Youth Expedition Leader: Mountain Leader or Coach?

Youth Expedition Leader: Mountain Leader or Coach?

Mountain leaders (MLs) are not assessed on their ability to coach but often require pedagogical skills, particularly.  Some National Governing Bodies (NGBs) have embraced coaching but the British Mountaineering Council (BMC) has not yet done so for mountaineering.  This article is offered to stimulate debate and will consider whether mountaineering should be coached or not, with particular reference to mountain leaders operating on youth expeditions.

 This article will focus on the mountain leader as a youth expedition leader but there are obvious parallels with many other roles such as Duke of Edinburgh Award training, outdoor education, and personal development.  All of these roles require coaching skills. 

The Coaching Requirement

Coaching covers many disciplines.  You only have to type ‘coach’ into an Internet search engine and you’ll see sports coaching, executive management, life coaching, and teenage behavioural issues listed amongst many others.  There are a diverse range of skills necessary for delivery of the coaching process but, surprisingly, few of the skills relate to physical or athletic performance.  Management of the programme and holistic development of the individual are the more prominent skills required and they are very similar to the skill set required of the youth expedition leader such as crisis management, threshold decision making, resource management, communication, interpersonal skills, empathy, and problem solving.  McMorris and Hale argue that ‘…coaches perceive their roles as being concerned with the individual’s welfare as well as their performance’ (2006, p.55) and this is supported by the results of recent research into transformational leadership on youth expeditions (McElligott, Arthur, Callow, and Hardy, 2012).

There is much evidence that the outdoor adventure leader is a coach.  It is a role which can encompass instructing, training, teaching, leading, facilitating, managing, mentoring, motivating, managing, and being a reflective practitioner.  Collins and Collins (2012) take this one stage further and present a very strong argument for the adventure sport coach to be classified separately to other sports coaches.  Their rationale is that coaching outdoor activities requires a high degree of technical performance in addition to the coaching, leadership, and developmental skill required.  Due to the complexity of these interrelated skills they describe the adventure sports coach as ‘…coach, captain and manager all while playing in the game’ (2012, p. 90). 

            Two major UK providers of youth expeditions are Outlook Expeditions and World Challenge.  Outlook Expeditions programmes are aimed at ‘…teaching the principles of leadership, teamwork, communication, problem solving, planning and organisation’ (Education and Personal Development, website, 2012) whereas World Challenge aim to ‘…teach life skills and expand minds outside the classroom’ (World Challenge, website, 2012).  Both companies require their expedition leaders to teach, and place considerable emphasis on the leader’s coaching or pedagogical skills.

When consulted, both Outlook Expeditions and World Challenge stated that they set Mountain Leader (Summer) as a base qualification to ensure the expedition leader has the hard skills for the trek phase, the group management skills for the remainder of the expedition, and to satisfy Duty of Care requirements of Local Education Authorities.   However, both companies also emphasised that they need their leaders to have coaching skills. 

Training however is a challenge with freelance staff.  Continued Professional Development is available through NGBs, relevant specialist associations, some companies employing freelance staff, and the Institute for Outdoor Learning.  However, attendance is voluntary and lack of development will not necessarily affect future employment. 

Neither Outlook Expeditions nor World Challenge would wish to see a coaching assessment incorporated into the mountain leader award, but would rather see coaching formalised, with training and assessment available alongside the technical awards.  Some staff consulted would advocate a similar system to the British Canoe Union (BCU) scheme introduced in 2007 for recreational and competition coaches, but this involved a radical restructuring of all the BCU awards and mountaineering may benefit from a more evolutionary approach as a number of organisations have considerable faith in the current technical awards. 

Mountain Leader Training UK is presently developing a coaching scheme for rock climbing.  There are no plans, however, to extend this to mountaineering as stakeholders are not demanding assessment of coaching skill for mountain leaders.  However, a 2008 study by the National Source Group (NSG, 2008), acting on behalf of the four UK mountaineering NGBs, formed the view that there were gaps between the current mountaineering awards and coaching being offered, and the priority recommendation was that a mountaineering coaching system should be developed.  To date there does not appear to be much progress on this priority issue! 

A Way Forward

In the study mentioned above, the National Source Group discussed five possible solutions to this shortfall in assessment.  The first option was to do nothing but this was rejected as there was a clear requirement for a coaching award and this would then align mountaineering with other sports.  The other options considered in detail were coach specific CPD courses, a parallel system to run alongside current mountain leader awards, a separate coaching system, or replacing the whole award structure with a separate coaching based award scheme.  The NSG recommended that these options were costed and offered relevant argument for and against each option. 

Going back to the role of an adventure sports coach, we’ve already acknowledged that the mountain leader has to be competent to manage his clients in challenging conditions.  By necessity, they must have a technical qualification so developing a coaching structure which operates separate to the mountain leader award is impractical.  Accordingly, a structure which operates in parallel with the current award scheme is considered a pragmatic way forward.  This structure should allow individuals to progress through increasingly demanding coaching awards, whilst simultaneously gaining experience and technical qualifications.

Conclusion

There is strong support amongst the youth expedition industry for expedition leaders to be assessed for their coaching skills and for coaching awards to run in parallel with the mountain leader award scheme.  The National Source Group set this as a priority in 2008 – I think it’s about time it was implemented.

References:

Collins, L. & Collins, D. (2012) ‘Conceptualizing the adventure-sports coach’, Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 81-93.

Education and Personal Development (2012) Outlook [online] available from: http://www.outlookexpeditions.com/about/education-personal-development [accessed 16/4/12].

McElligott, S., Arthur, C.A., Callow, N. & Hardy, L. (2012) ‘The impact of transformational leadership behaviours on self-esteem in the youth expedition context’, to be presented at the North American Society for the Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity Conference, Hawaii, Waikiki Beach Marriott Resort & Spa,
Honolulu, Hawaii Jun 7-9.

McMorris, T. & Hale, T. (2006) Coaching Science: Theory into Practice, Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

NSG (2008) National Source Group Report on Coaching in Mountaineering – A Possible Future for Coaching Awards [online], available from: http://www.mcofs.org.uk/assets/getactive/nsg%20report%20version%205%20sep08.pdf [accessed 23/4/12].

World Challenge (2012) World Challenge [online] available from: http://www.world-challenge.co.uk/ [accessed 16/4/12].