# Coaching certification program



## mullligan (Dec 2, 2008)

http://usarchery.org/userfiles/file/12-30-08_Coaching_Certification_FINAL.pdf

Did the age requirement get removed from the coaching program?
In the past there were age requirements as follows:
level 1 = 15yrs or older
level 2 > 18 yrs

Just curious


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

I and others spent a good chunk of change getting certified. Now we are told that we basically have to spend a week each year merely to maintain our certifications. Several thoughts

1) THE NAA is in a panic over the lack of medals and thinks by doing this it will appease the USOC

2) The NAA has an unrealistic attitude that it can be like the PGA or the ATP and more than a few people can actually justify spending a few thousand dollars in vacation time, travel etc each year for what basically is a volunteer system of coaches. 

3) Imposing ever increasing costly requirements on those of us who coach for the love of archery and to help kids is IDIOTIC. How many archery coaches are getting paid the money to support such requirements? How many of us have the time or realistic desire to be another Kisik Lee or Lloyd Brown-imposing this on us volunteer coaches is going to cause alot of us to say enough is enough

4) the NAA apparently has decided it has too many certified coaches and not enough true believers. 

5) I believe the NAA may have violated both actual and implied contractual terms with those of us who went through the certification seminars. What I read these terms as saying is that we really didn't teach your properly or that what we taught you is changing so much that we gave you obsolete information. We all know that is BS 

6) The NAA seems to imply that if you want to be a "certified coach" you must make that your only hobby or non=work related activity. Me-I prefer to use my vacation time taking my kids to tournaments. Spending a week at a dream team camp (which has a couple kids that I was rather instrumental in teaching) means one less week I can go to tournaments. If some coaches aren't coaching or teaching kids incorrectly-deal with them. FOr those of us who continually send competent athletes to competitions, stop trying to get us to drop out of the sport.

Frankly I am tired and sick of an organization that cannot get its act together and seems to constantly make things up as it goes on. I have been involved in several sports and NGBs and it is my opinion that the NAA is clearly the least professionally run I have ever seen. I also was around when the NRA lost its NGB status as well and have more than a passing bit of knowledge over that rather monumental change. 

sorry if I sound bitter-but the lack of consistency is appalling.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

mullligan said:


> http://usarchery.org/userfiles/file/12-30-08_Coaching_Certification_FINAL.pdf
> 
> Did the age requirement get removed from the coaching program?
> In the past there were age requirements as follows:
> ...


Yes, interesting, especially since even the L1 coaches have to have a background check (how much does that cost?). Can a 15 year old even get a "background" check? Is that even legal to require of a minor?


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

Jim C said:


> I and others spent a good chunk of change getting certified. Now we are told that we basically have to spend a week each year merely to maintain our certifications. Several thoughts
> 
> 1) THE NAA is in a panic over the lack of medals and thinks by doing this it will appease the USOC
> 
> ...


ttt

As a volunteer coach, I want to echo these sentiments. For goodness sakes, how about a coherent approach that recognizes we are volunteers. 
I don't mean to say that we should not be competent. We should. Most of us are. 
We care about the archers we teach. Please go the extra mile to help us out, rather than ask us to comply with onerous dicta.


----------



## Steve N (Apr 27, 2004)

I am an L-II with two years left on my current certification. My wife has to undergo periodic background checks for her teaching certificate. She believes the check was about $40 two years ago. Add to that the $20 recertification fee, means its going to cost me $15 a year to be a volunteer. Thats not a deal-breaker for me, but some states or jurisdictions may charge a lot more for the background check. I also wonder what the "TBD" recertification requirements will be, and what they will cost. If I have to travel, pay for a course, plus hotels and meals, to remain a volunteer, I know I will push for re-imbursement from the club, which means higher fees for the JOADs.

I had also seen a document from either NADA or NAA in November that said instructors and coaches would have to have certified first-aid training. I don't see any of that in the linked document.

I don't oppose making sure everyone is coaching from the same book, but NAA and NADA need to make the recertification available at the lowest possible cost. Otherwise they are going to lose a LOT of volunteers.


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*Background Checks*



Warbow said:


> Yes, interesting, especially since even the L1 coaches have to have a background check (how much does that cost?). Can a 15 year old even get a "background" check? Is that even legal to require of a minor?



I work with schools and scouts and I have had to have a background check every year. I have to pay for it and it cost me about $25 for a basic check.

Anyone can have a background check, but if you are a minor your records are sealed. If the NAA is going to run a more extensive check which may include financial then I think I am going to have a big problem with it.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

So what do people wish had happened?

It seems that the L1 and L2 are largely unchanged except for the addition of the background check.

BTW, the background check shows one of the presumptions in the NAA coaching system. They gear their coaching as if kids are the only target for beginning archery. It is all JOAD, JOAD, JOAD... Sure, at the higher levels, that is not the case, but they sort of presume that people will learn the basics in a JOAD program. But, I also recognize that kid programs are one of the main areas where coaches are needed and utilized, but I do think the NAA does also need to expand beyond thinking of all its programs as being just a big Olympic farm league.


----------



## sep1318 (Oct 16, 2008)

I had this long post drawn up, and then my session timed out.  Basically, I agree with Warbow that JOAD shouldn't be the sole focus of the NAA. I also think that since we're working with a volunteer community, the time and money committment for being certified should be minimal. Otherwise, it won't be worth it to jump through so many hurdles; last time I checked, there weren't any professional archers. Constraints are therefore part of the process, and the rules should reflect that, and be more relaxed, less arbirarily demanding. Coaching should be about the party line, it should be about working with the community you've got to improve what they have with what works for them. Humanity isn't a cookie cutter.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

This is a tough area in many regards. As many point out, coaching, including running JOAD programs, is largely a volunteer thing. But others--including me--have pointed out the convoluted and inefficient dissemination of information by the NAA as to what they are currently advocating. The new program will insure that high level coaches will have to stay current by having to attend relatively frequent re-certification courses. So there are competing issues working.

I like seeing the clarity of new program, finally eliminating the convoluted nature of the various training tracks. I like the clarity of the PDF in clearly noting the requirements (well, not in the details of what the gospel will be in the courses, of course) and who administers what. But I can also see the reasons why tying the the more advanced coaching to certs rather than just education may lead to less training not more, due to the expense and time involved.

As to the background checks, that is an interesting question. We are getting increasingly paranoid in todays society and I can see that the NAA wants to protect itself and JOAD clubs, but I'm wondering what other orgs require checks for similar training? Especially since those checks are redundant for school programs where the law requires background checks. Seems more CYA than actual protection for the public.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

I have gone thru a background checks (two sets of prints and questionnaires) for a state and local agency for work.
I will soon be finger printed and checked again as a school vendor.

Coach certification will be a fourth opportunity to be finger printed and checked.
I assume that there is no need to reinvent the wheel with regards to background checks and can copy what camps, scouts, parks and recreation and other programs do with regards to record keeping, etc.
Have they found a way of avoiding redundant prints and checks and to provide the needed security to safe guard personal information?

Hopefully more, especially the youth, will realize that DUI, vandalism and other falls from grace will follow them and adversely impact their future livelihood and ability to enjoy life freely.

This is an interesting free website, www.criminalsearches.com 

Here are some anti ID theft services:
http://www.zanderins.com/idtheft/idtheft.aspx
http://www.consumercompare.org/iden...t protection&gclid=CL-u_9Lz65cCFQ89awodtindEA


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> Have they found a way of avoiding redundant prints and checks and to provide the needed security to safe guard personal information?


That is an interesting notion. So many institutions demand SSN info that I don't think about the back end job of protecting that info that much, but does the NAA have rigorous procedures in place to insure that the material to apply for a background check and the results are secure? Negligence on their part could be a cause of action, especially if they keep any of that information on a computer or drive that could be lost or compromised by an internet trojan hunting for SSNs. (I'm not saying someone would target the NAA in particular, but few companies have perfect hygiene when it comes to computing, especially if they aren't used to dealing with sensitive information at an enterprise level.)


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Warbow said:


> That is an interesting notion. So many institutions demand SSN info that I don't think about the back end job of protecting that info that much, but does the NAA have rigorous procedures in place to insure that the material to apply for a background check and the results are secure? Negligence on their part could be a cause of action, especially if they keep any of that information on a computer or drive that could be lost or compromised by an internet trojan hunting for SSNs. (I'm not saying someone would target the NAA in particular, but few companies have perfect hygiene when it comes to computing, especially if they aren't used to dealing with sensitive information at an enterprise level.)


Hopefully we are just ignorant of the standard procedures for safe guarding and we have nothing to worry about.
"I assume that there is no need to reinvent the wheel with regards to background checks and can copy what camps, scouts, parks and recreation and other programs do with regards to record keeping, etc."
I will be interested to find out what the procedures are. If anyone has knowledge as to the details of how personal information and liability is managed at other like organizations, please share them.


----------



## redneckarcher29 (Oct 13, 2005)

Jim C said:


> I and others spent a good chunk of change getting certified. Now we are told that we basically have to spend a week each year merely to maintain our certifications. Several thoughts
> 
> 1) THE NAA is in a panic over the lack of medals and thinks by doing this it will appease the USOC
> 
> ...


Well said Jim, It is crazzy to have all the coaches fly out there. It's a waste of money(in my eyes). I am just a Level 2, but I would love to get my level 3 someday.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

If the NAA wants to send "certifiers" to the clubs fine. As I noted on another thread, the NAA labours under the delusions it is doing us a huge favor by having us as certified coaches. In reality, we are doing the NAA a big favor by creating NAA dues paying members.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

redneckarcher29 said:


> Well said Jim, It is crazzy to have all the coaches fly out there. It's a waste of money(in my eyes). I am just a Level 2, but I would love to get my level 3 someday.


Mike,
The Community Coach is perfect for you as a Intermediate Instructor.
In just three days, you will be able to receive BEST coaching training can become a certified coach.
Ideally your Mass archery association or Maine archery community or yourself would arrange for the Community Coach Course Instructor to come your area so a large group of Intermediate Instructors can all become certified community coaches without having to travel a great distance or spend a week of vacation.

Collegiate Archers are one of the keys to the future of the sport. Many collegiate archers go on to become club and JOAD club leaders, and coaches. Collegiate archers make good year around program leaders because archery became a part of life when they embraced personal responsibility and commitment.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Serious Fun said:


> Mike,
> The Community Coach is perfect for you as a Intermediate Instructor.
> In just three days, you will be able to receive BEST coaching training can become a certified coach.
> Ideally your Mass archery association or Maine archery community or yourself would arrange for the Community Coach Course Instructor to come your area so a large group of Intermediate Instructors can all become certified community coaches without having to travel a great distance or spend a week of vacation.
> ...


So Bob, you are a smart guy-one who works hard for archery-tell me why us coaches who are level 3's need to be subjected to radically increased costs to keep our certification.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Jim C said:


> So Bob, you are a smart guy-one who works hard for archery-tell me why us coaches who are level 3's need to be subjected to radically increased costs to keep our certification.


I can guess but don’t have the official “answers”; I suggest that the USAA transition team would.


I like how the new program unifies USAA coaching but that is a cost saver and not a cost increase because some don’t have to take part in two tracks.
I think that continuing education is a good thing. Continuing education must cost something or it probably not worth anything. One of the complaints I often hear from parent of JOAD is the lack of a consistent coaching instruction. They tell me that each time the move from one club to another, for what ever reason, they are told essential that what they were doing was all wrong and had to start over. Hopefully having all the coaches get up to speed with a unified plan and technique will keep archers from begin discouraged and leaving the sport.
I like that ASEP is no longer required which is a cost saver. Many have mentioned that the course, while interesting, did not apply to archery.
I think the background checks are here to stay. If it helps to weed out undesirable, it’s worth it.
I really like how easy it will be to become a Community Coach without having to wait then travel and take a week off to become Level 3. That’s a big time saver and that means money saver.
I think many level 3 should consider Community Coach Certification. I sense that the hope is to entice Level 3s to become Regional Coaches, but when time, money are in short supply, and then Community Coach is a great choice. Did I mention that I am jazzed about Community Coach?
I think yearly renew is to frequent, but I am lazy and just don’t want to have to keep sending out re registration packages so often. I don’t know anything about background checks and how that affects renewals and certification timing. I hope that we will be able to look at others that do background checking like camps, scouts and parks and recreation and learn from them.

The need is acute. There are literally hundreds of thousands of National Archery in the Schools archers out there. More are introduced every day. Camps, Scouts and 4H programs continue to introduce archery to many. The After School Archery Program is one place for those archers to continue to take part in archery as well as be introduced for the first time. Some will migrate to 3D, other to hunting. 

And some will give the JOAD as a year around program a try. That’s where the USAA community takes on the task of giving back to the sport by helping other with their archery just as we were helped. The best way to help is to provide a well reinforced a sustainable program. That means continuing education, evaluation and modifications to improve and to accommodate the changing environment. It all take funding...and a will to improve.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Thanks Bob but I find this current direction by the NAA insulting and based on the PM's I have received so do many others. As to background checks-you know what I do for a real job-

btw if someone buys a gun every year they have had that background check

I believe the way to handle things is to deal with problems-not make everyone have to jump through hoops to deal with supposed problems.


----------



## redneckarcher29 (Oct 13, 2005)

Serious Fun said:


> Mike,
> The Community Coach is perfect for you as a Intermediate Instructor.
> In just three days, you will be able to receive BEST coaching training can become a certified coach.
> Ideally your Mass archery association or Maine archery community or yourself would arrange for the Community Coach Course Instructor to come your area so a large group of Intermediate Instructors can all become certified community coaches without having to travel a great distance or spend a week of vacation.
> ...


That would be awesome, From what I understood I had to travel out to the training camp just to get level 3 certified....I didn't know they would come to us


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Jim C said:


> Thanks Bob but I find this current direction by the NAA insulting and based on the PM's I have received so do many others. As to background checks-you know what I do for a real job-
> 
> btw if someone buys a gun every year they have had that background check
> 
> I believe the way to handle things is to deal with problems-not make everyone have to jump through hoops to deal with supposed problems.


Jim,
When my professional association instituted continuing education, I felt it was unnecessary and a waste to time and money. I graduated from school, passed my licensing exams and finished my internship. Why was even more needed? Now that I have had to do it; I have learned to take advantage of the opportunity to learn new things. I am now better equipped to serve my customer. I just wish I had more time to devote to continuing education.

What is the protocol with regards to frequency of background checks when it comes to interacting with youth? Should all Instructors and coaches be required to have a background check every year? I know such a process would be costly and administratively time consuming but if it’s something we need to do, so be it. I will just have to pay knowing it’s the right thing to do. I selfishly would like to avoid having to be finger printed and background checked by several different entities (State, local agency, schools and coaching) each year. Talk about cost and redundancy!

I think the Community Coach course addresses the difficulty of attending a Level 3 course. More Community Coaches help solve the problem of training enough Intermediate instructors to start and run USAA Clubs to serve the flood of new archers. The Regional coach program insures that Regional coaches are active and in touch with the current state of coaching technique. One might call the changes to the coaching program as efforts to solve problems. I see them as a coaching program that is committed to improvement based on review and evaluation. I applaud the desire to implement a program with objective criteria. I also applaud the enlightened attitude that recognizes that a person that took a Level 3 course recently where BEST was taught has different needs than a Level 3 that was certified in 2000. 

More:
I agree with others that suggest that coaches and instructors contact the USAA with specific issues. My doing so the administration can identify special circumstances as well as trends and address them. The only why that the USAA can understand and address specific issues is to inform the USAA of specific circumstances. 

One thing I do know is that we need more Community Coach Trainers to teach Community Coach Courses across the country. CCC Trainer is another wonderful opportunity for Level 3 coaches to pursue.

We, the target archery community, are not delivering on the promise providing a place for all that want to be archers. Literally hundred of thousands of NASP archers have no place to go after NASP. The numbers are huge! Dedicated NASP instructors and volunteers are spread thin as it is. 

Thankfully there is hope on the horizon. The After School Archery Program is a wonderful bridge for those that would like to give an 8 week or so archery program a try to go beyond a camp, scout, 4H or basic NASP experience. The brilliance of ASAP is that practically anyone with the will can offer ASAP including NFAA and USAA clubs and Parks and Recreation department professionals who are in the “business” of offering community recreation programs. In ASAP, the archer is exposed to NFAA style (field, indoors), ASA Style (3D), Hunting and USAA style (Youth World Archery). After ASAP, some will migrate to the NFAA, ASA, IBO, hunting and to a year around USAA club if there is one nearby. 

We need to be “nearby” and that means more Instructors and coaches that start and lead JOAD clubs. If we don’t, we are discarding the dreams of countless youths to become a better person through archery. 
The job is bigger that any one individual. The only way we can succeed is to work together. I am not just talking about unity within the USAA. I am talking about the entire community of archery. State game and fish departments, archery manufacturers, supplier and retailers, archers with disabilities, clubs, at risks youth programs, ranges, Parks and Recreation, NFAA, ASA, IBO, NASP, Scouts, 4H, Camps, foundations… the list goes on. I had the pleasure of attending and presenting at the ATA Summit. What a wonderful community to be a part of. What is universal is that all know that we need to do a better job and improve, grow and provide as soon as possible. If you made it this far, don’t be discouraged. All of this is a huge opportunity.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Serious Fun said:


> Jim,
> When my professional association instituted continuing education, I felt it was unnecessary and a waste to time and money. I graduated from school, passed my licensing exams and finished my internship. Why was even more needed? Now that I have had to do it; I have learned to take advantage of the opportunity to learn new things. I am now better equipped to serve my customer. I just wish I had more time to devote to continuing education.
> 
> What is the protocol with regards to frequency of background checks when it comes to interacting with youth? Should all Instructors and coaches be required to have a background check every year? I know such a process would be costly and administratively time consuming but if it’s something we need to do, so be it. I will just have to pay knowing it’s the right thing to do. I selfishly would like to avoid having to be finger printed and background checked by several different entities (State, local agency, schools and coaching) each year. Talk about cost and redundancy!.



Professional certifications? Yes I have to have annual legal education to keep my law license. My employer pays that cost and I have a license that allows me to make a rather high salary. When I get paid 300 dolllars an hour to coach archery and I am required to have Continuing education to coach archery you might have a point-right now you post contradictory positions-how its great to impose these costs and at the same time claiming we need more coaches. Redundancy-We just took the RHPP and Level III in the last two years. 





Serious Fun said:


> I think the Community Coach course addresses the difficulty of attending a Level 3 course. More Community Coaches help solve the problem of training enough Intermediate instructors to start and run USAA Clubs to serve the flood of new archers. The Regional coach program insures that Regional coaches are active and in touch with the current state of coaching technique. One might call the changes to the coaching program as efforts to solve problems. I see them as a coaching program that is committed to improvement based on review and evaluation. I applaud the desire to implement a program with objective criteria. I also applaud the enlightened attitude that recognizes that a person that took a Level 3 course recently where BEST was taught has different needs than a Level 3 that was certified in 2000.
> 
> More:
> I agree with others that suggest that coaches and instructors contact the USAA with specific issues. My doing so the administration can identify special circumstances as well as trends and address them. The only why that the USAA can understand and address specific issues is to inform the USAA of specific circumstances.
> ...


can you guarantee that in two years the NAA won't change the requirements for this new type of coach? How many people would have spent the money to get a level III if they knew about the CURRENT REQUIREMENTS




Serious Fun said:


> We, the target archery community, are not delivering on the promise providing a place for all that want to be archers. Literally hundred of thousands of NASP archers have no place to go after NASP. The numbers are huge! Dedicated NASP instructors and volunteers are spread thin as it is.


How is causing people like me to throw up my hands in disgust and walk away from the NAA going to do this. You know my club, you know our record. I have done more to promote NAA archery in Southern Ohio than just about anyone over the last ten years. The ONLY indoor and outdoor range available to NAA members in the greater cincinnati area I fund with my own money. THis is where you and the NAA is contradictory-you want more coaches yet you want to cause current coaches to leave the organization



Serious Fun said:


> Thankfully there is hope on the horizon. The After School Archery Program is a wonderful bridge for those that would like to give an 8 week or so archery program a try to go beyond a camp, scout, 4H or basic NASP experience. The brilliance of ASAP is that practically anyone with the will can offer ASAP including NFAA and USAA clubs and Parks and Recreation department professionals who are in the “business” of offering community recreation programs. In ASAP, the archer is exposed to NFAA style (field, indoors), ASA Style (3D), Hunting and USAA style (Youth World Archery). After ASAP, some will migrate to the NFAA, ASA, IBO, hunting and to a year around USAA club if there is one nearby.
> 
> We need to be “nearby” and that means more Instructors and coaches that start and lead JOAD clubs. If we don’t, we are discarding the dreams of countless youths to become a better person through archery.
> The job is bigger that any one individual. The only way we can succeed is to work together. I am not just talking about unity within the USAA. I am talking about the entire community of archery. State game and fish departments, archery manufacturers, supplier and retailers, archers with disabilities, clubs, at risks youth programs, ranges, Parks and Recreation, NFAA, ASA, IBO, NASP, Scouts, 4H, Camps, foundations… the list goes on. I had the pleasure of attending and presenting at the ATA Summit. What a wonderful community to be a part of. What is universal is that all know that we need to do a better job and improve, grow and provide as soon as possible. If you made it this far, don’t be discouraged. All of this is a huge opportunity.


