Thoughts on Gawande and Personal Coaches: Coach, Teacher, or Babysitter? (from orgtheory.net)

If you missed Atul Gawande’s recent New Yorker piece on personal coaching, you should check it out (“Personal Best”). I think writers/academics have understood some of these ideas for some time (even tenured profs get regular feedback on their work from colleagues and in seminars, for example), but he presents a lot of interesting insights drawing on a range of examples including teacher training, Olympic-level and professional athletes, professional musicians, and physicians.

Gawande discusses a book that I have long-admired—Barbara Sand’s Teaching Genius—about legendary Juilliard strings teacher Dorothy DeLay (who knew a thing or two about Tiger Moms long before Amy Chua ever came along).  DeLay made a living teaching young children and adolescents how to play the violin—but was she a teacher or a coach?  This question has interested me ever since I started studying children’s competitive afterschool activities. During fieldwork I witnessed a lot of role confusion between parents and the adults they pay to instruct their children in a range of activities during the afterschool hours. Are people like DeLay teachers, coaches, or babysitters?

CLICK HERE TO KEEP READING-- ESPECIALLY FOR MY THOUGHTS ON THE RELATED GYMNASTICS COACHING SCANDAL-- ON ORGTHEORY, OR KEEP READING BELOW!

As Gawande writes, the idea of coaching, especially in sports, is a “distinctly American development.” If you know anything about organized leisure activities and the competitive impulse in our society, this shouldn’t surprise you.  As the number of opportunities for athletic coaching has increased, so too has professionalization. But it often has not gone far enough, especially when it comes to children.

Most teachers and coaches (of children) I met think of themselves as educators. But in almost all cases they are not formally credentialed or certified as such because such programs simply don’t exist. Parents often think of these teachers/coaches as educators… when it’s convenient for them. If not, it’s easy to slip into a “babysitter” mindset, where a parent is paying someone to care for their child—hence they “work for them.”

Gawande recognizes that the coach role is tricky, explaining that: “The concept of coach is slippery. Coaches are not teachers, but they teach. They’re not your boss—in professional tennis, golf, and skating, the athlete hires and fires the coach—but they can be bossy. They don’t even have to be good at the sport. The famous Olympic gymnastics coach Bela Karolyi couldn’t do a split if his life depended on it.”

His choice of Bela Karolyi to illustrate his point is a very timely one.  First of all, the World Championships in gymnastics start this week in Tokyo.  But, more importantly, the USAG (the governing body for gymnastics in the US) is in the midst of a coaching scandal.  Several high profile male coaches (many of whom, like Karolyi, could not do a split if their life depended on it) have been accused of sexual abuse.  The Orange County Register has written extensively on this scandal and you can read some of their coverage here and here.

The most disturbing part of the story is that while one of the male coaches has been “banned” from coaching by USAG, he is still coaching young, female gymnasts. How? Well you don’t have to be certified by the USAG to open a gym. Any of you could decide to go open a gym next week in your hometown.  There is no law or governing body to prevent you from doing so.  Sure, it may be harder to get insurance (and I believe that insurance companies are the unsung heroes in protecting kids and families from predatory afterschool activities coaches/teachers), but you could still do it.

Similarly, you could open a dance studio, start a music school, or call yourself a chess coach.  And you could charge a lot for your services and parents would come.  In addition, you could hire anyone you wanted to—even if they have been convicted of sexual abuse of minors.

Despite such serious concerns when it comes to coaching young kids, many resist introducing regulations.  They say that the government should stay out (which is why, I argue insurance companies have stepped in), or they worry that imposing a credentialing process will increase fees. The latter is likely true. But we don’t send our kids to unaccredited schools (or most of us don’t). Why send your child to an unaccredited teacher/coach who can charge any price he or she desires? As coaching opportunities continue to increase I think this will become more of an issue, particularly when it comes to children.

Should we pay Little Leaguers? (from orgtheory.net)

Second post over at orgtheory-- this on compensating players in the Little League World Series. Did you watch the Little League World Series last month? It’s possible you missed it in the wake of other news stories, like Hurricane Irene.  But this year’s winners (a team from Huntingdon Beach, California) were also overshadowed by coverage of their own game, as the state of competitive youth baseball and whether or not these “unpaid adolescents” were being exploited became the media’s focus.

