 

PLACE N RETURN BOX to remove this chockwt from yam meow.
TO AVOID FINES Mun on or before due duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU I. An Afﬁrmdlvo Action/Equal Opportunity lmmuion
anHI

EXPERIENCES OF TWO FIRST YEAR YOUTH
SPORT BASKETBAU. COACHES

By

Linda D. Lyman

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Physical Education and Exercise Science

1991

I I |. ) I .
J . l/ - ~ L I} ‘ . ’

ABSTRACT

EXPERIENCES OF TWO FIRST YEAR YOUTH
SPORT BASKETBALL COACHES

By

Linda D. Lyman

Coaching education programs are aimed at the inexperienced, untrained,
volunteer coach. These programs are implemented without any knowledge of
how the coach perceives or gives meaning to the task of coaching.
Researchers and educators implement programs based on theoretical reality
without any consideration to the individual reality of the participant within the
situation, the coach. Three loosely structured interviews, along with
observations of all practices and games, were conducted to understand the
behaviors of two first year volunteer youth sport coaches. The descriptive
fieldnotes and interview transcriptions were continually analyzed for emerging-
patterns, common themes, and tentative assertions. The evidence strongly
supports the overarching assertion that the coaches' behaviors, perceptions,
and meanings are affected by the tension between skill development, the

children having fun, and the outcome orientation of competitive sport.

Copyright by
LINDA D. LYMAN
1 991

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to take this opportunity to thank those people who were most
responsible for helping me complete my degree.

My ex-husband, Jim, who supported me ﬁnancially and emotionally even
as he watched us grow further apart. Without his confidence, patience, and
love, I would never have come to MSU, let alone have completed a thesis.

My adviser, Dr. Annelies Knoppers, who allowed me the freedom that I
needed to adjust and acclimate to the academic world. Without her
understanding and insight, I may not have stayed long enough to even begin
my thesis.

My pseudo advisor, Dr. Jayne Schuitemann, who agreed to help me
through my thesis defense just three weeks after defending her dissertation.
Without her help, I would still be preparing for my defense.

My committee members, Dr. Douglas Campbell and Dr. Deborah Feltz,
whose contrasting styles, insights, and expertise were invaluable to the success
of this project.

Last, but not least, I am extremely grateful to the two coaches who
participated in the study. They should be commended for their courage in
allowing me to observe them as they learned to coach. Without their

cooperation, I would not have been able to conduct this research.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I: Introduction and Review of Literature .................... 1
Introduction ........................................ 1
Research on Coaching Behaviors and Their Modification ......... 4
Research on Beginning Teachers ......................... 9
Symbolic lnteractionist Perspective ........................ 12
Purpose of the Study .................................. 13
Qualitative Research .................................. 14
Researchers Perspective ............................... 15
Deﬁnition of Terms ................................... 17

Chapter II: Methodology .................................... 20
Methods ........................................... 20
Negotiation of Access ................................. 20
Selection of lnformants ................................ 21
Overview of the Research Site ........................... 25

The community ................................... 25
The program ..................................... 26
A Confidentiality ...................................... 28
Data Collection Procedures ............................. 29
Observations .................................... 29
Interviews ....................................... 33
Data Analysis ....................................... 37
Ethical Considerations ................................. 38

Chapter III: Results and Discussion ............................. 41

Background Information ................................ 43
lnforrnants ...................................... 43
Dick ........................................ 43
Jack ........................................ 43
Jane ....................................... 43
Jill ......................................... 44
Setting: The Little 'Crackerbox" ........................ 44
General Description ................................ 44
Empty ...................................... 45
Game Days ................................... 46
Practices .................................... 47
Dick's Practices ................................ 48
Jane's Practices ............................... 50
Initial Perceptions ................................. 52
Timeline ..................................... 63
Phase 1 ........................................ 64
Dribble, Pivot Drill .............................. 70
Phase 2 ........................................ 81
Practice Organization/Transition from basic skills to scoring .81
Fun vs. Skill Development ........................ 95
Overarching Tensions ........................... 97
Phase 3 ........................................ 101 .
Conclusions ..................................... 1 16
Implications ..................................... 1 21
APPENDIX A: Letter to Coach ................................ 130
APPENDIX B: Coach's Consent Form ........................... 134
APPENDIX C: Letter to Parent ................................ 137 _

vi

APPENDIX D: Parent's Consent Form ........................... 140

APPENDIX E: Bill of Rights for Young Athletes ..................... 142
APPENDIX F: UCRIHS Approval .............................. 144
REFERENCES ........................................... 146

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Time Line .............................................. 63

Dribble, Pivot Drill ......................................... 70

viii

CHAPTER I

Introduction and Review of Literature

Coaching is a task that requires knowledge of the sport, the ability to
teach, the ability to plan, and the ability to organize and manage groups of
children who are at different physical, social, and psychological levels of
development. Coaches must be able to teach, guide, and interact effectively
with the children while coping with the requirements of the coaching role and
the pressures of competition. They must not only understand what the sport
experience means to their athletes, but also to parents, administrators, and
other people interested in the league.

Coaching education programs have been developed over the last
decade out of concern for the potential powerful effect of the volunteer coach on
the millions of children who participate in youth sport each year. Estimates of
the number of volunteer coaches range from 2-5 million per year in the US.
alone (Smith, Smith & Smoll, 1983; Lombardo, 1986). These coaches are
typically parents of participating children, former athletes themselves, or simply
people who like children and have an interest in sport. Most have had little or
no training in coaching (Martens & Gould, 1979).

The typical sequence of events in the recruitment and orientation of the
volunteer coach begins with the coach, usually a parent, being asked to
volunteer to coach at registration or on the registration sheet the child brings

home. On these sheets there is usually no explanation as to the time, emotions,

2

and knowledge needed to fulfill the coaching task. The next step is for the
coach to attend a league coaches' meeting where the coach is given a team list,
equipment, rules, practice and game schedules along with the brief description
about the philosophy of the league and what is expected from the coaches.
Armed with equipment, schedules, phiIOSOphies, and a team, the coach is sent
off to take on the responsibilities of the coaching role.

This is a tall task for a person who often has little or no teaching
background, management experience, and concept of the role of the coach and
the requirements of the task. The coaching task requires the skills of a
management person, a teacher, and a person knowledgeable in child
development. Nevertheless, volunteers are often allowed to enter into the
coaching role with little or no formal training. How can parents and organizers
allow this to happen? Do they really believe that the actual sport experience
can be beneficial with or without a knowledgeable person coaching these
children?

Increasingly, leagues are becoming aware of the need to train coaches.
However, leagues are often low budget operations that are organized around
the goal of the more children participants the better. This goal cannot be
accomplished without the time donated by volunteer coaches. As such, the
issue of whether or not to make attendance at coaching education workshops a
prerequisite for the donation of time and energy by volunteers, becomes a
dilemma for most leagues.

Organizers realize that potential coaches may refuse to volunteer if they

are also asked to put in extra time at coaching workshops (Seefeldt, 1982).

3

Many of these volunteers are also parents who may feel they do not need
special training to work with children. After all, this is fun and games. How
difﬁcult could it be to teach kids to play? Such a perspective may stem from not
understanding the task requirements for coaching.

The lack of training and knowledge of coaching is very problematic
because children in youth sport are often at critical physical, psychological, and
emotional levels of development which may make them extremely susceptible
to the results of their interactions and the events that take place within the
competitive sport context. The experience can either be detrimental or
enhancing to the psychological, emotional, and/or social development of both
children and coaches.

The extent of the influence of coaches on players has been documented
by several researchers. Harris (1983) found that the beliefs of baseball players
concerning the importance of winning were partially inﬂuenced by what the
coach stressed over the season. Those who have examined the reasons
children drop out of youth sport found that although "having other things to do”
is the main reason given for dropping out, other concems of the children include
an over-emphasis on winning, lack of fun, and negative feelings toward
coaches (Chelladurai, 1984; Gould, Feltz, Horn, & Weiss, 1981; Orlick &
Botterill, 1975; Seefeldt, 1978). Allof the former may often be a result of the
quality of the coach.

This concern about the quality of the coach has led researchers and
educators to develop various coaching education programs. Three such

programs are the Coaches' Achievement Program (CAP), the American

4

Coaching Effectiveness Program (ACEP), and the Coach Effectiveness Training
Program (CET). CAP and ACEP cover principles of pedagogy, management
skills, psychology, physiology, liability, sociology, and communication while
CET attempts to teach the coaches how to be positive in their attitudes and
actions toward the children (Murphy, 1985; Smith, Smoll & Curtis, 1979). The
impact of coaching education programs upon coaching behaviors has received
attention by various researchers.
B I G [.3]. lIl'IlI'iil'

Researchers have attempted to identify the frequency of behaviors that
successful coaches use in developing theories on what makes an effective
coach (Claxton, 1988; Markland & Martinek, 1988; Tharp & Gallimore, 1976).
The behaviors exhibited by successful coaches varied across the studies. In
most instances a successful coach was operationalized in terms of win-loss
ratio. Because, in the youth sport setting, researchers, educators, and most
parents consider a coach successful if the children are satisﬁed with their sport
experience, it would be difficult to draw implications from these studies.
Consequently, those studying youth sport coaches need to include an
examination the perceptions of athletes and coaches and degree of satisfaction.

To date, most of the work conducted in attempting to identify and
understand coaching behaviors and athletes' perceptions has utilized coding
systems that systematically place behaviors in classes and categories. The
Coaching Behavioral Assessment System (CBAS) seems to be the most widely
used interactional analysis tool of this kind (Horn, 1984; Rejeski, Darracott, &
Hutslar, 1979; Smith, Smoll, & Curtis 1978; Smith, Smoll, & Curtis, 1979; Smith,

5

Small, Hunt, Curtis & Coppel, 1978). Smith, Small, and Curtis (1978) used
CBAS to observe and code the frequencies of behaviors of Little League
coaches over a season. The researchers also obtained measures of the
childrens' perceptions of the coaches' behavior, the childrens' self-esteem and
the coaches' perceptions of their own behavior.

The results of the study showed that the coaches tended to demonstrate
more negative than positive coaching behaviors. Interestingly, the children
were more accurate in their perceptions of the actual observed behavior of the
coaches, than the coaches were themselves. Furthermore, the children were
more satisfied with their coaches, with themselves, and with their teammates
when they played for coaches who exhibited more positive than negative
behaviors.

Smith, Small, and Curtis (1979) combined the information of what the
coaches did and how the children felt about the experience and themselves
from the previous study into an experimental training program. The
investigators conducted a study which used this experimental training program
to try to modify coaching behaviors of Little League coaches. The 31 coaches
who participated in the study were randomly assigned to either the
experimental training program or the control group. The experimental group
attended a pre-season training program; the control group did not attend a pre-
season training program. The goal of this program was to modify the coaches'
behavior so that the sport experience was a positive one for the children.
During the season, observers tallied and categorized the coaches' behaviors at

games and practices.

6

The coaches in the experimental group demonstrated significantly more
behaviors consistent with the behavioral guidelines of the pre-season training
program than did coaches in the control group. Additionally, the experimental
coaches were evaluated more positively by their players. Furthermore, the
players of the coaches in the experimental group expressed more intra-team
satisfaction than those on teams of the control group. Finally, players who
played for trained coaches had higher self-esteem scores than players who
played for un-trained coaches. Thus, Smith, Small, and Curtis (1979)
concluded that the pre-season training program had successfully modified
coaches‘ behavior for the benefit of the children.

The results of these studies conducted by Smith, Small, and Curtis
(1978; 1979) clearly indicate that there is a relationship between coaching
behaviors and children's satisfaction with the sport experience. Direct causality
cannot be inferred, however, because there are many things outside of the sport
experience that happen in a child's life which could influence self-esteem and
satisfaction during the season.

Until recently, the work of Smith, Small, and Curtis (1978, 1979) had
been the only research on the effectiveness of coaching education programs in
changing the behaviors of coaches in the last 10 years. More recently an effort
to assess the effectiveness of ACEP was done by Burton and Tannehill (1988).
These researchers used a behavioral assessment system to determine if the
American Coaching Effectiveness Program (ACEP) was successful in
encouraging coaches to exhibit more of the behaviors targeted by ACEP as

necessary for effective coaching. Some of the targeted behaviors that ACEP

7

coaches exhibited more of than untrained coaches were encouragement and
general positive reinforcement. Similar to the findings of Smith et al., Burton
and Tannehill fdund a great discrepancy among observed results. For
example, the difference between the perceptions and observed behaviors of the
ACEP trained coaches was smaller than that for the non-trained coaches, but
the gap was still quite significant. Burton and Tannehill suggested:

that the overall inaccuracy of the coaches' and

player's perceptions and recall of coaching

behaviors suggests that the positive behavioral

changes exhibited by the ACEP coaches may not

necessarily lead to more positive evaluative

reactions by the ACEP coaches and players (p. 17).

Burton et al. (1988) found that even after the training program, coaches
exhibited more negative than positive coaching behaviors. Overall, however,
Burton et al. concluded that the training program was valuable in modifying the
coaching behaviors in a positive direction. However, the area in the
researchers felt more work must be done concerns teaching coaches how to
effectively use feedback and learned behaviors in specific situations.

Even though these studies tell us what the coaches are doing and how
these behaviors may inﬂuence the children, the studies also leave many issues
unanswered. First, it is quite possible that a program that aims to modify
coaching behaviors may neglect to consider the goals of the coach. Perhaps,
one coach is attempting to increase performance, while another is attempting to
make sure each child plays. Would both coaches then be exhibiting the same

behaviors with the same frequency? Second, another question that needs to

be addressed is why there is a difference between the perceptions of the

coaches and the children.

Third, the function of coaches and youth sport needs to be more clearly
delineated. Should the programs be designed to teach the coach to become a
teacher of not only skills, but of necessary rules and values to enable the child
to function in the social structure of youth sport? Fourth, although their
behaviors may be modified, coaches are not passive participants within the
context of youth sport. How does dealing with athletes, parents and
administrators affect their behavior? Fifth, so far studies to date tell us only what
behaviors were exhibited by coaches. Judgments of the effectiveness of a
coach in these studies were based on frequencies of a behavior and ignored
the reasoning behind the behavior. Possibly, the behaviors of a coach have
different meanings to an observer and to the coach. The difference may lie in
the perceptions of what the coach and researcher believe is appropriate
behavior within the context of the situation. As reﬂected in studies done with
behavioral assessment systems within physical education and sport settings,
coaches may be unaware of their behaviors towards individual athletes.
Researchers (Horn, 1984; Rejeski, Darracott, & Hutslar,1979) found that the
behaviors of coaches and teachers were affected by their perceptions of a
child's ability level. Specifically, Horn (1984) found that low skilled softball
players were given more praise and more general and corrective feedback,
while Rejeski et al. (1979) found that high expectancy children received more
reinforcement than their low expectancy classmates. These results seem to
indicate that coaches' and teachers' perceptions of the childrens' skill level may

lead to differential treatment. More importantly, the results indicate that the

9

coaches reacted differently within situations that were perceived as similar by
the researcher. Therefore, we need to understand the coaching experience
from the perspective of the participant - the coach. Why do coaches seem to
use more negative than positive behaviors? What are the coaches' meanings,
perceptions and feelings about their tasks and role? Why is there such a wide
range of behaviors in seemingly similar contexts?

These are the types of questions we need to ask to understand the
reasons coaches have for behaving the way that they do, how they perceive
their task, and how they experience coaching. The literature has identified
types of coaching behavior, but as is evident, we need to begin to explain why
coaches behave the way they do. We especially need to search for
explanations of the behavior of the first year coaches. While experienced
coaches can use lessons learned in past seasons to guide their behavior,
beginning coaches have little upon which to base decisions. Thus, it is
necessary to study how beginning coaches experience their first season.

B l B . . I I

Teaching is coaching in many ways and thus an examination of the
literature concerning beginning teachers may help understand the behaviors of
beginning coaches. The teacher enters the classroom with high expectations of
directing, guiding, teaching, and helping the children. However, Zeichner &
Tabachnick (1983) have shown that getting through the ﬁrst day can be difficult
for the first year teacher. McDonald (1980) has pointed out that all the
knowledge gained from academic courses and student teaching does not

adequately prepare the teacher for the realities of teaching.

10

Many ﬁrst year teachers are often not prepared for the highly interactive
social stmcture of the actual classroom. McDonald (1982), found that beginning
teachers go through four phases. The first is that of coping with the anxiety
created by entering a “real," not theoretical classroom while trying to learn to
teach the students. Second, after gaining control, the teacher must decide what
and how to teach. The third phase consists of coping with first experiences of
evaluating both the pupils' and one's own performance. The fourth stage
entails dealing with the differences of the meaning of the role of "teacher”
among all the people involved in the academic environment. Specifically,
people who most influence the perceptions of teachers as to their role include
students, parents, principals, administrators, and fellow teachers. In addition to
delineating these stages which may influence the beginning teachers'
construction and reconstruction of their role as a teacher, McDonald and Elias
(1983) also called for field research to determine how teachers perceive the
experience of teaching.

Case studies of beginning teachers are becoming an important avenue
for understanding how teachers perceive the experience of teaching. In one
study of two beginning teachers, Williams, Eiserman & Lynch (1985)
determined that many of their problems arose from the discrepancy between the
teacher's individual reality and that of the classroom experience. This was
demonstrated in the types of statements the teachers made when interviewed.
The statements inevitably began with "I never realized” and "I thought that.“
Bullough (1987), in a case study of Kerrie, a first year junior high school

teacher, attempted through field research to address the issue of how novice

11

teachers make sense of their role of teacher. Bullough (1987) found that Kerrie
developed many of the skills necessary to cope with the classroom through trial
and error. He also found that she went through many of the stages mentioned
in the study of induction programs for the beginning teacher (McDonald, 1982).

Kerrie's experience demonstrated the way in which many beginning
teachers are thrown into the role of teacher to either ”sink or swim." Bullough
(1987) suggested that in order for teacher education to be practical, it must be
geared toward reconstructing the actual classroom experience from the
perspective of the beginning teachers. Teacher education should incorporate
results from studies identifying the teachers' classroom experiences with the
theoretical world of teaching. As is evident, it is not enough to identify behaviors
and problems of beginning teachers without understanding how they perceive
those problems and behaviors.

Prior to comparing the experiences of beginning teachers with that of
beginning coaches, I would like to acknowledge that there is a major difference
between the formal training of a teacher and that of a volunteer coach.
However, If we look at the similarities between the role of teacher and coach,
we can see that both are put into similar interactive, evaluative and uncertain
environments. They are both responsible and evaluated for their own actions
as well as for the performance, attitudes and behaviors of the children.

It seems likely that beginning coaches would go through phases similar
to those of teachers. Coaches must first learn to manage and organize
practices. They then must begin to decide what skills are needed by individuals

as well as the team. The coach must evaluate athletes according to skill and

12

position, and cope with the meanings attached to winning and losing inherent in
the youth sport environment. Additionally, while interacting with the children in
this manner, the coach must deal with parents, administrators, and other
coaches. Developers of coaching education programs must follow the lead of
researchers in teacher education and make an effort to understand a coach's
individual reality of the experience. Perhaps it is time that sport researchers
and educators of coaches consider that the reality of academia may be different
than the reality of coaches. Furthermore, the material presented by coaching
education programs might be more applicable within the field setting, if
educators understood how coaches perceived the task of coaching.
Sll'll |"|E |'

Coaches are active participants in the sport context. Their perceptions
and meanings of “coach" may be constructed and reconstructed as they
experience the interactions and situations within each game and practice. In
other words, their perceptions of an event depend on their interactions with
people, their experiences, and their reactions when faced with a particular'
situation (Jacob, 1987).

This is the basic premise of the symbolic interactionist perspective. The
popular saying "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder" truly expresses the
symbolic interactionist's perspective that there is a 'tmth" or individual reality for
each person, as well as a meaning shared through social interaction (Charon,
1979). For example, certain hockey tactics are perceived by many people to be
violent and unsportsmanlike. Nevertheless, within the hockey community these

tactics may be seen as the beauty of the game.

13

George Herbert Mead (1927) has pointed out that the perception of the
actor is inﬂuenced by the person's interpretation of the object or event within a
specific social structure of a group. In other words, one's perspective of an
object or event is affected by one's social experiences within a reference group.
The group could be males, females, mothers, students, teachers, etc.

In addition, meaning is dynamic (Blumer, 1969). We are constantly
negotiating and renegotiating our personal meanings and perceptions through
social interaction. For instance, hockey players who constantly defend the use
of aggressive hockey tactics may accuse an opponent of being violent if they
personally become victim of these tactics; As such, a hockey player's
perceptions and meanings are dynamic, influenced not only by reference
groups but also by his or her interpretation of a speciﬁc event.

Similarly, the shared and personal perceptions, meanings and symbols
inﬂuencing the behavior of coaches are constructed and reconstructed through
social interactions within the coaching experience. Thus, in order to explain the
behavior of coaches, we must understand their perspective. We must see the
coaching experience through their eyes.

W

The purpose of this study is to understand how coaches experience their
ﬁrst year of coaching. Specifically I will focus on the following questions:

1) What experiences, models, and reference groups does the coach

draw upon to develop initial perceptions and meanings of "coach”?

2) How does the coach construct and reconstruct the role of coach as

she/he proceeds through the season?

14

3) What types of things does the coach perceive as shaping his/her

perceptions and meanings as she/he learns to coach?

4) How do the coach's perceptions, meanings, and behaviors change

overtime?

The importance of this study is twofold. First, as was shown earlier, the
existing literature has addressed only the issue of what coaches are doing and
has ignored the "why.“ The only way to answer the ”why” questions is to
understand the perceptions and meanings of the coach. The value of
understanding the meanings coaches attribute to their behavior may help to
explain why coaches are doing what they do. In order to accomplish this, we
must go into the ﬁeld with the coaches as they experience coaching. Secondly,
the coaching education programs may not adequately prepare the coach for the
social reality of coaching.

D II I' B I

Use of quantitative research methodology in the earlier cited coaching
literature has profiled the behaviors which coaches exhibit. The questions
arising from these studies suggested that in order to explain the behavior we
must understand the perspective of the coach.

' Qualitative methods are designed to gain an understanding of the
process by which participants define their roles, tasks, and experiences within
the environment in which they are actors (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982; Erickson,
1986). Field based methods such as descriptive observations and interviews
provide a way of understanding how the participants within a setting perceive

and view their world. Use of these methods, therefore, could facilitate the

15

understanding of the coaches' perceptions and meanings within the coaching
expeﬁence.
W

I realize that one of the main concerns with the methodology of this study
will be the fact that I, the researcher, am the research tool. This allows my
biases, experiences, and preconceived notions to influence the objectivity of my
interviews and observations (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982; Dobbert, 1982).

