Who's Coaching Our Kids?
By: Nicole Kulikov-Hagobian

Anyone can coach. Is this statement accurate? Furthermore, even if anyone can coach should anyone be allowed to coach? What knowledge should a coach possess, and through what means can or should they gain this knowledge? These are all questions that have led to a recent resurgence in the controversy of mandatory coaching education/certification. The simple question is: what should be the minimal standards for youth sport coaches? The answer, unfortunately, is not quite so simple. The purpose of this month’s section is to take a look at the issue of mandatory coaching education/certification, and highlight some of the major issues and concerns related to the question of "Who’s Coaching Our Kids"?

A discussion of the qualifications of youth sport coaches cannot be complete without first understanding why children participate in sport, and what causes them to discontinue participation. Ample research indicates that the number one reason children participate in sport is simply to have fun (Weinberg & Gould, 2007). Additional research has identified reasons youth cite for dropping out of sport, both school and agency-sponsored. Among those reasons is leadership. Specifically, children cite an overemphasis on winning and competition, a dislike for their coach, and not having enough fun as factors contributing to their decision to discontinue participation (Orlick, 1973; Gould, Feltz, Horn & Weiss, 1982).

There is a widely accepted notion that sport builds character. Parents and coaches alike believe that through participation in sport, our youth gain valuable life lessons that can transfer to non-sport contexts. Some of these lessons are commonly reported as: commitment, teamwork, time management, responsibility, cooperation, respect, compassion and fair play. However, instances of negative character in sport, and specifically negative behavior by adults (e.g., parents, coaches, officials, etc.) contradict the teaching of these life lessons. Take for example the following incidents in youth sports that have made headline news:

• A t-ball coach pays one of his players to hit his autistic teammate with a baseball to take him out of the game.
• An assistant youth football coach rushes the field and assaults an opposing player for making a late hit on his son.
• A coach of an 11-year-old football team shoves an opposing player in the helmet during the post-game handshake.
• A New Jersey youth baseball coach and councilman is suspended for using profanity in front of his team.

• 29% have witnessed a physical altercation involving coaches, parents or officials
• 74% have seen a coach yell at a child for making a mistake in a game
• 53% have occasionally witnessed a coach arguing with another coach, official, or parent at a practice or game
• 48% have had a child quit a sport because they didn’t like the coach

The general consensus in the field of sport psychology is that sport in and of itself does not teach positive character. What it does do is provide an avenue through which positive character can be taught if the adults involved in running the program create the appropriate environment for this to occur. Therefore, character building in sport is not inherent; it must be taught. In order for this to occur the coach must have an understanding of what constitutes character development, and implement specific strategies for teaching it within the context of their sport team. Proponents of mandatory coaching education/certification argue that this is one of the core competency areas that should be addressed in coaching education programs and in fact, it is included in most, if not all, existing youth sport coaching education programs. The following are general competency areas that have been suggested for inclusion in youth sport certification programs:

• Injury prevention, care and management
• Technical and tactical aspects
• General conditioning
• Nutrition
• Social/Psychological aspects
• Motor learning and development
       (NASPE, AAHPERD)

Proponents of mandatory coaching education/certification argue that hiring only coaches who meet these minimal standards will result in a higher likelihood that athletes will experience positive psychosocial impacts due to the emphasis placed on this area in coaching education programs. In short, these educated coaches should gain a greater understanding of the ways their behaviors impact their athletes, and be able to develop strategies for creating an appropriate environment in which their athletes can build positive character.

A second argument for mandatory coaching education is centered on legalities. It’s no secret that our country is what some people would call “sue happy.” Hiring certified coaches who have received training in risk management, sound physiological coaching practices and injury prevention, care, and management may result in fewer injuries to athletes and serve as evidence that the organization attempted to use preventative measures and thus was not negligent.

A third issue relates to professionalism. Individuals in most fields - teachers, nurses, doctors, day care providers, etc. - who work with children are required to have some form of certification or degree in their direct field. Why then, would we allow a coach to work with our children and impact them physically, psychologically, socially, and emotionally without direct training in this area? Being a student does not qualify one to automatically become a teacher so why would being an athlete automatically qualify one to be a coach? In addition, training in mathematics does not qualify one to teach English, therefore why would training in mathematics qualify one to coach since coaching is a sub discipline of the field of kinesiology?

