coach tracking study year three headline report
DESCRIPTION
This is the third year report from a four year longitudinal study of over 600 coaches. The report is split into two main sections. The first presents results on the active coaches (585 coaches); the second on those coaches who had stopped in the last 12 months and returned their Year Two questionnaire (36 coaches). Topics covered in this report include: motivations for coaching; coach development; support services; coaching careers.TRANSCRIPT
UK Coach Tracking Study Year Three Headline Report
February 2011
2
Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................... 3
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 5
2. Method ............................................................................................................ 6
3. The Sample ...................................................................................................... 8
4. Motivation for Coaching .................................................................................... 10
5. Coaching Roles ................................................................................................ 13
6. Coach Development ......................................................................................... 16
7. Coaching Careers ............................................................................................ 27
8. Next 12 months .............................................................................................. 31
9. Exit from coaching ........................................................................................... 33
10.Commentary .................................................................................................. 37
References ......................................................................................................... 39
3
Executive Summary
The Research
This report provides the headline findings from the third wave of data collection of the
main quantitative survey of the UK Coach Tracking Study.
The Coach Tracking Study is a four-year project that tracks UK coaches‟ experiences and
opinions in terms of their learning and development, deployment and employment, and
use of support.
The Sample
The third year sample includes 585 UK coaches (down from 851 in Year Two) which
remains the largest ever single sample of coaches to be researched. Information is also
presented for 36 coaches who reported giving up coaching.
The sample characteristics remain slightly different to that of the UK coaching population
as a whole, and appear to reflect more closely the characteristics of the central group of
coaches and head coaches as defined in the UK Coaching Workforce 2009-2016
document (North, 2009). This should be remembered when making any conclusions
about coaches and coaching from this report.
The coaches in the sample were largely male (73%), white (96%), non-disabled (96%),
and well qualified (52% had a degree level qualification or over).
Motivations for Coaching
Coaches continued to coach for a combination of various reasons, however, evidence
suggests that coaches rely primarily on intrinsic motives as they progress through
coaching, such as “enjoying coaching and developing athletes” and “the interaction with
athletes”. In comparison, extrinsic motives, such as pay and benefits, are not as strongly
reported by the coaches.
Coach Development
The coaches used a wide variety of learning sources/environments to inform their
development, and though there were preferences at different stages, and to meet
different learning objectives, evidence from Year Three strengthens the argument that
this variety and balance of sources is critical to coaches‟ development.
As coaches progress through their careers and develop, they appear to place increased
value in learning from informal and self-directed opportunities such as working closely
with the athletes/players/participants, reading books and using online resources.
In a similar fashion, coaches seek a variety of knowledge and information from the
learning opportunities they engage in. However, although they appear to seek more
information on technical and tactical aspects of coaching, they attach greater importance
to learning how to coach (e.g., listening, providing feedback, motivating).
Nine out of ten coaches (95%) held a recognised coaching qualification and valued them
as important to their development (93%), particularly in terms of knowledge gains.
However, evidence suggests that as coaches progress through their careers and become
qualified, they begin to place less value on the attainment of additional qualifications.
Furthermore, an increased number of coaches expressed a concern with the cost of
qualifications and difficulties relating to the location in which courses took place.
4
Support Services
Evidence from Year Three suggests that coaches on the whole felt “unsupported” by the
system. Year 3 continues the trend of coaches reporting less support from coaching
organisations, particularly in terms of costs, opportunities and advice on development.
Coaching Careers
Data from Year Three of the project provide some evidence that coaches are likely to
specialise and invest in coaching one or a small number of sports as they progress
through their careers, whereas during early stages they are likely to sample a greater
number of sports.
There appears to be increasing evidence that women coaches are more likely to be paid
than males.
Full-time coaches appear more able to undertake learning and development, whilst still
committing a significant proportion of their time to delivery.
The proportion of paid coaching is increasing slightly but most of this is on a part-time
basis.
The average annual salary for a full-time coach has increased from £21, 676 in Year One
to £23,676 in Year Three.
Coaches reporting that they had given up coaching were an average of 41 years old,
were predominantly male (53%), coached primarily on a voluntary basis (44%), and
held a lower level coaching qualification (53% Level 2 or below). This age profile is
significantly different to that reported in Year Two.
Reasons for giving up coaching were principally attributed to personal factors such as
increased work/family commitments. A secondary factor was a lack of support from
organisations (e.g., club, Governing Body) and lack of career (paid) opportunities.
5
1. Introduction
This report provides the headline findings from the third wave of data collection from the
main quantitative survey of the UK Coach Tracking Study.
The UK Coach Tracking Study is a four-year project that tracks UK coaches‟ development
in terms of learning, deployment and employment, and use of support. The project
collects quantitative data using a postal and web-based return from a large panel of UK
coaches.
This report will be followed by a number of more detailed and specific reports and
publications based on the UK Coach Tracking Study datasets.
6
2. Method
A full account of the method used in Year One of the UK Coach Tracking Study is
provided in Timson-Katchis and North (2008). The following provides an update of the
methodological issues in the last 12 months.
Participant retention
A key issue for the project given its longitudinal design was to minimise attrition and
maximise retention of participating coaches. Given that data collection occurs on an
annual basis it was important to maintain regular contact with participants. As an
incentive to maintain participation in the project all coaches were offered a free
subscription to Coaching Edge, a magazine which presents information on coaching,
coaching methods, development, leading practice and case studies. The magazine is a
quarterly publication, which ensured that participants were receiving communication
from the project team every three months.
As an additional incentive, all participating coaches were entered into an annual prize
draw for the UK Coaching Awards, one of the most high profile events celebrating the
best of coaching in the UK. Information and updates regarding the project, as well as the
experience of the coaches attending the UK Coaching Awards were featured in Coaching
Edge, thereby reinforcing to coaches the importance of the study and illustrating its
impact.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire used a mixture of closed and open response questions (see Appendix
one). The questionnaire was divided into the following thematic sections:
Section A: Personal changes over the last 12 months
Section B: Coaching changes over the last 12 months
Section C: Coaching experience in the last 12 months
Section D: Coach objectives
Section E: Coach development experiences and knowledge in the last 12 months
Section F: Coach qualifications
Section G: Coaching careers
Section H: Evaluating your own performance
Section I: Support services
Section J: The next 12 months
Data Collection
The questionnaire was sent to the 851 coaches that had participated in Year Two of the
project. Though the questionnaire length was reduced in comparison to Year One,
participants were allowed six months to complete and return the questionnaire. For
those participants who had not returned their questionnaire by post, regular reminders
were sent via the coaching edge and by e-mail.
Participants were offered three options for completing the survey:
Paper Submission: All participants were sent a paper-version of the questionnaire
along with a prepaid envelope to return it in.
Online Submission: Participants with online access were sent a secure web link to an
online version of the questionnaire. The link, unique to each coach, allowed
participants to complete the questionnaire over time and submit once completed.
7
Over the phone: Coaches were also able to complete the questionnaire over the
phone with the principal researcher.
Response
Of the 851 coaches that participated in Year One, 621 re-engaged in the project and
returned the questionnaire for Year Three, a retention rate of 73%. 585 of these coaches
were still active and 36 had stopped coaching.
Of the 230 coaches that withdrew from the study, 37 coaches (16%) relocated without
advising project management of their new contact details and therefore the
communication was returned undelivered. 21 coaches (9%) notified the research team of
their withdrawal from the project, 13 of which did due to the fact they were no longer
coaching while the other 8 coaches provided no reason. The majority of the coaches that
did not re-engage (n=172) did not communicate the reasons for their withdrawal with
the project team.
Analysis
Given the longitudinal design of the project and its stated aim to track coaches‟ progress
over four years, it was important to compare Year Three results with those in Year One.
To facilitate this, Year One results were recalculated on the basis of the Year Three
sample (585 coaches) to provide direct comparability.
The report is split into two main sections. The first presents results on the active coaches
(585 coaches); the second on those coaches who had stopped in the last 12 months and
returned their Year Three questionnaire (36 coaches).
