COACH SELECTION
Objective: To select coaches that WILL have the greatest benefit to the kids in the program, and meet the coaching requirements and the mandate of Confederation Hockey Club.
Preamble
In an effort to provide a quality hockey program, Confederation Hockey Club will select coaches it feels best meet the objectives of the program offered, governing bodies, and the game itself. These coaches will be selected, after team placement, and shall be appointed by the Evaluation committee. In the event of a number of candidates, then the selection process will be utilized.
Criteria
Coaches will be selected on the basis of five categories. These categories, in no particular order include:
1. Certification
2. Experience
3. Past Performance
4. Seniority
5. How they relate to (communicate with) kidsEach category will be scored out of five. The scoring will be based on the ratings of poor (1 point), below average (2 points), average (3 points), good (4 points), and excellent (5 points). The only exception will be in the Seniority category which will be on a sliding scale based on the number of candidates who have expressed interest in head coaching, the coach with the most seniority gets the highest score and it drops with reducing seniority.. A candidate has to score a minimum of 12 points to be considered as a head coach.
Executive Summary of Criteria Categories
1. Certification Evaluate what each candidate has and attach a score relevant to requirements. Confederation mandatory requirements include Speak Out, CHSP, and Initiation Level for Novice and below.
Scoring should relate to fulfillment of mandatory requirements. Speak Out and CHSP are universally required, therefore head coach candidates need to have them or be registered in them prior to December 31st of the current year. It shall be acceptable to choose a candidate if he has expressed the intent to meet this requirement and has made a commitment to the category directors to do so.
With respect to certification, we are ONLY scoring based on the requirement pertinent to the level in which the candidate has expressed an interest in coaching. For Example, if we have two candidates for a Novice team and one coach has a Level 3 and the other has Initiation level, if the Level 3 coach has Initiation certification then the two candidates meet the certification requirement for that category, therefore they are equal for Novice. In the categories of Atom and Peewee we can determine if a difference in certification achieved by the candidates has any merit or basis. Certification, although important, doesn’t necessarily translate into better youth coaches. It is important to note that if certification is applicable then a sliding scale can be utilized as a comparison, but there is more to coaching then classrooms and textbook. A level 4 coach cannot help an Atom 8 team if he doesn’t bring other skills to the table, such as an ability to communicate to the kids at their level, is organized, is energized, is motivated, and patient.
2. Experience
This category is a combination of previous coaching and playing experience. Please combine the level played and coached to come up with a comparison between the candidates. If we do not know the player history of all the candidates then it should not be utilized as a means of scoring one coach ahead of another.The intent of even looking at the level that someone has played is that this is useful in understanding the individual’s grasp of the game and whether this has merit or benefit to the kids. In some cases it can have great benefit, and in others it can be a deterrent. Benefits of high level of experience are to know what the game is like at higher levels and can keep things in perspective at the community level. Deterrent of high level could be the individual could be overly competitive and could be living gregariously through their child. Assess high and low level of playing experience and attach rating.
Past coaching experience should be considered; this can include other sports in addition to or instead of hockey. Watch for appropriate age levels, years coaching and attach a rating to past coaching experience. Greater emphasis should be on past coaching experience as opposed to playing experience.
3. Past Performance
This element of criteria is very important. How a coach has performed in the past when given the responsibility of coaching young children is essential. As discussed this should information should be globally collected and done so in a confidential manner. Any information that is negative in nature should be verified and followed up on. We cannot attach a rating based on hearsay or second hand information.Please refer to the assessment of coaches by the previous year’s category directors; this should include how coaches met the requirements placed on them by category. For example, getting game sheets in time and abiding by and meeting objectives of Confederation Hockey Club. The category directors give the following ratings
A) Good head coach -Recommended
B) Not recommended as a head coach(could do it in a pinch) but a good assistant
C) Not recommended for a coaching position
For the purpose of fitting these ratings into this process A=5, B=3, C=1. Please note category directors also consider issues like discipline, historical problems, effort, organization, and any major incidents that required the involvement of the disciplinary committee.
The online Confederation Hockey Coach and Club evaluation form is used along with the category director’s feedback to come up with a final rating in this category.
4. Seniority
This category deals with loyalty to the club. In the event we have two equal candidates except one has been loyal and stayed with the club, then the candidate with the most continuous years of loyalty shall be chosen.The scoring or rating in this category has been previously outlined. If we have three coaches then we have 2 or 3 points available. We have only two points if one candidate has zero years with Confederation. If we have three and they have all coached before then we go to continuous years of commitment to Confederation. For Example, if one has 6 years, another has 4, and the final has 2, scoring would be 3,2,1.
5. How they relate to kids
This is also important. We need to choose candidates that can relate to kids, can talk to them at their level and can excite them about hockey. This is a coach that can teach kids to love the game and the ideals the Club and the game stand for. We want both a responsible role model and someone who is at times a kid themselves who makes it fun and has fun. This is not a chore but labor of love.TIEBREAKERS
On occasion we may have a tie, all things are equal and who do we choose? Two separate volunteers from the evaluation committee will ask for three randomly selected names of parents from the most recent team the candidate has coached, he will call these parents and get feedback. Feedback should focus on positives and not negatives. Each volunteer will come back to the evaluation group and share the information collected, the committee will then make the decision.
NO CANDIDATE OR CAPABLE HEAD COACH
Should we be faced with a situation where there is no head coach amongst the players listed on an individual team, the committee will consider moving a coach to that team. This will be done before the “team” skates together. We shall ask the parent if they can ask their child if they would consider moving to team X from team Y. The child shall be told in a confidential manner who some of the kids are on both teams and they can chose if movement is acceptable. When having to move a head coach to a team without one, the focus must be on the needs of the kids and not the adults.
Alternatively, non-parent coaches should be and can be pursued should a move be detrimental to the evaluation and subsequent team formation process. We are not against non-parent coaches should they meet the requirements and if the references supplied fit with the mandate and objectives of the club.
2000 -DB