Community Junior Sport Coaching final report - 2009

Community Junior Sport Coaching 

Final Report 

November 2009 

Authored By: 

Donna O’Connor PhD and Wayne Cotton PhD 

The University of Sydney 

Junior Community Coaching Report December 2009 

1

Table of Contents 

Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................ 2 

List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................... 4 

List of Tables ....................................................................................................................................... 5 

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................. 6 

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 7 

Chapter 1 ............................................................................................................................................... 14 

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 14 

Aim and Objectives of the Research ............................................................................................. 14 

Methodologies .............................................................................................................................. 14 

Report Outline............................................................................................................................... 15 

Chapter 2 ............................................................................................................................................... 16 

Literature Review .............................................................................................................................. 16 

Junior Sport Coaches and Junior Sport ......................................................................................... 16 

Developmental Model of Sport Participation ............................................................................... 16 

Players in Action ............................................................................................................................ 18 

The benefit of Junior Sport Participation ...................................................................................... 18 

Coaches in Action .......................................................................................................................... 19 

Coach enjoyment and retention ................................................................................................... 21 

Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 21 

Chapter 3 ............................................................................................................................................... 22 

Methodology Underlying the Research ............................................................................................ 22 

Ethical Considerations ................................................................................................................... 22 

Participant Recruitment ................................................................................................................ 22 

Instruments ................................................................................................................................... 22 

Overview of Data Collection Techniques ...................................................................................... 26 

Method of Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 26 

Ensuring Validity and Reliability .................................................................................................... 27 

Issues Faced During Data Collection ............................................................................................. 28 

Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 28 

Chapter 4 ............................................................................................................................................... 29 

Results and Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 29 

Participant Profile ......................................................................................................................... 29 

Junior Community Coaching Report December 2009 2

Players in Action ............................................................................................................................ 32 

Players’ Reflections on the Training Session ................................................................................. 36 

Coaches’ in Action ......................................................................................................................... 37 

Coaches’ Reflections on the Training Sessions ............................................................................. 49 

Comparisons Between Coaches .................................................................................................... 59 

Chapter 5 ............................................................................................................................................... 64 

Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................. 64 

Objectives of the research as guided by the Project Steering Committee ................................... 64 

Commendations ............................................................................................................................ 66 

Additional Findings with Recommendations ................................................................................ 66 

Checklist for effective junior training sessions ............................................................................. 70 

Further research ........................................................................................................................... 72 

References ........................................................................................................................................ 73 

Appendix 1 ........................................................................................................................................ 78 

Modified Athlete Enjoyment Scale ............................................................................................... 78 

Appendix 2 ........................................................................................................................................ 80 

Semi Structured Interview ............................................................................................................ 80 

Appendix 3 ........................................................................................................................................ 82 

Coach Rating Scale ........................................................................................................................ 82 

Appendix 4 ........................................................................................................................................ 84 

Specific Rugby League Information ............................................................................................... 84 

Appendix 5 ........................................................................................................................................ 91 

Specific Rugby Union Information ................................................................................................ 91 


List of Figures 

Figure 2-1 The Allocation of Interpersonal and Sport Specific Knowledge ........................................ 17 

Figure 4-1 A breakdown of the number of years the coaches in the study have been coaching for .. 31 

Figure 4-2 Coaches behaviour during the training session measured by systematic observation....... 37 

Figure 4-3 Percentage of coach’s behaviours during their training sessions ....................................... 39 

Figure 4-4 How the coaches rated their training session immediately afterwards .............................. 49 

Figure 4-5 The percentage of coaches who thought they achieved their goals they set for their 

training session ................................................................................................................... 51 

Figure 4-6 A comparison between coaches perceptions of the level of physical activity and the 

recorded level of physical activity....................................................................................... 53 

Figure 4-7 A comparison between coaches perceptions of how they allocated time during training 

sessions and the actual observations ................................................................................. 54 


List of Tables 

Table 2-1 Suggested percentage of time and number of sports during the three stages of the 

DMSP .................................................................................................................................. 17 

Table 2-2 Percentage of a Practice Session that coach’s spend ‘instructing’ players ......................... 19 

Table 2-3 Percentage of Practice session spent in management ....................................................... 20 

Table 3-1 A description of the behaviours used in the Video Observation .......................................... 25 

Table 3-2 Procedures to Ensure Validity in the Project ........................................................................ 27 

Table 4-1 Descriptive statistics about the participants......................................................................... 30 

Table 4-2 Self reported reasons why coaches started coaching .......................................................... 31 

Table 4-3 The duration and frequency of the coaching sessions ......................................................... 32 

Table 4-4 Levels of physical activity of the training sessions measured using SOFIT ........................... 33 

Table 4-5 Percentage of time players spent on specific skills ............................................................... 34 

Table 4-6 Context of the training sessions measured by SOFIT ............................................................ 35 

Table 4-7 Results from the Modified Athlete Enjoyment Scale ............................................................ 36 

Table 4-8 A detailed breakdown of the coach’s behaviours during their training sessions ................. 38 

Table 4-9 Percentage distribution of variables included in the rating scale of the coaching event ..... 47 

Table 4-10 What the coached liked and disliked about the coaching session ..................................... 50 

Table 4-11 Personal reflective suggestions on how the coaches thought they could have improved 

their training session ........................................................................................................... 51 

Table 4-12 What coaches reported they do in training sessions to ensure their players have fun ..... 55 

Table 4-13 What the coaches enjoy most about coaching ................................................................... 56 

Table 4-14 What the coaches enjoy least about coaching ................................................................... 57 

Table 4-15 The main issues facing coaching today as reported by coaches ......................................... 58 

Table 4-16 A comparison between the level of coaches qualifications and aspects of the training 

session ................................................................................................................................. 60 

Table 4-17 A comparison between highly experienced coaches and novice coaches ......................... 61 

Table 4-18 A comparison between the contexts of training session as determined by the coaches’ 

planned activity in the session ............................................................................................ 63 


Acknowledgements 

The research team wishes to thank the many coaches and players who volunteered to participate in 

this study. We would also like to acknowledge the contribution of the Project Steering Committee: 

Michael Asensio (NSW Rugby League) 

Cathy Gorman-Brown (Sport and Recreation, NSW Communities) 

Lara Hayes (Australian Sports Commission) 

Natalie Menzies (Australian Sports Commission) 

Martin Meredith (NSW Rugby League) 

Sally O’Hanlon (Australian Rugby Union) 

John Searl (Australian Rugby Union) 

Kerry Turner (Sport and Recreation, NSW Communities) 

Simon Woinarski (Sport and Recreation, NSW Communities, chair) 


Executive Summary 

Community junior coaches play a critical role in providing opportunities for players to develop motor 

skills, physical health and psychosocial skills. Currently there is very little empirical evidence on what 

happens during junior rugby league and rugby union training sessions. To investigate this and to 

start identifying what makes up an effective training session it is necessary to explore not only what 

players and coaches are currently doing during training sessions, but also the players and coaches 

self reflections about the training sessions. 

The study involved 444 participants in total, 37 coaches and 407 under ten players from both rugby 

union (17) and rugby league (21) teams around the greater Sydney area. Seventy training sessions 

were observed with data collected and analysed using: A Modified SOFIT Testing Instrument; A 

Modified Short Form - Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (S-PACES); Junior Coaching Observation 

Instrument; A Modified Rating scale for coaching sessions; and Pre and Post Training Session Coach 

Interviews. 

Main findings - 

 

Qualifications and Experience: All participating coaches except two had a relevant coaching 

qualification. The average number of years the coaches have been coaching is 5.59 years. 

Training frequency and duration: The average length of the training sessions observed was 55 

minutes. Rugby league trains twice per week averaging 104 minutes of training time per week 

and rugby union trains once per week averaging 60 minutes of training per week 

 

 

 

 

Moderate-Vigorous Physical Activity (MVPA) levels: During an average under 10’s RL or RU 

training session the players are in MVPA 82% of the time (45 mins) which equals 75% of the 

minimum daily recommended amount of exercise. However increasing the amount of time 

players spend jogging and reducing walking time could be a realistic goal if increased levels of 

physical activity are seen as a priority. 

Components of training session: Skill development accounts for 44% or 24.2 minutes of training 

sessions. Passing and catching is the most prevalent skill that players practice during training 

sessions, with 12% or 6.6 minutes of every training session allocated to passing and catching 

drills. An interesting finding from this data is that less than 1% of any coaching session is 

dedicated to kicking skills and drills. Playing games make up on average 20% of a training 

session. For players during the sampling years (6-12 yrs) it is recommended that over the 

complete season the players participate in 80% deliberate play or games and 20% deliberate 

practice. Fitness activities accounted for 9% of the training session. 

Player enjoyment: The majority of players were very enthusiastic about their sport. The two 

aspects of training that they enjoyed the most were playing with friends and playing games. 

They enjoyed the training sessions as well as competition and did not want to miss out on 

participating. It was pleasing that players believed they were improving and also ‘knew what 

they were meant to do’. The coaches have done a great job in ensuring players have fun with the 

main strategies being: variety in the session; incorporate skills into games and finishing training 

with a game. 

Instruction: Instruction consists of pre-instruction, technical explanation, concurrent instruction, 

corrective or specific feedback, questioning, positive modelling and negative modelling. The 

proportion of time that junior coaches spend instructing their players is 48% or 26.4 minutes. 