8
3. The Sample
In order to understand and set in context the main findings of the report it is important
to consider the sample of coaches in this wave of data collection. General demographic
information is initially presented, in addition to data on the coaches‟ non-coaching
education.
Gender, Disability and Ethnicity
Sports Coaching in the UK 3 (sports coach UK, 2011) suggests male coaches account for
69% of the overall UK coaching workforce but in the case of qualified coaches (excluding
assistant coaches) 82% are male. The sample in the current study falls in between these
two figures, with a higher proportion of male coaches (73%) in comparison to the overall
coaching population, but a lower proportion in comparison to the qualified subgroup
(Table 3.1).
The Coaching Workforce 2009-2016 document suggests that 8% of the overall UK
coaching population and 11% of qualified coaches have a disability (North, 2009). In the
Coach Tracking Study sample there was an under-representation, with 4% of coaches
stating that they have a disability (Table 3.1).
Table 3.1
Coaches by Gender, Disability and Ethnicity
Year Three
N= %
Gender
Male 425 73
Female 160 27
Disability
Disabled 24 4
Non-Disabled 561 96
Ethnicity
White 564 96
Black and Ethnic Minorities 17 3
Prefer not to say 4 1
Total 585 100 Base: All coaches
The 2001 Census of Population indicates that almost 8% of the UK Population is from
minority ethnic groups. Data from Sports Coaching in the UK 3 (sports coach UK, 2011)
suggests that minority ethnic groups are under-represented in the overall UK coaching
population with just 3% reporting themselves as non-white. This under-representation is
further increased in the case of qualified coaches (excluding assistant coaches) as only
1% of these are of an ethnic minority(sports coach UK, 2011). The ethnic breakdown of
the sample in this study reflects this under-representation, with 3% of coaches reporting
as non-white (Table 3.1).
Age and Parenthood
Sports Coaching in the UK 3 (sports coach UK, 2011) indicates that 77% of coaches fit
into three age bands (15-24, 35-44 and 45-54). The sample in this study depicts a
9
somewhat older profile, with the highest percentage of coaches in the 45-54 year age
bands and only 9% of coaches in the 15-24 age band. The average age of a coach in this
study is 44 years in Year Three, in comparison to 41.8 in Year One, in line with the
progression of the survey.
With regards to parental status, there has been little change between Year One and Year
Three, with 20 coaches becoming parents again. 3 out of 5 coaches in this study have
children (62%) (Table 3.2).
Table 3.2
Coaches by Age and Parent Role
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Age
15-24 years 65 11 50 9
25-34 years 97 17 88 15
35-44 years 154 26 125 21
45-54 years 165 28 198 34
55+ years 104 19 124 21
Average Age 41.8 44
Parents
Yes 334 57 361 62
No 251 43 224 38
Total 585 100 585 100
Base: All Coaches
Highest Qualification Held
The coaches in the sample were well educated with 52% having a degree-level
qualification and only 1% having no qualifications (Table 3.3). This complements other
research that has noted relatively high qualification levels amongst coaches compared to
the UK population (North, 2006).
Table 3.3
Coaches by Highest Qualification held (non-coaching)
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Degree or Equivalent
262 47 296 52
Higher Education Qualifications
99 18 100 18
GCE A-Level or Equivalent
69 12 59 10
GCSE or
Equivalent 109 20 94 17
Other 7 1 13 2
No
qualifications 14 3 8 1
Total 560 100 570 100
Base: All coaches
10
4. Motivation for Coaching
In Year Three, coaches were asked about their motivation to continue coaching. The
most cited reasons related to the interaction of coaches with participants and the
rewards associated with it. Nine out of ten coaches (92%) stated that the “enjoyment
derived from seeing athletes develop their skills and improve” motivated them to
continue coaching. Over three quarters of coaches (79%) indicated that they continued
coaching because they “liked the interaction with participants” and 71% indicated that
they “liked the buzz when participants did well, knowing that they had something to do
with it” (Table 4.1).
Table 4.1
Coaches’ Motivation to Continue Coaching by Gender in Year Three
All Coaches % Male Coaches
% Female Coaches N= %
I like seeing athletes develop their skills and improve
532 92 92 93
I like the interaction with athletes / players / participants
457 79 80 79
I like the buzz when athletes do well, knowing I had something to do with it
412 71 71 73
Maintain involvement in sport now that I don‟t play
252 44 48 32
I like the thrill of competition 176 31 33 23
To help my old club 157 27 27 27
To help my child 121 21 24 12
It‟s a good career in terms of pay and
benefits 68 12 11 14
Base: 585 coaches who were still actively coaching Note: Coaches were able to tick all options that applied to them
Differences in motivation between male and female coaches revolve mainly around
children and past participation. The data suggests that female coaches are less likely to
continue coaching because of their child‟s own sporting participation (12% in comparison
to 24% of male coaches) (Table 4.1). This finding corresponds with data from Year One
and Two of the project, which suggest that male coaches are more likely to begin
coaching in order to help their child in sport (Timson-Katchis & North, 2008).
The largest difference between male and female participation is around maintaining
involvement in a sport the coach used to play. Given the lower levels of female
participation generally (sports coach UK 2011) it is not surprising that 32% of female
coaches are motivated by past participation compared to 48% of male coaches.
The results for Year Three back up previous findings from Year two that as coaches gain
experience in coaching, their motivation to remain in coaching is derived primarily from
their personal enjoyment and the sense of pride and achievement it offers them. This
highlights the importance of intrinsic motivation for continuing coaching, but may also
reflect the state of the wider UK sport system in which external benefits (e.g., pay) are
rare.
11
When motivations to continue coaching are examined by employment type a consistent
pattern has emerged over the last three years. Volunteer coaches appear more
motivated by family and community concerns (e.g. helping their child or their old club).
Paid coaches appear more motivated by the intrinsic qualities of coaching (e.g.
developing athletes and the interaction with athletes and players). In comparison to
volunteer and part-time coaches, full-time coaches are more motivated by extrinsic
benefits such as career, pay and benefits. However, these extrinsic benefits are still less
important than the intrinsic benefits they receive (e.g. interaction with athletes).
Coaches had an opportunity to highlight other reasons that motivated them to continue
coaching. Sixty coaches indicated an additional motivation and these are summarised in
Table 4.2 below. Though some of the reasons offered are not entirely unexpected and
reflect some of the reasons listed in Table 4.1 (e.g., improving participants life skills), it
was interesting that the most popular additional reason revolved around personal
development.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% Volunteer
Coaches
% Part Time
Coaches
% Full Time
Coaches
Figure 1:Coaches Motivation to Continue Coaching By
Employment Type
I like seeing athletes develop their skills
and improve
I like the interaction with athletes / players
/ participants
I like the buzz when athletes do well,
knowing I had something to do with itTo help my child
To help my old club
12
This is demonstrated by comments on „other motivations‟ that included: „develop my
knowledge and understanding of the coaching process‟; „enhance my own knowledge
and consequently my performance‟; and „I can learn how to improve my own
performance sometimes‟. This is consistent with the reasoning in Year Two (Timson-
Katchis and North 2010) that as coaches facilitate participant development, they develop
themselves.
Table 4.2
Other Motivations for Continuing to coach
Times mentioned Personal Development 12
Help the local community by addressing a gap in the local coaching provision 6
Give something back to sport 5
Help young participants in particular develop life skills and stay out of trouble 5
Love sport 3
I coach as part of my job (e.g., sport development, PE teacher) 3
Want to pursue coaching as a career so gradually moving towards that 2
Coaching is a good social alternative 2
Base: All coaches that offered an additional motivation for continuing to coach
13
5. Coaching Roles
In this section the report presents evidence on the specific roles the coaches were
undertaking in Year Three in comparison to Year One. Information is initially presented
on the sports the coaches worked across, followed by data on the age of the participants
they coached, and the participants‟ competitive level.