There is a growing body of research, which indicates that coaches who complete formalized coaching education courses and certification programs significantly increase their coaching efficacy (Campbell, T., & Sullivan, P., 2005; Lee, K., Malete, L., & Feltz, D., 2002; Maelte, L., & Feltz, D.L., 2000). The most significant effects are for game strategy and technique, motivation and character building.

However, whether or not coaches actually apply knowledge gained through coaching certification is unknown. Overall there is a lack of public research addressing the effectiveness off coaching education in a practical setting (Gilbert, 2006). In fact, it has been suggested that many coaches, particularly non-novice coaches, have pre-established beliefs about sport and coaching that they continue to harbor, even while completing coaching education courses, and thus are never really open to the information presented (Cushion, C.J., Armour, K.M., & Jones, R.L., 2003).

Others are concerned about supply and demand. Will mandating certification lessen the pool of coaches, which will in turn render children unable to play due to lack of available trained coaches? Many interscholastic associations have already adopted mandatory certification policies, and have begun implementing these policies. The specifics of the policies vary. For example, many states are “grandfathering” current coaches and allowing new coaches to begin coaching so long as they complete their certification within a specific timeframe. This may be their way to address the issue of supply and demand, however, if athletes truly benefit from coaches who are certified then why would a veteran coach be exempt from the certification requirements?

Lastly, the issue of cost arises. Who will pay the costs of coaching certification? Many youth sport coaches are volunteer and thus receive no compensation for their time. Should they then be asked to pay for coaching certification programs out of their own pocket? Should the organizations themselves, who are likely not operating with a large budget, pay the costs? If so, would this result in higher costs to parents and athletes for participation? Most interscholastic coaches work full-time jobs outside of their coaching and are paid minimally for their time dedicated to coaching. Attending coaching certification courses would be an additional cost and time constraint to these individuals. Would this deter people from pursuing coaching? Should they be compensated for their time spent in coaching education courses?

The current trend seems to be pointed toward some sort of mandated coaching certification or education programs for youth and interscholastic coaches. Although not all states or organizations have mandated these requirements, many have. The issue then, seems to be one more of form than necessity. More research into the effectiveness of these programs, in terms of the outcomes for athletes as well as the content and costs, needs to be conducted in order to have a more comprehensive picture of who is coaching our kids.

Coaching Certification/Education Programs

American Sport Education Program – www.asep.com

National Alliance for Youth Sports – www.nays.org

Positive Coaching Alliance – www.positivecoach.org

To see a complete list of accredited coaching education programs visit:

National Association for Sport and Physical Education – www.aahperd.org/naspe, http://www.aahperd.org/naspe/pdf_files/approved_programs.pdf

References

Campbell, T. & Sullivan, P. (2005). The Effect of Standardized Coaching Education Program on the Efficacy of Novice Coaches. Avante, 11(1), 38-45.

Cushion, C.J., Armour, K.M., & Jones, R.I. (2003). Coach Education and Continuing Professional Development: Experience and Learning to Coach, Quest, 55, 215-230.

Erickson, K., Coté, J., & Fraser-Thomas, J. (2007). Sport Experiences, Milestones, and Educational Activities Associated With High-Performance Coaches’ Development. The Sport Psychologist, 21, 302-316.

Gilbert, W.D. (2006). Introduction to Special Issue: Coach Education. The Sport Psychologist, 20, 123-125.

Gould, D., Feltz, D., Horn, T., Weiss, M. (1982). Reasons for attrition in competitive youth swimming. Journal of Sport Behavior, 5, 155-165.

Lee, K., Malete, L., & Feltz, D. (2002). The strength of coaching efficacy between certified and non-certified Singapore coaches. International Journal of Applied Sports Sciences, 14(1), 55-67.

Malete, L., & Feltz, D.L. (2000). The effect of a coaching education program on coaching efficacy. The Sport Psychologist, 14, 410-417.

Orlick, T.D. (1973). Children’s Sport – A revolution is coming. Canadian Association of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation Journal, 12-14.

Weinberg, R.S., & Gould, D. (2007). Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 4th ed. Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL.

(pelinks4u home)