Pre-instruction and concurrent instruction each accounted for 14.3% of the training session and 

were ranked equal second as the most dominant individual behaviours displayed by junior 

coaches. The lengthy duration of instructions suggest that coaches have difficulty giving clear 

and concise messages and have a tendency to ‘over-coach’ by continually ‘telling’ and 

‘correcting’ their players during training sessions. 

o On average there were four occasions during a training session where the coach relates 

a practice situation to the game context (technical explanation). 

o Only 3-4 questions on average are asked during the training session. This may suggest 

that the junior coaches tend not to take a ‘gamesense’ approach incorporating the 

appropriate use of questioning for player learning. 

o On average only four demonstrations are performed in each session with most being 

how to perform the task correctly (positive modelling). It is suggested that junior players 

may benefit from observing more frequent demonstrations at training. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Feedback: Corrective/specific feedback was the most dominant type of feedback displayed by 

coaches and accounted for 10.2% of the training session. Junior coaches gave feedback 44 times 

during an average training session – with an equal number being classified as corrective/specific 

or positive feedback (18.5). There was also twice as much positive feedback as negative (2.2: 1). 

Interestingly the target of the positive feedback tended to be the group or team (57%) rather 

than individual players (11%) while negative feedback, although low, was evenly distributed 

between groups and individuals (35%). 

Observation was the most dominant single coaching behaviour exhibited by junior coaches and 

accounted for 16.8% of training sessions and occurred on an average of 28 separate occasions 

during training. These observational periods allow coaches the opportunity to monitor player 

performance and contemplate appropriate modifications or interventions. 

Management and Organisation: The proportion of time that junior coaches spent organising (or 

managing) their players are 13% or 7.1 minutes. This is similar to the time high school coaches 

are reported to spent on management but less than that reported at the college and 

professional level (< 6.5%). Reducing this time will create further opportunities for players to be 

engaged in play or practice activities 

Humour (ranked 16 th ) and hustle (ranked 9 th ) were coaching strategies used infrequently by 

coaches. On average the coaches would hustle or encourage their players on eight occasions or 

3.5% of the training session. This was significantly lower than rates reported in the literature. 

Coaching style: 61% of junior coaches display an authoritarian leadership style with 59% coaches 

displaying a ‘player-centred’ approach compared to 22% that were classified as using a ‘coachcentred’ 

approach to coaching. 

Coaching arrangements: the junior coaches preferred the players to participate in various 

activities as a whole group (84%) with little pair work or individual practice. On those occasions 

when the coaches divided the players into small groups they preferred to have the players 

complete the same task. The reliance on ‘whole group’ activities reduces the opportunities 

players have to complete specific skills and make decisions. 

Interaction with Players: The results indicate that the junior coaches have a healthy interaction 

with their players. The majority of coaches are receptive to player suggestions (62%), are 

encouraging (89%) and display consistent behaviour (90%). 


Player participation: Junior RL and RU coaches could improve their planning and 

implementation of their coaching session. This conclusion is based on the following: 

55% of the training sessions were rated as performing at an ‘effective’ level of intensity 

In 70% of training sessions players were ‘ engaged’ in tasks 

56% of training sessions scheduled ‘a lot’ of practice time 

64% of training sessions were observed where players were sufficiently attentive 

Rating the training session: 48% of the coaches thought that their training session was good and 

only 9% thought that it was bad. Further investigation of this revealed that the coaches liked it 

when the players tried hard and worked well in the session and when the players listened. In 

contrast to this the coaches reported that they disliked it when the players did not turn up to 

training or when the players were not concentrating. The main suggestions that coaches put 

forward on how the training session could be improved relates to greater player attendance at 

training and improved management skills to reduce discipline issues. 68.5% of the coaches 

thought that they did meet their stated goals. An interesting aspect of reasons why goals were 

or weren’t achieved is the ‘coach centred’ focus of what the coach did in relation to his planning 

rather than reasons related to players level of enjoyment, learning or performance. 

Coach Perceptions: It appears the coaches grossly over estimate the amount of time that their 

players are very active and grossly under estimate the amount of time that their players are 

moderately active. This trend is repeated when they reflect on components of the training 

session – over-estimating how much time they spend on management, fitness and skill activities 

and under-estimating how much instruction they give to players. 

Fun: the main strategies coaches employed to ensure that players had fun was incorporating a 

variety of different activities (21%) and playing games (38%). 

Enjoyment and dissatisfaction: most coaches identified aspects directly involving children as the 

most enjoyable part of coaching with 57% indicating “watching kids have fun or improve”. This 

was followed by ‘athlete-coach relationships or interactions’ and “teaching”. When asked what 

they enjoyed least the broad category of ‘parents’ accounted for over 50% of coach responses. 

This included abusive parents, parents emphasis on winning, criticism from parents, and parents 

who think their kids are better than what they are. When asked to identify the main issues that 

face junior coaches parents were the number one issue followed by an ‘emphasis on winning” 

and “discipline issues/trying to manage players”. It seems there is a high level of stress and 

pressure which must surely challenge the coach’s motive to continue. 

Coach accreditation appeared to have very little influence on the type of training session 

conducted in terms of what players did or what behaviours were predominantly displayed by 

coaches. However, there were two significant differences. Firstly, coaches with lower 

qualifications conduct training sessions that are significantly longer than highly qualified 

coaches. This difference equates to 54.5 minute sessions conducted by highly qualified coaches 

compared to 62.7 minute sessions conducted by coaches with introductory level qualifications. 

Secondly, highly qualified coaches gave more technical explanations. 

Coaching Experience appears to be more of a discriminator. Results indicate that several 

significant differences occur in training sessions conducted by experienced coaches when 

compared to those conducted by novice coaches: 

experienced coaches spend significantly more time questioning their players. 

experienced coaches spend significantly more time in technical explanation. 


experienced coaches were observed showing significantly more enthusiasm than novice 

coaches 

In training sessions conducted by novice coaches, players have significantly higher levels of 

MVPA 

However on all other aspects of coaching there was no significant difference between 

experienced (> 5yrs) and inexperienced (< 2 yrs) coaches. 

Additional Findings with Recommendations 

Even when coaches are doing things well, there is always room for improvement. This section will 

highlight areas that are causing major concern with coaches and players as well as offering possible 

solutions. 

1. Management and organisational skills: Coaches are generally well educated on the basics of 

creating a good training session. They are not well equipped to execute and manage a session 

with a group of very active and chatty players who are there to have fun. 

Recommendation to State Sporting Organisation 

 

 

A review of coach education courses is needed to include not only the skills based content, 

but content that will give coaches confidence and strategies to cope with discipline issues, 

management issues and enhance their ability to give clear concise instructions to players. 

Develop workshops specifically for junior coaches that address relevant management and 

discipline issues and communication skills that can be conducted in local communities. 

Recommendation to the clubs 

Encourage all coaches to attend workshops 

2. Coach – Parent relationship: Parental input during training sessions and particularly at games 

can be detrimental to the well being of the team and the coach. Coaches are not well trained in 

how to influence the attitude of parents or to reduce conflict from the side line. This results in 

coaches feeling more pressure and less enjoyment. 


Greater support needs to be provided to junior coaches regarding parenting issues. Possible 

strategies include: 

Create an education package for parents that the individual clubs can use each season to 

reduce inappropriate parent behaviour. Issues to be addressed in the package could include: 

unreasonable expectations; objectives of junior sport; how parents can support their child 

and the coach. This package may include video, handouts, question/answer session. We 

recommend a more thorough investigation into this issue to create the most appropriate 

education package for parents. 

 

Develop a parent behaviour self assessment tool 


Provide junior coaches with coping mechanisms for dealing with abuse and criticism. This 

module/workshop can be added to the coach education program for new coaches. 

Experienced coaches also need to have access to this information. 

Emphasise to coaches that effective communication skills will assist in developing positive 

relationships with other parents. For example, listening to parents; showing empathy; 

communicating clear goals and messages to parents 

Offer conflict resolution sessions 

Recommendations for clubs 

Embrace the new parent education package and introduce it to parents as quickly as 

possible. 

In the meantime, during the registration process, parents should be reminded of the clubs 

overall aims for the season. This will cover the importance of equal participation, enjoyment 

for all, respect and learning. A reminder that winning is not the goal, doing your best is, and 

other similar ideologies are important to communicate strongly and frequently. 

3. Communication and ‘instruction’. In general, communication skills are not a strong point for 

junior coaches. In particular there is: 

A lack of clear & concise instructions 

The role of ‘cues’ doesn’t seem to be used effectively (concurrent instruction) 

A belief that coaches need to be continually talking and ‘instructing’ players – ‘observation’ 

of players is an effective and necessary coaching strategy 

Over-coaching 

Minimal use of questioning 

Minimal evidence that coaches cater for the different learning styles of their players 

A need to increase corrective and positive feedback 


 

 

Communication skills are critical to success. It cannot be assumed that all junior coaches are 

naturally good communicators. This is a skill that must be learned. A communication 

module must be included in any coach education course. Information on effective 

communication and instruction strategies should be supported by various practical 

activities and video examples relevant to the junior coach. 

Develop a variety of assessment tools that are easy to administer that could be used in the 

junior coach setting. An example would be a checklist of variables related to instruction that 

a parent or other coach could complete while observing a training session. This would 

provide instant and specific feedback to the coach. This could supplement the coach’s own 

self-evaluation. 

4. Coaches have no baseline for comparison on how effective they are as a coach or how they can 

improve. Junior coaches have difficulty accurately estimating what happens during a training 

session. They tend to over-estimate how active players are and under-estimate how much they 

‘talk’ or instruct. 



 

Create formal and informal mentoring activities – provide opportunities for coaches to 

observe other junior training sessions; consider establishing a pool of mentors and 

developing a system that provides access to e-mentors. 

