Unit IV IOP
©Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (2010) 9, 62-70 http://www.jssm.org
Received: 16 November 2009 / Accepted: 31 December 2009 / Published (online): 01 March 2010
Coaches’ perceptions of competence and acknowledgement of training needs related to professional competences Sofia Santos 1, Isabel Mesquita 1 , Amândio Graça 1 and António Rosado 2 1 Centre of Research, Education, Innovation and Intervention in Sport, University of Porto, Sport Faculty, Portugal 2 Faculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon, Portugal
Abstract The purpose of the present study was to examine coaches’ per- ceptions of competence and acknowledgement of training needs related to professional competences according to the profes- sional experience and academic education. The participants were 343 coaches from several sports, who answered to a ques- tionnaire that includes a scale focused on perceptions of compe- tence and another scale on acknowledgment of training needs. An exploratory factor analysis with Maximum Likelihood Fac- toring was used with Oblimin rotation for the identification of emergent factors. Comparison on coaches’ perceptions in func- tion of coaching experience and coaches’ academic background were made applying One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc multiple comparisons. Factor analysis on coaches’ perceptions of competence and acknowledgement of training needs made apparent three main areas of competences, i.e. competences related to annual and multi-annual planning; competences re- lated to orientation towards practice and competition; and per- sonal and coaching education competences. Coaches’ percep- tions were influenced by their experience, as low experienced coaches rated themselves at lower levels of competence and with more training needs; also coaches with high education, in Physical Education or others, perceived themselves as more competent than coaches with no higher education. Finally, the majority of the coaches perceived themselves to be competent but, nevertheless, they indicated to have training needs, which brings an important feedback to coach education. This suggests that coaches are interested in increasing their knowledge and competence in a broad range of areas which should be consid- ered in future coach education programs. Key words: Coaching education, perceptions of competence, professional competences, science of coaching, training needs.
Introduction The issue of the professional competences necessary to the coaching process has claimed the attention of coach- ing researchers (Abraham et al., 2006; Demers et al., 2006; Jones et al., 2004; Kirschner et al., 1997; Westera, 2001). The earlier research agenda restricted to coaches’ overt performance was criticized for missing the under- pinning mental premises that could explain coaches’ be- haviors. Consequently, the research turned its attention to examining the coaches’ thoughts and knowledge (Jones and Wallace, 2005). Though, in so far as professional competence reflects the coaches’ capacity to apply their knowledge and beliefs, while seeking for a more effective practice, the research on coaching education has been
expanding the interest from what coaches need to know to what they need to be able to do with what they know (Cushion et al., 2003; Demers et al., 2006).
Traditionally there is some confusion between knowledge and competence concepts although they have different meanings. Despite the diverse interpretations and forms that knowledge may assume, which compound the difficulty to define knowledge, traditionally, it does not comprise the ability to apply it (Kirschner et al., 1997; Pearson, 1984; Perrenoud, 1999). According to Kirschner et al. (1997) and Westera (2001) knowledge refers to a theory, a conceptual framework or a set of principles in a given domain which is remembered, learnt, or repro- duced. However, the need to meet the requirements of a changing society will be fulfilled by considering compe- tence as the application of knowledge in a specific setting (Kirschner et al., 1997; Westera, 2001). Therefore, com- petence is interpreted as a function of knowledge, skill, situation, self-confidence and values (Kirschner et al., 1997; Stephenson and Weil, 1992).
As professional competences allow coaches to ap- ply theory in their practice, competences become an im- portant part of coaching process, and must be thoroughly understood in order to enhance coaching effectiveness. Job-task analysis and qualitative approaches made appar- ent that coaches’ behaviors and competences extended mainly to the domains of training, competition and man- aging (Côté and Salmela, 1996; Côté et al., 1993; Côté and Sedgwick, 2003; Demers et al., 2006; Duffy, 2008). Concerning these major domains, coach education pro- grams as the National Coaching Certification Program (NCCP), proposed by the Coaching Association of Can- ada (CAC), the thematic network project AEHESIS (Aligning a European Higher Educational Structure in Sport Science) (Duffy, 2008), and the high academic educational program Baccalaureate in Sport Intervention (Demers et al., 2006), among others, put on view that coaches’ main tasks include: to organize, implement and evaluate plans for the long and short term; to conduct and support players during practices and competitions; and to co-ordinate assistant coaches and other staff members, for instance, being responsible for managing human re- sources. Moreover, coaches’ personal and social compe- tences, representing the ability to communicate, learn and be responsible (Duffy, 2008), form the basis for their interaction with participants, assistant coaches and other sportspersons as to lead coach education programs (Jones et al., 2002; Salmela, 1996).
Research article
Santos et al.
