Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Boston University / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis or dissertation. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / Bandura (1986,1997) asserts that a group's belief in its members' co-joint abilities, or its collective-efficacy, influences the degree to which that group seeks challenging goals, puts forth effort, and persists in the face of adversity. Group leaders serve important functions in the development of successful groups (Yalom, 1995). Since successful coaches are able to consistently demonstrate the ability to mold a group of individuals into a winning team, it is important to understand what methods coaches employ to develop team confidence. The purpose of this study was to understand how master football coaches develop team confidence. The participants for this interview-based, qualitative study included twenty "master" football coaches (6 professional and 14 collegiate). Criteria for inclusion were as follows: each participant had been a head football coach for at least ten years, and had a consistent record of success. Seventeen of the twenty had achieved success with three or more different teams. The findings reveal that these coaches employ a wealth of psychological strategies in different situations to enhance the development of team confidence. Their selective deployment of these strategies takes place throughout a series of developmental tasks, here described as the "Team Confidence Cycle." This includes seven key tasks: 1. Set the Course, 2. Create a Confidence Environment, 3. Promote Mastery, 4. Get Them to Perform, 5. Assess Performance, 6. Stay the Course and 7. Maintain High Performance. In the interviews the coaches revealed that team confidence was essential to their view of how teams achieve success. The constructs of team confidence and success were considered closely intertwined. Promoting mastery experiences, therefore, was primary among those strategies used by the master coaches to build team confidence. A second key strategy was that they pointed out successful experiences to their team(s). These coaches thus placed the greatest importance on "demonstrating ability" and then ensuring that improvement was noted. These findings are in accordance with Bandura (1997). Implications for coaches, especially of youth sport, are outlined in the final chapter. / 2031-01-01

Abstract Increasing global interest in coaching science research has resulted in a greater recognition of the complexities and dynamics existing in the coaching process (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003). Associated with the dynamic and complex nature of the coaching process are the many social relationships that operate within this process. A high performance coach’s network is often associated with athletes, officials, support staff and administrators. In essence, coaches form dynamic social networks (DSN; (Mallett, Rossi, & Tinning, 2007) that are paramount to developing their coaching practice, and therefore their coaching knowledge. The aim of this project was to understand how high performance football coaches (HPFC) learn. The research questions were as follows: • What are the major sources of information for HPFC? • What sources of information are most valuable to the HPFC? • What role does the interaction with other coaches’ play in developing knowledge? In order to better understand the nature of coach interactions in developing knowledge it is useful to consider the notions of communities of practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998), networks of practice (NoP) (Nichani & Hung, 2002), informal knowledge networks (IKN) (Allee, 2000) and dynamic social networks (DSN) (Mallett, et al., 2007). This qualitative research was conducted with six high performance football coaches (HPFC) in Australia using semi-structured interviews. Each interview was transcribed and analysed into meaning units through the process of triangular consensus. The coaches in this sample did not display a fully functioning CoP, IKN, or NoP. The HPFCs failed to display the critical element of a joint enterprise. Mutual engagement was partially reported between coaches of the same team but was not reported between opposition coaches. The coaches reported the final element of a shared repertoire. Nichani & Hung’s (2002) notion of a NoP and Allee’s (2000) research on IKN were considered as possible social networks to describe the coaching context. These coaches did not develop relationships that could be characterised as a NoP. The data suggests that the development of knowledge through face-to-face interactions with other people was valued over use of Internet exchanges and chat rooms. There was evidence to suggest the formation of a coaches’ IKN, however it is proposed that this was not the major source for these coaches in developing knowledge. Most importantly it was found that HPFC in the Australian context are engaged in a DSN. It was reported by the coaches in this study that their interactions are dynamic, in that they change throughout their careers to the extent that their people of influence can be numerous; this is due to two key findings. The nature of the work of HPFC is highly contested and thus the information and knowledge is sacred. This is a barrier for information and knowledge transfer and can inhibit learning. In addition finding a person of influence is a lengthy process as it can take years to build mutual trust and respect. By understanding how coaches learn their craft through their interactions with others, coach development could potentially assist coaches through the learning process.

Abstract Increasing global interest in coaching science research has resulted in a greater recognition of the complexities and dynamics existing in the coaching process (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003). Associated with the dynamic and complex nature of the coaching process are the many social relationships that operate within this process. A high performance coach’s network is often associated with athletes, officials, support staff and administrators. In essence, coaches form dynamic social networks (DSN; (Mallett, Rossi, & Tinning, 2007) that are paramount to developing their coaching practice, and therefore their coaching knowledge. The aim of this project was to understand how high performance football coaches (HPFC) learn. The research questions were as follows: • What are the major sources of information for HPFC? • What sources of information are most valuable to the HPFC? • What role does the interaction with other coaches’ play in developing knowledge? In order to better understand the nature of coach interactions in developing knowledge it is useful to consider the notions of communities of practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998), networks of practice (NoP) (Nichani & Hung, 2002), informal knowledge networks (IKN) (Allee, 2000) and dynamic social networks (DSN) (Mallett, et al., 2007). This qualitative research was conducted with six high performance football coaches (HPFC) in Australia using semi-structured interviews. Each interview was transcribed and analysed into meaning units through the process of triangular consensus. The coaches in this sample did not display a fully functioning CoP, IKN, or NoP. The HPFCs failed to display the critical element of a joint enterprise. Mutual engagement was partially reported between coaches of the same team but was not reported between opposition coaches. The coaches reported the final element of a shared repertoire. Nichani & Hung’s (2002) notion of a NoP and Allee’s (2000) research on IKN were considered as possible social networks to describe the coaching context. These coaches did not develop relationships that could be characterised as a NoP. The data suggests that the development of knowledge through face-to-face interactions with other people was valued over use of Internet exchanges and chat rooms. There was evidence to suggest the formation of a coaches’ IKN, however it is proposed that this was not the major source for these coaches in developing knowledge. Most importantly it was found that HPFC in the Australian context are engaged in a DSN. It was reported by the coaches in this study that their interactions are dynamic, in that they change throughout their careers to the extent that their people of influence can be numerous; this is due to two key findings. The nature of the work of HPFC is highly contested and thus the information and knowledge is sacred. This is a barrier for information and knowledge transfer and can inhibit learning. In addition finding a person of influence is a lengthy process as it can take years to build mutual trust and respect. By understanding how coaches learn their craft through their interactions with others, coach development could potentially assist coaches through the learning process.