Develop guidelines on how to develop and implement ‘coaching communities’. Provide 

support (1-2hr workshop) on facilitation role. Meetings could be scheduled on the Saturday 

before competition starts, once during the season (a non-playing Saturday) and the final 

Saturday. Saturdays that are cancelled due to wet weather may also be used. These 

meetings provide coaches with an opportunity to support each other and work through 

common issues. Examples may include: 

o Planning and conducting training sessions that everyone then tries with their own team 

(agree on goals, content etc) 

o Working on one problem at a time e.g. player concentration levels 

Develop guidelines to assist junior coaches in assessing their own performance and 

developing effective self reflective skills. 

Suggest an evaluation system for coaches. This may include the identification of 2 things 

under the following 3 headings – 

o What I need to start doing 

o What I need to stop doing 

o What I need to keep doing 

These can be determined by the coach themselves or in consultation with mentor, other 

coaches or ‘assistant’ parents 

5. Training Session. Prior planning and continual learning will assist coaches in providing players 

with greater opportunities for deliberate ‘play’ (games) and practice. 


Provide an online resource available to assist coaches with planning and selection of 

activities for training sessions. This would expand on what is available at the rugby’s online 

coaching centre. Relevant and specific games, activities and drills would be included in 

written and video form. An example in another sport is available at 

www.globalfootballsystems.com This online resource could be available free for all 

registered coaches (accessed through a login) or for a small fee paid by each club and 

available to all their coaches. 

Consider adopting a ‘long term athlete development’ or ‘development model of sports 

participation’ framework. This would encourage a greater emphasis on ‘games’ play for 9-12 

year olds. 

Encouragement of small group activities to increase player involvement and decision-making 

opportunities. This would supplement whole group activities. The minimal use of small 

group work at training may be a reflection on the over-emphasis on team ‘runs’ where 


coaches believe they must run as a team for lengthy periods. Examples to be included in 

coach education courses and the e-resources. 

Reinforce the importance of a ‘cool down’. As well as being ‘good’ practice in terms of 

recovery it is an ideal time where coaches can summarise the main points learnt during the 

training session. 

6. Coach frustration with low numbers at training. Coaches lack the adaptability to change 

training plans quickly to meet new situations. Coaches appear to lack confidence and skills in 

running small group activities. 


Junior coaches need to be given suggestions for events such as reduced player numbers at 

training so contingency plans can be formulated. This information can be discussed and 

demonstrated at coaching courses and made available on the junior coaching website. 

7. Support. The coaches feel they have a lack of support and often feel isolated 


 

 

 

Provide a blog where junior coaches could communicate and share ideas and experiences 

Provide access to an e-mentor: junior coaches are able to ask questions and receive advice 

on specific junior coaching issues 

Demonstrate to coaches how they can include other parents by setting roles and 

boundaries. An example would be having parents as ‘assistants’ to supervise small group 

activities. If parents have a role and can contribute at training they are more likely to be 

positive and supportive. 

8. Coach Education. A review of the effectiveness of current coach education courses. This will 

involve interviewing graduates from the previous two years to determine the relevance and 

applicability of knowledge gained from the courses. 

Recommendation 

Consideration should be given to both the delivery and content of coach education. 

Suggestions include - 

Player centred (rather than coach centred) 

Problem-based learning – emphasis on ‘How’ as well as ‘what’ 

Communication skills 

Management and organisational skills 


Chapter 1 

Introduction 

Traditionally sports in Australia have developed coach accreditation and education programs to 

improve the quality of junior sports coaching. However ABS statistics suggests that a significant 

number of junior coaches do not attend or complete accreditation courses. Also the assessment of 

the competency of coaches who complete an accreditation course does not provide information 

about what actually happens at training once those coaches go into the field. 

By developing a greater understanding of what is happening during typical junior coaching sessions it 

will be possible to identify any strengths and possible deficiencies of the coaching experience. Once 

data relating to any strengths and deficiencies has been thoroughly analysed it may be possible to 

develop systems that will improve the quality of junior coaching in the community setting resulting 

in coaches having an even greater impact on young athletes' development and enjoyment of sport 

(Hedstrom & Gould, 2004). 

Aim and Objectives of the Research 

The aim of the research was to conduct an investigation to develop a deeper understanding of the 

makeup of junior Rugby League and Rugby Union coaching sessions. Specifically the research 

revolved around the following objectives: 

1. Determine the proportion of time junior coaches spend organising their players 

2. Determine the proportion of time junior coaches spend instructing their players 

3. Determine how active players are during a coaching session 

4. Determine how often players get to practise performing the skills of the game 

5. Determine if coaches have an accurate understanding of how active their players are during a 

coaching session 

6. Determine how different levels of coach accreditation and the experience of the coaches 

impacts on player activity levels, instruction time and group management time. 

In order to fully investigate the objectives of the study, an approach was needed that would not only 

enable the researchers and key stakeholders to fully understand the coaching environment and its 

effect on players, but also one that would give valid and reliability results. One such approach is 

systematic observation, and it is this approach that forms the basis of the methods used in the 

study. 

Methodologies 

Using methods of convenient sampling (Gall et al, 1996) the study involved 444 participants in total, 

37 coaches and 407 under ten players from both rugby union and rugby league teams around the 

greater Sydney area. Systematic observation of these coaches and their respective teams was 

undertaken twice during the 2009 season. 

Two research assistants visited each training session with one assistant systematically observing the 

session using the System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time (SOFIT) (McKenzie, Sallis and Nader, 

1991). The other research assistant videotaped the session to enable the training session to be 


viewed and coded at a later date using an observational instrument adapted from the Coach 

Behavioural Assessment System (Smith, Smoll and Hunt, 1977) combined with the Arizona State 

University observation instrument (Lacy and Darst, 1984). Data was also collected at these sessions 

via pre and post session coach interviews and using an adapted Player Enjoyment Scale (Motl, et al., 

2001). Following the session the two research assistants also completed the Rating Scale for 

Coaching Sessions (Liukkonen, Laakso & Telama, 1996). 

Report Outline 

The research activities and findings of the study are presented in the subsequent chapters. In 

Chapter 2 a synthesis of the literature reviewed is provided to form a theoretical and practical basis 

for the study. 

In Chapter 3 an overview of the research methodology, is presented, followed by the specific 

procedures used in this study. 

Chapter 4 presents the analysis of data relating to the aims and objectives of the research. It begins 

with a descriptive overview of the participants in the study i.e., the coaches and players. It then 

presents the findings in relation to the following five areas: 

• Players’ in Action 

• Players’ Reflections on the Training Session 

• Coaches’ in Action 

• Coaches’ Reflections on the Training Sessions 

• Comparisons between the Data 

Chapter 5 summarises the research, discusses the major outcomes of the study and presents issues 

and recommendations for the state sporting organisations and clubs. Guidelines for effective 

training sessions are also outlined. 


Chapter 2 

Literature Review 

This chapter presents a synthesis of the literature that was reviewed to form the theoretical and 

practical foundation for this study. The review is divided into three main focus areas. The first area 

looks at junior sport generally; the second area examines research related to players and the section 

critiques relevant literature related to coaches. 

Junior Sport Coaches and Junior Sport 

Coaching is potentially a very gratifying pursuit as a result of working with aspiring athletes, the 

challenge of constructing an effective program, the fulfilment derived from teaching sport skills, and 

the opportunity to facilitate athletes' psychosocial development (Raedeke, 2004). In particular, the 

junior sport coach can have a significant impact on young athletes' development and enjoyment of 

sport (Hedstrom & Gould, 2004). Furthermore, the contemporary epidemic of inactivity and obesity 

in Australian children means there is potential for youth sports and their coaches to have a 

significant impact in this area in the future (Hedstrom & Gould, 2004). Paradoxically, little 

educational, social, financial, and psychological support exists for the development and retention of 

community junior sport coaches given their importance to the overall development of young 

athletes. Considering the importance of the coach in determining the quality and success of an 

athlete's sport experience, the existence of information that specifically relates to ‘best practice’, 

and the development and retention of community junior coaches is surprisingly negligible. 

Research indicates that coaches can influence whether the junior player has a positive or negative 

sports experience (Gilbert, Gilbert and Trudel, 2001; Hedstrom and Gould, 2004). Smith, Smoll and 

colleagues (Smith, Smoll and Curtis, 1979; Smith et al., 1993; Smith and Smoll, 2002) have been the 

leading researchers in investigating how coaching behaviours influence an athletes’ satisfaction. 

Their research suggests that players with a trained coach display increased motivation, self esteem, 

and satisfaction with their coach, teammates and the season. Coaches must also be aware that 

children (8-12 years) perceive their competence in relation to peer comparison so feedback must be 

task oriented rather than performance focused (Horn and Harris, 2002). 

Developmental Model of Sport Participation 

The Under 10’s age group investigated in this study is part of the ‘sampling years’ (6-12 years) within 

the Developmental Model of Sport Participation (Cote, Baker and Abernethy, 2003) where an 

emphasis on diversity of sport and a focus on deliberate play activities is important in developing 

player perceptions of competence which contribute to continued participation (Kirk, 2005). Table 2- 

1 outlines the three stages that players progress towards elite performance. Deliberate play 

activities are aimed at maximizing player fun and enjoyment and are intrinsically motivated. 

Deliberate play provides opportunities for players to experiment and be creative “without being told 

the right way to execute a skill” (Cote and Fraser-Thomas, 2008, p20). It has been suggested that an 

over-emphasis on deliberate practice during the sampling years can lead to sport drop out, burn-out, 

injuries and decreased enjoyment (p. 21). 


Table 2-1 Suggested percentage of time and number of sports during the three stages of the DMSP. 

