# New-Old Coaches Alliance Being Considered



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

In the early to mid-1990’s an organization called The Coaches Alliance was formed. Even though it had support and even pulled off a national coaches convention, it sputtered and did not continue. A number of people are considering re-starting that organization and we wanted to see how many of you coaches out there would be interested in joining.

There would be dues, but also services for those dues: newsletters, blogs upon which you can ask questions, discounts on magazines and books and maybe coaching gear, etc.

So, 1) are you interested and 2) what would you want from such a coaching organization if formed?


----------



## Ms.Speedmaster (Dec 10, 2010)

You may want to also post about that on the Archery Instructors/Coaches Network on FB. It's a closed group:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/archeryinstructors/

Personally speaking, it seems like a good idea, but I would want to see how it would collaborate with the existing organizations and what the goals were. Did it sputter because there wasn't a clear direction?


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

It is my opinion that alliance floundered because it sort of looked to (what was then the) NAA for support which was not forthcoming.
In addition coach the training program at a national level tends to change focus a lot as the names and faces change. 
Any momentum that we gain tends to be lost when the new cast of characters appears. This is not an indictment 
of any person or persons, it is just the way it tends to be. Having an organization run by coaches for coaches could help. 

There are organizations for professionals from doctors to golf coaches so why not archery coaches? 

With respect to collaborating with other organizations I think everyone is willing to play nicely together. Having a
continuing education program that offers something to everyone would be nice. Whether or not a coach believes that
NTS is the way to go or not is irrelevant. We are all here with the same general goal: we love archery and want to 
share it with others. Some make money at it, some offset their archery toy bill and some do it for free but the end goal
is to have students shoot safely and improve their skills, right?


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

International or US only?


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

Vittorio said:


> International or US only?


The previous incarnation of the coaches alliance included Coach Morin from Canada so I see no reason to
exclude anyone.

My personal belief is that this transcends political boundaries. It is all about archery and coaching not politics.
Excluding anyone who has something to offer the group would be counter productive.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

The group would need a strong purpose, or mission. It would also need a way to overcome all the various factions that exist within our sport and the different disciplines that are taught. 

Coaching compound vs. recurve vs. barebow are as different skill sets as coaching road cycling, hang gliding and racing cars. Yea, you're racing alright, but the technique and equipment are vastly different.

John


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

limbwalker said:


> The group would need a strong purpose, or mission. It would also need a way to overcome all the various factions that exist within our sport and the different disciplines that are taught.
> 
> Coaching compound vs. recurve vs. barebow are as different skill sets as coaching road cycling, hang gliding and racing cars. Yea, you're racing alright, but the technique and equipment are vastly different.
> 
> John


Agreed. But another way to look at it is that a coach needs to have a fairly broad knowledge of the sport. I enjoy olympic recurve. I have shot a compound and it is just not my cup of tea. On the other hand I live in the sticks and I am approached by 3D archers for help because they don't have many other alternatives close by. I need to understand what makes their part of the sport tick too. 

IMO a coach should always be looking for learning experiences.


----------



## PSE Archer (Oct 26, 2014)

What acredidation would one be considered a coach? The word "coach" means much more than teaching archery. A Level III USA/NFAA and up are considered coaches. 

I would definitely be interested......


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

PSE Archer said:


> What acredidation would one be considered a coach? The word "coach" means much more than teaching archery. A Level III USA/NFAA and up are considered coaches.
> 
> I would definitely be interested......


For now let's assume that we take the USA/NFAA accreditation as the requirement for voting membership but I think that would be up to
the members to decide. We are trying to facilitate the revival of the organization not take over and run it like a cult.

Something to think about:

Level 2 and Level 1 instructors also need a source for continuing education, etc. They should be involved in some way. Associate members?
I belong to a national falconry organization. Anyone can JOIN however voting is reserved for licensed falconers. 

Once again the reason for the post is to gather the thoughts of those who think this is a good idea. 
The whole idea is that the organization is run BY coaches FOR coaches. The greater the level of
involvement by the whole membership the higher the odds that the organization will not vanish.


----------



## Sasquech (Dec 15, 2014)

Accreditation is great but there are really great coaches turning out national level champions that don't hold accreditation so making it a requirement is going to eliminate a lot of folks. I was a top level certified ski instructor the organization that accredited us was universally loathed for always changing the programs to sell materials snd seminars not about best fastest way to make the public reach their goals . President of the org raked in a quarter mill a year and we got little we did not pay through the nose for meanwhile new instructors made the same money and knew little but we're successful. If you know your stuff you are better off than book trained and incompetent

I would like a program you go spend the weekend take the tests prove you know your stuff and get your certification. Usa archery makes that impossible


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

Sasquech said:


> Accreditation is great but there are really great coaches turning out national level champions that don't hold accreditation so making it a requirement is going to eliminate a lot of folks. I was a top level certified ski instructor the organization that accredited us was universally loathed for always changing the programs to sell materials snd seminars not about best fastest way to make the public reach their goals . President of the org raked in a quarter mill a year and we got little we did not pay through the nose for meanwhile new instructors made the same money and knew little but we're successful. If you know your stuff you are better off than book trained and incompetent
> 
> I would like a program you go spend the weekend take the tests prove you know your stuff and get your certification. Usa archery makes that impossible


That is always an issue. There are some people out there (in most fields) who are not certified and may not have any formal education credentials but who are talented.
That is a situation that has existed for a long time. The flip side is that there are people who are highly certified who can't teach to save their life (once again not limited to
archery). I will admit that I don't have a solution to that one.

