Interscholastic Coaching

This article addresses the state of coach education in the United States and discusses the impact existing coach education programs have on youth and interscholastic sport programs. Coach education and preparation is also discussed as part of physical education teacher preparation programs (PETE) in higher education. A discussion of the existing coach education programs addresses the issues of inconsistency, lack of standardization, course formats, and methods of coach assessment. Current recommendations for the improvement and further development of coach education programs are outlined based on empirical research, including competency-based education programs, opportunities for students to put their theoretical and pedagogical knowledge into practice, role modeling, and reflection. Included is also a brief discussion of the field of sport officiating. The development and improvement of coach education programs in the United States is pertinent in order for youth and interscholastic sport organizations to provide safe, effective, successful, and fun sport programs.

Keywords Coaching Education Curriculum Framework (CECF); Competency-Based Coach Education Programs; Learning Style; Officiating; National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE); National Standards for Sport Coaches; Officiating; Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE); School Sports; Sport Pedagogy; Referee

Physical Education > Interscholastic Coaching

Overview

Coaching / Coach Education

Participation in youth and interscholastic sport in the United States is popular and increasing as approximately 41 million children participate in youth sport and over 11 million adolescents participated in interscholastic athletics in 2005-2006 (McCullick, Belcher, & Schempp, 2005; NFHS, 2006). These numbers are growing, causing an increased demand for coaches to lead these youth and interscholastic sport programs; however, in order to meet the prevailing objectives of youth and interscholastic sport (i.e., skill development, character development, continued participation), qualified coaches are needed (McCullick, Belcher, & Schempp, 2005). Too often coaches are only exposed to the informal education of coach experience and observation, which serves to socialize the coach into the existing culture and power structure that exists within that sport organization or team (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003). There is a need for educating coaches in developing and maintaining effective and successful youth and interscholastic sport programs (McCullick, Belcher, & Schempp, 2005), as coaches have an impact on their athletes' enjoyment and continued participation in their sport programs based on their behavior and interaction with their athletes (Smith & Smoll, 1997). Coach education programs are important to help make current and future coaches aware of this influence and the impact they will have on their players and to help them shape their coaching philosophies, styles, and techniques in a manner that seeks to meet the overriding objectives of youth and interscholastic sport.

The United States government and the United States' National Governing Bodies of sport do not have a singular, mandatory and standardized national coaching education curriculum (Clark, 2000). Despite the strong presence of several American sports on the international sport scene, the United States does not adhere to a national coaching curriculum as many other international sport powerhouses do, such as the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia. The administration and inclusion of a standardized coaching curriculum in these countries has professionalized coaching as these programs are designed to provide various levels of preparation, certification, and licensure to individuals wishing to serve as coaches (Clark, 2000). In the U. S., coach education is not mandated across the board by the government, national governing bodies of sport, or state athletic associations and those organizations that do require coaching education vary in their requirements (e.g., from first aid and CPR training to a short series of collegiate level coursework). Overall, this lack of standardization poses a challenge to American sport organizations in terms of the control the organizations have over the type, amount, and quality of information that the coaches are obtaining through the various coach education programs.

Coach education programs have been developed and marketed to the American sport arena/coaching profession by a variety of for-profit and non-profit organizations. Some examples of these coach education programs are the American Sport Education Program (ASEP), several National Governing Bodies (e.g., USA Hockey), Coach Effectiveness Training (Smith & Smoll, 1997), and the National Federation of High Schools Coach Education Program (NFHS). The programs also vary in their delivery as some are delivered in a one-two day classroom/workshop format, some courses are online, and others are semester long collegiate level courses, yet most are large in scale. These large scale programs follow no government mandated curriculum and aim to train thousands of coaches in various sports throughout the country (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999). This large scale approach to coach preparation leads to these programs using many different course instructors who may deliver a program that is inconsistent and possibly ineffective in preparing coaches to work effectively and appropriately with youth and adolescents in sport programs (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999).

