Results of Recent Dissertations:

Volunteer Youth Sport Coaches: A Study of Motivation, Satisfaction, and

Efficacy

Dr. Louis L. Fletcher 25 July 2012

Introduction 2.5 million adult volunteers on an annual basis to support the sports activities of approximately 38 million children – Parental Expectations

• Future Star Struck • Gate keeper Syndrome

– Volunteer Youth Coach Stress • Motivation • Satisfaction • Efficacy (Confidence)

Introduction Background of the Problem – Parallels to Classroom Educators – Volunteer Youth Coach Dilemmas

• Violence Towards Young Athletes • Efficacy

Introduction Statement of the Problem – Identification of the factors which motivate

volunteers to become and remain recreational or competitive youth coaches, their level of satisfaction while volunteering, and the associated coaching confidence; which is a predictor of youth coach efficacy, is the purpose of the present study

Introduction Statement of the Problem – Necessity of Role – Motivation

• Children in the Program • Investment Model (Rusbult 1998)

– Sports Encomia • Coaches Perceived as Gate Keepers • Litigation • Violence (Stress Manifested)

– Education and Certification Movement • National Standards • Volunteer’s Time Constraints

Introduction Statement of the Problem – Research Questions

• Does the level of coaching confidence (efficacy) differ significantly between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches?

• Does the level of coaching confidence (efficacy) differ significantly between volunteer youth coaches with less than 5 years of experience and volunteer youth coaches with more than 5 year of experience?

Introduction Statement of the Problem – Research Questions (Cont)

• Does coaching satisfaction differ significantly between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches?

• Does the desire to coach because they have a young

athlete on the team differ significantly between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches?

Methodology Research Expectations – Hypothesis H01 (Null)

• There is no significant difference in the level of coaching confidence (efficacy) between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches

– Hypothesis HA1 (Alternative) • There is a significant difference in the level of

coaching confidence (efficacy) between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches

Methodology Research Expectations – Hypothesis H02 (Null)

• There is no significant difference in the level of coaching confidence between volunteer youth coaches w/ less than 5 yrs of experience and volunteer youth coaches w/ more than 5 yrs of experience

– Hypothesis HA2 (Alternative) • There is a significant difference in the level of coaching

confidence between volunteer youth coaches w/ less than 5 yrs of experience and volunteer youth coaches w/ more than 5 yrs of experience

Methodology Research Expectations – Hypothesis H03 (Null)

• There is no significant difference in coaching satisfaction between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches

– Hypothesis HA3 (Alternative) • There is a significant difference in coaching

satisfaction between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches

Methodology Research Expectations – Hypothesis H04 (Null)

• There is no significant difference in the desire to coach because they have a young athlete on the team between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches

– Hypothesis HA4 (Alternative) • There is a significant difference in the desire to coach

because they have a young athlete on the team between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches

Methodology Description of Research Design – Cohort Study

• Descriptive Statistics • Demographics • Response Rankings

• Inferential Statistics • T-test • Oneway ANOVA • Mann-Whitney U

Methodology Operational Definition of Variables – Competitive Youth Sport League: A league where there

is no mandate for equal playing time and participants must try out (audition) for a team and are subject to roster cuts (skill based) to be selected for team membership.

– Recreational Youth Sport League: A league where there

is a mandate for equal playing time and participants do not try out (audition) for a team and are not subject to roster cuts (skill based) to be selected for team membership.

Methodology Selection of Subjects – Gold Crown Foundation Youth Basketball

• Competitive League • Non-Profit 501 (c) 3 • Volunteer Coaches

– YMCA Youth Basketball • Recreational League • Faith Based • Volunteer Coaches

Methodology Procedure – Questionnaire (Self Report)

• Competitive Coach Cohort Sample • Recreational Coach Cohort Sample

– Statistical Package for the Social Sciences • Data Input • Data Analysis

Methodology Description of Instrumentation – Motivation to Volunteer Questionnaire (MVQ)

• 19 items with six sub-scales • Purposive Factors (PF) • Solidary Factors (SF) • External Factors (EF) • Commitments (CM) • Children in Program (CP) • Teach and Become Involved with Youth (TIY)