63
Therefore, a broad range of coaches’ competences is required for coaches to perform their role effectively. The study of coaches’ perceptions of competence and acknowledgement of training needs allows an understand- ing of the aspects coaches believe they are competent and those in which they perceive to need more training, which in turn provides valuable information to improve coach education. Perception of competence has been studied as an important aspect of teaching and coaching effective- ness (Coladarci, 1992; Feltz et al., 1999). Bandura’s so- cial-cognitive theory (1977) describes perception of com- petence as a cognitive process in which individuals make a subjective judgment about their ability to cope with certain environmental demands. Several studies about coaches’ perceived competence to improve learning and performance of their athletes (Lirgg et al., 1994; Taylor and Betz, 1983) have been developed. In particular, Feltz et al. (1999) measured coaching self-efficacy and found that past winning years in coaching, perceived ability of team and parental support were significant predictors of coaching self-efficacy.
Coaches’ perception of competence and acknowl- edgement of training needs could vary according to the coaches’ characteristics namely professional experience and academic education. Indeed coaches’ professional experience is taken into account in research as an impor- tant source of knowledge and competence (Gilbert and Trudel, 2001; Irwin et al., 2004; Jones et al., 2002; 2003; 2004; Wright et al., 2007). Additionally, to look into coaches’ academic training, particularly in physical edu- cation and sport, gains pertinence when considering that the academic ground offers a support to coaches’ behav- iors by providing knowledge on sport science, for in- stance about coach education and didactics (Bloom, 1997; Demers et al., 2006).
The main purpose of this study was to examine coaches’ perception of competence and acknowledgement of training needs related to professional competences. Specific research questions aimed to grasp the compe- tences related to the coaching role in which coaches per- ceive themselves more confident; the areas of profes- sional competence in which coaches perceive to have training needs; and how coaches’ perception of compe- tence and training needs are associated with different personal characteristics such as experience and academic education. Methods Participants This study included 343 coaches (289 men and 54 women), whose ages ranged from 16 to 65 years (M = 32.37, SD = 9.84). Coaches’ professional experience ranged from 1 to 25 years (M = 5.94, SD = 6.47). Consid- ering that professionals attain the stabilization period of their development after 5 years of experience (Burden, 1990) and taking into account the 10-year-rule for the attainment of expertise (Abraham et al. 2006), coach experience was classified into three categories, low ex- perienced coaches (up to 5 years of experience; n = 129; 38.6%); medium experienced coaches (5 to 10 years of experience; n = 152; 45.5%), and high experienced
coaches (10 and above years of experience; n=53; 15.9%). The influence of academic background on coach’s appraisals was also inspected. Higher education in Physical Education and Sport (P.E.) develops special- ized contents regarding sport sciences (Bloom, 1997; Demers et al., 2006), so coaches were also classified whether they had a P.E. degree, a degree below higher education, or other higher education degree. In this last group, it was verified that coaches had degrees from a broad range: economics, psychology, management, agrar- ian sciences, biology and military studies not related in the most part with education. Thus, 42.1% (n=142) of coaches have elementary to secondary school levels edu- cation; 45.7% (n = 154) a P.E. degree; and 12.2% (n = 41) other higher education degree.
Coaches under study cover twenty-two sports: handball, volleyball, soccer, athletics, swimming, basket- ball, gymnastics, rugby, tennis, table tennis, kempo, bad- minton, cycling, karate, judo, hockey, canoe, fencing, indoor football, figure skating, rowing and shooting, in a total of 274 (79,9%) from team sports, and 69 (20,1%) from individual sports.
Procedures Three strategies were used to develop the questionnaire, while fulfilling the requirements for construct and content validity. First, the process of item generation and design for the first version of the questionnaire was based on the underlying theoretical framework and a review of the relevant literature (Abraham et al., 2006; Côté and Sal- mela, 1996; Côté et al., 1995; Duffy, 2008; Kirschner et al., 1997). Second, a panel of three experts with PhD degree in Sport Pedagogy and experience in coach educa- tion evaluated if the initial pool of questionnaire items represented the competences profile related to the specific thematic. Some items were removed and other items were modified upon their advice. Third, the revised version of the questionnaire was then subjected to a pilot study with a sub-sample of 30 coaches of a range of sports and coaching experience, in order to test items clarity and accuracy, and the feasibility of the questionnaire.
The final version of the questionnaire is composed of a section addressing coach’s demographic characteris- tics, and two scales with 23 items each. One scale is fo- cused on coach’s self-perception of competence and the other on the acknowledgment of training needs. The items were answered on a 5 point Likert type scale from 1 to 5: non-competent; slightly competent; competent; very competent; extremely competent for perceptions of self- efficacy and no needed; slightly needed; needed; much needed and extremely needed for training needs.
The data collection was obtained from coaches that attended coaching education seminars throughout the 2008/2009 season. After assuring confidentiality and anonymity, coaches who volunteered were conducted to a quiet room where the proceeding to answer the question- naire was explained, and informed consent obtained. The participants had time to ask questions and the time to complete the questionnaire was not limited. The time to fill in the questionnaires ranged from twenty-five to thirty-five minutes.
