How do you train for good coaching?

One of our race directors at our club expressed his frustration to me, about finding coaches who meet the needs of the master's racers at the club.  I completely empathized with him.  Unfortunately a lot of masters racers are type three athletes; those that lack the natural ability but have motivation to succeed.  Any masters racers falling under the type one or type two category, often don't complain or just don't even bother with coaching.  Their natural talent often takes them where they want to go, and so they have little need for coaching.  I am a type three athlete, so my success depends very much on what coaching has to offer me.  In recent years I have learned to become "less dependent" on my coaches and have become more self directed.  I now use my coaches more as a "tool" in my learning process.  It is my personal opinion, that once an athlete has made this kind of transformation, success becomes much more attainable.  I am now a very active participant in my learning process, as opposed to when I first started racing.  What does this mean?  If you followed me for a day's training, and watched how I assimilated information and turned it into a learning experience, it would become more clear.  Here of some examples of the things I do.  Each time I go out, I have a focus.  I record information, I ask a lot of questions, not only to my coaches but also other athletes.  And at the end of the day, I make notes.  The best way I can describe it, is like I am assembling a big puzzle, each day putting more pieces together and sometimes rearranging pieces if I have put them in the wrong places.  I am not allowing someone else to assemble the puzzle for me, I am doing it myself.  That is the difference between active and passive learning.

So back to the original question, how do you train a coach to teach an athlete to do that.  Answer:  it is very difficult.  You see, passive learning is easier for the athlete but difficult for the athlete's coach.  The puzzle belongs to the athlete and therefore the coach has difficulty assembling the puzzle for them.  The pieces of that puzzle are stored in the athlete's mind, so it is very difficult for the coach to assemble the pieces because the athlete's mind is like a black box to the coach.  From the athlete's perspective, it is much easier for the them if the coach just tells them how to assemble the pieces.  An athlete who is learning passively, is the athlete that skis down a training course every run, waiting for the coach to tell them "what they did wrong" and how to "fix it."  If a coach wants to transform passive learners into active learners, then they must somehow convince the passive learners that active learning is more successful, even though it is more difficult.  A passive learner must first of all become aware of what the puzzle pieces are, inside their own mind.  Then they must learn how to make connections between the puzzle pieces.  Ex. how they are categorized, how they are related, how they interact and fit together.  The coach ends up asking the athlete a lot of questions.  The coach might also have to give the athlete insight as to how they themselves build their own puzzle.  An athlete can learn how to assemble their own puzzle by learning how the coach assembles theirs.  Sometimes having an active learner in your class with a bunch of passive learners can also be helpful. 

It is easier for a coach who is an active learner themselves to teach athlete's how to become active learners.  However a coach that has learned passively can learn to teach their athlete's how to be active learners.  It is considered an art form to know when to provide answers for your athlete and when not to, allowing them to discover things for themselves.  The process of guided learning is a challenge for any coach to master.  I had a coach once who was a master at this process.