In interscholastic sport, where coaches are often teachers and, in some cases, non-teaching community members, the level of professional preparation of the coaches may vary greatly. Physical education teacher preparation (PETE) programs often require students to complete a certain number of credits in coaching or provide coaching as a minor (Strand, 1992). Research has indicated that approximately 40% of undergraduate physical education teacher preparation programs require coach education coursework for physical education majors and approximately 50% of these programs require or recommend a coaching field experience (Strand, 1992). While teacher-coaches who are physical education teachers may have been required to complete coaching courses as part of their professional preparation, non-physical education teachers or coaching community members may not have taken these types of courses in their academic preparation and/or have no academic background in the areas of sport and exercise science that are typically incorporated into coach education programs.

These examples illustrate the basic challenges sport organizations face in educating their coaches or in finding coaches who are already knowledgeable in effective and safe coaching practices. There is no single model of coaching effectiveness because the dynamic sport context is constantly influencing the process of coaching (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999). Limited research has been done in coach education program effectiveness due to the challenge in conducting valid and reliable research to evaluate the courses (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999; McCullick, Belcher, & Schempp, 2005).

Even without standardization or extensive research, scholars have identified several issues with the existing coach education programs that may impact the effectiveness of the programs which educate coaches on how to conduct safe and effective sport programs (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999). First, the lack of consistency in the way that the courses are conducted (e.g., length of course, different instructors) can affect the program (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999). Second, many education programs assess students' understanding and knowledge of the information taught in the course with pen and paper tests. This method of assessment is not effective in that the information is being tested in manner that is completely de-contextualized from a real-life coaching scenario (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999). Third, without standardized coach education programs, the sponsoring organization or company that is conducting the education program may choose what to include and what not to include in the course content, thus affecting the type of information provided and possibly weakening the credibility of the program (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003).

Most programs do not include a component that focuses on developing coaching competency in actual coaching situations; therefore it is challenging to identify specific behavioral objectives that can be used to measure the effectiveness of the coaching course. Unfortunately, the reality is that coaches come into an educational situation with their own set of beliefs, values, coaching philosophy, level of experience, and pre-conceived notions about how to coach; as a result coach education programs cannot meet all the needs of every coach (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003).

Sport Officiating / Refereeing

The purpose of the sport official, referee, or umpire is to provide and maintain a game situation that is fair and safe for all competitors. Officiating or refereeing in interscholastic and youth sport is a challenging job as it requires the official to understand the rules, the penalties, and the context in which the game is taking place. Due to the increasing popularity of sport participation in youth and interscholastic sport, qualified sport officials are needed to maintain safe sporting environments. In interscholastic sport, the Officials' Association of the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) provides a professional membership organization for officials. This organization provides educational opportunities, a code of ethics, and insurance for officials to help protect the official from litigation involving a game/contest/event he or she officiates (NFHS, 2007). Interscholastic officials follow the following Code of Ethics as established by the NFHS Officials' Association (2007).

Education and development programs for officials are often offered through state officials' organizations, sport organizations (e.g., American Youth Soccer Organization, Little League), and national governing bodies of sport (e.g., US Field Hockey). These programs offer current aspiring officials opportunities to learn rules, practice in game situations, umpire mechanics, and how the organization is managed. Some collegiate physical education programs also offer students the opportunity to take courses in officiating popular sports (i.e., football, basketball). There are officiating opportunities at all levels of sport, from youth to international competition.

Viewpoints

Recommendations for Coach Education Programs

Despite the limited research in the actual study of the effectiveness of specific coach education programs, researchers have explored what coach education programs should incorporate in order to be more effective in developing the effective coach. Coach education programs must be aware and address the issue that coaches arrive to the program with a set of personal philosophies and experiences, personal values and beliefs. Coach education programs and the instructors should not approach the course as if the students are a blank pallet, therefore it is critical for the course to focus on making the students aware of their role as a coach and how these previous experiences and beliefs will shape and affect their coaching philosophies and styles (Nelson & Cushion, 2006). According to Demers, Woodburn, & Savard (2006), coach education programs should also shift the focus of the course content from focusing on what coaches need to know to what they need to do with what they know. This shift from knowledge to application of knowledge to the actual skill of coaching requires a shift in coach education programs from classroom or online-based programs to professional competency-based coach education programs.

