Re: NSCA & ASCA

[Guest guest]

Greetings,

I do have a bit of experience with the ASCA (Australian Strength and

Conditioning Association certification structure. It is different from

the NSCA CSCS.

There are 3 courses in the ASCA education system.

ASCA Level 0* - Beginners, aimed at Amateur Coaches at junior level,

High School Student and parents

ASCA Level 1 - First certification level for S & C coaches training

beginner level athletes to improve their sports performance

ASCA Level 2 - Train Advanced level athletes to improve sports

performance across a wide range of sports

ASCA Level 3 - National level, high performance coach, Pre-requisites:

Level 2 and 2 years full time or four years part time strength and

conditioning coaching at national level or higher.

For quite some time, the certification levels were sort of a standard

as you need to clock experience to go to the next level.

The Course consist of a couple of portion

1) Lesson

2) Practical Assessment - Such as Coaching methods and ability,

ability to conduct a strength/SAQ/flexibility etc session (generally

about 40% of the course. Most module had a practical except for

modules like Law and the S & C coach and such. Very specific

requirements, for example, for the ASCA Level 2, one of the practical

assessment is for the soon-to be Level 2 Coach to teach the olympic

lifts.

3) Coursework - Completing a workbook, not very difficult but

comprehensive, (when I did my Level 2, I had to plan and complete more

than 26 different program for the workbook on various topics such as

training for strength, team sports, timing and such.

4) Writing - Write a Journal length article that needs to be approve

for publication in the ASCA Newsletter (for Level 2). A much longer

paper for Level 3.

5) Practical Attachment

- 20 hours for Level 1 (6 supervised by a ASCA Coach (mentor) and 14

unsupervised)

- 60 hours for Level 1 (20 supervised by a ASCA Coach (mentor) and 40

unsupervised)

- not sure for Level 3.

6) Code of Ethics Understanding and consent

There is no exam in all 3 Levels.

But recently they have come up with a " Professional Structure "

accreditation scheme with 5 levels. "

Level 1 - ASCA Professional Structure Intern (Minimum ASCA Level 1 +

500 hours as assistant)

Level 2 - ASCA Professional Structure Graduate (Completing or

completed ASCA Level 2 + 500 hours as an S & C coach + demonstrated

ability to teach lifts, + +)

Level 3 - ASCA Professional Structure Professional (Completed ASCA

Level 2 + 2 years as an S & C coach in a High performance area + 1000

hours of practical coaching and such.)

Level 4 - ASCA Professional Structure Elite (Completing or completed

ASCA Level 3 + 4 years as an S & C coach in a High performance area +

1000 hours of practical coaching and such.)

Level 5 - ASCA Professional Structure Master (Completed ASCA Level 3 +

8 years as an S & C coach in a High performance area including 1 olympic

cycle + 1000 hours of practical coaching and such.)

The above mentioned are just the bare minimum, they are other

requirements such as being a mentor to a lower level coach etc.

Therefore as an example, if looking through the level I should

definetly be at least a Level 2 - PSG but almost a Level 3 - PSP

(though I have yet to apply for accreditation under the new Pro

Structure.

Hope this provides you guys with a better understanding of ASCA

system. It is not the official statement, but just from my own

experience and knowledge.

Cheers

Sofyan Sahrom, CSCS

[Mod: please don't forget to sign your posts with your full name, city and

country of residence - thanks]

>

> " I don't believe a coach's score on a CSCS exam defines their worth

> but how well they did on the scientific foundations section does give

> an indication of their basic understanding in the different areas of

> kinesiology. A coach may be very good at teaching the barbell lifts

> and sprinting technique and have a poor understanding of human

> physiology. You may also have a coach who has an excellent

> understanding of physiology but has no idea on how to coach technique.

> I do know some good coaches who have failed on their first try but

> they will be the first to admit they had some real weak areas in their

> knowledge. Failing the exam forced them to go back and really learn

> those areas. If you want to critcize the practical application

> section you will get no argument from me. "

>

> ****

> Matt,

>

> I have to respectfully disagree with your opinion.

>

> The problem with the NSCA, and the reason why I will be dropping my

> membership is the fact that they've forgotten who they are supposed to

> represent in the first place...the coach!

>

> I can tell you I know of multiple athletic trainers (NATA) that have

> taken and passed the CSCS on their first try yet they can't teach an

> Olympic lift, squat, or press to save their life if it depended on it

> (however they can teach standing one-legged on a bosu ball while

> shaking a body blade in one hand while keeping the eyes closed,

> whatever value that has!).

>

> I personally know of many great coaches who do not have a CSCS that

> can coach circles around ones that do. So what value exactly does

> this CSCS cert really have if some great coaches do not have it nor

> care to have it, while at the same time they certify book readers that

> have no business teaching the lifts! The NSCA should have nothing but

> a practical examination...how better to judge a potential coach being

> that it's practically based anyway, right? You should be required to

> write a year plan for an athlete or sport and be prepared to defend it

> among a group that will judge whether or not you are qualified.

>

> Unfortunately, the NSCA, IMO, has become what it had originally hoped

> not to be...an organization more focused on money making rather than

> bettering the opportunity for the coaches.

>

> ==============================

>