Sportswriter Dan Wetzel made his case for compensating Little Leaguers in “Pay the Little League World Series Players.”  Wetzel writes: “Not every Little Leaguer, just the ones who play on television, where their innocence is packaged into a commodity. And, no, they shouldn’t make millions or even hundreds of thousands.  They should get something, maybe several hundred per television appearance. If it made people more comfortable that the money went to a college savings fund or maybe into a trust that becomes available when they’re 18 or 21, so be it.”

Any self-respecting economic sociologist, or sociologist of childhood, will immediately think of Viviana Zelizer’s classic Pricing the Priceless Child after reading this quote.  And you will also know that childhood innocence and compensation do not always mix so well.

I’ve written about how we should think of children’s participation in afterschool activities as a form of children’s work.  Afterschool activities can qualify as “work” both because of prizes won and because of the acquisition of cultural capital that will have a pay-off in the longer run.  I’ve also written about child performers, particularly children on reality television shows, and how they are compensated.  Child performers have always occupied a complicated space in child labor debates, partly because their “work” is often constructed as being “educational.” But I’m not aware of any serious scholarship (sociological, economic, or legal) on compensation of child athletes.

CLICK HERE TO KEEP READING AT ORGTHEORY (AND CONTINUE READING BELOW)!

In my opinion compensating child athletes may sound logical on some level, but it is a complicated issue that poses a few problems that are likely insurmountable in today’s commodified world.  The most obvious practical complication has to do with NCAA regulations. If we compensate kids they almost certainly lose their NCAA eligibility.  Of course many of these kids won’t go on to play NCAA baseball, but they may play another NCAA sport.  Compensating them without proper protections in place jeopardizes those future opportunities. (Paying NCAA athletes is another issue that has been batted around for some time, though it also has been talked abouta lot more in the past few months).

Second, and even more complicated, is that if we compensate kids in a way consistent with them being classified as workers or performers (and limiting compensation to those who appear on television makes it more likely they would be classified as performers) that would also limit the number of hours they could “work” and the conditions under which they could labor.  This could impact practice times, length of games, and other parts of the sporting experience.

However, I do believe that kids should be compensated and rewarded for their hard work—particularly when it helps adults benefit financially. One model to look at would be the National Spelling Bee (which, incidentally, is now not only broadcast on ESPN, but also live on ABC in the final rounds).  Finalists receive prizes, like an encyclopedia, along with scholarships, bonds, and cash awards.  Other in-kind gifts like computers and trips are also possible (for example the National Geography Bee winner wins a trip to the Galapagos Islands). Perhaps elite child athletes could receive similar types of awards—like specialized training—that could protect them from NCAA violations.

In the meantime they have to settle for hometown parades and a DVD of their television appearances.  What do you think is fair?

Guest blogging at orgtheory this month- First post on the afterschool industry

Please check out my first post over at orgtheory-- on the back-to-school/afterschool industry. If you’re a parent you’ve likely spent a lot of time lately preparing for the start of the school year.  Pictures on the front porch of the house with child in first-day-of-school attire (posted to Facebook, of course)? Check. School supplies purchased featuring some sort of Disney/Nickelodeon character? Double Check. Signed child up for a plethora of enrichment afterschool activities after being deluged with ads and then feeling guilty because every other child your child’s age seems to be enrolled? Check Plus.

Today it’s not just classroom instruction that creates so much cultural and social capital in childhood.  The out-of-school hours are a huge source of capital-building as well (what I call “competitive kid capital” in my work on elementary school-age kids involved in the competitive afterschool activities of chess, dance, and soccer).  And these afterschool hours are not only the source of capital for kids, they are also the source of very real economic capital for many adults.  For many teachers and coaches these afterschool activities are the basis of their livelihoods.  In particular, they make a living by both creating competitive kid capital and sustaining a base of families who believe that kid capital is essential to future success.

Behind the culturally celebrated veil of competition then is an elaborate infrastructure and industry that organizes, supports, and promotes organized children’s activities, and in turn shapes the daily lives of many American families.  There is a world of childhood activities organized to profit from parents who are concerned about their children’s futures.  Different sets of individuals, organizations, and businesses play a role in producing child competitors and winners, just as it takes an “art world” to create an artist or a piece of art (a la Becker).

