Scheduled for Poster Session: Research on Teaching and Instruction in Schools and Higher Education, Thursday, April 10, 2008, 11:15 AM - 12:45 PM, Convention Center: Exhibit Hall, Reseach Consortium Poster Sessions


Examining Instructional Behaviors of Dual Roles as Athletic Coaches and Physical Educators

Howard Z. Zeng and Raymond W. Leung, Brooklyn College of the City University of New York, Brooklyn, NY

In higher education, coaches are usually expected to teach physical education (PE) skill courses even though coaching and teaching are not viewed as the same profession. To be successful in this dual-role assignment, coaches need to narrow the gap between the two professions and view the dual roles by the similarities, not the differences (Bergmann-Drew, 2000, McElroy, 2002). The purposes of this study were to identify and compare the differences and similarities in instructional behaviors of the dual roles between coaching and teaching settings. Participants were nine athletic head coaches who also taught PE skill classes in a NCAA Division III college in the East Coast of the United States. Eighteen athletic practices and 18 PE skill classes (four lessons per educator) were videotaped and coded using the Arizona State University Observation Instrument (ASUOI, Lacy & Darst, 1989). Interval and event recording techniques were employed; hence, the percentage and rate per minute (RPM) data were obtained. The percentage data indicated that the following six behavioral variables were used by the participants significantly (p < .05) differently between coaching and teaching conditions: Preinstruction (16.6% vs. 19.8%), coaching (C) < teaching (T); Postinstruction (22.7% vs. 19.8%), C > T; Positive-Modeling (1.3% vs. 8.5%), C < T; Hustle (5.1% vs. 1.4%), C > T; Management (3.8% vs. 10.2%), T > C; and Uncodeable (11.9% vs. 4.4%), C > T. Findings from a one-way factorial multivariate analysis of variance using the RPM data were consistent with those of the percentage data. Further analyses by the discriminant function analysis indicated that Hustle behaviors were used by the participants more frequently in coaching while Positive-Modeling and Management behaviors were utilized more often in teaching. Concurrent-Instruction, Questioning, Negative-Modeling, Praise, and Scold behaviors were used by the participants with similar frequencies between coaching and teaching settings. In conclusion, participants in this study exhibit similar quantities of instructional behaviors over the four observation occasions across coaching and teaching settings with respect to the 11 instructional behaviors of the ASUOI. When comparing the instructional behaviors exhibited by the participants in their dual roles, Hustle behaviors appear to be used more often in coaching whereas Positive-Modeling and Management behaviors tend to be used more frequently in teaching. Other instructional behaviors such as Concurrent-Instruction, Questioning, Praise, and Scold behaviors seem to possess similar functions in coaching and teaching settings.


Keyword(s): coaching, professional preparation

Back to the 2008 AAHPERD National Convention and Exposition (April 8 - 12, 2008)