Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Coaching is a rapidly evolving field. Its forms are more diverse than those of professional supervision, which is, in fact, an established approach with the characteristics of 'coaching'. Although the origins and development of coaching are different from supervision, there is some connection between concepts and practices of both modalities. Professional supervisors need to be fully familiar with the field of coaching, so as to be able to (re)define their position within professional supervision. In order to do this, they should study the developments in coaching. This paper offers an overview of coaching in the English speaking world. It can be used as an informative guide by practitioners and as a basis for further research comparing coaching and professional supervision and more clearly defining their similarities and differences.est growing field within consulting (Liljenstrand, 2003.:1,referring to Eggers & Clark, 2000.and to Hall et al.,1999.).Many companies have substituted the coaching process for all other sorts of executive training (Judge & Cowell, 1997.).The number of publications on coaching is growing rapidly.An Email-Newsletter in German is sent out to 22,950 recipients. 2 The Internet search engine Google returns over 37,800,000 results for the query 'Business coaching Personal coaching'.At least four international (scientific) journals on coaching have been established in the past several years 3 .However, like consulting, coaching is a 'buyer beware' business (Shuit, 2005.a).It is flourishing without an established theoretical framework.It exists in many different forms and approaches.People who are professionally connected with the field of supervision as an educational form of coaching (semi-)professionals to handle their professional tasks (and who nowadays increasingly refer to themselves as 'professional supervisor/coach') must have at their disposal a solid knowledge base of the rapidly emerging field of coaching (Van Kessel/Fellermann, 2002.; Van Kessel, 2002.a;Van Kessel, 2002.b;Van Kessel, 2002.c;Van Kessel, 2002.d).What does the term 'coaching' represent and what do activities subsumed under the term 'coaching' offer their clients and commissioners/sponsors?What are the differences and similarities between coaching and supervision as a method of coaching (semi-)professionals with a tradition of over a hundred years? 4 These questions are the topic of this article.In discussing them we will shed light on the following topics: The world of coaching (section 2); What does the term coaching stand for?(section 3); Domains of coaching (section 4); Types of coaching (section 5); The position and roles of coaches (section 6); The focus and forms of coaching (section 7); Coaching methods and principles (section 8); Methodological approaches to coaching (section 9); Outcomes of coaching (section 10); Competences of coaches (section 11); Coaching as a distinct area of practice and study (section 12); Coaching, mentoring and consultancy (section 13); Coaching and professional supervision (section 14).The article ends with conclusions (section 15).The aim of this paper is to present an overview of the field, as an aid in finding one's way in the jungle of coaching.It is based on resources which mainly reflect trends in the Anglo-Saxon world (the USA, Canada, Great Britain, and Australia).It will be clear that 2 www.coaching-newsletter.de 3 a.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».