The Future of Coaching Education
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•233 views
The document discusses the future of executive coaching education and outlines a vision for improving coaching education. It proposes a rigorous coaching education program that includes theoretical knowledge, ethical standards, coaching skills and processes, practical application, and evaluation. The program would provide a cohort-based curriculum, research-informed teaching, individual and small group feedback, and portfolio evaluation aligned with coaching certification requirements. The goal is to establish a professional coaching community through an improved approach to coaching education.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
The Future of Coaching Education
- 1. The Future of Executive Coaching Education Stacey Larsen, Ed.D. University of St. Thomas, Minnesota November 18, 2013 ©2013
- 2. How Do You Plan to Use Coaching? ©2013
- 3. Key Elements in Coach Education • • • • • • Theoretical Knowledge Professional Standards Ethical Practice Skills & Processes Practical Applications Evaluation & Feedback ©2013
- 4. The Problem with Coaching Education Today ©2013
- 6. A Professional Coaching Community • • • • • • • Rigorous curriculum, breadth and depth Research to Practice Cohort course series Individual and small group feedback Diverse Team of Scholar Practitioner Faculty Portfolio Evaluation Aligned ICF & CCE Certification ©2013
- 7. Let’s Continue the Conversation UST Executive Coaching Survey StaceyLarsen1 on LinkedIn ©2013
Editor's Notes
- At the crux of this is coaching education and the development of quality coaches. I’d like to share with you some key learnings from my doctoral research and work with individuals and organizations in executive coaching and tell you about where I see the future of coaching education heading. I’ll also share with you information about the proposed graduate certificate in coaching that we’re developing here at UST based on the information I’ll be outlining tonight.
- Because I teach an introductory coaching course, I’m often asked – what coaching training I’d recommend. My first answer is “that depends” What’s your goal? Coaching education used to be primarily those interested in coaching as a profession. However, Coaching Education has become (and is becoming) more diverse than that. There are many ways coaching can be used to benefit individuals and organizations – and therefore many needs for coaching education. How do you plan to use coaching - As a profession? (be or hire an external coach) A solution to organizational challenges?(be an internal coach or coordinate internal coach group) A tool for leadership development? (manager as coach) Or perhaps you hope to create a coaching culture in your organization – where employees and managers use coaching to interact with each other on a daily basis? As you choose coach education, it’s important to consider the end you have in mind. Historically, programs have focused on creating external coaches, but now more and more programs are catering to those who are interested in doing internal coaching and building manager and HR professionals skills in coaching. A small number are starting to focus on how to support organizational leaders in creating a coaching culture.Coach education is for more than just those who want to sell coaching services – it’s for anyone who wants to build their own coaching capacity or the capacity of those in their organization.
- Coaching has come a long way in the past 20 years, but in many ways, the field is still like the Wild West. When I completed my doctoral research on executive coaching in 2009 (I had been trained as a coach and working in the field for several years and thought I knew quite a bit about the topic), I came to understand just how diverse and confusing the landscape can be. Anyone can say they are a coach – there is no regulatory body. There are dozens of coaching schools/programs/providers, types of coaching, and associations who certify coaches. The terminology is confusing…information is difficult to find…no one source to provide guidance. This is why I am passionate about providing information to consumers of coaching (individuals and organizations) and why I began teaching the Coaching Leaders course here at UST in 2010.There are plenty of programs out there with varying degrees of rigor and success. Many good people, associations, organizations, coaching schools working to control the quality of coaching. If you don’t just want to go on word of mouth (the most relied upon method of choosing coaching schools/programs) what criteria should you use to choose for your coaching education? Thanks to groups like ICF and GSAEC, we now have standards for the practice of coaching and the education of coaches. The best coach education programs have the following components (on the screen).
- Even with these criteria in place, the research I did interviewing executive coaching clients and their coaches pointed to a glaring, but seldom discussed problem. The current way coaches are trained and educated is extremely siloed. And they (and their clients) don’t know what they don’t know. Plenty of missed opportunities and limited perspectives.As I explain to my students –we can put the types of coaching approaches into essentially 4 buckets – To simplify, we’ll say coaches who focus on client’s mindset, those who focus on behavior, those who take a systems approach, and those who look at interactions. -I found that coaches are often only aware of their own bucket – Many (not all) Can describe their flavor of coaching (the really good ones can tell the theoretical foundation they are grounded in), but cannot put that in perspective with other approaches in the field. The creates blind spots and missed opportunities. It also inhibits rich dialogue between and among practitioners in the field. Folks spend a lot of time advocating for their own approach, but not expanding their big picture understanding in the field. Debates are limited – coaches should be trained in psychology, or that it’s a detriment to them. Research is very focused on whether or not coaching works, but what are we really measuring here when there are so many different kinds? -Clients often have no idea that other buckets exist. They focus in on whether a coach feels like a good fit. Comfort – ability to be vulnerable with them, confidence, like their philosophy. They really have nothing to compare coaches to.Essentially, what we have is training programs rather than education programs (for the most part).
- The Ideal Coach isn’t just trained or indoctrinated in one approach – they understand the whole palette of colors/flavors coaching approaches available to them and they can make conscious choices about which one or ones to use with particular clients in particular instances and fitting their own style. This would bring together the various silos in the field, and enrich discussions among practitioners. It would reduce blind spots and enhance the understanding and decision making of coaching clients.CHOICE….Scholar Practitioners
- This idea is on it’s way to becoming reality – current proposal for 2014 at the University of St. Thomas. We plan to have scholar practitioners as faculty that represent and model the various coaching approaches or buckets.Connected courses – Faculty team – reflect differing approaches (diversity) and also communicating. Common texts shared course to course to encourage richer and continued conversation.Students will receive 1-1 and group practice and support from coach mentors and peers and will develop an ePortfolio demonstration of their philosophy and skills that they will be able to use in the certification process for further certifications (such as with ICF) and/or with clients.