Abstract Increasing global interest in coaching science research has resulted in a greater recognition of the complexities and dynamics existing in the coaching process (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003). Associated with the dynamic and complex nature of the coaching process are the many social relationships that operate within this process. A high performance coach’s network is often associated with athletes, officials, support staff and administrators. In essence, coaches form dynamic social networks (DSN; (Mallett, Rossi, & Tinning, 2007) that are paramount to developing their coaching practice, and therefore their coaching knowledge. The aim of this project was to understand how high performance football coaches (HPFC) learn. The research questions were as follows: • What are the major sources of information for HPFC? • What sources of information are most valuable to the HPFC? • What role does the interaction with other coaches’ play in developing knowledge? In order to better understand the nature of coach interactions in developing knowledge it is useful to consider the notions of communities of practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998), networks of practice (NoP) (Nichani & Hung, 2002), informal knowledge networks (IKN) (Allee, 2000) and dynamic social networks (DSN) (Mallett, et al., 2007). This qualitative research was conducted with six high performance football coaches (HPFC) in Australia using semi-structured interviews. Each interview was transcribed and analysed into meaning units through the process of triangular consensus. The coaches in this sample did not display a fully functioning CoP, IKN, or NoP. The HPFCs failed to display the critical element of a joint enterprise. Mutual engagement was partially reported between coaches of the same team but was not reported between opposition coaches. The coaches reported the final element of a shared repertoire. Nichani & Hung’s (2002) notion of a NoP and Allee’s (2000) research on IKN were considered as possible social networks to describe the coaching context. These coaches did not develop relationships that could be characterised as a NoP. The data suggests that the development of knowledge through face-to-face interactions with other people was valued over use of Internet exchanges and chat rooms. There was evidence to suggest the formation of a coaches’ IKN, however it is proposed that this was not the major source for these coaches in developing knowledge. Most importantly it was found that HPFC in the Australian context are engaged in a DSN. It was reported by the coaches in this study that their interactions are dynamic, in that they change throughout their careers to the extent that their people of influence can be numerous; this is due to two key findings. The nature of the work of HPFC is highly contested and thus the information and knowledge is sacred. This is a barrier for information and knowledge transfer and can inhibit learning. In addition finding a person of influence is a lengthy process as it can take years to build mutual trust and respect. By understanding how coaches learn their craft through their interactions with others, coach development could potentially assist coaches through the learning process.

Thesis (M Sport Sc (Sport Science))--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / The purpose of this study was to describe the different methods used by coaches to improve decision making in ruby. The study included three coaches from the Western Cape area. Two of the three coaches worked with U/20A league teams and the third coach worked in the Super A league. Eight coaching sessions were video taped and analysed to identify the coaching method used when presenting skill development activities. The verbal behaviour each coach was also recorded. Five rugby games involving each of the teams were also analysed to determine which team had the highest success rates in key categories. The results showed that Coach 1 integrated decision making with skill practice primarily through the method of verbal feedback during sessions where he used a direct teaching style. His comments to players during technical skill instruction were focussed on linking their skill performance to its tactical use in a game. The other two coaches followed the expected pattern of using indirect teaching styles to teach players how to apply tactics. It was concluded that different coaches may use different teaching styles to improve players’ decision making. The belief that the direct style of coaching focuses on technical learning at the expense of tactical understanding may be false. Much more research needs to be completed on coaching methods before specific recommendations can be made to coaches about optimal approaches to balancing the demand for good tactical decision making and sound technical skill performance.

The aim of the current thesis was to critically examine the reflection and experience-based learning of professional football players and coaches at a football club. Specific attention was paid to the influence that the social environment had on players and coaches experiences and the extent to which they influenced each others experience-based learning and reflective practice. A case study approach using semi-structured interviews and ethnography including participant observation, informal interviews and audio/video recordings informed the current research. Schön's (1983) experience-based theory of learning and reflective practice was used to represent coaches and players reflective practice prior to the application of Foucault (1972, 1979, 1988, 1991a) as social theory. It was found that an institutionally reproduced discourse, which emphasized the importance of winning, governed both coaches and players experience-based learning at the club. Positive discourses of reflection were introduced by coaches and embodied by willing and docile players due to the added legitimacy that was associated with their knowledge. Players reflective practice represented a technology of power as it was dominated by their coaches presence and resulted in players interpretations being normalised to the extent that they became self-surveillant. Players compliance contributed to the construction and reproduction of an overarching disciplinary culture of surveillance that was initially introduced by the club s coaches and made possible through the constant assimilation of data and different forms of performance monitoring (i.e. GPS, video-based PA, physical testing).

The purposes of this study may be stated as follows: 1. To analyze the instructional procedures utilized by the coaching staff in the development of the T-wing football formation at the Grand Prairie High School, Grand Prairie, Texas. 2. To gain a better understanding of the functions of the T-wing football formation as it is taught at the Grand Prairie High School. 3. To make recommendations and to propose further developments for the instructional procedures used in coaching the T-wing football formation at the Grand Prairie High School.