A good portion of the inﬂuence of a researchers subjectivity can be
eliminated by the researcher looking for and acknowledging the motivation for
the study, biases, and experiences which may affect the objective treatment of
the data (Borman, LeCompte & Goetz, 1986; Hammersley & Atkinson, 1983).
For this reason I feel I must address why I am here at Michigan State University
and explore the biases I may have developed as an athlete, a parent, and a
coach.

My whole motivation for attending graduate school was to obtain the
credibility that comes with a Master of Arts degree so that I could develop and
implement effective coaching education programs. Because I grew up in the
pre-Tltle IX era, I have had very few structured athletic experiences. The one
and only coach I had was a physical education major whose heart was in the
right place; she knew the sports, but I thought she lacked the ability to
communicate, motivate, and teach.

My first coaching job was serving as an assistant basketball and softball
coach to this woman at my old high school. I did everything possible to prove to

her and everyone else that a person did not need to be a teacher or physical

16

education major to be able to coach effectively. I enjoyed giving to the athletes
what I, as a female, was never allowed to experience. After this experience, I
developed a junior high basketball program and coached both the seventh and
eighth grade for eight years. While I was coaching within the school system, I
volunteered much of my free time to coach youth sport softball, basketball, and
ﬂag football. In my last three years of coaching, l coached crew at the University
of California, San Diego. Overall, I had made my way up the coaching ladder
without any academic training in either teaching or physical education.

Throughout those 12 years, I developed a philosophy of coaching. In
essence, I believe that an effective coach must have the ability to communicate
at all levels, to take the perspective of the other, and to have excellent listening
skills. I also believe that all the academic training in the world will not make
someone a ”good” coach if he or she lacks these people-oriented skills. By
'good" I mean in the sense that a coach helps the children realize their potential
not only as athletes, but as developing people. I believe that sport can be an
excellent vehicle to help children Ieam about their physical, mental, and social
selves, if handled properly.

Over the years, I have seen the potential of the youth sport experience
wasted, not because coaches did not have good intentions, but primarily
because they did not understand what the coaching task entailed. l have seen
coaches who failed to realize the impact that competition can have on their
original good intentions and who have ignored the fact that children are people
too. I have known coaches who were unaware of the role communication plays

in making the sport experience a learning and growing process for everyone

17

involved. As a result of this disillusionment with youth sport, I did not allow my
two sons to participate. I will always regret that they never were able to
participate with me in the sport world.

My deﬁnition of an ideal coach is one who is a combination between a
loving parent, a concerned friend, and a skillful teacher. Possibly, my least
favorite coaches are the egotistical, arrogant, parents who are coaching for their
egos, not the children. Even though I get angry and disgusted with the
behaviors of some youth sport coaches, I blame researchers, educators and
league administrators for not making them aware of what I think are the skills
needed to coach. Like athletes, coaches need help in developing the skills
necessary to be good at what they do. I want the current study to aid in the
‘ development of education programs which would help coaches do their job for

the beneﬁt of not only the children but for the coaches themselves.

D E 'I' II
First year coach: A coach who has not coached a sport at any level.
Volunteer: A person who donates time, emotions, and efforts

without any expectations of monetary reward.

Youth Sport: Competitive sport programs designed to teach
children the necessary physical, emotional, and
social skills to function within the competitive sport
setting. These programs are usually community-
based, organized for the benefit of as many children
as possible. Less ambiguously defined, ”organized

sport programs were defined as those with

18

designated coaches, organized practices, and
scheduled competitions“ (Gould, 1982, p. 204).

Basketball League: Youth sport basketball programs administered
through community recreation departments.
Although these programs may use local school
facilities, they are not organized through the school
system. The purpose of these leagues is to teach
basketball to children between the ages of 7 and 11.
These teams are usually coed. The coaches are all
volunteers, typically parents of participating children.
The only requirement for being a volunteer coach is
the desire to coach the children.

Practice: Any session organized by the coach to work on team

or individual skills in preparation for the game

situations.

Games: Competitive contests between teams scheduled by
theleague.

Social Reality: The common understandings and definitions

developed through social interactions that construct
the social expectations within the competitive sport
context. These socially constructed expectations
change with factors such as level of competition,

orientation of the program, sport, and gender.

Individual Reality:

19

The individual definitions and meanings which
develop through past experiences and social
interactions within the competitive sport context.
There will be differences based upon each coach's
ability to adapt to the social reality of the sport context

and his or her perceptions of past experiences.

CHAPTER II
Methods

In an effort to understand how first year youth sport volunteer coaches
experience coaching, I conducted participant observation research with two ﬁrst
year volunteer basketball coaches, a male and a female. A basketball program
was selected because of my familiarity with the sport and the season in which
the study took place. The two coaches agreed to be observed and interviewed
during the course of their first season coaching third and fourth grade children. I
was a participant in the sense that these coaches were minors and to be
allowed to coach they needed an adult present at all practices and games. I
was that adult. Three formal but loosely stmctured interviews were conducted
to determine if the coaches' perceptions and definitions of coaching had
changed as a result of actual coaching experiences. To compliment the
interviews, I made descriptive observations of every organized practice and
game. Both coaches and their assistants were interviewed and observed.

II I' I' l E

My initial contacts with the league were through the secretary. She had
given me all the pertinent information about the program. When I made direct
contact with the head of the recreation association, Dave, I was informed of his
apprehension about a study being conducted within his jurisdiction. He was
concerned about the inconvenience that might be experienced by the children

or the coaches.

20

21

I explained the purpose of the study and the methods by which I would
collect my data. I assured him that I would not interfere with the children or the
league. I explained that I would negotiate with the informant coaches when and
how I would fit into their normal coaching routine. Dave gave me the name of
the director of the basketball program, Bill. Dave told me that if I could convince
Bill, as I had convinced him, I could contact the ﬁrst year coaches and conduct
the study within their association.

I contacted Bill immediately and made arrangements to meet him and
explained the proposed study. After discussing the study and the research
procedures with Bill, I was given the names of all ﬁrst year participant coaches.
I contacted all of these individuals by phone.

The following week, Bill gave me a list of eight or nine more first year
participant coaches. With the exception of one woman, these were all high
school age males and females. I contacted the woman ﬁrst. She was more
than willing to participate but she had two years experience as an elementary
physical education instmctor. Consequently, I decided to make contact with all
of the other ﬁrst year volunteers.

SelectionmneJntormams

The informants were selected from a pool of first year volunteer coaches
in‘two basketball leagues in the Greater Lansing Area. The leagues conducted
organized competitive basketball programs for third through sixth grade boys
and girls. There were 46 coaches in the two leagues combined; 10 coaches
were in their first year of coaching. Except for one woman, all of the available

informants were high school aged males and females. Originally, I had set ﬁve

22-

criteria for the selection of an informant. First, the coach must not have had any
prior coaching experience. Second, the coach should be a parent of a
participating child. I felt this was important because studies have shown that at
least 60% of volunteer youth sport coaches are parents (Gould & Martens,
1979; Smith et al., 1983). Third, this coach should not have a physical
education degree. A coach with a physical education degree would not be
representative of the typical untrained volunteer coach. Fourth, the coach
should not have extensive experience in organization and implementation of
children's activities such as scouts and teaching. This criterion was needed to
help ensure that the coach was not more qualified to deal with the
organizational and social aspects of coaching than most volunteer coaches.
Fifth, the person should not have played college varsity sport in the last 10
years. I felt that if the coach had recently participated in college sport, he/she
would be more aware of training methods than the typical volunteer coach.

The only parent in the two leagues that was a ﬁrst year coach was a
woman who was a former physical education instructor. She was eliminated as
a possible informant because she had two years of physical education teaching
at the elementary level. The remaining first year coaches, eight females and
one male ranging in age from 16 to 18 years of age, fit all other criteria except
being a parent coach. Thus other criteria became more important. I contacted
these ﬁrst year coaches by phone and explained the purpose of the study. I
inquired about their sport background, refereeing background, grade in school,
and willingness to participate.

My original intent was to conduct a case study. However, as the

23

selection process progressed, I decided to expand the study to both a male and
female coach. This was done to accommodate the gender separation within the
league. The league had made a concerted effort to recruit women to coach girls
and men to coach boys. The inclusion of a coach from each division helped me
to find common themes and patterns reﬂecting the experiences of first year
coaches in the entire third and fourth grade division.

Initially, I was worried whether the high school age coaches would be
able to articulate themselves well enough in the interviews to give me to "useful"
data. My concern stemmed from my background experiences in youth sport.
High school men and women rarely coached in the leagues with which I was
familiar. Thus, during the selection process, I engaged each coach in
conversation in an attempt to determine how well they could express feelings
and thoughts. After speaking with each coach, I found that all of the potential
coaches were articulate and willing to express their feelings about sport and
coaching.

Although the male coach, Dick, was selected because he was the only '
available first year male, he was very articulate and thoughtful in his initial
discussion. Dick played on a varsity basketball team, had played as a
youngster in the league under study, and had also refereed for the program.
The female coach, Jane, was selected because she closely matched Dick in
sport and refereeing experiences. Jane had been a varsity athlete in three
sports. Like Dick, she had participated in the league and had worked as a
referee. One difference between the two informant coaches was that Dick was

coaching his brother. None of the available females were coaching teams with

24

siblings on them.

My original intention was to select an informant coach without recent
college playing experience. The high school playing experience of Dick and
Jane could be considered extremely similar. However, if Dick and Jane
represented ﬁrst year volunteer coaches for this league and possibly other rural
youth leagues, I felt I must study what is part of the real world sport context and
select them for the study.

I contacted Dick and Jane by phone again to ask permission to come and
observe their first practice and to arrange my participation as the adult present
at their practices and games. Dick agreed to participate during his ﬁrst practice.
He was given the letter explaining the study and the informed consent
procedures. In addition, I received verbal permission from his father.

Jane's first practice was cancelled because of inclement weather. She
was contacted again by phone. I sent her the coach's letter explaining the study
(see Appendix C) and a copy of the informed consent form (see Appendix D).
At the time of this phone conversation, I agreed to become the parent of record
during her practices and games.

Each coach had an assistant. The assistants were classmates of the
coaches. As I began observing practices, I realized the presence and
interactions of the assistant coaches were a very important aspect of the social
reality of the coaching experience. For this reason, I decided to conduct
interviews with the assistants, Jack and Jill, as well. Jack and Jill both had
junior varsity or varsity playing experience. In addition, as children they had

played in the current youth league program.

25

Jane was playing a varsity sport at the same time that she was coaching.
She had to compete in varsity tournaments on Saturdays. All of the childrens'
games were also scheduled on Saturdays, consequently, Jane coached only in
the first game. For this reason, Jill was interviewed twice and in much more
depth than the male assistant because she coached the children in the rest of
the games.

W
W

The basketball program was under the umbrella of a community
recreation association. The site of the actual practices and games was the main
elementary school within the community, Progress. At one time, Progress was a
typical rural town in the midwest. However, in more recent years, Progress had
changed with the increase in density and growth of the surrounding city and
suburban areas. Outwardly, Progress appeared to be a rural town on the
outskirts of suburbia. However, increases in population in Progress consisted
primarily of middle to upper middle class professionals from the surrounding
cities who wanted the peace of the country in their personal lives.

Just minutes away from Progress, there were malls, theaters, museums,
and parks marking the status of the inhabitants as upper middle class suburbia.
Progress seemed to be such a contradiction. The middle to upper class
inhabitants were separating their professional markers of status in the city from

their personal lives in the country.

26

Immortal]:

There were 181 children participating in the basketball program. This
was the largest number of participants in the history of the program.
Registration sheets for the children and coaches were sent to all the local public
and private elementary schools in the immediate community. Children from two
of the neighboring small towns were also allowed to participate. The program
was divided into two distinct portions. The first four Saturdays were designated
as skill sessions while the ﬁnal six weeks consisted of competitive league play.

Skill sessions were organized by the local high school basketball coach.
The instructors of the skills sessions were local school coaches, local athletes,
former participants, and parents. The volunteer coaches for the league portion
of the program were not required to participate in the sessions.

Skills such as shooting, layups, dribbling, passing, and defensive stance
were explained and were demonstrated to the children. The children were then
asked to attempt the skills while the instructors physically and verbally corrected
the children's technique. The children were separated by grade during the.
skills sessions. Bill, the program director, used observations of the childrens'
abilities during skills sessions to aid him in making equal teams in the league
portion of the program.

The league portion was divided into two distinct levels of competition, a
third and fourth grade level and a fifth/sixth grade level. The levels were broken
down further by gender. Thus, there were four separate game schedules within
the program. A team consisted of eight children.

Seven of the 24 volunteer coaches were females. Additionally, seven

27

coaches were also high school students. The youth of the community played an
integral role in the development and longevity of the program. Not only did high
school youth volunteer to coach teams, they also refereed, conducted the skills
sessions, and until this year, supervised the program. Many of the high school
students who were now refereeing had participated in the youth basketball
program as children.

Each team was allowed only one 45 minute practice a week. The total
number of practices for each team was to be seven. Dick and Jane's teams
only practiced six times because of holidays and weather. Each team had six
scheduled games. However, a major storm Cancelled the final game of the
program for all the teams.

In summary, the overall duration of the youth basketball program was 10
weeks. The first four Saturdays were designated as skills sessions. The
children were separated on the basis of grade. During the skills sessions, Bill
observed the abilities of the children in an effort to construct even teams.

The competitive portion was divided further by gender. Both informants
coached at the third and fourth grade level. For that reason, further descriptions
of the site, the setting, or the league will be limited to the third and fourth grade
level.

A discussion of the setting, the informants, and their teams within the
setting of the gym will be continued in the background section of Chapter 3.
The background section will set the stage for the entire results and discussion of

the thesis.

28
Q [i l I' II

The children and the coaches were assured of strict conﬁdentiality in my
recording and reporting of the data. The children were given nicknames
according to something I noticed immediately about them. For example, one
boy slid and ripped a hole in the knee of his sweats in the first practice. Even
though he never were those sweats again, he was identiﬁed as “Knees."

At the second practice of both coaches, I asked to speak to the children.
Dick and Jane introduced me to the children on their teams. I explained to the
children that I was going to be conducting a study about their coaches. I told
them that in order to do a good job I had to watch not only what the coach was
doing but also what they were doing. I explained that sometimes they might be
playing around or daydreaming and I might see it and write it down in order to
understand how everyone acts in practice. I asked the children if they would
mind me watching what they did. I told them they could read my notes anytime
they wanted. I also told them that I would give them nicknames so they could
not be identiﬁed in my notes or in the paper that I was writing. All of the children
verbally agreed to my observing them in practice. I also passed out the letter to
the parents explaining the study (see Appendix A) and the informed consent
procedures (see Appendix B). The vignettes and data for the written report
were derived only from children who handed in written consent forms.

The coaches and assistant coaches were identiﬁed by initials or letters in
my field notes. In my transcriptions of the tapes, I did not use the coaches
names in the questions or the answers. There were no identifying names

placed on the notebooks or the tapes. I used a different color notebook for each

29

coach. The signed informed consent forms were placed in a file in California.

There was one problem about strict confidentiality in that the coaches
themselves told many of their friends at their high school about the study. I
attempted to keep the identities of the coaches from Bill. However, this was
almost impossible because of my presence at all of their games and practices.

MW

Previous studies of coaching behaviors have used interviews,
observations, questionnaires, and surveys based on social learning theories,
leadership theory, and cognitive-behavioral approaches to determine the actual
behavior of coaches (Martens, 1978; Seefeldt, 1978; Smith & Small, 1978).
Each of these methods has a place in the development of theory to predict
coaching behaviors. However, in order to explain and predict coaching
behaviors, we must understand those observed behaviors from the perspective
of the coach within the sport context.

In order to best accomplish this task, I used the field based research
procedures of observation and loosely structured interviews. These procedures
helped me to understand the perspective of the participant coaches within the
context of their individual reality of coaching. In other words, through a
combination of interviews and observations, I attempted to understand the
behaviors of the coach within the context of the experience of coaching.
maceration:

Learning what to observe was a process that has continued beyond the
study. The observations were difﬁcult and I was always plagued with the feeling

of uneasiness. Did I observe enough? Did I observe the correct event? At ﬁrst,

30

I tried to capture everything. I constantly reminded myself that l was trying to
understand the perspective of the coach. I focused on the social interactions
within events.

I observed pre-practice interactions between the children. This usually
set the tone of the gym during practices. I observed the interactions between
the coaches and their assistants. I tried to capture the coaches' reactions to
specific events during games. I observed the coaches' behaviors during pre-
game talks, time outs, halftime, and after the game. In the practice setting, I
observed the interactions within the specific drills, from drill to drill, and between
different individuals. I tried to capture the experiences of the coaches. I
observed all interactions that I thought would help me to understand Dick and
Jane's perspective of coaching.

If meanings and perceptions are constructed and reconstructed through
social interaction, then these observations should reﬂect how modiﬁcations in
the coach's knowledge of their role, their athletes, and the sport context itself
inﬂuence the coach's actions over the season. I observed both practices and
games because the requirements for the situations are different. Practices are
usually seen as the process by which the team becomes prepared to play a
game. Games are the arena in which the children and the coach display their
skill and team development with the added pressure of competition. There is
also an interactive component between behaviors exhibited in games and
practices.

I had hoped to be as close to the action as possible for the purpose of my

observations in practice and game situations. Because my informant coaches

31

were minors, they needed an adult at their practices in order to coach.
Consequently I arranged to be the "parent” of record for both coaches. This
allowed me to interact very naturally with the children, the parents, and the
coaches. l was also allowed to be on the team bench during the games and I
was given free reign to follow the coaches around during time-outs, quarter
breaks and half-time. Many times during a game, the boys or girls would sit
beside me or look over my shoulder and read my ﬁeld notes. One boy even
played his harmonica for me after a practice and told me a family secret. This
was the ideal participant observer role for my purpose. My accepted and
functional role helped to reduce the prospect of my behaviors or verbalizations
affecting the coaches learning to coach.

I arrived at practices and games at least 10 minutes early. I did this so I
could observe the coach's interactions with the children, parents, or assistants
prior to the practice or game. I also was able then to informally discuss the
previous game or plans for the practice. I attempted to write down as much
descriptive detail about every situation that arose during a practice or game. I
tried to capture descriptions of the children's behaviors and the coach's
reactions. I also tried to jot down as many direct quotes as possible during
demonstrations, organization of drills, and basic discussions.

The ﬁeld notes taken during the practices and games were in the form of
sentences, quotes, and brief contextual descriptions. These raw ﬁeld notes
were then expanded into complete sentences and paragraphs. The expanded
notes contained some methodological notes, observer comments, and

reﬂections about the practice or game.

32

I attempted to be as objective as possible. The ﬁrst few times I observed
and expanded my field notes, I was so worried about personal bias and
interpretation that I didn't write down what I felt was happening. I thought if I did
not evaluate the situation at all, and only described what I saw, my data would
be more representative of the participants' views.

However, I realized that if I interjected my comments on the side margins,
these comments helped me to develop conversation with Dick and Jane to
clarify points that I did not understand. Many times I found that my prior
coaching and parenting experiences created interest in why the informant was
behaving in a way that seemed foreign from my perspective. An awareness of
this interpretation helped me to make a greater attempt to understand what was
happening from the informant's perspective. This experience coincided with
Earis,s (1986) argument that although the researchers interpretation/rnferences
and evaluations can hinder objective observations, they can also be useful in
the "formation of the insider-outsider perspective that is more informative than
either perspective alone” (p. 70).

One example of this type of insider-outsider perspective was the
clariﬁcation of what "good job" meant to each coach. From my observations I
could not ascertain whether the coaches were more interested in the children
making the basket than technique or effort. But upon questioning the coaches, I
found that they had an awareness of their inconsistent use of reinforcement.
This could be expected in that these coaches are learning to coach on the job.
If I had not jetted down my personal evaluation on the way "good job” was being

used, I may not have made such an effort to understand the coach's perspective

33

on reinforcement.
lntenrlm

Interviewing was a way to discover how the coaches perceived the title
"coach.“ We are each influenced by our past experiences, our reference
groups, and how important something is to us (Charon, 1979). Being a coach
may represent power to one, teacher to another, and friend to another. We are
active participants in the construction of the world around us. As such, we react
and act according to our past social experiences, our interpretation of the
meaning in each situation, and how our actions will affect us as individuals and
within our reference groups (Blumer, 1969).

In order to explain behavior, researchers must go beyond the world of
observer and enter into the world of the participant. Mead (1927) defined this
"as the distinction between the world of things on the one hand and the
consciousness we have of the world on the other hand.“ (p. 135). For this
reason, I felt that it was very important to structure the three formal interviews as
loosely as possible so that the coaches'. perceptions of the coaching experience
were reﬂected in the interviews. The coaches may have had a shared meaning
of coach, but their perceptions were inﬂuenced by their different perspectives. I
wanted to know these initial perceptions so that I could attempt to determine
how the role of ”coach“ was constructed and reconstructed as the coach went
through the season.

I expected that the coaches' meanings and perceptions of ”coach” would
be modified and changed through their interactions within the social structure of

the sport world (Snyder, 1986). At any given practice or game, the coach may

34

see the role very differently. The individual reality of the coaching experience
may lie In the perceptions, meanings and symbols socially constructed by the
coaches during the season. In order to get at their ”reality,“ my perspective had
to be absent from the interviews as much as possible. I tried to accomplish this
by loosely structuring the interviews with most of the questions coming from the
interview itself. I attempted to clarify points the coach made and focus on what
the coach found important about the experience and not just what I was
interested in pursuing. Each coach consented to have their interviews tape
recorded.

The first interview was intended to acquaint myself with the coach and to
determine the coach's initial perceptions of the coaching task. My original
intention was to conduct the ﬁrst interview prior to the coaches' conducting any
practice or being involved in a game situation. However, both coaches were
students as well as athletes during the early part of the study. This created
problems in getting extra time for interviews. I could not arrange a time with
Dick until after his second practice. I interviewed him at the elementary school
an hour prior to the first game. I interviewed Jane after the ﬁrst game at her
home. Thus, both coaches had been exposed to the children prior to the first
interview.

At the time of the first interview, Dick had conducted two organized
practices and Jane had conducted one practice and coached in one game. The
interview focused on their background in sport, their perceptions of how they
were going to accomplish the task of coaching, and what they planned to focus

on during the season. Both coaches brought up the point that the experience of

35

coaching was not what they had expected. The contents of these interviews
were used as baseline data for the rest of the study.

The second interview evolved out of the analysis of the descriptive ﬁeld
notes of practices and games, the contents of the ﬁrst interview, and informal
discussions. Prior to the interview, I jotted down notes on areas I wanted to
clarify and touch upon. I focused on patterns of behavior that had changed or
that I needed to understand from the perspective of the coach. I never wrote
down any specific questions so that the interview could be guided by the
perceptions and feelings of the coach. Dick was interviewed at a restaurant just
prior to his fourth game. Jane was interviewed at her home just after her fourth
practice. Both interviews lasted approximately 1 hour and 15 minutes.