Exploratory factorial analysis was applied with the
Coaches’ perceptions of professional competences
64
purposes of assessing the questionnaire’s psychometric properties and factorial structure. Aiming to reduce the number of variables, factor analysis used the Maximum Likelihood Method which minimizes the discrepancy between the population and sample covariance matrix maximizing the fitting function. In order to analyze the relations between factors, the analysis was applied with Oblimin rotation, since it allows the factors to be corre- lated (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
The number of participants satisfied Comrey and Lee’s (1992) recommendation of having at least a subject to item ratio of 5:1. In addition, the criteria of a minimum eigenvalue of 1.0 (Pedhazur, 1971) and at least three loads above 0.40 were necessary to retain a factor. The factorial solution is also confirmed in the scree plot ap- proach, validating the number of selected factors.
As the KMO tests pointed out a very good correla- tion between the variables (KMO = 0.939 and 0.946) and the Bartlett's Test resulted in significant differences (p<0.01), the factorial analysis’ requirements were veri- fied. The fidelity of the instrument was also tested through the assessment of its internal consistency. The Cronbach alpha was fixed on 0.70 (Nunnally and Bern- stein, 1994). Factor scores were calculated considering a weighted arithmetic mean of the items for each factor.
Finally, descriptive statistics were used to calcu-
late frequencies, percentages, means and standard devia- tions. In order to explore coaches’ perceptions in function of their professional experience and academic education, One-way ANOVA was applied using Tukey’s post hoc multiple comparisons. Results The exploratory factorial analysis produced solutions with 3 factors for both scales under analysis - perceptions of self-efficacy and training needs (Table 1). The respective subscales showed good internal consistency, with Cron- bach’s alpha of .90 to .96. As each factor presented eigen- values higher than 1.0 and was composed by 6 to 9 items, none were excluded from the study. Also, the factors include all the 23 items that composed the questionnaire.
Together, the three factors of the self-efficacy scale explain 69.35% of the total variance. As presented in table 1, the first factor explains the greatest amount of variance (59.27%). Coaches’ perception of competence related to annual and multi-annual planning (factor 1) presented an average of 3.96; perceived competences related to practice and competition orientation (factor 2) presented an average of 3.90; and, finally, those related to personal and coaching education competences (factor 3) presented an average of 3.29. In average, coaches’
Table 1. Factorial matrix resultant from the factorial analysis with Oblimin rotation, analyzing coaches’ self perceptions related to professional competences.
Self-perceptions’ factors and items Loadings Alpha Eigen values % of
Variance 6 To organize and implement the multi-annual plan. .842 3 To carry out the multi-annual preparation planning,
considering the team and the individual needs. .835
12 To establish the competition multi-annual plan. .831 9 To evaluate the multi-annual preparation planning. .817 15 To relate the competition with the multi-annual plan. .794 5 To organize and implement the annual plan .624 8 To evaluate and modify the annual planning, adapting it
to unexpected situations. .589
14 To coordinate the competition with the annual plan. .589
1 Competences
related to Annual and
Multi-annual Planning
2 To carry out the annual plan, considering the team and the individual needs. .428
.942 12.496 54.329
13 To guide an athlete during the competition, considering technical and discipline aspects. .792
10 To prepare an athlete and a team to the competition. .77 7 To evaluate and modify the practice session, adapting it
to unexpected situations. .758
4 To organize and direct the practice session. .729 1 To plan the practice session considering the team and
the individual needs. .718
2 Competences
related to Practice and Competition Orientation
11 To prepare a season’s competition, establishing goals adjusted to the team’s level. .698
.915 2.01 8.737
20 To be responsible about the world vision (social aspects and norms), trying to modify behaviors .757
22 To solve problems within new situations. .727 21 To communicate ideas, problems and solutions. .71 17 To lead an organization, managing the athletes, coaches
and sport specialist’s activities. .663
18 To guide the education of beginner coaches. .655 19 To manage other coaches education. .633 16 To assume the head coach’s role, managing other
coaches and sport specialist’s activities. .596
3 Personal and
Coaching Education
Competences
23 To be self-sufficient in learning, by a reflexive practice. .533
.909 1.444 6.28
Santos et al.
65
Table 2. Factorial matrix resultant from the factorial analysis with Oblimin rotation, analysing coaches’ training needs re- lated to professional competences.
Training needs’ factors and items Loadings Alpha Eigen values % of
Variance 10 To prepare an athlete and a team to the competition. .836
13 To guide an athlete during the competition, considering the technical and discipline aspects.
.818
7 To evaluate and modify the practice session, adapting it to unexpected situations.
.808
1 To plan the practice session considering the team and the individual needs.
.771
23 To be self-sufficient in learning, by a reflexive practice. .767 11 To prepare a season’s competition, establishing goals ad-
justed to team’s level. .733
1 Competences
related to Practice and Competition Orientation.