Number of Sports Coached
In Year One of the project the majority of coaches (66%) coached only one sport. A third
of coaches (22%) coached two or three sports, with a very small minority coaching four
or more (4%) (Table 5.1). In Year Three there was a significant change with a greater
concentration on one sport (84% now only coached one sport). Figures for Year Three
suggest the shift from sampling to specialising in coaching as suggested by Timson-
Katchis and North (2010) may have peaked in Year Two (when the figure was also
84%). It will be interesting to see if there are any changes reported in Year Four.
Table 5.1
Number of Sports Coached
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
1 368 66 488 84
2 124 22 62 11
3 45 8 18 3
4 10 2 5 1
5 4 1 5 1
6 3 1
Average 1.5 1.2
Total 554 100 578 100
Base: All coaches Note: Year One data include all sports coached since start of coaching career up to date of Year
One data collection; Year Three data include sports coached in the last 12 months
14
In terms of the sports coached there has been little or no change noted from Year One to
Year Three (Table 5.2). Football remains the sport most coached with 22% of coaches
(albeit down from 27% in Year One) followed by Hockey (10%), Rugby Union (9%)
Cricket (7%), and Athletics (7%). These results are consistent with data presented in
Sports Coaching in the UK 3 (sports coach UK 2011).
Table 5.2
Coaches by Sport
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Football 158 27 131 22
Hockey 61 10 56 10
Rugby Union 57 10 50 9
Cricket 55 9 43 7
Athletics 49 8 41 7
Swimming 37 6 29 5
Netball 30 5 23 4
Cycling 29 5 28 5
Tennis 28 5 26 4
Equestrian 24 4 21 4
Basketball 21 4 16 3
Squash 23 4 20 3
Gymnastics 16 3 13 2
Orienteering 16 3 14 2
Badminton 14 2 10 2
Judo 13 2 9 2
Running/jogging 12 2 6 1
Triathlon 11 2 9 2
Canoeing 11 2 6 1
Rowing 9 2 8 1
Bowls 8 1 9 2
Rugby League 8 1 5 1
Table Tennis 8 1 5 1
Golf 7 1 6 1
Archery 7 1 4 <1
Volleyball 6 1 5 1
Weight Training 6 1 5 <1
Climbing 5 <1 1 <1
Windsurfing 4 <1 2 <1
Skiing 4 <1 1 <1
Sailing 4 <1 -- --
Keep fit / Yoga 3 <1 5 1
Movement/Dance 3 <1 2 <1
Karate 3 <1 4 <1
Rounders 2 <1 7 1
Shooting 1 <1 2 <1
Mountaineering 1 <1 1 <1
Ice Skating 1 <1 -- --
Ten Pin Bowling 1 <1 -- --
Base: All coaches Note: Data are based on number of coaches coaching any given sport, so coaches coaching 2 or more sports have been counted for all the sports they coach.
15
Age and Level of Participant Groups Coached
In terms of the age groups coached, it is important to note that accurate comparisons
cannot be drawn due to changes in the data collection methodology between Years One
and Three, though allowing for this, some similarities remain. The majority of coaching
roles were primarily with the young people aged four to twenty, with nearly eight out of
ten roles being with these groups (Table 5.3). In comparison, only two out of ten
coaching roles were with adult groups in Year Three. The results are consistent with data
from Sports Coaching in the UK 3 (sports coach UK 2011) which reports that over three
quarters of coaches were working with children.
Table 5.3
Age of participant groups coached
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Younger Children 4-11 years
169 12 384 29
Older Children 12-16 years
197 14 445 33
Young People 17-20 years
75 5 222 16
Adults 21+ 100 7 295 22
Mixed 884 62 --- ---
Total 1425 100 1346 100
Base: All coaching roles Note: The figures above are based on all coaching roles rather than all coaches, so if a coach has 2 or more coaching roles, they have been counted 2 or more times
In Year One data regarding all coaching roles since coached started coaching were gathered, whereas in Year Three only data on coaching roles in the last 12 months were collected.
In terms of the level of participants a similar trend is observed as per the age of
participants coached. Most coaching roles focused at the “Club” level (28%) with
“Improver” (20%) and “Beginner” (20%) levels closely following (Table 5.4). This trend
could be attributed to the high numbers of coaching roles with younger age groups. As
expected, far fewer coaching roles appear to be with higher-level participants, for
example, only 4% being at the international level.
Table 5.4
Level of participant groups coached
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Beginner 311 22 258 20
Improver 179 12 257 20
Club 345 24 371 28
County 97 7 124 9
Regional 75 5 120 9
National 58 4 97 7
International 69 5 51 4
Recreational 10 1 31 2
Mixed 284 20 --- ---
Total 1428 100 1309 100
Base: All coaching roles Note: The figures above are based on all coaching roles rather than all coaches, so if a coach has 2 or more coaching roles, they have been counted 2 or more times.
In Year One data regarding all coaching roles since coaches started coaching were gathered,
whereas in Year Three only data on coaching roles in the last 12 months were collected.
16
6. Coach Development
A key aim of the project was to explore coaches‟ development in terms of their
experiences, education and qualifications. In this section, the report explores coach
development in further detail by extending the analysis to coaches‟ knowledge.
Learning Sources/Environments
An important aspect of the research design was to consider the most important sources
or environments from where coach learning takes place.
Learning Source/Environment Usage
In Year One, the results suggested that coaches used a wide variety of learning
sources/environments to enhance their learning and development, and data from Year
Three reinforced this claim. Learning sources, which are immediate to the act of
coaching, remain the most used by coaches, such as „coaching practice‟ (84%),
„reflective practice‟ (75%), „working with athletes/players/participants‟ (72%), and
„working with/observing coaches from your sport „(71%) (Table 6.1).
In the Year Two report it was suggested that the slight decrease in the numbers of
coaches citing „coaching practice‟ as a source of learning and development may be
attributed to coaches becoming more proficient in the day-to-day tasks of coaching,
therefore placing less importance on the utilisation of coaching practice as a learning
source. Year Three results support this idea as the decrease in those citing „coaching
practice‟ as a source of learning and development has increased from 4% to 7% as the
coaches gain more experience.
Interestingly, „non-coaching related education‟ was used by 14% more coaches in Year
Three in comparison to Year One, which would suggest that coaches are drawing
learning from outside the coaching field.
Sources of learning that were increasingly utilised in Year Three were „reading books,
journals, magazines‟ (+2%) and „online learning‟ (+3%) which illustrates that coaches
are using a wide variety of media to enhance their learning. These types of resources
have been highlighted by previous research (Gilbert & Trudel, 2001) in which coaches
reportedly used them to generate strategies and solve specific coaching concerns.
There was a notable decrease (-27%) in the numbers of coaches citing formal coaching
qualifications as a source of learning and development. However this is likely to be a
reflection of the sample, as 95% of coaches are qualified, and only 22% of coaches
gained a new coaching qualification in the last 12 months with only 13% working
towards a new one (see Table 6.5)
Data further suggests that as coaches progress and develop they do not rely as much on
their own sporting experiences – „experiences as an athlete/player/participant‟ and
„observing my own coach when I was player‟ were both cited by 6% less, a finding
echoed by the wider coach development literature (Gilbert, Côté, & Mallett, 2006;
Erickson, Côté, & Fraser-Thomas, 2007).