I like you Bob, I am not going to say what I really think about this last pie in the sky bit you wrote here.


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

*Recert.*

I am going to have to do this in bits and pieces.

I am Jim C's wife, we turn out many fine archers through CINCINNAIT JUNIOR OLYMPIANS. It is a GREAT INSULT to us to have to go through recertification programs after we consistantly put out a good prduct.

Jim has more education than those running the NAA making these inane decisions. How many of you have 3 Ivy League degrees?

We have turned out 3 kids who have either attended or are attending DREAM TEAM camps. We have turned out many fine BRONZE, SILVE RAND GOLD OLYMPIANS...CHECK WITH TERRY IN THE FRONT OFFICE.

Our expenses to come to a coaching seminar are double what most have. We have to fins baby/house sitter, barn animal care, etc.

to be continued...


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

*recert. pt 2*

We have invested OVER $250,000 in our archery program. built an indoor range, and have the only outdoor range int he area.

We give kids bows and all the accourtrements they need to be competitive. For graduation, we normally give them the bow they are shooting which is generally a top of the line bow, so that's about $1000, because we outfit it as well.

To force us to come to another coaching seminar when we are turning out fine archers is taint amount to saying "you're not doing your job right becasue we didn't teach you the right thing the first time!" What's that say about the NAA?


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

*recert. pt 3*

I have a propsal!

Jim and I are aslo Judges! Tom Green sends out scenarios that one might run into a tournament as case studies. Why can't the NAA's not so Grand Pooh Bahs come up with such a thing for the High Level coaching staff?
It would make sense! The way the judges thing works out is you answer the cse studies, and email to TG and then maintain your judges status.

NAA, I don't have to belong to your organization! I already am a life member of the NFAA! Cost is more reasonable! I don't have to ba an NAA member to compete in your tournaments, I am an NFAA LIFE MEMBER! Why did I restate? I think the NFAA is much better run and they don't have the stipulations you do for their coaches!

BEWARE NAA YOU COULD BE STIRRING UP A BOILING POT OF OIL BY YOUR DEMANDS ON SUPERIORLY PERFORMING COACHES.


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

*recert pt 4*

The boiling pot will put the NAA in the PIT!

You have to watch what you do, you never know who you are dealing with.

I/WE STRONGLY OBJECT TO YOUR DEMANDS FOR RECERTIFICATION, ESPECIALLY WHEN OUR CLUB PUTS OUT MANY FINE ARCHERS, BRONZE, SILVER AND GOLD OLYMPIANS, EVEN DREAM TEAM MEMBERS!

What's the real issue? Maybe tackle that and figure out what's wrong from the top first, then work your way down the line.

Yes, Yes, I know the NAA is restucturing, but if this is resturcturing, then we better take another look! 

These demands, are *extreme* and unecessary. 

Respectfully,
Liz C


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

*recert pt 5*

A Post Script:

We also have a collegiate archer, adults and a very senior member!

So we range from age 9-over 70, and most are tournament competitors!


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Continuing education is a good thing. If the coaching program continues to review and evaluate, I would expect the program to evolve and change as the program becomes more experienced and enlightened. I assume the TBD recertification process would be the vehicle to facilitate such program updates.

Before anyone gives up, I suggest personally contacting the coach program folks at the USAA and discussing a person’s specific situation. The four page USA Archery Coach Certification Program cannot begin to address the variety coaching situations. Less than a page addresses transition. There is a huge difference between a Level 3 that was last trained at the time of the Clinton administration verses a Level 3 that has also had recent ongoing high performance BEST training. There is even a group of people that took the last Level 3 class that have are not certified pending the determination of the USA Archery Coach Certification Program, talk about limbo. 

I like the idea of trying to be objective but there is a reason that laws are interpreted by people (lawyers, juries, judges and court members). Each case should be considered by its own merits. I was raised believing that working with people and not titles or class is the “American way”. Let us know what the USAA has to say to your specific situation. By doing so, you help others that may have a similar question or situation. Being proactive is a good thing.

Just because things have not worked out in the past is no reason to avoid trying again. The try and try again attitude is how we got to the moon, how airbags were developed, and how an archer hits the X. I do think the archery community can unify. At the very least, I never want to be the person to blame not trying and casting youths a drift.


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Serious Fun said:


> Continuing education is a good thing. If the coaching program continues to review and evaluate, I would expect the program to evolve and change as the program becomes more experienced and enlightened. I assume the TBD recertification process would be the vehicle to facilitate such program updates.
> 
> Before anyone gives up, I suggest personally contacting the coach program folks at the USAA and discussing a person’s specific situation. The four page USA Archery Coach Certification Program cannot begin to address the variety coaching situations. Less than a page addresses transition. There is a huge difference between a Level 3 that was last trained at the time of the Clinton administration verses a Level 3 that has also had recent ongoing high performance BEST training. There is even a group of people that took the last Level 3 class that have are not certified pending the determination of the USA Archery Coach Certification Program, talk about limbo.
> 
> ...


Bob,
Try, Try again(?) in this instance is going to COST A BUNCH OF PEOPLE A TON OF MONEY. My father always used to say, if you can't do it right the first time, then you're going to spend at least twice the time fixing the errors that were caused by doing things incompletely the first time.
I don't know many people who have the kind of time and resources that this endeavor is going to require. Is the NAA WILLING and ABLE to PAY for all of us to come out again and get retrained? To pay the salaries of those who need to take a week off? I doubt that very much!


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

*Proposal*

I have another idea, as Jimand I were talking:

Since it is NOT an OLYMPIC year, maybe The NAA could pay for Kisik Lee to come to the states (or the JOAD clubs) and do seminars. Since Kisik is the "guru" for the USOC, why not have him see the USA and come to the JOAD clubs and preach the BEST System to all the coaches. He could use the JOAD sessions to certify coaches. At JOAD you have actual students and, in this case, it would be actual coaches or "coaches in training".
It might just work out for the clubs and for Coach Lee. We have plenty parents who watch their kids practice at home, and wouldn't it be nice for the parents to have the knowledge of what their children are practicing?
I athink it would be good for Coach Lee to get out there and see the JOAD clubs, since this is where he is drawing from for DT, which (as I undestand) are potential Olympic hopefuls. Kids can have good and bad days at tournaments, but at JOAD there is consistency!

Just an idea!


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

lizard said:


> I have another idea, as Jimand I were talking:
> 
> Since it is NOT an OLYMPIC year, maybe The NAA could pay for Kisik Lee to come to the states (or the JOAD clubs) and do seminars. Since Kisik is the "guru" for the USOC, why not have him see the USA and come to the JOAD clubs and preach the BEST System to all the coaches. He could use the JOAD sessions to certify coaches. At JOAD you have actual students and, in this case, it would be actual coaches or "coaches in training".
> It might just work out for the clubs and for Coach Lee. We have plenty parents who watch their kids practice at home, and wouldn't it be nice for the parents to have the knowledge of what their children are practicing?
> ...


“…Redundancy-We just took the RHPP and Level III in the last two years.”
Liz, If I understand correctly, you and Jim to part in Regional High Performance Program training recently. That being the case, You have had National Coaching BEST training, right?
I would think you two would not need it again except for continuing education items since you took the RHPP training. Let us know what the USAA coach transition leadership has to say to you two. 

Regional Camps: A dream of the JOAD Committee is to reinstitute JOAD Olympian Camps regionally. If there were administrative planning and funding, there could be Regional JOAD camps. These would be ideal for Regional Coaches to conduct as part of their recertification. Your club and facility would be an ideal location. Ohio knows how to host an event. I would love to hear what the USAA coach transition leadership has to say to you if you offered to host a regional camps for Regional Coach Recertification. 

The opportunities are there if we can envision them and proactively work to make it happen. The key is to understand the vision and adopt a why not point of view. Your "just an idea" are exactly want needs to be communicated in person to the USAA leadership. You know what you are talking about, tell them.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

lizard said:


> I have another idea, as Jimand I were talking:
> 
> Since it is NOT an OLYMPIC year, maybe The NAA could pay for Kisik Lee to come to the states (or the JOAD clubs) and do seminars. Since Kisik is the "guru" for the USOC, why not have him see the USA and come to the JOAD clubs and preach the BEST System to all the coaches. He could use the JOAD sessions to certify coaches. At JOAD you have actual students and, in this case, it would be actual coaches or "coaches in training".
> It might just work out for the clubs and for Coach Lee. We have plenty parents who watch their kids practice at home, and wouldn't it be nice for the parents to have the knowledge of what their children are practicing?
> ...


An interesting idea. It makes more sense financially to send one person around the the country rather than hundreds to Chula Vista, like an author book tour. But, in the case of sending Coach Lee around, the actual cost of travel and lodging would be obvious, not hidden as it is when people have to take time off work and travel to see him.

In martial arts it is common for masters to tour the country and give seminars and demonstrations at local dojos. Seems like the same thing could be good for JOAD programs, to both train and provide publicity to local programs.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

In 2006, Coach Lee sort of did a tour. As a JOAD leader, judge and tourney director, it was by pleasure to take part in BEST presentations in Chula Vista, twice in Vegas at the World Archery Festival, at the Arizona Cup, and at the National Target Championship if memory serves. Coach Lee conducted several other presentation at other major tourneys and events during that time.

*Observations: * 

One presentation isn’t enough. Even though I took park in five presentation, I learned a great deal each and every time. Again the concept of continuing education.
The many of the attendees at the Arizona Cup Coach Lee presentation were international coaches and archers that seemed more than eager to glean as much as they could.
Coach Lee is soft spoken and knows how to use power point.
Many coaches were hesitant to take part in the presentations back then as it was unclear how BEST would be integrated into the coach certification progress. Now that the USAA intend to incorporate and main stream BEST, perhaps it is time to go on tour again.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Serious Fun said:


> “…Redundancy-We just took the RHPP and Level III in the last two years.”
> Liz, If I understand correctly, you and Jim to part in Regional High Performance Program training recently. That being the case, You have had National Coaching BEST training, right?
> I would think you two would not need it again except for continuing education items since you took the RHPP training. Let us know what the USAA coach transition leadership has to say to you two.
> 
> ...




Here is what we were told by the recently fired Tom Parrish

1) we were first told that IF WE DID NOT attend the recent BEST RHPP Recertification program we would be DROPPED as coaches. EVEN THOUGH

a) the Regional BEST/RHPP director is a member of our club

b) two of my kids are on dream team and the other coaches clearly know what sort of archers we are turning out

c) I have been at the last 5 JOAD nationals and I am constantly conferring with other coaches

THEN after I complained to Don Rabska, Darrell, and others, we were TOLD WE MERELY HAD TO SEND VIDEOS of our archers. I said WHY -all Parrish had to do was to go to dream camp or JOAD Nationals. We have had kids at both.

WE WERE ALSO TOLD By another true believer that well-you might lose your RHPP Certifications but your Level III is valid and could be renewed just by paying the recertification fee.

DO YOU NOW UNDERSTAND WHY I AM PSSED OFF BOB? Because the clowns running things cannot even get their frigging ducks in a row. Why the hell should I continue to pay money to an organization that has no clue about what it wants. Now we have this community coach certification. Wonderful, how soon is that going to be changed.

WHY DOES THE NAA FEEL A NEED TO CREATE ENEMIES out of people who have busted their balls for this organization. DO you know how much time I have spent running tournaments for the NAA etc? Figure an easy 500 hours over the last ten years. 


AS TOM BARKER NOTED, one of the FEW things the NAA does competently is judges and Coaches. WHY CHANGE SOMETHING THAT IS WORKING.

WHY SHOULD I TRUST the koolaid drinkers who tell me this is for the better when they constantly change their own positions.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Jim,
Heck yes!
The very subjective nature of the coaching certification process is exactly what newly published USA Coach program is trying to fix.
It make no sense to have a HPP coaching program and a separate Level 3 and Level 4 coach certification process.
To rarely if ever offer a Level 3 course is crazy, how do you expect to encourage coaches to become certified when there is practically no chance to attend a class?
Then if you do become Level 3, you need to take a RHPP course too?
Your frustration is a direct result having two systems and no clarity, understanding of purpose or objectivity.
Your frustration is shared by many and undoubtedly one of the reasons for the unification.

I suspect that the promises made to you by the past administrators were empty because the association was splintered. 
I would not go so far as to say you were lied too. To lie a person would need to know the truth which was an impossibility.

The change in leadership shows that the USAA understands the need and is willing to do what it takes to fix the problems.
The CEO structure puts one person with the success of the whole USAA in charge.

For those that have languished for years in coaching confusion, it is amazing that you were able to hang in there this long in a state of conflict.
It is as if we are accustom to chaos and think that things are the way they should be. Like a hostage that begins to sympathize with their captor.

We have lost several great coaches that could not stand it and simply let their certification lapse.
Other have been driven away by the antics you have experienced and reported on.
We might get them back if they see that the program is a well organized united effort.

For new coaches, the USAA Coaching Program is a single clear path that encourage them to follow the road map.
Unification and objectivity vs. who you know and back scratching and the good ole boy network.

It was not your or my or anyone else fault except to say that if we don’t insist on professionalism, transparency and business like conduct, what we will get is the same old thing. 
If you can make sense of it all go out and yell, “I have had enough and I am not going to take it anymore” and then work together to make the USAA the best it can be for the betterment of whole sport. That sort of happened on October 31, 2008.

I would not blame anyone that steps back and lets the dust clear before re engaging. In fact, it might be a good strategy to preserve mental health. But if you see the benefit of an effective USAA and have the tools and vision needed to help shape the future. Do what you can.


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Serious Fun said:


> “…Redundancy-We just took the RHPP and Level III in the last two years.”
> Liz, If I understand correctly, you and Jim to part in Regional High Performance Program training recently. That being the case, You have had National Coaching BEST training, right? Yes we had BOTH the level 3 and the HPP coaching seminars (in the same year) and were certified
> I would think you two would not need it again except for continuing education items since you took the RHPP training. Let us know what the USAA coach transition leadership has to say to you two. An idea, might be to get the HPP seminar on DVD and send it out to all those certified coaches who turn out archers like we do, and have that as 'continuing ed', at no charge, as we have already paid dearly for the certification.
> 
> ...


What I was trying to get across is that Coach Lee needs to get out there and see the clubs he is drawing from...and YES, it will take funds and planning to get Coach out there, but he NEEDS to be exposed to the clubs! If he is just exposed to the DT kids, then he cannot see kids like Ian, our son, who has shot MASTER LEVEL (indoor) already, as well as the other kids who would probably treasure his just being there!


----------



## strcpy (Dec 13, 2003)

It seems to me that the whole point of contention is *what* that level III means. 

It seems that Jim C finds it to mean that he is part of a well educated volunteer force that is out to produce as top notch a group of archers as he can. Key word being "volunteer" - it is your hobby - and therefore you may very well only teach a small handful of kids that aren't terribly interested in Olympic Competition.

It seems that the NAA feels that role is given in the community coach (IIRC it was called level 2.5 before we went all Microsofty and decided a nice neat increasing set of numbers was too confusing?). A level III is either a professional coach *or* a person who's primary (and maybe only) hobby is *regional* furthering of archery programs.

In that light you are not even arguing the same thing and will *never* agree that the changes to the level III cert make sense as you fundamentally disagree as to what someone with that certification is supposed to be doing.

In a sense I also agree with both points. At the least of you accept where each side is coming from then their arguments from that point on out make a lot of sense.

However, I personally find I have to fall on Jim C's side on this one, especially given that wasn't what the level III's were to begin with. It would have been better to add the stronger regional (say, a level 3.5) than to "degrade" someone status (in the sense that most level III's are going to be in Jim C's shoes and have treated their level III as a community coach and, therefore, will now have their certifications be lower on the whole org chart even if nothing would change in what they are doing).

I truly like the more top down approach and the attempt to get more locally certified coaches. However I dislike that granting access to certain bits of knowledge (say the level III course) requires you to do tasks that do not pertain to actual coaching. I can very much see that the community coaching certification is a good thing (and there is a real need for something for between a level II and III), however I can only see the requirements for a level III dropping the number of them out there and that is a Bad Thing.


----------



## MilesMom (Apr 26, 2008)

Agreed strcpy (c/c++??). How one defines L3 is quite important to the discussion.

The adoption of the title "Community Coach" is a bit unfortunate IMHO, as is perhaps the title "Regional Coach." These titles do not convey to the public (i.e. parents of archery students, news organizations, schools, etc) any particular level of expertise on the part of the Coach. I know I'm just talking semantics here, but public perception is important to the sport. As a parent, I'd rather know that my kid's coach is an "Advanced Coach" as opposed to a "Community Coach."

The first thing I thought of when I heard the title "Community Coach" was that perhaps it's for people coaching in a casual, limited manner, such as individuals who teach mostly local "Parks & Rec" courses or coach a kid's softball team or whatever. The connotation certainly isn't, to me, that the person is a highly-skilled archery coach. IMHO "Community Coach" is too vague, plus it's not a particularly professional-sounding title to bestow upon US Archery coaches. If I were a coach, I probably wouldn't be too thrilled about advertising myself as a "CC." Sounds very bush-league. Mind you, I'm not dissing the CC certification level, just the use of that title by the NAA.

Likewise, "Regional Coach" doesn't sound like an advanced coaching certification of any sort. An "RC" sounds a bit itinerant in nature, not advanced.

As for the change in coaching certification requirements, I'll leave that discussion to JimC and SeriousFun and others ;-)


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

strcpy said:


> It seems to me that the whole point of contention is *what* that level III means.





MilesMom said:


> These titles do not convey to the public (i.e. parents of archery students, news organizations, schools, etc) any particular level of expertise on the part of the Coach. I know I'm just talking semantics here, but public perception is important to the sport. As a parent, I'd rather know that my kid's coach is an "Advanced Coach" as opposed to a "Community Coach."
> 
> The first thing I thought of when I heard the title "Community Coach" was that perhaps it's for people coaching in a casual, limited manner, such as individuals who teach mostly local "Parks & Rec" courses or coach a kid's softball team or whatever.


I have to agree. When I first read the PDF, the community vs. regional designation made sense to me, but that was inside baseball. From the out side if someone said "community coach" I'd think of other "community" things, like parks and rec and, well, community theater. Either way, community vs. regional are more administrative titles to an outsider and may not indicate what NAA is trying to communicate.

While it was confusing when there were different education and coaching tracks, it does seem odd that now training is tied strictly to certs. I'm glad I don't have to keep renewing my BA over and over again


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Warbow said:


> I have to agree. When I first read the PDF, the community vs. regional designation made sense to me, but that was inside baseball. From the out side if someone said "community coach" I'd think of other "community" things, like parks and rec and, well, community theater. Either way, community vs. regional are more administrative titles to an outsider and may not indicate what NAA is trying to communicate.
> 
> While it was confusing when there were different education and coaching tracks, it does seem odd that now training is tied strictly to certs. I'm glad I don't have to keep renewing my BA over and over again


AWESOME POINT! LOL...renew your BA, I think you have a diploma that states you earned it! HEY! Diplomas for graduates of HPP seminars! GREAT IDEA!
I have to agree with the community v regional coach designation as well. If I am a parent wanting to get my kid into archery (he already is) THOSE 2 titles would mean nix to me! I would want someone who is competent, but most of all WILLING to coach my kid. I think the volunteer is more likely to be the one to teach my kid...why? Beacuse he or she WANTS to do it; sort of like our FINE MEN AND WOMEN IN THE MILITARY! They WANT to be there, they don't HAVE to be there. A volunteer is more likely to teach a kid properly (after having gone through training) than a paid coach...BECAUSE THEY WANT TO DO IT! Not saying that a paid coach isn't a good resource, but if we all got paid for coaching beginning archers then the cost for JOAD would escalate exponentially.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

For sports to be able to support a large number of paid or full time coaches, the sport has to be one that will generate financial rewards for skilled athletes. For example, while squash as a professional sport doesn't have a huge payday in the USA, schools like Harvard, Trinity and Yale give juniors with high national rankings major league breaks on admissions. Thus, at the club where I play, the Squash pro earns 50 bucks an hour teaching squash and with private lessons, and clinics, earns enough during the season to make a good living. Sports like Swimming and gymnastics don't have a huge professional circuit but again, with Division One college scholarships rather plentiful, we have several full time professional swimming and gym coaches in our area who are not High School employees. 