4 To organize and direct the practice session. .636
.961 13.631 59.266
6 To organize and implement the multi-annual plan. .815 9 To evaluate the multi-annual preparation planning. .81 12 To establish the competition multi-annual plan. .743 15 To relate the competition with the multi-annual plan .719 2 To carry out the annual plan, considering the team and the
individual needs. .577
8 To evaluate and modify the annual planning, adapting it to unexpected situations.
.557
5 To organize and implement the annual plan .551
2 Competences
related to Annual and
Multi- annual
Planning
14 To coordinate the competition with the annual plan .499
.938 2.177 9.467
19 To manage other coaches education. .803 17 To lead an organization, managing the athletes, coaches and
sport specialist’s activities. .779
18 To guide the education of beginner coaches. .737 16 To assume the head coach’s role, managing other coaches
and sport specialist’s activities. .722
22 To solve problems within new situations. .501 20 To be responsible about the world vision (social aspects and
norms), trying to modify behaviors .467
3 Personal and
Coaching Education
Competences
21 To communicate ideas, problems and solutions. .459
.905 1.539 6.689
perception of competence ranged from “competent” to “very competent”.
Considering the training needs scale (Table 2), the three factors explain 75.42% of the total variance. The results show that coaches highlighted training needs re- lated to practice and competition orientation (factor 1), with an average of 3.48; competences related to annual and multi-annual planning (factor 2), with an average of 3.02 and personal and coaching education competences (factor 3), with an average of 3.04. Regarding the training needs, in average, coaches rated competences represented by factors 1, 2 and 3 as “needed” to “much needed”.
Based on the factors that characterize coaches’ perceptions of competence and training needs related to professional competences, it was completed a compara- tive analysis of coaches groups formed by professional experience and academic education.
Considering professional experience (Table 3), we found significant differences in coaches’ perceptions in all factors. The results revealed that higher experienced coaches perceived themselves more competent in annual and multi-annual planning (F2.321 = 6.778; p = 0.001), in practice and competition orientation (F2.325 = 4.208; p = 0.016) and, also, in personal and coaching education com- petences (F2.316 = 5.991; p = 0.004) than the low experi- enced coaches.
Significant differences were, also, found in coaches’ perception of their training needs (Table 3). The
low experienced coaches believed they need more train- ing than the higher experienced coaches regarding compe- tences related to practice and competition orientation (F2,310 = 4.685; p = 0.012), and to annual and multi-annual planning (F2, 324 = 4.489; p = 0.013). Again, no differences were observed with the group of medium experienced coaches.
Considering coaches academic education (Table 4), several significant differences were identified in coaches’ perceptions of competence. In fact, regarding the three factors - competences related to annual and multi- annual planning (F2, 324 = 11.086; p < 0.001), practice and competition orientation (F2, 326 = 15.702; p < 0.001) and personal and coaching education competences (F2, 318 = 12.958; p < 0.001) - both coaches with P.E. degree and coaches with other higher education degree perceived themselves more competent than coaches with degree bellow higher education. In contrast to these results, a unique difference was shown respecting to the training needs (Table 4) and between the two higher education groups: P.E. group acknowledged lower values of training needs regarding the competences related to practice and competition orientation than coaches with other higher education degrees (F2, 312 = 3.710; p = 0.26).
Discussion The analysis of coaches’ perceptions of competence and
Coaches’ perceptions of professional competences
66
Table 3. Comparative analysis of coaches’ perceptions of competence and educational needs related to professional compe- tences considering the professional experience.
Professional Experience Mean SD Perceptions of competence
Low experienced 3.446 .727 Experienced 3.587 .686 Competences related to Annual and Multi-annual Planning (b) High experienced 3.757 .670 Low experienced 3.889 .616 Experienced 4.073 .594 Competences related to Practice and
Competition Orientation (b) High experienced 4.091 .590 Low experienced 3.419 .692 Experienced 3.695 .708 Personal and Coaching Education
Competences (b) High experienced 3.688 .661
Training Needs Low experienced 3.185 .871 Experienced 2.859 .871 Competences related to Practice and Competition Orientation (b) High experienced 2.856 .992 Low experienced 3.180 .851 Experienced 3.141 .972 Competences related to Annual and
Multi-annual Planning (b) High experienced 2.869 .924 Low experienced 3.133 .905 Experienced 3.100 1.024 Personal and Coaching Education
Competences High experienced 2.919 .954
Legend: Statistical differences between a) Low experienced and Experienced; b) Low experienced and High ex- perienced; c) Experienced and High experienced.
acknowledgement of training needs resulted in a similar three factors solution, making apparent competences related to annual and multi-annual planning, competences related to practice and competition orientation, and per- sonal and coaching education competences. Hence, coaches, in general, perceived that they need more profes-
sional education in a broad range of areas, pointing to- wards an assorted model of training needs.
However the reason why the item “To be self- sufficient in learning by a reflexive practice” had entered into different factors from one scale to the other is not easy to ascertain. While in the coaches’ perceptions of
Table 4. Comparative analysis of coaches’ perceptions of competence and educational needs related to professional compe- tences considering their academic education.