The third interview of the coaches was conducted about 2 weeks after the
season. This interview was guided by analysis of all of the data from formal and
informal interviews and expanded field notes. The interviews focused on
tentative assertions about common themes and patterns found in the
continuous analysis. In the interviews, I also attempted to ascertain the
perceptions, meanings and feelings of the coaches about their experiences
from the beginning to the end. I engaged the coaches in discussions about
speciﬁc events which might have modiﬁed or helped to change their individual
reality of their role of coach. This interview basically tied up any loose ends and
allowed the coaches to discuss what they found troublesome, what they would
do differently, and how closely they saw themselves accomplishing their initial
goals.

I also interviewed the female assistant, Jill, because Jane only coached

36

in the ﬁrst game. The rest of the games were coached by Jill, who was also a
high school athlete. I interviewed Jill after the fourth game at her home. I had
tried to interview her sooner, but she had a part-time job after school.

Jill's interview was guided by the analysis of my ﬁeld notes pertaining to
her coaching in the games and at practices. I wanted to learn about her sport
background and her meanings, perceptions, and feelings about the role of
coach. This interview lasted about 1 hour and a half. Jill was very candid in her
discussion of the difference between what she thought coaching would be like
and how she experienced it. She also discussed how she had changed her
behavior in reaction to the actuality of situations. I interviewed Jill one ﬁnal time
2 weeks after the season ended. This interview evolved out of the analysis of
all of the data collected.

I also interviewed the male assistant, Jack. Jack attended all but one
practice. He did not play as active a role as Jill; however, I wanted to
understand how the interactions within the practices and games may have
changed all of the coaches' and assistants' perceptions, meanings and feelings.
I felt that it was important to determine if certain aspects of the social structure of
the league, team, practice, or game affected all of the coaches.

Jack's interview occurred 2 weeks after the season ended. The interview
was guided by analysis of all of the data collected. I wanted to determine Jack's
initial perceptions of coaching and the way he perceived the task after the
season. Jack was very articulate. He was more than willing to discuss his
perceptions about his experience as assistant coach. The. interview was

conducted in a local restaurant and lasted 1 hour and a half.

37

The head coaches were given sweatshirts while the assistants were
given tee shirts as a token of appreciation for their time and cooperation. The
coaches were also told they would be given a copy of the results section of the
thesis.

W

The analysis of the ﬁeld notes, the interview transcriptions, and all other
data collected was a continuous process. I had planned on transcribing the
interviews immediately after each interview. This became impossible because
of the time involved in expanding the ﬁeld notes as soon as possible for the
daily and weekly analysis of the data. The complete transcription of each
interview was delayed until I analyzed the data for the next interview. All of the
transcriptions and ﬁeld notes were expanded and transcribed prior to the ﬁnal
interview with each coach. I listened to each tape at least three times during the
course of the study and once during the writing of the thesis.

The first interview was analyzed to ascertain how the coach initially
perceived the coaching experience and on what those perceptions of coaching '
were based. The analysis of the ﬁrst tape and the ﬁeld notes of the first half of
the season generated further research questions on emerging patterns,
common themes and tentative assertions. This process of reading and
categorizing the data to develop further questions about the emerging patterns,
common themes and tentative assertions continued throughout the season and
into the ﬁnal stages of analysis.

The data were analyzed for both conﬁrming, and disconfirming evidence.

This was an important step in helping to develop strong valid assertions that

38

had enough evidence to help explain discrepant cases (Borman et al., 1986;
Erickson, 1986). As I began to develop assertions, I searched the data for
evidence in the form of descriptive vignettes and quotes from both the ﬁeldnotes
and interviews. The discrepant cases were also written up in vignettes in an
attempt to determine if the assertions had enough evidence to withstand any
disconfirming evidence.

I continually searched for evidence to support my assertions. Diagrams
were drawn in an effort to see the common themes visually. I asked myself
questions such as: What did they do? What did they say? Who cares? Am I
seeing what they see or what I want? All of these questions guided the search
for the evidence needed to substantiate the assertions made in this thesis.
Many times I felt I had a valid assertion. As I began the process of finding
quotes, vignette material, and explanations for discrepant cases, I would come
up with a totally different assertion. Frustration loomed very large at times.

However, I was motivated by the desire for this study to contribute to the
body of knowledge in the coaching education field. I wanted my thesis to be
both a good product, and a process.

Ell . | C . I I'

The ethical considerations addressed in this study were the issues of
confidentiality, the observation of practices harmful to the children, and the
hiding of my coaching background. The issue of confidentiality has been
addressed previously.

I did not expect to observe the coaches physically or psychologically

abuse the children, but the possibility of this happening did exist. I kept an open

39

mind and decided that I would handle the situation if it arose. I also considered
the problem of judging whether the coaches were doing a good job and how I
wanted to intervene for the benefit of the children. Occasionally, I did feel the
urge to help the coaches out of a bind or help them in their quest for making the
coaching and playing experience pleasant and productive for the children and
themselves. However, if I was to understand how first year volunteer coaches
experience coaching, I had to bite my tongue. Surprisingly, I sensed more the
lack of enjoyment and control the coaches experienced rather than the results
the children experienced from the neophyte coaches.

I had decided not to inform the coaches of my coaching background.
However, my policy of withholding this information created trouble in some
situations. On the one hand, I felt that l was not being fair to the coaches. l was
expecting openness from them without reciprocating the favor. On the other
hand, I felt that the coaches' knowledge of my coaching background might
result in their placing me in an evaluative or teaching role. Fortunately, this type
of research lends itself to changes in plans as the situation or informants dictate.

In her first interview with Jane, she implied that I knew more about
coaching and sport than just a student or athlete. At this point, I felt compelled
to tell her about my coaching and teaching background. Dick was informed of
my background to establish my credibility because he seemed rather vague
about his immediate feelings about a practice or a game. After receiving this
information, he was much more open and asked many questions pertaining to
drills and knowledge he could use in his own athletic endeavors. Many times,

Dick and Jane stated that it would be nice if I could give them some coaching

40

tips. I then explained my dilemma and I promised that they could ask questions
and discuss what I saw at the ﬁnal interview. At the end of the final interview,
both coaches took advantage of my promise to discuss coaching tips.

The results and discussion chapter follows. The results and discussion
chapter demonstrates that three phases of coaching behaviors emerged from
Dick and Jane encountering the tension between fun, skill development, and

outcome.

CHAPTER III

Results and Discussion

This chapter is divided into five sections labeled background
information, initial perceptions, Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3. Each section
sets the stage for the next. The background section leads to the development of
the coaches' initial perceptions concerning the task of coaching. The initial
perceptions section establishes what the coaches' initial perceptions were.
Using the initial perceptions as a baseline, Phases 1, 2, and 3 provide evidence
for the assertion that the coaches' perceptions, meanings, and behaviors are
constructed and reconstructed while dealing with the tension between skill
development, fun, and outcome.

This assertion is substantiated by presenting evidence in the form of
vignettes derived from ﬁeld notes and quotes from interviews. Through analysis
of the data, the evidence supports the assertion that three distinct, but not
separate, phases of changes in the coaches' perceptions and behaviors
emerged during the season. These changes were best exempliﬁed during
practices. For that reason, descriptions of the coaches' perceptions, meanings,
and behaviors during practices are divided into three sections, Phase 1, Phase
2, and Phase 3.

Each phase is developed at two levels. On one hand, the descriptions
allow the reader to make a comparison between the coaches. On the other

hand, the phases are presented so the reader can ascertain the relationship

41

42

between skill development, fun, and outcome and the coaches' transition to the
next phase.

During Phase 1, the initial perceptions of Dick and Jane seemed to guide
the structure and focus of their practice behaviors. The second phase evolved
from the coaches weighing their initial perceptions against the influence of
actually coaching in the first game. The third phase developed from the
coaches' assessment of what they had accomplished based on the outcome of
the previous four games. This assessment of accomplishment was based on
the realizations of the tension between their initial perceptions of what could be
accomplished and the actual experience of coaching.

The evidence within the chapter supports the assertion that the coaches
constructed and reconstructed their practice behaviors as they encountered the
social reality of coaching. Hence, a description of a typical practice was
impossible. However, the gym seemed to capture the tone or personality of
each team during practices. The tone in the gym seemed to emerge from the
social interactions that occurred in the setting. The gym seemed to actually take
on the personality of the teams.

The following background information gives a brief overview of the
experiences that inﬂuenced Dick and Jane's initial perceptions. This section
also sets the stage for the typical team personality/tone captured by the gym. A
description of the tone in the gym for each team should be useful in
understanding the social interactions within the organized practice setting and

the initial perceptions of the coaches.

43
BackomundJinmaticn
10100113016

ﬂick, Dick was a high school varsity athlete. Not only did Dick
participate in the youth basketball program as a child, he also refereed in the
league the previous year. Dick had a part-time job during the school year. His
motivation for volunteering was to coach his little brother, Matt, in his ﬁrst year of
participation in the program. Dick participated as a varsity athlete during the
ﬁrst half of the youth basketball program. Dick was coaching third and fourth
grade boys.

Jack. Dick recruited Jack as his assistant coach while the two played on
the varsity basketball team together. Like Dick, Jack had participated in the
program as a child. In addition to volunteering for the competitive part of the
program, Dick and Jack gave their assistance in the skills sessions. Jack had
also refereed in the program the year before.

Jan. Jane played in three varsity sports at the local high school. As a
child, she had participated in the youth basketball program for one year. Her
youth basketball coach was her mother. Jane had also refereed for the
program. Her motivation for coaching was to show the children the benefits of
sport participation. She was considering coaching as a career. Jane was
coaching third and fourth grade girls. Jane's high school team was competing
in weekend tournaments throughout the youth basketball season. For this
reason, Jane only attended one game. Jill, the assistant coach did all the game

coaching while Jane did all the practice coaching.

44

JjIL Jill had participated in high school athletics at the junior varsity level.
Jill had been a participant in the youth basketball program. Although Jill did not
have the extensive basketball experience of the other informants, she had
participated in youth sport and school programs until an injury prevented further
sport participation.

Summary. Dick and Jane were the focus of this study on first year
coaches. Both coaches were high school varsity athletes. Dick and Jane had
participated in the program as children and refereed the year prior to the study.
Dick, Jane, Jack and Jill not only handled the roles of student, athlete, and
coach, but they also had part time jobs.

Jill was interviewed twice because of her increased duties during games.
Jack was interviewed at the end of the season. All of the informants were
coaches within the third and fourth grade portion of the program. The following
description of the setting is specific to the gym in which the third and fourth
grade teams practiced and competed.

W. After observing two practices and one game per
week, I realized that the small elementary school gym came alive with each
practice or game. During the course of the study I experienced the gym in four
different situations. Each time, the aura or tone of the gym corresponded to the
human interactions within the setting. It was as though the gym took on the
personality of the team or event within its misshapened walls. Therefore, it
seemed that the gym took on the following four distinct personalities during the

course of the season.

45

Empty. Empty and waiting for the entrance of the eager child athletes,
the gym seemed misshapened and out of place. The width of the gym was
almost the same as the length. The ceiling was so low that if someone shot
from half court, the ball would hit the ceiling. The boundaries of the court left
very little room on the sidelines. The endlines were so close to the walls that
there were mats on the wall to protect the children. There were no bleachers,
chairs, or tables within the conﬁnes of the gym's misproportioned walls, except
on game days. However, just outside the double doors was a cart containing
folding metal chairs. On practice days, I would select a chair and place it along
the sideline for the purposes of observing the coaches.

There were three entrances to the gym: One set of double doors on the
west side of the building, a door on the south side and a door directly opposite
on the north end. The set of double doors was the main entrance for the
children, the coaches, the parents, and all other significant people. These
doors also led out to the water fountain, the place where many of the young
boys and girls escaped the drudgery of practice. During games, the water
fountain was the spot where teammates and opponents disappeared at halftime
while the coaches pondered the inconsistencies of their third and fourth grade
”athletes." Empty, the gym seemed so small, misproportioned and inadequate
for the task of staging a league.

For that very reason, there were rule changes to accommodate the size
of the gym. The court was so small that the team for a game consisted of four
people instead of the usual ﬁve. Also, if a child rebounded a ball and landed on

the line, there was no violation. This had to do with the close proximity of the

46

endline to the wall. Because of the lack of physical space on the sidelines,
opposing players had to be a least afoot away on the inbound plays. Even with
the rule changes, I asked myself, 'how were two teams of eight child "athletes,”
spectators, coaches, and ofﬁcials going to ﬁt?"

W. The empty, inanimate, quietness of the gym changed
dramatically on game days. People were two and three deep within the
framework of the double doors. Coaches and teams were waiting in the
hallway to take their turn inside the ”crackerbox" arena. There was always as
much action outside the double doors as inside the confines of the gym.
Coaches were giving last minute instructions to their teams prior to engaging in
competition. The child "athletes' were dribbling balls, chasing each other,
giggling, laughing, and occasionally peeking through double doors to gauge
when it was their turn to "play basketball.”

Inside the double doors were the sights and sounds of the gym on game
day. There were about 20 metal folding chairs along the left sideline. These
chairs were ﬁlled with parents, siblings, and fans of the children. The competing
teams were situated on the opposite sideline. The child "athletes' were sitting
on the floor and standing along the small area between the sideline and the
wall.

During the course of the games, the coaches assumed a number of
different positions along the sideline. The most familiar positions consisted of
squatting down with the children, standing tall yelling instructions, and
slouchlng against the wall.

There was a scorer's table situated in between the two teams. On the

47

table, facing the spectators, was a ﬂip card tally of the score. From my position
on the team ﬂoor, I could not see the score. However, with a stretch of the neck
or a quick run onto the court the young ”athletes' were able to give a running
commentary on their competitive status.

Even though the smallness and misproportioned features of the gym
were magnified on game days, the gym was functional. The sounds of the
children "athletes,” their family and friends, made the gym seem so alive. The
sounds of back and forth dribbling, missed shots, referees' whistles, spectators,
teammates, and coaches were enjoyed by everyone within the conﬁnes of the
"crackerbox' arena.

This was the place for the child "athlete" to try out the skills learned in the
instructional sessions and practices. The gym was full of enthusiasm for the
"athletes' attempts at playing basketball. The sounds of the fans clapping and
cheering for each child's effort echoed much more loudly than the immediate
cheer for a basket. On game days, the gym became the vehicle for the program
to showcase the results of the opportunities of participation, while on practice
days, for forty-ﬁve minutes each week, the gym reflected the distinctive sights
and sounds of the individual teams.

13mm. The gym seemed so different during practices. I was usually
the only other person in the gym besides the coaches and the children. I sat in
the center of the gym along the left sideline in a folding chair. On practice days
the gym seemed large. Large in the sense that when a small girl or boy was
asked to dribble full court the task seemed impossible. That was a long way for

such a small ”athlete" to control the ball. As the children attempted outside

48

shots and layups, the distance between the childrens' arm reach and the basket
seemed like miles.

My perceptions of the size and adequacy of the gym changed with my
observations of the social interactions of the different events within the gym. My
original perceptions of the inadequacy of the gym were based on my
experiences with normal size gyms used for adult size athletes. Therefore, my
perceptions of the setting were constructed and reconstructed dependent on the
event and the social interactions that took place at any given time.

The biggest contrast between practices and games was the manner in
which the game and practice noises echoed in the gym. Game noises seemed
necessary, functional, and easy to receive. Practice noise was much different. I
perceived the practice noise as much more painful, distracting, and agitating.
There was also a distinct difference in the personality of the gym during Dick
and Jane's practices.

Dick had eight boys on the team. The practices were held on a week
night. Dick's younger brother, Matt, was on the team. One of Dick's practices
was cancelled because of a school holiday. During the ﬁrst half of the Season,
Dick and Jack were still actively competing at the local high school.

The practices usually began at least seven or eight minutes late. This
was due to the slowness of the boys showing up for practice. Normally, Dick
and Matt were the ﬁrst to arrive. They would shoot baskets while waiting for
Jack and the other boys. The interaction between Dick, his brother and any

other boys would change upon Jack's arrival. At that time, Dick and Jack would

49

stake out a basket to shoot, dunk, and play at until there was enough boys to
begin practice. Some nights the boys knew not to interrupt the interaction
between the coaches. Other nights, Dick and Jack were more than willing to
allow the boys at “their basket.” Many times I would observe Dick and Jack
playing one on one with the boys. When Dick decided that there were enough
boys to begin, everyone was lined up for layups.

The individual child's attention span for a particular drill seemed to be
two times through a drill. Then the boys would begin to giggle, laugh loudly,
tease, run out of line, and tackle each other. The team attention span for the
entire practice was about 20 minutes. After that time, the only thing that seemed
to keep their attention was playing. This ”playing" consisted of chasing each
other, giggling, and talking while they attempted each and every new drill
introduced. As a bystander and former coach, I found the typical tone in the
gym to be distracting.

The misproportioned walls did not absorb the noise of the boys' yelling,
screaming, laughing, jumping, and tackling. The noise bounced from wall to
wall. There were times when I wondered if the boys were going to start
bouncing off the walls.

The practices always began with layups. Dick would lean against the
wall under the basket and correct the boys in the formation of the drill or their
technique. The boys seemed to get a bit of the pro-practice energy under
control during the layups. The typical order of events, after the layups, was to
work on certain basic skills, offensive or defensive schemes and end in a

scrimmage situation.

50

During Dick's practices, the tone in the gym fluctuated from the boys'
eager anticipation of learning "basketball" to the antsy, noisy behavior of young
children unable to focus their attention on the tasks that Dick felt were important.
There were many times that from the standpoint of a former coach, I wondered if
the boys were paying attention to the drills. Other times, as a mother, I realized
that there may be a contradiction between dedicated athletes and third and
fourth grade boys. As a researcher, I wished that the noise and activity levels
weren‘t so distracting and conducive to a general feeling of agitation.
Wises

Jane had eight girls on her team. Jane's practices were in the
afternoons, right after school. Jane's assistant, Jill, was an acquaintance from
school. Usually, Jill and Jane arrived about the same time. Generally, some of
the girls would arrive before either of the coaches. Up until the last practice,
Jane was still participating in a varsity sport at the high school. Therefore, Jane
only coached in the ﬁrst game. She was prepared to coach the ﬁnal game, but
the game was cancelled.

Jane organized and directed all of the practice sessions. Jill conducted
drills within practices based on directions from Jane. In game situations, Jill
was on her own. When the girls were split up at opposite baskets, each end of
the gym took on a different tone, dependent on the coach and the group of girls.
The overall attention span of the team seemed to border on the same 20 minute
limit of Dick's team. However, individually, the girls seemed to pay attention to
the drills for longer periods of time. There were certain individuals who would

talk and giggle with each other while in line. Typically, with the exception of one

51

practice, the girls did not giggle, laugh, yell, and scream throughout the drills
and scrimmages.

The noises, created by Dick's team's lack of attention, seemed like a
group decision to see how loud and rowdy the gym could become.
Comparatively, the noises of Jane's team seemed like individual or dyadic
decisions to decrease the boredom of watching others do the drills.

The tone of the setting was important in that it laid the groundwork for
understanding some of the different interactions within the practices. Hopefully,
I have drawn a picture depicting the team personality tones with the gym setting.
These tones helped to set the stage for understanding the coaches'
experiences. The tones in the gym were used to describe the teams because of
the dynamic nature of practice behaviors and stnrcture. The personality that the
gym took on during each teams' practice was basically stable throughout the 7
weeks.

The information in the previous background biographies will be useful to
the reader in understanding the development of the coaches' initial perceptions. '
The entire structure of the results section is built on and held together by the
development and understanding of the persistence of the initial perceptions.

Dick and Jane had very similar sport participation experiences.
Nevertheless, many of those experiences were perceived differently by each of
the coaches. The different perceptions for seemingly similar experiences
provide evidence for George Herbert Mead's (1927) assertion that one's
perception of an object or event is affected by one's social experiences within a

particular reference group. Dick and Jane's initial perceptions, meanings, and

52

goals were constructed through the social experiences briefly discussed in this
section.

The ﬁrst interview of each coach was conducted within the ﬁrst 2 weeks
of practices. At that time, Dick and Jane discussed their initial perceptions,
meanings, and goals concerning the task of coaching. The next section
establishes the relationship between the background information of the
coaches and their initial perceptions about coaching.

I 'I' IE I'

This section of the chapter summarizes Dick and Jane's initial
perceptions and meanings concerning the task of coaching. As the evidence
from the first interview demonstrates, these perceptions and meanings were
directly influenced by the past sport experiences of the coaches, outlined in the
previous background section. In the same way that the background section laid
the groundwork for understanding the basis of the initial perceptions, this
section helps to develop the foundation of the actual practice structure and
behaviors during Phase 1. Not only do the initial perceptions of the coaches
create Phase 1, they also play an important role in the construction and
reconstruction of Phases 2 and 3. Dick and Jane had similar overt experiences
within the sport context. However, as this section illustrates, those seemingly
similar experiences were often interpreted much differently.

Dick and Jane entered into the individual reality of coaching with beliefs
about the task of coaching. These beliefs were based on perceptions and
meanings developed through past sport experiences. Both coaches were

varsity athletes, had played in the youth league, and had refereed the previous

53

year. The following evidence supports the assertion that these past sport
experiences directly influenced the initial perceptions of the coaches.

As shown by the statement below, Dick's perceptions of what it would be
like to specifically coach third and fourth graders was based on his past
experience as a referee.

I knew what it would be like from reffing, you know, the
gym is gonna be packed with parents. And I knew they'd
go all over and there wouldn 't be any organization. 80 I
was pretty much looking fonvard, ya know, not looking
forward, but I knew what I was going into coaching third
and fourth graders.

(Transcription of taped inten/iew 2/11/89)

Refereeing third and fourth graders led Dick to the perception that there
might be a lack of organization when working with the children. In addition to a
lack of organization, Dick recognized that the boys might not learn much. Not
only was this perception based on his exposure to third and fourth grade
athletes during refereeing, but also his experiences in the same youth sport
program. The only youth sport coach Dick perceived as having made any
impression on him was a young man who was a varsity athlete at the time.

..... that year they were 24- 1. So that was great and I
ended up going to see them play in the regional. And that
was fun, but he didn't really make an impact on teaching
me things. ldon't remember anything.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

The coach clearly made an impression on Dick. However, Dick could not
remember learning any skills from this coach. He remembered one coach, a
varsity athlete, like himself, who he believed had basketball skill and

knowledge. However, he could not remember learning anything from this

54

coach.

This experience may have influenced Dick's perceptions that even
though he had the knowledge, the children might not understand or care about
what he planned to teach.

Ah, I knew I could teach it personally, I didn't know
whether they would understand to where they'd care. 0r
whether I'd teach them and they'd do it in practice and
leave practice and forget about it.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Based on his past experiences refereeing third and fourth graders, Dick
thought that he had the ability and an idea about what it would be like to coach
children of this age.

