Using Flipgrid to improve reflection: a collaborative online approach to coach development

ABSTRACT

Background: Coaching researchers have stressed the need for critical reflection in practitioners, as an important tool to facilitate development. In parallel, however, coaches’ preference for more informal development methods are well documented. The increased impact of social media and other online applications offers new ways to pursue these important factors, and previous research has explored the use of written online blogs as a medium for this purpose.

Purpose: The objective of the current study was to explore the potential effectiveness of Flipgrid, a video-based online communication tool that enables face-to-face, short verbal interactions, for facilitating and promoting collaborative online learning and critical reflection.

Research design and data collection: The intervention was applied to a group of student-coaches (n = 21), enrolled in an undergraduate sports coaching degree programme at a higher education institution in the UK, as a part of their educational diet. Responses were analysed using Hatton and Smith’s [Hatton, N., and D. Smith. 1995. “Reflection in Teacher Education: Towards Definition and Implementation.” Teaching and Teacher Education 11 (1): 33–49] reflective framework; an approach used previously in coach development studies. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected reflecting the number and reflective level of interactions over a fifteen-week period.

Findings: Results showed good support for the approach, with participants exhibiting more frequent and more critical responses as compared to earlier studies which had used a blog-based written response and interaction format.

Conclusion: Further research is worthwhile to examine the broader usage of the approach. However, in this higher education setting, the approach proved impactful with these student-coaches.

KEYWORDS:

• coach education
• coach learning
• reflective practice
• social learning

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).