Knowing What To Do Next

An alternate title for this piece is “Using Stations and Games to Teach”, but it might take me a little time to explain that switch-a-roo.

Up front, one just has to know that the alternate title has to have a connection to USA Hockey and it’s ADM program.  After all, who else would put so much faith in “using stations or games to teach hockey to our players”? 

With that, let me take a step back in time, to when I was running a number of teams and hockey programs back around Massachusetts…

To begin, it wasn’t just USA Hockey’s ADM program that first got me thinking about my ultimate title — as in “knowing what to do next”.  No, I guess I’ve been forced to ponder it a lot of times over my 45-plus years in coaching.

Actually, you ought to know that I was working in a version of the ADM before I left New England, and I can say that I did see some results with the kids in that program.  So, while I might poke a needle at a part of that concept, I am not necessarily bashing the overall idea of the program, or the way things were being done back in one of my home rinks.

My cause to “ponder it (the title topic)” over the years at least partly had to do with requests from other coaches to suggest what they should be doing with their kids.  And that mainly had to do with giving those coaches exact, detailed lesson plans for each of their nightly practices.

Also, as I’ll try to describe in the end, the challenges I’m going to outline from here onward have a lot to do with the way I’ve designed the unique format within these Hockey Mastermind Group posts.

So, hmmmmmm…  What’s my problem with all this?  

Well, there is always a problem in “knowing what to do next”.  For that very reason, USA Hockey will likely only get to accomplish a percentage of what they’d really like from their standard ADM program.   In other words, it would be impossible for ANYONE — including yours truly — to design a lesson plan in advance that will totally help a far away coach with his or her players.

Okay,  as an example of what I’m getting at, let’s consider my last High School Prep team…  You probably know that I had that group from early June until the US Thanksgiving, and that my entire reason for being with them was to help each kid make his own respective high school team.   

Of course, I had a plan in place to bring those fairly talented teens from June to the end of November.  However, could that plan really be carved in stone?  Not on your life.  Over those many months, individuals — and even the group — would have slight setbacks.  At the same time, they’d get the hang of some skills, some tactics and some conditioning exercises that really pleased me.  What I’m getting at, obviously, is my need to constantly adjust things according to what I was seeing at any given moment.

I’m sure you also know that, before I left for Florida, I was coaching a young Mite team (that also happened to be part of the local ADM).  Unlike the HS Prep team, though, the entire Mite program, their opponents, and even my own players were new to me.  So, I had to alter my planning a bit, and only design those little guys’ lesson plans according to some shorter term goals.

I’d  also just completed my kzillionth year of running a Learn-to-skate/Learn-to-play program.  And, while I’d done it for that long, I can tell you that the nature of each new group was always slightly different from the year before and the year before.  In other words, while I might enter the first few sessions with an idea of what I want to accomplish with each group, I could never just stick to some old lesson plans I’d designed 20- or 30-years ago.

So, when it comes to answering the above question — about “What To Do Next”, I’m going to state firmly:  that’s where the REAL coaching or teaching comes into play.

No, there’s no formula for any of this.  Instead, as I suggested above in reference to my HS Prep guys, readings had to be taken nearly every time we met.  And I’m talking about nearly every aspect of the kids’ games.

Going back to some younger kids right now (because the examples might be easier to explain)…  Those in my Learn-to-play clinic should have been able to get around fairly well as we took to the ice our first few Sunday mornings, with a number of the the kids even being able to travel backwards, and perhaps do some sort of stop.  Still, I’d run several VERY basic skill drills with them, and I’d be making mental notes on exactly where they were at that time — on things like their forward striding, their cross-overs, their stopping abilities, and their backward skating.  And from those readings I’d design my next week’s lesson plan.

Am I making sense here, folks?

Here’s the kicker, though…  I could be absolutely sure that that group would do extremely well in given areas, while they would pretty likely struggle with a few others.   So it was my job to 1) accelerate the teaching where needed,  2) go slower in certain areas, and 3) even take a step backwards with some remedial drills for a few other skills.

And I’m going to suggest that that exact process had to take place every single time we’d meet as a group.  In fact, that exact process was taking place with my high school guys, it was happening with my Mites, and it was happening with a group of kids I was also teaching in a weekly skills clinic.

Now, although most members are right now thinking they totally understand what I’ve said to this point, I’m wondering if they realize the dangers in not doing it this way.

For example, can you just imagine how many players will be lost if a set lesson plan was put in place long ago, and then adhered to — to the letter — for the rest of the coming winter?  My guess is that about one third of a given group would progress, while quite a few kids would be totally lost:   1)  because we didn’t take the occasional backward step when they needed it, or 2) because we didn’t accelerate things when that was appropriate.