Academic Education Mean SD Perceptions of competence
Bellow higher education 3.403 .638 P.E. degree 3.735 .730 Competences related to Annual and Multi-annual Planning (a; b) Other higher education 3.856 .724 Bellow higher education 3.799 .583 P.E. degree 4.163 .599 Competences related to Practice and Com-
petition Orientation (a; b) Other higher education 4.172 .540 Bellow higher education 3.375 .673 P.E. degree 3.764 .693 Personal and Coaching Education Compe-
tences (a; b) Other higher education 3.750 .588
Training Needs Bellow higher education 3.173 .805 P.E. degree 2.874 1.026 Competences related to Practice and Com-
petition Orientation (c) Other higher education 2.902 1.042 Bellow higher education 3.148 .819 P.E. degree 2.949 .976 Competences related to Annual and Multi-
annual Planning Other higher education 3.026 1.011 Bellow higher education 3.085 .896 P.E. degree 3.020 1.029 Personal and Coaching Education Compe-
tences Other higher education 3.069 .951
Legend: Statistical differences between a) Bellow higher education and P.E. degree; b) Bellow higher education and Other higher education; c) P.E. degree and Other higher education.
Santos et al.
67
competence scale the referred item loaded on the “Per- sonal and Coaching Education competences” factor, in the acknowledgement of training needs scale it loaded on the “Competences related to Practice and Competition Orien- tation” factor. A tentative explanation for this apparent divergence could be that factors are not uncorrelated, and consequently, even if coaches consider that to be self- sufficient in learning by a reflexive practice is a personal and critical competence, they also take it of fundamental importance for the practice and competition orientation. Therefore coaches recognize that becoming a reflexive practioner is a training need related to skilled performance in the practice domain. As Irwin et al. (2006) verified, from a study with six graduates coaches on Coaching Science, reflection exists as an important element of coaching practice; moreover, as there is a ‘gap’ between the academic experience and the ‘real world’ reflective practice of sports coaching graduates, the development of reflective practice within sports coaches would appear critical to enhance professional competences.
Competences related to Annual and Multi-annual Planning emerged as the strongest factor for coaches’ perceptions of competence scale, which means that those competences may provide an excellent starting-point to examine the development of coaches’ competences. In- deed, whatever the coaching experience or academic education, regarding annual and multi-annual planning, coaches indicated that they perceive themselves as very competent. Nevertheless, coaches perceived that training in those areas is still needed. Demers et al., (2006) as- cribed that developing a seasonal or annual plan is a key goal for an undergraduate program of coach education. Coaches from under study emphasized long term plans, considering prospective and strategic plans as a funda- mental part of their professional competence. In its turn research have dedicated little attention to the planning aspects, namely to long term plans. Côté and Sedgwick (2003) point out the importance of the conception of ini- tiative plans, instead of simply reacting to various situa- tions in training and competition, and affirmed that coaches plan proactively by preparing training for the long and short-term and their athletes for unexpected situations that may occur (p. 67). In fact, the development of the strategic plan greatly helps to clarify the micro and macro plans and ensure that particular action plans are all "on the same script". This emphasis in the strategic plan- ning process itself is considered as a very important step in coaching planning.
Moreover, in this study, to plan, prepare and guide competitive experience and practice sessions were put together in the same factor, the one that unveils the daily work of coaches and the basic competences of the profes- sion. This factor, named Competences related to Practice and Competition Orientation emerged as the one in which they needed more training (much needed), even though they perceive themselves as very competent. Demers et al. (2006) emphasizes the competences of communicating and implementing training tasks, providing support and managing athletes during competition. Furthermore, the elite coaches interviewed by Abraham et al. (2006) identi- fied the competences of providing feedback and skill
acquisition as the key-words of coaches’ pedagogy; which they employed to explain how to construct the practice session and to adjust information to the ever changing environments of practice and competition.
A broad range of competences related to social is- sues, sport management and coaching education, called Personal and Coaching Education Competences, emerged as the third factor for perceptions of competence and acknowledgement of training needs. Although coaches’ perceptions resulted in being competent this factor was also classified as needed as the others. Those findings seem to be a sign of coaches’ permanent seek for compe- tence and curiosity to learn more in a broad range of ar- eas. Vargas-Tonsing (2007) reported the interest of coaches in learning more about communication with par- ents and athletes, since the communication is an essential part of coaching (Abraham et al., 2006; Vargas-Tonsing, 2007; Wiersma and Sherman, 2005). Coaches’ success and social status depends on their ability to make all sportspersons (athletes, parents, directors, etc.) trust on their skills. Accordingly, in this study, coaches recognize that effective communication skills are essential for suc- cess and link this competence with leadership and good teaching practices. Salmela (1996), also, highlights the importance of coach’s moral values and social and cul- tural sensitivity being this fact particularly important considering the large amount of time that coaches spend with the athletes and the power they exert over athletes’ minds. Recent studies (e.g. Cushion and Jones, 2006; Jones et al., 2004; Potrac and Jones, 2009) point out that social interactions are in the center of the coaching proc- ess, as “coaches are social beings operating in a social environment” (Jones et al., 2002, p. 35). However Cush- ion and Jones (2006) state that the social dynamics which founds the relationships between all sportspersons is not yet sufficiently understood. Thus, it is argued that coaches’ activities ought to be examined and explained as such, for instance using ethnographic research, in order to better inform the coaching training programs.