• 4-point Likert scale

Methodology Description of Instrumentation – Satisfaction with Volunteering Questionnaire

(SVQ) • 7 items • 4-point Likert scale

Methodology Description of Instrumentation – Coaching Efficacy Scale (CES) Coaching

Confidence Questionnaire (CCQ) • 24 items with four sub-scales

• Game Strategy Efficacy (GSE) • Motivation Efficacy (ME) • Technique Efficacy (TE) • Character Building Efficacy (CBE)

• 10-point Likert scale

Methodology Methodological Assumptions and Limitations – Self-Report

• Respondent Accuracy • No Reward or Punishment System • Temporal Affect

• Sample Size • Random Sample • Representative Sample

Methodology Ethical Assurances – Human Subjects

• IRB • Informed Consent

– Confidentiality

Findings Analysis and Evaluation of Findings – Quantitative Analysis

• T-test • Oneway ANOVA • Mann-Whitney U

– Hypothesis Testing • Null • Alternative

Findings Analysis and Evaluation of Findings – Although the rankings of recreational coaches were

consistently higher than competitive coaches for multiple items and the second order factors no significant results were found using an Independent Samples T-test, Oneway ANOVA, or Mann-Whitney U. Therefore; the Hypothesis HO1 (null): There is no significant difference in the level of coaching confidence (efficacy) between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches is not rejected.

Findings Analysis and Evaluation of Findings – The “ability to motivate athletes” (p=.03) and “ability

to build team cohesion” (p=.055) were found to be significant using the Independent Samples T-test and Oneway ANOVA. Therefore; Hypothesis HA2 (alternative): There is a significant difference in the level of coaching confidence (efficacy) between volunteer youth coaches with less than 5 years of experience and volunteer youth coaches with more than 5 years of experience is accepted for both items.

Analysis and Evaluation of Findings – Despite the differences noted in the descriptive data

no significant results were found using an Independent Samples T-test, Oneway ANOVA, or Mann-Whitney U. Therefore; Hypothesis HO3 (null): There is no significant difference in coaching satisfaction between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches is not rejected.

Findings

Findings Analysis and Evaluation of Findings – The recreational coaches’ top ranking of “my

children are involved in sports program” is significantly different than the competitive coaches’ ninth place ranking. This item was found significant (p=.003) using the Independent Samples T-test and an Oneway ANOVA. Therefore; Hypothesis HA4 (alternative): There is a significant difference in the desire to coach because they have a young athlete on the team between volunteer recreational youth coaches and volunteer competitive youth coaches is accepted.

Conclusions Recommendations – Characterizing your target recruiting population is

the first step to understanding if what you have to offer is what the potential workforce wants. Motivation is the root of desire but it must be sustained for the desire to coach to remain strong. Satisfaction is the fuel which feeds the engine of motivation; therefore, it is a necessary component for retention. Coaching confidence (efficacy) is the vehicle which carries motivation and satisfaction to coaching success.

Conclusions Recommendations – The number one motivation factor for recreational

coaches was found to be the fact they had children in the program. This factor ensures a subset of the workforce will continue to enter coaching as long as they have young athletes who are interested in playing.

– It is recommended that this group be cultivated to inspire selected coaches to coach beyond their child’s tenure.

Conclusions Recommendations – Competitive coaches do not espouse having a child

in the program as the most important factor. The latter group is also a recommended target for cultivation because they have faced a higher level of competition and usually more technically proficient in teaching young athletes.

– One factor that could deter the consistent recruiting of competitive coaches is the desire to “coach at a higher level” that was informally reported to the investigator by many competitive coaches.

Conclusions Recommendations – If coaches are rewarded with the opportunity to go

to a professional coaching clinic conducted by prominent high school, college, or professional coaches this could make education a reward.

– It is recommended that a recognition program for coaches would both satisfy egoistic desires and build coaching competence.

Conclusions Recommendations – Parent-stakeholders should be required to sign a

statement of acceptable parental behavior with respect to coaches as condition of their child being in the league. If the aforementioned contract is breached, then sanctions such suspensions and expulsions should be levied and refunds for fees should not be entertained.

– It is recommended that all stakeholders be exposed to the accountability processes of the league.