How I learnt to coach backwards
The day I was handed this document changed how I coached
I started to find easier ways for my players to improve a range of strokes and movements on court. I learnt a new skill, to coach backwards.
Instead of introducing players to the beginning of the stroke or movement, I started at the end, just before impact.
This post is based on a paper called “Backward Chaining Teaching Method of Motor Skills” by P Chekkadurai & C Stothart 1978. The man who gave it to me was Roger Mills, my dear friend and mentor.
If you want to read the paper before listening to my thoughts, then click the link above. The copy still has Rogers hand written comments. I make no excuse for that, in fact, I think it added to my understanding.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Backward Chaining Teaching Method
Backward chaining does work
The immediate improvements
Advantages of using Backward Chaining
Questions .. Where would you start?
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Backward Chaining Teaching Method
This is one of the most useful papers I have read. It recommends teaching aspects by starting at the ‘end’ of a sequential set of component parts. Introducing new aspects (thoughts, intentions, concepts, etc) after others (that happen near to the point of contact) have been partly mastered.
This means that the player has to perform or think about something new, and then they immediately perform the previously mastered action.
This is completely different to the way I was introduced to sequencing new learning. We were instructed to ‘start at the start’ of the movement.
It meant that players would try something new, partly master it, THEN I would introduce something new again.
I am not a sports scientist, and there are many things I don’t understand. It may surprise some of my friends to hear that I’m not interested in exactly how and why some teaching/coaching methods work better than others.
What really does excite me is when something works and works with a variety of players…… now that really excites me!
The methods included in this paper and the way they can be applied to Badminton really do make a difference
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Backward chaining does work
It is a very effective teaching method in developing technical skills : hitting and moving
I’ve used backward chaining in the coaching for a range of strokes, especially when movement is included.
Using this concept can be very game-like. For me, it’s very important not to separate striking and moving. If fact, many striking actions benefit if they are combined with a movement.
Backward chaining has at its core the fact that one part of a skill follows directly into another, and that can have a big influence on the next ‘link’ of the action. I hope my sports science friends don’t jump on me for using the word skill in this way.
Backward chaining can be used with skills that involve small simple movements (single step) or more slightly complex, larger movements that include striking (long jump lunge/chasse approach). There is certainly a different coaching philosophy /methodology between using backward chaining and ‘static practice’ as some coaches call it.
I’ve also used backward chaining in the teaching of some ‘complex’ hitting skills such as the overhead backhand. My understanding only came after many hours of working with Roger and trying it out on the court. Reading about the methodology only partially prepared me. My coaching delivery, plus my reflection, which was full of trial and error, eventually gave me the confidence to know that this works!
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
The immediate improvements
The first area I found that helped my players was when they were improving their net shots, when combined with a movement towards the forecourt.
I managed to make practices feel more like games: have variability in feeding, players striking lots of shuttles, easily making the practice ‘tougher’ without necessarily increasing errors. Most of all, the players were coping. Improvements seemed faster, and when things went wrong, the first step was to take away the last element introduced.
By taking away the last introduced element, it gave both me and the player an opportunity to repeat the last few minutes and hopefully get that back to more successful outcomes. The benefit was that it still felt like we were practising the stroke/ movement, but now the success level increased.
In time, I realised that the players were benefitting from learning new elements at the start of the practice and working towards previously learnt (or partly learnt) ones. Rather than my previous approach of introducing new elements at the end of previously learnt ones.
Strokes and moments
These are the on-court strokes and situations that I find easily benefit from using Backward Chaining
— All forecourt net work (nets & lifts/flick) with a variety of forward movements (Step / Jump Lunge / Chasse / Running)
— Deep Forehand (drag/pull)
— Overhead backhand strokes (long drops & clears)
— Some parts of the Overhead forehand
In all of these examples, I recommend that you start from just before the contact and then work backwards. You may need to amend the hitting action and body position to re-create that moment before striking.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Advantages of using Backward Chaining
- There is lots of ‘end skill’ reinforcement: players are always striking shuttles and trying to accomplish the task.
- The last element (the hit) is continually worked on and reinforced; therefore, the method is high in positive reinforcement and accomplishment of the task
- The introduction of new elements in a stroke or movement is always followed by previously ‘mastered’ (or partly mastered) and successful elements
- If a technique/movement starts to breakdown then take away the new elements and repeat with the previously successful outcomes
- The player is striking shuttles on every attempt. Less reliance (almost none) on shadow work for learning
- Confidence through success is easier to achieve
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Questions .. Where would you start?
1 . Do you try to coach (improve) both net skills and the approach movements at the same time?
2 . Or, do you separate movement and striking in your coaching?
3 . Have you considered starting mid way though a complex stroke & movement but still retain game-like feelings and outcomes?
These were all the questions I faced before I read this paper. Then I became more familiar with the theory, and it’s aspects of ‘positive terminal reinforcement’.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
What do you do when introducing net shots and movement?
Do you start around the mid court them move forward? – teaching movement patterns without striking.
If you follow this process, how do you ensure that the players are still able to hit lots of shuttles, and how do you keep them motivated?
or
Do you start in the forecourt with a single-step net? – mastering the contact from simple controlled feeds.
If you follow this process, how do you introduce game-like movements and the ability to cope with different feeds?