Archery, sadly, has no scholarship potential in US colleges, nor does archery have the same say business important credentials as say Golf or tennis. Before the NAA can create a system of widespread professional coaches who are willing to constantly INVEST in their coaching skills in order to see real financial returns, there must be the demand for professional coaching to support that

Whether we like it or not-there is no such demand and I doubt there will ever be. There are too many other sports that are far more spectator friendly or socially "important" and thus, the NAA pretending that it can be like the Professional teaching golf circuit or the ATP (Association of Tennis Professionals and the related certified coaching program) is a pipe dream. BTW I know of what I speak of-I have been a certified table tennis instructor for 32 years (even table tennis has more paid coaches than archery) and I was a college (Cornell) squash coach for several years and I serve as a volunteer adjunct coach at our club working with elite juniors. 

Imposing ever inceasing costs and UNCERTAINTY upon VOLUNTEER coaches in an effort to create true believers is going to leave the church pews rather barren.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Easy to understand for a new to archery person is helpful.
Numbers are much easier than names for sure.
Bronze, silver and gold is also something that is recognizable to most.
I wonder if it would be worthwhile to have coach certification “nick names”
Community-Bronze
Regional-Silver
Elite-Gold
Master-Diamond or Platinum


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Jim C said:


> ...Archery, sadly, has no scholarship potential in US colleges, ....


Sorry for going off topic just for a moment.
It turns out that USAA College Archery Program is a collegiate scholarship opportunity thanks in large part to the Easton Sports Development Foundation.
http://www.uscollegiatearchery.org/scholarships/
Scholarship can be had at the “club” level as opposed to the restrictive NCAA sanctioned type.
What is being offered today is a far cry from just a year or even a few months ago.
In today’s world, the speed of which new information and knowledge is produced is staggering. It is hard to keep up, no doubt.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Lets resolve the incompetence of the national organization and its short sighted nonsense first before dealing with names

I have yet to hear why I and all the other level IIIs should have to BUY our certification all over a mere 2-3 years after we already paid for it

Lets be Honest 

MOST LEVEL IIIs did so for the following reasons

1) So they could certify Level I or II's in their community or club

2) To be certified nationally rather than locally

The NAA's current take on Level III's is myopic, deluded and does not comport with reality. I know very few Level III's who aspire to be olympic coaches. I leave that dream to people like Don Rabska or Dick Tone-people whose entire professional life is archery. 

I never saw a need to be a level IV-the certification seminar I went to was the same for both other than the IV Candidates had to give a presentation of 20 minutes-ALL OF WHICH I could have done equally as well without much effort as was the case with everyone else in the room, plus they spent an afternoon talking about their coaching.

Lets be introduce some more honesty. there are plenty of good coaches who don't jump through the NAA hoops. Manning Baumgartner comes to mind and I don't believe Terry Wunderle does either. But for those of us who wanted to support the NAA, that goal is rapidly fading. I am to the point where I think those who decreed this new nonsense are engaging in a contractual breech with those of us who paid our money and they should go the way of Parrish and others. Its time for the MEMBERSHIP to control this organization and get rid of the clowns who have no clue about reality or care about those of us who are the grass roots members.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Serious Fun said:


> Sorry for going off topic just for a moment.
> It turns out that USAA College Archery Program is a collegiate scholarship opportunity thanks in large part to the Easton Sports Development Foundation.
> http://www.uscollegiatearchery.org/scholarships/
> Scholarship can be had at the “club” level as opposed to the restrictive NCAA sanctioned type.
> ...


Well that is good news but it nowhere approaches other sports. My top senior (HS) Boy was just given an appointment to the USNA to play squash, his sister, an early acceptance at Stanford where she was their #2 recruit. Last year, my graduating senior was accepted at Brown-while she had top grades, her national squash ranking basically guaranteed her place and she is starting on the varsity.


----------



## Brandeis_Archer (Dec 20, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> Sorry for going off topic just for a moment.
> It turns out that USAA College Archery Program is a collegiate scholarship opportunity thanks in large part to the Easton Sports Development Foundation.
> http://www.uscollegiatearchery.org/scholarships/
> Scholarship can be had at the “club” level as opposed to the restrictive NCAA sanctioned type.
> ...


Now come on, you can't be seriously calling that equivalent (or even close) to a full ride from an Ivy league, can you? 

If I won every single scholarship mentioned on that page at the highest amount, plus my state NAA organization's (Thanks SAAM!), I would net a bit over $4,500. Let's not get into the fact that the NFAA's scholarship program goes up to $2500, but the NAA's program page still says that they won't have funding... for 200*7*.  Love you too, NAA) Let's assume I do that every year for four years, for a total of $18,000 (over half from the NFAA, none at all from the NAA). While definitely significant (and very much appreciated to an archer of that caliber), the cost of Brandeis right now is estimated to be $50,190 per year, and that has been going up a few percent a year. So for over $200K, you can get a Brandeis education.

I can be the best collegiate archer in the nation (to the scholarship committees) which will doubtlessly take thousands of hours of practice, travel, likely coaching others, running practices, organizing trips, and the like, and the best I can do in scholarships is a shade under 10% of the cost of attendance (from several varied sources).
On the other hand, I could be a fairly good fencer, put in the same amount of work as I would being an archer, and have schools recruit me and offer me a free ride (or even, say, half the cost of attendance). 

I do love shooting, especially in CAP, and the scholarships are *definitely* appreciated, and they definitely help. That said, there is no way in hell that you can argue that someone should do archery for a free (or even vastly reduced price) higher education.



Oh, by the way, we're still bitter over the fact that we have to pay $20 more per person for a magazine that finds its way into the mailroom recycling bin more often than not. Remember when that used to be an option? So that's a couple hundred dollars in total that goes to the NAA, when it could have bought us several dozen arrows, a couple new bows, more backstop netting, tournament fees, or any one of various things that a collegiate archery club can use. Nope, into the recycling bin and the NAA pockets it goes.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

*My bad*

I apologize for getting off subject.
I just wanted to be sure folks know that there are a lot of fantastic improvements out there and it is almost a full time job to keep up. It’s worth checking often. Full rides for folks like NCAA varsity athlete might be a good topic for a Collegiate Archery Program thread.

As for coaching certification. I think the discussion is brilliant. I am sure that working together and working one on one, we can come up with a solution for each and every individualized case to insure that every Level 3 has the additional Best training they need to pursue the whatever coaching avenue they would want or need.

One thing that is not mentioned enough is the NFAA, ASA, USAA and others involvement and level of support of Basic, Intermediate Instructor curriculum and Community Coach Course programs. The unity effort does have legs. ASAP is a great example where NFAA, ASA, USAA, ESDF, ATA, and NADA are all part of the team. http://www.afterschoolarchery.com/about_us.htm. The National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) is also a part of a collaborative effort with its support of ASAP http://www.mtrpa.info/PDF's/archery_prog.pdf 

This is a little off subject to but here goes. The USAA bylaws are divided into user groups of sorts. Athletes, Coaches, Judges, Collegiate Leaders, JOAD Leaders, At Large, Independents. Why should a Coach have to pay a USAA membership fee and a separate USAA Certified coaching fee? At the very least, the fee could be combined so a person just need to make one credit card charge or write just one check. It would then be really easy to track coach membership fees, and determine the % of administration fees to direct program benefit. I am one of those crazies that believe that people don’t mind paying more taxes if the benefit is clear and accountable.


----------



## tradbowman1999 (Jan 2, 2009)

*What make a level 4 a level 4?*

I know what is needed to be a level instructor. 
My problem is that Don Rabska is a level 4 w/ out ever becoming a level 2 or 3. Check with NADA or NAA to confirm it. Do not take my word. 

Just throwing my input


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

tradbowman1999 said:


> I know what is needed to be a level instructor.
> My problem is that Don Rabska is a level 4 w/ out ever becoming a level 2 or 3. Check with NADA or NAA to confirm it. Do not take my word.
> 
> Just throwing my input


Well, frankly, that is probably as it should be. There should be a way for existing qualified coaches to test past ranks like L1 and LII. Heck, for all I know he may have had input in writing those curricula.


----------



## Steve Ruis (Oct 4, 2002)

*Wow! May We Live In Interesting Times!*

This change is really interesting (despite the fact that there really are very few details). What I find perplexing is that it seems as if everyone is on the same track, that being "becoming an elite coach". How many elite coaches do we need? There is also no recognition of recreational archers (the vast majority). In Canada, they FCA acknowledged that high performance archers often began as recreational archers and high performance archers almost all return to be recreational archers. So, they have programs directed at recreational archers.

I have recommended that the current Level 1-4 system remain (with quality upgrades) for the recreational side and then that coaches from the L3-4 ranks be invited to further trainings to support the elite side, which is somewhat of what we had. (Level 4s were codes as 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, and 4e, depending on experience.)

My state (Illinois) has exactly four L3-4 coaches listed on the USAA website (there may be 5). I think this is far too few coaches in reality as people struggle as to how to find one. I do not find my Level 4 training a hindrance in working with recreational archers, in fact it is a great boon. I am also in a position to help local L2's who are doing program (e.g. JOAD and ASAP) work. I have no intention of becoming an elite coach. So, I am likely to opt out of the new system.

Unfortunately, what I see now may result is a widespread exodus of volunteers feeling put upon.

Make sure you express your support/lack thereof/ideas to USA Archery and not just talk among ourselves.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Steve Ruis said:


> In Canada, they FCA acknowledged that high performance archers often began as recreational archers and high performance archers almost all return to be recreational archers. So, they have programs directed at recreational archers.
> 
> I have recommended that the current Level 1-4 system remain (with quality upgrades) for the recreational side and then that coaches from the L3-4 ranks be invited to further trainings to support the elite side, which is somewhat of what we had. (Level 4s were codes as 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, and 4e, depending on experience.)


I think that point can't be emphasized enough. Concentrating solely on an elite track isolates the NAA from general support. There are competing archery organizations who soak up the recreational archers, and their support and funding, while the NAA continues to consider the their whole org to be a feeder system for Olympic archers--or at lest that is the impression they manage to give off.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Warbow said:


> I think that point can't be emphasized enough. Concentrating solely on an elite track isolates the NAA from general support. There are competing archery organizations who soak up the recreational archers, and their support and funding, while the NAA continues to consider the their whole org to be a feeder system for Olympic archers--or at lest that is the impression they manage to give off.


"One thing that is not mentioned enough is the NFAA, ASA, USAA and others involvement and level of support of Basic, Intermediate Instructor curriculum and Community Coach Course programs. The unity effort does have legs. "


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> "One thing that is not mentioned enough is the NFAA, ASA, USAA and others involvement and level of support of Basic, Intermediate Instructor curriculum and Community Coach Course programs. The unity effort does have legs. "


That is a fine thing, but that doesn't mean that the NAA's programs are inclusive, only that they are coordinating with other groups in terms of unifying the teaching of archery. That is not quite the same thing in terms of servicing NAA membership and growing NAA membership through inclusive _NAA_ programs.


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

*Change? Fix it or Quite*

Change is difficult. 

Jim, how many coaches do you think are being displaced by the new changes? I know there are the normal ones in this forum who complain about the NAA regardless of what they do, but how many coaches realistically do you feel are really effected. I'm talking about qualified coaches not wannabees.

And, what do you think they should do. Quite? Form a Union? Write Letters? Or just complain. I only see the constant complaining and never a mention of a solution or someone actually stepping up to the pump and doing something.

Perhaps the NAA is trying to get ride of the above element in the NAA ranks.:mg:

Just a thought for curious inquiring minds.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

tradbowman1999 said:


> I know what is needed to be a level instructor.
> My problem is that Don Rabska is a level 4 w/ out ever becoming a level 2 or 3. Check with NADA or NAA to confirm it. Do not take my word.
> 
> Just throwing my input



Don Rabska is one of the top coaches in archery. There are very few people I would pay good money to take lessons from. He is one of them. I don't think Darrell Pace was a level 2 either. I guess you wouldn't want to listen to him either


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

steve ruis said:


> this change is really interesting (despite the fact that there really are very few details). What i find perplexing is that it seems as if everyone is on the same track, that being "becoming an elite coach". How many elite coaches do we need? There is also no recognition of recreational archers (the vast majority). In canada, they fca acknowledged that high performance archers often began as recreational archers and high performance archers almost all return to be recreational archers. So, they have programs directed at recreational archers.
> 
> I have recommended that the current level 1-4 system remain (with quality upgrades) for the recreational side and then that coaches from the l3-4 ranks be invited to further trainings to support the elite side, which is somewhat of what we had. (level 4s were codes as 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d, and 4e, depending on experience.)
> 
> ...



exactly


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

ArtV said:


> Change is difficult.
> 
> Jim, how many coaches do you think are being displaced by the new changes? I know there are the normal ones in this forum who complain about the NAA regardless of what they do, but how many coaches realistically do you feel are really effected. I'm talking about qualified coaches not wannabees.
> 
> ...


ArtV

The rub is that some have, despite the odds, succeeded in the old system. They found their way thru the maze, persevered and achieved the near impossible. Just as they were able to pat themselves on the back for a job well do “Wham” they must do still more. “New” criteria is put in front of them that must look like Everest after having just fought through miles of dense jungle.

The necessity to change and its benefit vs. the cost is the question. Will it be worth the effort? Another set of phone calls to better understand the “new” criteria. More waiting to see how it all shakes loose. Each additional dollar, minute of time is painful because again, they thought they were done. 

You bet I feel for anyone that followed the rules just to find out that they need to follow the a new set of rules. You bet I appreciate their suffering cries. You bet that anyone would be critical and question if the new rules are going to stick and how many more changes must they endure.

Here is the ironic thing. What I describe in the first paragraph is actually what a divided coaching system been putting archers through since…forever. 

The club instructor or parent guides an archer to a top tournament finish. The instructor or parent realize that it’s time for better coaching. A coach is found and “Wham”…changes are made, what has been successful form up to that point, was in fact all wrong. Eventually success and it’s time to move up to better coaching again and “Wham”…changes are made, what was good really wasn’t. And after more hard work and maybe a few coaching changes, success. That’s it, right? No more changes, right? Not quite, you are invited to High Performance Coaching and “Wham”…changes and these are the biggest yet. 

This is the painful cycle that archers have been enduring that a uniform national coaching technique and program can mercifully break. Truth is that we have lost a lot of good archers and good people along the way. I have great respect for the archers that have endured the torture they have been put through. What is most amazing to me is the amount of pure talent some of these archer possess to be able to succeed over and over again.

Is the USAA somehow wanting to get rid of certain elements? I think it is better said that the objections of some cannot be allowed not hinder the long term health and success and sanity of target archery as a whole. I will side with the best interest of the archers every time.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

The long term health of the organization is not advanced by pssing off people like me who have busted my butt for the NAA. As I noted, the NAA wants more true believers and less people who think. 

No one has come close to saying how the NAA is helped by having people like me and TOm Barker and Steve upset.


----------



## Sappo (Apr 30, 2008)

I am new to this JOAD and coaching stuff and I must admit I know very little about the NAA. I do know from experience with certifying associations I have been a technical dive instructor now for 3 years. From my experience if you don't like something leave it and start your own, I may be wrong but what would it take to start a different program to teach kids and adults Olympic style archery.
I would start from the top finding out what are the rules and guide lines for coaches and their students to enter the Olympics. This is why IANTD started and is now a thriving technical SCUBA Assoc.

Then again I may be wrong!!!


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Jim C said:


> The long term health of the organization is not advanced by pssing off people like me who have busted my butt for the NAA. As I noted, the NAA wants more true believers and less people who think.
> 
> No one has come close to saying how the NAA is helped by having people like me and TOm Barker and Steve upset.


The USAA is not helped by anyones anger or frustration. I am eager to hear how the variety of Level 3/4 are specifically guided to help achieve their goals.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Ummm….I hate to be argumentative on this thread, but I think many are misunderstanding the requirements of recertification. From reading the press release and making a few phone calls, in order to be recertified you only need to go to a simple recertification seminar which is a few hours or so at various events. The cost will be minimal. I doubt that this all has been published but I highly suggest those who are very angry about issues should contact their board members or the office to get clarification. This feeding frenzy of attacking the new board and Interim CEO is frustrating for me to watch since I have seen this organization spiraling out of control for the last 10 years and now that they finally are working on turning the organization around for the better, some appear to want to attack without giving this new group a chance to fix a lot of serious problems that have festered for some time. Fixing the problems will take time and your help in keeping an open dialogue with the new board will help. Why don’t those who are angry contact the NAA and voice their displeasure but make sure you get some facts before you attack and make some good suggestions if you have any other than being angry that things are not going your way. 

I am a level 4 and HPC regional coach and have done some communicating myself to find out just exactly what I will need to do to continue with being certified if I want to. I really didn’t like having to go to a week long program last year to get the HPC regional position. This has been voiced by some about taking vacation time (what the -ell is that? Never had one….) :mg: However, I wanted to find out what is being said and taught today in the Lee method so I can figure out if some of the information will help me coach just a little bit better.

Sorry if I stepped on some toes, but I figure since some are using sledge hammers to smash toes, a little stepping on some won’t be too big of an issue….. :embara:


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Tell me Rick what this says to YOU

Current Level 3 coaches, and those Intermediate (Level 2) Instructors who have
held their status for over two years, will have a one year deadline (December 31,
2009) to take the Regional Coach Course AND attend the additional day
Community Coach Course seminar to be awarded Regional Coach Certification.
Or, if they choose, can take a Community Coach Course within the year to be
certified under Community Coach

Course Cost: $450.00/per person and includes materials

I might not have been a 1352 archer but I will pit my reading and comprehension skills against anyone who is in the NAA

Since you make a living in archeryu Rick maybe you can explain to those of us who don't-those of us whom the NAA needs far more than we need it-what benefits do I get by spending several thousand dollars (yes when you have a ten year old and are away for a week it costs alot of money to get someone competent to work for 120 straight hours to watch him, make sure our horses are fed etc) and blow an entire week of vacation?


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

> I am a level 4 and HPC regional coach and have done some communicating myself to find out just exactly what I will need to do to continue with being certified if I want to. I really didn’t like having to go to a week long program last year to get the HPC regional position. This has been voiced by some about taking vacation time (what the -ell is that? Never had one….) However, I wanted to find out what is being said and taught today in the Lee method so I can figure out if some of the information will help me coach just a little bit better


Rick, 
in this paragraph you make my point. If every level 3/4, RHPC has to call to find out exactly what they have to do to maintain certification, then that is all the NAA office is going to do. I was fortunate to be able to attend the November RHPC course in Colorado Springs (but in reality I would have cancelled had I not already purchased the airline ticket after the financial meltdown and thus it became a sunk cost to attend.) But, looking forward I now have to annually recertify by paying more money and attending more course work or going to more camps all on my nickel. The reality is that I can not afford archery any more as a volunteer coach. One other point. As a level 3 and RHPC what is additive for me to take the Community Coaches Course, which is now a requirement? I teach several level 2 and 1's every year, I run a JOAD program, I run tournaments, I send kids to world teams, several new JOAD olympians come out of my group every year. As someone said earlier, I do not have to recertify on my Chemical Engineering or MBA degrees every year. I do understand the need for continuing education and had I maintained my professional engineering license I would have to go attend continuing education courses. But, if I don't, they don't rescind my degree.

I really am not trying to be argumentative. If USA Archery wants to make their coaching group more elite and rigorous, then that is fine. All I am saying is the base of volunteer coaches has been milked for about all that they have. Making it harder for that group of coaches/instructors to get initial certification and then to recertify is long term detrimental to growth. If USA archery wants a small group of exclusive professional coaches, then this is the approach they ought to take. But, if the goal is to grow archery in a very poor economy where employment retention and expense minimization have become the main topics over the dinner table, the current approach is not going to help.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

BTW-Liz and I were at the October/November 2006 Level 3/Level 4. IIRC threre has been maybe ONE Level 3 camp since then MEANING EVERY LEVEL THREE save a few has to REPEAT THE ENTIRE COURSE again according to the dictates of the NAA. 

And in a year or two maybe BEST WILL CHANGE AGAIN and the same people will decide well you have to do it all over again. Trust is earned-I don't trust the people running things anymore. I don't trust people who are basically saying-Jim you and your wife wasted two weeks of your time 2.2 years ago and we decided what you learned was insufficient.

Where is my refund if the NAA sold us something that is so obsolete that we have to do the entire thing again?


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Well golly gee willikers, Jim. I ain’t got the smarts you got! I is just a farm boy from Indianer and only know how to shoot a bow and arra. Sorry Jim, being intelligent and flouting it don’t mean poop to me. It is more dependent upon how one uses it. Something tells me there is something else bothering you. I really hope there is no hidden agenda here.

Since you appear to be far above the intelligence level most of us here on this board have, why don’t you come up with a nice quality proposal to the NAA or better yet, offer your services to be a committee member so that all those people in the NAA can get straightened out? 

Now that I have vented….ahhhh….there is one year before anybody’s certification runs out. Mr. Pian, Mr. Barker, Mr. Ruis, Mr. ArtV and others, your sound judgment and discussion is great. Hopefully it gets noticed to those who are trying to improve on the system. Don’t forget, most of these people who are working this program are volunteers just like you. They try to come up with ways that will help everyone and develop a structure that makes sense but like most quickly thought out plans there are tons of loopholes and pitfalls to iron out and fix. 