Dick also believed that he had the knowledge base which would enable
him to determine what to teach the children. This assertion is supported by
Dick's process of selecting drills during practice sessions. The high school
coach had given the program coaches a list of skills and drills that he felt would
be useful in developing the childrens' basketball progress. Dick used drills from
the list. However, he believed that some of the drills were too advanced and .
that the 45 minute practice did not allow for efficient use of the drills on the list.
Dick's decision to pick and choose from the list was based on his own athletic
participation.

The list has a lot of things I’ve been doing. But I pretty
much know from going through and playing basketball
what they should learn and what people taught me.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/1 1/89)

The decision concerning what the children should learn was based on

Dick's perceptions developed through sport participation. He exposed the

55

children to skills on the list; however, the selection process was based on his
perceptions of what the children should learn.

Dick's initial perceptions of coaching youth sport made him question the
willingness and capability of the children to learn. He believed that he had the
ability and knowledge to coach the children. He wanted the children to learn.
Yet, there was a tinge of doubt as to whether anything would be learned.

..... ljust want to teach them something. Most of all not...l
think it'll just end up just being they'll remember me as
their coach. Maybe because I was on the varsity team. Or
because, I don't think they'll remember much that I taught
gigscription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Dick perceived that the boys would remember him, even if they did not
remember what he taught them. These perceptions seem to be based on Dick's
past experience with the only youth sport coach that he could remember, a high
school varsity athlete, like himself. When asked if he wanted them to get more
out of the youth sport experience than he did, Dick's response reflected the
desire but without much hope.

ldo, but I don't think they will. Cause ah, even 7th & 8th
grade they expected us to know some stuff, but it was
pretty much starting over in 7th grade.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

The transition from youth sport level to junior high level basketball did not
seem to have been smooth for Dick. His concern of whether the boys would
learn more than he did seemed to be inﬂuenced by his recollections of what it
took to be prepared for the 7th grade level. This experience may have

influenced his reason for volunteering.

56

Dick was coaching to fulﬁll a promise to his younger brother, Matt. Dick
had promised to coach Matt during his first year of participation. Dick was not
considering coaching beyond this year. Jane, on the other hand, was
considering coaching as a possible career.

Jane entered into the task of coaching with many of the same general
experiences as Dick within the sport context. However, her initial perceptions of
what it would be like to coach third and fourth graders was much different.

One reason Jane volunteered was because she was considering the
possibility of a coaching career. The decision to volunteer was also inﬂuenced
by Jane's perceptions of the task of coaching while in her role as a referee.

Um, last year when lreffed, lthought it (coaching) looked
like fun. And a couple of friends of mine coached and they
just looked like they were having a lot of fun .....
(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Jane volunteered based on the perception of coaching that she
developed while refereeing. Coaching looked like it would be fun. Jane
clariﬁed what would be fun about coaching by explaining what she felt she had
to offer to the children.

..... know this will probably be my last year to play
basketball, unless, I get Ohio State. I thought if I could
take some of what I've learned and some of my.... how
much fun I've had and show them how much fun they can
have, I could take my experiences and kind of start them
off on their way.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Jane perceived that the fun part of coaching would be making the girls'
initial sport experience enjoyable and worthwhile. Jane wanted to give the girls

a good sport foundation.

57

Unlike Dick, Jane felt that she could accomplish quite a bit during the
course of the season.

I had a vision that I could get a lot done. And that I could, I
could get a lot done by the end of the season.

They would know a lot of knowledge.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Jane expected to get a lot accomplished. She had refereed third and
fourth grade children and thought coaching would be fun and rewarding. She
planned on giving the children a solid and enjoyable foundation from her
knowledge based on her past athletic participation. Jane, like Dick, had the
same recollection of not remembering what, if anything, she learned as a youth
sport participant. This is evidenced by Jane's recollection of what skills her
youth sport coach focused on.

....And I have no idea what she focused on. I really don't
remember at all.
(Transcripﬁ'on of taped interview 2/13/89)

Jane could not remember any skills that she had learned from her youth
sport coach. Even though Jane, like Dick, could not remember anything she
learned at the youth sport level, her perceptions of what she could accomplish
were much different from those of Dick's. Jane expected that the children would
learn something from the experience. Dick wanted the children to learn, but
seemed to expect that they would not.

They had both played in the program as youngsters, refereed the year
before, and were playing high school varsity sports. Although their perceptions

of what they could accomplish coaching third and fourth graders were very

different, their views on what they wanted to accomplish and teach the children

58

were very similar.
In their ﬁrst interviews both coaches expressed their desire to teach the

children the basics. Dick's initial perceptions of what he should teach focused

not only on the basics, but shooting and defense.

Well, I thought there was a lot of stuff you had to teach
them; to shoot layups, and do the basics. You kno w, shoot
a ....what I call a set shot for them. Teach them some

defense.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/1 1/89)

The basics, layups, and defense were key skills Dick perceived should
be taught to the children. Dick continued by explaining what he, as a coach,

planned to accomplish.

What I hope to accomplish ? I hope to, ah, when they
leave....when I'm done coaching, that they know the
basics. I don't think you can really teach these young kids
anymore than that where they are really paying attention.
I just hope they remember how to play defense and
defensive stance, shooting techniques and...
(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Dick wanted to teach the children the basics and defense. Yet, he still
had reservations about their ability to learn what he introduced to them.
However, if they were to remember anything, defense was an important factor to
Dick.

Another factor that Dick perceived as being an important aspect of
participation for the children was teamwork.

Um, teamwork, you know, working with the team. This is
pretty much the ﬁrst time they have really done that, other
than if they've played peg ball. Teamwork is probably the
most important.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

59

Teamwork for Dick was especially important because this league may be
the boys' ﬁrst experience with a team. The boys should learn how to function
within the framework of a team.

Many youth sport coaches are criticized because people feel that the
coaches place too much of emphasis on winning. Dick's response to how he
would handle wins and losses was expressed in his desire for the children to
have fun.

I think the most important for me is that they have fun.
Especially at this age level. And even at ﬁfth/sixth grade
’(TZSiiscription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Fun, along with teamwork, were very important aspects of participation
for Dick, and that seemed to stem from the boys' young age.

Dick's initial goals were to teach the boys basic skills, defense,
teamwork, and make sure they had fun. These goals closely paralleled the
initial goals of Jane. ' However, Jane voiced the desire for a much stronger
emphasis on the basics in an informal discussion after her ﬁrst practice.

Offense and defense are of no use, if the girls can't pass, dribble, or
shoot.
(Field notes 2/9/89)

Jane felt that the foundation of basketball was the ability to be competent
in passing, dribbling, and shooting. The fundamentals or basics to Jane
consisted of not only basketball skills but the ability of the girls to have some
grasp about the game of basketball.

Basics, let me see! Ah, just like dribbling, defense, basics,

ldon't know just the basics of the game. Gosh, that's hard.
Just to have them understand the game, like say they're

6O

watching T. V. They could say, hey, they're on defense
now .....
(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Jane perceived a need to develop the girls' overall knowledge of the
game of basketball. She wanted them to have an understanding of the game.
Jane seemed to have clear objectives for the girls.

Probably that they've learned the basics; how to play the
game; what to do in certain situations. Like, that they had
fun. That they like me as a coach and that they learned
from me. And not that I was just a playmate.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Jane wanted to be remembered for what she taught the girls. Jane also
felt that the girls having fun was very important. The girls would hopefully learn
skills and develop a general basketball knowledge base.

Throughout their interviews both coaches expressed an interest in the
children having fun and learning the basics. What constituted the basics varied,
but only slightly.

Jane's statement of wanting the children to remember her as ”coach"
versus playmate seemed to best reﬂect the feelings of both her and Dick. While
deﬁning what ”coach" meant to them, they both expressed more respect for and
confidence in coaches who were disciplinarians, not "nice guys." Dick's
description of a previous coach exempliﬁes this point.

Mr. Jones, he's, ldon't look up to him. He's a teacher at
the high school also. He's really a nice guy. You

know, funny, but .....

(Transcription of taped interview 2/1 1/89)

Mr. Jones was a nice guy. He was funny. However, Dick did not

consider Mr. Jones a good coach. Dick continued by explaining why he did not

61

think Mr. Jones was a good coach.

....He knows a lot, but he doesn't enforce it.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Dick explained that enforcing meant that the coach was strict enough that
people did what the coach wanted, "or else.” The same rationale was used by
Jane to explain why she believed that a previous coach did not deserve his job.

. A ”good coach“ maintained the attention and respect of their athletes.
Both Dick and Jane had played at the youth sport, junior high, and high school
level. Through their experiences of being coached, they developed the
perception that a good coach was someone who not only had the knowledge,
but could also make the athletes do what she/he wanted.

Another important and similar goal of the coaches was to make sure that
all of the children played equally during games. This was a league program
policy, but both had very strong feelings about this coaching task. Dick's
analogy of third and fourth grade basketball probably best expressed the
feelings of both coaches.

Ya know from reffing, I know how they play. Nobody sets
picks at their age. So, I 'm just gonna keep them in there,
keep them fresh. And make sure everybody plays the
same amount.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Dick did not seem to expect much from the boys in game situations.
These perceptions were based on Dick's observations of the skill level of third
and fourth graders while he refereed. Thus, he felt it important to play them
equally.

In summary, Dick and Jane continually voiced opinions about coaching

62

which were based on their past experiences within the sport context. They had
different initial perceptions about what it would be like to coach third and fourth
graders. However, the two most important things they wanted to accomplish
were to teach the children the basics and make sure the children had fun.
Subsidiary goals focused on playing the children equally, teamwork, general
basketball knowledge, and that somehow they would be remembered as a
"coach."

The initial perceptions outlined in this section establish how the coaches
perceived the coaching task and what they planned to accomplish. The
evidence supports the assertion that these initial perceptions were based on
Dick and Jane's experiences as athletes and referees.

Dick and Jane's ﬁrst practices were very similar in structure and focus.
But, as they travelled through the actual experience of coaching, the content of
the practices shifted. Different skills seemed important. Not only was the
difference in structure and focus noticeable between coaches, but also, from
practice to practice for each coach.

In both cases, there were three distinct phases of change. As shown by
the following timeline below, the first phase for both coaches consiSted of
practices prior to the ﬁrst game. The transition from the second to third phase

for each coach began with the fifth practice.

63

 

 

 

Time Line
rum
m1
PHASE:
mo 225:; sail and
DICKPipzeipaez P4e4esespeztm
JANE P1 G‘l P2 G2 P3 G3 P4 G4 P5 G5 ”P: 4/1 2‘ "7”" 9
PHASEI PHASEZ PHASE:
for 2nd
mm W
m: 3/7
GI GUM
P: Practice
Figure 1

The first phase reflected Dick and Jane's initial perceptions of the task of
coaching. The transition from Phase 1 to Phase 2 began as the coaches
experienced coaching in game situations. In the second phase both coaches
seemed to focus on offense without any concern for the basics or defense. The
third phase seemed to transcend from the coaches' perceptions of their success
or failure within the coaching role. These evaluations seemed to be based on
their initial perceptions of the coaching task and the effects of the focus of
practices on the outcome of games. The focus of Dick's last two practices .was
to keep the boys busy. Jane, on the other hand, fell back on her initial goal of
teaching the girls the basics.

The next section describes how those initial perceptions about the task of

64

coaching were actually carried out by the coaches in Phase 1. Phase 1
consisted of practices prior to the coaches experiencing the influences of the
outcome orientation of competitive games.

Analysis of the data from observations of all the practices and games,
combined with the interviews, support the assertion that the changes between
phases were inﬂuenced by the tension between skill development, fun, and the
outcome orientation of games.

In order to substantiate this claim, I have structured the descriptions of the
phases on two levels. First, I describe the phases through a comparison of the
practice behaviors and structures between coaches. Second, I address the
issues of skill development, fun, and outcome by comparing and contrasting the
issues as they were experienced by each coach.

The evidence presented in the following section will substantiate the
assertion that Phase 1 was the portion of the season when the coaches' initial
perceptions of the task of coaching directly influenced the focus of practices.
Dick and Jane believed that they had the knowledge and the ability to
accomplish their goals. In Phase 1, Dick and Jane acted on their initial
perceptions and focused their practices on basic skills, defense, and general
basketball knowledge. The first practice of each coach reflected what the
coaches themselves had expressed as important skills, drills, and areas of
emphasis in the task of coaching.

EbaseJ.
Prior to encountering the task of coaching in a game situation, Dick had

two practices, Jane only one. As shown earlier, Dick wanted the children to

65

learn the basics and defensive techniques. The focus of his ﬁrst two practices
substantiate the importance Dick placed on these areas. Most of the 45 minutes
of each practice were spent on basic skills such as passing, shooting, dribbling,
and rebounding.

Explanations of how to execute a skill were detailed and complemented
by Dick or Jack demonstrating the proper technique. An example of the
emphasis placed on the execution of basic skills was in Dick's instructions
during a passing drill in the first practice. The following is an excerpt from the
field notes describing Dick's use of verbal instructions with visual models to
teach the bounce pass.

W. The boys were doing layups when Dick called them all
together at half court. As they gathered around Dick, he explained that
they were going to learn to pass. According to Dick they needed to learn
to pass, "because it's an important part of the game.“ He then told the
boys to line up. As the boys lined up opposite each other lengthwise
along the court, Dick and Jack positioned themselves in the same
manner at half court.

As Dick started talking about the bounce pass, the boys became quiet
and seemed to be tuned into Dick's explanation. “The bounce pass is .
thrown to bounce 3/4 of the way to the person, so it bounces up waist
high.” He continued by instructing the boys on how to release the ball.
”The pass comes from the chest and you have your thumbs down." While
Dick verbally explained how to execute the bounce pass, he carefully
held the ball at his chest trying to make sure the boys could see the
correct hand positioning. He then threw a bounce pass to Jack, verbally
emphasizing the correct technique. "Thumbs down, wrists out, and 3/4 of
the way.“

(Field notes 1/30/89)

During Phase 1, Dick was diligent in integrating physical demonstrations
with verbal explanations of how a skill or drill was to be executed. The vignette

clearly demonstrates Dick's interest in teaching the boys basic skills. In

66

addition, Dick attempted to give the boys a reason for learning the pass. After
each boy attempted the bounce pass, Dick introduced the chest and overhead
passes in the same manner.

Other skills introduced in Dick's ﬁrst two practices were the defensive
stance, dribbling, shuffling, free throws, rebounding, and jump ball situations.
These skills were emphasized in the ﬁrst two practices because Dick perceived
them to be important in getting the boys prepared for their ﬁrst game. This was
reflected in Dick's discussion of what drills he selected based on the limited
time had during practices.

....So I pretty much skimmed it and picked out a few things
I thought were important for the ﬁrst game. So we knew
what we were doing.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

What Dick skimmed was the suggested list of drills drawn up by the high
school varsity coach. Dick perceived that he had the knowledge, through past
athletic experience, to select the skills that would best prepare the boys for their
first game. Similarly, Jane based her selections of appropriate drills on her past
athletic experiences. In an informal discussion after her ﬁrst practice, I asked
Jane why she had selected the dribble/pivot drill. She explained that she had
designed the drill in the summer to develop her own skills in an effort to become
a varsity starter.

The framework of Dick's ﬁrst two practices focused on layups, basic skills,
and the pick. The last 5 or 10 minutes were for scrimmaging. During Phase 1,

most of Dick's practice time was spent on basic skills and defensive drills.

A small portion of time in the first practice was spent introducing the

67

offensive concept of the pick. The pick, as Dick explained to the boys, consisted
of an offensive player blocking the path of the defensive player who was
guarding the ballhandler. The ballhandler then dribbles around the blocked
defensive person and goes to the basket. The key points Dick emphasized for
proper execution of the pick were that the ballhandler go in the direction of the
pick and that the pick be stationary. The point of the pick was to free the
ballhandler up for an easy layup.

Dick demonstrated the pick maneuver with Jack over and over in the ﬁrst
two practices. Not only did the coaches verbally explain correct execution of the
drill, but they demonstrated it, physically positioned the boys, and walked the
boys through drills. To remind the boys to use the pick, Dick would yell out
statements in the games and scrimmages such as, ”ball side pick,” “use the
pick," "ball-pick.”

Repeated observations of these attempts to teach the boys the pick
suggested that it was a difficult maneuver for the boys to comprehend and
execute. The following vignette provides evidence to support this assertion.

We. Dick had reminded the boys that it was crucial
for the ballhandler to dribble in the direction the pick is set. The boys
were set up in a four on four, half court situation to work on setting picks.
. Prior to giving the boys the ball, Dick reminded the boys how to set the
pick and to dribble on the side where the pick was set.

The first time the boys attempted to run the drill there was a state of
chaos. All of the offensive players were chasing the defensive people.
They were all trying to block the path of the defensive players without
anyone noticing where the ballhandler was on the court. Dick stopped
the drill and demonstrated the correct way to set a pick. He handed the
ball to the ballhandler and mayhem broke out. The boys were chasing
each other, laughing, yelling, and seemingly not interested in the concept
of basketball, let alone the pick. Dick tried to get them to stop, but the

68

boys were still running wild. All of a sudden he said, ”when I say stop,
you should stop right there!“ Dick's voice was ﬁrm. The boys stopped
running and chasing, but they continued to talk and laugh amongst
themselves. As the boys talked, Dick reminded them to only set a pick on
the person guarding the ballhandler. He emphasized that the point of the
drill was to get the ballhandler open to make it easier to score.

(Field notes 2/6/89)

This vignette describes a situation where the pick was never set.
However, when a proper pick was set, the ball handler would inevitably dribble
in the wrong direction, shoot, or pass. The main focus of the pick was to free the
ballhandler up for an easy basket. Dick's intent was not just to score, but to
score with a layup. Dick attempted to impress upon the boys the importance of
the pick. The following statement, along with the ”too advanced" vignette,
support the assertion that Dick was not focusing only on the points, but the
process of scoring with a close, easy shot, the layup. Dick constantly prefaced
his insistence on setting picks with an explanation of "why.”

The object is to get around the man and go to the basket for a layup.
(Field notes 1/30/89, 2/6/89)

During pick drills and scrimmages, Dick almost always prefaced his.
corrective feedback with the intent of the pick, the layup. Dick felt that the layup
was the easiest and highest percentage shot for the boys to attempt. He
continually reminded them that, even if they made a basket with a longer shot,
that they should have used the pick to get Open for the layup. The importance of
the layup was exempliﬁed in Dick's explanation of what the boys would work on
during their third practice.

I know for sure they will be doing their layups and stuff. That's

important to me. Layups, the easiest shot in the game. And it
seems to me they should get more layups than anything.

69
(Field notes 2/18/89)

Dick expressed his belief that more scoring should come from layups
than other shots. Dick acted on his perceptions of the importance of the layup.
Half court right and left hand layups were the first drill the boys did at every
practice.

The boys were continually reprimanded for taking longer shots and not
using the pick for a closer shot. Getting open to score was the point of the
offense. However, Dick consistently focused on a particular way to score, the
layup.

The pick was to be the team's offense, as evidenced by the following
vignette of the team discussion at the end of the second practice.

W. Dick called the boys to the center, "Up to middle.” The

boys noisily gathered around Dick in the center of the court. He told them

they were doing a good job. He then explained that the reason that he
had introduced the pick was to give the boys an offense for the game.

The boys were told to meet on Saturday at 1:00 for their ﬁrst game.

(Field notes 2/6/89)

The message was clear. The pick was introduced with competition in
mind. The first game was in four days. Even though most of the practice
focused on drills, the pick was the only skill mentioned in conjunction with the
upcoming game. As Dick was setting the stage for phase two, Jane was just
about to have her ﬁrst and only practice prior to the ﬁrst game.

Jane's ﬁrst practice focused even more on correct technique of basic
skills. Jane, like Dick, combined verbal explanations of proper execution with a

physical demonstration of the desired skill. However, she monitored the

childrens' execution of the skill much more closely than Dick. The following

70

diagram and vignette provide an example of Jane's awareness of the girls'

execution attempts during the dribble/pivot drill.

Dribble, PIvot Drlll

START
”ccrrcm

'- TTTTTT I
| REPEAT
I AGAIN

 

IE

 

 

 

o
“I
o
l E3
2nd -
Stotlonl. _ ._ _ _ 9.9.99. station
coon @JUMP 0 JUMP
STOP STOP
9 r PIVOT
NO J3 JII'I
GI GII'II
JI I JIII
Figure 2

Wm. Jane directed each girl to pick up a be". As the girls
gathered around, Jane said, “What I want you to do now is get in a line
behind me. Follow what I do. Do you remember the jump shot and
pivot?“ One or two girls called out 'yesl" The rest of the girls were silent.
After the girls scrambled in line behind Jane, she turned and said, "watch
me."

As the diagram above shows, Jane stood halfwaybetween the endline
and halfcourt. The girls were lined behind her. She began dribbling
toward halfcourt. As she reached halfcourt. she executed a jump stop

71

and pivoted in the direction of the opposite sideline. Jane's head turned
toward the girls and she reminded them, ”keep your dribble!" Jane
continued the drill until she was back where she started.

Jane went to the front of the line and began with the girls following. As
she got to halfcourt. she realized the girls were not doing the drill
properly. Jane observed each girl at the first pivot station. It the girl did
not execute properly, Jane would combine a physical demonstration with
a verbal explanation of the pivot. The girl would be asked to try it again.
If she was unable to execute, Jane would place the girl's body back into
the start position and pivot her.

Jane went through the same procedure with every girl at every station. At
the final station, one girl attempted to sneak by after an unsuccessful
jump shot and pivot. Jane yelled, "hey, hey, get back here." Jane
explained to all of the girls that they had to pivot off their left foot. She
then positioned the girl and she successfully completed the pivot. Each
girl ran through the whole drill three times.

(Field notes 2/9/89)

Jane monitored the progress of each girl in the jump, stop/ pivot drill.
She went to great lengths to explain the drill at an individual and group level.

Jane had already expressed her initial perception that the execution of
the basics was the foundation of offense and defense. Jane's actions reflected
her belief in the importance of the basic skills. The following vignette supports
this assertion.

Wm. Jane called the girls together at center court. One
girl came to the gathering with the ball in her hand. Jane asked for the
ball. The girl threw the ball to Jane with one hand and it landed at Jane's
feet. Very ﬁrmly and directed at the girl, Jane asked, "What kind of pass
was that?“ Then she looked at the whole group and continued in a ﬁrm
tone, ”Every time you throw the ball, I want correct form on the pass!”
Then she grasped the ball and held it in both hands at her chest. At the
same time she reminded the girls of the proper techniques, "thumbs
down, palms out, and then throw from the chest.” Jane then
demonstrated the correct hand position and threw the ball across the
court to Jill.

(Field notes 2/9/89)

72

Jane expected the girls to use the proper technique whenever they were
in the gym. The signiﬁcance of basic skills for both coaches was established in
the section concerning initial perceptions. The previous two vignettes support
the contention that Jane's behaviors in this phase reﬂected her initial perception
about the basics being the foundation of basketball.