Let's look at the big picture of a group like this: I don't think we are proposing to be a certifying body. We are trying to create a place for the exchange of information and ideas
and to provide a place for continuing education. As the Faber statue says: "Knowledge Is Good". (Animal House reference. Yes, I am old)

We don't necessarily want to exclude someone just because they are not certified by XYZ to be a coach however we do want to keep control so that things don't slide down 
the slippery slope and become emotional exchanges between people who may or may not have any actual knowledge to contribute.

How do you weed out those who will be a negative influence? I admit that I do not know but I think we are open to all reasonable ideas. That is why I created this thread.


----------



## Sasquech (Dec 15, 2014)

That is easy tight moderation see advanced intermediate archery gets a little passionate but the moderators are great


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

Ultimately the "look and feel" of the group will be determined by the membership but I am hoping that
it is something more than a "chat" exchange. While the chat room format (like AT) is fine for some things I would hope
that exchanges of information are more detailed and well thought out like presenting papers to a professional body or
writing a magazine article. Something more than a few sentences written on one's phone while eating lunch.

The one thing we do want to avoid is having the group devolve to an argument for and against NTS or people defending
KSL and others bashing him. It appears that most discussions of form subsequently turn into that argument here
which has nothing to do with AT specifically and more to do with how passionate archers (and coaches) are about the sport.

We would also like to make sure that all proceedings of the organization are available to all members. For example if we have some
sort of gathering/convention, ect the proceedings will be published and available not only to members but non-members as well.


----------



## abbykristine (Jul 26, 2013)

I am completely for this. I mean, archery coaches basically have their own community, but it's sometimes hard to find each other. I often go to the coaches I know, for advice or help whenever I need it or am stumped, so having that access, world wide or not, would be awesome.

I think if the organization comes up, or is agreed upon, they could maybe have subdivisions? Like a "council" that can manage the organization as a whole (which would be made up of people from different styles instead of a single style like nts and experience in running an organization like this) and then have a couple of people running each individual style maybe? Then people who are not in "leadership" can go to their "leadership" and then if it need be, that "leadership" can go to the "council"? That way it could stay a little more organized and then things are associated with one style doesn't get mixed up with another (less arguing maybe). It's not the best or most original way of setting up things. But since there is compound, recurve, longbow, traditional, recreation, competition and hunting, we might be able to address most aspects of archery. I teach anywhere from traditional to hunting to olympic and am certified by USAA (about to get another certification), but am not limited to that one style. So having an organization that collects all kinds of coaches and gives access to everyone would be very much helpful.

I also think that there should be support more than there should be telling one another that the others are wrong. Archery is an adaptive sport, so we need to give more accommodation than criticizing of one style. So maybe everyone in the group should have opportunities to try some other styles or learn more. Maybe vote on who has the best idea of the style and get them to do some sort of seminar or write a page in a magazine or newsletter that might come into development? And don't limit just one group access to it, but sort of spread it around.


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

abbykristine said:


> I am completely for this. I mean, archery coaches basically have their own community, but it's sometimes hard to find each other. I often go to the coaches I know, for advice or help whenever I need it or am stumped, so having that access, world wide or not, would be awesome.
> 
> I think if the organization comes up, or is agreed upon, they could maybe have subdivisions? Like a "council" that can manage the organization as a whole (which would be made up of people from different styles instead of a single style like nts and experience in running an organization like this) and then have a couple of people running each individual style maybe? Then people who are not in "leadership" can go to their "leadership" and then if it need be, that "leadership" can go to the "council"? That way it could stay a little more organized and then things are associated with one style doesn't get mixed up with another (less arguing maybe). It's not the best or most original way of setting up things. But since there is compound, recurve, longbow, traditional, recreation, competition and hunting, we might be able to address most aspects of archery. I teach anywhere from traditional to hunting to olympic and am certified by USAA (about to get another certification), but am not limited to that one style. So having an organization that collects all kinds of coaches and gives access to everyone would be very much helpful.
> 
> I also think that there should be support more than there should be telling one another that the others are wrong. Archery is an adaptive sport, so we need to give more accommodation than criticizing of one style. So maybe everyone in the group should have opportunities to try some other styles or learn more. Maybe vote on who has the best idea of the style and get them to do some sort of seminar or write a page in a magazine or newsletter that might come into development? And don't limit just one group access to it, but sort of spread it around.


We have been talking about a similar structure with Focus Groups and a Steering Committee but regardless of what you call them the idea was pretty much the same.


----------



## abbykristine (Jul 26, 2013)

Sweet. Well I say go for it, because I will definitely be a part of it for sure!


