skills so as to perform at high levels. Thus, deliberate practice is not enough to enable young athletes to perform at international levels and this requires the method to be combined with ability and talent. Hackfort and Tenenbaum (2006) state that deliberate practice alone does not guarantee that an athlete will achieve the highest level of performance. According to them, athlete’s environment influences their level of performance. Moreover, genetic prepositions like height which are essential for high performance cannot be improved through deliberate practice. Moran (2006) emphasizes that sports expertise must maintain concentration in order for them to perform at the highest levels. This means that, in addition to deliberate practice the sports personnel must concentrate in order to be consistent hence attain highest level of performance. Nevertheless, the young athlete must be motivated to undertake deliberate training so as to acquire the knowledge required in order to become an expert. Therefore, deliberate practice alone cannot assist youths to attain the highest level of performance and thus it must be combined with motivation and concentration. Deliberate practice and Team games The theory of deliberate practice has gained increased criticism due to lack of invalid extrapolation in games involving teamwork (Moran, 2006). Deliberate practice is usually undertaken individually and this means that it does not incorporate sports which involve teamwork. A study conducted by Shavinina (2009) indicated that the theory of deliberate practice may not be applicable in sport game particularly those ones involving groups or teams. According to her findings, deliberate practice reduces enjoyment, requires high concentration and hard work hence it consumes a lot of time. On the other hand, group and team type of practice is demanding and highly enjoyable and requires half of the total time taken in deliberate practice. According to Murphy (2012) highly disciplined and motivated individuals are likely to engage in deliberate practice in their own without the need for influence from other individuals. However, in group or team sports cohesion is of critical importance in order to coordinate different members involved in the team. Thus, a team sport requires a demanding and a directive leadership style while individual sports require supportive and autonomous leadership. Thus, for team games it may be difficult to apply the theory of deliberate practice due to its demanding nature. Baker, Cote and Abernethy (2005) argue that the theory of deliberate practice may be too inflexible to be applied in team sports. Deliberate practice theory states that practice alone is enough in order to develop expertise in an athlete. However, development of an expertise in team sports requires a player to master a wide range of knowledge and skills which include; physical fitness, knowledge on team strategies and the means of coordination. Therefore, practice alone as advocated by deliberate practice cannot be used in a team game which requires a variety of training methods. Contextual and Social Economical variables According to Moran (2006), the theory of deliberate practice ignores important socio-economical and contextual variables. Deliberate practice theory fails to incorporate the effects of resource availability or constraint on the performance of athletes. Jekins (2005) argues that the performance of athletes can be enhanced if they have access to specialist instructors and suitable training facilities. The theory relating to deliberate practice assumes that practice is enough in order to develop an expert. However, the training resources that are available can influence the athlete’s progress through the three stated stages in expertise development. Additionally, economic factors have not been adequately considered in deliberate practice theory. Individuals with adequate economic resources can be able to promote their skills by acquiring the necessary resources unlike individuals who are weak economically. This can in turn have a substantial effect in developing an expert. Athlete centred Practice Preamble Athlete centred practice aims at promoting learning through athlete awareness, ownership and responsibility. It is a coaching style which focuses on unleashing athlete’s potential by asking questions rather than giving instructions. According to Davis and Broadhead (2007) an athlete centred training approach is suitable for group sports as it gives athletes choice and control. The method allows the athletes to make their own decisions while competing and this motivates them to perform at their highest levels. Starkes and Ericksson (2006) states that athlete cantered approach promotes a sense of belonging for the athletes by providing them with an opportunity to play a role in solving a sporting problem through a shared approach to learning. The method values athletes and accepts their contributions equally and at the same time it accepts each athlete as a unique individual. On the other hand, the coach is expected to listen to athletes ideas and to implement them. Athlete cantered practice induces the athletes to learn and to have a greater retention and understanding of both skills and tactics. Time consuming According to Kidman, Lombardo and Jones (2010), athletes cantered practice approach is time consuming hence ineffective for training purposes. Coaches have limited time and this requires them to come up with a detailed plan on how to undertake their training activities. In addition, a coach may be under pressure to perform and this means techniques like asking the athletes some questions and having them analyze situations may not prevail due to time constraint. Thus, the coach will be forced to focus on informing, lecturing and telling the athletes what to do hence ignoring the athletes’ cantered approach. Additionally, athletes require a lot of time to come up with effective ideas hence this presents a challenge in relation to managing time. Moreover, a lot of time is required in order to develop athletes towards becoming thinking athletes. Andersen (2007) argues that it takes a lot of time for an athlete to become accustomed with new coaching techniques. Therefore, a lot of time is consumed before the athletes can learn to make decisions and to engage actively with the coach in order to come up with ideas aimed at enhancing their sporting activities. Furthermore, the approach can have negative effects on some players. This can occur where a player lags behind and finds it difficult to cope and to match the understanding held by other players. Thus, the coach is forced to use a lot of time in questioning the player in order to ensure continuity and uniformity in the team. Perception of the Coach Coaches perceive that they have to pass on the knowledge and experiences that they posses to their athletes. This makes the training program to be coach centred