Gold Medal Squared Volleyball - Coaching Resources

home | contact | site map

newsletter

success stories

articles

back to article directory

The Laws of Learning and Gender in Sports
by Dr. Carl McGown

Those of you who have been to one of our coaching clinics will remember that we try to justify our belief that a coach's choice of methods is the most important decision that a coach makes. We then try to reason that the choice of methods should not be based on clinics, videos, books, or methods that we get from other coaches. We think methods should be based on the laws of learning.

Not long ago I was watching the men's basketball final four. During one of the many hours I watched, there was a show on ESPN that selected the 10 greatest basketball coaches. John Wooden (former UCLA coach) was selected as the greatest (Dean Smith of North Carolina was number two). Bill Walton (a former UCLA star and current basketball analyst) talked about Wooden and his practices. Walton said: "Practice was a teaching and learning session based on the four laws of learning: Demonstration, Imitation, Feedback, and Repetition. And oh did we ever repeat: over and over and over again."

For some reason when Walton talked about Wooden and his four laws of learning I thought of this e-mail we had received from one of our clinic attendees:

"During one of my many interactions with college coaches this weekend the issue of swing blocking was once again brought up. When we were watching the Ohio State University versus Penn State University men's game I mentioned how effective swing blocking was and that both teams were utilizing the technique. The assistant coach from [a school that must remain nameless] said "these are guys not girls." To which I replied, "what is your point? Are you suggesting that women somehow are biologically and physiologically so different from men that they are incapable of doing similar movement patterns? I don't expect women to perform as quickly nor as explosively as men; however, they don't attack as quickly or as powerfully as men, so what stops them from using swing blocking?"

She then suggested that "certain women" could do it while others simply could not. I asked her to explain who all these women were and what separates the ones who are "capable" from the ones who are not. She had no reply and I did not feel like getting in a full scale argument with her, so I changed the subject.

My point is that I think some understanding of the laws of learning and how they apply regardless of a person's gender would be useful to unscientific thinking coaches like her and the many others like her. Her willingness to dismiss the usage of a technique simply because in her mind "not every female is capable" is mind blowing stupidity to me.

What about all the male volleyball players, are they all capable just because they are of the male gender? This type of logic compels me to believe that there are some extremely unqualified (from both a logical and scientific perspective) coaches out here.

It is ironic that no one would challenge the idea that passing a ball with straight arms is the best method (males and females both seem capable of doing this). I am sure that others would argue that due to the slower speed of women that a four step approach is too long or that transition footwork patterns take too long.

I hope as my team improves that there will be coaches who take note not only of my players but the type of movements that they utilize. Honestly though, I doubt it. Most of them simply look at how tall someone is and what their vertical jump is. The University of [another school to remain nameless] coach watched my team all weekend (almost every game). Just before the finals she commented on how good my MB1 is. She specifically was impressed by her touch on the ball, her ability to change her attack in mid-air and just her overall court smarts. Not to mention that she is our best passer at this point. She almost sounded sorry for not looking more closely at her earlier. But just after she got through saying all these incredible things about her, she commented that she was probably too small to compete in the [nameless conference]. My MB1 is 5'11", which is small for a MB in the [nameless conference]; however, she is perhaps the smartest hitter I have ever seen and bigger blocks don't bother her very much (she hit .447 for the tourney). She is also an excellent blocker. Simply put, she is a very good volleyball player, yet the coach couldn't get beyond the fact that she isn't 6' 2".

I should have her watch Luka Slabe [a 6'0" OH for BYU] in the 2001 National Championships. But, alas, she would probably use some scientific explanation like he is a guy and she is a girl and, therefore, it makes a difference, just like it did with Ossie Antonetti [a 6'1" Opposite for BYU in the 1999 National Championships]. I guess it shouldn't bother me this much but it is almost insulting that these girls (my girls!) have to put up with this kind of closed-minded thinking. I hope if I ever get the chance to coach at the next level I am better at evaluating talent than some of these other coaches."

So what is the moral of this story? Simply this: If you use the laws of learning to help you make coaching decisions you will be a better coach than if you don't use them. The laws apply in basketball and volleyball and they apply to boys and girls and men and women.

For more information on the Laws of Learning and other coaching principles, sign up for one of our coaching clinics today!

Questions or comments regarding this article? Email them to Dr. Carl McGown at carl.mcgown@goldmedalsquared.com