17
Table 6.1 Learning Sources / Environments Utilised by Coaches in the Last 12 months
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Coaching Practice 530 91 490 84
Reading Coaching books, magazines and journals
463 79 476 81
Working with / observing coaches from your sport
442 76 415 71
Reflecting on past coaching 437 75 441 75
Working with athletes / players / participants
432 74 424 72
Coaching qualifications – Governing Body or UKCC
379 65 222 38
Experiences as an athlete / player /
participant 377 64 338 58
Watching DVDs, Videos, CD ROMs 354 61 326 56
Advice from family / friends 294 50 291 50
Online Learning 410 49 303 52
Coaching Conferences 282 48 258 44
Workshops 269 46 303 52
Working with a coach mentor 239 41 300 37
Experience of being a parent 238 41 208 36
Working with / observing coaches from
other sports 236 40 237 41
Experience at work outside coaching 229 39 217 37
Working with / observing my own coach when I was player
172 29 136 23
Non-coaching related education 148 25 230 39
1:1 training needs analysis with a coach developer
95 16 51 9
Base: All coaches
Note: Coaches were able to indicate more than one learning source therefore figures do not total
Learning Source/Environment Importance
In terms of the importance of learning sources/environments, many of those that are
used the most frequently, are also seen as being the most important. Furthermore
despite the noted reduced levels of usage of learning sources, the perceived importance
of the sources has generally increased across the board since Year One (Table 6.2).
As per Year One, and in line with a great deal of other research on coach development
(Abraham et al, 2006; Salmela, 1996; Wright et al, 2007), learning by doing involving
„coaching practice‟, remains one of the most important (97%) learning sources.
Other important learning sources identified were those that involve working with others
(coaches, athletes and mentors). This reinforces the argument put forward in the Year
Two report that coaches appear to attach great importance to networking with other
coaches, and being able to establish and engage in communities of practice.
18
Table 6.2 Rating of Learning Sources / Environments Utilised by Coaches in the Last 12 months
Year One Year Three
% Important % Important
Coaching Practice 99 97
Working with athletes / players / participants
97 97
Working with / observing coaches from your sport
95 98
Working with a coach mentor 95 97
Workshops / training events / courses 94 94
Coaching qualifications – Governing Body or UKCC
93 93
Coaching Conferences 93 94
Reflecting on past coaching 92 96
Experiences as an athlete / player / participant
89 93
1:1 training needs analysis with a coach developer
87 96
Working with / observing coaches from other sports
87 95
Reading Coaching books, magazines and journals
86 95
Watching DVDs, Videos, CD ROMs 86 92
Experience of being a parent 85 95
Working with / observing my own coach when I was player
84 93
Non-coaching related education 78 95
Advice from family / friends 78 93
Experience at work outside coaching 76 94
Online Learning 77 93
Base: All coaches who indicated that they used the named source
All the learning sources are rated as important to learning and development by over
90% of coaches. Therefore, it would be reasonable to conclude that coaches value
learning and it is most effective when it combines many different types of learning
situations. Given the highly dynamic and complex nature of coaching (Cushion et al,
2003) coaches need to develop a wide range of skills and knowledge. Data presented
here, suggests that in an attempt to achieve this, coaches engage in a wide variety of
learning situations, each having its own unique role to play in a coach‟s development and
indeed it is the blending of these that is significant.
Time spent on Learning and Development Activities
The coaches were asked to indicate how much time they spent on development
opportunities in the past year1. Overall there was little change from Year One with the
exception of the amount of time spent on development activities. Part and full time
coaches increased by 42 minutes and 1 hour respectively whereas volunteer coaches
reduced this figure by 12 minutes. This is understandable given that volunteer coaches
are likely to have jobs outside coaching with less time to spare on tasks such as
development. In contrast, full time coaches may be more likely to see development
opportunities as a central component of their working lives and contribute time
accordingly.
1 For the purposes of this analysis the following learning and development opportunities were not included, as these would not provide an accurate representation: (a) coaching practice, (b) experience at work, (c) experience of being a parent, (d) experiences as a participant, (e) working with participants and (f) working with my own coach when I was a player.
19
Table 6.3
Average estimated weekly time spent on development activities (hours)
Year One Year Three
All Coaches 4.6 4.7
Employment Status
Voluntary 3.9 3.7
Paid Part Time 4.4 5.1
Paid Full Time 6.0 7.0
Parenthood
Yes 4.2 4.8
No 5.1 4.7
Base: All coaches
Coaches who were parents devoted an hour less in Year One when compared to coaches
with no children (Table 6.3). However, in Year 3, parents and non-parents seem to be
devoting similar amounts of time to developmental activities. Analysis was conducted
against variables such as age, gender, length of coaching experience, level of coaching
qualification and level of participants coached and no differences were found.
20
Knowledge and Information Sought by Coaches
In Year Two and Year Three of the project, the research was expanded to collect
information on the types of knowledge and information the coaches sought in furthering
their practice.
Coaches were asked to state what types of knowledge and information they sought from
engaging in various developmental activities. The results indicate that although the
coaches favoured some types of knowledge such as on technique and tactics (74% of
coaches), they were also interested in interpersonal skills such as “providing participants
with feedback” (65%), “motivating participants” (62%), and “listening skills” (60%)
(Table 6.4). This may reflect the importance given to learning sources that involve
working with others (Table 6.2). It is further evidenced by the fact that seven out of ten
coaches rated skills such as “listening” (81%), “responsiveness” (71%), “providing
feedback” (70%) and “motivating” (67%) as being very important to their development.
Table 6.4
Knowledge / information sought by coaches and perceived rating of importance Year Three
Sought Importance Rating
N= %
% Very
Important
%
Important
%
Unimportant
Technical / Tactical Knowledge
433 74 63 37 1
Providing Feedback 380 65 70 30 --
Motivating 364 62 67 32 1
Observation and Analysis 360 62 65 34 1
Planning Sessions (i.e.
content structure) 359 61 64 35 1
Listening 349 60 81 19 --
Providing Instruction 338 58 61 37 1
Self reflection 338 58 65 34 1
Evaluating Sessions 328 56 57 42 1
Knowledge of wide range of methods
328 56 53 46 1
Understanding Player development
321 55 61 39 1
Questioning 313 54 65 35 --
Responsiveness 308 53 71 28 1
Organisation of sessions (i.e. health & safety, equipment)
294 50 58 41 1
Planning Programmes (i.e.
over a season / year) 288 49 52 47 1
Decision Making 254 43 58 40 1
Managing the environment
254 43 58 41 1
Facilitating 223 40 56 43 1
Base: All coaches Note: Coaches were able to indicate more than one type of knowledge therefore figures do not total Types of knowledge / information were only rated by coaches who had indicated they had sought it
On the whole, the data illustrates that coaches recognise the multi-dimensional nature of
coaching practice, and the need for learning and development to reflect this. It is
interesting however that although coaches have had access to/sought information on the
“what” of coaching (e.g. technique/tactics), they appear to place greater importance on
the “how” of coaching (e.g. listening, motivating etc.).
21
Coach Qualifications
Of the 585 coaches that took part in the survey, 555 (95%) held a recognised coaching
qualification in Year One (Table 6.5). A further 5 coaches gained their first recognised
coaching qualification in Year Three. In total 126 coaches (22%) gained a new
recognised coaching qualification in Year Three.
Data from Sports Coaching in the UK 3 (sports coach UK, 2011) indicates that half
(53%) of the UK coaching population holds a recognised coaching qualification. Whilst it
is encouraging to note that 95% of participating coaches were qualified, this is likely to
be a sampling issue, as many of the coaches participating in the project were recruited
through 1st4Sport qualifications and through links within the coaching system (e.g.,
Governing Bodies of Sport, local authorities and county sport partnerships).
The percentage of male and female coaches with up to date qualifications are similar
(95% and 97% respectively) (Table 6.5). This result is in stark contrast to the findings of
the Sports Coaching in the UK 3 report (sports coach UK, 2011) which indicates a
significant imbalance between male and female qualified coaches in the general coaching
population.