rather than athletic centred (Kidman, 2009).According to Kidman, Lombardo and Jones (2010), many coaches claim that it’s their responsibility to lead the team and this requires them to belief in themselves and to have self confidence in directing the athletes. Additionally, the skills and experiences that they posses make them to perceive that it’s their role to guide the team rather than the players. This in turn creates a barrier towards successful application of athlete centred approach. Farrow, Baker and MacMahon (2008) note that a majority of coaches are unable to apply athlete centred approach especially when the team is composed of young and inexperienced athletes. Additionally, the players may be unable to play at the expected levels and this may further force a coach to abandon athlete cantered approach. According to Baker, Cote and Abernethy (2005), majority of coaches focus on short term goals due to the pressing need to excel. This means that the coaches occasionally focus on short term objectives of winning at the expense of developing athletes’ long term understanding of the sport through athlete centred approach. Furthermore, the performance of most coaches is measured in relation to the number of games that the team wins. This in turn makes the coaches to perceive that the team can only excel by adopting their strategies and techniques hence this prevents the application of athlete cantered approach. Social expectation Society expects coaches to act as the lenders of the athletes by providing them with good guidance and training. Additionally, the society views a successful coach as the one who imposes his leadership on the athletes and at the same time educates them (Kidman, Lombardo and Jones, 2010). Therefore, the society holds a stereotypical image of the coach and this means that the athletes are not expected to question his or her authority. Furthermore, the society holds the view that coaches possess supreme knowledge which should not be challenged by athletes. According to Baker, Cote and Abernethy (2005) when coaches seek ideas from the athletes, the society views this as a sign of weakness and incompetence. This in turn prevents the coaches from adopting athlete centred approach. Jekins (2005) emphasizes that majority of coaches were former successful athletes and they work under limited study in relation to the growth and development of athletes. Thus, they simply utilise the same coaching techniques that they were coached with and thereby promoting coach centred leadership model. Moreover, these coaches may not be equipped with the necessary knowledge and experience in regard to athlete centred practice. The lack of exposure to athlete centred practice means that the coaches cannot apply the approach in leading their athletes. According to Cooper (2010) most coach’s styles of coaching is influenced by their background in sport. Therefore, in case the coaches may have identified negative consequences relating to the use of athlete centred approach they can never use it in their training. Athletes According to Starkes and Ericksson (2006), athletes have a negative attitude towards athletes’ cantered coaches and this creates a huge barrier towards the adoption of such a model. Athletes have different ideas regarding their participation in sports. Additionally, they have different interests, desires, commitment and involvement levels. Therefore, they prefer commanding coaches who display a coach-centred leadership model. This ensures athletes that their coaches are sure of what they are doing and at the same time they are confident that their strategies will make them succeed. According to a study conducted by Cooper (2010), many athletes prefer to be told what to do rather than participating in determining what should be done. Also, some athletes may only have an experience of coach centred leadership style. This makes them to believe that the coach centred style is the only one that works best for them. Furthermore, athletes lack the willingness to participate in athlete centred approach due to lack of experience and knowledge about the method. Therefore, the athletes end up resisting the approach because of the fact that they find themselves struggling while using the method. Kidman, Lombardo and Jones (2010) note that most athletes find it uncomfortable and difficult to think and respond when they are asked questions because they have to take responsibility for their learning by working in regard to their knowledge. Nevertheless, athletes have less respect for athlete centred coaches because they view them as less powerful and at the same time they may perceive that such coaches have inadequate knowledge. Cultural differences in coaching Athlete centred approach is criticized because it does not consider the cultural background of coaches. According to Cooper (2010), the cultural backgrounds of coaches play an important role in determining the application of athletic centred approach. According to her studies some coaches find themselves to be extremely strict towards their athletes and they attribute this to their cultural background. Kidman, Lombardo and Jones (2010) argue that cultural differences affect the character traits of coaches. Therefore, coaches who use strict leadership styles are less likely to adopt athletic centred approach. References Baker, J.(2006). Early Specialization in Youth Sport: A Requirement for Adult Expertise? High Ability Studies, 14(1), 86-94. Cooper, K. (2010) . Coaches Perspective on Athlete-Centred Coaching. Journal of Exercise Sciences, 4(1), 56-89. Davis, W., & Broadhead, G.(2007). Ecological Task Analysis and Movement. Mitcham; Human Kinetics. Farrow, D., Baker, J., & MacMahon, C (2008). Developing Sport Expertise. Oxon: Routledge. Garrett, W., & Kirkendall, D.(2007). Exercise and Sport Science. Sydney: Wolters Kluwer Health. Gill, D., & Lavon, W. (2008). Physiological Dynamics of Sport and Exercise. Mitcham: Human Kinetics. Gould, D.(2006). Sports Specializtion. Successful Sports Parenting, 1(1), 1-3. Hackfort, D.,& Tenenbaum, G.(2006). Essential Processes for Attaining Peak Performance. London: Meyer and Meyer Hol, N.(2008), Positive Youth Development through Sport. London: Routledge. Huber, J.(2012).Applying Educational Psychology in Sports. Mitcham: Human Kinetics. Jekins, S.(2005). Sports Science Handbook. London: Multi-Science Publishing. Kidman, L.(2009). Athlete-Centred Coaching. Oxon: Routledge. Kidman, L ., Lombardo, B., & Jones, G.(2010). Athlete Centred Coaching. Worcester: IPC Print Resources. Moran, A.(2006). Sport and Exercise Psychology. Oxon: Routledge. Murphy, S. (2012) The Oxford Handbook of Sports Performance. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Rowland, T.(2011). The Athlete’s Clock. Mitcham: Human Kinetics. Slobounov, S.(2008). Injuries in Athletics. London: Springer Stafford, I.(2010). Coaching Children in Sport. London: Taylor & Francis Read More