Re-visiting a critical analysis of ‘coaching philosophy’: deconstruction to reconstruction

This paper revisits the concept of ‘coaching philosophy’ a decade after its initial critical review, acknowledging persistent issues regarding its definition, articulation, and implementation. Despite the ongoing recognition of its importance in guiding coaching practice, the literature remains confused, with unclear and inconsistent terminology. Research over the past decade has still frequently conflated ideology with philosophy, resulting in a failure to provide clear, actionable philosophical support for coaches and coach education. We suggest moving away from ‘coaching philosophy’ and focusing on what actually underpins coaches’ behaviours and practices and, importantly, where those underpinnings have come from. We propose that researchers, coaches, and coach developers consider philosophical and sociological reasoning linked to coaching behaviours and practices. This will help coaches, with clarity, implement what they value and believe to be the most appropriate coach behaviours and practices for their athletes and environment. We want to encourage coaches then to think more critically about their coaching via (1) engaging in a philosophy for coaching, specifically around coach behaviours and practices and (2) encourage sociological reasoning that prompts coaches to reflexively consider how past experiences, context and power relations shape their articulations of coaching and their action(s) in practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sport Education and Society
Published
2025-05-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2025.2505941
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Coaching Methods and Impact
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.54
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Re-visiting a critical analysis of ‘coaching philosophy’: deconstruction to reconstruction

Mark Partington, Christopher J. Cushion
1 citations
Sport Education and Society
Coaching Methods and Impact
1.54
article

Re-visiting a critical analysis of ‘coaching philosophy’: deconstruction to reconstruction

Mark Partington, Christopher J. Cushion
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This paper revisits the concept of ‘coaching philosophy’ a decade after its initial critical review, acknowledging persistent issues regarding its definition, articulation, and implementation. Despite the ongoing recognition of its importance in guiding coaching practice, the literature remains confused, with unclear and inconsistent terminology. Research over the past decade has still frequently conflated ideology with philosophy, resulting in a failure to provide clear, actionable philosophical support for coaches and coach education. We suggest moving away from ‘coaching philosophy’ and focusing on what actually underpins coaches’ behaviours and practices and, importantly, where those underpinnings have come from. We propose that researchers, coaches, and coach developers consider philosophical and sociological reasoning linked to coaching behaviours and practices. This will help coaches, with clarity, implement what they value and believe to be the most appropriate coach behaviours and practices for their athletes and environment. We want to encourage coaches then to think more critically about their coaching via (1) engaging in a philosophy for coaching, specifically around coach behaviours and practices and (2) encourage sociological reasoning that prompts coaches to reflexively consider how past experiences, context and power relations shape their articulations of coaching and their action(s) in practice.

Sport Education and Society
Loughborough University (GB), Edge Hill University (GB)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Coaching Methods and Impact
1.54
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.