When is it Science?
Keith Lyons' post today on coding in science, along with the usual array of meetings, conversations and discussions that occur working in High Performance sport, got me thinking about the way we define coaching and science.
When we are talking about 'science' we really mean the 'scientific method', which is generally defined as systematic observation, measurement and evaluation when attempting to impact a certain premise (or hypothesis). There is no educational requirement to do science, nor is it necessary to be employed as a scientist to do science. Of course, education and environment can certainly help.
At times the practical definition of science has become, 'something done by a scientist'. And the followup assumption is that it isn't scientific if it isn't done by a scientist. It is actually the opposite, you are a scientist if you do something scientific.
In the same way, you are a coach if you do some coaching. Of course, if you make an effort to learn about coaching, and evaluate the impact of your coaching, you can become a better coach. At times coaches underestimate the methodical way they come to decisions and form their opinions.
I am a scientist. I am also a coach. If I am coaching I don't cease to be a scientist, and visa versa. (Interestingly even though my current employment is neither a scientist nor coach, I'm expected to bring expertise in both to the job!)