' Jane introduced the girls to dribbling, passing, the shuffle, and defensive
drills. Her explanations and demonstrations were all very detailed. She
observed and corrected the technique of every girl, in every drill. Even though
the girls were attentive and receptive to the drills, they kept asking when they
could ”play." Finally, in the last 5 minutes of practice, Jane told them they could
scrimmage. As evidenced by the next vignette, there was a slight problem. The
girls did not know the difference between offense and defense. They did not

know how to "play“ basketball.
Wm. Jill pointed to four girls and said, ”you four,

over there and you four over there.” Jill and Jane yelled, "let's play." The
girls just stand there. Jane and Jill looked at each other and laughed.
Jane asked, ”How many know what offense and defense are?” Only two
or three girls raised their hands. Jane explained, "offense is when your
team has the ball." Jill continued with, ”defense is when you guard
someone from the other team.“

Jane pointed to a basket and told one group of four, “they will score
here.” One girl chimes in, “you try and keep the other team from scoring
points.“ Jane and Jill organized the girls so that each girl was across from
the person she was guarding. They explained to each girl whether she ,
was on offense or defense. Jane handed the ball to an offensive player
and told everyone to try it again. Now all the girls chased, giggled, and
grabbed at the girl with the ball.

(Field notes 2/9/89)

First, the girls did not understand the concept of scrimmage. Then, after

73

repeated explanations of offense and defense, the girls still did not understand
which team they were on and when they were on offense and defense. The rest
of the time was spent on starting and stopping the scrimmage attempts. Each
time play was stopped, Jane or Jill would ask each girl whether she was on
offense or defense. They also spent a good deal of time trying to control the
girls' chasing, giggling, and talking while they were attempting to ”play." Their
first game was two days away. During those last 5 minutes, Jane and Jill
repeatedly looked at each other, shook their heads, and laughed. What else
could they do? The ﬁrst game was only two days away.

With two days until the ﬁrst game, Dick and Jane were still organizing
practices based on their initial perceptions of the coaching task. Both coaches
introduced drills for shooting, dribbling, passing, and defensive skills. The
evidence presented through interviews and vignettes, thus far, supports the
assertion that the coaches' initial perceptions of the coaching task directly
inﬂuenced the focus of practices.

Embedded within the evidence is the emergence of the tension between
fun and skill development. Jane and Jill laughed at the fact that the girls did not
know basketball. During those last 5 minutes, the girls playfulness seemed to
interfere with Jane's plans to work on offensive and defensive skills. As the
behavior of the girls deviated from the focus ofthe scrimmage, Jane
would stop the action and settle the girls down. Much like the boys, the noise
and activity would only subside long enough to regain energy.

A good example of the emergent tension between fun and skill

development was the "too advanced vignette.” While Dick was focusing on

74

correct execution of the pick, the boys were laughing, yelling, chasing each
other and being verbally and physically active. This type of behavior occurred
during most drills. The boys seemed to enjoy playing around. Many times the
activity level of the boys became very distracting for me. From my perspective,
the boys were being rowdy, rambunctious, noisy, and inattentive to the drills
and they seemed to be having fun.

These periods of playfulness seemed consistent with the general tone of
the gym established in the background section. However, the increased activity
levels seemed to conﬂict with what the coaches were trying to accomplish. Dick
and Jack constantly attempted to slow the boys down, but the noise and activity
level would calm just enough to regain strength and then explode as evidenced
in the "too advanced” vignette. The tension between the coaches' drills and
boys' thrills continued until the last two practices, when Dick and Jack virtually
eliminated drills.

l was surprised that the coaches allowed the attention of the boys and
girls to deviate so much from the focus of the drill or activity. My surprise was
based on my recollection of both coaches' initial perceptions of discipline within
the task of coaching. Both coaches had expressed surprise and
disappointment in previous coaches' inability to control their athletes'
behaviors. The following statement describing Jane's dismay at a former
coach's inability to communicate and maintain control demonstrates both
coaches' initial perceptions on the importance of discipline.

Yea, he probably knows the sport, but he doesn't know
how to pass on the sport. And pass on what you're

75

suppose to do. And pass on techniques and plays to do.
He was just really loose and just let us, let people get
away with murder. No discipline, he just, in my mind, it
makes me wonder how he ever got the job.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Both coaches felt that a good coach made the ”athletes' do what the
coach wanted. Jane believed that her former coach had the knowledge, but he
was too loose. He was not ﬁt for the job.

Dick's assessment of his discipline responsibilities was representative of
both coaches' initial perceptions concerning discipline.

Personally, I mean, I want to discipline them on the whole
court. I feel that you know that any time, even in the
wannups. When they are shooting around and stuff.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Dick expressed his desire and plan to maintain control from the time the
boys entered the gym until they left. Jane had also expressed the same desire.

They both wanted the children to learn the basics and have fun. And yet,
the childrens' fun seemed to interfere with the coaches' basic drills. Dick, Jane,
Jill, and Jack expressed an inability to comprehend the childrens' lack of
seriousness. Dick's statement best typified the coaches' surprise at the
childrens' behavior.

Honestly, you know, I thought they'd pay attention more. They
didn't. You know it. Kinda, their dad probably told them, your
gonna be shootin' and havin' fun.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Dick expected the boys to be more attentive. He guessed that they may
have been more concerned with fun. Jane had also commented on the fact that

the children were not as serious as she expected. Dick and Jane's perceptions

76

of a difference in goals between them and the children may have been created
by Dick and Jane's recollections of their youth sport experience. Both were
convinced that they had been much more serious and attentive when they
played youth sport.

They wanted the children to have fun, but they also wanted to develop
the childrens' skills. However, as evidenced by the following statements from
Dick and Jane's ﬁrst interview, the coaches realized that some tensions existed
between fun and keeping the childrens' attention during skill development drills.

Jane found it difficult to find things that seemed like disciplinary
measures to the girls.

...what do you do? you can't...l mean, what do they
dislike? They've got so much energy and stuff. And the
only thing I can do is keep them out of a game. Which you
really can 't do. They're kids. This is, they pay for this.
And I'm their coach and you can't do that.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Jane was frustrated by her inability to ﬁnd something that would punish
the girls for their messing around behaviors. How could she control their.
attention during practice if they enjoyed things that she considered
punishment?

Dick's explanation concerning the problem that he was having in
controlling the attention of the children summarizes the major stumbling block
for both coaches in Phase 1.

If they are gooﬁng off, I'll, you know, goofing off for third
and fourth graders might be having fun for them. So lkind
of have to make the separation from them having fun and

gooﬁng off.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/1 1/89)

77

Dick wanted them to have fun. He wanted them to pay attention during
the drills. However, Dick believed that he must be careful in maintaining control.
There seemed to be a ﬁne line where maintaining the children's attention might
eliminate fun. What was fun to the children seemed to get in the way of drills.
Jane was wondering if there were any measures the girls disliked enough to
maintain control. Dick tried to separate goofing off from fun before trying to
control the boys' attentions.

On the one hand, the coaches expressed the belief that they must
maintain control in order to accomplish their goal of teaching the basics. On the
other hand, the coaches were having a difficult time determining if discipline
would eliminate the childrens' fun or which disciplinary measures would
actually control the goofing off behavior of the children. The evidence in the
section on initial perceptions showed that both coaches placed a great deal of
importance on the children learning skills and having fun. Even without
competitive game situations, there existed a tension between fun and skill
development.

In Phase 1, the coaches never seemed concerned about the competitive
aspect of the coaching task. Dick and Jane seemed to base their expectations
on the age and earliness of the season. Neither coach expected much from the
children in their ﬁrst game. Jane wanted them to learn the basics. Her
assessment of the situation after the first practice was best expressed by the

question Jill asked me.

78

Can you give us any help? I think we need it.
(Field notes 2/9/89)

Jill asked the question just after Jane and Jill realized the girls did not
know the difference between offense and defense. I explained that I was
unable to offer any assistance because of the effect it would have on the study.
Then, Jane and Jill began laughing as they remembered the last 5 minutes of
the girls attempting to scrimmage.

Dick's explanation of what he expected from the boys in the ﬁrst game
lends support to the assertion that neither coach expected much from the
children in their ﬁrst game.

I'm sure not looking for pretty games, today. Nobody sets
picks at their age. So, I'm just gonna keep them in there.
Keep them fresh and make sure everybody plays the
same amount.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Dick did not expect much from the boys. He acknowledged that the pick
might be a little advanced for them to use effectively. He seemed to be content
making sure they all played equally. Dick also felt that it was easier for third and
fourth grade age children to have fun even when they lose.

Everyone can, but at a younger age level it is easier. You
know, if they lose I don't really think it is important to them.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

Dick believed that everyone could lose and still have fun. However, the
younger one was the easier it would be. The boys were at the youngest age
level in the competitive program.

The ages of the boys seemed to affect what Dick expected out of their

execution of skills, their seriousness, and their ability to have fun if they lost.

79

During a discussion about how Dick would handle winning and losing games,
Dick expressed that the most important aspect of the games for this age level
was that the boys have fun.

If we lose and they don't play well, I probably won't tell

them you didn't play well, but I'll help them in the things

that they didn't do well, for instance, offense and you know

if we win that would be great. I'd tell them they did a good

job. And if we lost and played well, I'd tell them, ya know,

you guys played well. I think most important for me is that

they have fun. Especially at this age level.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

No matter whether the boys won or lost, the most important aspect of the
game was that the boys have fun. The age of the boys seemed to inﬂuence the
perceptions Dick had about the relationship between winning and fun.

Similarly, Jane wanted the girls to enjoy their early experiences in sports
since she had enjoyed her sport experiences. She felt it would be fun to coach
and expose the girls to the fun aspect of sports.

..... How much fun I've had and show them how much fun
they can have and what they can do with it. Then, I'd,
they, that would be great. I could take my experiences

and kind of start them off on their way.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

In essence, Jane was not only going to focus on basics, she was also
going to teach the girls what a fun and valuable experience being part of a team
could be. Jane, like Dick, never discussed her expectations on the basis of
winning or losing. She seemed to be solely interested in the girls' experience
being well-rounded and enjoyable.

However, after the first game she did express surprise at her lack of

interest in the score of the game. The following quote is Jane's description of

80

her behavior during the ﬁrst game.
Then, like Milly or one of the other girls would say “oh
we 're losing. " And, I like, I was surprised. I was really
surprised that I didn't even really pay attention to it, really.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Jane was so interested in the play of the girls that she was oblivious to
the score. Jane continued by explaining that she was busy trying to discern
what the girls needed to be better prepared for the next game. Neither coach
brought up the topics of games, score, or starters. Even though both coaches
discussed the upcoming game, their concern was that the children not feel self-
conscious about their performance in front of their friends and family. The
evidence provided demonstrates the lack of emphasis Dick and Jane placed on
the upcoming competition. During the ﬁrst game, both coaches arbitrarily put
children together as a starting team. I expected to observe similar practices
emphasizing basic skills that the children were unable to execute in the game.
Dribbling, shooting, and passing were the skills which the children seemed to
be weakest.

As established in the initial perceptions section, Dick and Jane's goals
were to teach the basics, defense, and provide the opportunity for children to.
have fun. During Phase 1, the coaches' initial perceptions of the task of
coaching were turned into ”reality.” Both coaches focused on what they
perceived as basic skills. Dick and Jane were both detailed in their
explanations of drills and complimented them with demonstrations. Neither

coach mentioned the outcome aspect of the league. During Phase 1, the

children seemed to decide when, where, and how they were going to have fun.

81

The coaches were trying to cope with the problem of determining how to
maintain and control the childrens' playfulness during drills.

In Phase 1, there already seemed to be a tension between the
development of skills and the childrens' playful behaviors. Dick and Jane's
perception of a good coach was a person who could control his/her athletes.
However, both were having trouble deciding when and how to maintain control.

The next section constitutes the phase in which the focus of Dick and
Jane's practices was offense. For Dick, Phase 2 focused on the pick. In the
third, and fourth games, Dick would become so involved in score that he would
yell ”shoot,” forgetting the focus of the practiced offense, the layup. Practices in
Phase 2 for Jane focused on the give-go. The evidence will support the
assertion that Phase 2 was a result of the outcome of games. The coaches'
perceptions and meanings within the social reality of coaching were changed

due to increased tension between skill development, fun, and outcome.
Ehascz
EI'Q 'I'I'I'EB'SI'IIIS'

The girls performance in the first game seemed to live up to the
expectations of Jane and Jill. The opposing team scored at will. Many times,
Jane's girls were playing offense when they were supposed to be on defense.
Very rarely did a dribbler on Jane's team get the ball beyond half court.
Throughout the whole game, Jane seemed frustrated, but patiently reinforced
the girls for their valiant efforts. When it 'was all over, the girls had lost by 20
points.

In Jane's first interview after the ﬁrst game, she expressed her realization

82

that the girls would not be ready for any offensive plays until much later in the
season. So, I expected the next practice to be much like the ﬁrst. What a
surprise. The following vignette supports the assertion that the focus of Jane's

practices changed drastically after the ﬁrst game.

Wanna. The second practice began with Jane calling
the girls to the center. Jane told the girls that they did a good job on

Saturday at the game. Encouragingly, she told them that ”their shots did
not fall, but they eventually would." She reviewed what the concepts of
offense and defense meant and then told them to line up for full court,
right handed layups.

At the end of the layup drill, Jane called Jill over to the center of the court.
Jane looked at Jill and said, ”Jill, give/go, pick and roll."

In what seemed to be disbelief, Jill questioningly replied, "You want them
to learn this?" Jane's body language suggested that she was aggravated
at Jill's statement. The group was split up in half with Jane and Jill each
working with four girls at opposite ends of the court. Jill walked over to
her group and said, "I don't think you should be learning this." Jane
heard this comment and approached Jill.

The two coaches had a discussion on the sideline. Jill felt that the
give/go drill was too difficult for children that age. Jane strongly
disagreed. As Jill walked back to her group of girls, she shook her head
and said, ”we're going to learn the pick and roll. I do not think you should
learn it." The remaining 20 minutes was spent trying to set up the give/go
drill.

(Field notes 2/17/89)

This was a drastic change from the organization of the first practice.
Earlier Jane had expressed her belief that the basics were the backbone of
offense and defense. The first practice focused solely on skills such as
dribbling, passing, pivoting, and defense. However, the only basic skill
introduced in the second practice was the layup. The rest of the time was spent
on an offensive manuever, the give/go. Correct execution requires the

ballhandler to pass the ball to a teammate and then ”pick" the defender of the

83

new ballhandler. The person with the ball can either give it back to the original
ballhandler or go to the basket.

Jane may have won the disagreement concerning the introduction of the
give/go, but the following vignette supports Jill's assessment of the difficulty
factor.

' ' . Prior to the discussion about the
appropriateness of the give/go, the girls had been separated into groups
of four at each end of the court. After Jill and Jane had discussed the
drill, they returned to their groups and began the task of teaching the
give/go by designating two girls on offense and two on defense. Jane
started her explanation of the drill by passing the ball to one girl and
emphasizing the relationship between the pass and ”give." Jill had
discontinued her explanation of the give/go so that she and her group
could observe Jane's demonstration. Jane continually asked the girls if
they understood each new aspect of the drill introduced. The
explanation and demonstration became much more detailed with the
Inclusion of the pick n' roll concept. All of a sudden, Jill called over to
Jane, "I'll have you teach this, OK? As Jane corrected the position of one
of the girls, she replied, 'OKI"

Jill told her girls she wanted them to work on ”guarding” while they
waited for Jane. The girls began to chase, yell, scream, and giggle. This
was quite a contrast from the other end of the gym where Jane was
continually correcting the girls attempts at the give/go. The girls very
rarely executed the first pass, let alone the pick n' roll. Eventually, the
attention of Jane's group wandered. A few of the girls were doing
cartwheels, and not focusing on the give/go. Rolling her eyes, Jane
walked toward Jill's group. Jill called out, ”you teach them what you're
doing." As Jane came face to face with Jill, she replied, 'O.K., all I taught
them was the give/go and they are not doing well.“ In an "I told you sort of
way” Jill said, "Well, maybe it is too complicated." After another
opinionated discussion, Jill and Jane swapped groups and the process
of "how to give n' 90" was repeated.

(Field notes 2/17/89)

Most of the time the girls could execute the ﬁrst pass correctly. Only two
girls seemed to understand that if you were designated as offense, your team

had the ball. Otherwise, you were on defense. The execution of the drill

84

seemed to be Inhibited by the girls inability to understand and execute basic
basketball techniques. And yet, Jane focused on the specific drill and
neglected what she had expressed as the backbone of basketball, basic skills.

After exposing both groups to the give/go, Jane tried to integrate the drill
into a scrimmage situation. Needless to say, the give/go was never executed
and the girls' playful, inattentive behaviors were heightened by their attempts at
setting picks on each other. In those last 20 minutes there seemed to be a
conflict between Jane's goal of practicing the give/go in a scrimmage situation
and the girls' playfulness as they attempted to execute the give/go.

The third practice deviated from the give/go emphasis of the second
practice. As practice began, Jane explained to the girls that they were going to
practice the give/go, after their layups. With that announcement I expected to
observe a practice similar to the second one. However, after the give/go
offense, there was a shooting drill, a rebounding drill, and a scrambling drill.
One explanation for why the focus of the third practice reverted back to the
basics was Jill's objection the week before to the introduction of the give/go.

Jill came to the third practice with a list of skills she felt the girls needed to
work on based on their performance in the second game. Even though Jane
spent a good deal of time on the give/go, she could not justify ignoring the skills
Jill felt the girls needed to be prepared for the next game. After all, Jill was the
game coach. Jane had to rely on Jill's assessment of what the girls needed.
During her second interview, Jane alluded to her feeling of being left out, and

not being prepared for what the girls might need in game situations.

85

I think a little bit. But I think it is because I'm not at the
games. So, ldon't know actually, what they're doing right
and what they're doing wrong.

(Transcription of taped interview 3/7/89)

She felt out of touch and unprepared to deal with situations arising from
game play. This was the first time that Jill had given Jane any report or
assessment of the girls' game performances. She had disagreed with the
introduction of the give/go in the second practice. In many ways, Jane did not
have a choice. She had to incorporate what Jill indicated as necessary
preparation for the fourth game. They were now 0-3.

The fourth practice was almost a carbon copy of the second one. Jane
was the only coach, Jill was taking the Scholastic Achievement Test. No one
was there to question the appropriateness of focusing on the give/go offense.

Since the first game, Jane's emphasis had changed drastically. The
organizational focus of the practices had changed from basics to offense.
Goofing off behaviors were becoming more and more frequent and loud.
Jane's organizational focus seemed to be inﬂuenced by the outcome of each
game. As the girls kept losing, the basics and defense were abandoned for the
give/go offense. scoring.

After engaging in the social reality of coaching, Jane was beginning to
evaluate the effectiveness of the content of the practices. The outcomes of the
previous games seemed to have quite an impact on the organization of

practices. The following statement supports the assertion that Phase 2 evolved

from Jane's encounter with the individual reality of competition.

86

I think like games, when we get beat and stuff. It makes
me think about offense, because our scoring average is
maybe been three points a game. So, I think about
offense. Why we aren't scoring and stuff. But, I've got
defense. Because that's what at that level, I think defense
is important.

(Transcription of taped interview 3/7/89)

Jane continued by telling me that defense was much more important, but
that each game created pressure to score. Even though she believed that
defense was more important, the organization of practices in Phase 2 revolved
around the give/go offense. The outcome of previous games seemed to change
Jane's perceptions of which drills were important for the girls. Initially, Jane had
stated that without basic skills, the offense was useless. And yet, the quest for
more points overshadowed the fact that the girls could not execute the basic
skills needed to run the give/go. For Jane, the reconstruction of practice
behaviors and meanings was abrupt and focused on scoring.

The transition from Phase 1 to Phase 2 in the season was much more
subtle in Dick's case. It began with his statement at the end of the second
practice that the pick was "the offense.” Offense was never mentioned in Dick or
Jane's ﬁrst interview as an important aspect.

As the following statement from the first interview demonstrates, Dick
wanted the boys to be exposed to different types of drills. He would not send
them to play in a game without an overall knowledge of skills. As the evidence

in Phase 1 demonstrated, up until now, Dick acted on this belief.

Like I wouldn't just teach them offense. And they'd go into
their first game and they wouldn't know what to do on
defense. .
(Transcription of taped interview 2/11/89)

87

Dick specifically stated that he would not just teach the boys offense. In
his ﬁrst two practices, the boys were exposed to a well rounded group of basic
basketball skills. The time spent on the pick was minimal compared to time
spent on the basics and defense.

The boys won their first game. They beat the other team by 15 points.
For the ﬁrst three quarters, Dick was consistent in yelling, "use the pick, ball side
pick." He was constantly directing the boys on where to stand, so they could set
picks. Dick constantly emphasized the importance of getting open for the layup.
He wanted the boys to attempt the "easiest shot” in basketball, the layup.

Even though Dick emphasized "the offense," the boys were not executing
the pick. The boys attempted to set picks, but their execution was exactly as
they practiced, offensive boys chasing defensive boys irregardless of who had
the ball. The end result was that the boys won without “the pick“ According to
Dick, the third practice focused on executing the pick in a scrimmage situation

because only one boy set a pick in the game.

W. The third practice began with the boys gathered
around Dick at the center of the court. Dick and Jack proceeded to

discuss the points of the game. They explained to the boys that they
needed work on the offense. The boys were reminded that the point of
the pick was to get pe0ple open for a layup. The boys were then directed
to setup for half court layups.

There were only ﬁve boys at practice. They seemed to have their own
agenda. After the layups, Dick introduced an inbounds play. Only four
boys could participate at a time. Dick did not notice, but during the rest of
the practice his brother and a friend decided who substituted in and out
of the drill. Very rarely did they sit out. Approximately 10 minutes later,
Dick incorporated the inbounds play into an offensive scrimmage
situation. The reason Dick gave for spending so much time on the
offense was, ”Saturday we ran the offense only once. Joe was the only

88

one who set a pick.“
(Field notes 2/13/89)

The rest of the practice focused on the pick drill. The organization of
practices in Phase 2 focused on scoring, but with a speciﬁc offense. Dick's
assessment that more time should be spent focusing on the pick seemed to be
influenced by the boys inability to execute it in the game. They deﬁnitely had
enough points. They had won.

The rest of the practice was spent trying to impress upon the boys the
importance of setting picks. While correcting the boys efforts, Dick emphasized
that the object of the pick was to get someone open for a layup. They were to
focus on shooting layups and eliminate the long shot attempts. All of Dick and
Jack's corrective feedback was prefaced with the purpose of the pick, to get
open for the "layup." '

The boys' second game seemed to be an imitation of the girfs' ﬁrst game.
Each time a boy dribbled to the half court line, the ball was stolen and the other
team scored. When a pick was executed correctly, the ballhandler could not
control the ball. Like the girls, the boys' ability to execute the pick seemed
inhibited by their lack of basic skills.