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

While we are putting our heads together on creating an archery coaches association, it would help us if those of you interested would let us know what kinds of help would you like. When NADA was around, they provided liability insurance for when you weren't otherwise covered (like when you are coaching independently) and a list of coaches available. Any ideas?

If for some reason you would rather keep your suggestions private for some reason please feel free to PM or email me.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Would it be possible to create an online coaches test?


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

From a purely technical perspective the answer is, of course, YES.

The intention is not really to become a certification body but to provide resources and continuing education for coaches. The way I look at it is
like the organizations that doctors, dentists and other professionals have - they don't certify you as a doctor (the state medical board does) but they do provide
continuing education to keep your skills current and build on what you already know. 

We did talk about having online short courses on specific subjects (for example: "the release" or "tuning a recurve" ) where you would complete a module and
then take a short test to prove that you completed the module. That would allow you to fill what you see as gaps in your skills or pursue something that interests you.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Maybe I am looking at this wrong, but if you are going to put yourself above the average person and call yourself a coach, then it seems to me that you have to have someway to prove that you are indeed above the average person. You have to pass a test and then be approved by a certification board. How you go about doing this is something to be determined. This coaching certification has to be worth something for the coach. Maybe it qualifies the coach to buy insurance for a very low price.

My second thought is what gives anyone the authority to say that they are the certification board. The general archery community has to buy into the line of thinking that there is a superior group of people that qualify to be the certification board.

Take a look at the yoga community and how they go about certifying their instructors. I have been taking yoga for 5 years and lead classes when asked. But unless I pay $400 and go to a weekend of yoga training I can't call myself a certified yoga instructor. But I can be a yoga instructor when I want. I guess that I could make up a certificate from my own school of yoga.


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

I agree that there are some problems with the current system of certifying coaches but since I don't
have a better idea I avoid criticizing. Basically what we have now is (to paraphrase Winston Churchill) "the worst system of certification except for all of the rest".

This problem is not limited do coaching archery (or yoga for that matter). Look at the system of certifying teachers.
With all due respect to teachers who are conscientious and do a great job molding the minds of our youth, there are
a lot of teachers out there who are inept, unmotivated or are simply there for the paycheck. Every state has all sorts of
systems for certifying teachers but the bad ones still manage to find themselves in front of classrooms. How frustrating that
must be for the good teachers who get paid the same because they are on a union contract. If the teaching community
(which arguably has a lot more resources than we do) can't get the certification system to weed out the bad apples then we 
need to figure out how to do the best we can with what we have. 

In my mind that is to let the coaches who want to learn and expand their skills do so.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Good luck with certifying coaches. I try to learn more each day and after 40 years I feel like I am just scratching the surface of what a coach needs to know. I think that only a few dedicated people would be willing to go through the training and testing to become a certified coach.


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

jim p said:


> Good luck with certifying coaches. I try to learn more each day and after 40 years I feel like I am just scratching the surface of what a coach needs to know. I think that only a few dedicated people would be willing to go through the training and testing to become a certified coach.


We have no intention of certifying coaches. The intention is to provide continuing education and other resources.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Would you want to sell this continuing education and other resources or would you want to provide free resources?

I saw where you were involved with falcons. That has to be a great hobby.


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

jim p said:


> Would you want to sell this continuing education and other resources or would you want to provide free resources?


Whether the dues would cover that sort of stuff or there would be a charge is yet to be determined. We seem to get a lot of mostly positive feedback that
something like this is a good idea but not a lot of input on what the organization should look like or what services, etc it should provide. One thing that we
DO want is to have it be an open organization run with a lot of input from the coaches it serves.



jim p said:


> I saw where you were involved with falcons. That has to be a great hobby.


Falconry is more of a lifestyle than a hobby. For example have you ever tried to find a "falcon sitter" in the phone book?
It is really a passion and yes it is very rewarding but also a lot of work. I get a lot of emails and calls from would-be apprentices
looking for a sponsor who have no idea what sort of commitment they need to make. The fascination of walking around with a
cool bird on a glove seems to be where their thought process stops. Hunting with a bird of prey is very much like interactive
bird watching and having a wild animal which regards you as a hunting partner is a unique and satisfying relationship. Unlike
bow or firearms hunting however you cannot put your bird away when the season is over.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I can see where it would be a lifestyle. I had never thought that hunting season would be over for falconry. It seems to me that a falcon in the wild hunts everyday so why not let a kept falcon hunt everyday.

I know that there are strict rules about who can keep a falcon and that is a good thing.


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

jim p said:


> I had never thought that hunting season would be over for falconry. It seems to me that a falcon in the wild hunts everyday so why not let a kept falcon hunt everyday.


You clearly have more sense than those in government. Unfortunately falconers are subject to the same seasons as other hunters. We can hunt certain pest species (starlings, European sparrows) 365 but other species have pretty much the same season as other hunters.

If you (or anyone else) is interested take a look at http://www.n-a-f-a.com/ or send me a PM

Now back to our regularly scheduled discussion.....


----------



## montigre (Oct 13, 2008)

I'm up for this--I feel the idea of continuing education would be a boon to our sport and would greatly assist our coaches and instructors in maintaining their proficiencies and would be a great means of enriching our learning experiences.


----------