I personally don’t see anything wrong with recertification. It’s called keeping up with the newest and latest ideas that can improve your understanding of the game. From what I gathered most of these recertification programs will be at tournaments most of you attend so a few hours in the evening will satisfy your requirements thus no travel cost, just a few hours of your time. 

We have had it really good for years as coaches. All we had to do was attend about 8 to 12 hours to get up to level 2 and then spend about a week to get to level 3 and then on to 4 if you chose to go that route. Then once we had it, we only had to show we were active in coaching…just a little letter to be written and sent in to the NAA to being recertified. Now Lee comes along and demands that those who want to be in his program will have to come to a week long event every year. This is for the elite coaches who want to be in his program. I personally don’t have time for his program nor do I have time to travel all the time working with the elites. Most of us have a job in the real world (although some think anyone who works in the archery business don’t really work).

I went to my first certification course in 1975 and became an “Instructor of the NAA”. That was the only level they had at the time. There were many reasons to criticize this system, but I chose to take what they had to offer and utilize it for my furtherance of the sport and coaching. The NAA went through a change in the 80’s and I watched some people get grandfathered in with no NAA experience whatsoever. This is when they came up with the 1-4 levels. Us “Instructor of the NAA” people were automatically qualified for level 3. I took the 4 course so I could learn more. I have taught some 1’s and 2’s and been a guest lecturer at 3’s and 4’s. I am a firm believer that one should go through the system in order to understand the system. The grandfathering in to me is a political maneuver to allow those who think they are so intelligent they do not have to follow the same rules thus we get amateur intelligent rookies that cause grief among some top archers who have to put up with the ineptness. Yes, being smart doesn’t always qualify you for the position. I have seen a lot more harm than help due to this grandfathering.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Just to get things straight in my head.
•	Basic and Intermediate Archery Instructor has been updated recently and are “a okay” needing only series of transition modules to be able to smoothly integrate camp, scout, 4H, NASP and other archers to ASAP and JOAD.
•	The USAA had two different coaching tracks, level 3 and level 4 and HPP. Level 3 courses were lengthy, few and far between which greatly hindering the number of level 3 coaches. The HPP was a completely separate track. Coaches had to keep up with two complete separate tracks in the past.
•	Coach Level ID numbers were abandoned to avoid confusing the new unified coaching plan from the two coaching track scenario.
•	ASEP is gone for the most part after feedback indicated that the course material, though interesting, does not apply to individualized target archery.
•	Community Coach Course Certification was adopted so becoming a Best trained coach could take place in any community in three days at any time by bringing in a Community Coach Instructor “to town”.
•	Regional Coach Certification includes activity as well as reinforcement and updating of their education and knowledge base.
•	The new coaching plan is was presented four pieces of paper reflecting the general nature of information and indicating that refinement is inevitable to address huge differences between each individual coaches current training status as a Level 3-4 coach and HPP coach.
•	Background checking are being added.
•	After a decade of languishing and neglect the USAA is proactively transitioning and informing at a record pace. 

Its been only 60 days since the volunteer transition team was announced. I don’t think they had much of a Thanksgiving, or Christmas holiday. Thank you.

Is the USAA doing things exactly the way I would personally would want if I were king. No. But I support the effort I delegate to the leadership because I know that we have a responsibility to provide a program that will help grow Olympic and World Target Archery long after we are all gone. If we wait for all to agree, we actually will be all dead and gone and the USAA too. Here is the wild thing, its not about the USAA. Its about Hunting, Olympics, ASA, World Championships, IBO, Paralympic, Scouts, NFAA, NASP, Judges, ASAP, Special needs, Parks, 4H, Tourneys, Equipment, Jobs, Recreation, Coaching and most of all, Archers. Ric, I don’t think the venting is helpful, said the pot to the kettle.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

http://www.usarchery.org/userfiles/file/Coaches_Directory_2-7-08.pdf


There are at least one hundred people listed as Level III's here based on my quick counting. 450 dollars x 100 people if all of those Level IIIs want to keep their certifications. Plus all the level II's 

again from the NAA website

Current Level 3 coaches, and those Intermediate (Level 2) Instructors who have
held their status for over two years, will have a one year deadline (December 31,
2009) to take the Regional Coach Course AND attend the additional day
Community Coach Course seminar to be awarded Regional Coach Certification.
Or, if they choose, can take a Community Coach Course within the year to be
certified under Community Coach.

So how many seminars will the NAA have in the next YEAR? The math doesn't add up. Last I checked, the NAA has only sponsored ONE level three camp since I was certified in 2006. 

Rick, you made a mistake-sorry if I pointed it out. I never said you were stupid or even implied it-you are actually one of the smarter people I have met in this sport. 

I have a great idea-stop changing stuff every year or so. Stop pretending that most of us are getting paid to do this. 


I have yet to hear the benefits we get from redoing everything. And what is the guarantee in two years there won't be another brilliant brainstorming session and the powers that be decide that we need to redo everything again?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Rick McKinney said:


> . Don’t forget, most of these people who are working this program are volunteers just like you. They try to come up with ways that will help everyone and develop a structure that makes sense but like most quickly thought out plans there are tons of loopholes and pitfalls to iron out and fix.
> 
> I personally don’t see anything wrong with recertification. It’s called keeping up with the newest and latest ideas that can improve your understanding of the game. From what I gathered most of these recertification programs will be at tournaments most of you attend so a few hours in the evening will satisfy your requirements thus no travel cost, just a few hours of your time.


Not true-everyone who is a level III for more than two years (ie just about EVERYONE) will have to spend an entire week and at minimum (no travel costs included etc) 450 dollars to merely KEEP that level Three




Rick McKinney said:


> .
> We have had it really good for years as coaches. All we had to do was attend about 8 to 12 hours to get up to level 2 and then spend about a week to get to level 3 and then on to 4 if you chose to go that route. Then once we had it, we only had to show we were active in coaching…just a little letter to be written and sent in to the NAA to being recertified. Now Lee comes along and demands that those who want to be in his program will have to come to a week long event every year. This is for the elite coaches who want to be in his program. I personally don’t have time for his program nor do I have time to travel all the time working with the elites. Most of us have a job in the real world (although some think anyone who works in the archery business don’t really work).


His program-I thought the NAA belonged to us members. Level III isn't elite, indeed most level IV's aren't elite. If you want to be an olympic team coach, world team coach I agree with Rick. SO why impose more costs and time (most people have what-2 weeks of paid vacations) on us VOLUNTEERS who are CREATING NAA MEMBERS. How many of those 100 I counted are going to do this Rick? 



Rick McKinney said:


> .I went to my first certification course in 1975 and became an “Instructor of the NAA”. That was the only level they had at the time. There were many reasons to criticize this system, but I chose to take what they had to offer and utilize it for my furtherance of the sport and coaching. The NAA went through a change in the 80’s and I watched some people get grandfathered in with no NAA experience whatsoever. This is when they came up with the 1-4 levels. Us “Instructor of the NAA” people were automatically qualified for level 3. I took the 4 course so I could learn more. I have taught some 1’s and 2’s and been a guest lecturer at 3’s and 4’s. I am a firm believer that one should go through the system in order to understand the system. The grandfathering in to me is a political maneuver to allow those who think they are so intelligent they do not have to follow the same rules thus we get amateur intelligent rookies that cause grief among some top archers who have to put up with the ineptness. Yes, being smart doesn’t always qualify you for the position. I have seen a lot more harm than help due to this grandfathering.


Being smart allows one to see the problems created by an organization that really does not understand the realities of this sport. The Teaching squash Pro at my country club makes more than Kisik Lee does each year and he is one of a couple hundred in the USA. Do you think recurve target archery can support 200 professional coaches who earn 85-110K a year teaching archery?


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

> They try to come up with ways that will help everyone and develop a structure that makes sense but like most quickly thought out plans there are tons of loopholes and pitfalls to iron out and fix.


Rick, 
Thanks for the reality check. I will adjust accordingly and be patient for the next iteration.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Hey, I think something is soaking in for me. Three things:

•	Jim Coombe quote: “I have a great idea-stop changing stuff every year or so. Stop pretending that most of us are getting paid to do this.” 
I believe that if we don’t take coaches seriously and that means at least enough compensation to cover expenses, we will not grow the coaching ranks. If we don’t grow the coaching ranks the hundred of thousand of kids will not have enough coaches to go too. I think it borders on criminal to leave kids with no place to go. The USAA status quo of no useable membership data base and two separate coaching tracks is un workable. It much change.

•	How many Community Coach Courses will the USAA conduct? We are the USAA. When you or any other USAA member arranges for a venue, brings a Community Coach Course Instructor to town and otherwise arranges for a course, the USAA did it. The Arizona State Archery Association, a member state association of USAA, plans to host a CCC. It would be great if the 50 or 100 largest communities in the USAA did the same. You see the USAA in the mirror every morning. 

•	I detect a great interest in the fine details of the four page coaching document. And a nagging remembrance of the old NAA leadership. The transition team includes the likes of Sheri Rhodes, Lloyd Brown, Derek Davis and Denise Parker. By my experience these are all people that are, experienced, good listeners, have good thinking skills, are well meaning, work hard, expect results, make things happen and have the best interest of the community in mind. If something is just plain wrong, they possess the common sense to fix it and that’s what they are doing. The also have USAA BOD oversight. If you see something wrong, tell them.

Jim and Liz Coombe do their part as do many others. We need opposing views to insure that we don’t go blinding over a cliff. Over the years, I have come to appreciate why Jim does not volunteer to be a National JOAD committee member and other such efforts. First he is too smart to put himself at risk in the line of fire and further behind chores at home and duties and the range. Second, we need the minority party to be represented. Minority Whip Coombe. Sometimes the minority can stop a bill, sometimes they can’t. And that’s the way it should be. 

The USAA leadership has reviewed, evaluated, and is transitioning to improve. Let’s get behind the bus and push hard to get to a better place and thats what Jim C is doing in a minority whip role. 

There are no guarantees in life. One thing is for sure, for Tom Hanks character in the movie “Cast Away”, life was not going to improve unless he took the effort and risk to get off the island. As the movie goes, he just barely made it. Will we have a story worth making a movie? Or will we have 10 more years of a soap opera?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Good post Bob, I recall saying I would have been happy to be the northern Joad Rep, In addition to being the CEO and chief sponsor of CJO, I have been the state association VP and now (after term limits kicked in) the State JOAD coordinator. As you may recall, at the Orlando JOAD Nationals where IIRC you were COJ, I was about the only Northern Coach/ club leader or rep who attended the JOAD Meeting., I also attended the one at Chula and of course at Cincinnati.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

Ok…first my sincere apologies to Jim for my vent as well as the rest of those reading this thread. I am just as frustrated as many of those who are tired of dealing with changes with each new administration. However, I want you all to understand where I am coming from. I am fully behind this new leadership. I have total faith that they will do what is right if we help them. They have a monumental task in cleaning up a huge mess and it will take time and support. I certainly do not have the answers as Jim has pointed out. So I will back out of this thread and try to get answers before I speak again.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Rick McKinney said:


> Ok…first my sincere apologies to Jim for my vent as well as the rest of those reading this thread. I am just as frustrated as many of those who are tired of dealing with changes with each new administration. However, I want you all to understand where I am coming from. I am fully behind this new leadership. I have total faith that they will do what is right if we help them. They have a monumental task in cleaning up a huge mess and it will take time and support. I certainly do not have the answers as Jim has pointed out. So I will back out of this thread and try to get answers before I speak again.


No apologies needed Rick, I respect you and consider you a friend. That isn't going to change based on some AT debate.


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

•	Jim Coombe quote: “I have a great idea-stop changing stuff every year or so. Stop pretending that most of us are getting paid to do this.” 
I believe that if we don’t take coaches seriously and that means at least enough compensation to cover expenses, we will not grow the coaching ranks. If we don’t grow the coaching ranks the hundred of thousand of kids will not have enough coaches to go too. I think it borders on criminal to leave kids with no place to go. The USAA status quo of no useable membership data base and two separate coaching tracks is un workable. It much change.

Great point! If the NAA wants us all "on the same page" then they better come up with a less costly way to get the job done.

•	How many Community Coach Courses will the USAA conduct? We are the USAA. When you or any other USAA member arranges for a venue, brings a Community Coach Course Instructor to town and otherwise arranges for a course, the USAA did it. The Arizona State Archery Association, a member state association of USAA, plans to host a CCC. It would be great if the 50 or 100 largest communities (Do you mean the NAA CLUBS and JOAD Clubs, like CJO?) in the USAA did the same. You see the USAA in the mirror every morning. 


•	I detect a great interest in the fine details of the four page coaching document. And a nagging remembrance of the old NAA leadership. The transition team includes the likes of Sheri Rhodes, Lloyd Brown, Derek Davis and Denise Parker. By my experience these are all people that are, experienced, good listeners, have good thinking skills, are well meaning, work hard, expect results, make things happen and have the best interest of the community in mind. If something is just plain wrong, they possess the common sense to fix it and that’s what they are doing. The also have USAA BOD oversight. If you see something wrong, tell them.Do they not read some of the Archery Talk stuff?!?

Jim and Liz Coombe do their part as do many others. YES WE DO! We need opposing views to insure that we don’t go blinding over a cliff. Over the years, I have come to appreciate why Jim does not volunteer to be a National JOAD committee member and other such efforts. First he is too smart to put himself at risk in the line of fire and further behind chores at home and duties and the range. Second, we need the minority party to be represented. Minority Whip Coombe. Sometimes the minority can stop a bill, sometimes they can’t. And that’s the way it should be. 
One reason Jim may not have wanted to volunteer for the National JOAD Directorship is because of travel, and time constraints, and politics. One thing that I detest is politics in organizations such as the NAA. The Powers that be, should be there for the archers, not for themselves to rule over us who wholeheartedly have supported them.

The USAA leadership has reviewed, evaluated, and is transitioning to improve. Let’s get behind the bus and push hard to get to a better place and thats what Jim C is doing in a minority whip role. 

There are no guarantees in life. One thing is for sure, for Tom Hanks character in the movie “Cast Away”, life was not going to improve unless he took the effort and risk to get off the island. As the movie goes, he just barely made it. Will we have a story worth making a movie? Or will we have 10 more years of a soap opera?[/QUOTE]

I think the important point to all this is don't tell us, who spent thousands of dollars (Within a month of each other-see other post by Jim) that our certification is no good and that to get recertified we have to travel to an OTC to get it done again. Find a way to do it at our clubs, or offer a DVD program to augment the training we alreaday had! That, I will suggest to the Powers that be at the NAA!


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

lizard said:


> I think the important point to all this is don't tell us, who spent thousands of dollars that our certification is no good and that to get recertified we have to travel to an OTC to get it done again. Find a way to do it at our clubs, or offer a DVD program to update the training we alreaday had! That, I will suggest to the Powers that be at the NAA!


Well, most of this stuff is above my pay grade, but it is the case that many continuing education programs (state Bars, for instance) have different kinds of credit for different kinds of continuing education presentations, depending on whether you attend in person, through an on line presentation that has some vague sort of compliance monitoring, and lastly, for watching or listening to a DVD, CD or mp3.

While archery as a physical activity clearly can benefit from in person participation with feedback, I should think that some aspects of the training can be done, as has been suggested, by DVD or some such. Especially the recerts. While the initial cost of producing such a DVD and collateral printed materials could be in the thousands, that is merely the expense that a few coaches may bear by attending a seminar in person, given the time off from work, travel, lodging and course fees. At the very least, some of the course work could be printed up in advance and sent out so people could study it beforehand and shorten the in person course time--something that should be done even with the L1 and L2 courses to increase retention (the faster you stuff new info into people's heads, the faster they forget.)

BTW, the idea that the new designations of "community coach" will supersede the L1-5 designations in common parlance seems short sighted. With the numbers, anyone can instantly tell the hierarchy and L3 is quick and easy to designate. I have a feeling that people will still call the new levels by the old numbers, just as people have to call iPods Classic G1, G2 Nano and such, even though Apple tries to be coy and not give public model numbers for new generations. The numbers are just too useful.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Here is the Community Coach Course website
http://www.communitycoachingcourse.com/
Note the involvement of the ASA, NFAA and USAA

Here is a list of graduates
http://www.communitycoachingcourse.com/Completed.htm
Note that three courses were conducted in 2008 in a variety of locations.
It help greatly for thee membership pools collaborating. I imagine that the conversation at the course between the different memberships is enlightening.

Note also that five are certified at course leaders, and I assume LD Falks should be added to the list.
They, and hopefully many more as others complete work shop, can be brought to any community. The course fees pay for the costs, so that the course leaders can continue to teach without going bankrupt,

Community Coach Course Leaders is where wonderful can happen.
I suggest that State Associations or Clubs or even Individuals host Community Coach Courses in the 50 or even 100 largest population centers in the USA.
Imagine if there were 50 to 100 Trained as Community Coach Course Leaders, enough for all the large communities so that travel and hotel expenses would no longer be a factor? Talk about accessible and ease.

Level 3 instructors are ideal candidates to Community Coach Course leader workshop training. Those that are committed to serving their community would be hard pressed to find a better contribution than to be able to offer Instructor and the Community Coach Course several times a year. More Instructors and Coaches means more help at the club level and ideally more clubs in general to help meet the growing demand.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Serious Fun said:


> Community Coach Course Leaders is where wonderful can happen.
> I suggest that State Associations or Clubs or even Individuals host Community Coach Courses in the 50 or even 100 largest population centers in the USA.
> Imagine if there were 50 to 100 Trained as Community Coach Course Leaders, enough for all the large communities so that travel and hotel expenses would no longer be a factor? Talk about accessible and ease.


I for one am very excited about the new Community Coach Course and hope to attend one myself in the near future. With the inclusion of the CCC into the revamped NAA coaching lineup, I'm hoping that more CCC classes will become available in my area (Washington DC). Right now, the closest classes are a days drive from my home :sad:. Hopefully we will get a CCC Leader who is interested in leading a class in the MD/VA/DC area!


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

You can find Coach Lee seminars on the KSL International Archery Website
http://www.kslinternationalarchery.com/index.html

Coach Lee is presenting on Friday January 9th, 09 at the ATA Show in Indy.
Indy is within driving distance for a lot of folks.
What I don’t know is if there are any seats to this seminar that are available the public.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> You can find Coach Lee seminars on the KSL International Archery Website
> http://www.kslinternationalarchery.com/index.html
> 
> Coach Lee is presenting on Friday January 9th, 09 at the ATA Show in Indy.
> ...


Do you find it odd that USArchery.org doesn't have even one single link to their head coaches instructional website? I might understand if USArchery had some competing info of its own, but AFIK, there isn't one single introduction to archery, instructional manual or video of any kind on the USArchery website, unlike, FITA or Archery Australia. You'd think that there would be a link on the USA archery page that saying "Learn Archery!" or "Where to start" or something, but there isn't, only what must be a confusing mass of links to any person not familiar with FITA style archery. In fact, if you type in "learn archery" into the site search box and click on "search" you get zero results! That really needs to change.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Warbow said:


> Do you find it odd that USArchery.org doesn't have even one single link to their head coaches instructional website? I might understand if USArchery had some competing info of its own, but AFIK, there isn't one single introduction to archery, instructional manual or video of any kind on the USArchery website, unlike, FITA or Archery Australia. You'd think that there would be a link on the USA archery page that saying "Learn Archery!" or "Where to start" or something, but there isn't, only what must be a confusing mass of links to any person not familiar with FITA style archery. In fact, if you type in "learn archery" into the site search box and click on "search" you get zero results! That really needs to change.