Stage Deliberate Play / 

other sport activities 

(% involvement) 

Sampling 

(age 6-12 years) 

Specialising 

(age 13 – 15 years) 

Investment 

(age 16 – 22 years) 

Deliberate Practice 

(% involvement) 

No. of other sports 

80 20 3 – 4 

50 50 2 – 3 

20 80 1 - 2 

Lyle (2002) suggests that ‘participation coaching’ is sports leadership and teaching, with the purpose 

of providing initial experiences in sport for athletes. Competition and performance elements are not 

emphasised during the sampling years. Rather the focus is on fundamental movement skills and 

trialling different ways to execute skills that can be transferred across different sports. Junior 

coaches need to avoid ‘over coaching’ 6-12 year old players. 

Cote (2008) suggests that junior participation coaching should focus on the 4 ‘C’s’: Competence, 

Confidence, Connection and Character. Specifically he recommends that junior coaches - 

 

 

 

 

 

Adopt an inclusive focus as opposed to an exclusive selection policy based on performance. 

Organize a mastery-oriented motivational climate. 

Set up safe opportunities for athletes to have fun and engage playfully in low-organization 

games. 

Teach and assess the development of fundamental movements by focusing on the child first. 

Promote social aspect of sport and sampling. 

Cote (2008) divided the coaches required knowledge into two domains - 

Sport specific knowledge: include technical, tactical, mental, pedagogical, training, nutrition, etc. 

Interpersonal knowledge: individual and group interactions with children, adolescents, and 

adults (i.e. coach-athletes, coach-parents, coach-assistants relationships, etc.). 

The reliance on these two knowledge domains varies throughout the stages of the DMSP (Fig 2-1) 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

interpersonal knowledge 

sport knowledge 

20 

0 

sampling specialising investment 

Figure 2-1 The Allocation of Interpersonal and Sport Specific Knowledge 


Players in Action 

Currently in Australia and in similar western societies, the levels of physical activity of adolescents 

are declining at faster rates than ever before (Booth et al., 2006). In order to combat this decline the 

Australian government through the Active Kids are Healthy Kids campaign (Department of Health 

and Ageing, 2004) has decided to focus on improving the physical activity levels of adolescences. The 

recommendations in the campaign are intended to make public the minimum level of physical 

activity required for good health in children. These recommendations were based upon the best 

available evidence and are also in line with international best practice. The campaign states that 

Australian children should get a minimum of 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity 

(MVPA) a day, with MVPA being defined as a brisk walk and above (Department of Health and 

Ageing, 2004). The importance and opportunity that the junior sport environment plays in meeting 

these national guidelines is an area that has not been fully explored and an area that the current 

literature that this study can fill. 

Another area of concern identified in Booth et al.’s NSW Schools Physical Activity and Nutrition 

Survey (2006) is the low ability level of adolescents to perform and master the fundamental 

movement skills (FMS) which underlie all sports (e.g., passing running, kicking, dodging etc). This 

finding not only has implications for schools in NSW but also other areas where these skills are 

regularly performed i.e., the junior coaching environment where the FMS are regularly taught and 

practiced. 

Research also indicates that the time taken for adolescents to master a single fundamental 

movement skill ranges from 280 minutes to 600 minutes (NSW Department of Education and 

Training, 2000). The role the junior sport environment can potentially play in developing these FMS 

is significant, especially considering the frequency and duration of junior training sessions 

throughout a year. Research on this however is limited. 

The benefit of Junior Sport Participation 

Junior coaches play a critical role in providing opportunities for players to develop motor skills, 

physical health and psychosocial skills such as self concept, cooperation, responsibility, self-control 

and empathy (Fraser-Thomas and Cote, 2006; Malina and Cumming, 2003; Seefeldt, Ewing and Walk, 

1992; Weiss and Stuntz, 2004). Evidence suggests youth sport participation provides an ideal 

environment for developing life skills (Gould, Collins, Lauer and Cheung, 2008) and fostering 

cognitive development (Pool and Miller, 2006). Similarly it has been suggested that coaches who use 

appropriate reinforcement and praise; encourage players after mistakes; and use effective 

instructions are most likely to enhance player psychological development. Participation in junior 

sport can also contribute to normal growth and development and enhance aerobic fitness, strength 

and skill development (Fraser- Thomas et al., 2005). 

Unfortunately there is also the negative aspects of junior sport participation particularly when a ‘win 

at all costs’ mentality is prevalent. This can lead to unhealthy levels of aggression and stress and 

contribute to player burnout and withdrawal. If players encounter competition or advanced skill 

work too soon they will experience increased anxiety and decreased self esteem. 


It has been reported that US youth players are more likely to drop out of sport if their coaches are 

autocratic, less encouraging and place a heavy emphasis on winning (Salminen and Liukkonen, 

1996). In Australia the main reasons for dropping out of sport are: no time for other interests, the 

sport isn’t fun anymore, conflict with the coach, the coach played favourites or was a poor teacher 

(ABS, 2008). 

Coaches in Action 

There is a dearth of empirical based research evidence in support of coaching practice. Although 

there is an extensive knowledge base regarding physical education teachers there is a paucity of 

literature concerning coaching effectiveness and the training of junior coaches. Successful coaches 

are not only knowledgeable in the techniques or skills of their sport; they also know how to teach 

those skills to athletes. Crucial to enhancing performance is how the coach facilitates learning in the 

athlete. Systematic observation instruments have been used in previous research to identify the 

behaviours that coaches demonstrate in their coaching practice. “Systematic observation allows a 

trained person following stated guidelines and procedures to observe, record, and analyse 

interactions with the assurance that others viewing the same sequence of events would agree with 

his (or her) recorded data” (Darst, Mancini and Zakrajsek, 1983, p.6). 

1. Instructions 

Case study research on coaches at various levels confirms that the behaviours of effective coaches 

consist of a high percentage of instructional strategies – questioning, feedback, explanations, 

demonstrations and analysis (Cushion and Jones, 2001; Lacy and Darst, 1985; Millard, 1996). The 

Table below indicates that coaches spend 19 – 58% of a training session ‘instructing’ their players. 

Table 2-2 Percentage of a Practice Session that coach’s spend ‘instructing’ players 

Level of sport sport % training spent on 

‘instruction’ 

Reference 

College Basketball 62.7 Tharpe & Gallimore 

(1976) 

Professional Soccer 59.8 Potrac et al (2007) 

Youth Soccer 58.2 Cushion & Jones (2001) 

Elite Soccer 50.3 Vangucci et al (1997) 

Youth Various 43.3 Liukkonen et al (1996) 

Youth Football 43.3 Seagrave & Ciancio 

(1990) 

High School Volleyball 23 Stewart & Bengier (2001) 

College Volleyball 19.6% Lacy & Martin (1994) 

However Fisher, Mancini, Hirsch, Proulx & Straurowsky (1982) reported that coaches from less 

satisfied teams gave 70% more information to their athletes than did coaches in the more satisfied 

environments. This strongly suggests that effective coaching is linked more to the quality (how and 


when) rather than to the sheer quantity of instruction provided to athletes. In all probability 

coaching expertise is not a function of increasing or decreasing certain behaviours. Rather it is 

having the ability to make the correct decisions within the constraints of the training environment. 

Consequently coaching can be classified as a cognitive skill that can be taught. 

Liukkonen, Laakso & Telama (1996) assessed the coaching behaviours of 128 youth sport coaches in 

Finland. Using systematic observation and a rating scale for coaching sessions they found that twothirds 

of the session comprised of instructions, modelling and assisting performance, and 

observation. Interestingly there was little feedback given (positive or negative), activities were 

mainly to the whole group with instructions given in an authoritarian manner, and little interaction 

among players. 

Previous studies have indicated that questioning and demonstrations are often infrequently used by 

coaches (Bloom, Crumpton and Anderson, 1999; Claxton, 1988; Mesquita, Sobrinho, Rasado, Pereira 

and Milisted, (2008); Potrac et al., 2007). However both strategies have been recommended as 

teaching approaches that will assist athlete learning. 

In his review of 56 studies that used systematic observation of coaching behaviours, Kahan (1999) 

found that coaches engage in a cycle of spontaneous and reactive behaviour that can be described 

as “initial instruction which may include demonstration by the coach, silent observation of player 

performance, concurrent or terminal-feedback possibly coupled with hustle - or encouragement 

statements, further observation of player performance, and repletion of the cycle until the task is 

changed” (p. 41). The majority of these studies used either the Arizona State University Observation 

Instrument or the Coaching Behaviour Assessment Scheme to code coaching behaviours, with each 

coach being observed for an average of 5.5 hours (2-4 training sessions). 

2. Management 

Another major behaviour category assessed during systematic observation studies has been 

management. Table 2-3 summarises the amount of time coaches spend managing or organising 

players during practice sessions. 

Table 2-3 Percentage of Practice session spent in management 

Level of sport sport % training spent on 

‘management’ 

Reference 

High School Basketball 15.3 Lacy & Goldston (1994) 

High School Volleyball 14.8 Stewart & Bengier (2001) 

High School Baseball 14.6 Rupert & Buchner (1989) 

Professional Soccer 6.2 Potrac et al (2007) 

College Volleyball 6.4 Lacy & Martin (1994) 

Elite Soccer 5.2 Vangucci et al (1997) 


Coach enjoyment and retention 

Despite the important role of coaches in youth sport, participation rates have been decreasing 

throughout the world (Coleman, 2002; Yamaguchi & Takahashi, 2000). It is therefore important to 

understand the motivations which underpin coaches' involvement in a given sport in order to ensure 

that sporting organisations can attract and ensure the success of volunteers within their given roles 

(Coleman, 2002). 

This research will also attempt to find out what coaches derive enjoyment from and what causes 

dissatisfaction so organisations are able to assist with the development and retention of these 

coaches. It has previously been reported that coach motivations were derived from personal 

characteristics and experiences within the sport, interest in working with young people, and wanting 

to remain involved in sport in some capacity (Sage, 1989; Schinke et al., 1995; Salmela, 1995). 