Competency-based programs take into consideration that coaching is an active and dynamic process that involves others. Researchers have made recommendations for this type of program, its format, and what content should be included to produce effective and competent coaches. The following are some examples of their recommendations:

• Coaches should learn about themselves (e.g., how they learn, etc.) before learning about coaching (McCullick, Belcher, & Schempp, 2005) in order to provide students with an understanding of their own personality and how that affects their behavior, as well as how to have an appreciation for and understanding for different learning styles (Gould & Caswell, 2006).

• Coach education programs should provide students with opportunities to put theory and pedagogical knowledge into practice. This on-site practice would allow instructors and peers to provide consistent and encouraging feedback to students on their ability to apply the theoretical knowledge that was covered in the 'classroom' portion of the course to actual coaching/teaching situations, thus providing them with an opportunity to learn how and when to apply the knowledge through the interactive process of linking concepts to practice (Demers, Woodburn, & Savard, 2006; McCullick, Belcher, & Schempp, 2005; Nelson & Cushion, 2006).

• Coach education programs should be conducted in a small class format in order for students to learn the most through interaction with the instructors and/or peers.

• Programs that integrate research into the curriculum are viewed as more credible to the students than programs that rely on tradition and common practice ((McCullick, Belcher, & Schempp, 2005).

• Course instructor should be consistent in their approaches to coaching and teaching, as well as serve as role models for the students to observe the coaching behavior the program is touting (McCullick, Belcher, & Schempp, 2005).

• Students should be provided with opportunities to reflect on the learning and coaching processes during, after, and in retrospect (Gilbert & Trudel, 2001). The reflection should be guided and structured early on in the learning process and then become less structured as time goes on (Demers, Woodburn, & Savard, 2006).

• Coach education programs should include a course or content in the area of sport law in order ensure that coaches have a solid understanding of their responsibilities as a coach (Conn, 1990).

• If a coach education program incorporates several courses across a period of time (e.g., program in higher education setting), it is suggested that a synthesis course conclude the program to provide a culminating course that formally challenges the students to incorporate all of the information and skills that have been learned over the course of the program (Demers, Woodburn, & Savard, 2006).

• Coach education programs should include formal assessment of the students through performance testing, interviews, and direct observations of coaching behaviors (Gilbert & Trudel, 1999) in order to more effectively assess the students ability to understand and implement into practice the information that has been included in the course.

Proposed Content Standards for Coach Education Curricula

As previously discussed, the United States does not have a mandated standardized coach education program in place; however, the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE, a sub-organization of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance has developed a set of National Standards for Sport Coaches. These standards were created to provide a set of guidelines for coach education programs to sport and coaching organizations. These were developed by a committee of experts in sport and exercise science and describe the skills and knowledge that sport coaches should know and have. It is important to note that not all coach education programs use these standards as the framework of their curriculum. The National Standards provide an outline of eight domains of knowledge with 40 standards falling under these domains (NASPE, 2006). These eight domains provide organization to the forty standards and benchmarks that can be used to assess coach competency in each domain (NASPE, 2006). These domains include:

•Domain 1: Philosophy and Ethics: Coach competency in the ability to provide an "athlete-centered coaching philosophy and professional accountability for fair play by all" (NASPE, 2006)

•Domain 2: Safety and Injury Prevention: Coach competency in the ability to provide safe conditions for athletes and act appropriately when emergencies occur.

•Domain 3: Physical Conditioning: Coach competency in the understanding and ability to apply scientific concepts related to physiological training, body composition and weight management, nutrition education, and over-training for safe and healthy athletic conditioning.

•Domain 4: Growth and Development: Coach competency in establishing practice and competition to promote the physical, social, and emotional growth of athletes including an inclusive learning environment for all athletes.

•Domain 5: Teaching and Communication: Coach competency in fostering learning and enjoyment, as well as "individualizing instruction, empowering communication skills, and using good management techniques in designing practices" (NASPE, 2006).

•Domain 6: Sport Skills and Tactics: Coach competency in basic sport knowledge and the ability to apply that knowledge to the competitive situation with an emphasis on a developmental progression that is age appropriate, sequential, and progressive.

•Domain 7: Organization and Administration: Coach competency in providing a effective organization and administration (i.e., risk management, human resources, financial management) for daily operation and management of program.

•Domain 8: Evaluation: Coach competency in effective and appropriate assessment of all aspects of sport program (e.g., personnel selection, practice effectiveness, game management) for continued program development and growth.

