Lee Nelson

Beyond ‘crude pragmatism’ in sports coaching: Insights from C.S. Peirce, William James, and John Dewey: A commentary

Like Dr Jenkins I too believe that coaching scholars and students could benefit from giving greater consideration towards if and how the work of the classic pragmatic philosophers might inform how we seeks to investigate and make sense of coaching practice. The pragmatic writings of John Dewey, George Herbert Mead, William James, and C.S. Peirce have certainly had a profound impact on the development of sociological, psychological, and pedagogical theorising and inquiry and, as such, the field of sports coaching might benefit from seeking to grapple with such philosophising in greater detail than it has attempted to date. It is in light of this that I would like to applaud Dr Jenkins for seeking to stimulate discussion in this area. Unfortunately, space does not permit me to comment on each of his four identified themes. Instead, I will focus on Dr Jenkins’ call for a greater exploration of the relationship between pragmatic philosophy and the implementation of mixed method research in sports coaching. I hope that my commentary might in some way help to stimulate further debate about mixed methods coaching inquiry.

The deconstruction and reconstruction of sports coaching: An interview with Professor Robyn Jones: A commentary

It is with great pleasure that I write this commentary in response to the lead article. Professor Robyn Jones has proven to be a source of considerable scholarly inspiration. Through the adoption of a broadly interpretivist paradigmatic stance, my research seeks to respond to his 2005 call with Professor Mike Wallace for a ‘knowledge-for-understanding’ project. Like Robyn, I find myself interested in the micro-sociological analysis of sports coaching contexts. In pursuit of these ends, I tend to draw on the theorisation of symbolic interactionism, dramaturgy, and relational sociology. In the opening section of this commentary, I give thought toward Robyn’s observation that coaches often strive for acceptance and offer further evidence in support of this claim. In recognition that the relative success of a practitioner’s efforts to gain the social approval and acceptance of others can have significant implications for their sense of self, the second section of my commentary calls for a more explicit investigation of those means through which social relations and interactions impact on coaches, as well as other sports workers, well-being. Here, the work of Peggy Thoits is offered as a potentially useful sensitising framework.