Similarly, Walsh (2004) noted that participation in sport as an athlete and desire to maintain 

involvement in the sport were the primary reasons for beginning coaching in Australia. Additionally, 

family involvement in the sport; wanting to offer something back to the sport and an academic 

background relating to sport had a strong influence on a coach’s decision to begin coaching (Walsh, 

2004). Reasons that contribute to coaches deciding to continue to be a volunteer coach include: 

helping others to improve (39%), enjoyment (29%), making a contribution to sport (19%) and 

achievement/success (8%). 

Current evidence highlights the immense pressure to sustain coach involvement in youth sport 

programs over an extended period of time. When you consider the work, family and coaching 

commitments that must be balanced, it is perhaps possible that the youth sport coach may 

experience burnout from the following stressors: increased work demands, excessive workloads, 

conflicting roles, high expectations, and striving to satisfy everyone's needs. 

Summary 

In summary, there is very little empirical evidence on what constitutes an effective junior sport 

training session. Systematic observation instruments are a valid and reliable way to assess coaching 

behaviours. The first step in developing guidelines for effective youth coaching is identifying what 

coaches currently do. However to gain a greater understanding of player skill development it has 

been suggested that player activity (on-task behaviour, skill attempts etc) as well as coach behaviour 

be observed and analysed (Lacy and Martin, 1994). As the majority of studies designed to examine 

coaching behaviour and player outcomes have involved male coaches and male athletes from the US 

and UK, caution must be taken in generalizing those results to Australian junior coaches. 


Chapter 3 

Methodology Underlying the Research 

This chapter details the research methodology utilised to investigate the aims and objectives of the 

study. The chapter begins with a literature review of the research methodology and instruments 

used in the study, along with justification for their choice. The chapter concludes with a discussion of 

the ethical considerations and a summary of the methods used to ensure the reliability and validity 

of the research. 

Ethical Considerations 

This study was conducted using the ethical guidelines implemented by the University of Sydney. It 

was important for the research to follow these strict ethical guidelines in order to protect the rights 

of participants, and ensure that the research was conducted in a fair and equitable manner. 

Approval was granted from the University of Sydney’s Human Research Ethics Committee. All of the 

participants in this study were informed of the nature and extent of the research prior to its 

commencement and signed consent forms. As this research involved video-taping the training 

session consent from the coach and all players’ parents/guardians needed to be attained for that 

team to be included in the study. 

Participant Recruitment 

Participants were recruited from the Sydney metropolitan area through the NSW Rugby League and 

Australian Rugby Union Associations. All teams competing in the 2009 RL and RU Under 10s age 

division were invited to participate in the study. 

Instruments 

The project incorporated the use of five instruments. An overview of these instruments can be seen 

below 

1. System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time (SOFIT) 

The System for Observing Fitness Instruction Time (SOFIT) is a previously validated momentary time 

sampling and an interval recording system (McKenzie, Sallis, & Nader, 1991) that uses a three-phase 

decision system to examine how active athletes are, how coaches spend their time during training 

sessions and in the case of this study what skills were performed during the training session. 

Phase 1 of the process involves making a judgment on the activity level of the athletes. This is made 

by observing preselected players (one at a time) and determining their level of physical activity 

periodically (every 20 seconds) throughout the training session. Phase 2 of the decision sequence 

involves coding the context of the training session being observed. At the end of each observation 

interval (20 seconds), a decision is made whether training time is being allocated to management, 

imparting knowledge, fitness, skills practice, or playing games. The final modified phase, Phase 3, 

involves coding what specific rugby skills the players performed during the session. 

SOFIT (McKenzie, Sallis, & Nader, 1991) is widely used, and its activity codes have been validated for 

use with adolescents (Rowe, Van der Mars, Schuldheisz, & Fox, 2004) through heart rate monitoring. 


2. Activity Enjoyment Scale (S-PACES) 

The Short Form - Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (S-PACES) includes 9 items which athletes rate 

themselves on a five-point Likert scale (See Appendix 1). The scale measures the amount of 

enjoyment the athletes perceive themselves to have experienced during an exercise activity. Motl, 

et al. (2001) found PACES to be a reliable measure of physical activity enjoyment and concluded that 

the scale had both factorial and construct validity. The scale was considerably adapted for rugby 

situations by using rugby terminology. 

The instrument was administered directly after each observed training session by trained research 

assistants. 

3. Pre and Post Session Semi Structure Interviews 

In order to consolidate the information gained from observing the coaches and to provide 

corroboration of the data from other sources, interviews were conducted before and after every 


Patton (2002) described the usefulness of interviewing by stating that. 

“We interview people to find out from them those things we cannot directly observe. The 

issue is not whether observational data is more desirable, valid or meaningful than selfreport 

data. The fact of the matter is that we cannot observe everything. We cannot 

observe feelings thoughts and intentions. We cannot observe behaviours that took place 

at some previous point in time. We cannot observe situations that preclude the presence 

of an observer. We cannot observe how people have organised the world and the 

meanings they attach to what goes on in the world. We have to ask people questions 

about those things” (p. 278). 

The interviews in this project followed a semi-structured guide (see Appendix 2), and were aimed at 

exploring issues related to the aims and objectives of the research. As suggested by Minichiello, 

Aroni, Timewell, & Alexander (1995) the structure of the interview also allows enough flexibility for 

participants (i.e. coaches) to express a range of individual perceptions regarding their experiences. 

Specifically the interview guide raised issues pertaining to: 

• The coach’s experience and qualifications in coaching rugby 

• What the coaches planned to do during the session (asked prior to the session) 

• How successful the coach thought their training sessions were and why 

• The coaches thoughts on coaching in general 

At the beginning of the interview the coaches were asked if they had any objections to having the 

interview recorded. They were advised that their comments would be recorded anonymously, and 

they would not be identified individually. All of the coaches agreed to the recording process, thus all 

interviews were recorded ensuring an accurate record was obtained. 

4. Coach Rating Scale 

A modified version of the Rating Scale for coaching sessions (Liukkonen, Laakso & Telama, 1996) was 

completed at the conclusion of the training session by trained research assistants (see Appendix 3). 

The rating scale for coaches includes aspects such as teaching arrangements, communication skills, 

working methods, interaction between coach and athlete, and engagement in tasks. For example, 


organizational skills are rated on a 5 point scale from poor (1) to good (5); persistence of behaviour 

is rated from inconsistent (1) to consistent (5). 

5. Systematic Video Observation 

The researchers developed the Junior Coaching Observation instrument by combining categories 

from the Coach Behavioural Assessment System (Brewer and Jones, 2002) and the Arizona State 

University Observation Instrument (Lacy and Darst, 1984). The combination of these two valid and 

reliable observational instruments resulted in data being collected on 17 behavioural categories: 

instruction – pre-instruction, concurrent, technical; demonstration – positive modelling, negative 

modelling; feedback – corrective/specific, general, positive, negative; questioning; hustle 

(encouragement); management/organisation; observation; humour; time off task. Table 3-1 outlines 

the definition for each behavioural category. 

The validity of systematic observation instruments are well documented in the literature. As the 

Junior Coaching Observation instrument was adapted from two previously validated instruments the 

content validity was confirmed by a group of twelve experienced coaches enrolled in a Masters 

degree. Reliability was ensured by conducting training sessions with the ‘coders’ prior to any formal 

coding of the data. Reliability was also improved from previous studies as the training sessions were 

video recorded rather than coded in ‘real’ time. This allowed the research assistant to observe, 

pause and review (in slow motion if required) behaviours prior to coding. The inter and intra 

reliability coefficient was measured using a Spearmen correlation calculation and returned values of 

0.895 and 0.864 respectively, indicating that the Junior Coaching Observation instrument is a reliable 

tool. 


Table 3-1 A description of the behaviours used in the Video Observation 

Behaviour 

Pre-Instruction 

Concurrent instruction 

Technical Explanation 

Questioning 

Positive modelling 

Negative modelling 

Positive feedback 

Negative feedback 

General feedback 

Corrective feedback or specific 

feedback 

Hustle 

Scold 

Humour 

Management/organisation 

Observation 

Not on task / conferring with 

others 

Uncodable 

Definition 

Initial information given to player(s) preceding the desired action 

to be executed. It explains how to execute the skill, play, task or 

drill that it precedes 

Cues or reminders given during the execution of the skill or play. 

The coach rationalises through explanation of how the practices 

that are being undertaken would relate to the game situation 

either from a technical (technique) or strategically (tactical) 

basis: “From this situation in a game you would …” 

Any question to player(s) concerning strategies, techniques, 

assignments, etc. associated with the sport 

A demonstration of correct performance of a skill or playing 

technique 

A demonstration of incorrect performance of a skill or playing 

technique 

positive feedback (verbal or non-verbal) in the form of 

demonstrations of satisfaction or pleasure, at a skill or practice 

attempt: “Good”, pat on back, smile 

Verbal or nonverbal feedback demonstrating displeasure at the 

players’ skill or practice attempt of the drill, skill or play: “That’s 

awful” 

Nonspecific feedback (verbal or non-verbal) 

Information, re-explanation or feedback regarding the actual 

performance of the drill, skill or play which informs the player of 

how the performance should be altered in order to improve: 

“Get lower” OR 

feedback of a specific nature given to the player(s) following the 

execution of a specific skill or task: “The timing of that pop pass 

was excellent” 

Verbal statements intended to intensify the efforts of the 

player(s) 

Verbal or non-verbal behaviours of displeasure 

Verbal statements related to organizational details of practice 

sessions not referring to strategies or fundamentals of the sport 

Periods of diagnostic observation when the coach is not talking 

and is observing the players and analysing their execution of the 

skill or activity or observing the way in which a team is executing 

strategies in open play situations 

Any behaviour that cannot be seen or heard or does not fit into 

the above categories 

Adapted from the Arizona State University Observation Instrument (Lacy & Darst, 1984, pp. 59-66) and the Rugby Union 

Coaches Observation Instrument (Brewer & Jones, 2002, pp. 148-150) 


Overview of Data Collection Techniques 

The vast nature of the research made data collection in this study a complex issue. To ensure the 

robustness of the research, rigorous uniform data collection techniques were needed. These 

techniques included the training and employment of 16 research assistants. The training included, 

depending on the area of employment, either training in uniform data collection procedures and the 

implementation of specific testing instruments, and/or training in data entry and analysis. 