Table 6.5 Coach Qualification Breakdown
Year Three % Male Coaches
% Female Coaches
Have a qualification N= %
Yes 555 95 95 97
No 28 5 5 3
Gained a new qualification
Yes 126 22 19 28
No 459 78 81 72
Highest Level Qualification
Level 1 96 18 18 17
Level 2 181 33 32 37
Level 3 165 30 34 22
Level 4 77 14 13 17
Level 5 23 4 3 7
Currently studying for another qualification
Yes 76 13 14 13
No 509 87 86 87
Total 100 100 100
Base: All coaches
While level 2 qualifications remain the most common, it is encouraging to note that there
has been an increase (albeit slight) in the attainment of Level 3 to 5 qualifications. For
example, only 11% held a Level 4 qualification in Year One, which rose to 12% in Year
Two, and which has risen to 14% in Year 3. Furthermore, while 25% of coaches had a
level 3 qualification in Year One, this rose to 27% in Year Two and further increased to
30% in Year 3. In comparison with the sub-group of qualified coaches identified in the
Coaching Workforce 2009-2016 document (North, 2009), most of which were qualified to
Levels 1 and 2, results show that the majority of Coach Tracking Study coaches are
qualified to a higher level (levels 2 and 3).
22
Given the high incidence of qualified coaches within the sample it is perhaps unsurprising
that only 13% of coaches were currently working towards another qualification (much
lower than the 42% noted in Year One) and suggests that a significant majority of
coaches are increasingly focusing their development on informal and non-formal
learning.
Table 6.6 Highest Level Qualification held by coaches working with children in Year Three
All Coaches
Coaches working with children under 16 years
old
Coaches working with participants over 17
years old
N= % N= % N= % Level 1 96 18 84 20 12 9
Level 2 181 33 147 35 34 28
Level 3 165 30 120 29 45 37
Level 4 77 14 54 13 23 19
Level 5 23 4 15 4 8 6
Total 542 100 420 100 122 100
Base: All qualified coaches
There was evidence that coaches working with children under 16 years old were less well
qualified than those working with participants 17 years and older (Table 6.6). For
example, only 17% of coaches working with children had a Level 4 or 5 qualification,
compared to 25% of coaches working with older teenagers and adults. There are two
possible explanations for this finding. Firstly, coaches working with young children may
feel that a basic level qualification (e.g., Level 1) will be adequate for the group they
work with. Secondly, coaches working with adults are more likely to deal with elite
athletes or participants attempting to acquire a high level of expertise, and thus may
require a high level of qualification (e.g., Level 4 or above) to work effectively with these
individuals.
Benefits of Coaching Qualifications
Comments on the benefits of taking-up a formal coaching qualification (Table 6.7)
demonstrate the shift in coach thinking as they gain experience. In Year One the most
cited benefits were linked to improving knowledge and practice. By Year Three the most
important benefits highlighted were “provides new information/keeps you up to date”
(48%), “networking and sharing of ideas with other coaches” (47%) and “takes your
coaching to the next level” (47%). Qualification content may be more important earlier
in a coaches‟ career, whereas being provided with new information, networking and
advancing coaching skills to a new level may be more useful for coaches who have
acquired the basic knowledge bases in earlier qualification uptake.
As may be expected, there was a notable decrease of 22% between Year One and Year
Three in terms of the influence of coaching qualifications on the basic skills to start
coaching. As the majority of coaches (95%) in the current sample are qualified and have
significant coaching experience, basic coaching skills have already been acquired and are
therefore unlikely to be influenced by the undertaking on any new qualifications.
23
Table 6.7 Perceived Benefits of undertaking a new coaching qualification
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Improves Coaching Knowledge 180 52 49 39
Improves Coaching Practice 180 52 51 40
Builds Up Confidence 164 47 52 41
Networking and sharing of ideas 163 47 59 47
Takes your coaching to the next level 159 46 59 47
Improves knowledge of sport 152 44 53 42
Provides new information / keeps you up to date
141 41 61 48
Provides a focus for coach development 140 40 45 36
Improves practice of sport 134 39 42 33
Builds up your CV 131 38 42 33
Provides you with credibility 125 36 43 34
Provides access to new coaching opportunities
107 31 29 23
Provides you with the skills to coach wider
audiences 96 28 30 24
Gives you the basic skills to start coaching 93 27 6 5
Base: All coaches studying for a new coaching qualification Note: Coaches could indicate more than one problem therefore figures do not total
On the whole, despite the current coach development literature presenting formal coach
qualifications in an unfavourable light (e.g., Abraham et al, 2006; Nelson & Cushion,
2006) results illustrate that qualifications are seen as beneficial. In many respects
coaching qualifications should be seen as being complementary to other methods of
coach development rather than central.
Problems with Coaching Qualifications
Financial and logistical concerns such as cost, location and timing consistently rank as
the three biggest problems to taking up qualifications in Years One to Three. In Year
Three these problems remain most cited, and in fact were highlighted by a greater
majority of coaches (25%, 25% and 25% respectively). However, other problems raised
in Year One, concerning awareness and information provision, were cited by fewer
coaches in Year Three. These results indicate that although cost is indeed a growing
concern for coaches, a greater number of them are aware of possible funding options.
An increased percentage of coaches (from 12% in Year One to 21% in Year Three) cited
that courses take too long to complete. This might be a particularly important issue for
coaches of a volunteer status who combine coaching with a full-time job and family
duties. As a result, combining day-to-day duties with the time required to complete
coaching courses is likely to place them under significant pressure.
In terms of the content and quality of the qualifications, little change was noted.
Problems with the accuracy of assessment methods (7%) and an overemphasis on
coaching theory (7%) reduced slightly in importance in Year Three although concerns
with the language used in coach education rose slightly to 6%. In addition, issues
regarding the lack of practice (8%) and benefit of qualifications at early stages of
development (3%) were cited by a smaller percentage of coaches in Year Three. As
coaches acquire more hands-on coaching experience they may attach less importance to
whether or not coach education can provide them with practice opportunities.
Furthermore, these results suggest that despite the perceived improvement in
assessment methods, coaches still feel that qualifications do not have a significant
practical dimension. On a positive note, problems relating to tutor quality have
24
decreased by 3% which could be a reflection of changes in tutor training as part of the
UKCC.
Table 6.8 Perceived Problems of undertaking a new coaching qualification
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Not enough information on funding available for coach education
84 24 23 18
Courses are difficult to access in terms of their timing
81 23 31 25
Courses are too expensive 79 23 31 25
Courses are difficult to access in terms of
their location 70 20 31 25
Assessment methods do not reflect coaching knowledge and practice
50 14 9 7
Overemphasis on coaching theory rather than its application in the real world
49 14 9 7
Not enough information on the next logical step in coach education
45 13 7 6
Not enough information on how to access coach education
44 13 11 9
Courses take too much time to complete 43 12 26 21
Qualification does not include enough actual practice
36 10 10 8
Tutors delivering the courses are not of a
high enough quality 25 7 5 4
Qualifications are only appropriate at early
stages of development 15 4 4 3
Qualification is not at an appropriate level 13 4 4 3
The language/terminology used in coach education and CPD is difficult to understand
13 4 7 6
There is no need to coach education and qualifications as coaching experience is
enough
5 1 0 0
Base: All coaches studying for a new coaching qualification Note: Coaches could indicate more than one „problem‟ therefore figures do not total
25
Rating of Support Services
The coaches were asked to comment on the support they received from Governing
Bodies of Sport and other agencies such as sports coach UK. Results in Year One,
presented a mixed picture with about 30% of coaches indicating that they felt supported,
with the remaining 70% indicating that they had received little or no support (Table
6.9). It is disappointing that by Year Three the number of coaches feeling supported has
dropped.
Table 6.9 Rating of Support Received From Coaching Organisations ‘Development Support’
(e.g., GBs of Sport, sports coach UK) Supported Supported
a little
Not at all supported
Not relevant (support not
needed) Total
% % % % % N=
Identifying
developme
nt
opportuniti
es
Year
One 34 34 29 3 100 566
Year
Three 29 30 35 6 100 562
Help with the
cost of development
opportunities
Year
One 25 21 50 5 100 568
Year Three 22 21 49 8 100 569
Identifying
your development needs
Year
One 34 34 29 3 100 571
Year
Three 26 34 34 6 100 574
Base: All coaches
Regarding the specific results only three out of ten coaches felt that they were
supported, both in terms of identifying generic development opportunities (29%), but
also identifying their own specific development needs (26%), in comparison to over a
third of coaches in Year One (34% and 34% respectively). Nearly half of the coaches
(49%) felt that they were not receiving any support with regards to the cost of their
development, a finding in line with comments made by coaches about the cost of coach
qualifications (see Table 6.8). The results support findings from Year One that two
primary barriers to coaches‟ further development are knowing what opportunities are
available and appropriate and the cost of such opportunities.