USAA National Coach Lee was on the job in January of 06. As recent as 7 days ago, the BEST method was the High Performance Program form http://www.usarchery.org/usarchery/html/HighPerformance.html yet there was a separate Level 3 and 4 coach certification program http://www.usarchery.org/html/coachescertificationcoursesoverview.html. USAA coaching information lacked information as to the relationship between HPP and coaching certification http://www.usarchery.org/usarchery/html/Coaching.html. Many coaches took part in both programs doubling the amount of time and effort in an attempt to stay current. 
On December 30, 09, the USAA announced the USAA Transition Task Force’s initial efforts to organize the coaching program into an integrated program http://www.usarchery.org/userfiles/file/12-30-08_Coaching_Certification_FINAL.pdf.
Per the December 30, 09 announcement …”More details, including class schedules will be forthcoming, but for now, know that the new integrated USAA Coaching Certification program will expose all coaches in this country to National Coach Kisik Lee’s training methods in order to demonstrate a new commitment to a National Training Program…”

As for “learning archery” I often receive questions about where to go for target archery in my community. Referrals come from a variety of sources including the national level that is unable to keep up with the state of archery in countless communities. In Arizona, we created a webpage with a wide variety of beginner resources http://www.azjoad.com/main/new_archers.htm. We suggest that taking part in a year around club and seeking certified instruction/coaching is the key to “learning archery”. I believe that USAA clubs is the place where most will first come into contact with Olympic and World Archery. Does it make sense to focus outreach efforts from the bottom up? After all, we know more about where to go in our neighborhoods than the National office can? Regardless, website updates, membership data and communcations will be items the USAA CEO empowered to look to the future will need to address.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> USAA National Coach Lee was on the job in January of 06. As recent as 7 days ago, the BEST method was the High Performance Program form http://www.usarchery.org/usarchery/html/HighPerformance.html yet there was a separate Level 3 and 4 coach certification program http://www.usarchery.org/html/coachescertificationcoursesoverview.html. USAA coaching information lacked information as to the relationship between HPP and coaching certification http://www.usarchery.org/usarchery/html/Coaching.html. Many coaches took part in both programs doubling the amount of time and effort in an attempt to stay current.
> On December 30, 09, the USAA announced the USAA Transition Task Force’s initial efforts to organize the coaching program into an integrated program http://www.usarchery.org/userfiles/file/12-30-08_Coaching_Certification_FINAL.pdf.
> Per the December 30, 09 announcement …”More details, including class schedules will be forthcoming, but for now, know that the new integrated USAA Coaching Certification program will expose all coaches in this country to National Coach Kisik Lee’s training methods in order to demonstrate a new commitment to a National Training Program…”


This really doesn't address the points I brought up. There are is no introductory or training material of any kind for new archers in those links. USA Archery's site lacks simple introductions, referrals, references or instructional material of any kind for new archers, AFIK. Nor does it even have good references to the BEST Method, not even a single link to the instructional site of their head coach!




Serious Fun said:


> As for “learning archery” I often receive questions about where to go for target archery in my community. Referrals come from a variety of sources including the national level that is unable to keep up with the state of archery in countless communities. In Arizona, we created a webpage with a wide variety of beginner resources http://www.azjoad.com/main/new_archers.htm. We suggest that taking part in a year around club and seeking certified instruction/coaching is the key to “learning archery”. I believe that USAA clubs is the place where most will first come into contact with Olympic and World Archery. Does it make sense to focus outreach efforts from the bottom up? After all, we know more about where to go in our neighborhoods than the National office can? Regardless, website updates, membership data and communcations will be items the USAA CEO empowered to look to the future will need to address.


I think the USA Archery site contains too much inside baseball and not enough introductory information on how to get involved in archery--and I don't mean that the site has to be specific and recommend a local site, but general information, the kind you put together. Even you confirm that this is the case and had to put introductory info on your own site! Including the kind of material that should be on the national site. Kudos to your initiative, but you shouldn't have had to do it.

Also, I agree that a program with a good coach is a great way to go, and it is what I recomend to people where at all practical, but I don't think that means it is a good idea not to post instructional material on line. Not everybody is near an instructional program. The NAA doesn't support Adult non-elite instruction very well. And keeping all the instructional material "secret" by not posting it and not having printed material for students reminds me of when the Catholic Church wanted to keep the bible in Latin, because the bible should only be read and interpreted by trained professionals. Today, people read translations of the bible so they can understand it on their own, as well as hear what their church has to say about it. The same should be true for instructional material for USA Archery. USA Archery already **has** the material in the form of instructional materials in the coaching curricula, and giving away those manuals on line won't affect the coaching programs because you take the course for the cert and the instruction, not for access to a manual. Additionally, instructional material gives people an overview of the sport and give one a sense of perspective, as you read through it and see things you do or don't know. Reading Total Archery, for instance, told me, I had very little idea what coach Lee was talking about and lead me to seek out instruction and learn and read more. It didn't make me think I was a genius who needed no outside input. Granted, other people's mileage may vary, but I think USA Archery should expand its site in a few basic ways to make the site more user friendly to people new to the sport, perhaps more like you have with the AZ site.

In one sense, I do not believe that USAA clubs are the place where most people will come into contact with FITA style archery because most people will never hear about or get to such a club. Just looking at the USArchery website give the impression that FITA style archery is too confusing to bother with and too hard to get started in. I do agree that marketing to NASP (to the extent marketing to NASP participants in schools is allowed) is a fine idea, but there is no excuse for not having introductory material on the national site.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Warbow said:


> This really doesn't address the points I brought up. There are is no introductory or training material of any kind for new archers in those links. USA Archery's site lacks simple introductions, referrals, references or instructional material of any kind for new archers, AFIK. Nor does it even have good references to the BEST Method, not even a single link to the instructional site of their head coach!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I see your point when it comes to materials. I know to go to the different USAA merchandise pages because I have been there before and know whats there. http://www.usarchery.org/usarchery/html/Merchandise.html


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Warbow said:


> Do you find it odd that USArchery.org doesn't have even one single link to their head coaches instructional website? I might understand if USArchery had some competing info of its own, but AFIK, there isn't one single introduction to archery, instructional manual or video of any kind on the USArchery website, unlike, FITA or Archery Australia. You'd think that there would be a link on the USA archery page that saying "Learn Archery!" or "Where to start" or something, but there isn't, only what must be a confusing mass of links to any person not familiar with FITA style archery. In fact, if you type in "learn archery" into the site search box and click on "search" you get zero results! That really needs to change.


GREAT POINT Warbow! Amen to that!


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Warbow said:


> This really doesn't address the points I brought up. There are is no introductory or training material of any kind for new archers in those links. USA Archery's site lacks simple introductions, referrals, references or instructional material of any kind for new archers, AFIK. Nor does it even have good references to the BEST Method, not even a single link to the instructional site of their head coach!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Warbow, Actually USAA does have an adult program, if you explore around the site you'll find it. We, at CJO, have taken to teaching parents who wish to learn archery the discipline, and do give awards to them as well as the kids. It seems to mean more to the kids, but the adults like the recognition. 

You have an excellent point about where the introductory info is on archery on the NAA site, but I usually steer people to the joad tab, and tell them to look at the 2007 handbook which has a boat load of great info in it. So it is there for the exploring, but you have to be guided as to where to look!


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> I see your point when it comes to materials. I know to go to the different USAA merchandise pages because I have been there before and know whats there. http://www.usarchery.org/usarchery/html/Merchandise.html


Strictly speaking those aren't even "USA Archery" Materials, nor do any of the materials sold by USA Archery necessarily comport with current USA Archery Gospel. The Ruth Rowe "Archery: Refining Your Form DVD" is probably a fine DVD, but it doesn't reflect BEST, nor does Ruth Rowe plan on updating it to do so, but you won't find that information on the USA Archery website--and how would any archer know that? Or any new archer looking to get into archery know that? Not one single instructional publication or DVD is by USA Archery, or even co-produced by them to reflect current USA Archery standards. The closest thing to something resembling current USA Archery teaching is the BEST DVD was created in 2007 by the Easton Sports Development Foundation, presumably in some sort of cooperation with USA Archery but isn't necessarily exactly what the coaching courses teach now or tomorrow--but I don't actually know because there is nowhere I can look up those course to find out!! In fact, from what I understand, the already completed printed companion manual was abandoned because it contained material that conflicted with USA Archery material.

If USA Archery can't decide what the current gospel is long enough to post a treatise on their website, how is anybody who isn't a freshly minted L3/Township/Village/Community/Big State/Large Sales District Coach or greater, etc, supposed to know what they are currently teaching? Granted, the frequent recerts is supposed to address this issue but, I don't think that this information should only be disseminated through by word of mouth from coaches, like wandering missionaries with the latest Gospel--that they heard in person a year ago. That is soooo Bronze Age...and inefficient. Coaches are clearly a key driver, but they should not be the only way this information is communicated.

FITA has their basic manual free on-line as a PDF. So does Archery Australia. So should USA Archery, especially since there is so much confusion about what USA Archery is teaching as BEST at any given time. You shouldn't have to take an advanced Coaching course on a monthly basis to find out the current gospel according to USA Archery.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

lizard said:


> Warbow, Actually USAA does have an adult program, if you explore around the site you'll find it. We, at CJO, have taken to teaching parents who wish to learn archery the discipline, and do give awards to them as well as the kids. It seems to mean more to the kids, but the adults like the recognition.
> 
> You have an excellent point about where the introductory info is on archery on the NAA site, but I usually steer people to the joad tab, and tell them to look at the 2007 handbook which has a boat load of great info in it. So it is there for the exploring, but you have to be guided as to where to look!


Thanks for the pointer. I think the JOAD and the Adult programs are good programs. My point was that USA Archery does not support the non-elite Adult education effort very well, rather than it being non-existent, the STP program being listed as a near after thought on the JOAD site, a place where no reasonable adult would navigate first to look for Adult Training. On the USA Archery site it is sometimes called by the name it started under, "Senior Training Program," making it sound like it is only for senior citizens, unless you know the "senior" division means 18+, which newcomers aren't likely to know. 

The adult program is given such short shrift that nobody seemed to have noticed that the Adult Achievement levels appear in three different, and contradictory versions, on the USA Archery site and the JOAD site until I noticed pointed it out. And some JOAD leaders including your husband have stated that nobody cares about the Adult Achievement levels--though he didn't necessarily mean to disparage the STP program in general, especially considering you have adults in your program. An NAA person is looking into the issue with the conflicting achievement levels, though, so hopefully these kinds of issues can be resolved eventually.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

No question we can do better.
•	I hope that a contemporary membership data base can be implemented to facilitate membership communications.
•	I think the website will need updating especially old information needs to be archived to avoid confusion.
•	I think the USAA programs planned a whole so that the USAA efforts are coordinated.
•	I especially think we need to collaborate with other archery association to coordinate efforts to avoid duplication, fill in the gaps and to support each other

When it comes to organization structure, I admire NASP. It is from the top down. If the NASP leadership dictates red nocks, those that want to participate in NASP need only ask “what shade of red?”
The NASP structure is business like and as a result very efficient. The success of NASP in such a short time is proof of organizational structure is sound. 

In contrast, NAA is a democracy. Perhaps not in reality, but in certainly attitude. Rarely did anything move forward without consensus. It seems like there was always enough votes to veto anything. Since the NAA is membership driven the membership tended to focus on how programs affected the existing membership. No one advocated for the future member and their needs. 

Thankfully things are changing. A year ago, a new BOD was elected/selected. The BOD now has independent representation. The BOD actually chose one of the business minded Independent BOD members that had limited knowledge of USAA to be the BOD Chair. I hope that signals a change of attitude where by the USAA conducts itself in a professional businesslike fashion. Once the USAA leadership determines who its customer or customers are, they can focus on the mission. I believe the USAA customer is the archer of the future. 

I could go on. My hope is that the membership empowers the leadership with our support, and then let them do their job. For that to happen, the membership will need to understand that they will not always get what is best for them, their club, their state or their region. The membership will have to accept that others are making the decision of what is best for the future USAA.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> When it comes to organization structure, I admire NASP. It is from the top down. If the NASP leadership dictates red nocks, those that want to participate in NASP need only ask “what shade of red?”
> The NASP structure is business like and as a result very efficient. The success of NASP in such a short time is proof of organizational structure is sound.


...and I bet their trains run on time, too 

The NASP is highly targeted and it has the financial backing that allows it to be so, and it has a captive audience, in a sense. In school, instructors can just tell kids what equipment to use, and what style to shoot, because it's school equipment. And I do sort of like the idea that everybody is on equal footing equipment-wise, more or less, in the NASP program. But, that kind of top down structure organization can't work out side of the NASP's targeted focus. Outside NASP archery coaching is made up of independent minded folks and who mostly work on a volunteer basis who don't take kindly to being told what to do or how to do it. If the NAA wanted to create company owned JOAD store fronts and pay everyone involved, they could do that, too.



Serious Fun said:


> I could go on. My hope is that the membership empowers the leadership with our support, and then let them do their job. For that to happen, the membership will need to understand that they will not always get what is best for them, their club, their state or their region. The membership will have to accept that others are making the decision of what is best for the future USAA.


It will be interesting to see what happens...


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

Jim, I am surely not up on all the insides and ramifications of coaching in archery, especially from the NAA stand point, but the first thoughts that come to mind in answering your post is....... 

The NAA is pushing for the Olympic side. Most Level III's I would imagine are not versed in what the OTC want in coaching....meaning the style of Oly archery they want to be taught and their desire to make sure all Level III and above coaches are on the same page. Personally I doubt any that were certified 3 or more years ago are on the same page. For instance if a coach went to a one day seminar for the BEST method, I would hardly think they would be able to coach the method with any credibility. (Assuming the NAA is wanting the BEST Method to be taught nationally.)

Also, if the Level III coaches are responsible for training local Level I and II coaches, if they are not up to snuff on the desired coaching methods than the whole system would break down in a few years from bad teaching methods in accordance with what the NAA wants.

I would suggest if a Level III coach was interested in just coaching compound shooters than they go through the NFAA certification program and not be concerned about the NAA.

Again, I am making an assumption that the NAA primary interest is the development of Oly style recurve shooters.

Personally, what I feel I see happening is the NAA making a hard effort to get all coaches on the same page, teaching the desired protocol, and using the same methods. This will create accountability, consistence, and better trained shooters especially for those who do desire a shot at international competition. Most of which is not happening now.

Humbly
Art



Jim C said:


> Lets resolve the incompetence of the national organization and its short sighted nonsense first before dealing with names
> 
> I have yet to hear why I and all the other level IIIs should have to BUY our certification all over a mere 2-3 years after we already paid for it
> 
> ...


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

wrong Art


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

One after thought. I do agree if the NAA wants everyone to be on the same page they need to understand the volunteer ranks concern about the cost of retraining. They should step up to the pump with either free training or assistance getting to the training camps. 

Art


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

Jim C said:


> wrong Art


Really, well, like I said just my thoughts.

Hope you guys can figure it out. Actually I think most who want to shoot archery Oly style or any style are marching along quiet well. 

Art


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

ArtV said:


> One after thought. I do agree if the NAA wants everyone to be on the same page they need to understand the volunteer ranks concern about the cost of retraining. They should step up to the pump with either free training or assistance getting to the training camps.
> 
> Art


Now that makes sense-when we went to BEST and then Level 3-4 two years ago-that was the goal. So now they decide all of that was worthless and we have to do it all over again. So why should I trust these people and then in a year or two they decide that they need to do it all over yet again.


NO ONE is able to answer my main question-what benefits do I as a coach who CREATES NAA MEMBERS get for shelling out another several thousand dollars given the fact that I cannot trust these people that in a year that INVESTMENT is now worthless?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Jim C said:


> wrong Art


I don't suppose you could be more specific?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Warbow said:


> I don't suppose you could be more specific?


He got it right later on-the NAA is acting as if we all are getting paid big bucks to create more NAA members. That is the assumption that they base this on. When that assumption is proven to be false-and it is-the entire rationale falls apart. If liz and I don't keep our certification (and trust me-we are not going to jump through these idiotic hoops anymore) we won't be around to certify any 1 or 2s in the area. Same with many of the other 100 or so level 3 coaches who have been told they will lose their certifications if they don't do the whole thing over again within the next year. The NAA loses when that happens. I lose nothing. This isn't about me, as I have said, the NAA needs people like me much more than I need them. That's why I am a volunteer.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Jim C said:


> He got it right later on-the NAA is acting as if we all are getting paid big bucks to create more NAA members. That is the assumption that they base this on. When that assumption is proven to be false-and it is-the entire rationale falls apart.


Ah, now I understand. Thanks.


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

Has anyone tried to form a lobbying body. There's power in numbers; individuals are easy to sluff off. So, who else is complaining?


----------



## Poolgy (Jan 12, 2007)

I normally read this stuff and laugh!

Thanks to all who get the pot stirred up and to everyone that has the ability and talent to calm it back down. 

I was at the Level 3/4 training with Jim and Liz. We were told then that we were the first class to be certified under the new BEST system. I really enjoyed the week listening to Lee, Rabska, Rick, and Larry. (Thanks Guy's!) Later they started the High Performance program. I was hoping to go back for my level 4 this past year (even though as Jim stated they went to the same class as ours with the excepption of one day) but it was never offered. When they started the CC certification I think it further discredited the level 3 certification. I hope they make up there minds soon since they put a deadline on us for Dec. 09. Maybe my work and money will be back up by the time they make up there minds. 

Hey Jim! I look forward to seeing you and Liz again in the future! I know you will still be around. You love it to much to quit! :director: :wave3:


----------



## LifetimeArchery (Apr 4, 2008)

*Concerns about changes in Coach certifications*

Here are the some of the questions and concerns I have. I share them here in hopes that others will communicate their questions and concerns directly with USA Archery as I plan to. 

What exactly are the recertification requirements? A strong case can be made that the document from Denise Parker posted on Dec. 30 reads as if recertification is an annual repeat of the entire course. But knowing some of the people on the Transition Team, I'm hoping that this is not the case. I also see that annual recertification is a minimal fee of $20-25. I don't really imagine that an OTC can host participants for 4-6 days at that low a fee. In the case of the Community Coach course, a hotel and meals will cost more than the course or recertification fees. In any case, as coaches we need to know how to plan for travel and also to budget for our own professional development. Additionaly, as course leaders for Levels I & II - we need a clear answer very quickly. Our students will have these same questions and expect us to know the answers. "Forthcoming" is not a date I feel comfortable with.

I don't understand why a Basic or Intermediate Instructor can "slide" for three to four years before being recertified. With all respect, because I was was one (and technically still am)... I'll assume the numerical majority are largely seasonal or as-needed archery instructors. (I'm gonna catch hell for that comment, I know! I apologize in advance.). By contrast most NAA Level III Coaches I know of are coaching weekly if not more often. We are certainly coaching the base of rising competitive archers. We may stray on fine points of technique (my apologies to my Coach!) but because we were trained by well qualified Level IV and Level V Coaches, we certainly teach from a more consistent and stronger base of knowledge. In contrast, I have students come to me quite often who have had summer or one-off classes from Basic/Intermediate Instructors. In most cases we have to re-teach the very, very basic techniques even to the extent of personal safety. Given my experience, it seems that advanced level coaches could go longer than twelve months before needing to recertify. I'm curious why the Coaching Development Committee and/or the Transition Team supports such frequent recertification.

How do background checks get handled? Are they done prior to someone taking the course? Some Level I and Level II students sign up the day of the course. If students do not pass the background check do they get a refund? From whom? As a course leader I'm not willing to risk the instructor fees. Next, how do we explain to their employers (camps, civic & city orgs) that while they may have paid for and completed their own background check, it has to be done again? Further, I certainly do not want to be anywhere near anyone else's Social Security Number of other sensitive information. Here is why I ask: I certified about 85 Level 1/Basic Instructors in 2008. I need to start working on courses for 2009 THIS month if they are to be scheduled and accomplished prior to the summer camp season. It is quickly approaching!

I agree that the title "Community Coach" does not reflect the personal commitment, effort, depth of knowledge and experience these coaches bring to their students. Perhaps "Advanced" or something similar could be considered. I recognize the need for change in the overall program to improve consistency and increase coaching quality. I also understand there is a large number of dormant certified coaches at advanced levels. That needs to be addressed. I know or know of most of the people in this thread and we know that we are active beyond our own belief sometimes! But I don't understand why the numerical levels were discarded. They are succinct, clear and understandable by our students, the parents of our students, our institutional customers and the archery-aware public.

There are some other concerns I have but they are centric to my particular situation. 

While I am here... Yes, I coach for a fee. Though I hesitiate to give myself the title of "Professional Coach". I'll let my students tell you if I'm a professional. I do strive hard (as I believe all of us on this board do) for each and every one of my students. I also still volunteer coach for up to three weeks a year as I have since 1989 with the local Boy Scout council. So I do walk on both sides of the archery fence. I do so proudly as I've seen the development of nearly every one of my students. It is not always measured in bullseyes. When they are able to accomplish something they did not believe they could accomplish then I am happy. Their success and their confidence is my success.

It is up to us as coaches no matter how we butter our bread or define our success to seek clarification and then appropriately voice concerns. "Seek first to understand, then to be understood. - Steven R. Covey"

John Kristoff
Raleigh, NC
NAA Regional High Performance Coach
NAA Level III Coach
NFAA Advanced Certified Instrctor - Level IV
NADA Member


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Poolgy said:


> I normally read this stuff and laugh!
> 
> Thanks to all who get the pot stirred up and to everyone that has the ability and talent to calm it back down.
> 
> ...



Yes we were told that weren't we. I still have obligations to the kids who started in my program so I am not "quitting". BTW we had gone to the BEST seminar in CS a couple months before that camp around Nov 1 in Chula so the BEST system was already up and running.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Poolgy said:


> When they started the CC certification I think it further discredited the level 3 certification.


How does CC certification discredit the level 3 certification? 

If anything, the new coaching system, which now includes the Community Coach certification, will improve the stature of level 3 coaches, not diminish it. The additional training necessary to obtain/keep a level 3 only serves to enhance the standing of level three coaches. From what I'm hearing on this board, the level 3 certification club will certainly become more exclusive! 