Prior to the training observation the coach and or manager was contacted to confirm training times 

and locations and to make the coach aware that a two person research team was going to observe 

and record the session. On the day of the observation, the research team was trained too: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Arrive at the venue 15mins prior to each session. 

Introduce themselves to the coach and conduct the pre-session semi structured interview. 

Set up the video camera, wireless microphone and video the training session. The camera 

focused on the coach at all times during the training session. 

Observe the session using SOFIT. 

At the conclusion of the training session conduct the modified Athlete Enjoyment Survey and the 

post-session semi structured interview with the coach. 

Complete the Coach Rating Scale 

Method of Analysis 

The data collected during this research project was analysed in three different ways depending on 

the nature of the data gathered. The methods of analysis for the video coding, quantitative and 

qualitative data collected are described below. 

Video Coding 

The DV-tapes of each training session were captured on computer and uploaded into a web based 

computer system called EVA (Educational Video Annotation). Each time a specified behaviour was 

observed the trained research assistant coded it by having selected ‘cue segment start’ at the 

beginning of the behaviour and ‘cue segment finish’ when the behaviour changed to something else. 

They then selected which behaviour had just been observed. This process was repeated for the 

entire training session. Research assistants were able to rewind and replay the video if required. The 

coding of the training session allowed each behaviour to be quantified. The frequency and duration 

of each behaviour ‘episode’ was recorded in the system and then exported for further quantitative 

analysis. 

Quantitative Data 

The quantitative data was coded to enable computerised entry. The data was then entered into a 

spreadsheet file and subsequently transferred for storage and analysis in Statistical Package for the 

Social Sciences (SPSS). A series of one way Analysis of Variances (ANOVA’s) and Chi-Square tests and 

correlations were performed on the data to determine if there were any significant differences 

between, or relationships with specific data fields. 

Qualitative Data 

The process of analysing the data collected from the pre and post session interviews followed the 

techniques of analysis recommended by Miles and Huberman (1994), and McCracken (1988). The 


analysis involved transcribing the data before coding individual comments into categories 

determined by the themes revealed during the analysis. 

Ensuring Validity and Reliability 

Ensuring for validity and reliability is a fundamental requirement of any research (Campbell & 

Stanley, 1966). However, a number of researchers have commented on the difficulty of ensuring the 

validity and reliability of the instruments used in this type of research (Eisner, 1997; Wallen & 

Fraenkel, 2001). Nevertheless, it was important to ensure that some confidence could be placed in 

the findings of the current research by attending to the validity and reliability of the research 

procedures. 

A number of techniques and measures have been discussed throughout this chapter to ensure that 

the validity and reliability of the methodology used, inferences made, and conclusions drawn from 

this research study are not only appropriate, but also consistent over time. A summary of these 

procedures can be seen below in Table 3-2. 

Table 3-2 Procedures to Ensure Validity in the Project 

Procedure 

Use of structural corroboration, by the use of 

multiple sources of data (Eisner, 1997; Guba, 

1981; LeCompte & Goetz, 1984; Miles & 

Huberman, 1994; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998; 

Wallen & Fraenkel, 2001). 

Collection of referential materials, e.g., 

documents, audio recordings and other ‘slice-oflife’ 

data items against which findings can be 

tested (Eisner, 1997; Guba, 1981; Wallen & 

Fraenkel, 2001). 

Consensual validation, or agreement among 

other researchers that the description and 

interpretation of the research are right (Eisner, 

1997; Guba, 1981; LeCompte & Goetz, 1984). 

Checking for researcher effects (LeCompte & 

Goetz, 1984; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Wallen & 

Fraenkel, 2001). 

Obtaining confirmatory feedback from the 

informants themselves (Guba, 1981; Miles & 

Huberman, 1994). 

Implementation 

Triangulation of data sources, (video 

observations, SOFIT observations, Coach Rating 

Scale, pre and post session semi structured 

interviews). 

Interviews, audio recordings and resource sheets. 

Review of research procedures at committee 

meetings prior to the research being conduct, 

research instruments being used in similar 

environments. 

Low profile adopted by researchers; data 

collection was as unobtrusive as possible. 

Particularly in the pre and post session semi 

structured interviews where coaches were asked 

to identify the physical activity levels of their 

players 

Combining the validity and reliability procedures shown in Table 3-2 has increased the reliability and 

validity of the research, adding to the robustness of the research. 


Issues Faced During Data Collection 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Legal matters e.g. delay in getting the contract signed meant that the data collection period 

started later than planned 

Returned consent forms – number of teams available heavily reduced (often 1-2 forms were 

missing per team) 

Wet weather – in some areas of Sydney fields were closed for a total of five weeks during the 

season 

Planning (RA’s employed by area) 

When consent forms were received (2 teams were confirmed as participates in the final week of 

the season) 

Teams confirming training was on and then not turning up 

Conclusion 

This chapter has described the methods used to collect data which can help to provide answers to 

the research questions of the study. Data from all sources were analysed using techniques of 

analysis recommended by Miles and Huberman (1994), and McCracken (1988) The analyses of this 

data, together with a discussion of the findings are given in the next two chapters. 


Chapter 4 

Results and Discussion 

This chapter presents the results of the study through the analysis of the qualitative and quantitative 

data. This chapter begins with a profile of the participants involved in the research project, followed 

by a detailed analysis of the data under the five areas: 

• Players in Action 

• Players’ Reflections on the Training Session 

• Coaches in Action 

• Coaches’ Reflections on the Training Experience 

• Comparisons within the Data 

Participant Profile 

The nature of this research project required volunteer participants throughout the study. Using 

methods of convenient sampling (Gall et al., 1996), the study involved 444 participants in total, 37 

coaches and 407 under ten players 

All 37 coaches participated in the pre and post session semi structure interviews (see Appendix 2), 

and all 407 players completed the modified S-PACES questionnaires (see Appendix 1). These two 

data sources were used to profile the participants. An overview of the profile can be seen in Table 

4-1.The players ranged in age from eight to twelve years with an average age or 9.7 years. The range 

is interesting as the guidelines for participating in the under 10 rugby competition are that ‘you can 

only play if you are turning 10 or under in the year of the competition’. The results indicated that 

eight 11 year olds and seven 12 year olds were training in the under 10 competition. 


Table 4-1 Descriptive statistics about the participants 

Participants 

Profile 

Players 

Age 

Range in Age 

Coaches 

Average Years Coaching 

9.7 (0.55) years 

8 – 12 years 

5.59 (4.57) years 

Qualifications/Accreditations Held % League % Union 

No Relevant Qualifications 5 6 

Introductory Courses 

Level 1 

Level 2 

Level 3 

Other Relevant Qualifications 

14 

Modified Games 

Coach 

62 

Club Coach 

14 

Senior Club Coach 

5 

High Performance 

Coach 

63 

Smart Rugby/ 

Foundation 

BEd (Physical Education) 1 19 

13 

18 

0 

Table 4-1 also gives a detailed overview of the coaches who participated in the study, including the 

highest level of relevant qualification or accreditation they held. A pleasing observation to make 

from the table is that only two coaches in total (representing 5% in League and 6% in Union) had no 

relevant coaching qualifications. 

Table 4-1 also reveals that the average number of years the coaches have been coaching is 5.59 

years. A more detailed breakdown of this can be seen in Figure 4-1, which clearly indicates that the 

majority of coaches have been coaching for more than 5 years, which is a positive finding, however a 

down side of this maybe the limited number of coaches who are new to coaching. 


70 

60 

% of Years Coaches have Coached 

63.5 

50 

40 

30 

% of Coaches 

20 

10 

0 

15 

9 9 

3.5 

1 year 2 years 3 years 4 years > 5 years 

Figure 4-1 A breakdown of the number of years the coaches in the study have been coaching for 

The high retention rate of junior coaches could also be an indication that a lot of the coaches are 

parents of the players and that they have been coaching their sons since their sons started playing 

rugby 5 years ago. This notion was explored more in the semi structured interviews where 51% of 

the coaches revealed that they started coaching because their son was in the team. Further analysis 

of the data revealed that, of the 51% who started coaching because their son was in the team, 68% 

have coached for 4 years or more. This leads support to the idea that a significant number of 

coaches continue to coach because their children are in the team. 

A complete breakdown of why the coaches in this study started coaching can be seen in Table 4-2 

Table 4-2 Self reported reasons why coaches started coaching 

Why the Coaches Started Coaching 

% of Similar 

Responses 

Son in the team 51 

I was asked 15 

For the love of the game 13 

I finished playing and want to stay involved 8.5 

I want to pass on knowledge (teach) 6 

It is part of my job (i.e., Development Officer) 4.5 

I was not happy with the existing team coach 2 


Players in Action 

This section of the chapter specifically addresses the data relating to what the players did during the 

training sessions. An overview of the duration of the training sessions is initially presented followed 

by data collected from the SOFIT instrument and the Athlete Enjoyment Scale. 