Then, a couple of what I think are cute asides…

I’ve had a few parents very nicely express concerns with their kids’ games or their skills.

One of my assistant coaches had been around the game for awhile, and he occasionally shared some worries about our kids making certain kinds of mistakes.

Another experienced assistant was wishing I’d accelerate an area of the game where his son was concerned.

And in just about every one of those conversations, the parent or coach was dead-on.  I mean, they were right in what they were seeing;  it’s just that they were usually wrong as to when it might be appropriate to address their concerns.

I hate going off-track on you again, but here’s another aside, this one aimed at making my point even further…

In this one, I was working on puckhandling skills within the ADM program, and as each differently skilled group rotated to my station, I was teaching that group according to all I’ve described above —  from reading where they were at a given time, etc.

There were a ton of young parents watching each clinic, and I was often thinking to myself that a few of the former hockey playing dads were probably wondering why I was having kids stickhandle without ever mentioning their need to keep the eyes up.

Ha.  My simple answer to that (if I could hang a banner over center-ice) would be, “Everything in its own time and place.”  In other words, the stickhandling challenges I was giving those kids right then were overwhelming enough, so I didn’t want to complicate matters by tossing an extra challenge their way.  (Down the road, I’d actually have an easy way to teach eyes up stickhandling.)

Okay, so let’s go back to a few of my opening statements…

I suggested that there’s at least the probability that any given ADM  program might only achieve a percentage of its full potential.  And the key words in that last sentence are “any given ADM program”.  In other  words, my pretty educated feeling is that each program is going to come closer or further from its true potential according to how well teaching adjustments can be made (ideally on a night-to-night basis).  Let me repeat what I said earlier, though, in that kids ARE going to benefit from the ADM; my worry is that some kids will benefit more while others benefit less.

Then, let me tell you that the guy or gal who authors a booklet containing perfect lesson plans for an entire season is going to become a millionaire.  Of course, if you’re thinking about purchasing something like that, think again.  As you should realize by now, it’s virtually impossible to create such a thing.

Oh, well…  I actually have created something like the above — that really does work.  And it’s going to be released here someday in the future, when I’ve had a lot of extra time to get it exactly right.

Now, I want to make two more points that might clarify all the above ranting…

First, where did that idea of “knowing what to do next” REALLY come from?  Well, it originated one night when I kinda seethed at a friend suggesting that he’d seen another hockey school coach using some drills he could have only borrowed from me.  My reply to that friend was something to the effect that, “One drill is hardly the secret to my effectiveness as a teacher.  No, what I’ve always done best was to know exactly what to do next — if a player needed a greater challenge, if he or she needed some serious help, or if we could allow him or her to stay on course.”  In other words, steal any drill you want, because it’s the the next drill and the next — or knowing the progressions within a given skill — that make all the difference in the world.

Secondly, I want to answer the member coach who asked me for some ideas on using stations to teach:

• In all honesty,  I think the head coach has to decide which drills will work better having assistants and small groups briefly work together.  Plainly, some drills do lend themselves best to this format, while others don’t seem to make sense.
• I always like to work in “blocks”.  In other words, I’ll work my kids in the same skill area for maybe six to eight practices, and then slide in another block of skills work for the next stretch of practices.  So, if a head coach is going to use three or four stations within most practices, a different block of skills work would be attached in each of those stations.
• I’d next suggest that the head coach free himself from being stuck at any one station, so that he might be able to move and observe where his kids are with a given skill or drill — you know, the coach has to assess exactly what it is his kids will need to do next in order to progress.      

Thirdly, I think a lot more thought has to go into the concept of using games to teach.  In other words, while it’s easy to find NHL and other elite players (perhaps) benefiting from so-called “small area games”, it should be noted that those players have most of their basic skills firmly ingrained.  In contrast, if young kids aren’t all that adept at passing and receiving, wouldn’t their time be better spent on “drills” that deal with those skills?  ???  I have used small area games for fun, or for mental distractions.  And, I have used a few finely focused games to help my older guys with their play.   That said, I think they can be used sparingly with any age — especially for some fun, but I’d think seriously about how much value they have in teaching or enhancing skills.    

Finally, if there’s one thing I’d like members to come away with here, it’s that there is currently no silver bullet, and no one-size-fits-all.  No, I truly believe the best coaching or teaching is done on a day-to-day or night-to-night basis, and it’s predicated on really “Knowing What To Do Next”.