How Coaching Behaviors Relate to the National Coaching Standards

Background/Purpose: This study used the conceptual framework of the National Coaching Standards (NASPE, 2006) to study effective coaches and compare their coaching behaviors to the National Coaching standards. Although many studies have looked at the effectiveness of high school coaches, no studies could be found that also investigated how successful coaches’ behaviors aligned to the National Coaches Standards.

Method: A convenience sample of ten, Caucasian and male, high school coaches were recruited to participate from a large school district in the Southwestern US as participants in this study.This study included two observations of coaching behaviors and the environment (using the ASUOI instrument; Lacy & Darst, 1984), one formal and several informal interviews, along with document analyses. All data were then compared to the National Coaching Standards (NASPE, 2006).

Analysis/Results: Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, frequencies, percentages) were reported for the observation data.  A constant comparison technique (Brannon, 2005) was utilized to code, record, and analyze data from the various sources. Data triangulation (i.e., observational results, informal interviews, field notes, and document analyses), an independent peer reviewer, a search for negative cases and member checks were used to support the trustworthiness of the data. Results showed that these high schoolcoaches exhibited many positive and effective behaviors (especially related to instruction). It was surprising to find that none of the 10 coaches were familiar with the National Coaching Standards and that the standards were not fully reflected in the ASUOI, the coaching documents, or the coaches’ philosophies. All eight of the domains from the Coaching Standards were observed during practices or present in documents; however, domain five (instruction) was observed much more frequently than all other domains. The qualitative themes identified across data sources were: (a) the importance of program structure and environment, (b) educational background and pedagogical content knowledge, and (c) coaching experiences. 

Conclusions: This study is significant since no other studies could be found that compared coaching behaviors and materials to the National Coaching Standards. This study is also significant since it highlights the need for coaches to become aware of and to meet the National Standards for Coaches. It also highlights that many of the National Coaching Standards were not observed in a cohort of effective high school coaches.