1. The Duration of the Training Sessions 

During the course of the research 70 under 10 team training sessions were observed from all over 

Sydney. These 70 team training sessions comprised of 43 rugby league sessions and 27 rugby union 

sessions. The average length of the training sessions observed was 55 minutes. A detailed outline of 

the training sessions can be seen in Table 4-3. 

Table 4-3 The duration and frequency of the coaching sessions 

League % 

(N=43) 

Union % 

(N=27) 

Training Session Length* 52 mins 60 Mins 

Frequency Twice per week Once per week 

Range 30 – 78 mins 40 – 81 mins 

Total Average Session 

Length 

55 Mins (SD 11.4) 

* P < 0.05 

An Initial observation to make from Table 4-3 is that there is a significant difference (P

University of Sydney were trained in using the SOFIT system of observation and observer accuracy 

(intra-rater reliability) was repeatedly measured during training until an agreement rate of 90% was 

reached. As recommended by McKenzie et al. (1991) inter observer reliability checks were 

conducted opportunistically on 5% of the coaching sessions. Percentage agreement rates were 

calculated for observer ratings of physical activity, lesson context and skills performed. The 

agreement rate ranged from 80.5 % to 94.0% with a mean rate of 88.3% which compares favourably 

with rates reported by McKenzie et al. (1995). 

Table 4-4 indicates both the percentage of the training session the players spent in various levels of 

physical activity and the minutes this percentage equates too. A notable observation made from 

Table 4-4 is that during an average under 10s’ training session the players are in MVPA 82% of the 

time or 45mins, which equals 75% of the minimum daily recommended amount of exercise. While 

there are limited studies in this exact area to compare with, a comparison can be made with physical 

education classes where in the United States teachers are encouraged and struggling to get levels of 

MVPA above 50% in their classes (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009). Taking this 

into consideration the results displayed in Table 4-4 are very positive, although the recommended 

guidelines for physical activity do suggest that more vigorous physical activity is more beneficial. In 

this sense, increasing the amount of time players spend jogging and reducing walking time could be 

a realistic goal if increased levels of physical activity are seen as a priority. 

Table 4-4 Levels of physical activity of the training sessions measured using SOFIT 

Player Activity Levels 

Percentage of Training 

Time (%) 

Amount of 

Training Time (mins) 

Lying Down >1 0.3 

Sitting 4 2.2 

Standing 14 7.7 

Walking 41 22.5 

Jogging 29 15.9 

Vigorous 12 6.6 

Time in MVPA 82% 45 mins 

The modified SOFIT instrument also measured the amount of time the players spent practising 

specific skills during a training session. A detailed breakdown of these can be seen in Table 4-5. The 

table indicates that passing and catching is the most prevalent skill that players practice during 

training sessions, with 12% or 6.6 minutes of every training session allocated to passing and catching 

drills. An interesting finding from this data is that less than 1 % of any coaching session is dedicated 

to kicking skills and drills. Awareness is drawn to this figure because of the emphasis placed on 

kicking in the current games of rugby league and union and finding that only small amounts of time 

are spent learning this skill at the under 10 level. Learning the fundamental skills of the game is 

important as research (Okely & Booth, 2004) suggests that players who lack the underlying skills of a 

game are likely to participate less in organised sport. 


Table 4-5 Percentage of time players spent on specific skills 

Skills Performed During The 

Training Sessions 


Time Allocated to Skill (%) 

Amount of Time 

Allocated to the Skill 

(mins) 

Passing and Catching 12 6.6 

Ball Carry 9 4.8 

Tackling 8 4.4 

Kicking 1 .5 

Ruck and Maul (Union Only) 3 1.6 

Other 10 5.5 

Total Time on Skills 44% 24.2 mins 

Research (Booth, M., et al., 2006) also indicates that in NSW only 75% of boys in year 6 have 

mastered or nearly mastered the catch, and only 60% have mastered or nearly mastered the basic 

kick. Given this and the suggestion by the NSW Department of Education and Training (2000) that it 

takes between 240 to 600 minutes to learn a fundamental skill, it is important to get as much 

practice as possible when learning these skills. Questions surround whether the time spent on skill 

development in junior rugby training session, as shown in Table 4-5 is enough, especially if the 

training session occurs only once per week. 

The SOFIT instrument also measured the context of the session with the results shown in Table 4-6. 

The table reveals that on average 44%, or 24.2 minutes, of training sessions is dedicated to skill 

development. This figure also reflects the “Total Time on Skill” portrayed in the previous table. Also 

revealed is that playing games make up on average 20% of a training session. This would include the 

traditional team training run at the end. This is substantially less than the 80% recommended for 

players during the ‘sampling years’ (6-12 yrs). 


Table 4-6 Context of the training sessions measured by SOFIT 

Session Context 

% of Session 



(mins) 

Management 11 6.0 

Knowledge 12 6.6 

Fitness Activity 9 5.0 

Skills Practice 44 24.2 

Game Play 20 11 

Other 4 2.2 

Table 4-6 also indicates that coaches spend 23% or 12 minutes on average of a session either in 

managing the session (i.e., explanation of drills, organizing equipment, transition between etc) or 

passing on specific game and skill knowledge to the players. A more detailed breakdown of the 

coaches’ behaviour can be found in the “Coaches’ in Action” section (see page 37) later in this 

chapter. 


Players’ Reflections on the Training Session 

At the conclusion of the training session, the players were asked to complete the modified Athlete 

Enjoyment Scale (see Appendix 1). The questionnaire was given to players directly after a training 

session and was designed to measure the amount of enjoyment the players perceived themselves to 

have experienced during the training session. The results of this survey are displayed in Table 4-7. 

The table clearly indicates high levels of enjoyment on all variables tested. While the original Athlete 

Enjoyment Scale was considerably modified for this project, the strength of these figures is 

highlighted by the relatively low standard deviations. 

Table 4-7 Results from the Modified Athlete Enjoyment Scale 

When I am at training… 

Mean Score /5 (SD) 

… it’s fun 4.65 (0.36) 

… I enjoy the stuff we do to get fitter 4.58 (0.33) 

… I really enjoy the games 4.85 (0.22) 

… I enjoy practising the skills 4.61 (0.36) 

… I enjoy playing with my friends 4.86 (0.19) 

… I enjoy coming to training 4.46 (0.50) 

… I enjoy competitions 4.73 (0.28) 

… I am improving 4.71 (0.23) 

… I know what I am meant to do 4.69 (0.27) 

A noteworthy observation to make from Table 4-7 is that while all variables are high, the most 

amount of enjoyment perceived by the players, when they were training, was achieved by playing 

with friends. It is also interesting to note that the “complex formula” of what makes a training 

session enjoyable is obviously working extremely well. Additional research supporting these findings 

in the specific area in junior rugby coaching is limited, and it is recommended that more detailed 

qualitative research is conducted to truly gain a deeper understanding of what players like about the 

training session and why. 


Coaches’ in Action 

The behaviours exhibited by junior coaches during rugby league and rugby union training sessions 

were investigated using videoed systematic observation. This information together with the results 

from the modified coach rating scale will provide a greater understanding of the junior coaching 

environment. Coaching behaviours reported in the literature have predominantly been from the 

perspective of athletic success and efficiency of coaching (Bloom et al., 1999; Claxton, 1988; Horton 

et al., 2005; Lacy and Darst, 1985). All studies have been conducted in a different sporting context – 

predominantly in the USA, UK and Europe and examining high school through to professional 

coaching practice making it difficult ficult to compare the coaching behaviours reported here to those in 

the literature. There is no comparison of coaches at an individual level due to the unique context of 

each sporting environment but rather looking at the sample of 37 coaches collectively. 

Figure 4-2 indicates that the two dominant coaching behaviours displayed are instructing and 

observing players. Together this accounts for 65% of all training sessions. The coaches exhibit 

affective behaviours (feedback – positive, ive, negative or general; scold, hustle and humour) for 15% of 

the training session closely followed by managing or organising players (13%). Previous research 

reports that instruction is the most frequently used behaviour regardless of the level or age of the 

athlete (Claxton, 1988; Cushion and Jones, 2001; Liukkonen et al., 1996; Mesquita et al., 2008; 

Seagrave and Ciancio, 1990; Tharp and Gallimore, 1976; Vangucci et al., 1997). 

% Total Training Time 

2% 

5% 

15% 

48% 

Instructions 

Management/Organisation 

17% 

Observation 

Not on task 

13% 

Affective behaviour 

uncodable 

Figure 4-2 Coaches behaviour during the training session measured by systematic observation 

Table 4-8 outlines the frequency, duration, and percentage breakdown for each of the 16 coaching 

behaviours. Specifically column 2 indicates the average number of times each behaviour was 


37

exhibited by junior coaches during a single training session with column 5 identifying the average 

duration of these episodes. Column 3 reveals the average time (in seconds) 

Table 4-8 A detailed breakdown of the coach’s behaviours during their training sessions 

Behaviour 

Mean 

Occurrences 

per session 

Mean Total 

Duration (s) 

% of Total 

Practice 

Session 

Mean D (s) 

of single 

event 

Range (%) 