Also the administrative and managerial tasks in- herent to coaching are ascribed by thematic network pro- ject AEHESIS (Duffy, 2008) and by the Baccalaureate in Sport Intervention’s program (Demers et al., 2006). The elite coaches interviewed by Abraham et al. (2006) re- ferred to themselves as program leaders, and highlighted the importance of being able to manage human resources, for instance, leading a team of support staff. Besides gen- eral managing and head coach’s skills, the participants of this study also classified as important and needed compe- tences of educating beginner coaches. Research on coach- ing education has highlighted the importance of learning with more experienced coaches (Bloom et al., 1998; Cushion et al., 2003; Duffy, 2008; Gilbert and Trudel, 2001; Gould et al., 1990; Irwin et al., 2004; Knowles et al., 2005). As a consequence, not only the coaching edu- cational programs should include beginners’ coaches supervised field experiences (Cushion et al., 2003) but also prepare coaches to survey less experienced col- leagues. The elite coaches interviewed by Bloom et al. (1995) considered essential, to the improvement of coach- ing education, the development of a training program for
Coaches’ perceptions of professional competences
68
mentors, which are experimented coaches that supervise other coaches’ education (Irwin et al. 2004). Also, the AEHESIS’s project (Duffy, 2008) considers as one of the main activities associated with the coaching role the teaching, instructing and mentoring of sportspersons.
The results concerning professional experience
showed that low experienced coaches perceived them- selves less competent than high experienced coaches in all three factors. Also, they pointed out more training needs in issues related to practice and competition orientation, and annual and multi-annual planning. Learning through experience is undoubtedly one of the most referred ways of learning (Fleurence and Cotteaux, 1999; Jones et al., 2003, 2004; Wright et al., 2007), as well as source of knowledge (Gilbert and Trudel, 2001; Jones et al., 2002; Lemyre and Trudel, 2004; Wright et al., 2007). Hence, coaches who have experienced more practical situations describe themselves as more competent. Lemyre and Trudel (2004) studied youth ice hockey and soccer coaches’ opinion about the content of the Canadian NCCP and concluded that their prior experience had influenced their judgment. Experience was also pointed out by Jones et al.’s (2004), since when asked about the factors that influenced their professional development, coaches men- tioned practical experience in the first place.
Considering academic education, under study demonstrates that coaches with higher education degrees (P.E. or others) perceive themselves as more competent than coaches with no high education. The academic envi- ronment, even if not sport specific, promotes the devel- opment of basic professional competences, for instance, related to communication, leadership, evaluation or find- ing solutions to problems, which support coaches’ behav- iors and, consequently, may enhance the perception of competence as founded.
However some researchers (e.g. Bloom, 1997; Demers et al., 2006) highlighted that sport specific educa- tion has the advantage of supporting coaches’ behaviors with theoretical knowledge from the sport sciences, no differences in perceptions of competence were found between coaches with a PE degree and other higher edu- cation. The lack of more differences between these groups, into certain extent, may be due to the fact that ‘other higher education degree’ includes a broad range of academic fields, majorly in areas not related to teaching. However, a higher education allows a higher cultural level that could affect in a positive way coaches' percep- tion about their knowledge and competence to coaching. In the future it will be necessary to investigate about the influence of the P.E. course in coaches’ perceptions, namely using qualitative methods as interviews, to under- stand why those differences were not verified. However related to the training needs’ findings a difference was found between coaches with a P.E. degree and other higher education. This is related to practice and competi- tion orientation and indicates that coaches without sport specific education recognize more strongly the need for developing the basic competences underpinned the coaches’ daily work.
Furthermore further studies, which go beyond these findings, are recommended trying to understand
how perceptions of professional competence and training needs are influenced by the interaction of several coach characteristics. Conclusion Coaches’ perceptions of competence and acknowledge- ment of training needs resulted in three main areas: com- petences related to annual and multi-annual planning, competences related to practice and competition orienta- tion and, finally, personal and coaching education compe- tences. Although the competences were grouped in only these three factors, it included an assorted range of coach- ing competences, about all of which coaches indicated to have training needs, that brings an important feedback to coaching education. Nevertheless, the tasks that coaches had the most need in performing were related to the train- ing with a slight tendency to consider this area as the most necessary.
Whatever were the coaches’ years of experience or academic education, it was noticed that even though coaches considered themselves at least competent, they also perceive all kind of competences as needed. Those results suggest that coaches are interested in learning and in increasing their knowledge and competence in a broad range of areas, ascribing the importance of the research about coaches’ conceptions and educational needs to coaching improvement. The research is this area also claims, the need to identify, develop, and evaluate coach- ing competencies at all levels of coaching enabling coaches to access and communicate with the evolving body of coaching knowledge and best practice in a man- ner that will foster and support continuous learning and development. Regarding the competences that emerged in this study and the subjects that compose each compe- tence, it is advisable to consider them in the practical context, i.e., within the educational programs field. Espe- cially the competences related to coaching education and managing, about which there is still a lot of issues to explore, should be consider in the development of pro- grams curriculum and learning strategies.