Another outline for a coach education curriculum is the Coaching Education Curriculum Framework (CECF), which includes a set of learning outcomes that should be covered in coach education programs for coaches in interscholastic athletics (Dils & Ziatz, 2000). This curriculum framework focuses on the development of student athletes who display self-confidence, the courage to act, self-discipline, teamwork, honesty, leadership, and possess cardio respiratory efficiency, and enjoy of physical activity (Dils & Ziatz, 2000). The CECF promotes the inclusion of information related to the following topics from sport and exercise science into the coach education curriculum with the aim of having the student athletes gain experience or competency in the following objectives:

1. Physiological Efficiency (i.e., cardio-respiratory, mechanical, and neuromuscular)
2. Psychological Benefits (i.e., enjoyment of physical activity, self-confidence and self-esteem, stress relief, challenge)
3. Spatial Relationships/Orientation (i.e., body awareness, game strategy based on use of space in relation to other players and objects)
4. Object Manipulation (i.e., object projection, object reception)
5. Social Relationship Skills (i.e., self-expression, communication, teamwork, competition, leadership)
6. Socio-cultural Understanding (i.e., participation in culturally popular activity, appreciation of movement)

The education and development of coaches is a complex process as the sport context is dynamic and constantly placing coaches in situations where they need to make sound decisions in order to maintain a safe, productive and effective environment for the athletes to acquire good sport and social skills. While there is no standardized and mandated coach education curriculum in the United States, there are opportunities for aspiring and experienced coaches to learning about effective strategies and techniques in coaching. Fortunately, physical education teachers often have the opportunity to take courses in coaching as part of their degree program and are able to benefit from this formalized coaching curriculum. American coach education is under development and continues to evolve based on the research that has been conducted in coach effectiveness and learning and teaching strategies in pedagogy. American organizations, such as NASPE, are striving to standardize coach education curricula and the inclusion of competency-based education and assessment for coaches. The field of officiating is also becoming more professionalized as the education and development of sport officials/referees/umpires continues to be undertaken by small and large statewide high school-affiliated organizations, as well as national governing bodies and other sport organizations.

Terms & Concepts

American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD): A professional organization that serves to "promote and support creative and healthy lifestyles through high quality programs in health, physical education, recreation, dance and sport, and to provide members with professional development opportunities that increase knowledge, improve skills, and encourage sound professional practices. [Approved by the Alliance Assembly, April 1998]."

Coaching Education Curriculum Framework (CECF): A set of learning outcomes that should be covered in coach education programs for coaches in interscholastic athletics.

Competency-Based Coach Education Programs: Coach education programs that emphasize and promote the ability of the coaches to apply theoretical and pedagogical knowledge to coaching practice

Learning Style: Differences in how an individual successfully acquires knowledge (e.g., cognitive, learning, teaching, thinking, etc.).

National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE): Non-profit national professional membership organization that sets standards for practice in physical education, sport, and physical activity.

National Standards for Sport Coaches: Standards set forth by the National Association of Sport & Physical Education that serve “to provide direction for administrators, coaches, athletes and the public regarding the skills and knowledge that coaches should possess” (NASPE, 2006).

Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE): Professional preparation programs for students interested in becoming physical education teachers.

Bibliography

Clark, M. A. (2000). Who's coaching the coaches? In J.R. Gerdy (Ed.), Sports in School (pp. 55- 65). New York: Teachers College.

Conn, J.H. (1990). A critical need in the professional preparation of physical educators and coaches: A course in sport law. Physical Educator, 47 , 27-33. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9609192478&site=ehost-live

Cushion, C. J., Armour, K. M., & Jones, R. L. (2003). Coach education and continuing professional development: Experience and learning to coach. QUEST, 55 . 215-230. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from EBSCO online database SportDiscuss with Full Text.

