The Study
This study was conducted by Deborah L. Feltz, chairperson of the Department of Kinesiology, and three doctoral students: Melissa Chase, Sandra Moritz, and Phillip Sullivan. The purpose of this study was to develop an instrument to measure the nature of coaching efficacy in high school athletic coaches and to use this instrument to examine sources and outcomes of coaching efficacy. Coaching efficacy is defined as the confidence that coaches believe they have to affect the learning and performance of their athletes. The research was conducted in two phases. The first phase involved designing and establishing the factorial validity of the instrument. The Coaching Efficacy Scale included four dimensions: game strategy, motivation, teaching technique, and character building. An investigation of the sources and outcomes of coaching efficacy was conducted in Phase 2 using varsity coaches of high school boys' basketball and their players. The research team hypothesized that coaching experience, previous season success, perceived talent of one's athletes and perceived social support would predict the strength of one's confidence or efficacy in coaching. Coaching efficacy was also predicted to influence how one coaches (e.g., type of feedback used, coaching style, management strategies), performance success of the players, commitment to coaching, and player satisfaction. Coaching behaviors were observed and recorded by a team of graduate students under the direction of Professor Feltz.

The Findings
Coaches who had more years of coaching experience, higher perceptions of their team's talent, perceived support from the community and parents, and who had a more successful season the year before were more confident in their coaching efficacy in the areas of game strategizing, ability to motivate players, and instructional/diagnostic techniques. Character building efficacy was not predicted by these variables. In turn, high efficacy coaches had higher winning percentages during the current season and higher player satisfaction than did low efficacy coaches. High efficacy coaches also showed more praise and encouragement behaviors but less instructional/organizational behaviors than low efficacy coaches. Coaches did not differ on the hours per week that they put into coaching. Coaches indicated that, on average, they committed 23 hours per week to their coaching during the season.

What it Means to You
Coaching efficacy is an important variable in coaching effectiveness, athletic performance, and athletes' satisfaction with their experience. You can help your coaches develop a sense of coaching efficacy by enhancing their sense of social support through your own interest and encouraging the interest of the community and parents. Ensure that coaches have adequate coaching experience before stepping into a head coaching position at the varsity level. Apprenticing under a head coach is a valuable way to gain experience and confidence. Participation in the Program for Athletic Coaches Education (PACE), offered through MHSAA, is also valuable in developing a sense of coaching efficacy.

More Information
Consult Feltz, D.L., Chase, M.A., Moritz, S.E. & Sullivan, P.J. (1999). A conceptual model of coaching efficacy: Preliminary investigation and instrument development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91.

< back to 1999 ed-Research Reports