Just curious, 
Dave G.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

I took the Level III with some notable folks, Tom B, Ron Charmichael, Guy Krueger, Steve Cornell, Brian Ficker, Angelo Ruiz...and some other folks were getting their Level IV there too, Jim Pruitte, Ron McCormick...

I can tell you that the Community Coach Course is not a Level 2.5 instuructor trainer course, it's a coach certification course. It doesn't replace or degrade the Level III (Regional Coach) certification. The Community Coach Course (CCC) lays the groundwork for someone to be certified as a coach and ply that trade until they have the experience and desire to be certified at the next level.

Even though the Community Coach is certified to train Intermediate Instructors, that isn't the focus of the course at all. The focus of the course is coaching skills. The ATA and ESDF are pouring money into Community Archery Programs and building major Archery Centers around the United States. The ATA's non-profit arm, Bowhunting Preservation Alliance, is working with the states' DNR and F&SW folks to build community archery ranges and start programs to provide archery recreation outlets to kids who are in and graduating from NASP.

The above areas are the focus of the Community Coach Program. You don't need Level V (Master Coach) coaches running introductory archery classes at a JOAD. You should have a Community Coach overseeing a bunch of Basic and Intermediate instructors doing that while the Regional and Elite coaches are working with the archers who show the potential and desire to compete and go further.

JMHO


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ldfalks said:


> I can tell you that the Community Coach Course is not a Level 2.5 instuructor trainer course, it's a coach certification course. It doesn't replace or degrade the Level III (Regional Coach) certification.


Actually, I thought that is specifically what it the CC _does_ do, replace the L3 certification, and hence part of the reason that some people who are current Level III coaches have some concern over the time and expense that will be required to "upgrade" their L3 to the new CC.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Warbow said:


> Actually, I thought that is specifically what it the CC _does_ do, replace the L3 certification, and hence part of the reason that some people who are current Level III coaches have some concern over the time and expense that will be required to "upgrade" their L3 to the new CC.


The CCC bridges the gap between Intermediate and Level III (Regional) Coach. Regional Coach is the new title for Level III. At least from what I understand.

LD


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ldfalks said:


> The CCC bridges the gap between Intermediate and Level III (Regional) Coach. Regional Coach is the new title for Level III. At least from what I understand.
> 
> LD


]You may be right, but it is not clear to me. I thought that the document was trying to offer a path where current L3 coaches could upgrade to "regional coach" rather than listing it as equivalent. It seems they are offering a path that current L3s and experienced L2s can upgrade to CC with additional training. Or, current L3's can "upgrade" (or "downgrade"?) by taking the CC course and become a CC. But, it seems that current L3's get no credit whatsoever for their previous L3 training and status since L2s are being offered the same "upgrade path", nor is there any credit for for having taken HP courses in the past. But I could be mistaken.

From the PDF:


> TRANSITION ISSUES:
> During the 2009 year, the Regional Coach courses will also have a one day
> Community Coach Course for those instructors who have not taken the class
> previously.
> ...





> BASIC INSTRUCTOR
> Audience: Camp instructors, Girl/Boy Scouts, 4-H etc.
> Purpose: Introduce how to teach archery to a new instructor, most likely never shot
> before. Course focuses on safety, range set-up, basic equipment setup and repair and
> ...


----------



## MilesMom (Apr 26, 2008)

Warbow said:


> ]...current L3's can "upgrade" (or "downgrade"?) by taking the CC course and become a CC. But, it seems that current L3's get no credit whatsoever for their previous L3 training...
> From the PDF:


That's the same impression I get, Warbow. It does look like a downgrade for current L3s without an RHPC course. After all, these coaches have already earned their L3 at an OTC. That should count for something!

For example, I know an L3 coach who has just taken the RHPC course, passing the written test with flying colors. To be considered for a Regional slot, now he must take a Community Coach course too (assuming I'm reading the transition section correctly). Umm, why? It seems ludicrous, IMHO, not to waive the Community Coach class for coaches whose experience (such as completion of an OTC L3 course) exceeds anything they could possibly learn in a one-day CC coaching class. To me, that CC course seems about as valuable to them as the... ASEP course?! ;-) Ahem.

'Course, if you're moving up through the coaching ranks from Basic to Intermediate, then CommCoach is the next logical step. Though, as I've said before, I find that name both unfortunate and confusing to parents/students/clients.

Another question I have is: Just how many Regional Coach slots are there? Is it a set number, whereby there's no place to be "promoted to" if all the slots are filled, thus leaving a qualified coach "stuck" at the CC level? To me, "Regional" implies a set number of slots per region. OTOH, the term "High Performance Coach" might be a better, more descriptive job title for these coaches. "Regional" means nothing to a student/parent but "High Peformance" does.

But, I can't go to bat with HQ for the coaches because I'm not a coach - I'm simply an archery volunteer and a JOAD/FITA mom. I can not speak for coaches, I can only voice my own opinion. I know first-hand how much of their own time, money and dedication coaches give to our sport. I would hate to see the NAA lose good coaches to the NFAA due to all this certification turmoil. While our dedicated coaches would probably still attend NAA events, we stand to lose some much-needed volunteers.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

MilesMom said:


> Another question I have is: Just how many Regional Coach slots are there? Is it a set number, whereby there's no place to be "promoted to" if all the slots are filled, thus leaving a qualified coach "stuck" at the CC level? To me, "Regional" implies a set number of slots per region. OTOH, the term "High Performance Coach" might be a better, more descriptive job title for these coaches. "Regional" means nothing to a student/parent but "High Peformance" does.


I agree. I think the new names are intended to be clear but actually do the opposite. In common business usage, "regional" refers to a limited number based on large districts--like a regional manager for one of a company's 5 nationwide regional districts. But L4--ahem--I mean Regional Coaches are not something you want a fixed number of. More is better!! Regional does seem to falsely imply that a limited number of RC's will ever be allowed. Regional is a word that comes with too much baggage. It also sounds like they coach "regions" rather than people. But, I know the changes are meant well. I just hope that they refine the changes a tad more before implementing them.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

*USAA Coaching Certification update 1-5-09*

http://usarchery.org/userfiles/file/1-5-09 Coaching Certification Update.pdf


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> http://usarchery.org/userfiles/file/1-5-09 Coaching Certification Update.pdf


For those who prefer inline text, here are the main points from the PDF:


> USAA Instructors and Coaches,
> This letter serves as a follow up to the December 30th USAA Coaching Certification program announcement. We have received considerable and thoughtful feedback on the program outlined in the initial posting and would like to inform everyone that we are considering some adjustments based on this feedback. The Task Force, Coach Lee and I will be getting together over the next couple of weeks to discuss the following recommendations:
> 
> · Offer the Transition Regional Course (Regional Course and Community Course combined) for two years vs. one (2009 and 2010) to give Level 2 (held over 2 years), Level 3 and Level 4 coaches an additional year to take the quick route to Regional Course certification.
> ...


For CC course are outlined. A certain coach trainer is going to be very busy


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Warbow said:


> I agree. I think the new names are intended to be clear but actually do the opposite. In common business usage, "regional" refers to a limited number based on large districts--like a regional manager for one of a company's 5 nationwide regional districts. But L4--ahem--I mean Regional Coaches are not something you want a fixed number of. More is better!! Regional does seem to falsely imply that a limited number of RC's will ever be allowed. Regional is a word that comes with too much baggage. It also sounds like they coach "regions" rather than people. But, I know the changes are meant well. I just hope that they refine the changes a tad more before implementing them.


How many "elite" coaches do we need? How many teams do we field? The real error appears to be the mentality that us Level IIIs are all aspiring to be national team coaches. I have NO DESIRE to travel to foreign nations etc. I don't have the time. Most Level III's do not and I dare say neither do most of the level IVs I know . With Kisik and a few full time professional coaches like Sherri Rhodes, Don Rabska, etc, I don't see a real need for the Jim C's of the world to try to compete with them. I note that after the new regional coaching curriculum, there is no set training course for anyone above that.

Given that the audit of the NAA suggests that the coaching was a success story-what is the motivations to change things and drive alot of us out of it?

I try to analyze things logically. I have yet to see the logic in this. I base this on the fact that archery is not golf or tennis. Archery is not akin to dozens of country clubs in each state that will pay a golf or tennis pro a good salary. That will never happen IMHO in the USA. I doubt it happens in most other countries either. I understand the desire for potential charges of Kisik or Don that I or others might create having sound grounding in the currently accepted best system (BEST now-maybe something else in a couple years-Vittorio "pushers" seem to do ok these day). However, if we don't bother with the credentials what is gonna happen? I am still going to coach my kids the best I can but I am not going to waste another week this or any other year, getting yet another credential. And God help the NAA if it ever comes to us being told we cannot run JOAD clubs or attend JOAD shoots as coaches unless we jump through their hoops. I can see some that want that. 

Under the current system, the top coaches rise to the top based on several factors. Some have no credentials from the NAA yet turn out national or world champions. some people have credentials coming out the wazoo and I wouldn't let any of my students within a rifle shot of them.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

As of now there are 6 Community Coach Course Leaders certified to conduct courses. We need to have a few more Course Leader Workshops soon.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Jim C said:


> How many "elite" coaches do we need? How many teams do we field? The real error appears to be the mentality that us Level IIIs are all aspiring to be national team coaches. I have NO DESIRE to travel to foreign nations etc. I don't have the time. Most Level III's do not and I dare say neither do most of the level IVs I know . With Kisik and a few full time professional coaches like Sherri Rhodes, Don Rabska, etc, I don't see a real need for the Jim C's of the world to try to compete with them. I note that after the new regional coaching curriculum, there is no set training course for anyone above that.


Of course you are right, I merely meant that having lots of highly trained coaches is generally a good thing for archers, not specifically that they should all be "elite," per se. I didn't mean that having lots of highly trained coaches is likely, given the few opportunities they have compared to coaches in other sports (as you have pointed out.) I think some have said in the past that the "qualifications" above L3 (or was it above L4?) become more of an arbitrary or a political thing based on the whim of Coach Lee rather than a set of written standards, but I don't know if I remember that correctly or if it is remotely true.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

ldfalks said:


> As of now there are 6 Community Coach Course Leaders certified to conduct courses. We need to have a few more Course Leader Workshops soon.


How many days is a Community Coach Course Leader Workshop?
Who can become a Community Coach Course Leader? (Level 3, Community Coach, Regional Coach?)


----------



## mullligan (Dec 2, 2008)

*USAA coaching program update*

pls see the update on usarchery.org

http://usarchery.org/userfiles/file/1-5-09 Coaching Certification Update.pdf


----------



## Poolgy (Jan 12, 2007)

JDT_Dad said:


> How does CC certification discredit the level 3 certification?
> 
> If anything, the new coaching system, which now includes the Community Coach certification, will improve the stature of level 3 coaches, not diminish it. The additional training necessary to obtain/keep a level 3 only serves to enhance the standing of level three coaches. From what I'm hearing on this board, the level 3 certification club will certainly become more exclusive!
> 
> ...


I guess what I was trying to say is that I have talked to some that went to a CC course and they believe they recieved just as much training as the level 3 class did. They were told that the current level 3's had not been trained with the new info they were getting therefore they believe we wasted our time! If the CC course is going to give that sort of idea then yes it does discredit the level 3. I hope this was a students misunderstanding and not an instructors point of view.

However the way I understand the new language as of today we (L3's) have got to go get recertified or downgrade to a CC. If I am misunderstanding then make it clearer for me. We will not be able to simply renew. We have to do it all over again or step down a level. 

I do not have a large pool of students looking for national or international competition. I do get one or two that have big dreams. I believe it is my responsibility to be prepare for these that do. I have only sent 3 to nationals and one won the championship. I helped start this kid out. I did not build him but I was given the honor of being his coach all this time and not a stumbling block. He had the desire and I was willing to run with him. I just want to run with those that want to run and maybe make a positive difference in the lives of others. If a coach wants a trophy then he needs a coach himself not a student! Very few can do both, but yes there are some!

By the way! Maybe we should tell the ones recieving all this +and - feedback thanks for listening! After all they did repost a response and a promise to listen to constructive feedback. What more could you ask for!

Good Night! ( or morning?)


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Poolgy said:


> I guess what I was trying to say is that I have talked to some that went to a CC course and they believe they recieved just as much training as the level 3 class did. They were told that the current level 3's had not been trained with the new info they were getting therefore they believe we wasted our time! If the CC course is going to give that sort of idea then yes it does discredit the level 3. I hope this was a students misunderstanding and not an instructors point of view.


I think you can believe LDFalks when earlier in this thread he said: 

"I can tell you that the Community Coach Course is not a Level 2.5 instuructor trainer course, it's a coach certification course. _It doesn't replace or degrade the Level III (Regional Coach) certification_. The Community Coach Course (CCC) lays the groundwork for someone to be certified as a coach and ply that trade until they have the experience and desire to be certified at the next level." 

If some CCC class students came away with the impression that the CCC is somehow superior to the old LIII that's unfortunate. I do believe its true that many LIII's don't have BEST method training so perhaps thats how some of the students at the CC classes came away with their perception of superiority. It is my understanding that the CCC integrates BEST method training into the curriculum. 

POOLGY, thanks for helping me understand your point of view. 

I also think thanks are should be given to the BOD for quickly responding to the concerns of the coaching community.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Serious Fun said:


> How many days is a Community Coach Course Leader Workshop?
> Who can become a Community Coach Course Leader? (Level 3, Community Coach, Regional Coach?)


When we ran the workdhop in Oct 2008, the CCC Leader workshop was designed to be 3 full days. As of then, Level III (Regional HP) Coaches and above who are current on BEST Method could apply for certification as a CCC Leader. More important than rating is the ability to present the material.

I would imagine that there will be some CCC Leader workshops scheduled soon and the requirements will be close to those for the past workshop.

LD


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*I am sooooo confused*

I am very confused now....Ok more confused then before.

Do I need to take a Communitiy Coach class to keep my level 3?

My level 3 was taugh by Don Rabska who teaches BEST so does that not count? 

I was told that the Community Coach class that Van Webster is goinng to teach will cost $250.....

I understand that USA Archery, Dennise Parker and company are trying to clean everything up and I for one will support them, but with the econamy the way it is there is now way in you know where that I will be able to pay that much to be re-cert. 

I guess I will just have to coach without a cert or just shoot for myself.


:embara:


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Poolgy said:


> I guess what I was trying to say is that I have talked to some that went to a CC course and they believe they recieved just as much training as the level 3 class did. They were told that the current level 3's had not been trained with the new info they were getting therefore they believe we wasted our time! If the CC course is going to give that sort of idea then yes it does discredit the level 3. I hope this was a students misunderstanding and not an instructors point of view.
> 
> However the way I understand the new language as of today we (L3's) have got to go get recertified or downgrade to a CC. If I am misunderstanding then make it clearer for me. We will not be able to simply renew. We have to do it all over again or step down a level.
> 
> ...


Since most of the CCC's have been run by me, I'll tell you what I say in the introduction regarding Level III Certification.

I tell the class that, "when I got a Level III, the certification course contained much more information than I needed for the coaching level at which I would be working (club/community) or could immediatly assimilate. What I needed, as did some other coaches that I talked to that had just gotten their Level III, was a much more condensed course that was affordable, attainable and appropriate for the beginning level Coach."

I also say that, "this is not a Level III Lite. It covers some of the information that was in my Level III (coaching philosophy, goal setting and basic training plans), but also covers more basic information as well (mental aspects, tournament prep, coaching challenges and solutions to those challenges, how to conduct a coaching session)."

I say that, "if this course had been availavble when I decided to get my coach certification, I would probably be a Community Coach now. I didn't have any aspirations at that time to be an elite level coach."

I think the last part is exactly what the most vocal of the pundits on this thread have said. this is a coach certification that targets those coaches who want coaching knowledge but aren't interested in going for high-falutin' international positions.

So, if you want to be a coach; coach archers at your JOAD; concentrate on working at the local level; not have to be pressed into attaining ever-higher certifications just to keep your name on the list; then this is the certification you should look at.

I often hear the question, "why do these people get a Level III and then don't do anything with it?" Maybe the answer is that they really didn't want or need to be a Level III in the first place. That was just the only choice to tack "coach" in front of their name. Now there's a different choice that doesn't carry as much baggage with it.

Hope this helps.

LD


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

LD,
That did help. Thanks

There is another reason that some folks go ahead and get the level 3 or Regional High Performance Coach information and that is to make sure they are teaching the most current knowledge so that when they hand a kid (or adult) off to a "professional" coach, the higher caliber coach doesn't have to undo anything. Part of my reason in my taking the level 3 and then RHPC course was to sort of do the USA Archery version of the hipocratic oath if you will, first do no harm. Yea, it might have been overkill, and yes maybe I should have just audited the course work (it cost no more to go ahead and get certified) but I at least have the knowledge and can speak somewhat intelligently about the subject matter.



> When we ran the workdhop in Oct 2008, the CCC Leader workshop was designed to be 3 full days. As of then, Level III (Regional HP) Coaches and above who are current on BEST Method could apply for certification as a CCC Leader. More important than rating is the ability to present the material.


LD, does this mean that those that "passed" the practical and written test in November's RHPC week long class can apply to teach the CCC? Thanks in advance.


----------



## Valkyrie (Dec 3, 2002)

I'm with archerycat - I'm confused - {raising hand} - I'm an archer and I don't know what this means to me or anyone with a coaching certificate.

Ok - so ...

As an archer and a coach I'm fundimentally divided on the issues.

As an archer, I want the knowledge of the coach so that when I'm NOT being coached, I can work on and understand what the coach has told me.

As a Coach, I want to be able to efficiently express myself to my archers so that they "get it" and "go with it" when I'm not there to coach them. A coach needs to be able to talk to their students in different ways as each student learns or "hears" differently. A coach also needs to be able to recognize flaws and quickly correct them - so they need experience.

So - as an archer, I want the knowlege - that's why I took the level 2 some time ago, but I've not been able to fit the level 3 into my schedule or my finances. Now it's all mixed up again.

I attended two different best seminars - one in AZ at the cup, one in Illinois by Ron McCormick. As an archer, I feel like I have some beginnings of understanding and incorporating BEST - even though I felt like I was doing most of it before it was called BEST. As a coach, I have not had anyone progress enough into BEST that I feel like I cannot help them.

Would it be better to divide archers and coaches? Teach archers the BEST system, techniques, and equipment things. Teach coaches how to talk and train the archers. 

Perhaps these classes should be "dual track" - first part of the course is for archers, the second part for those who want to coach. You could be a "level 1" archer without being a "level 1 coach". You could progress to a level 3 archer but not be a level 3 coach.

Not all archers are coaches, but all coaches (IMO) should have the training background of an archer.

I'm still confused - I'll sit down now.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

TomB said:


> LD,
> That did help. Thanks
> 
> There is another reason that some folks go ahead and get the level 3 or Regional High Performance Coach information and that is to make sure they are teaching the most current knowledge so that when they hand a kid (or adult) off to a "professional" coach, the higher caliber coach doesn't have to undo anything. Part of my reason in my taking the level 3 and then RHPC course was to sort of do the USA Archery version of the hipocratic oath if you will, first do no harm. Yea, it might have been overkill, and yes maybe I should have just audited the course work (it cost no more to go ahead and get certified) but I at least have the knowledge and can speak somewhat intelligently about the subject matter.
> ...


some of us did it so we could certify people in our area and our club to be ones or twos so they could work at summer camps, BSA etc and not have to pay a bunch of money to do so.

Some of us have the certification so when people try to find some coaching in the area and the google it they come up with us since we have the only real facility to facilitate recurve coaching


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

TomB said:


> There is another reason that some folks go ahead and get the level 3 or Regional High Performance Coach information and that is to make sure they are teaching the most current knowledge so that when they hand a kid (or adult) off to a "professional" coach, the higher caliber coach doesn't have to undo anything.


I think that is part of my concern. I realize that the L1's and L2's aren't teaching advanced archery, but they do need to know enough to not to conflict with BEST. I assume the curricula are designed with that goal in mind, but not necessarily by telling them any thing about BEST. I assume there is value in knowing more about BEST even if it isn't at a level where one can teach it, per se.

I also wish there was some overt versioning of the classes, Say L3 v1.1 . From the USAA update, it seems they are having to decide which classes should count for what since the "same" classes were taught differently at different times.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Jim C said:


> Some of us have the certification so when people try to find some coaching in the area and the google it they come up with us since we have the only real facility to facilitate recurve coaching


...I assume that is related to the fact that USA Archery only publicly lists L3 and above...


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

TomB said:


> LD,
> That did help. Thanks
> 
> There is another reason that some folks go ahead and get the level 3 or Regional High Performance Coach information and that is to make sure they are teaching the most current knowledge so that when they hand a kid (or adult) off to a "professional" coach, the higher caliber coach doesn't have to undo anything. Part of my reason in my taking the level 3 and then RHPC course was to sort of do the USA Archery version of the hipocratic oath if you will, first do no harm. Yea, it might have been overkill, and yes maybe I should have just audited the course work (it cost no more to go ahead and get certified) but I at least have the knowledge and can speak somewhat intelligently about the subject matter.
> ...