CLICK HERE TO KEEP READING AT ORGTHEORY, OR KEEP READING BELOW!

We should think of those who run organizations related to children’s afterschool activities as entrepreneurs (note that they are usually part of the formal economy, but can be part of the informal economy as well).  These entrepreneurs are surrounded by constellations of other entrepreneurs who charge for additional services—like those who sell clothing and shoes needed to participate in an activity, or publish magazines and books about the activities.  I was particularly struck by this when I attended a State Soccer Expo and saw vendors selling products I had not previously considered vital to the travel soccer enterprise. For example, there was a booth for a company that sold the paint used to paint the lines on soccer fields. Another booth featured a business specializing in cookies, popcorn, and other snacks, which can then be sold by teams, at a marked up price, as part of fundraising efforts.  Another sold special headbands meant to help prevent concussions.  Clearly, such products are only sometimes necessary.  But producers, who need to make money, advertise that the products will make participation more convenient, or improve a child’s performance, thus making a purchase “required.”  Other products, like the headbands, are successful by preying on parental concerns about their children’s safety.

Because parents are willing to invest a lot of money in these activities, there is a lot of money to be made.  Profits are high because prices are high; teachers and coaches can charge a lot since there are often not many competitors in their areas of expertise, which would help keep prices down.  While some parents express discomfort that some adults are “making a living off of” their children (childhood is supposed to be a sacred time, after all), they still pay up for fear of their child being “left behind.”

Notably, the funeral industry and some industries associated with children (like preschool) are regulated in an attempt to limit exploitation of a vulnerable population.  What is problematic is that children’s after-school activities have become so commodified, with little to no regulation of their practices.  How much are you willing to spend on the “art world” surrounding your child’s afterschool life?

Sync or Swim: Reviewing the Trials, Tribulations, and those Nose Clips

No, those girls aren't in white face. They have just slathered on sunscreen to protect their skin from the sun as they spend upwards of eight hours a day training outside in a swimming pool. And, no, they aren't addicted to Jell-O. Instead,they are buying boxes of gelatin in order to slick back their hair during competitions. This is the sport of synchronized swimming and it is the subject of a great documentary, just released to DVD-- Sync or Swim.  The film, originally released to festivals in 2008, follows the selection process and the competition at the 2004 Olympics.  As one of the swimmers explains, "synchro" is not a glory sport. There aren't any big endorsements.  The Olympic experience is the pay-off.

The director, Cheryl Furjanic, does a great job showing the everyday dedication required to be an elite-level synchronized swimmer.  Every swimmer must work at the local Bingo hall once a week to raise funds. Many give up jobs, or have parents who give up jobs, and move across country to support their dreams. All while spending upwards of 8-12 hours per day physically training.

And, while many often make fun of synchro for the glitz and make-up associated with competitions, the daily reality is glitz-free.  During training, and even Olympic Trials , no glitz is in evidence as all the women don similar black suits and white caps with only a number identifying them.  Sure there is a focus on "looking good," which means being attractive and competing with a smile, but synchro requires that these women be tremendously strong and flexible athletes.  Sync or Swim helpfully explains the key elements in a routine (like the "egg beater" and the "heron"); turns out that in a typical synchro routine swimmers complete four laps of the pool while performing.  In breaking down the training the DVD reminded me of one of my favorite (though often unappreciated) sociology books-- Daniel Chambliss' Champions: The Making of Olympic Swimmers (for a shorter summary of one of the key concepts in the book, check out his article "The Mundanity of Excellence").

Just as Furjanic breaks down the training and elements she also, wisely, chooses to give the viewers some context and history.  Synchronized swimming was originally known as "water ballet" and "ornamental swimming" when it started in the 1920s. As the sport became more technical, with rules and judges' scores, the name change occurred (again, I can't help but point out the timing of when this competitive structure started, and how that coincides with other competitive activities prior to WWII-- see an article I wrote on this here). Popularity came after the 1939 World's Fair and the rise of Esther Williams. Williams was originally a speed swimmer, but due to WWII no Olympic Games were held and she was recruited to join the Aquacades, which helped her land a movie contract, and the rest is history. Synchro became an Olympic sport in 1984 (before that it had been an exhibition event) and the US dominated the medal podium until 1996. Since then Russia, Japan, and Spain have proven to be strong competitors.

