Coaching

This little essay is not about coaching as a profession as in scholastic or intercollegiate sports, with concerns about team lineups, scheduling, budget, personnel, facilities, etc.  Rather, it is about people—individuals being taught one-on-one.  It is about a specific approach to helping a learner be able to teach himself. It is education in its most fundamental, effective, and lasting sense.  The word ‘educate’ comes from the Greek meaning ‘to lead forth, to bring out that which was inside, to work from the inside out.  I believe it is true that

                      Education is not the filling of a pail.

                      It is the lighting of a fire.

                      And the fuel for the fire is on the inside.

Coaching this outcome is the process of which I write.  The outcome is to help the learner have fun and success in what he is attempting to do.

Coaching is helping the individual remove the barriers that hinder accomplishment and success and arrival at the outcome.  It is giving the student, or athlete or novice the non-judgmental but accurate feedback that helps him see things through an undistorted ‘mirror.’  The coach helps the person see, feel, sense and develop an awareness of what is really going on in the attempted execution of a skill.  The coach is an extra set of eyes. The coach helps the person eliminate the ‘blind spots’ and, like a sculptor of marble, bring out what is hidden latent inside the rough block of stone (his potential).

   

The attitude of the one being coached is also critical. No one can be taught anything unless he or she is ready and willing to learn.  Since it is obvious that ‘it takes two to tango,’ it should be obvious that the role of the learner is to be trusting and receptive of the viewpoint that his coach brings to the task at hand.  One under the supervision (one of greater vision) of a coach must understand that he is working with his coach, not for the coach. 

   

This approach to coaching is not to have the coach be the ‘giver’ –it is not to establish a hierarchy with the coach telling the person what to do, but rather a partnership of trust where both work together.  The coach does not tell his student what is right or wrong (do this, do that) so much as work to open up the learner to what is possible. Together they analyze the learning situation with the learner seemingly and ultimately doing most of the analyzing.  The coach, though, patiently observes and guides the learner into his own discovery.  If the coach can be a generally silent and an exemplary model (yet an enthusiastic example) within the limitations / gifts of his own physical makeup so much the better. 

Coaching is an art and learning is also an art.  Taking a mechanistic approach to learning –trying to immediately ‘fix a problem’ or gain a proficiency instead of understanding it is, in my experience, a temporary or unsatisfactory solution. It is like cramming for a test—maybe then passing the test but soon forgetting the principle that was being tested.

Approaching either coaching or learning as a science is usually much less effective and certainly less enjoyable.  And both should be.

The Faith of Our Fathers (and Our Children)

“A person will worship something, have no doubt about that. . . .  That which dominates our imaginations and our thoughts will determine our lives, and our character.  Therefore, it behooves us to be careful what we worship, for what we are worshipping we are becoming.”     (Ralph Waldo Emerson)

These words from one of the ‘giants’ in my pantheon describe what has happened / is happening to religion in America.  The influence of religion in America is dying because people are more often looking downward at their devices instead of at their scriptures, and far too infrequently ‘upward’ toward their Maker and their Redeemer; they are worshiping what they get more than they do the Giver of all good things.  And more and more they are looking inward and not finding much there.  Especially is this true among America’s teenagers and young adults.

However, just as there are still a few ‘giants in the land’ among all age cohorts and in what is called the ‘great literature’ to redirect our attention and give us positive example, there is yet hope for the positive effect of religion in our lives and in our culture:  “Christianity has died many times and risen again; for it had a God who knew the way out of the grave.”   (G. K. Chesterton)

An important national study—the 2003-05 National Study of Youth and Religion (NSYR)—found that although America still purports to be Christian and has some involvement in it, in general it has become very shallow and in reality does not make much difference in the way people live their lives as measured against traditional moral and theological standards.  Even in most traditional churches the ‘social gospel’ has supplanted ‘revealed’ and Bible-centered religion and theology.

I take the faith of our teenagers as a bellwether of what is happening to our erstwhile American Christian culture.  Here is a summary of the NSYR study of American teenagers (but could be extrapolated to adults in our society):

1.     A sizable majority (75%) of U.S. teenagers claim some religious (primarily Christian—Protestant, Catholic and Latter-day Saint (Mormon) in terms of number) identity.  About 50% of all Christian youth say religion is important in their lives.

2.     Most U.S. teens follow their parents’ preferences and attitudes in regard to religion.  While ministers, priests and rabbis, teachers and relatives, especially grandparents, may be influential,  parents’ attitudes and example are most important in forming children’s spirituality. Most teenagers have generally positive feelings toward their religion, and express tolerance of all religions and denominations (and social trends)—unless their parents are strongly prejudiced.  But measures of actual religiosity (daily prayer, regular scripture reading, church attendance, strong influence and acceptance of moral and theological teachings) show that religion ‘is nice,’ but not particularly or personally important to them.

3.     Of the various religions of the world (Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Asian religions) most U.S. teens claim adherence to Christianity, and of the denominations of Christianity those scoring highest to lowest in measures of religiosity are, first, Mormons, followed by conservative Protestant and black Christians, then mainline Protestants, and finally Roman Catholic.  Jewish (non-Christians) and nonreligious teens score lowest in religiosity and integration of traditional moral values that are important to grounded individuals and a stable society.

  

4.     Churches that have religiously grounded programs, activities, and opportunities for youth to be actively involved and to serve and be heard, are more apt to foster religious values and spiritual maturity in young people.  Even in these churches that recognize the needs of their youth, however, they are losing the battle for the souls of the young if they deviate from the core teachings of Christianity and focus on a ‘feel-good’ and entertainment-based appeal.  Shallowness does not hold our youth.

5.     Though American youth may be nominal Christians or at least tolerant and accepting of those who are religious, their spiritual and religious understanding are very weak.  Even those who are regular attenders in mainline Protestant and Catholic churches are, in the words of the NSYR study, “incredibly inarticulate about their faith, their religious beliefs and practices, and its meaning or place in their lives.”  Again, this was not true of the majority Mormon youth interviewed. 

6.     As contrasted to earlier times, mainstream American religion “doesn’t claim teenagers’ time or attention compared to other social institutions, activities, and organizations,” or to social media.  A religious worldview as presented by these mainstream churches seems to have little influence in shaping the lives of those youth immersed in the temptations of a secular world.

  

7.     On a positive note, highly religious teenagers have “sizable and significant differences in a variety of important life outcomes” as compared to less religious teens.  Highly religious youth succeed. 

 

An informative book written by Kenda Creasy Dean, one of the researchers who worked on the National Study of Youth and Religion, titled Almost Christian: What the Faith of Our Teenagers Is Telling the American Church, published by Oxford University Press, 2010, is worth a reading by those interested.  Blame for the watered-down feel-good theology of mainline Protestantism  and the compromised credibility of the modern Roman Catholic church, the author says, accounts for the apathy of our youth and bodes ill for the influence of religion for the future in most of institutional churches of America.

My recommendation?  If you, too, feel that society is headed in the wrong direction and think that a restoration of the ‘old time religion’ may help ameliorate our most serious problems, study carefully the programs, practices, theology, and religiosity of the institutions and the effect on people who are ‘representative members’ of the churches out there, and align yourself with that Church which in all ways most  closely replicates the church which Christ founded, and has in its members, brought about the change that all serious religions would hope to achieve.

  

I submit that that Church which Christ established has been restored to the earth and exists.  “By their fruits ye shall know them.”