Tom,
I would say yes to that. There will be some CCC Leader Workshops scheduled for those who want to go that route and Lead Community Coach Courses. You should apply. I think there will be formal announcements as soon as some of the other dust settles


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Warbow said:


> I also wish there was some overt versioning of the classes, Say L3 v1.1 . From the USAA update, it seems they are having to decide which classes should count for what since the "same" classes were taught differently at different times.


Actually, the USAA update said that the Regional High Performance Classes varied over time. They did not indicate L3 classes varied over time, but your point does apply to the RHCP designation I suppose.

From the USAA Update:

"As Coach Lee has determined the format for the Regional Coach Course will be nearly identical to the week-long Regional High Performance seminar held in November in Colorado Springs, those coaches who attended this class and passed the test, will be awarded the Regional Coach designation for 2009. As Regional High Performance Classes varied widely, more evaluation needs to be done with regard to what other classes might be eligible for credit as outlined above. The Task Force will consider the combination of Level 3 coaching certification and RHP class attendance to determine if this is sufficient to be awarded Regional Coach Certification."


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

JDT_Dad said:


> Actually, the USAA update said that the Regional High Performance Classes varied over time. They did not indicate L3 classes varied over time, but your point does apply to the RHCP designation I suppose.


Yes, it was the RHCP I was thinking of. I used the L3 as an example, though, because I think the point could even apply there. Things get updated, changed and, hopefully, improved. With software there are usually clear version numbers, even version histories with logs of all the improvements and fixes. I wish USA Archery had something like that. We keep hearing that this and that has changed--but there is no list of what has changed. USA Archery doesn't even publish a single thing about BEST available to archers, let alone a list of how USA Archery has changed it's teachings. Surely there were written lists of those changes somewhere, but kept "hidden" inside USA Archery. Sometimes I feel like USA Archery treats archery education like a priesthood. It is clear that USA Archery has some absolutely great coaches and coach training programs, but that is the only way USA Archery promulgates information. I agree that a coach is the way to go where practical, but I'd also like to see that path backed up with published material on-line on USA Archery, and version histories


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

JDT_Dad said:


> Actually, the USAA update said that the Regional High Performance Classes varied over time. They did not indicate L3 classes varied over time, but your point does apply to the RHCP designation I suppose.
> 
> From the USAA Update:
> 
> "As Coach Lee has determined the format for the Regional Coach Course will be nearly identical to the week-long Regional High Performance seminar held in November in Colorado Springs, those coaches who attended this class and passed the test, will be awarded the Regional Coach designation for 2009. As Regional High Performance Classes varied widely, more evaluation needs to be done with regard to what other classes might be eligible for credit as outlined above. The Task Force will consider the combination of Level 3 coaching certification and RHP class attendance to determine if this is sufficient to be awarded Regional Coach Certification."


One of our coaches-Steve Cornell went to the First real BEST Seminar IIRC at the USOTC (not to be confused with ones held for short periods of time at say the 2006 JOAD Nationals or by regional HPPC's). This was probably in 2006 before JOAD Nationals which my club ran. The next formal multi-day BEST seminar was at CS in early September 2006 which I and my wife, Derek Davis etc attended IIRC. Rick McKinney, John Magera, Gary Holstein were assiting in that. 6 weeks Later, we were at Chula Vista for the Level 3-4, Don Rabska ran the second half of that camp and BEST was clearly part of the agenda.

As late as a couple months ago,-when we were FIRST told that we had to go to the recently completed RHPP seminar to remain regional HPPC I was told the following

1) By Parrish-if you don't go you lose your RHPP Certificate

2) After I told him basically that my schedule for the rest of the year was filled and I wasn't going to spend another week (and the related fees to have someone watch our farm, our animals, our son) I then was told we could comply by merely sending a video of our students. I asked Parrish why he couldn't bother to go to dream camp or JOAD Nationals and see for himself


3) IDFalks then told me that even if we were stripped of our RHPC Certificate, we could keep our level 3 by filing the recertification document (no one with any involvement in JOAD archery doubts we are very active coaches). Now I am not blaming Dee for anything nor do I know what sort of guidance he had to make such a statement. However, since he is a main mover and shaker on this CC stuff I assumed he was stating the official position-even though at the time Official Position seemed to be an oxymoron for the NAA.

Now its all changed. Pardon me if I don't trust the NAA or believe I can rely on any sort of consistency. 

The NAA can justify a need for consistency among coaches on the grounds they don't want some promising junior Jim C or Liz or Tom etc trains only to have them show up at the OTC using form that is anathema to the current national coach whomever that might be. However, it seems to me that is not as near a realistic danger is the NAA's own lack of consistency and constantly changing things causing people to walk away from the organization.

What is interesting is that technically, archery is not nearly as complex as say Table Tennis (where the very type of bat you use can radically change your required stroke production) and we don't get this constant changing criteria constantly from that NGB.


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

Poolgy said:


> I normally read this stuff and laugh!
> 
> Thanks to all who get the pot stirred up and to everyone that has the ability and talent to calm it back down.
> 
> ...



Funny....That what the level 3/4 class that I took was told. Taught by Tom Parrish, Don Rabska and Larry Skinner.....Hmmmmm Interesting.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Archerycat said:


> Funny....That what the level 3/4 class that I took was told. Taught by Tom Parrish, Don Rabska and Larry Skinner.....Hmmmmm Interesting.


what was the date of that one you took?


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Jim C said:


> One of our coaches-Steve Cornell went to the First real BEST Seminar IIRC at the USOTC (not to be confused with ones held for short periods of time at say the 2006 JOAD Nationals or by regional HPPC's). This was probably in 2006 before JOAD Nationals which my club ran. The next formal multi-day BEST seminar was at CS in early September 2006 which I and my wife, Derek Davis etc attended IIRC. Rick McKinney, John Magera, Gary Holstein were assiting in that. 6 weeks Later, we were at Chula Vista for the Level 3-4, Don Rabska ran the second half of that camp and BEST was clearly part of the agenda.
> 
> As late as a couple months ago,-when we were FIRST told that we had to go to the recently completed RHPP seminar to remain regional HPPC I was told the following
> 
> ...


First off:
Tom Parrish is not here any more and nothing he told you applies now. On Nov 1, 2008 all that was in the past. Maybe a class action suit would raise the dead, but I doubt it. Let's move forward with the info we have today.

Secondly, I told you what the USAA Web Site said to do and posted a link for the form that I used to renew my Level III in August 2008. What happened between the time that Larry Sullivan sent me my new Level III Certificate and card in Sept 2008 and now is not my fault. I'm a USAA member, not a mover and shaker. What I said was what had been told to me...before Nov 1, 2008. The "Official Position" is coming from the USAA CEO not LDFalks.

I have played table tennis and shot archery. I think table tennis is much less complicated than archery.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

Jim C said:


> One of our coaches-Steve Cornell went to the First real BEST Seminar IIRC at the USOTC (not to be confused with ones held for short periods of time at say the 2006 JOAD Nationals or by regional HPPC's). This was probably in 2006 before JOAD Nationals which my club ran. The next formal multi-day BEST seminar was at CS in early September 2006 which I and my wife, Derek Davis etc attended IIRC. Rick McKinney, John Magera, Gary Holstein were assiting in that. 6 weeks Later, we were at Chula Vista for the Level 3-4, Don Rabska ran the second half of that camp and BEST was clearly part of the agenda.
> 
> As late as a couple months ago,-when we were FIRST told that we had to go to the recently completed RHPP seminar to remain regional HPPC I was told the following
> 
> ...


Wow! I'm not sure how all this is related to a minor point I brought up with Warbow, but I'll do my best to respond.

Jim, I'd like to thank you for all you have done for the OH archery community. Your reputation is known far and wide. I really do hope you won't let down those kids you are currently helping.

Now comes the bad part.

Tom Parrish is long gone. For whatever reason, he was let go by the very BOD you now say can't be trusted. You imply that all Tom had to do was go look at the athletes you sent to camp to evaluate your coaching ability. To the best of my knowledge, Steve Cornell was listed as the coach of the athletes your club sent to camp, so Tom really couldn't use them to evaluate your coaching ability.

Lastly, LDFalks was correct when he stated all you had to do was fill out the form to reapply for your L3. LDFalks was trying to be helpful when he suggested how to reapply for your L3. However, this subject came up long before the recent changes made by the BOD on 12/30/2008. (I remember reading the AT thread, so I know). I'm not sure how LDFalks is supposed to know what the BOD is going to do before they make it public. Its pretty hard to fault a guy for not knowing the future.

Lets quit bickering and give the BOD a chance to make this right.

Respectfully, Dave Gilbert - JDT_Dad


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

I would like to thank the USAA Transition taskforce, the USAA acting CEO and the Coaching Certification leadership (i.e. LD Falks, etc.) for doing the heavy lifting needed to unify and integrate certification. 

I often hear from archers and their family members that they wish they would have started with best trained coaching from day one to avoid the multiple form changes as they move up. In the future, archers and parents will be able to receive a consistent style of instruction and coaching to allow an archer to move up from instructor to community coach and perhaps higher and be able to build on what they have learned. The intergrated coaching transition can’t happen fast enough for the benefit of the archers. 

Overall the credit goes to the recently reconfigured USAA Bylaws crafted by the former NAA BOGs. The membership that ratified the Bylaws. And the current USAA BODs who oversee the effort to organize the USAA for the future. Coaching certifcation intergration is just one component of many that make up the suite of USAA programs. There is a lot of work to do.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

JDT_Dad said:


> Wow! I'm not sure how all this is related to a minor point I brought up with Warbow, but I'll do my best to respond.
> 
> Jim, I'd like to thank you for all you have done for the OH archery community. Your reputation is known far and wide. I really do hope you won't let down those kids you are currently helping.
> 
> ...


Well I am not going to argue about those kids-we coach as a team-but I was the one who was asked to sign their dream team application and i will leave it at that. I don't take credit for any of our kids-all have benefited from Steve, Darrell, and others. I don't need to promote myself based on the work those kids do on their own nor do I have any aspirations to be anything more than a really good JOAD coach. The real credit goes to the boys and their father who makes sure they get to tournaments and practices etc. The fact is, if I was teaching them something different than steve or darrell or liz or al kramer was-there would be a conflict-there is none.

I am not bickering-I am stating a fact-I am not going to keep spending money for credentials that may or may not be valid or worthwhile in a year or two. I do not trust the administration

I am also stating a fact that what the NAA is doing is short sighted because it ignores the reality of archery coaching in the USA-that most of us are volunteers and making volunteering too expensive only hurts the NAA not us.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

ldfalks said:


> First off:
> Tom Parrish is not here any more and nothing he told you applies now. On Nov 1, 2008 all that was in the past. Maybe a class action suit would raise the dead, but I doubt it. Let's move forward with the info we have today.
> 
> Secondly, I told you what the USAA Web Site said to do and posted a link for the form that I used to renew my Level III in August 2008. What happened between the time that Larry Sullivan sent me my new Level III Certificate and card in Sept 2008 and now is not my fault. I'm a USAA member, not a mover and shaker. What I said was what had been told to me...before Nov 1, 2008. The "Official Position" is coming from the USAA CEO not LDFalks.
> ...


really were you a 2200 level player? The serve alone is more complicated. Then we can talk about the off the bounce loop against topspin. Most everyone can make a good archery shot with a year of training -the trick is to do it 60 or 144 times in a row. half the people in the world couldn't ever return Waldners forehand kill with a year of training.

And yes Dee things have changed-that is exactly the point I have been making.

And maybe you can address why a bunch of volunteers ought to pay more and more and more.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Jim C said:


> really were you a 2200 level player? The serve alone is more complicated. Then we can talk about the off the bounce loop against topspin. Most everyone can make a good archery shot with a year of training -the trick is to do it 60 or 144 times in a row. half the people in the world couldn't ever return Waldners forehand kill with a year of training.
> 
> And yes Dee things have changed-that is exactly the point I have been making.
> 
> And maybe you can address why a bunch of volunteers ought to pay more and more and more.


I could probably get to 2200 if I played long enough. How many games do you get to play to add up a score that high anyway. You know a lot about ping-pong. Do coaches there volunteer also?

Even if you volunteer for something you must continue to meet the certification requirements for the position that you are occupying as a volunteer. Right now USAA doesn't have a "Volunteer Level" certifiaction and a "Getting Paid" level of certification. I've been looking at some research that another coach is doing right now about the coach certifications in other sports and the USAA levels aren't out of line. They don't have "Volunteer Levels" either.

Either do it or don't. Suck-it-up and drive on or sit on your butt and get left behind. I don't care what you do, but the old line about the pitiful plight of the underpaid volunteer is wearing thin. You're getting paid Jim, you just don't want to admit it. The good feeling that you get when you give a kid a bow, and the satisfaction that you feel when you see one of your archers progress is the payment that you have asked for. If that isn't enough then start charging. But if you aren't going to charge then quit gripping about not getting paid in cash.


----------



## titanium man (Mar 5, 2005)

*Coaching*

Wow, this has been some interesting reading. 

I am in total agreement with Jim and Liz.:mg: 

I truly hope this doesn't occur in the officiating ranks.

When did coaching in the US become a true career path? I can only count on one hand the few that would be worthy of that, but a steady income..?
I've had this conversation with several wide-eyed coaching wannabees and it's like the old saying, "keep your day job". 

The NAA needs to concentrate on participation, not shooing people away.

In regards to coaching style, I think the total BEST method clashes with the whole American work ethic and background of rugged individualism. We're not geared to "be like somebody else", in the world. We're geared to being coached in the basics, practice, practice, practice, and beat our competition with the style that fits our individual make-up. The Best method may work great for some, yet not others. It also seems geared for the young, what's new huh? 

That's just my opinion, but I do worry if this "recertification", disease, bleeds over into the officiating side of the sport. We not only won't have coaches, but no tournaments at the local level because we won't have officials to certify the STAR events.

Just my opinion.

JC


----------



## rpdjr45 (Jul 28, 2007)

*What happens after the era of Lee?*

Keeping it simple, my two bits worth of insights are:

1.Lee is the head coach, and if successful, that well be the form that the NAA wants everyone to follow. Why? because it is based on the Old Eastern European (the commies) system of determining the best form/technique, and finding the athletes that match the form/technique. No individualism. This way or the high way, end of story. Korea follow(s)(ed) the same system. The system *does *work. And this leads to...
2. Coach the best system or you don't coach with NAA blessing. Which means certification or lack of it. So, if you want to play, you pay and play by the rules as they are. If you don't like it, you're out. Or you're an outlaw or rebel. (And let's admit it, we Americans simply do not like to be told what to do, period.)

Then the question is: how long do we play Lee's BEST game? If successful in the next two Olympics, then we shall be BESTING out all over. If our BEST archers do not succeed, then NAA regroups and we play the game all over again. What happens after he is gone? Use the Howard Hill method? Cannot deny his success. I prefer Al Henderson's approach. And this leads me to ask ...

3. How do we select our team? My opinion, the same way we do in track and field: we select from the best shooters on the day of the tournament. Injured,too bad. Having a bad week or month, and you've been scoring off the charts a month earlier, too bad. I cannot say that is a perfect system, but I do believe it is the fairest. Does it mean that some of the truly best archers of the country might not be shooting, yes it does. Even in the Olympics, the best archers may not win, but the best archer on that day, when they needed it, will win. Just like the runner in lane 8. No one looks for them, but they can win it, too. And to conclude...

4. If we want to play coach and be certified, etc, then we play the game.
I do not think the BEST method is the best method. I do not think that the philosophy of any sport should be to bend the athlete to the system, but that the athlete's native skills are best utilized as effectively as possible. I do not think it is wise to put all the eggs into one basket. To put it into track and field terms again, if the runner is high stepping as if running over rail road ties, and can still clock world record times, I'm not going to try and force him to change his gait and screw him up. If the archer wants to shoot with 3 under and scores 1325 consistently, then let them shoot 3 under.
I think 85% of us coach because we love the sport and want to teach the kids the sport in a safe and attainable manner. We are for the most part very much concerned about not killing their natural enthusiasm. I do not think we all need to teach archery in the same exact manner. That's me. But I cannot change the game unless I am a player, and so I will play the game and get certified for the safety aspect. As for money. What money? I work cheap: give me a burger and coffee. Not that crappy Starbucks stuff either. I want real coffee: like Dunkin Donuts Coffee.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

ldfalks said:


> I could probably get to 2200 if I played long enough. How many games do you get to play to add up a score that high anyway. You know a lot about ping-pong. Do coaches there volunteer also?
> 
> Even if you volunteer for something you must continue to meet the certification requirements for the position that you are occupying as a volunteer. Right now USAA doesn't have a "Volunteer Level" certifiaction and a "Getting Paid" level of certification. I've been looking at some research that another coach is doing right now about the coach certifications in other sports and the USAA levels aren't out of line. They don't have "Volunteer Levels" either.
> 
> Either do it or don't. Suck-it-up and drive on or sit on your butt and get left behind. I don't care what you do, but the old line about the pitiful plight of the underpaid volunteer is wearing thin. You're getting paid Jim, you just don't want to admit it. The good feeling that you get when you give a kid a bow, and the satisfaction that you feel when you see one of your archers progress is the payment that you have asked for. If that isn't enough then start charging. But if you aren't going to charge then quit gripping about not getting paid in cash.




That sort of attitude is indicative of the problem. Making this about me is not helpful. Driving people out is not helpful. You still haven't figured out the reality of this sport in this country. You leave people behind and archery won't grow. You want to pretend you are going to be another Kisik Lee-go for it. Most of us are a bit more realistic


----------



## Poolgy (Jan 12, 2007)

ldfalks said:


> Since most of the CCC's have been run by me, I'll tell you what I say in the introduction regarding Level III Certification.
> 
> I tell the class that, "when I got a Level III, the certification course contained much more information than I needed for the coaching level at which I would be working (club/community) or could immediatly assimilate. What I needed, as did some other coaches that I talked to that had just gotten their Level III, was a much more condensed course that was affordable, attainable and appropriate for the beginning level Coach."
> 
> ...


Actually, that is along the lines of what I thought maybe was being conveyed in the CCC. I do not think you are wrong by teaching or introducing the class this way! You can say this to 50 people and get 50 different opinions. Unfortunately, that will never change! Just like coaches that will walk up to your students that they do not know and start telling them what to do or when you have a student that is making great progress they start recruting them to come shoot with them because they can help them progress even more. ukey: Thats just part of the program. Of course every now and then we have to vent on them just to set the record straight! (Just not in front of the student!)

I look forward to stepping UP to the regional level from my current L3. Let's just hope they don't get crazy with the process or the fees. 

Has anyone noticed that during all this economic recession that coaching salarys haven't changed.:set1_applaud: Maybe we can promote archery coaching as a "recession proof career"?! :greenwithenvy:


----------



## Poolgy (Jan 12, 2007)

*Good Morning Jim!*

I just post a thought in my previous post I thought you may be interested in. Have you thought about all the money most of us haven't lost during this recession! (In Archery!!) In fact I think I have made out better simply because I quit spending.

Just a humurous thought for the day! :teeth:

Have a good day! I have to go to work now!


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Poolgy said:


> I just post a thought in my previous post I thought you may be interested in. Have you thought about all the money most of us haven't lost during this recession! (In Archery!!) In fact I think I have made out better simply because I quit spending.
> 
> Just a humurous thought for the day! :teeth:
> 
> Have a good day! I have to go to work now!


Excellent point


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

To Every Coach reading this post
You have to understand something, as coaches we give the archer's the TOOLS to shoot, the credit goes to the ARCHERS not the COACHES. So, get it into perspective! We as coaches do NOT shoot the arrows! We TEACH the archer how to shoot, how to correct form flaws, how to work through the "archery slumps," but most importantly how to be good people through our sport/discipline.
To those of us who are at the ranges everyday, or every session we have, you are doing above and beyond, and appreciation should be shown through a big thank you. To those of you who want to crow about the kids you coach, "Pride cometh before a fall" so, beware!
To those who love coaching (like I do), and seeing those lights come on on the archer's mind when it all clicks on full tilt, it's a very gratifying feeling! To some that is enough payment to others it isn't. Coaching, like shooting, is a personal thing, we share information, people glean and sort it out and figure what works.
B.E.S.T. doesn't work for everyone, so you tweak it to fit the archer! We are not all built the same way to be able to replicate someone else's style.
While Darrell Pace's son had his same style, I, for instance do not! Different things work for different people. A coach's job is to help the archer figure out what works for them and help them implement it into their own shooting style. B.E.S.T. IS constantly changing, and if you, as a coach are brilliant enough to figure it out (without paying thousands of dollars for "reglorification") and adjust to what suits the archer, then you're a grand coach. Mr Wunderle, whom I greatly respect and who is a dear friend and my coach, doesn't have all these certifications, yet he has produced MANY World Champions, and OLYMPIANS.
My conclusion is the knowledge base is awesome, but certification is good at first, but then you have to adjust to your own students, and give them the credit, not yourself!