Not only did the outcome of games influence Dick's practice
behaviors, but also his game behaviors. The following vignette supports this
assertion. In the first three practices and the ﬁrst game, Dick emphasized using
the pick for the layup. Now, overtly it seemed that all he wanted was points.

W. Dick's pre-game instructions were to set picks. More

specifically, "when you get the ball under the basket, shoot.” Halfway
through the second quarter, the score was 20-6. Dick's team was getting

89

slaughtered. At this point Dick was still yelling to the boys to focus on the
practiced offense. He would yell, "pick" and the boys responded with
good execution of the pick, but they could not get open for the layup.

Two times one of the boys set a pick. In both instances, the same
ballhandler was called for double dribbles. The other team got the ball
on the violation and immediately scored. Dick's behavior and offensive
emphasis changed drastically. Three times, just prior to halftime, Dick
yelled "shoot,” as the ballhandler crossed the half court line.

Normally, the instructions were to "set the pick,” or ”go to the basket.” The
last time he yelled, "shoot" to a boy at half court, the gym got quiet. There
were two boys guarding Dick's player. When Dick yelled out for the boy
to shoot, the boy turned and looked at Dick on the sideline. One of the

boys guarding him stole the ball and scored. Dick's behavior was such a

flagrant deviation from what Dick had been emphasizing that from across

the gym a woman ﬁrmly called "Richard." It was his mother.

(Field notes 2/18/89)

The change in Dick's behavior was very obvious to Dick's mother and
me. I had observed Dick for weeks and he had never encouraged the boys to
"shoot” from half court. He had always reprimanded the boys for long shots.
But the score of the game seemed to inﬂuence his perceptions as to what was
important. As Dick experienced the individual reality of losing, scoring, not the
pick, became more meaningful.

In an informal interview after the game, Dick could not remember the
incident described in the ”shoot vignette.” He never heard his mother. However,
he was aware that he had begun to direct the boys to shoot from long distances.

My frustrations at losing, may have influenced my
decisions on shooting.
(Fieldnotes 2/18/89)
He continued by saying he may have been grabbing at straws. Dick was
also cognizant of the fact that the boys used the offense and lost. Dick

expressed his frustration over his dilemma by telling me what the next practice

90

should focus on.

If we were to have practice Tuesday (holiday), there would
be no shooting, only dribbling and offense. This would be
a type of punishment in a way.

(Fieldnotes 2/18/89)

Dick realized that the boys were unable to get the ball down the ﬂoor.
Whenever they did get the ball down the court, they were unable to shoot
accurately. In his initial interview, Dick had stated that the set shot was one of
the things he wanted the boys to learn. Dick, like Jane, was abandoning some
of those goals, for scoring. The outcome of the games seemed to have more of
an impact on the coaches' behavior than their expressed beliefs concerning the

task of coaching.

W. The boys were losing their third

game. Dick attempted to be patient and consistent. He constantly
reprimanded the boys when they shot long. Except once when Jake
made a lucky long shot. Jake brought the ball down the court. Dick
yelled, ”layup." Jake just heaved the ball toward the basket from the
sideline. As Jake released the ball, Dick firmly called out, ”Jake!” The
ball swished through the net. Dick clapped and told Jake, "good job.”
They were losing. They needed the score.

Throughout the rest of the game, Dick tried to get the boys to set the pick,
do the inbounds play, and go for the layup. He became verbally and
overtly insistent on the boys going for the layup. The boys, on the other
hand, seemed to think just shooting from anywhere was better than
waiting for the layup.

(Field notes 2/25/89)

During the ﬁrst loss, the boys seemed to be unable to just "shoot.” They
had been taught to execute the pick and score a layup. However, as the score
became more lopsided, the boys adopted the ”just shoot” philosophy that Dick
had verbally reinforced in the second game. Now, Dick was attempting to get

the boys to redirect their attention to the practiced plays. Dick assumed that the

91

boys had abandoned the offense, because of his previous game behavior. He
acknowledged this fact in his second interview, discussing what he would do
differently if he were to start over.

..... Even if they were losing, I made a mistake. Because

now they are just shooting from anywhere. ..If they were

losing, a good coach would just keep them doing what

they were doing. ..I just told them to start shooting

because I wanted, ya know, points.

(Transcription of taped interview 3/4/89)

Dick acknowledged that he had changed his perceptions as to what the

boys should do in a game, and abandoned his original goals. This was best
demonstrated by his statement about what he had wanted to accomplish.

To teach them to have fun and work as a team and play
basketball.
(Transcription of taped interview 3/4/89)

Dick continued by describing the part of coaching that was the most
difﬁcult for him.

The part I really wanted to team them, skills.
(Transcription of taped interview 3/4/89)

Dick wanted the boys to learn basic skills, defense, and teamwork. He
also wanted them to have fun. But practices in Phase 2 had been organized to
focus almost entirely on offense. He admitted the offensive emphasis in the
third and fourth practices constituted about 75% of the time. Additionally, he
was aware that defense had been neglected. The following is Dick's
explanation of how defense was neglected.

Maybe because everyone likes to play offense and no-
one likes to play defense when you're at that ago. I'm not

blaming the kids at all. But I think I have kind of slacked
away from that...Boy, I haven't been teaching that at all.

92

But I didn't do anything about it Tuesday in practice. ljust,
it must have slipped my mind.
(Transcription of taped interview 3/4/89)

Dick continually expressed how important defense was to him. And yet,
teaching defense to the boys had slipped his mind. Dick suggested that playing
offense is more desirable to the boys. However, he did not seem to accept that
explanation. In an informal discussion after the third game, Dick told me that the
fourth practice would focus more on defense. And yet, it slipped his mind.
Instead, the fourth practice focused on offense.

I was about 5 minutes late. I could hear the boys from outside the closed
double doors. Their rowdy behavior had been consuming more and more of
the practice time, but the noise level had already broken the sound barrier. I
wondered if the coaches were going to get anything done. As the following
vignette shows, the tempo of the practice seemed to be set by the boys' early
practice behavior.

. As I entered, I saw bodies wandering
away from the drill together in fun-ﬁlled chase. I saw boys hook-sliding to
their place in line. The boys seemed to be enjoying themselves. They
were not paying too much attention to the layup drill. Both Dick and Jack
attempted to quite them down. The attempts fell on ears full of other
boys' sounds. One of the boys, Jamie, was hit in the head by a ball
thrown in playfulness by Tom. There was no effort to reprimand the boy

' who tossed the ball. Dick asked Jamie if he was alright. Then Dick and

Jack got into line and did layups with the boys. At first this calmed the

noise level, the reprieve did not last long.
(Field notes 2/27/89)

My fieldnotes for this practice were labeled ”hyper.” I could see and feel
the coaches being influenced by the uncontrollable behavior of the boys. Dick

and Jack had never participated in a drill before this practice. Now, they were in

93

line doing layups as one of the gang. Another event which occurred during this

practice was the introduction of ”killers.” Killers is a repetitive running drill

considered by most athletes to be a form of punishment or conditioning. The

following vignettes demonstrate the changes in practice emphasis which

eventually led to the development of Phase 3.

W. After the layup drill, Jack called all the boys to the center
of the gym. Noisily, the boys gathered around Dick and Jack. Without
getting their complete and undivided attention, Dick told the boys, ”four of
you down there and four down there.” There was not much movement
from the boys, except their mouths. All of a sudden, Dick pointed to the
endline and said, "all eight of you down at this end." As the group
congregated on the endline, the boys seemed to become attentive to
Dick's words and actions. The boys were told that they were going to run
killers. As Dick and Jack stood at center court and explained how to run
killers, they told the boys that there are ﬁfteen killers planned. However,
if the boys were good, they could work off some of the killers.

The first killer started with a loud 'OK" from Dick. Some boys were
running, some jogging. At the finish, the boys were huffing and pufﬁng.
Two boys attempted to sit and Dick commanded them to ”stand up, stand
up! Put your hands over your head and do not bend over.” Just as the
heavy breathing began to die down, Dick called out, "OK, Jack is going to
shoot, it he misses you'll run 1 more, if he makes it, you'll run two more."
There was a collective groan from the boys. Jack missed the ﬁrst shot
and the boys cheered. However, Dick had Jack try it again. Jack sunk'
this shot. The boys barely got the groan out when Dick started them on
their next killer. At the finish, some boys pretended they were
hyperventilating. Everyone was sent out to get a drink.

(Field notes 2/27/89)

I perceived that killers were introduced as a result of the excessive rowdy

behavior of the boys. However, in an informal interview after practice, I was

reassured by Dick that the introduction of killers had been pre-planned.

However, Dick and Jack both concurred that the boys behavior might have

been a good enough reason for implementing killers.

After everyone returned from the drinking fountain, they were told that if

94

they did not settle down, they would do killers the remaining 30 minutes. Much
of the extreme rowdiness seemed to be alleviated after the introduction of killers.
Even so, as demonstrated by the following vignette, the boys were still laughing,
giggling, and chasing as they began working on setting picks in a four on four

scrimmage.

WW. For the first ten minutes of the

scrimmage, Dick and Jack emphasized going for the layup. At one point,
Jack demonstrated the proper technique for a right handed layup.
lnterrnixed between the instructional messages were statements such as
"listen up,” ”everyone stop” and "when I'm talking to you, don't talk.”
Finally, Dick and Jack joined in on the scrimmage. By the end of the
practice the tone of the gym could be labeled "hyper."

(Field notes 2/27/89)

Twice in the fourth practice, Dick and Jack participated with the boys.
The coaches seemed to try and control the tempo of the practice. However, the
boys could only be quieted for a few moments at a time. Dick and Jack's
participation could have been a result of the collective behavior of the group
overpowering the coaches' ability to control the practice. While killers were
introduced for conditioning purposes, they may have been appropriate as a
method of controlling the boys' hyper behavior.

For Dick, like Jane, the organization of practices in Phase 2 revolved
around offense. Although Dick had introduced the pick in Phase 1, greater
emphasis was placed on his initial goal of teaching them a blend of necessary
skills. Now, in Phase 2, Dick's practices were organized with offense in mind,
neglecting the all-important defense, and the basics skills needed to execute
the pick. Evidence provided from the fourth practice indicated that Dick and

Jack still wanted to teach the boys proper execution of the pick and how to

95

shoot layups correctly. However, the boys' goofing off behavior seemed to
control the tempo of the practice.
W

The chasing, tackling, and roaring of the boys became distracting to
watch. As a former coach, I was distracted and frustrated by what seemed to be
the boys' lack of attention to the specified drills. In the second interview, Dick
assessed the boys' fourth practice behavior as goofing off. This was the first
time that he had acknowledged the boys' inattention to his drills might be
negative.

Maybe gooﬁng off to me, may be having fun for them but
like last practice, I think they were gooﬁng off.
(Transcription of taped interview 3/4/89)

He continued by explaining how he reached the conclusion that the boys
were goofing off.

They didn't listen. They didn't listen to what I was saying.
They were "gooﬁng off. " You know, laughing, and which
might be fun to them. But I consider that as coach gooﬁng
granscription of taped interview 3/4/89)

Dick had distinguished in his mind that in the fourth practice the boys
were goofing off. But he also suggested that he was having a difﬁcult time
deciding when to discipline. Again, Dick was coping with the perceived
dichotomy between fun and skill development. Could these two factors be
balanced?

Jane experienced this same kind of dilemma when she discussed the

girls' deﬁnition of fun.

96

...because two girls asked me, Thursday, if they could do
killers. They go, ”can I do killers, can I do killers ?" and
now for us, that was a disciplinary.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Jane had been discussing the problem of administering discipline when
she felt the girls were goofing off. She was fmstrated because while the girls
were goofing off, they seemed to be having fun. The girls goofing off behavior
had been increasing over the season. And yet, killers, which were dreaded by
varsity athletes, seemed to signify fun for the girls.

Both coaches had stated initially that underlying everything, they wanted
the children to have fun. They seemed to think the children were having fun, but
they wanted them to pay attention and learn the basketball concepts they were
teaching.

The evidence suggests that Dick and Jane saw a dichotomy between
having fun and learning the basics. This might best be typified by Dick's
response to my question as to why he did not correct the boys' skill execution in

scrimmage situations.

I'd come right back and say, well, I just wanted them to
have fun.
(Transcription of taped interview 4/11/89)

Through Phase 1, Dick and Jane perceived that there was a dichotomy
between skill development and the children having fun. Until the ﬁrst game, the
organization of practices was focused on skill development. Now, in Phase 2,
offensive scrimmaging was the focus of practices. As the organization of

practices focused on scoring, the dichotomy between fun and skill development

evolved into a tension between fun, skill development, and outcome.

97

During the second phase of the season, the coaches' perceptions and
behaviors seemed to be greatly influenced by the outcome orientation of the
game. Both coaches verbalized that knowing the basics, defense, and that the
children were having fun were still very important. However, they had almost
completely abandoned those goals in their quest for offense.

Initially, both coaches had expressed that they believed that the children
learning something was more important than winning. However, in Phase Two,
the win-loss record of the team seemed to be tied to the coaches' self-
presentation. Jane's account of why she took losing so personally best typifies
this assertion.

Well, hey my name is on the team. So (nervously
laughing) if it was Jill 's then it would be OK!
(Transcription of taped interview 3/7/89)

Jane felt the pressure even though she was not the game coach. This
reflects the pressures many coaches may feel when they realize that most
people do not evaluate them based on the childrens' improvement or
experience. Few people ask what the children learned in a game. More times
than not, the ﬁrst question coaches are asked pertains to their win-loss record or
a speciﬁc game score.

Q I i I .

In the first phase of the season, Dick and Jane focused their practices on
skills and drills that they initially perceived as important for the children. After
engaging in coaching in a game situation, Dick and Jane's meanings,

perceptions, and behaviors were reconstructed to adapt to the social reality of

98

competition. They both still felt very strongly about the importance of the basics,
defense and fun. Seemingly, the outcome of games had a greater impact on
behavior than their initial perceptions, and scoring became all important.

During the second phase of the season, the tension between skill
development and fun seemed to increase. As the coaches focused more on
offensive drills, the gooﬁng off behavior of the children increased. On one hand,
the coaches were having a difficult time determining when and how to maintain
the childrens' attention without eliminating the fun aspect. On the other hand,
the increase in the childrens' gooﬁng off behaviors, along with the coaches'
decision to focus on offense led to little, if any, directed skill development. How
can there be more scoring if the children cannot shoot, dribble, or pass during
games?

Much of this tension was created by the coaches constant negotiation of
meanings, behaviors, and goals while experiencing the social reality of
competition. Scoring became inﬂuential in ”reality," while perceptually the skill
development and enjoyment of the children was essential to accomplishing the
coaches' goals. Jack brought out this theme very cleariy as he tried to justify not
disciplining the boys, even though he felt their goofing off might have hindered
skill learning.

..... Because, are they having fun? Are they goofing
around? Should we discipline them for this ? Well, if we
discipline them no w, then we 'II have to discipline them

later....But they might be winning.
(Transcription of taped interview 4/19/89)

As long as the boys' gooﬁng off did not hinder the game outcome, than

99

the boys' inattention to skills drills would be tolerated. The evidence presented
thus far, in Phase 2, supports the assertion that there was a tension between
skill development, fun, and outcome. However, up until the second interview,
the coaches only acknowledged the tension between skill development and
fun.

Dick and Jane treated the tension between fun and skill development like
a dichotomy. Consequently through Phases 1 and 2, the coaches were
constantly making choices between skill development and their dilemma of
deﬁning fun. After experiencing the social reality of competition, game outcome
seemed to have more of an impact on the coaches meanings, perceptions, and
behaviors. During Phase 2, the negotiated "realities" and initial perceptions of
each coach were engulfed by the social reality of the competitive sport context.
While reflecting back on the first two-thirds of the season, Dick and Jane began
to identify the tension between fun, skill development, and outcome.

In their second interview, Dick and Jane expressed their desire to correct
problems created by their offensive emphasis in the second phase of the
season. Jane's assessment of the situation best demonstrated this desire.

ldon't think I would ever put in the give/go. ldon't think I
would ever...offense. I think I would just kinda forget about

that and totally work on defense and fundamentals.
(Transcription of taped interview 3/7/89)

Jane finished by listing basic drills like dribbling, that she would be
emphasizing in the next two practices. If Jane acted on her words, her last two
practices should resemble Phase 1. Dick identified two major areas that he

would change if he could start over. The following description of what Dick

100

would do differently focuses on discipline and defense without mention of fun or
oﬂense.
Uh, stress defense more. Because that's real important to
me. I'd mn them more. So, I maybe, like just mnning and
disciplining them. I feel mnning kind of makes you in
charge. It makes, what's the word, you seem like the
boss...Maybe they would have, a you know, listened a little
harder.
(Transcription of taped interview 3/4/89)

Throughout Phase 1 and 2, Dick and Jane verbalized that their original
perceptions of what the children should learn were more important than offense.
While reflecting on the season up until then, they both decided that if they could
start over, they would focus on control, basics, and defense. As established
earlier, somehow the outcome of previous games had influenced the
reconstruction of perceptions, meanings, and behaviors in relationship to the
value of offense.

Through this point in the season, both coaches had experienced similar
paths in Phase 1 and 2. The coaches' organization of practices, in Phase 1,
focused on skill development. During Phase 2, both coaches' behaviors
suggested that the need for points became more important than the coaches'
expressed beliefs.

In Phase 3, the coaches traveled much different experiential paths. Dick
balanced the tension between fun, skill development, and outcome by focusing
on fun and self-preservation. Jane, on the other hand, fell back on her initial

perceptions and returned to the basics. Additionally, she integrated the

knowledge she had gained from her experiences in Phases 1 and 2 to face the

101

tension between fun, skill development, and outcome.
Elam

Phase 3 consisted of the fifth and sixth practices of each coach.
However, in Dick's case, the transition to Phase 3 began in the fourth practice.
At that time, Dick introduced the concept of mnning "killers,” a repetitive running
drill. In addition, the scrimmage situation became a free-for-all with Dick and
Jack participating.

The fifth practice deviated from the scrimmage emphasis of the fourth
practice. Organizationally, it followed the basic format of the previous practice;
layups, killers, and then a free-for-all scrimmage. However, the elusive defense
was incorporated into the scrimmage as evidenced by the Defense and
lnbounds Play Vignettes.

W. As the boys gathered around Dick to set up in teams,

he said, "We haven't played very good defense the last three games." He

continued by reminding them about the importance of defense. This was
unusual in that the only comments typically made about defense were
statements such as, "guard your man" or "stay with your man.” While Dick
continued to discuss defense, the boys had divided up into teams and
were running around and chasing each other. Dick yelled out, ”listen up,
set up the offense. Get it to one of the guards. OK?" The scrimmage

began with a jump ball.
(Field notes 3/6/89)

In the fourth practice, there was never any mention of the importance of
defense. Now, defense was being stressed over offense. Furthermore, during
the course of the scrimmage, Dick was as explicit in his corrective feedback as
he had been in Phase 1. This was evidenced by the contrast between Dick's
impatience last week with the boys' inability to execute the inbounds play

versus his patient explanation of the same situation this practice.

102
WOM- The boys set up for the inbounds pass.

Everyone was covered. The ball could not be passed onto the court.
Dick yelled, "Stop!" Last week he either yelled at the guard to take the
correct spot or ignored the mistake. This practice he explained the where
and why of the position. ”In this situation, you should go past half court.
The defense can‘t go past half court, so you should go there.” Dick then
pointed to the exact spot he wanted the boy to stand. This type of patient,
corrective feedback was demonstrated by Dick throughout the
scrimmage.

The scrimmage continued with Dick and Jack interjecting comments
about the boys' effort and correct positioning. They also kept score,
calling it out frequently. From out of nowhere, Dick encouragingly said,
”next basket wins.” The boys all got into position for the skins' inbounds
play attempt. The skins turned the ball over to the shirts, who

immediately scored. The boys on the shirts team began whooping and
hollering with excitement.

Their enthusiasm was short lived. Dick sauntered to the center of the

court and announced, "We're gonna work on defense." There was a

collective moan from the boys. Normally, once the scrimmage began, it

continued until the end of practice. The change in format and emphasis
was probably as much a surprise to the boys as to me.

(Field notes 3/6/89)

Not only was Dick patient and diligent in his explanations of the inbounds
play, but the defensive drill was implemented with a heavy focus on correct
technique. The practice ended with an intrasquad shooting competition with the
losers running killers. The boys seemed to really enjoy this part of the practice.
They were cheering on their teammates, paying attention, and actually seemed
to have fun.

This practice had variety. The organization seemed to focus on the
basics and defense within a scrimmage situation. The practice ended with a
control statement, killers. The intrateam competition served a notice, if you do

not shoot well, you will run. Additionally, the intrateam competition seemed to

create a fun, energizing environment. The ﬁfth practice placed some of the

103

basic skills emphasis of Phase 1 within the context of scrimmaging.

The focus on basics and defense might be explained by the awareness
brought about by the second interview. Dick had stated that if he could do the
first part of the season over he would teach more defense and skills. The fifth
practice seemed to integrate Dick's desire to increase his emphasis on the
basics and defense with his free-for-all scrimmage. The "killers” were used to
keep the boys' attention, a punishment for the losing group, a future threat to the
winning group, control.

This type of reflexive awareness was also evident in the fourth game
which was just an hour after the second interview. In the pro—game talk, Dick
looked directly at me and told the boys, ”I'm really going to be watching your
defense." I was worried that there had been a reactive effect from the interview
in Dick's coaching. However, once the game began Dick forgot defense and
focused on ”the pick.”

The sixth practice combined the free-for-all scrimmage of the fourth
practice and the intrasquad competitions of the fifth. The basics and defense
were not addressed at all in the ﬁnal practice of the season. The ﬁfth practice
seemed to be Dick's last attempt at trying to balance the tensions between fun,
skill development, and outcome. In his experimentation with what drills kept the
boys busy and alleviated the pressure from the coaches, Dick instituted
intrateam competitions and free-for-all scrimmages which became
representative of a typical practice in the third phase of the season. Jack
probably expressed the sentiments of both coaches best when he explained to

me why the emphasis had changed to less-organized scrimmages and killers.

104

To get them to settle down, work on things, so I ﬁgured it
was time. We decided to scrimmage a lot more. That way
they were real loud. That way it wasn't as hard. We didn't
have to control them as much.

(Transcription of taped interview 4/19/89)

If the boys were scrimmaging, there was not as much need for control. In
Jack's mind, running killers helped to settle the boys down so that they could
work on skills. Dick also pointed out that they were having a hard time
controlling the boys. The team's record was 1-3. Dick had perceived that at this
point nothing could be done to correct the problem created by focusing on the
"pick" in Phase 2.

