专家教练以其丰富的体育知识而闻名。专家知识可以通过其结构和领域内容来定义（吉尔伯特和2009）。知识的结构包括各种方案，在该计划下，知识可以组织。乔林（1982）认为知识可以分为两大领域：陈述性知识和程序性知识。陈述性知识是日常的知识，可能包括有关特定学科的概念和元素的现成信息。执行任务所需的程序知识细节步骤或活动。亚伯拉罕等（2006）提出了教练员的知识图式，包括陈述性知识和程序性知识。这种方法的基础上提出了对辅导过程模型过于简单，可在多种情况下的示意图和背景通过参考相关的知识和信息处理程序是比较合适的。”作者认为，示意将反映整个辅导过程与此原理概述知识/决策的概念和由此产生的行为，要求所有的教练。为了验证原理图亚伯拉罕和柯林斯（2006）采访了16位专家教练，以确定教练过程作为一个整体。原理是建立在三个来源的知识；体育专项知识、教育学、和教练的“技术”（生理学、心理学等）。同样卡西迪等人（2009）提出了一个结构的教练的声明性和程序性知识，包括主题内容，教学内容和课程内容。纳什和Collins（2006）将隐性知识和显性知识分类，因为它反映了在培训中所固有的不明确的问题和决策。这些研究表明教练和使用的知识和教育学，反映在课程内容之间的关系的相关性。
美国食品科学作业代写:教练员的知识
Expert coaches are renowned for their extensive knowledge in their sport. Expert knowledge can be defined by its structure and domain content (Coté and Gilbert, 2009). The structure of knowledge includes various schemes under which knowledge can be organised. Anderson (1982) suggests that knowledge can be split into two broad domains: declarative and procedural knowledge. Declarative knowledge is routine knowledge that may include readily available information about concepts and elements relating to particular subjects. Procedural knowledge details steps or activities required to perform a task. Abraham et al (2006) suggested a schematic of coaches' knowledge that included declarative and procedural knowledge. This approach was put forward on the basis that previous models of the coaching process are too simplistic and that a transferable schematic across a 'multiple of situations and contexts through reference to relevant knowledge and information processing procedures is more appropriate.' The authors argue that a schematic would reflect the entire coaching process and this schematic outlines the knowledge/decision-making concepts and the resulting behaviors requirements of all coaches. In order to validate the schematic Abraham & Collins (2006) interviewed 16 expert coaches to determine the coaching process as a whole. The schematic was built on three sources of knowledge; sport specific knowledge, pedagogy, and the coaching 'ologies' (physiology, psychology etc). Similarly Cassidy et al (2009) proposed a structure of coaches' declarative and procedural knowledge that included subject matter content, pedagogical content, and curriculum content. Nash and Collins (2006) classified knowledge in terms of tacit and explicit knowledge as it reflects the ill defined problems and decision making inherent in coaching. These studies show a correlation in the relationship between coaching and the use of knowledge and pedagogy which is reflected in course content.
