EXPLORING CO-REGULATORY SCAFFOLDING BETWEEN A COACH AND FIGURE SKATER IN PRACTICE: A CASE STUDY LISA BAIN Thesis submitted to the University of Ottawa in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master’s of Arts degree in Human Kinetics School of Human Kinetics Faculty of Health Sciences University of Ottawa © Lisa Bain, Ottawa, Canada, 2019 EXPLORING CO-REGULATORY SCAFFOLDING Abstract Self-regulated learning (SRL) processes are frequently used by elite athletes and are thought to be an important factor in the development of expertise (McCardle, Young, & Baker, 2017). Before learners become self-regulated, they must first be co-regulated by a more experienced other (Glaser, 1996), such as an instructor. Scaffolding, a form of co-regulation, has three conceptual characteristics: contingency, fading, and transfer of responsibility (van de Pol & Elbers, 2013). Of the little research done on scaffolding, most studies have been in the education domain with few looking at it in a naturalistic setting. This thesis represented a seminal investigation on the nature of scaffolding in a coach-athlete dyad. It aimed to explore scaffolding using a naturalistic, instrumental case study with an experienced female coach (aged 53, national level) and her competitive male figure skater (aged 15, provincial level) using a concurrent mixed methods design (Creswell, 2003). Data were collected through a) an athlete self-report survey on SRL at the beginning and end of data collection; b) participant observation, field notes, and audio recordings of coach-skater dialogue at 16 practices spread across 5 months of the season; and c) three separate interviews at mid-, late-, and post-season with the coach and skater. Study 1 presents results informed by the skater’s survey and quantitative analyses of audio transcripts. The skater’s self-report of the SRL-SP (Bartulovic, Young, & Baker, 2017) was higher at time two (post-season) compared to time one (mid-season), indicating an increase in SRL. Due to very poor reliability uncovered in pilot work, planned analyses to determine changes in the directionality of coach- and skater-initiated discussion and contingency at various points across the season could not be performed. Study 2 presents the results of thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) on the interview data and audio transcript excerpts. Deductive analyses showed it was difficult to identify and describe aspects of the three scaffolding characteristics ii EXPLORING CO-REGULATORY SCAFFOLDING separately due to their overlapping conceptual definitions, and their interplay during practice. Inductive analyses revealed nuances of scaffolding in sport, including micro- and macro-level co-regulation. Micro-level co-regulation emerged as an important “interface” illustrated by mature coach-skater interactions surrounding practice trials. The interface involved shared and individual expectations for the coach and skater, roles, and described transitory processes relating the co-regulatory interface to the skater’s SRL. Fading in sport differed from the linear model in education with a cyclical pattern of engagement by the coach, returning to refine the skater’s elements if they were incorrect. After integrating and interpreting all the data, the findings suggested scaffolding manifests in unique ways in a sport dyad, with SRL representing a process goal of the interface. iii EXPLORING CO-REGULATORY SCAFFOLDING Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been possible without the support and encouragement from so many people. First, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my thesis supervisor Dr. Bradley Young. Thank you for your continued support, guidance, contagious energy, and insight throughout my graduate studies and research. I have grown so much over these past two years as a researcher and a person, and I could not have done it without you. You have challenged me to think critically and have been a great “co-regulator” throughout this research process. I am grateful that I have had the opportunity to work with you. I would also like to thank my thesis committee members Dr. Bettina Callary and Dr. Lindsay McCardle for their insightful comments, hard questions, and guidance throughout this research process. Thank you for the enthusiasm shown towards my work and the helpful feedback provided, they were integral to this project’s development. Next, I would like to thank the participants who participated in my research, this project would not have been possible without you. Thank you for allowing me to come out to your practices and for your enthusiasm during your interviews. It was a pleasure working with you. Thank you to my fellow lab mates Chelsea, Rafael, Stuart, Tyler, and Matt, for the great discussions, mentorship, and fun excursions we have had. I have enjoyed playing flag football, billiards, and curling throughout these past two years. Thank you all for providing both practical and emotional support throughout this journey. I would like to thank all of the friends I’ve made throughout my graduate studies; you have made this an incredible journey and I am lucky to have met you all. You rock, don’t ever change. Finally, I would like to thank my family. Thank you for the unwavering love and support that you have provided me throughout my whole life, and especially during these last few years. iv EXPLORING CO-REGULATORY SCAFFOLDING Thank you for lending your Excel expertise and your knowledge of statistical analyses. Thank you for visiting me and FaceTiming me whenever I needed it, and always making me feel like I was a part of everything even though I was 4 hours away. Your love, support, and encouragement has made all the difference. To my grandparents, even though you are no longer with us, I can still feel the love and support you have provided me throughout my life. Last but not least, I am grateful to Jonny, who has listened and supported me throughout this process. Keep up the great work! v EXPLORING CO-REGULATORY SCAFFOLDING Table of Contents Abstract............................................................................................................................................ii Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................................iv Chapter 1: Introduction................................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 2: Review of Literature.................................................................................................. 3 Co-regulation....................................................................................................................... 3 Scaffolding........................................................................................................................... 3 Scaffolding and optimal learning in education........................................................ 6 Sport in the Motoric Domain............................................................................................... 9 Fading in the motor learning literature.................................................................... 9 Scaffolding in sport coaching................................................................................ 10 Chapter 3: Overview of the Studies .......................................................................................... 11 Research Questions............................................................................................................ 11 Implications and Significance of the Research.................................................................. 11 Methods..............................................................................................................................11 Participants............................................................................................................. 11 Design of study...................................................................................................... 13 Athlete’s self-report survey for SRL.......................................................... 14 Audio recording of practices and coding of skater-coach verbal exchanges................................................................................................... 14 Semi-structured interviews........................................................................ 16 Data Analysis..................................................................................................................... 18 Self-report of SRL.................................................................................................. 18 Quantitative analyses of dialogue data.................................................................. 18 Qualitative analyses............................................................................................... 19 Integration and Interpretation of Concurrent Methods...................................................... 19 Outline of Presentation of Results..................................................................................... 21 Chapter 4: STUDY 1: The Struggle with Coding Naturalistic SPort Practice Dialogue is Real................................................................................................................................................ 22 Methods..............................................................................................................................26 Analyses and Results........................................................................................................