Learning to be adaptive as a distributed process across the coach–athlete system: situating the coach in the constraints-led approach
Open accessAbstract
Background: The constraints-led approach was first proposed to capture how movement solutions are shaped and organised without being prescribed. It has since been extended as a suitable framework for informing coaching practice. The contemporary view of the role of the coach in the constraints-led approach characterises them as a monitor and manipulator of constraints on the learner. In essence, the coach is a designer whose role is to shape constraints such that practice consistently improves the learner’s capabilities to perform in a range of different contexts. This objective reflects what the coach aims to establish with the learner – an increased capability to adapt to new circumstances, such as improved performance in a competition or better learning in a training camp. Even if constraints manipulation performed by a coach is not necessarily prescriptive, this viewpoint suggests the effective coach acts as a change agent, who, through constraint manipulation, can orchestrate the learning process. Arguably, the conceptualisation of the coach as a constraints manipulator, has typically been misinterpreted as meaning that they are relatively disengaged (and at worst absented) in the learning process where their primary role is the gate keeper to variability in constraints and behaviour.Aims: Our aim is to re-emphasise the role of the coach in the constraints-led approach by exploring the idea that the coach and the learner(s) together, situated in a learning environment, constitute a learning system. Here, the coach forms a co-adaptive relationship with the learner, making adjustments to constraints on practice based on emergent relation dependent information, where the learner and coach mutually constrain each other’s behaviour. In doing so, the coach and athlete form temporary couplings from which new information and opportunities for action, learning, and creative behaviours can form. An important consequence of this reconceptualisation is that emergent, adaptive, and creative actions are somehow distributed across the coach–athlete social system.Implications: It is neither the learner nor the coach, but, the processes shaping their interactions that should be at the heart of applying the constraints-led approach. For effective coaching, it is essential that the coach is tuned in to the learner’s current capabilities and skill level and adapts practice accordingly. In doing so, setting up constraints to interact in a manner informed by representative design facilitates opportunities to learn to adapt skills that can support performance and learning. Hence, representative task design is not only crucial for athletes’ learning, but for the coach’s learning as well.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Representative training designs provide learners with relevant affordances and perception-action couplings so that they become perceptually attuned to critical information sources.
“In detail, representative training designs display three dominant notions: (1) providing learners with relevant affordances and perception-action couplings, so that they become perceptually attuned to critical information sources (e.g., Seifert et al., 2017; Orth et al., 2019);”
From Skill Training Periodization in “Specialist” Sports Coaching—An Introduction of the “PoST” Framework for Skill Development (2019) · cites this paper as Orth et al., 2019
Research often advocates the benefits of increasing interference in order to encourage movement adaptations and enhance skill learning.
“Research often advocates the benefits of increasing interference in order to encourage movement adaptations and enhance skill learning (Davids et al., 2008; Orth et al., 2019);”
From Skill Training Periodization in “Specialist” Sports Coaching—An Introduction of the “PoST” Framework for Skill Development (2019) · cites this paper as Orth et al., 2019
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 71 · Cited by 79
- Authors
- Orth, D., van der Kamp, J., & Button, C.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam Movement Sciences (NL)
- Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- University of Otago (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Orth, Dominic
- Venue
- Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-12-13
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 146-161
- ISSN
- 1362-7120 (ISSN-L)
- 1740-8989
- 1742-5786
- OpenAlex
- W2905129632
- Cited by
- 79
- References
- 71
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5
- FWCI
- 10.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- research.vu.nl
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Sports and Physical Education Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Physical Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- constraints-led approach, coach role, coach-athlete relationship, adaptive learning, distributed learning, constraint manipulation, coach learning, athlete learning, emergent behavior, creative activity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review