"Nothing was working," so the organization of practices was changed to
make it easier on the coaches and more fun for the boys Control, intrateam
competitions, killers, and free-for-all scrimmage evolved as the focus of Dick's
third phase of the season. As Dick was attempting to ease the tension between
fun, skill development, and outcome, Jane integrated her initial perceptions with
the experience gained from engaging in the social reality of coaching.

In the third phase, Jane took a different approach to dealing with the 0
individual reality of the first two-thirds of the season. After four straight losses,
Jane summed up the frustration she felt because “nothing was working.”

Because, I don't think that there '5 anything that's working right
now. ldon't think anything is going to help them. So why not
go back to the basics and kind of start over for two weeks.
Even though it won't help them. What we 've been doing isn't
going to help them either, so why not. Don't have anything to

lose anymore (laughing).
(Transcription of taped interview 3/7/89)

The inference seemed to be that because the girls had lost all of their

105

games, "nothing was working." Jane's plan of action in the third phase was to
change her emphasis to the basics because she believed "nothing was
working." The organization of the ﬁfth practice closely resembled Phase 1. Jane
combined explicit verbal instructions and physical demonstrations to work on a
defensive dribbling drill, a teamwork drill, shuffling, passing, and a new layup
drill. The last 10 minutes were spent on the give/go. Additionally, Jane had
reverted back to closely monitoring the performance of each girl as
demonstrated by her insistence on correct dribbling technique in the following
vignette.

. Jane announced, "we are going to work on
dribbling today.” A collective "yea” sounded throughout the gym. Jane
continued, "OK, get a partner. You only need one ball.” Two girls ran in
front of my chair and smiled. Similarly, another girl proceeded to tackle
her partner. Loudly, Jane called the girls to the endline, "I want everyone
down here." As the girls grouped on the endline, Jane directed that, "the
one with the ball, get into the basketball position. I want you to dribble in
place!” Four girls stood on the endline dribbling in place while listening
for the next command. Jane's voice rose above the dribbling as she
asked, ”Do you know what killers are?” The group answered "yea"! Jane
explained to the girls how killers were usually done and how to adapt the
drill to dribbling.

The first four girls dribbled down the ﬂoor and back. When the next group
came to the baseline, Jane called out, ”basketball position." As Jane
demonstrated the proper position, she gave a step by step explanation of
the proper form and technique, "hands out, knees bent." As she ﬁnished
demonstrating the skill, Jane placed Betty into the proper position. As the
drill continued, Jane's monitoring of the girls sounded like this, ”Switch to
the right hand, right now, come back here, go back with the left hand,”
and "Ginger, that is the best I've seen." Throughout the practice, Jane
asked the girls, "Do you understand?" If anyone answered no, she
demonstrated the proper technique and then physically placed the girl in
proper position.

(Field notes 3/9/89)

Jane had gone back to focusing on the basics. The organization of

106

practices revolved around introducing the girls to dribbling, layups, passing,
and shooting with an emphasis on correct technique. Throughout the season
Jane had combined demonstrations with verbal descriptions of the desired
concept. However, during Phase 2, Jane had focused on the execution of the
give/go without much emphasis on the basic skills needed to execute the
give/go. Now, in Phase 3, Jane's practice behaviors seemed to be influenced
by her initial perceptions. While Dick was attempting to keep the boys attention
with less controlled practices, Jane had decided to take back some control.

The evidence presented thus far supports the assertion that the coaches'
behaviors in Phase 3 were influenced by their evaluations of the effectiveness
of practices based on game outcome.

The reasons given for the changes in both coaches' behavior was the
perception that nothing else was working. "Working” apparently was linked to
the win-loss record of the team. Jane felt that she had nothing to lose anymore.
So, without the pressure of the outcome of the next game, why not go back to
what she perceived as important? No one expected the team to win, so the
tension created by outcome was eliminated. Similarly, Dick seemed to
eliminate the tension created by outcome through his focus on keeping the boys
busy lwithout exerting much effort. Free-for-all scrimmages and intrateam
competitions had replaced “the pick.” .

Dick realized that the boys' gooﬁng off had interfered with getting things
accomplished. Initially, he had stated a strong desire for the boys to have fun.
Now was his chance to eliminate the tension between skill development, fun,

and the outcome of the game by just focusing on fun. Dick organized practices

107

to keep the boys active. And yet, the tension still existed. Trying to juggle skill
development, the children having fun, and the pressure from the outcome of
previous games had driven Dick to deal with only one aspect at a time, except
in the ﬁfth practice.

At that practice, Dick attempted to integrate drills into the boys' favorite
setting, the scrimmage. Taking the intrateam competitions of the fifth practice
and the free-for-all scrimmage of the fourth practice, Dick chose to finish the
season focusing on the boys having fun. After all, one of his initial goals was for
the boys to have fun. He had accomplished that goal. Similarly, Jane's goal
was for the girls to have fun.

In the first two phases of the season, Jane seemed to juggle the tensions
between the three aspects in similar ways as Dick. However, her last two
practices patterned the rigor, variety, and focus on technique of her first practice.
And yet, in her final practice, Jane acknowledged the dichotomy between fun
and skill development in her handling of the girfs' gooﬁng off during a drill.

Although she treated the situation as if one hindered the other, she also'
demonstrated that she was developing the ability to balance the tension created
by skill development and fun. As she evaluated the situation, Jane was ﬁnding
that there was a time and place for both.

W— The girls were split up evenly at the baskets. They were

supposed to be working on a teamwork drill. About halfway through the

drill, the girls began to tackle each other, giggle, and generally just mess
around. This had happened before, but Jane usually stopped anything
before it got out of hand. From my perspective, on one hand, the girls
were having fun for the last practice. On the other hand, nothing much

was getting accomplished in the drill. Jane dribbled toward me along the
sideline. With a smile on her face, excitedly she said, "Lisa is laughing.“

108

(Field notes 3/11/89)

Jane felt that Lisa's having fun was worth the girls' inattention to the drills.
Her description of the incident in her ﬁnal interview supports this assertion.

Anyhow, because Lisa never had fun until then. So I
thought, well, it wouldn't hurt you know. And the rest of
them were having fun. It wouldn't hurt for like five or ten
minutes to let them goof off.

(Transcription of taped intenriew 4/15/89)

Jane seemed to want to work out the tension between the outcome
orientation of games, skill development, and fun. This was also evidenced by
her eagerness to coach in the sixth game. She wanted to see how the girls
would play after two practices focusing on. basic skills. Jane was very
disappointed that the final game was cancelled. Because of Jane's varsity
commitments, she coached only in the first game. Jane wanted the opportunity
to coach in another game.

The girls had been improving. In the fifth game, the girls exhibited the
exact arm position of the dribbling drill at the ﬁfth practice. Not only that, but
they were within six points of the other team in the third quarter. In her first
interview, Jane stated that the basics were the backbone of offense and
defense. If she could coach the last game without any pressure, maybe, just
maybe, the basics would pull through. Jane did not have anything to lose. If
they lost, well, that was to be expected. If they won, then she would look like a
good coach. Dick, on the other hand, began with the pressure to continue
winning.

Dick was in a different situation, but the focus was the same for both

109

coaches in Phase 1 and 2. Like Jane, Dick focused on a wide variety of skills in
Phase 1, prior to games. However, the inﬂuence of outcome created a change
in practice emphasis. Score became the name of the game. As losses
increased, Dick's perceptions of what was important changed. Keeping the
boys active during Phase 3 was the key to his surviving until the last game.

After all, Phase 3 evolved from the coaches' assessments that "nothing
was working.” I would argue that if the coaches could have stood back from the
pressure of outcome evaluation, they would have seen that things did work. As
a former coach and having knowledge of the girls' from the beginning to end, I
would say that every girl improved dramatically. Each and every girl ended the
season understanding the concepts of offense and defense. As a team unit, the
improvement was unbelievable. From my perspective, Jane accomplished
many of her initial goals.

The accomplishments in the boys' skills and team play were much
different. The boys were able to randomly execute the same inbounds play
Dick's varsity team used. Furthermore, each and every boy could set a pick.
They were consistent in their layup and passing skills. Even though the boys
probably spent more time messing around than seriously doing drills, it seemed
to me that Dick had accomplished a number of his goals.

However, Dick and Jane were frustrated. Dick's response, in the final
interview, about not understanding the children, reﬂects the confusion of both
coaches. Even though winning was never stated as important, both coaches

were amazed that losing did not seem to upset the children more.

110

But, I didn't know. I was kind of getting bored with
practices and games. And the kids didn't seem to are.
You know what I mean. Their attitudes, they didn't seem
to care about winning. I shouldn't say winning, didn't care
anymore. Because they were losing, so....

(Transcription of taped interview 4/11/89)

The lack of perceived seriousness on the part of the children had
bothered Dick and Jane since their first interview. Both coaches could not
believe that the children were so inattentive. Dick and Jane's perceptions that
the children were not serious were influenced by their recollections of their
behavior during their youth sport days. Not only that, but both coaches were
varsity athletes. In most instances, the goal of high school sport programs is to
win. The background of the coaches may have had an impact on their deﬁnition
of serious. At the third grade level, all of Dick and Jane's children may have
considered themselves serious athletes. The coaches' perceptions about the
childrens' lack of seriousness and concern for winning also seemed to
influence the coaches' behaviors.

Even though neither coach expressed a desire to win, observations of
Phase 2 practice and game behaviors would suggest a win orientation. During
the season, the coaches' behaviors were very inconsistent with this assertion.
On one hand, the coaches organized the practices in Phase 2 around scoring.
If I had only observed these practices and games, I may have concluded that
the coaches were win oriented. However, if that were truly the case, why did
Dick, Jane, and Jill play the children equally without concern for who played

with whom?

Only once did the idea to put certain players together seem to cross the

111

mind of any of the coaches. The one time I observed someone attempt this was
at the girls' ﬁfth game. In the third quarter, Jill had an opportunity to manipulate
who played with whom. The girls were only six points down. This was the
closest they had ever been to another team in the third quarter. Half way
through the third quarter, Jill discussed with me her plan to play the better girls
together. In her interview, Jill explained why she considered changing her
substitution policy.

I think I more or less needed to win. I think for the team,

because I remembered that they were getting really down

before the game. ldidn't want them to get down, because

I didn't want them to hate basketball. I wanted to feel

better about my coaching. I wanted to win.

(Transcription of taped interview 3/15/89)

Jill thought the girls' needed to win to enjoy the experience.
Furthermore, she needed a win to feel good about her coaching. This adds
support to the assertion that the win-loss record of the team was somehow tied
to the coaches' egos. The coaches exhibited inconsistent behaviors
concerning their emphasis on winning.

On the other hand, Jane admitted, in her ﬁrst interview, that she surprised
herself by not caring about the score.

What really surprised me. It's during the game. I didn't
even look at the scoreboard but maybe once. I was
surprised.
(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)
Without saying it, Jane inferred that she expected to care about the score.

Jane continued by explaining what she was paying attention to instead of the

scoreboard.

112

In the girls and what they were doing. And you know
trying to get them to do what they should be doing. And
thinking about what I could teach them.

(Transcription of taped interview 2/13/89)

Winning was not foremost in the minds of these coaches. During the
game, Jane was too busy trying to coach to think about the score. Dick had
expressed the same type of thoughts during games. Jill would get so wrapped
up in directing the girls in the games that I would have to remind her to make
substitutions. And yet, observations of Phase 2 behaviors would suggest
otherwise. As they were exposed to the social reality of coaching, their
perceptions and behaviors seemed to change through exposure to the tension
between fun, skill development, and outcome.

In their ﬁnal interviews, all four of the coaches discussed what they would
do differently. The consensus was that they would have implemented more
disciplinary measures and would have emphasized basic basketball skills. The
coaches seemed to believe that there was a dichotomy between fun and skill
development.

Throughout the study, goofing off seemed to interfere with the childrens'
attention to drills. From the coaches' standpoint, how did the childrens'
inattention to drills effect the tension between fun, skill development, and
outcome? First, the coaches continually treated the tension between fun and
skill development as a dichotomy. They never seemed to work out a balance
between the two factors. Second, the focus on offense diverted the coaches'

attention away from the importance that skill development plays in the execution

of the "pick" or the give/go. How can the children win without basketball skills?

113

Offense, scoring, is necessary to win. Furthermore, Dick and Jane believed the
children would have more fun if they won. And yet, the coaches perceived that
the children were having fun when they goofed off. This is best exempliﬁed by
Jane's explanation of how fun got in the way.

Maybe a little bit, actually a lot. Yea, because that was

one of my main objectives. So, like in the last practice

when Lisa was having fun, I let her. But then I also at the

time, I thought winning was fun feel So, I thought I didn't

know if they were having enough fun not winning. But,

yea, I think it made a difference.

(Transcription of taped interview 4/15/89)

Fun was one of her main objectives. But how do you allow gooﬁng off
and still win? If occasional goofing off in drills was more fun than winning, then
Jane had to balance the tension between skill development and fun. That is
exactly what she had done in the sixth practice.

Jack expressed the same point of view. He had already stated that
teams and people will have more fun if they win. When asked if fun, skill
development, and winning work together, he summed up the tension between
the three.

Not all the time, maybe you have to sacriﬁce the having
fun part and work hard at the fundamentals to get the win.
(Transcription of taped interview 4/19/89)

All of the coaches seemed to believe that winning would be fun for the
children. Additionally, they perceived that gooﬁng off was fun for the children.
Jack believed that they had to eliminate fun to work on drills. Furthermore, they

would have a better chance to win if they focused on fundamentals. The ﬁrst

and second phases reflected the coaches' perceptions that they could not

114

balance fun, skill development, and outcome.

Before the outcome of the games was a factor, the coaches allowed
goofing off and tried to focus on drills. As they began to play in games, the
focus became scoring more points. Losing seemed to accentuate the focus on
offense. Defense and the skills necessary to execute offense were trivialized.
The coaches' personal evaluations of the effectiveness of the first two thirds of
the season and a need to deal with the tension between skill development, fun,
and outcome of games led to Phase 3.

Dick and Jane agreed that game situations created the perception that
learning to run the offense was important for the children. Both coaches stated
that they would go back to the basics, defense, and establishing more control, if
they coached again.

However, I wonder. The tension between skill development, fun, and
outcome of games is built into the sport context. As demonstrated throughout
this thesis, the coaches' perceptions, meanings, and behaviors were influenced
by the social reality of competition and many times Dick and Jane were
unaware of the discrepancies between their beliefs and their behaviors. The
following are examples of the influence that the constraints within the sport
contest exerted on the coaches. Dick did not realize he was yelling, "shoot" to
the boys at half court. Dick felt defense was one of the most important aspects
of the game, but it slipped his mind. Jane could not figure out what to use as
disciplinary measures. Jill, who always played the girls equally without concern
for game status, played the better girls longer and together in a ”close” game.

Jack discussed how competition influenced his perceptions and behaviors

115

while in the situation. This is evidenced by his telling what he would do
differently.

I guess I wouldn't. Just at the time, it was great. Let's

have them play. It worked the ﬁrst time. So, we thought it

was great, you know....A couple of years ago I wondered

why did the dads (coaches) have these kids run plays at

this age? And then, when I got there myself, it was

like...let's put a play in.

(Transcription of taped interview 4/19/89)

While looking from the outside in, Jack thought teaching plays was a bit
much. Yet, Dick and Jack focused on the "pick," even though they truly knew
the concepts and execution were too difﬁcult. Jack alluded to the fact that while
in the situation it seemed correct, he never considered doing it before he
coached and would not do it again.

All of the coaches stated they would do things differently. Yet, they never
imagined themselves doing what they did. The third phase seemed to evolve
out of the coaches ability or inability to cope with the tension between fun, skill
development, and outcome and their perception that ”nothing was working."

Dick made the choice to wait the season out. Let the boys have fun and
keep them busy. Each practice and game was one step closer to the end. Jane
made the choice to teach the girls the basics and deal with the tensioh.‘ She
was excited that she was going to coach in the sixth game. However, on the

morning of the sixth game there was a major ice storm. All of the games were

cancelled and the season was over.

116

Conclusions

Dick and Jane, like most youth sport coaches, entered into the social
reality of coaching without any formal training. They were eager to make the
experience fun and beneficial for the children. Both coaches had years of
competitive basketball experience. Dick and Jane were not strangers to how
coaches do what they do. After all, they had been coached for years. So, why
did they have such a difficult time engaging in the task of ”coaching?”

Their perceptions about how and what they were going to do were based
on experiences as athletes. Obviously, the social reality of coaching was
different from the perspective of a coach than an athlete. Furthermore, the
individual reality the coaches experienced was influenced by the interactions
within their separate team units. Thus, Jane's individual reality was not Dick's
”reality.”

The social construction of reality is a dynamic process which changes to
adapt to social interactions that seem problematic to one's everyday reality
(Berger & Luckman, 1967). In other words, Dick and Jane could ignore the
tension between skill development and fun as long as game outcome was not a
factor. In Phase 2, Dick and Jane's “realities” were reconstructed to adapt to the
outcome orientation of the competitive sport context. Finally, in Phase 3, due to
the incongruence between the social reality of coaching and their initial
perceptions, the coaches renegotiated their own ”realities” to deal with the
tensions between fun, skill development, and outcome. At the macro level,
there were realities within the social reality of coaching.

At the micro level, the ”reality" of each coach was dependent on the

117

social interactions within their specific situation. Each coach was continually
negotiating his or her meanings and perceptions throughout the season
(Blumer, 1969). The differences in realities between coaches can be explained
by Mead's (1927) assertion that the perception's of the participant are
influenced by the person's specific social interactions. Similarities in
perceptions and meanings that existed within phases were more than likely
created by the coaches adapting to the social reality of the coaching task.

Evidence of the coaches constantly negotiating and renegotiating their
meanings, perceptions, and behaviors to adapt to constraints within the sport
context parallel the research on beginning teachers. McDonald (1982)
conducted case studies of beginning teachers and found that the teachers went
through four stages based on their negotiation of their role as a teacher. These
teachers, like Dick and Jane, were constructing and reconstructing their
meanings and perceptions to deal with the constraints within the social reality of
teaching.

The hidden constraints which Dick and Jane encountered were the
tensions between fun, skill development, and outcome. These factors had a
major impact on Dick and Jane's constant negotiation and renegotiation of their
meanings, perceptions, and behaviors. The tension between those factors is
the essence of youth sport programs. _

These programs downplay the competitive aspect by making rules for
equal playing time. Coaches are asked to stress skills, fun, and the social
aspects of participation. On one hand, programs downplay the outcome

orientation of the games. On the other hand, they publicly keep a running tally

118

of who is winning and who is losing. The tension between fun, skill
development, and outcome seem to be built into the socially understood
philosophy of youth sport programs. From the perspective of a former athlete,
parent, or a sport enthusiast, coaching youth sport may look and sound easy.

The evidence presented in this thesis suggests otherwise. Dick and
Jane perceived they had the knowledge and ability to coach third and fourth
grade children. How hard could it be to teach them skills and make sure they
were having fun? The outcome of games was secondary to the process of
participation in game situations. Both coaches perceived that assessing when
goofing off interfered with skill development and an overemphasis on scoring
hindered them in accomplishing their initial goals. I would argue that the
coaches accomplished many of their initial goals, however, their win-loss record
overshadowed these accomplishments.

From my observations, all of the children learned some basketball skills,
concepts, and rules. If goofing off is having fun, as the coaches believed, the
children had a great time. Why did Dick and Jane have the perception that °
”nothing was working”? I would argue that they perceived that society deﬁnes a
”good coach” as one who wins. This assertion is supported by the body of
literature which studies the practice or game behaviors of coaches. Most times,
comparisons are made between winning and losing coaches in an effort to
determine ”what works" (Claxton, 1988; Hendry, 1969; Markland & Martinek,
1988).

Dick and Jane believed that "good coaches' were able to control their

athletes' behaviors. However, because the children's having fun was one of

 

119

their goals, they could not determine how, when, or if they should use
disciplinary measures. This dilemma seemed to hinder skill development. In
turn, the lack of skills may have influenced the outcome of games. In Phase 1,
Dick and Jane seemed to treat the tension between fun and skill development
as a dichotomy.

After experiencing the social reality of game outcome, both coaches
focused on offense. With the addition of outcome, the coaches made the
decision to treat the tension between fun, skill development, and outcome as if it
could not be balanced to make the experience more enjoyable and beneficial
for all. In the final phase, Dick decided to eliminate the tensions by focusing
solely on fun without concern for further skill development or more points. Jane,
on the other hand, decided to return to the basics and deal with the social reality
of coaching.

Dick and Jane constructed similar realities in Phase 1 and 2. However,
in Phase 3, their interpretations of the incongruence between their initial
perceptions and “the Reality“ of coaching were very different. Dick, more or
less, was waiting for the season to end. Jane was eager to coach in the sixth
game. Why such a drastic difference in Phase 3?

Possibly, their reasons for volunteering created differences in how they
handled the discrepancies between their realities of coaching and the social
reality of the sport context. Jane was considering coaching as a career, while
Dick was making good on a promise to his younger brother. Also, Jane exerted
more discipline in the beginning, eliminating the uncontrollable behaviors that

Dick continued to face.

 

120

Another possible explanation could be a difference in how Dick and Jane
were coached. However, from all indications, both athletes had coaches who
focused on technique. One final issue that I have not addressed, which might
account for differences in meanings, perceptions, and behaviors, is gender.
However, I do not believe that there is enough information within my data to
make any assertions concerning the impact of gender on differences in
coaching between Dick and Jane. Consequently, I suggest that Dick and
Jane's perceptions were influenced by the social interactions within their
particular reference groups.

Dick and Jane's interpretation of gooﬁng off as having fun, was probably
based on their expectations as athletes. As a person moves up the competitive
ladder, dedication, hard work, and giving 100% effort are highly valued. Not
paying attention, talking, or gooﬁng off are seen as detrimental to the ”team."
However, as a former coach, I know that it is difﬁcult to maintain the athletes'
attention throughout the season without a few bouts of goofing off. Drills may be
fun for a while, but the hours of repetition lead athletes to making their own fun.

Consequently, Dick and Jane's treatment of fun and skill development as
dichotomous may have been influenced by their interpretation of fun as athletes
or possibly the age difference between the children and the coaches. It is
possible that the children may have been having fun while doing drills and
observing demonstrations. While I believe that within the sport context there
can be fun without disruption to the agenda of the coach and team, I depicted
fun and skill development as a dichotomy to accurately describe the

experiences of the coaches.

121

The purpose of the study was to understand how coaches experience the
task of coaching. With these results, I hoped to bridge gaps that might exist
between theory, the social social reality of coaching, and the coaches'
individual "realities." I believe that the evidence presented answers my original
thesis questions and supports the overarching theme that three phases evolved
from the coaches renegotiating their realities to deal with the tension between
fun, skill development, and outcome. Furthermore, I believe that the results
have implications for coaches, youth sport program administrators, and
researchers designing coaching education programs.

