Scheduled for Pedagogy Free Communications I, Wednesday, April 10, 2002, 8:45 AM - 10:00 AM, San Diego Convention Center: Room 7B


A Case Study of the Dual Roles of a Teacher/Coach: An Ecological Comparison

Karen Pagnano, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA

An ecological perspective has been utilized to understand the teaching-learning context in physical education and sport settings, yet few studies have systematically studied the teacher/coach in their dual role context teaching and coaching (Hastie & Siedentop, 1999). The purpose of this study was to examine the similarities and differences between the contexts of teaching physical education and coaching the same sport. Specifically, examine the settings in terms of the tasks the students and athletes are expected to carry out, the ways in which the tasks develop during lessons and practice sessions, and types of accountability. Participants were an experienced male physical education teacher/softball coach (Sam) and his physical education class (n=23), and varsity softball team (n=15). Sam taught a 5-day softball unit and was the softball coach for a 12-week season. Data were collected using field notes and an observation instrument developed to code task description, content development using Rink’s Games Stages, student/athletes and teacher/coach responses. Interviews were conducted with the teacher/coach, students and athletes. Interviews with the teacher/coach explored their background, and perceptions and beliefs about teaching and coaching. Student and athlete interviews were more informal and focused on aspects of the day’s class or practice. Documentation was also collected (e.g., lesson/practice plans, tests, and game statistics). Data were analyzed using a constant comparison method. Results support three major findings. First, the program of action (PoA) in the sport setting was rigorous while in the physical education unit the PoA was weak. The major differences stem from a disconnect between this teacher/coach’s words and actions that contributed to the weak PoA in physical education (i.e., goals, tasks, assessment misaligned). Second, significant differences existed in the type of tasks, number of tasks, and opportunities to respond to tasks in each context. Specifically there were higher OTR’s, more emphasis on skill combinations and strategy development in the sport context while in physical education there were fewer tasks, low OTR’s, minimal individual skill practice and an emphasis on game play (9v9). Finally, differences in accountability also existed. The accountability systems in sport was embedded in the “natural” consequences of game performance (i.e., win-loss record, game statistics determined starters/positions and practice focus) while accountability in physical education was characterized by pseudo accountability for instructional tasks (i.e., standing in the correct position in games). This study is an important first step in a closer examination of the actual teaching/coaching practices of dual role professionals.
Keyword(s): coaching, high school issues

Back to the 2002 AAHPERD National Convention and Exposition