More insights to coaching education can be pro- vided through this study’s findings. For instance, it was also found that the way coaches perceive their compe- tence and training needs are influenced by their own ex- perience. Indeed, low experienced coaches perceive them- selves as less competent and with more training needs. As experience has been stated as a major source of knowl- edge and learning, we would recommend that training programs began with the evaluation of the training needs of the coaches, in order to move towards a more individu- alized training and, also, more close to the real training requirements. Moreover coaches’ self-perception about competence demonstrated that coaches with high educa- tion (in P.E. or others) perceived themselves as more competent than coaches with no high education. Although academic training in Physical Education should be a dif- ferentiating factor of coaches’ perceptions, little differ- ences between coaches with education in Physical Educa- tion and other high courses were found. As ‘other higher education fields’ are not, in majority, related to teaching, a more contextualized study, that considers the nature and
Santos et al.
69
the quality of the education courses - specially using qualitative methods - is needed in order to better under- stand these findings. References Abraham, A., Collins, D. and Martindale, R. (2006) The coaching
schematic: validation through expert coach consensus. Journal of Sport Sciences 24(6), 549-564.
Bandura, A. (1977) Social Learning Theory. General Learning Press, New York.
Bloom, G. (1997) Characteristics, knowledge, and strategies of expert team sport coaches. Doctoral thesis, University of Ottawa, Ot- tawa. 218.
Bloom, G., Bush, N., Schinke, R. and Salmela, J. (1998) The importance of mentoring in the development of coaches and athletes. In- ternational Journal of Sport Psychology 29(3), 267-289.
Bloom, G., Salmela, J. and Schinke, R. (1995) Expert coaches’ opinion about novice coaches’ education. Sport 38(3), 46-51. (In French: English abstract).
Burden, P. R. (1990) Teacher development. In: Handbook of research on teacher education. Ed: Houston, W. R. New York: Macmil- lan. 311 - 327.
Coaching Association of Canada (2005) Summary of the NCCP Evalua- tion Project. Available from URL: http://www.coach.ca/eng/certification/documents/REP_Summa ry_NCCPEvalBlueprint_dec05.pdf. [Accessed 28/12/2009].
Coladarci, T. (1992) Teachers' sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching. Journal of Experimental Education 60, 323-337.
Comrey, A. L. and Lee, H. B. (1992) A First Course in Factor Analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale
Côté, J. and Salmela, J. (1996) The organizational tasks of high- performance gymnastics coaches. The Sport Psychologist 10(3), 247-260.
Côté, J., Salmela, J. and Russel, S. (1995) The knowledge of high per- formance gymnastics coaches: Competition and training con- siderations. The Sport Psychologist 9, 76-95.
Côté, J., Salmela, J., Baria, A. and Russel, S. (1993) Organizing and interpreting unstructured qualitative data. The Sport Psycholo- gist 7, 127-137.
Côté, J. and Sedgwick, W. (2003) Effective behaviors of expert rowing coaches: A qualitative investigation of Canadian athletes and coaches. International Sports Journal 7(1), 62-77.
Cushion, C., Armour, K. and Jones, R. (2003) Coach education and continuing professional development: Experience and learning to coach. Quest 55(3), 215-230.
Cushion, C. and Jones, R. (2006) Power, discourse, and symbolic vio- lence in professional youth soccer: The case of Albion Football Club. Sociology of Sport Journal 23(2), 142-161.
Demers, G., Woodburn, A. and Savard, C. (2006) The Development of an Undergraduate Competency-Based Coach Education Pro- gram. The Sport Psychologist 20(2), 162-173.
Duffy, P. (2008) Implementation of the Bologna Process and Model Curriculum Development in Coaching. In: Higher Education in Sport in Europe. From labour market demand to training sup- ply. Eds: Petry, K., Froberg, K., Madella, A. and Tokarsky, W. Maindenhead: Meyer & Meyer Sport. 80-108.
Feltz, D., Chase, M., Moritz, S. and Sullivan, P. (1999) A conceptual model of coaching efficacy: Preliminary investigation and in- strument development. Journal of Educational Psychology 91(4), 765-776.
Fleurence, P. and Cotteaux, V. (1999) Expertise construction with high level French coaches. Avante 5, 54-68. (In French: English ab- stract).
Gilbert, W. and Trudel, P. (2001) Learning to coach through experience: Reflection in model youth sport coaches. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 21(1), 16-34.
Gould, D., Giannini, J., Krane, V. and Hodge, K. (1990) Educational needs of elite U.S. national teams, Pan American, and Olympic coaches. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 9(4), 332- 344.
Irwin, G., Hanton, S. and Kerwin, D. (2004) Reflective practice and the origins of elite coaching knowledge. Reflective Practice 5, 425-442.