Implications

The philosophy of this youth program, like many others, was focused on
the children having fun and developing skills through participation in practice
and game situations. Measures were taken to equalize the skill level of the
teams. Additionally, guidelines were established to insure equal playing time
and equal practice time. Coaches were presented with these guidelines and
the ”Athletes Bill of Rights" (Appendix D). The message seemed clear. The '
structured games were just one mode used to develop the childrens' skills and
enjoyment of basketball. Games were to be viewed as part of the youth sport
process. The actual outcome/score was to be incidental to the participation and
learning experiences of the children. ,

In their ﬁrst interviews, Dick and Jane professed the same philosophy.
Prior to experiencing coaching in scheduled games, Dick and Jane's practice
behaviors seemed to indicate that the outcome of the upcoming games would

be incidental to the childrens' efforts at learning to play basketball. After my ﬁrst

122

observations and interviews, I expected that both coaches would continue to
focus on the childrens' fun and skill development.

However, as the results and discussion section demonstrated, each
coach experienced three distinct, but not separate, phases of practice
behaviors. These phases emerged as the coaches attempted to cope with the
tension between fun, skill development, and outcome. During Phase 2, the
coaches' overt behaviors suggested that they were win oriented. I believe this
change in perceptions and behaviors from Phase 1 resulted from the tension
embedded in the structure of the program. The explicit philosophy and structure
of the basketball program in the town of Progress seems typical of most youth
sport programs.

The explicit philosophy of both the program and the coaches was to
ensure that the children enjoyed participating in games and practices while
learning basic skills. In the practices before scheduled games, Dick and Jane
acknowledged a tension between the childrens' "goofing off“ behaviors and skill
development. Both coaches realized their children were not ready to be
athletes, so they labeled ”goofing off" as the fun aspect of participation. Jane
and Jill actually laughed when considering the sight of their girls playing in a
game. The coaches seemed to understand the limitations of their children.
After all, they viewed games as a forum that allowed the children to participate
and practice their skills as a team. The outcome/score was incidental to the
childrens' enjoyment of playing on a team and developing basketball skills.

In this youth sport program, like many others, there is a contradiction

between the explicit philos0phy of the program and actual program practices. I

 

123

believe that it is very difficult for parents, and administrators to downplay
outcome/score when the score is displayed as an indication of who is winning
and who is losing. Very rarely did Dick or Jane look to the scorers' table.
However, their children continually peeked at the score, the parents reacted to
each basket, and the administrators allowed coaches to look over the score
sheets for individual statistics. It is little wonder that Dick and Jane became
focused on offense. Once they evaluated the game coaching experience, Dick
and Jane perceived that scoring was important within the social reality of
competition. Before Dick and Jane were exposed to the reaction of fans, the
children, peers, and the practices of administrators regarding game situations,
outcome/score was not important. After the first game, Dick and Jane's
behaviors and definitions changed based on their perceptions of acceptable
behavior within the social reality of competition constructed through interactions
with fans, parents, and administrators.

Youth sport programs are not entities within themselves. These
programs exist within a society that stresses competition, upward mobility, and
being number one. It is little wonder that score becomes important. Adult
games are used societally to determine who is the better person or team based
on final outcome. Even though this concept is incongruent with youth sport,
competitive league schedules for games are incorporated within the structure of
the program. The evidence presented suggests that once the coaches
experienced a game situation they changed their behaviors to coincide with the
pressures of competition inherent in the adult world and passed along to this

youth sport program.

124

Throughout the study Dick and Jane verbalized the importance they
placed on the childrens' fun and skill development. Dick and Jane assessed
that they had deviated from what they wanted to accomplish by focusing on
outcome. They based this change of their perceptions on the experiences of
coaching in scheduled games.

I would suggest that youth sport programs need to evaluate the role that
structure plays in the stereotypical win at all costs behavior of the coaches.
Perhaps it is counterproductive to structure formal teams for competition when
the stated goals of youth sport programs call for the children to enjoy
participating in these programs.

Many times between scheduled games, I witnessed boys and girls from
different teams playing basketball without keeping track of the score. These
children introduced themselves and began playing basketball. The games
were noisy, unconstrained by adult rules, and continually adapted to
accommodate those who wanted to participate. The children were dribbling,
shooting, passing, and defending. Additionally, the games were full of action
and included everyone who wanted to enjoy the childrens' informal game of
basketball. The children were practicing their skills and having fun without a
competitive game stmcture.

The tension between fun, skill development, and outcome could be
reduced through a restructuring of youth sport programs. In determining how to
restructure, administrators might begin by asking the children what they enjoyed
and learned during the program. Administrators might take that one step further

and ask the children what they did not like about the program.

 

125

Other possible ways to reduce the tension between fun, skill
development, and outcome, would be to structure the programs so that terms
such as league, season, and competition were not attached to the childrens'
version of basketball. These terms suggest that the emphasis of the program is
on outcome versus process and that the children are miniature adult athletes.
Some of the measures that might be taken to eliminate reliance on such terms
would be to have play days instead of game days. On Saturdays the children
would be given a speciﬁc time to participate in a semi-organized game. The
children would play with different children each week. This would increase the
socializing portion of the program. Also, it would be very difﬁcult to use terms
such as schedule, competitive game, and season without a structure.

In this program the teams were not evenly matched, so when the score of
the games was displayed, It was obvious which team was better. If program
administrators believe that organized teams are a necessity, they should
reorganize the teams periodically to maintain equity. To minimize the ultimate
winner aspect of competitive games, the score could be started over each
quarter, then each team would have four chances at a win.

The philosophy of this program, like many others, is to ensure that the
children have fun and develop skills through participation. As demonstrated
earlier, the children seemed to enjoy their informal games between and after
scheduled games. Those children did not keep score and they still focused on
utilizing the skills developed in the program. More importantly the children were
having fun without concern about score, mistakes, or adult rules and

regulations. The game was adapted and modified for children by children.

126

Unlike the present structure of most youth sport programs, where the games are
designed by adults.

Adults involved in these programs need to structure programs so that the
fun, skill development, and participation aspects of the games are modiﬁed to
accommodate the emotional and physical levels of the children. Their cheers
should be directed at attempted rebounds, youthful attempts at dribbling, and
childlike imitations of adult teamwork. The structure should be modified to
eliminate the social reality of competition that creates the overt win oriented
behavior of coaches.

The evidence presented in this theses suggests the need for youth sport
programs to evaluate the influence that contextual factors may have on the
behaviors of coaches. Even though Dick and Jane were untrained coaches, the
results may also have something to offer to the developers of coaching
education programs. Dick and Jane were first year coaches. Dick and Jane
perceived a tension between fun and skill development. One might presume
that attending a coaching education program would help first year coaches
identity when and how to manage practices. Such knowledge would help to
alleviate the tension between fun and skill development.

However, as evidenced by the results, the tension between fun and skill
development is embedded in the structure of the program. Many coaching
education programs educate coaches in management, skill development, and
participation practices, but may not address the relationship between these
coaching tasks and the social reality created through interaction with parents,

administrators, the athletes, and the program structure.

127

I would suggest that the next step in this line of research is to study two
first year trained coaches to determine how they experience the tension
between fun, skill development, and outcome. How do their experiences differ
from Dick and Jane's? Does coaching education prepare youth sport coaches
for the philosophical dilemmas that they are bound to face in a structure
embedded in adult style competition?

The developers of coaching education programs should consider using a
research methodology such as field research, to better understand the influence
of structure on the perceptions of coaches, administrators, children, and other
people associated with youth sport. Coaching education programs evolved
from the perceptions that untrained volunteer coaches were more interested in
winning than in the children. These perceptions were based on repeated
observations of the overt behavior of untrained volunteer coaches, like Dick and
Jane. The results of this study strongly suggest that the stereotypical win
oriented behavior of such coaches may result from the structure of youth sport
programs.

Youth sport coaches may not necessarily be win-oriented individuals.
Many, like Dick and Jane, may have the best interests of the children they coach
in mind. However, they are trying to down-play competition within a competitive
league structure.

Consequently, the structure of youth sport programs must be examined
and restructured to best meet the needs of the children. In order to do this,
research should be conducted that focuses on the relationship between the

perceptions of the participants (coaches, children, parents, and administrators)

1 28

and the structure of youth sport programs.

This study focused on the perceptions of 2 volunteer untrained coaches.
In order to better understand additional perspectives, future research should
focus on coaches who have participated in coaching education programs, the
children who participate, their parents, and program administrators.

Coaching education programs may play a vital role in helping program
administrators restructure youth sport to better meet the needs of children.
Therefore it is critical that future research and recommendations include such

programs as we seek to improve youth sport experiences for all children.

APPENDIX A

Letter to Coach

130

Dear Coach:

I would like to ask you to help me in a project I am conducting to
understand how volunteer coaches experience the task of coaching. Why you,
a volunteer coach?

I believe that you are the key to children having a rewarding, fun, and
stimulating experience in youth sport. You give of your emotions, experiences,
and time. You are very essential to youth sport and yet we know very little about
you and how you see your task. More time and effort has been put into
researching the more prestigious areas of high school and college coaches, but
even these studies have been done from only one perspective, that of the
researcher. We have not attempted to find out what it is like to be a youth sport
coach. All in all, I feel that it is time we came to you, the coach, and ask how you
feel, think, and experience coaching. If we can understand how you experience
the joys, dilemmas, and specific situations of coaching, we may begin to
develop coaching education programs that come from the proper perspective,
yours. Coaching education programs should be based on the perspective of
the participant, not the observer.

If you agree to participate, I would like to observe you at as many
practices as possible during the course of the season. During this observation
process, I would like to be as close to the action as possible without dismpting
your regime. I would like to be able to talk to you after these observations to get
your perspective of the observed practice or game. I would also like to formally
talk with you about your experiences at the beginning, the middle and the end

of the season. These interviews could last up to ninety minutes. I would like to

131

use a tape recorder during the interviews, but this decision would be up to you.
I realize that I am asking you to volunteer several more hours of your precious
time for the interviews and the discussions. I assure you that your effort will not
only be appreciated by me but hopefully the coaches of tomorrow.

Because I feel that the perspective of the coach is needed in developing
effective coaching education programs, this project is being conducted in an
effort to add to the coaching literature used as a basis for these programs. This
project is being conducted in partial fulﬁllment of my masters degree program at
Michigan State University. If you decide to participate, you will have the right to
drop out of the study at any time.

To assure you confidentiality, I will use a code name to designate you in
all of my recordings and observational notes. I will also be the only person
working with the original data collected, so that I will be the only person aware
of your identity and the league identity. I will do everything possible in the
publication of the findings to disguise any physical or personal attributes and
demographics which could identify you.

I admire the efforts of people like you who care so much about our
children. I realize that I am asking quite a bit of your time, emotions, and
thought processes. I feel it is time that volunteer coaches had the opportunity to
let parents, researchers, and athletes know what it feels like to coach from the
front seat, not the back seat. It you have any questions, feel free to call me at

353-6925.

 

132

Linda D. Lyman
M.A. Student

Dr. Annelies Knoppers
Associate Professor

APPENDIX B

Coach's Consent Form

1.

10.

134

I have been informed of the reasons behind the study. I understand the
focus is how I perceive and experience my task as a ﬁrst year coach.

I understand that Linda Lyman will observe most of my practices and
games.

I understand that she and I may have informal discussions after some of the
practices and games. Such discussions will be at my convenience and with
my permission.

I understand I will be formally interviewed three times during the season. I
also understand these interviews could last up to ninety minutes and they
will be at my convenience.

I understand that if I agree, the interviews may be tape recorded and that
the tapes will be destroyed within seven days after the transcriptions.

I understand that I have the right to refuse to participate at any time during
the course of the project.

I understand that a ﬁctitious name will be used in the recording of data from
interviews and observations.

I understand that the information gained from this project will be reported in
a manner which will make it impossible for anyone to ascertain my identity
through links with the league, personal attributes or actions.

I understand that I have the right any time during the study to clarify issues
about the project which concern my participation.

I understand that at the end of the project I have the right to any information

gained from this project that will help me in my future coaching.

l have read and understand the above statements. I have decided to participate

135

in the project with the understanding that I am free to withdraw my consent

without prejudice at any time.
Coach's Signature
Parent's Signature

Date

APPENDIX C

Letter to Parent

137

Dear Parent:

My name is Linda Lyman. I am conducting a study on how first year
coaches coach and have obtained permission from your child's coach MRIMS
Blank to observe him or her during the season. I will be conducting the project
in partial fulfillment of my masters degree at Michigan State University. I am
interested in understanding how a coach handles his or her first year of
coaching.

In order to understand the coach's perceptions of the coaching experience,
I must observe him or her throughout the season. The task of coaching requires
that the coach organize, teach and guide the children through each practice
and game. So, although the children are not the focus of the project, the
coach's behaviors will be influenced by the children. Consequently, I cannot
truly understand how the coach experiences his or her first year of coaching
without observing the whole physical and social structure of each practice and
game. Therefore, I need your permission to use any data collected in my
research during observations which may involve your child. I assure you that
your child's identity will be kept conﬁdential. I cannot see any reason to use the
names of the children. In any event, each child will be given a fictitious name.
Nowhere in the fieldnotes or written report will names or distinguishing
characteristics of the coach or children be used. You or your child are free to
decline to participate in this project at any time without penalty.

I hope you will allow your child to participate in this project. I am
conducting this study in hopes of learning about the coaching experience so

that we can develop more effective coaching education programs. If you decide

138

not to give consent, I will not use your child or his or her behaviors in my
research. The possibility may exist at a later date that I may find I need to talk to
some of the children to get a better understanding of the situation. If this
becomes the case, I would first contact you to receive permission for this
purpose. If you have any questions about this project, feel free to contact me at
353-6925.

Please sign the attached consent form and send it with your child to the first
practice.

Sincerely,

Linda D. Lyman
M.A. Student

Dr. Annelies Knoppers
Associate Professor

APPENDIX D

Parent Consent Form

140

The purpose of the study has been explained to me. I understand that the
main focus of the study is my child's coach, Mr/Mrs , but that the data
collected during normal practice and game routines may involve my child.

By giving my permission for any data collected specifically involving my
child to be used, I understand the following:

1. I consent to having my child's interactions which may be pertinent to the

study to be recorded and used for Ms. Lyman's thesis.

2. All data collected for this study will be confidential, and the only person
who will be aware of my child's identity in the fieldnotes and written
reports will be Ms. Lyman.

3. I have the right to withdraw my permission for the use of data which
specifically involves my child at any time.

Please sign and return to the first practice.
I agree to allow the data collected involving my child to be used in Linda

Lyman's research project concerning the experiences of first year coaches.

Child's Name
Signature of parent or guardian

Date

APPENDIX E

Bill of Rights for Young Athletes

142

gal“ of ﬂights for goungﬂthletes v

I ﬁight to Participate in sports
ll ”Right to participate at at level
commensurate xvith each child's
maturitz and ability
Ill 11th to have qualified adult
leadership

IV ,ﬁight to 1A2 as a child and not

asam ult

V ﬂight of children to share in the

leadership and decision- making
of their sport Jnrticipation

VI light to Participate in safe and
healthx environments

‘Vlll ,IBight toam equal opportunity

to strive for success
IX ﬂight tolae treated with dignitz
X ﬂight to have fun in sports ©

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Reprinted with DQI’I’TIISSIOD from Guam/mos for Children's Sports, R. Morton: and
V. Seefeldt (Eds.). Washington,O.C. American Alliance for Health, Physical

Education, Recreation and Dance, l979.

APPENDIX F
UCRIHS Approval

144

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

 

umcomﬂnoummvmc EASTWOIICHIGANOOIﬂ-ﬂu
WWW

“mum

(511)”5-973.

December 27, 1988 W

Linda D. Lyman
E139 Owen Hall

Campus
Dear Ms. Lyman:

Subject: 'I'HE EXPERIENCES OF A FIRST YEAR VOLUNTEER
YOUTH SPORT COACH W”

The above project is exempt from full UCRIHS review. The pro
research protocol has been reviewed by another committee mem r.
The rights and welfare of human subjects appear to be protected and
you have approval to conduct the research.

You are reminded that UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar
year. If you plan to continue this project and one year, please make
enema:

provisions for obtaining aggropriate S approval

Anbchan es in procedures involving human subjects must be reviewed
by 8 prior to initiation of the change. UCRIHS must also be
notiﬁed promptly of any problems (unexpected side effects, complaints,
etc.) involving human subjects during the course of the work.

Thank ou for bringing this project to my attention. If I can be of any
future elp, please do not hesitate to let me know.

Sincerely,

    

J hn H dzik. PhD.
air, UCRIHS

JKH/sar
cc: A. Knoppers

HSU’IQWWWM

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Berger, P. L &Luckmann, T. (1969). Wang. New
York: Doubleday & Company.

Blumer, H. (1969). ' '
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Boodan. R. C. & Biklen, s. K. (1982). WWW
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Borman, K. LeCompte, M., & Goetz, J. (1986). Ethnographic and qualitative
research design and why it doesn't work. WW,
39(1), 42-57.

Bullough, R.V.,Jr. (1987). First yearteaching: Acase study. learners
W.m219-237.

Burton, D. & Tennehill, D. (1988). Developing better youth sport coaches: An
evaluation of the level 1 American Coaching Effectiveness Program
(ACEP). Unpublished manuscript.

Charon, J. M. (1979). W. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.:

Prentice-Hall.

Chelladurai, P. (1984). Discrepancy between preferences and perceptions of
leadership behavior and satisfaction of athletes in varying sports.

JoumaLotSnodﬁsnholooLﬁ (1). 27-41-

Claxton, D. B. (1988). A systematic observation of more or less successful high '

school tennis coaches WW 2 302-
310.

Dobbert, M. L. (1982). W. New York, New York: Prager
Publishers.

Earls, N. (1986). Naturalistic Inquiry: Interactive research and the insider-
outsider perspective. (special monograph). MW
EhxsicaLEducation. ﬁ (1)

Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C.

Wmock (Ed). WWW (3rd ed-l- New York:
McMillan Publishing Company, 119-161.

146

147

Gould, D. (1982). Sport psychology in the 1980's: Status, direction, and

challenge in youth sports research. W, A, 203-
218.

Gould, D., Feltz, D., Horn, T,&Weiss, M. (1981). Reasons for attrition in
competitive swimming. JoumaLoiﬁnoaﬁsxcboloox. 5. 155165.

Gould, D. & Martens, R. (1979). Attitudes of volunteer coaches toward
significant youth sport issues. W, 59, 369-380.

Hammersley, J. C. &Atkinson, P. (1983). W.

London: Tavistock Publications.

Harris, J. C. (1983). Interpreting youth baseball: Player's understandings of

attention, winning, and playing the game. W, 54 (4), 330-
339.

Hendry, L. B. A personality study of highly successful and ”ideal" swimming

coaches. 13W. 50. 299-305.

Horn, T. S. (1984). Expectancy effects in the interscholastic athletic setting:
Methodological considerations. MW, 6, 60-76.

Jacob, E. (1987). Qualitative research traditions: A review. 391m
EducationaLBeseatch 51I1).1-50

Lombardo, B. F. (1986). The behavior of youth sport coaches: Crisis on the
bench. In R. E. Lapchick(Ed.),ELagthre_d_f_QQu§(pp. 199-205). Lexington,
Mass.: Lexington Books.

Markland, R. 8. Martinek, T. J. (1988). Descriptive analysis of coach
augmented feed- back given to high school varsity female volleyball

players. WW. Z. 289-301
Martens. R. (1978). Javandsadnesainmﬂdrenasmas Champaien. "1.:

Human Kinetics Publishers.

Martens, R. & Gould, D. (1979). Why do adults volunteer to coach children's

sports? me. C. Roberts& K. M. Newell (Eds), W
W. Champaign, llI.: Human Kinetics Publishers, 78-

McDonald F J (1980) W

on: I‘ooocnoooullo :.

148

training. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service. (Eric Document
Reproduction Service No. Ed )

McDonald. F J (1982) Wt:
W. Princeton, N. J.: EducationaITesting Service. (Eric
Document Reproduction Service No. Ed)

McDonald. F. J. 8: Elias. P. (1983). Wham:

Princeton, N. J.: Educational Testing Service. (Eric Document
Reproduction Service No. Ed)

Mead, G. H. (1927). In D. L. Miller (1982) (Ed.). W
59.11. Unpublished work. George Herbert Mead. Chicago: Chicago Press.

Murphy, P. (1985). Youth sport coaches: Using hunches to fill a blank page.
W. 13. 136-142.

Orlick, T. & Botterhill, C. (1975). W. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

Rejeski, W., Darracott, C., & Hutslar, S. (1979). Pygmallion in youth sport: A
ﬁeld study. WW. 1. 311-319.

Seefeldt V (Ed) (1978) W
W State of Michigan.

Seefeldt, V. (1982). The changing image of youth sport In the 1980's. In R. A.
Magill, M. J. Ash, & F. L Smoll (Eds),
amnglmy, (2nd Ed..) Champaign, lll,: Human Kinetics Publishers, 16-25.

Smith, N. J., Smith, R. E., &Smoll, F. L. (1983). Kidsmn: Mass.: Addison-
Wesley Publishing Co.

Smith, R. E. & Smoll, F. L. (1978). Sport and Child: Conceptual and research
perspectives. InF. L. SmoII&R. E. SmIth (Eds) Esmbglggjgal

WW. Wash., D..:C Hemisphere Publishing,3-12.

Smith, R. E., Smoll, F. L. Curtis, B. (1979). Coach effectiveness training: A
cognitive behavioral approach to enhancing relationship skills in youth sport

coaches. MW. 1. 59-75.

Smith, R. E, SmolI, F. L., &Curtis, B. (1978). Coaching behaVIors in Little
League baseball. In F. L. Smoll& R. E. Smith (Eds.,) Esmhglggjgal

Who 171-201) Wash. D..:C Hemisphere
Publishing.

149

Smith, R. E. Smoll, F. L, Hunt, E., Curtis, B. &Coppel, D. B. (1978).
Psychology and the bad news bears. In g. g. Roberts & K. M. Newell

(Eda) WW. Champaign, IIl.:
Human Kinetics Publishers, 109- 130.

Snyder, E. E. (1986). Athletics and higher education: Asymbolic interaction

perspective. InC. R. Rees&A. W. MIracle (Eds) Wanting.
Champaign, lll.: Human Kinetics Publishers, 211-226.

Tharp, R. G. 8. Gallimore, R. (1976). What a coach can teach a teacher.
Money. 19.931. 2. 75-78.

Williams, D. D, Eiserman, W. D., &Lynch, P. (1985). W
W Annual meeting of

American Educational Research Association. (Eric Document Reproduction
Service No. Ed 260010).

Zeichner, K. M. &Tabachnick, B. R. (1983). W
W. Annual meeting of american Educational Research

Association. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 240113).

"Illllllllllllllllllllllllllll3