26
Table 6.10
Rating of Support Received From Coaching Organisations ‘Career Development’ (e.g., GBs of Sport, sports coach UK)
Supported Supported
a little
Not at all supported
Not relevant (support not
needed) Total
% % % % % N=
Help with
finding
appropriate
opportuniti
es to coach
Year
One 25 24 36 14 100 567
Year
Three 21 22 40 17 100 571
Knowing the next steps for your coaching
Year One 35 35 25 5 100 565
Year Three 28 32 33 8 100 572
Help with career opportunities
Year One 17 20 41 21 100 567
Year Three 13 18 44 25 100 572
Base: All coaches
The coaches reported receiving lower levels of support for developing their careers in
Year Three in comparison to Year One (Table 6.10). Only 28% of coaches indicated that
they received support on „knowing the next steps for your coaching career’, a drop of 7%
from Year One (Table 6.10). In terms of getting help to progress their careers most
coaches indicated that they did not feel supported in Year One and this has increased in
Year Three. Four out of ten coaches in Year Three indicated that they received no
support with finding opportunities to coach (40%), in comparison to just over a third
(36%) in Year One. This could be a reflection of the decrease in the number of coaches
coming into contact with coach development officers (see Timson-Katchis & North,
2010).
27
7. Coaching Careers
One of the main aims of the research was to identify the changing profile of the coaches‟
careers. This section reports on the coaches‟ employment status (i.e. whether they are
voluntary, part-time and full-time coaches), the impact of coaches‟ employment status
on the frequency and time distribution of coaching-related activities, and finally coaches‟
pay levels.
Employment Status
From Year One to Year Three of the project, no change is noted in terms of coaches
working in a voluntary capacity. However, there has been a 9% increase in the number
of paid part time coaches with a similar decrease in the number of paid full time coaches
(see Table 7.1). A greater proportion of female coaches in Year Three appear to be
coaching on a paid basis (both part time and full time) (71% female compared to 58% of
males in Year One and 70% female compared to 50% male in Year Three).
Table 7.1 Coaches by Employment Type
Year One Year Three % Male Coaches % Female Coaches
N= % N= % Year One
Year Three
Year One
Year Three
Voluntary 250 44 255 44 52 50 29 30
Paid Part Time
199 35 254 44 39 39 44 56
Paid Full Time
120 21 71 12 19 11 27 14
Total 569 100 580 100 100 100 100 100
Base: All coaches
Time Spent Coaching
In examining coaches‟ use of time, and their frequency of coaching, there was little
change between Years One and Three, with most coaches (91%) coaching at least once
a week or more (Table 7.2).
Table 7.2
Frequency of Coaching
Year One Year Three
N= % N= %
Almost every day 221 39 223 39
At least once a week
293 51 303 52
At least once a month
39 7 45 8
At least once every 6 months
14 2 7 1
At least once a
year 3 1 1 <1
Total 570 100 579 100
Base: All coaches
28
The Year Three data continued to support the notion that full time coaches were
coaching on a daily basis, whereas part time and volunteer coaches were most likely to
coach on a weekly basis (Table 7.3).
Table 7.3 Frequency of Coaching by employment type
Volunteer Part Time Full Time
Year One Year Three
Year One Year Three
Year One Year Three
Almost every day
13 12 39 48 92 100
At least once a week
72 73 52 47 6 ---
At least once a
month 10 12 6 5 2 ---
At least once every 6 months
4 2 3 <1 --- ---
At least once a
year 1 <1 --- --- --- ---
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
Base: All coaches
Information was also collected regarding the coaches‟ allocation of time to various
coaching related tasks on a weekly basis (Table 7.4). Interestingly, less than half of the
coaches‟ time was actually spent on delivering coaching, a figure which was similar for
Years One and Three (43% and 40% respectively). This is consistent with data for the
UK coaching population (sports coach UK 2011). However in other areas this sample is
different from the general coaching population with more time spent on administration
and less on preparation and review. Surprisingly, only 21% of time was spent preparing
and reviewing coaching activities, the latter of which is regarded as good practice and
can enhance learning and development.
Table 7.4 Weekly breakdown of coaching related hours
Coaching
Activity
Year One Year Three
Time (hrs) % Of Time Time (hrs) % Of Time
Preparation 2.9 14 2.8 12
Delivery 8.9 43 9.3 40
Review 1.8 9 2.1 9
Coach Related Administration
3.3 16 3.2 14
Other 3.9 19 --- ---
Travel --- --- 3.5 15
CPD --- --- 2.3 11
Total coaching hours
20.8 100 23.2 100
Base: All coaches Note: “Other” option expanded in Years Two and Three into “Travel” and “CPD”
Similar to Year One, results from Year Three support the link between coaches‟ allocation
of time and their employment status, with full time coaches delivering nearly 26 hours of
coaching, in comparison to 4 hours with volunteer coaches and 10 hours with part time
coaches (Table 7.5). Full time coaches, as expected, spent more time across all coaching
related activities in comparison to their volunteer and part time coaching counterparts.
In terms of delivery time, part time and full time coaches appear to have increased the
29
amount of time they spend on a weekly basis coaching, by just over two hours in the
case of part time coaches and almost 4 hours in the case of full time coaches. With
regards to preparation, a slight decrease in the amount of time allocated was noted
across volunteers and full time coaches though part time coaches increased their
preparation time from Year One to Year Three. Both volunteer and part time coaches
increased the time dedicated to reviewing their coaching while full time coaches have
decreased reviewing time from Year One to Year Three.
Table 7.5 Weekly breakdown of coaching related hours by Employment Type
Coaching
Activity
Volunteer Part Time Full Time
Year One Year Three
Year One Year Three
Year One Year Three
Preparation 1.7 1.5 2.7 3.5 5.6 4.9
Delivery 3.9 4.0 7.6 9.7 21.8 25.7
Review 1.2 1.3 1.5 2.6 3.6 3.0
Coach Related
Administration 1.8 1.7 2.6 3.8 7.4 5.6
Other 2.3 --- 3.4 --- 8.2 ---
Travel --- 1.8 --- 3.8 --- 7.4
CPD --- 1.4 --- 2.9 --- 2.9
Total hours 10.9 11.7 17.8 26.3 46.6 49.5
Base: All coaches Note: The question options differed from Year One to Year Three. The “Other” option was only posed in Year One, whereas the options for “Travel” and “CPD” were posed in Year Two and Year Three.
Coaching Pay
The study also provides information on coaches‟ pay. The results suggest that the
average coaching salary for paid coaches (both part time and full-time combined) is
currently £20,087 per year, indicating a significant increase of 12% from Year One
(Table 7.6). Part time coaches‟ annual salary reflects this overall increase, with salaries
rising to just under £7,000 per annum, whereas full time coaches have had a 9%
increase to £23,676. This supports other evidence2, which suggests that the majority of
paid coaching positions are currently between £17,000 and £28,000 per annum
(depending on location, qualifications, and other specific job requirements).
Table 7.6
Coaching Pay in Year Three
Part Time Full Time
Year One Year Three Year One Year Three
Paid Sessions per week
4.4 4.9 18.3 23.7
Average pay per
session £21.77 £23.17 £24.46 £27.33
Average annual salary
£5,562 £6,902 £21,621 £23,676
Base: All paid coaches
When considering pay on a sessional basis, results suggest that the average pay per
session has increased by 6% from Year One, rising from £22.43 to £23.94 per session.
This increase is reflected in the 6% rise in pay per session for part time coaches rising to
2 - http://ww2.prospects.ac.uk/p/types_of_job/sports_coach_instructor_salary.jsp
30
over £23, and the 11% increase in pay per session for full time coaches rising to over
£27.