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

lizard said:


> To Every Coach reading this post
> You have to understand something, as coaches we give the archer's the TOOLS to shoot, the credit goes to the ARCHERS not the COACHES. So, get it into perspective! We as coaches do NOT shoot the arrows! We TEACH the archer how to shoot, how to correct form flaws, how to work through the "archery slumps," but most importantly how to be good people through our sport/discipline.
> To those of us who are at the ranges everyday, or every session we have, you are doing above and beyond, and appreciation should be shown through a big thank you. To those of you who want to crow about the kids you coach, "Pride cometh before a fall" so, beware!
> To those who love coaching (like I do), and seeing those lights come on on the archer's mind when it all clicks on full tilt, it's a very gratifying feeling! To some that is enough payment to others it isn't. Coaching, like shooting, is a personal thing, we share information, people glean and sort it out and figure what works.
> ...


Liz, You edited this out of your post, so I'll repost it and answer your question:

*Mr Falks, I RESENT YOUR STATEMENT TO JIM! YOU DON'T SEEM TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE POINT IS HERE...IF WE ARE TO PAY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO COME BACK OUT THERE AND GET "REGLORIFIED" AS HIGH PERFORMANCE COACHES OR EVEN LEVEL 3 COACHES, WHAT ARE WE TO DO? CHARGE OUR JOAD KIDS $20 A SESSION? EGAD, CJO KIDS GET THE BEST, AND I DON'T MEAN B.E.S.T. COACHING OF ANY CLUB AROUND. HOW MANY ARCHERY CLUBS CAN CLAIM THE STAFF WE HAVE THE DIRECTOR WE HAVE AND THE ARCHERS WE HAVE?* YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS THIS WHOLE DEAL IS SHOWING YOU ARE ATOTALLY MISSING THE POINT.

No, I'm not missing the point and, yes you should charge the kids coming to your JOAD something. I think they would gladly pay something to be coached by two coaches who are as great as you and Jim say you are. Yes you do have some big names at the CJO. Even more reason that kids and their parents would see a percieved value in paying some small fee for their kids to benefit from such a wealth of knowledge.

But, when you run a JOAD are you actually on the line coaching or are you shooting or doing something else? Do you ever sit down while the archers are working or are you constantly on your feet, on the line offering advice and helping?

The cost of volunteering isn't the price of your certifications and re-certifications, it's tho opportunity cost of the money you could be making by charging "something" instead of working for free. Don't gripe about the cost of the recertifications. You should be kicking yourself about the hundreds of hours you have given away and then tried to use as leverage to make everyone feel sorry for you.

Do you gripe about a one-eyed red-neck mechanic making $25.00 an hour rotating your tires while the shop makes another $50.00 on top of that? No. Then why would you or anyone else gripe about paying a few $$$ to get their kids PROFESSIONAL archery instruction or coaching? This isn't a rhetorical question.

BTW, Jim can type fast enough to fight his own battles.


----------



## dchan (Jun 29, 2004)

*from a New L3's perspective*

Been following this with interest and have gotten concerned messages from the rest of my class.

All of the info so far points to L3's 2 years or older or going forward. Where does our class of August 2007 fall?

Here's the requirements again..

-------------------------

COMMUNITY COACH
Audience: Instructors looking to advance into a coaching and athlete development role.
Purpose: Introduce coaching philosophy, training cycles/plans, competition preparation, mental aspects, equipment, B.E.S.T. training.
Length of Course: 20-24 hours
Prerequisite:
· Background check
· Must have been:
1. An Intermediate Instructor for one year - or
2. Pass an exam to ‘test out’ of the Intermediate level and verify three years
experience in an archery instructor capacity.
Administration: NADA
Course Cost: $250.00/per person and includes materials
Renewal period: One year
Recertification Fee: $25.00
Recertification Requirement: Attend one Recertification Seminar within a two year period.

REGIONAL COACH
Audience: Coaches looking to advance their coaching skills and become eligible for USA Archery national camps and team appointed positions.
Purpose: Incorporation of sports science, psychology, nutrition, and biomechanics and advanced B.E.S.T. training into coaching philosophy.
Length of Course: One week
Prerequisite:
· Background check
· Must have been a Community Coach for two years
Administration: USA Archery
Course Cost: $450.00/per person and includes materials
Renewal period: One year
Recertification Fee: $25.00
Recertification Requirement: Attend a Recertification Seminar or Junior Dream Team Camp

ELITE COACH
Audience: Coaches looking to advance their coaching skills.
Purpose: To achieve Elite Coach status by demonstrating a strong understanding of the
National Training Program, demonstrate effective interaction with athletes and have an
established and successful archery program that is producing top athletes.
Length of Course: N/A – Pass evaluation by National Head Coach
Prerequisite:
Background check
Regional Coach for two years
ASEP Course required.
Choose one of two routes
o Route 1
2 Camps -Junior Dream Team Camps (or equivalent)
1 Camp – Designated Team Leader.
o Route 2
1-3 month apprenticeship at the OTC-CV with National Head
Coach
Administration: USA Archery
Course Cost: Daily OTC facility charges apply
Renewal period: One year
Recertification Fee: $25.00
Recertification Requirement: Attend a Recertification Seminar or Junior Dream Team
Camp AND must help run a grassroots or Paralympic camp.

--------------------------

Our L3 course was held at the OTC.

The class was 6 days at the OTC. The same as the regional coach level.

The course material covered a lot of what the regional coach requirements "Incorporation of sports science, psychology, nutrition, and biomechanics and advanced B.E.S.T. training into coaching philosophy."

With the exception of advanced B.E.S.T Training which we didn't get enough of in my opinion, We did sit in with coach Lee on one of his BEST sessions and had a chance to interact with him and ask questions 1 on 1 when ever we had a chance to chat with him.

We all had to take the ASEP course now only required for the elite coaches.

Testing was done for every component of our training as well as a lot of evaluation of our coaching technique and how we interacted with athletes. We had to use each other for athletes in this coaching technique feed back.

Given this info, where the heck does our L3 class fall in the big scheme of things.

DC


----------



## mcullumber (Jul 31, 2006)

*My two cents*

Sorry for the length. This thread has been quite interesting to follow. There have been many solid opinions and thoughts on both sides of the fence. I am a current Level II Instructor and was about to travel to Chula Vista in December to take the Level II Class. It was cancelled for obvious reasons. For me, I have no issues with the changes although I would like to see a very basic safety/instructional course, I think someone coined the phrase “a volunteer” course for parents without the cost of a background check.

What I do see happening is USAA/NAA losing some instructors. I DO NOT see the sport of Archery losing these instructors, just USAA/NAA. I also see new instructors coming into and going through the system and in time replacing those who left. As long as USAA/NAA keeps the basic foundation or core of the courses and they don’t keep overhauling it, I feel they are going in the right direction. Improvements or continuing education modules can and should be added when needed.

If you look at the new courses you see that the Basic and Intermediate courses are really no different than what was offered. The majority of people who take these classes are going to be people who will volunteer and want to teach new people how to shoot. These are the individuals who help run our clubs around the country. They teach the basics of Archery and they help get archers started in the right direction. They don’t have the time or the need to go any farther into the system. The cost is minimal.

The next three levels (didn’t want to use that word) are for those who want to coach. Coaching is very different than instructing. The people who take these courses are ones that want to work with more serious and dedicated archers. They learn how to manage an archer and an archery team. They are involved in the mental game, nutrition, weights and exercise. They coach team rounds and strategy. There will not be as many at these stages as there will be in the lower Instructional levels and has you go higher there will be even less, thus the use of the word Elite.



One of the main arguments I hear is that one does not get paid enough to invest the time and money it will take to get higher certifications. Personally I think many of us have given away our services far too long. I understand the case for keeping costs down for those who are just starting, but I think one should really expect to pay to get a higher degree of coaching and training. Because there is not an end game in Archery, i.e. college scholarships, pro teams, etc. we will never have the numbers at the elite level that many sports have, but there will always be some who want to attain that elite status. We really need to get away from the idea that we have to give archery away to get the numbers. A good solid, well run program will bring people to the sport. Our club, the Papago FITA Archers (about 100 members) runs 4 to 6 beginner archery classes a year. These classes are 4 weeks long and we charge $50.00 per individual, adult and youth. We keep the class size to 20 people and we are full every class. We have been doing this for two years now. Oh, we teach them with Recurves only. We try and have one introductory Archery class per month. This is a free class and is one hour long. We use this class to let people have a taste of archery so to speak and it feeds our beginners class. Our JOAD program is just beginning (1 year) and we are slowly moving it towards a program much like a soccer or volleyball club, with different skill level groups. The parents know what will be expected of them, the yearly costs for tournament and coaching. We hope to be taking about 20 JOAD’s to Indoor Regionals. They key is we spell thing out and are not afraid to set-up some fees. 

I know I’m opening myself for some hits, but it is just the way I feel. This sport, like anything else in life is what you make it.

Mike Cullumber


----------



## cityhic (Jan 3, 2009)

Good for you Mike. I think you should be compensated for your expertise. BTW, I'm not a coach just a student. I personally respect a coach (that I don't know and just met) more if I have to pay for the instruction. However, if the likes of D. Pace or R. McKinney teach for free I would give them the respect that they earned.

Does anyone know what elite level coaching costs in other parts of the world say AU, Korea, Russia, UK, etc?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

ldfalks said:


> Liz, You edited this out of your post, so I'll repost it and answer your question:
> 
> *Mr Falks, I RESENT YOUR STATEMENT TO JIM! YOU DON'T SEEM TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE POINT IS HERE...IF WE ARE TO PAY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO COME BACK OUT THERE AND GET "REGLORIFIED" AS HIGH PERFORMANCE COACHES OR EVEN LEVEL 3 COACHES, WHAT ARE WE TO DO? CHARGE OUR JOAD KIDS $20 A SESSION? EGAD, CJO KIDS GET THE BEST, AND I DON'T MEAN B.E.S.T. COACHING OF ANY CLUB AROUND. HOW MANY ARCHERY CLUBS CAN CLAIM THE STAFF WE HAVE THE DIRECTOR WE HAVE AND THE ARCHERS WE HAVE?* YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS THIS WHOLE DEAL IS SHOWING YOU ARE ATOTALLY MISSING THE POINT.
> 
> ...




reposting something someone deleted is uncool Dee-

and the fact is most of us are not into archery to make money-just like my father worked 20 hours a week as a volunteer in addition to being CEO of a good sized company and as his father before him , I choose to do my volunteer work in this field rather than say chairing a department at the local university or chairing 4-5 non-profit boards. I am not bashing you for thinking you are entitled to money-that is no problem to me

what you seem to miss is that most people don't charge and if you think that we should charge so the NAA can justify charging us to get recertified --well I think that is short sighted. As to how we coach it seems to work. Liz runs the books at practice-she does the individual coaching at our range by appointment. She handles rental, bills, buying stuff for the club, getting trophies for shoots, insurance etc. She also does the summer camps at various schools assisted by a couple of our senior JOADS. That is through her independent business but it helps recruit JOAD members. I do all the coaching on our saturday sesions and 90% of it during the summer. Steve does all the introductory orientations at JOAD, he has the twins and (before Tyler went to ASU) come to his house for photo work and form work. Darrell, Steve and I all work with kids on the line and I use Darrell as a resource for issues that he might have the best insight into. He and I often do short meetings with the entire group. I set up the equipment and maintain it. Al Kramer-who has been shooting longer than I or Darrell have been alive-often helps with the kids as well at both the armory and my range. So does Brandon Alyward who works in the top pro shop in our area. He works with the compound kids as do I. I also coach those interested in crossbow. I have missed maybe 4 sessions in 11 years.

We have to pay the armory a pretty good chunk of change to use it BTW. The kids do pay a nightly fee-more if they use our gear, and a yearly membership fee. You would be hardpressed to find another JOAD club that has 40 Whitetail matts, two digital clocks and the other stuff we have. 

I think our program works. The fact that our JOAD club is the oldest in the nation-has had 4 or 5 different people run it-and fairly smooth transitions from one leadership group to another-has run two JOAD Nationals in the last 6 years and an Olympic Trials-all of which were praised as extremely well done-and consistently-for a small market-turned out some pretty good shooters-and better yet-kids who are considered good sports demonstrates that we are doing this the right way. 


as to your idiotic claim that I want people to feel sorry for us-it is just that Dee. It is the NAA I feel sorry for when they lose people who get tired of being soaked for these certifications. As I said Dee, the nAA needs people like me alot more than I need the NAA. You apparently are in a polar opposite position.

And Dee-don't ever question my motivations again or tell me what I ought to do to run a club that seems to work.


----------



## mcullumber (Jul 31, 2006)

Jim, from what I have read and heard from people here in Arizona, you and Liz run a great program. Congratulations. Our little club here in Arizona is just starting and we have a long way to go to get to your level. I hope I am not out of bounds saying this. I agree with you that most are not in it to make money, but I do think there are costs involved that a lot of us cannot cover, so we charge enough to run the organization. Our time is freely given. One thing I have found, at least here in AZ. is that people want to know who is teaching their kids and what credentials they come with. We used to charge zero for our programs. We felt that more people would come if the program was free. We were right, we had more kids and adults than we could handle. We also found that very few of the kids stayed around because mom and dad were using us has a babysitting service. When we started to charge a fee, we had more people staying and our programs grew. We also started to see more parents getting involved and in turn they started to ask who we were. As their kids got more serious and the equipment costs got serious, they wanted a higher quality of instruction and coach.

I don’t see a lot of people going beyond the basic, intermediate and community coach courses. Most of the clubs around the country are run by instructors at these levels. There will be some who want to do more with certain archers and they might become regional and elite coaches. I don’t think there will be a lot of these coaches and I think they should charge for their skill, but of course that is their choice. I don’t know of any elite coach in any sport that does this for free and has not spent large sums of money keeping current with their sport. If they do charge nothing, God bless them.

Good luck and I hope I have the opportunity to meet you both.

Mike Cullumber


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

mcullumber said:


> Jim, from what I have read and heard from people here in Arizona, you and Liz run a great program. Congratulations. Our little club here in Arizona is just starting and we have a long way to go to get to your level. I hope I am not out of bounds saying this. I agree with you that most are not in it to make money, but I do think there are costs involved that a lot of us cannot cover, so we charge enough to run the organization. Our time is freely given. One thing I have found, at least here in AZ. is that people want to know who is teaching their kids and what credentials they come with. We used to charge zero for our programs. We felt that more people would come if the program was free. We were right, we had more kids and adults than we could handle. We also found that very few of the kids stayed around because mom and dad were using us has a babysitting service. When we started to charge a fee, we had more people staying and our programs grew. We also started to see more parents getting involved and in turn they started to ask who we were. As their kids got more serious and the equipment costs got serious, they wanted a higher quality of instruction and coach.
> 
> I don’t see a lot of people going beyond the basic, intermediate and community coach courses. Most of the clubs around the country are run by instructors at these levels. There will be some who want to do more with certain archers and they might become regional and elite coaches. I don’t think there will be a lot of these coaches and I think they should charge for their skill, but of course that is their choice. I don’t know of any elite coach in any sport that does this for free and has not spent large sums of money keeping current with their sport. If they do charge nothing, God bless them.
> 
> ...


Thanks-and I state again-we do charge. Kids pay each session at the armory and pay more to rent the equipment. They also pay a yearly membership. This pays for the rental, the NGuardsman we have to pay to guard the armory (a requirement), the targets arrows etc. Our time is freely given. True, I sponsor some of the kids with gear. That is not the club. We allow members of the club to use our private facilities as well. Many make donations in terms of a few bucks here and there, others help with work, some bring a crate of pop or gatorade etc.


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

mcullumber said:


> Sorry for the length. This thread has been quite interesting to follow. There have been many solid opinions and thoughts on both sides of the fence. I am a current Level II Instructor and was about to travel to Chula Vista in December to take the Level II Class. It was cancelled for obvious reasons. For me, I have no issues with the changes although I would like to see a very basic safety/instructional course, I think someone coined the phrase “a volunteer” course for parents without the cost of a background check.
> 
> What I do see happening is USAA/NAA losing some instructors. I DO NOT see the sport of Archery losing these instructors, just USAA/NAA. I also see new instructors coming into and going through the system and in time replacing those who left. As long as USAA/NAA keeps the basic foundation or core of the courses and they don’t keep overhauling it, I feel they are going in the right direction. Improvements or continuing education modules can and should be added when needed.
> 
> ...


I agree with most of what you say, however, we choose to donate our time, because our club benefits by being one of the clibs the NAA can fall back on to host a tournament and do it with supreme attention to detail. EVERY tourney we have run has gone on with little or no complaints from archers or spectators. If you've been to one of our tourneys great if not, then come to one when you know we are hosting one. You'll see what sacrificing our "pay" as JOAD coaches to the club can do for an organization.
Our first JOAD nat's. we actually saw a profit, I don't think that happens too often for most clubs.


----------



## ldfalks (Mar 14, 2003)

Jim C said:


> reposting something someone deleted is uncool Dee-
> 
> and the fact is most of us are not into archery to make money-just like my father worked 20 hours a week as a volunteer in addition to being CEO of a good sized company and as his father before him , I choose to do my volunteer work in this field rather than say chairing a department at the local university or chairing 4-5 non-profit boards. I am not bashing you for thinking you are entitled to money-that is no problem to me
> 
> ...


You're so cute when you're angry.  If you're going to take something off, why stop at the gloves. Go on ahead and take your drawers off and really show your... I just love winding you up Jim.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

ldfalks said:


> You're so cute when you're angry.  If you're going to take something off, why stop at the gloves. Go on ahead and take your drawers off and really show your... I just love winding you up Jim.


you really don't matter enough to me to do that. Three years ago I never heard of you. I suspect in a few years, I won't remember you.


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Jim C said:


> you really don't matter enough to me to do that. Three years ago I never heard of you. I suspect in a few years, I won't remember you.


LOL:mg::embara:


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

ldfalks said:


> You're so cute when you're angry.  If you're going to take something off, why stop at the gloves. Go on ahead and take your drawers off and really show your... I just love winding you up Jim.





Jim C said:


> you really don't matter enough to me to do that. Three years ago I never heard of you. I suspect in a few years, I won't remember you.





lizard said:


> LOL:mg::embara:


You three need to cool it and settle down. You've degenerated into acting like children. All three of you add so much to this sport and why you would allow yourselves to act in such a manner on a topic you are all so very passionate about is beyond me.

I don't know how many of your students visit these board, but I certainly wouldn't want any of mine (if I had any) to see me behave in such a manner. The first way you lead is by example, what kind of example are you giving right now?

You might think about that before you post again.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Mulcade said:


> You three need to cool it and settle down. You've degenerated into acting like children. All three of you add so much to this sport and why you would allow yourselves to act in such a manner on a topic you are all so very passionate about is beyond me.
> 
> I don't know how many of your students visit these board, but I certainly wouldn't want any of mine (if I had any) to see me behave in such a manner. The first way you lead is by example, what kind of example are you giving right now?
> 
> You might think about that before you post again.


I) you might look at see who started the personal attacks

2) who exactly are you and why do you speak to me as if I needed your advice


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

:argue:


Mulcade said:


> You three need to cool it and settle down. You've degenerated into acting like children. All three of you add so much to this sport and why you would allow yourselves to act in such a manner on a topic you are all so very passionate about is beyond me.
> 
> I don't know how many of your students visit these board, but I certainly wouldn't want any of mine (if I had any) to see me behave in such a manner. The first way you lead is by example, what kind of example are you giving right now?
> 
> You might think about that before you post again.


If you have futher things to say about the personal comments on the board, I suggest going PMs! Seems to me the whole point of the boards is to DISCUSS :argue: , not blast personal barbs at each other.
Thanks, and it is just a suggestion!


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

*Coaching Topic*

I have been thinking about this whole coaching thing, and if I remember this correctly...
When Coach Lee came to USAA from the Aussies, he wanted most of the coaches who run the JOADs to come and take training and get certified in BEST so that we all would be on the same page, so many of us did and got double certifications in the span of 2 months. Then training for the Olympics started, and we still weren't in the medals. 
So now seems the NAA wants to tweak all the coaching again, and I don't think that idea is sitting well with those of us who spent substantial amounts of money in 2006 to get level 3 and HPP coach certification. 
We went to Coach Lee seminar at the ATA show, and it was all the same stuff as Level 3 & HPP classes, so his method hasn't changed that radically!
Anyway, what are we to believe? Who are we to believe?
I'm not planning on spending any more money to go through further certification classes, unless they are available through the internet or on DVD. Yeah personal interaction may be key, but we can personally see our results through our JOAD kids!
Thanks!


----------

