In this assessment, you will present your case study of an athlete/participant to an assessor over a Zoom call. Your presentation, usually in the form of a PowerPoint presentation, should last 10 minutes and afterwards, there will be 10 minutes of discussion guided by questions from the assessor. The Zoom call is recorded to enable us to quality assure the process.

The case study should reflect your own work (that is, you are not delivering a programme someone else has written) and must present work that has been done, not work that is planned. You will be required to present an overview of a macro cycle (9-12 months) with more specific detail and evidence from a minimum of a three month.

Many people assume that your case study has to cover a performance sport/activity, but you can also present on; a recreational sports/activity; return to play after injury, including appropriate progressions for performance.

You should present your case study in a logical order that as a minimum , should cover all of points below:

A NEEDS ANALYSIS OF THE SPORT AND ATHLETE 

• Evidence of an assessment and an understanding of the sport/activity. This would typically include, but is not limited to, a kinesiological, metabolic and injury risk analysis of the sport, a critical review of the established literature relating to the sport/activity and an objective assessment of the competitive level/demands for the athlete
• Objective assessment of the athlete and an interpretation of this assessment to provide an evaluation of the individual’s training status in relation to the demands of the sport, the competitive and training requirements of the athlete
• Evidence of collaboration with a technical coach and/or other support staff.

PROGRAMME RATIONALE AND PROGRAMME DESIGN 

• Present the programme rationale as a justification of the programme design based on the needs analysis
• Present an overview of a macro cycle (or longitudinal training plan) with more specific detail and evidence from a minimum of a 3-month window that has been carried out
• Illustrate how the programme is integrated with the technical aims, technical training programme and the competition schedule and/or performance outcomes as appropriate
• Evidence of underlying scientific principles.

SESSION EXAMPLES AND CONTENT 

• Demonstrate how the sessions and the strength and conditioning content fit into the overall programme plan
• Present session examples for all the appropriate elements of training as they occur within the case study, which may include; endurance; speed; agility; strength; rate of force development.

EVALUATION AND MONITORING 

• Objective and subjective measures of progress and an interpretation of these measures
• Evidence of feedback to the athlete, coaches and/or other members of the support team. 

TOP TIPS 

• Have to hand any additional evidence as a back-up to your presentation, it may be useful in the discussion
• Focus on an individual athlete/participant, presenting a plan for a team won’t enable you to demonstrate the required level of detail.

WHY TO PEOPLE FAIL THIS ASSESSMENT?

The pass rate for those on their first case study assessment is around 60%, and the most important lesson to learn from those that fail is to prepare well – ensure you cover all the competency points required in the guidelines. If your case study hasn’t enabled you to cover these, you would need to present another athlete or extend your time working with the one you are building the case study around.

In addition, don’t make these common mistakes, while not all are automatic failure points, they won’t help you demonstrate competency:

• A theoretical programme with planned/still to be carried out work, or a fake programme with ‘too good to be true’ results
• A programme written by someone else, delivered by you
• A programme where elements are being delivered by a technical coach, but there is no detailed knowledge of, and testing/monitoring of their training objectives
• Not presenting data from the programmes that reflect the training volume and intensities that the athlete actually achieved
• No clearly defined training objectives or specific goals based on the athlete’s needs analysis or the initial programme goals or an overly ‘aggressive’ programme that isn’t realistic for the athlete/participant
• First principles of training not being recognised, misinterpreted or abused. Ensure you evidence how you have applied training principles such as law of individual differences, accommodation, progressive overload, general adaptation syndrome, reversibility, specificity and variation
• Session design does not conform to recognised best practice for the outcome. For example, the session has a stated aim of ‘maximum strength’, but the prescribed sets, reps, recovery would deliver ‘strength endurance’ outcome
• If the case study involves a youth athlete, you must evidence the recognised guidelines for youth physical development and consideration of maturation status and screening
• Failing to test/re-test relevant objective measures of improvement
• Not managing to complete the presentation in 10 minutes, typically spending too long presenting the needs analysis – practice the delivery!