Although coaches working with young people and adults (17+) receive payment for
fewer sessions per week than coaches working with under 16‟s (8.3 versus 8.7), they
receive higher average pay per session (£30.85 versus £22.28) and a higher average
annual salary (£21,282 versus £18,373). This could reflect the higher level of
qualifications among coaches working with adults (Table 6.6).
Table 7.7
Coaching Pay in Year Three by Age Group Coached
All Paid Coaches Coaches working with
children under 16 years old
Coaches working with young people and
adults (17+)
Paid Sessions per week
8.9 8.7 8.3
Average pay per session
£23.94 £22.28 £30.85
Average annual salary
£20,087 £18,373 £21,282
Base: All paid coaches
Further investigation into coaching pay, in relation to participant groups coached, reveals
that coaches working with high performance participants (international) command a
higher rate of pay both on a sessional (£37.57) and an annual basis (£26,718) although
those working on a national level are paid for the most sessions per week (13.8).
Table 7.8
Coaching Pay in Year Three by Highest Participant Level Coached
Paid sessions per
week Average Pay per
Session Average Annual Salary
All Coaches 8.9 £23.94 £20,087
Beginners 7.1 £33.50 £15,138
Improvers 8.3 £17.03 £17,051
Club 6.9 £20.95 £14,411
County 9.4 £22.65 £20,488
Regional 7.2 £25.42 £15,655
National 13.8 £23.83 £20,198
International 11.5 £37.57 £26,718
Base: All paid coaches
31
8. Next 12 months
Of those coaches who remained active in the sample, the majority appeared to have
made accurate predictions regarding the amount of coaching they expected to do in Year
Three (Table 8.1). On average, coaches in Year Two who expected their coaching to
increase ended up coaching one hour a week more in Year Three. Similarly, coaches who
in Year Two expected their coaching to decrease were, in Year Three, coaching on
average three hours a week less.
However, coaches who did not expect a change in the amount of coaching they were
doing actually experienced a decrease in 1.3 hours a week of coaching delivery. This
compares with the previous year when those expecting no change witnessed an increase
of 42 minutes.
Table 8.1
Expectations of amount of coaching in the next 12 months
Year Two expectations for coaching in the next 12 months
Weekly average number of hours delivering coaching
Year Two Year Three
More 9.2 10.4
Same 10.2 8.9
Less 8.5 5.4
Base: All coaches
Looking forward to Year Four, the majority of coaches (65%) expected their levels of
coaching to remain the same. However, there was a notable decrease in the amount of
coaches expecting an increase in their level of coaching in the forthcoming 12 months
(Table 8.2). At the end of the project it will be interesting to investigate how much coach
expectations of the following year can be viewed as a barometer of future activity.
Table 8.2 Expectations of Amount of Coaching in the Next 12 Months
Percentage
Year Three
More Same Less Total
Gender Year
Two
Year
Three
Year
Two
Year
Three
Year
Two
Year
Three
Men 35 28 60 66 5 6 100
Women 37 24 56 63 7 13 100
Employment Type
Voluntary 35 29 60 61 5 10 100
Paid Part time 39 26 53 68 7 6 100
Paid Full time 30 24 69 67 1 8 100
Total 36 27 59 65 5 8 100
When asked to indicate whether they intended to stop coaching within the next year, 4%
of coaches indicated that they intended to do so (Table 8.3), a figure up by 2% from
Year Two. Notably, there was a 5% increase in the number of female coaches indicating
an intention to stop coaching. In comparison, there was only a 1% increase in the
number of male coaches who expressed the same intention. With regards to
employment type Year Three results show an increase of 1% of voluntary and part time
coaches intending to stop coaching whereas there is an increase of 3% in the number of
full time coaches who intend to stop coaching.
32
Table 8.3
Intention to stop coaching in the next 12 months
Percentage
Yes No Total
Gender Year Two
Year
Three Year Two Year Three
Men 2 3 98 97 100
Women 1 6 99 94 100
Employment Type
Voluntary 2 3 98 97 100
Paid Part time 3 4 97 96 100
Paid Full time 1 4 99 96 100
Total 2 4 98 96 100
Those coaches who indicated an intention to stop coaching over the next 12-months
were asked to provide information on their reasons (Table 8.4). The most cited reasons
referred to changes in personal circumstances along with structural issues within their
sport, such as a lack of support from the organisations in which they coached and limited
career development opportunities.
Table 8.4
Reasons for intending to stop coaching
Reasons given Times mentioned
Personal reasons (e.g., maternity, travel, health) 8
Lack of support from organisation (e.g., club, GB, CSP) 7
Lack of available paid opportunities to coach 6
To pursue a full time career in sport but not coaching 1
33
9. Exit from coaching
Due to the longitudinal nature of the research design, it was anticipated that a certain
level of attrition would occur in the sample from year to year. As part of the project, we
encouraged coaches, who have stopped coaching, to let us know the motivation behind
their decision to do so. Of the 585 coaches that returned their questionnaire in Year
Three, a total of 36 (6%) stated that they had given up coaching since they last took
part in this project.
Interestingly, of those that stopped coaching, only 14% had originally said they intended
to do so (Table 9.1). In other words, eight out of ten coaches who stopped coaching did
not intend to do so. In comparison to coaches that remained active only 2% indicated in
Year Two that they intended to stop, but actually continued to coach in Year 3. Taken
together, these results suggest that though stopping coaching may often be a short-term
decision, coaches with an expressed commitment to it are far less likely to stop.
Therefore it is crucial that further investigations seek to understand what drives a coach
to stop, including the contributing factors and, indeed, the interplay between them.
Table 9.1 Intention to stop coaching in the next 12 months Comparison between active and lapsed coaches
Lapsed Coaches Active Coaches
Number % Number %
Yes 5 14 11 2
No 31 86 560 98
Total 36 100 571 100
Base: Lapsed coaches: all coaches who have stopped coaching since Year Two compared against all coaches who continued to coach Active coaches: all coached still coaching
In order to gain a better understanding of the motivation driving lapsed coaches‟
decision to stop coaching, a profile of them is presented below. It appears that males
(53%) and females (47%) were similarly likely to stop coaching. The data suggests that
older coaches were more likely to give up coaching, with almost half of the coaches
(47%) being 45 years or older. This contrasts with figures for Year Two were younger
coaches (15-24) were more likely to give up. This is an area that will require further
investigation in Year Four and at the end of the project.
34
Table 9.2 Coaches who have stopped coaching
By Gender, Age and Parental Role
N= %
Gender
Male 19 53
Female 17 47
Age
15-24 years 5 14
25-34 years 9 25
35-44 years 5 14
45-54 years 15 42
55+ 2 5
Average age 41
Parents
Yes 16 46
No 19 54
Total 36 100
Base: All coaches who have stopped coaching since Year Two and returned the Year Three questionnaire
Coaches with lower qualification levels were more likely to have exited coaching (Table
9.3). Half of all coaches exiting the profession were Level 2 or lower (53%). This
continues a trend first shown in Year Two suggesting higher levels of qualification may
play a significant role in coach retention.
Table 9.3
Highest Level Coaching Qualification held Comparison between active and lapsed coaches
Lapsed Coaches Active Coaches
N= % N= %
Level 1 5 15 96 18
Level 2 13 38 181 33
Level 3 12 35 165 30
Level 4 4 12 77 14
Level 5 -- -- 23 4
Total 34 100 542 100
Base: Lapsed coaches: all coaches who have stopped coaching since Year Two compared against all coaches who continued to coach
Active coaches: all coached still coaching
Earlier in the report, issues with a lack of support from coaching organisations was
highlighted with regards to coaches‟ personal and career development in coaching (see
section 6 on Coach Development). Data collected with regards to coaches giving up
coaching however, indicates that „support‟ was not a contributing factor in them
stopping. In fact Table 9.4 suggests that coaches still engaged in coaching received very
similar levels of support from coaching organisations, in comparison to coaches that had
stopped.