Chris Carver tells much of this history in Sync or Swim. Carver is a formidable woman, coaching the swimmers from high above.  All the coaches tend to sit above the pool, looking down, and they use a microphone to bark commands and corrections that can be heard underwater as well. With her ubiquitous voice head coach Carver seems a God-like figure.  She also reminded me of the director in A Chorus Line, who similarly uses a microphone to control his charges from a disembodied high perch.

Carver is also featured in another recent documentary about synchronized swimming-- 2008's Synchronized Swimming, released by PBS as part of their "The Pursuit of Excellence" series (I must tell you, if you haven't seen the Ferrets episode that is part of this series, you are seriously missing out. It is a real-life/too-much-to-be-believed version of Best in Show... but with ferrets).  Though this came out before Sync or Swim, it takes place after the main action of it.  In this documentary Carver is no longer Olympic head coach; instead she is coach of the Santa Clara Aquamaids, one of the top synchro clubs.  Also featured in both docs is Anna Kozlova.  In Sync or Swim she is a competitor (winning two Olympic medals), and in The Pursuit of Excellence episode she is a coach of the Aquamaids.  (A nice touch in the 2011 DVD of Sync or Swim is that the bonus features give you a 2010-11 update on where the swimmers and coaches are now-- and many of them have gone on to great personal and professional success in and out of synchronized swimming [particularly noteworthy is how many have received top-notch higher educations].)

While Sync or Swim is definitely more comprehensive and edited better, which also means telling a more compelling story with lots of drama (including the story of one swimmer who was involved in a tragic car accident that leads to jail time), I did like that The Pursuit of Excellence episode discussed boys in the sport of synchro whereas Sync or Swim was  mute on this issue.  One talented young man is featured, and his dedication is all the more admirable given he is not currently allowed to compete in major international events, like the Olympics.  Though, if you can only purchase or view one, my vote goes to Sync or Swim, for its superior editing, narrative arc, and contextualization of the sport.

On a final note, in The Pursuit of Excellence episode, coach Chris Carver does *guarantee* that at least one of the young swimmers featured will someday make an Olympic team. I did a bit of digging and couldn't find that any of the "stars" made the 2008 team. Can anyone confirm if any are up for next summer's 2012 London Games?  Based on the timeline in Sync or Swim, the training squad should already be taking shape (note Trials are this November).

Why Summer Camp Isn't as Safe as You Think (on The Huffington Post Parents)

It was a hot Monday morning in July and he was dribbling a soccer ball when it happened. Twelve-year-old Joshua Thibodeau was at a soccer camp last month when he suddenly collapsed. Within 45 minutes, he was dead. By all accounts Joshua Thibodeau's death was a tragic accident. Yes, it was hot, but he had just had a water break. Yes, the three coaches working at the camp, including one EMT, followed proper procedures. And, yes, little Joshua had undergone a medical exam within the past year clearing him to play soccer. With the autopsy results still pending it's useless to speculate on his cause of death (Sudden cardiac death syndrome? Dehydration? Seizure?). But it's useful to reflect on what parents can learn from this tragedy, especially as the fall sports season gears up.

Summer camps started in the United States in the 1880s, mainly for affluent boys. By the 1930s niche camps developed for girls, religious groups, and immigrants. These sleepaway and day camps focused on outdoor activities and a range of group activities and competition, like Color Wars.

While traditional summer camps still exist, in the twenty-first century it is specialty camps that have proliferated. Specialty camps focus on a specific activity -- like the soccer camp where Josh Thibodeau was playing. Middle- and upper-middle class parents opt to use the summer months to help their children develop concrete skills and credentials that will help them throughout the next year, and in the years leading up to the college admissions race.

Top-notch camp counselors are sought out for these specialty camps so that "the best" can teach kids how to be "the best." But just who are these camp counselors, and how qualified are they to be working with young kids? Unlike teachers, camp counselors are neither required to be certified to work with young children nor to be treated as experts in a given subject area (like soccer, tennis, dance, chess, etc.).

Click HERE to keep reading on The Huffington Post Parents!