Thanks for listening! I appreciate your points and take exception with one and obviously just diasgree with others which is cool. I dont mind others views. If you think its dumb to expose students to different ways of learning on different days offer reasons why. In my experience people are different and learn in different ways.
A few points: - Having an 'Ecological Monday' makes no sense, unless you believe something six days a week and suddenly don't one day a week. This demonstrates a lack of understanding. - Also, eco-advocates telling coaches not to coach is a complete misrepresentation. They advocate for a shift from explicit coaching (instruction and prescription) to facilitating learning through practice design and constraint manipulation. He knows this, which makes his statement disingenuous. - The approach is an alternative method and isn't for everyone. It takes more than just having a superficial understanding before applying it or critiquing it. It's certainly not ideal for certain coaches, as it suggests they should step back, emphasizing that it's not all about them or their knowledge. This can be more challenging for some than for others.
Ecological Dynamics as a learning methodology would likely argue that it takes only minimal understanding before applying it. The entire concept is largely learn as you go by doing, why would that not also be the case for application as a coach. If I wait until I master the understanding through (insert medium here) then apply it is like waiting til all the lights between me and my destination are green before leaving the driveway. Put simply, can't have it both ways.
@KodiakCombat, you're absolutely right, learn as you go defo fits within an eco world view. However. I think a decent understanding might be advised before critiquing and misrepresenting the approach publicly.
@mcnoodles76 why? In eco, mistakes and errors are part of the process. A coach shouldn't worry about a blue belt telling someone something that creates bad habits. Nor should a coach be afraid to design a bad class. In your pursuit of some sort of EcoD purity, you've strayed from the very principles of EcoD. Wild.
That's a fair comment given the lack of context here. I've spent 5 years playing devil's advocate. I've repeatedly stated that anyone who says they have this approach fully dialed in is kidding themselves and others. Thinking we can fully understand the complexity of ecology will make fools of us all. What it's not. Is telling coaches not to coach.
@josh. By all means, please continue to demonstrate your lack of understanding. Ecological Dynamics is a theoretical framework underpinned by an assumption of how people learn to move. It is incoherent to mix assumptions. There lies your reason. Of course, you are free to expose people to whatever you want. Similarly, I am free to point out that you do not understand the framework you are criticizing. My other points were about your misrepresentation, and that you should probably have a deeper understanding of what the approach actually assumes before you use it one day a week or critique it publicly. It's acceptable to be ignorant, but if you bullshit publicly, expect to be called out. Again, this approach is not suited for coaches who are too lazy to do the necessary homework, or who need to be the 'sage on the stage'. But I guess there are six other days of the week for that."
Who is this charlatan?
Thanks for listening! I appreciate your points and take exception with one and obviously just diasgree with others which is cool. I dont mind others views.
If you think its dumb to expose students to different ways of learning on different days offer reasons why. In my experience people are different and learn in different ways.
A few points:
- Having an 'Ecological Monday' makes no sense, unless you believe something six days a week and suddenly don't one day a week. This demonstrates a lack of understanding.
- Also, eco-advocates telling coaches not to coach is a complete misrepresentation. They advocate for a shift from explicit coaching (instruction and prescription) to facilitating learning through practice design and constraint manipulation. He knows this, which makes his statement disingenuous.
- The approach is an alternative method and isn't for everyone. It takes more than just having a superficial understanding before applying it or critiquing it.
It's certainly not ideal for certain coaches, as it suggests they should step back, emphasizing that it's not all about them or their knowledge. This can be more challenging for some than for others.
Ecological Dynamics as a learning methodology would likely argue that it takes only minimal understanding before applying it. The entire concept is largely learn as you go by doing, why would that not also be the case for application as a coach. If I wait until I master the understanding through (insert medium here) then apply it is like waiting til all the lights between me and my destination are green before leaving the driveway.
Put simply, can't have it both ways.
@KodiakCombat, you're absolutely right, learn as you go defo fits within an eco world view. However. I think a decent understanding might be advised before critiquing and misrepresenting the approach publicly.
@mcnoodles76 why? In eco, mistakes and errors are part of the process. A coach shouldn't worry about a blue belt telling someone something that creates bad habits. Nor should a coach be afraid to design a bad class.
In your pursuit of some sort of EcoD purity, you've strayed from the very principles of EcoD. Wild.
That's a fair comment given the lack of context here.
I've spent 5 years playing devil's advocate. I've repeatedly stated that anyone who says they have this approach fully dialed in is kidding themselves and others.
Thinking we can fully understand the complexity of ecology will make fools of us all.
What it's not. Is telling coaches not to coach.
@josh. By all means, please continue to demonstrate your lack of understanding.
Ecological Dynamics is a theoretical framework underpinned by an assumption of how people learn to move. It is incoherent to mix assumptions. There lies your reason. Of course, you are free to expose people to whatever you want. Similarly, I am free to point out that you do not understand the framework you are criticizing.
My other points were about your misrepresentation, and that you should probably have a deeper understanding of what the approach actually assumes before you use it one day a week or critique it publicly. It's acceptable to be ignorant, but if you bullshit publicly, expect to be called out.
Again, this approach is not suited for coaches who are too lazy to do the necessary homework, or who need to be the 'sage on the stage'. But I guess there are six other days of the week for that."