D'Alessio, T. (2011). A quality athletic program begins with quality coaches. Interscholastic Athletic Administration, 38, 22-23. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=66782700&site=ehost-live

Demers, G., Woodburn, A.J., & Savard, C. (2006). The development of undergraduate competency-based coach education program. The Sport Psychologist, 20, 162-173. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from EBSCO online database, SportDiscuss with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=21386942&site=ehost-live

Dils, A., & Ziatz, D. (2000). The Application of Teacher Education Curriculum Theory to Interscholastic Coaching Education: Learning Outcomes Associated with a Quality Interscholastic Athletic Program. Physical Educator, 57 , 88. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from the EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=3131196&site=ehost-live

Docheff, D. (2011). Using national coaching standards to upgrade your athletic program. Interscholastic Athletic Administration, 37, 14-15. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=60384276&site=ehost-live

Gilbert, W. & Trudel, P. (1999). An evaluation strategy for coach education programs. Journal of Sport Behavior, 22 , 234-250. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from EBSCO online , Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=1909324&site=ehost-live

Gould, T. E. & Caswell, S. V. (2006). Stylistic learning differences between undergraduate athletic training students and educators: Gregorc mind styles. Journal of Athletic Training, 41 , p. 109-116. Retrieved May 9, 2007 from EBSCO online database SportDiscuss with Full Text http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=20713914&site=ehost-live

McCullick, B.A., Belcher, D., & Schempp, P.G. (2005, June). What works in coaching and sport instructor certification programs? The participants' view. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10 , 121-137. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from EBSCO online database SportDiscus http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=17267351&site=ehost-live

National Association for Sport and Physical Education (2006). National Standards for Sport Coaches. NASPE Website. Retrieved May 17, 2007, from http://www.aahperd.org/naspe/template.cfm?template=domainsStandards.html

National Federation of State High School Associations. (2006). 2005-2006 NFHS Participation Survey. NFHS Website. Retrieved May 17, 2007, from http://www.nfhs.org/core/contentmanager/uploads/2005_06NFHSparticipationsurvey.pdf

National Federation of State High School Associations. (2007).NFHS Officials Association. NFHS Website. Retrieved May 23, 2007, from http://www.nfhs.org/web/2006/08/officials_association.aspx

Nelson, L.J. & Cushion, C.J. (2006). Reflection in coach education: The case of the national governing body coaching certificate. The Sport Psychologist, 20, 174-183. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from EBSCO online database, SportDiscuss with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=21386943&site=ehost-live

Smith, R.E. & Smoll, F.L. (1997, February). Coaching the coaches: Youth sports as a scientific and applied behavioral setting. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6, 16-21.

Stevens, G. (2011). "Wanted - Athletic Coach": Creative strategies for filling staff openings. Interscholastic Athletic Administration, 37, 16-18. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=60384277&site=ehost-live

Strand, B.N. (1992). A descriptive profile of teacher preparation practices in physical education

teacher education. Physical Educator, 49, 104-113. Retrieved May 15, 2007 from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9609192501&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Barnett, N.P., Smoll, F.L., & Smith, R.E. (1992). Effects of enhancing coach-athlete relationships on youth sport attrition. The Sport Psychologist, 6, 111-127.

Figone, A. J. (1994). Teacher-coach role conflict: Its impact on students and student athletes. Physical Educator, 51 , 29-35. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9411283746&site=ehost-live

Gerdy, J.R (Ed.).(2000). Sports in school. New York: Teachers College.

Lee, M.J. (2004). The importance of values in the coaching process. In M.C. Silva & R.M.

Malina (Eds.), Children and Youth in Organized Sports (pp.82-94). Portugal: Coimbra University Press.

Malloy, D.C. (1991). Philosophy and officiating archetypes. Physical Educator, 48 , 177-183.

Mascarenas, D.R.D., Collings, D., & Mortimer, P. (2002). The art of reason versus the exactness of science in elite refereeing: Comments on Plessner and Betsch. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 24, 328-333.

Smith, R.E.& Smoll, F.L. (1996). Way to go, Coach! A scientifically validated approach to coaching effectiveness. Portola Valley, CA: Warde Publishers.

Smith, R.E., Smoll, F.L., & Cumming, S.P. (2007). Effects of motivational climate intervention for coaches on young athletes' sport performance anxiety. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 29, 39-59.

Smoll, F.L.& Smith, R.E. (1989). Leadership behaviors in sport: A conceptual model and research paradigm. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1522-1551.

Smoll, F.L.& Smith, R.E. (Eds.) (2002). Children and youth in sport: A biopsychological perspective (2nd ed). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.