Assessment Brief 1 (Referral)
Sports Coaching: Theory & Practice
Coursework Assessment Criteria for:
Coursework One (Referral): Skills & Games Based Coaching
This assessment is designed to allow students to consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of two approaches to coaching sports performers: skills based and games based coaching. This assessment is designed to meet with learning outcomes one and two of the module. The work will allow you to consider which approach to coaching is more suited to particular groups of performers and construct critical arguments both for and against each approach.
Content of Coursework
Working individually, students will produce an essay of 2000 words (±10%) entitled:
“The strengths of the games centered approach to coaching sports and teaching PE far outweigh the weaknesses. Discuss.”
You should consider the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches, drawing on academic literature sources discussed in lectures and from the guided further reading. Where suitable, you may also draw upon practical examples from either your own coaching experiences or that of others.
The aim of this work is to synthesise theoretical knowledge of different coaching approaches alongside an understanding of coaching in practical situations. Therefore you should consider the application of particular learning theories and pedagogies to each of the approaches to coaching.
You should present your work using the following headings:
Introduction / Discussion / Conclusion / References / Appendices (where appropriate)
As this is a capped referral, the maximum mark you can achieve is 40%.
Understanding and Managing Coursework Assessment checklist
This brief checklist is designed to help you avoid some of the common mistakes which can lose you marks on your coursework. After you have completed your coursework assignment, then check through your work and ‘tick off’ each point once you are sure you have fully addressed that aspect.
YOU NEED TO THEN SUBMIT THE COMPLETED CHECK LIST WITH YOUR COURSEWORK.
Have you presented your work following the guidelines given in this document?
Have you kept to the total word count of 2000 words?
Have you written in an academic style, using third person?
Have you correctly cited all references?
Have you correctly presented these references alphabetically using the Harvard style?
Have you proof read your work and checked your spellings and punctuation?
Lower 2nd (2.2)
Upper 2nd (2.1)
1st Class Hons
Quality of Report
Overall marginally unsatisfactory – the report has some sound aspects but numerous weaknesses.
Satisfactory – there are several major weaknesses influencing the quality of the work
Good – more than one major weakness has influenced the overall quality of the work
Very good –one major weakness or a few minor issues to an otherwise very good standard of work
Outstanding – exceptional standard throughout with no major issues evident in the quality of research, articulation or evaluation of ideas
Ability to critically evaluate and demonstrate original thinking (30%)
A basic description of Coaching Theory and Learning Concepts but lacking in both the depth and detail expected at this level. Little or no critical analysis and no appreciation of the wider context of the groups needs
Descriptive. A competent description of Coaching Theory and Learning Concepts but not always linked to the value for learning for each group. Make better use of examples to support your text which could help answer the question
Shows an awareness of some but not all of the areas of Coaching Theory and Learning Concepts. Good descriptive text just needs to develop a more evaluative approach, to cover all groups and challenges. Could have contextualised better to your group.
A comprehensive text which demonstrates an awareness and an in-depth understanding of but also shows an appreciation of the limits of Coaching Theory and Learning Concepts. Good use of examples to support your text and demonstrate the needs of the groups and impact on coaching practice
A high level of critical evaluation and full awareness of Coaching Theory and Learning Concepts especially the value to learning across the groups. Makes sound judgements to frame appropriate questions about the drawbacks and advantages. Excellent use of examples from both theoretical and practically applied situations
Application and explanation of key theories or concepts (30%)
Poor understanding is evident as little or no attempt has been made to apply theory to support your ideas. There are errors and misunderstandings.
Basic understanding of coaching theory and learning concepts is evident although some of the key concepts are missing or misinterpreted indicating gaps in knowledge.
A general understanding of coaching theory and learning concept is evident in the text but not always applied accurately. The basic key concepts and ideas around coaching are included and linked to learning
Detailed understanding of concepts, very good discussion of theory. Very good application of learning theory although explanations could be improved.
In-depth and detailed understanding of Coaching and Learning concepts. Excellent application and linking of educational theories to learning outside. Concepts clearly explained and contextualized to coaching, learning and impact
Quality of source literature collected to support your discussion. (15%)
Not particularly well researched with limited and/or poor resources (often too reliant on inappropriate research).
Evidence of research but using too many sources of questionable origin or too few resources overall. Limited resources limit your ability to interpret the topic effectively.
A range of relevant literature is used, although may be lacking in primary sources. Quality and/or quantity of research could be improved especially given the wealth of research on education. The skill is judging the best sources to use!
Very good range of relevant, contemporary literature, although there may still be the occasional ‘questionable’ source.
Exceptionally well researched using an extensive range of relevant, appropriate and/or contemporary literature. Sources at the forefront of educational research have been used to inform the text
Communication, Structure & Organisation (15%)
Poorly communicated with an illogical structure. The reader is unable to follow the discussion.
Ideas are fairly clear and coherent but sections are missing or could have been better organised.
Ideas generally clear and coherent although the structure did not always support this.
Commendable clarity of ideas and a reasonably logical and coherent structure.
Exceptional clarity of ideas which are logically presented and culminate with an informed summary. Text is communicated with exceptional authority
Referencing and presentation (10%)
Harvard referencing is poor both in the reference list and in the in-text citations and will need to be addressed. Standard of presentation is unacceptable and lacking in professionalism
The text does not demonstrate a confident use of Harvard. Numerous weaknesses give an impression of a lack of attention to detail
Harvard may need attention. A good standard of presentation but with deficiencies which mar the professionalism of the finished document.
Harvard is appropriate for this level with few if any minor errors A very good standard of presentation with minor issues which can be easily remedied.
Harvard and presentation are almost faultless at a level approaching that expected of a professional document