Jones, R., Armour, K. and Potrac, P. (2002) Understanding the coaching process: A framework for social analysis. Quest 54(1), 34-48.
Jones, R., Armour, K. and Potrac, P. (2003) Constructing expert knowl- edge: A case study of a top-level professional soccer coach. Sport Education and Society 8(2), 213-229.
Jones, R., Armour, K. and Potrac, P. (2004) Sports Coaching Cultures: From practice to theory. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group, London.
Jones, R. and Wallace, M. (2005) Another bad day at the training ground: coping with ambiguity in the coaching context. Sport, Education and Society 10(1), 119-134.
Kirschner, P., VanVilsteren, P., Hummel, H. and Wigman, M. (1997) The design of a study environment for acquiring academic and professional competence. Studies in Higher Education 22(2), 151-171.
Knowles, Z., Borrie, A. and Telfer, H. (2005) Towards the reflective sports coach: issues of context, education and application. Er- gonomics 48(11-14), 1711-1720.
Knowles, Z., Tyler, G., Gilbourne, D. and Eubank, M. (2007) Reflecting on reflection: exploring the practice of sports coaching gradu- ates. Reflective Practice, 7 (2), 163-179.
Lemyre, F. and Trudel, P. (2004) The learning process within the coach role. Avante 10(3), 40-55. (In French: English abstract).
Lirgg, C., Dibrezzo, R. and Smith, A. (1994) Influence of gender of coach on perceptions of basketball and coaching self-efficacy and aspirations of high school female basketball players. Women, Sport, and Physical Activity Journal 3, 1-14.
Nunnally, J. C. and Bernstein, I. H. (1994) Psychometric theory. 3rd edition. McGraw Hill, New York.
Pearson, A. (1984) Competence: A normative analysis. Competence inquires into its meaning and acquisition in educational set- tings. University Press of America, Lanham. 31-40.
Pedhazur, E. (1971) Factor structure of the dogmatism scale. Psycho- logical Reports 28(3), 735-740.
Perrenoud, P. (1999) Pedagogia Diferenciada. Das Intenções à Ação. Artmed Editora, Porto Alegre. (In Portuguese).
Potrac, P. and Jones, R. (2009) Power, conflict and co-operation: To- wards a micro-politics of coaching. Quest 61, 223-236.
Salmela, J. (1996) Great Job Coach! Getting the edge from proven winners. Potentiun, Ottawa.
Stephenson, J. and Weil, S. (1992) Quality in Learning: a capability approach in higher education. Kogan Page, London.
Tabachnick, B. and Fidell, L. (2007) Using Multivariate Statistics. 5th edition. Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
Taylor, K. and Betz, N. (1983) Applications of self-efficacy theory to the understanding and treatment of career indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior 22, 63-81.
Vargas-Tonsing, T. (2007) Coaches' preferences for continuing coaching education. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 2(1), 25-35.
Westera, W. (2001) Competences in education: a confusion of tongues. Journal of Curriculum Studies 33(1), 75-88.
Wiersma, L. and Sherman, C. (2005) Volunteer Youth Sport Coaches' Perspectives of Coaching Education/Certification and Parental Codes of Conduct. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport 76(3), 324-338.
Wright, T., Trudel, P. and Culver, D. (2007) Learning how to coach: the different learning situations reported by youth ice hockey coaches. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy 12(2), 127- 144.
Coaches’ perceptions of professional competences
70
Key points • Coaches’ perceptions of competence and acknowl-
edgement of training needs resulted in three main areas: competences related to annual and multi- annual planning, competences related to practice and competition orientation and, finally, personal and coaching education competences.
• The professional tasks that coaches had the most need in performing were related to the training ori- entation.
• Coaches with higher education degrees (P.E. or oth- ers) perceive themselves as more competent than coaches with no higher education.
• Low experienced coaches perceived themselves less competent than high experienced coaches. Also, they pointed out more training needs in issues re- lated to practice and competition orientation, and annual and multi-annual planning.
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY Sofia SANTOS Employment Faculty of Sport, Oporto University, Portugal Degree MSc Research interests Coach education, coach behavior. E-mail: sofiafmsantos@gmail.com Isabel MESQUITA Employment Professor, Faculty of Sport, Oporto University, Portugal Degree PhD Research interests Coach education, instructional approaches, teaching and coaching team sports, game analysis. E-mail: imesquita@fade.up.pt Amândio GRAÇA Employment University of Porto; Faculty of Sport, Portugal Degree PhD Research interests Sport pedagogy, teaching and coaching team sports, teachers’ and coaches’ knowledge, ınstructional approaches. E-mail: agraca@fade.up.pt António ROSADO Employment Faculty of Human Movement, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal Degree PhD Research interests Sport education, sport psychology. E-mail: arosado@fmh.utl.pt
Isabel Maria Ribeiro Mesquita
Rua Dr. Plácido Costa, 91 - 4200.450 Porto, Portugal
Copyright of Journal of Sports Science & Medicine is the property of Hakan Gur, Journal of Sports Science &
Medicine and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.