35
Table 9.4 Rating of Overall Support Received From Coaching Organisations
Comparison between active and lapsed coaches
Supported Supported
a little
Not at all supported
Not relevant (support not
needed)
Total
% % % % N= %
Lapsed
Coaches 27 36 33 3 33 100
Active Coaches
25 41 29 5 558 100
Base: Lapsed coaches: all coaches who have stopped coaching since Year Two compared against
all coaches who continued to coach Active Coaches: all coaches still coaching
A comparison between active and lapsed coaches in terms of their employment type
further strengthens the claim that a commitment to coaching is less likely to result in
giving up. Nearly half of all coaches that gave up coaching were volunteers, whereas
only one out of seven lapsed coaches was full time.
Table 9.5 Comparison of Lapsed and Active Coaches by Employment Type
Lapsed Coaches Active Coaches
Number % Number %
Voluntary 16 44 255 44
Paid Part time 15 42 254 44
Paid Full time 5 14 71 12
Total 36 100 580 100
Base: Lapsed coaches: all coaches who have stopped coaching since Year Two compared against all coaches who continued to coach
Active coaches: all coached still coaching
Coaches that stopped coaching in the last 12 months were asked to provide additional
information on why they stopped coaching, and though further research is needed, the
data provide an insight into the factors at play. The results suggest that 69% of the
reasons cited for giving up coaching are related to personal circumstances (Table 9.6),
with the most frequently cited reason being changes in work (33%). Coaches explained
that redundancy or increased demands from work infringed on their capacity to continue
coaching. Changes to their education provision, such as the coaching element of
university modules, and exams, was also an important factor for giving up coaching.
Changes in family situation, such as having a baby, or changes in children‟s participation
in sport were also highlighted as important (20%).
Table 9.6 Reasons given for stopping coaching
Number of raw data % Total raw data
Personal-related 69%
Work 13 33
Education 3 8
Family 8 20
Lack of time 1 3
Health 2 5
System-
related 34%
Lack of Support 7 18
Lack of Opportunities 5 13
Confrontation with parent 1 3
Total 40 100
Base: All Lapsed Coaches
36
Although the majority of coaches‟ gave up coaching for personal reasons, one third
(34%) gave up due to issues surrounding the coaching system, such as lack of support
and lack of opportunities (Table 9.6). It is therefore crucial that these issues are
explored further, and addressed as a matter of importance, as it is primarily over those
issues that coaching organisations can have the greatest impact.
37
10.0 Commentary
In the Year Two report (Timson-Katchis and North, 2010) a number of emerging trends
were identified and in general, these have been supported by the Year Three evidence.
These are updated below along with some additional points to emerge in Year Three.
Key Trends
Reasons for staying in coaching appear more intrinsically motivated (e.g. enjoying
working with athletes) than reasons for beginning coaching (which are more related
to pay and career).
There is some evidence that coaches engage in sports coach „sampling‟ early in their
coaching careers before specialising and investing in one or a small number of sports.
As coaches develop there is evidence that their learning and development profile
changes. For example, there was more evidence of coaches using books/magazines
and on-line approaches and less use of formal opportunities such as qualifications;
although there use of workshops actually increased.
Coaches value a wide range of knowledge and information types in facilitating their
development. Although they are most likely to seek information on technical and
tactical aspects of coaching, they also value information of pedagogical aspects such
as listening skills, responsiveness and motivation.
Perceived benefits of undertaking a new coaching qualification include networking,
sharing ideas and taking your coaching to the next level. Unfortunately there has
been a decrease in coaches‟ belief that new qualifications will improve coaching
practice and less than a quarter believe qualifications will provide them with greater
access to new coaching opportunities.
Problems associated with undertaking a new coaching qualification include the
prohibitive cost of courses and the difficulty in accessing courses because of their
location. A new issue to emerge in Year Three was that coaches felt new
qualifications took too long to complete.
There is evidence that formal intensive support to coaches has decreased since the
Year One survey. Generally, it would seem that coaches feel „unsupported‟ by the
system and that this feeling has increased further into Year Three.
The proportion of paid coaching has remained very similar across the three years.
The increase in part-time coaches has been counter-balanced by the decrease in the
number of paid full-time coaches.
There are mixed signals with regards to coaches‟ pay – on balance the evidence
suggests that pay may have increased slightly between Year Two and Year Three.
The margins of error are too large to say whether the changes are above/below wage
inflation.
There appears to be a turnover of at least 10% per year in the coaching population
with national figures suggesting a greater number are coming into coaching, than
leaving. This suggests a large proportion of coaches with a low level of coaching
experience are undertaking coaching sessions.
38
Additional points to emerge in Year Three
Although cost is a recurring problem associated with coaching qualifications by Year
Three a greater number of coaches appear aware of possible funding options.
There has been a notable decrease in the number of coaches expecting to do more
coaching in Year Four. It will be interesting to see if this is reflected in the Year Four
data.
Older coaches were more likely to give up coaching in Year Three compared to the
Year Two data when those aged 15-24 were most likely to stop coaching. This will
need more analysis in Year Four to discern if any trend exists.
39
References
Abraham, A., Collins, D. & Martindale, R. (2006). The coaching schematic: validation
through expert coach consensus, Journal of Sports Sciences, 24(6), 549-564.
Cassidy, T., Jones, R. & Potrac, P. (2004). Understanding sports coaching: the social,
cultural and pedagogical foundations of coaching practice (Abingdon: Routledge).
Côté, J., & Hay, J. (2002). Children‟s involvement in sport: A developmental perspective.
In J.M. Silva & D.E. Stevens (Eds.) Psychological foundations of sport (pp. 484-502).
Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Cushion, C.J., Armour, K.M. & Jones, R.L. (2003). Coach education and continuing
professional development: experience and learning to coach, Quest, 55, 215-230
Jowett, 2005
Cushion, C.J.., Nelson, L., Armour, K.M., Lyle, J., Jones, R.L., Sandford, R.A., &
O‟Callaghan, C. (2009). Coach Learning and Development: A review of the literature,
sports coach UK, Leeds
Erickson, K., Côté, J. & Fraser-Thomas, J. (2007). Sport experiences, milestones and
educational activities associated with high-performance coaches‟ development, The Sport
Psychologist, 21, 302-316.
Gilbert, W., Côté, J. & Mallett, C. (2006). Developmental paths and activities of
successful sport coaches, International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 1(1) 69-
76.
Gilbert, W.D. & Trudel, P. (2001). Learning to coach through experience: reflection in
model youth sport coaches, Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 21, 16-34.
Jowett, S., ''On repairing and enhancing the coach-athlete relationship'', in The
Psychology of Coaching, S. Jowett & M. Jones (Eds.), The British Psychological Society.
Sport and Exercise Psychology Division, Leicester, 2005, 14-26, ISBN 1 85433 416 6.
Nelson, L.J. & Cushion, C.J. (2006). Reflection in coach education: the case of the
national governing body coaching certificate, The Sport Psychologist, 20, 174-183.
North, J. (2009). The coaching workforce 2009-2016, Leeds, sports coach UK
North, J. (2006). Community Sports Coach: Coach Profile Survey Report, Leeds,
October.
Salmela, J.H. (1995). Learning from the development of expert coaches, Coaching and
Sport Science Journal, 2(2), 3-13.
sports coach UK (2011) Sports Coaching in the UK III, sports coach UK, Leeds
Timson-Katchis, M., & North, J. (2008). UK Coach Tracking Study: Year One Headline
Report, sports coach UK
Timson-Katchis, M., & North, J. (2010). UK Coach Tracking Study: Year Two Headline
Report, sports coach UK
Townend, R and North, J (2007). Sports Coaching in the UK II, sports coach UK, Leeds
Wright, T., Trudel, P. & Culver, D. (2007). Learning how to coach: the different learning
40
situations reported by youth ice hockey coaches, Physical Education and Sport
Pedagogy, 12(2), 127-144