Rank 

Pre - instruction 15.2 453 14.3 32.5 2 - 54 2= 

Concurrent 

instruction 

Technical 

explanation 

Corrective/specific 

feedback 

25.9 435 14.3 19.4 0 - 44 2= 

4.1 137 4.5 33.1 0 - 14 8 

18.5 306 10.2 16.3 1 - 34 5 

Questioning 3.6 67 2.2 23.2 0 - 11 12 

Positive modelling 3.6 68 2.3 22.1 0 - 11 11 

Negative modelling 0.2 3 0.1 16.8 0 - 2 17 

Management / 

Organisation 

12.5 369 12.7 35.1 2 - 27 4 

Observation 28.0 502 16.8 22.0 2 - 62 1 

General feedback 3.9 59 2.0 22.9 0 - 9 13 

Positive feedback 18.5 177 5.9 10.7 1 - 19 6 

Negative feedback 4.3 52 1.5 12.3 0 - 8 15 

Scold 4.1 59 1.8 14.7 0 - 12 14 

Hustle 8.0 113 3.5 14.9 0 - 31 9 

Humour 1.3 14 0.6 13.6 0 - 10 16 

Not on task 5.3 143 4.9 30.6 1 - 23 7 

Uncodable 1.8 82 2.7 62.7 0 - 12 10 


% of Total Training Session 


Humour 


Scold 

General FB 

Questioning 


Hustle 

Technical explanation 

Not on task 

Positive FB 

Corrective FB 

Management / Org'n 


Pre - instruction 

Observation 

0.1 

0.6 

1.5 

1.8 

2 

2.2 

2.3 

3.5 

4.5 

4.9 

5.9 

10.2 

12.7 

14.3 

14.3 

16.8 

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 

% of Total Practice Session 

Figure 4-3 Percentage of coach’s behaviours during their training sessions 


Instructions 

As mentioned previously ‘instruction’ accounts for just under 50% of all junior training sessions 

reflecting the focus on verbal instructions and imparting knowledge to their players. This domain can 

be further broken down to the following specific behaviours: pre-instruction, technical explanation, 

concurrent instruction, corrective or specific feedback, questioning, positive modelling and negative 

modelling. Excluding concurrent instruction, this finding suggests that players are inactive for 33.6% 

of training sessions while listening to the coach explain something or observing a demonstration. 

This amount of instruction may be valuable for the development of motor skills (Miller, 1992) and 

knowledge of the sport but may also have a negative impact on player enjoyment levels. Most 

players participate in sport for fun and the social aspect of being with friends and it is recommended 

that coaches aim to keep players as active as possible rather than spending large amounts of time 

standing around (Orlick, 1973). Another aspect to consider is the amount of explicit verbal 

instructions given to the young players. Literature (Masters, 2008) now suggests there are 

advantages for later performance if early skill learning experiences are implicit rather than coaches 

being over prescriptive and continually ‘telling’ and ‘correcting’ their players (Williams and Hodges, 

2005). This would suggest that coaches’ instruction time is kept brief so players do not become 

dependent on the coach and ‘work it out for themselves’ during game play. That is, coaches refrain 

from ‘over-coaching’! 

Behaviour 

Mean 

Occurrences 

per session 

Mean Total 

Duration (s) 

% of Total 

Practice 

Session 

Mean D (s) 

of single 

event 

Range (%) 

Rank 

Pre - instruction 15.2 453 14.3 32.5 2 - 54 2= 

Concurrent 

instruction 

25.9 435 14.3 19.4 0 - 44 2= 

Pre-instruction and concurrent instruction each accounted for 14.3% of the training session and were 

ranked equal second as the most dominant individual behaviours displayed by junior coaches. On 

average junior coaches gave pre-instructions on 15 occasions throughout a training session with the 

average duration of 32 seconds for each instruction. Of more concern is the infrequent occasion 

that coaches instructed for up to 4.40 minutes prior to the players participating in some type of 

activity. Considering the age group of the players, and their shortened attention span compared to 

adults, these lengthy pre-instructions may lead to learning or management problems (over attention 

to irrelevant detail, lack of focus, general restlessness). If players are unable to concentrate on 

instructions given they may have difficulty performing the required task which may also impact on 

self esteem and confidence. 

Interestingly the junior coaches in this study dedicated more of the training session to preinstruction 

than coaches of older athletes. This may reflect the junior coaches’ belief that they need 

to give detailed pre-instructions to players of this age group to increase the likelihood that a drill or 

activity will be performed successfully. However the literature on effective communication 

recommends that instructions are clear and concise. It is more effective to deliver small amounts of 


information followed by opportunities to apply the information. Consequently this age group may 

benefit from having more frequent instructions followed by practice opportunities. Coaches may 

benefit from remembering the 5 S’s: simple, step-by-step, short with substance. 

As mentioned previously concurrent instruction accounted for 14.3% of the training session or 

approximately 8 minutes where the players were participating in an activity while receiving an 

instruction. The average duration of each of these messages were 19 seconds. It can be speculated 

that some coaches’ believe they must be continually ‘instructing’ to be effective coaches (Potrac et 

al., 2007) or keep the players ‘on task’. These coaches tend to spend most of the training session 

talking. 17 coaches on at least one occasion gave concurrent instructions that lasted over 60 

seconds. The effectiveness of these instructions must be questioned when you consider the young 

players were attempting to complete a task and simultaneously comprehend what the coach was 

saying. It has been suggested that children between 5 – 10 years should not multitask but rather are 

more effective at focusing on single activities that allow them scope to experiment (Poole and Miller, 

2006). 

It has been suggested that novice coaches tend to engage in more concurrent instruction of longer 

duration whereas experienced coaches prefer to have the complete attention of their players before 

correcting mistakes and therefore tend to stop play more frequently (Vangucci et al, 1997). However 

effective coaches tend to continually use key words or cues to assist learning and performance while 

the players are still practicing. This process is perhaps best demonstrated by legendary USA 

basketball coach John Wooden who had higher rates of pre-instruction and concurrent instruction 

than the current study but they were each of shorter duration indicating his ability to give clear 

concise messages. Researchers Gallimore and Tharp (1976) comment they were surprised at how 

brief his concurrent instructions were – often limited to five to eight words – frequently given while 

the players had large amounts of practice time. An example was “hard, driving, quick steps” (Coyle, 

2009, p. 168). 

On average there were four occasions during a training session where the coach relates a practice 

situation to the game context (technical explanation). Table 4.8 illustrates that this aspect of a 

coach’s instructions represent 4.5% or approximately 2.30mins of the average training session. This 

is to be expected considering the age of the players and the de-emphasis on just winning. Under 10 

years competition is part of the ‘sampling years’ where the emphasis should be on player enjoyment 

and players becoming competent in the general skills of the sport. Another influencing factor could 

be the knowledge level of the volunteer junior coaches in linking the practice and game situations. 

As expected there is more time spent on technical explanations with older and more skilled players 

(Bloom et al, 1999; Horton et al, 2005; Lacy and Goldston, 1990). At the elite level this focus shifts to 

the dominant coaching behaviour related to the tactical aspects of the sport (Bloom et al, 1999; 

Horton et al, 2005). 


Behaviour 

Mean 

Occurrences 

per session 

Mean Total 

Duration (s) 

% of Total 

Practice 

Session 

Mean D (s) 

of single 

event 

Range (%) 

Rank 

Technical 

explanation 

4.1 137 4.5 33.1 0 - 14 8 

Questioning 3.6 67 2.2 23.2 0 - 11 12 

The use of questioning is an important strategy that promotes player learning. However the effective 

use of questioning by a coach is a learned skill. Considering the age group of the players and the 

experience and qualifications of the volunteer coaches perhaps it is unsurprising that only 3-4 

questions on average are asked during the training session. This may reflect the emphasis on 

deliberate play during the ‘sampling years’ to encourage continued participation. This may also 

suggest that the junior coaches tend not to take a ‘gamesense’ approach incorporating the 

appropriate use of questioning for player learning. Coaches need to be confident and comfortable 

with this learning strategy before they are likely to implement it. The low use of questioning used by 

the junior coaches supports the findings reported for high school tennis (3%, Claxton, 1988) and 

basketball coaches (5%, Lacy and Goldston, 1990). However Claxton (1988) reported that successful 

high school tennis coaches spent significantly more time questioning compared to less successful 

coaches (2.8 v 1.3%, p=0.03). 

Behaviour 

Mean 

Occurrences 

per session 

Mean Total 

Duration (s) 

% of Total 

Practice 

Session 

Mean D (s) 

of single 

event 

Range (%) 

Rank 

Positive modelling 3.6 68 2.3 22.1 0 - 11 11 

Negative modelling 0.2 3 0.1 16.8 0 - 2 17 

Junior coaches used modelling – whether positive or negative – infrequently during their coaching 

sessions. On average only four demonstrations are performed in each session with most being how 

to perform the task correctly (positive modelling). Negative modelling (highlighting incorrect 

technique) was the least exhibited coaching behaviour (rank 17). This is an interesting finding as 

modelling is thought to enhance learning particularly for visual learners. Modelling has also been 

suggested to assist junior players as they can see the performance rather than relying solely on 

hearing the instructions (Vangucci et al., 1997; Weiss and Rose, 1992). Observing skills being 

performed also gives the player the opportunity to focus on aspects of the task that they are having 

difficulty with. The low use of modelling recorded in this study support the finding of Mesquita et al. 

(2008) with amateur volleyball coaches but was less than high school tennis (Claxton, 1988), and 

volleyball (Lacy and Goldston, 1990) coaches. At the elite level, positive modelling was an important 

coaching behaviour displayed by women’s soccer coaches (15%, Vangucci et al., 1997). American 

basketball coach John Wooden consistently incorporated his own routine of positive modelling – 


negative modelling – positive modelling when instructing his players. These demonstrations only 

lasted several seconds with short sharp points. It is suggested that junior players may benefit from 

observing more frequent demonstrations at training. It has been suggested that demonstrations (or 

modelling) at a rate of 6% of total practice trials may be effective (Masters, 2008). 

Feedback 

There were four types of feedback used by coaches – corrective or specific feedback, general 

feedback, positive feedback and negative feedback. Corrective or specific feedback has been 

previously mentioned as it contributes to the coaches’ instructions to players to enhance learning. 

This form of feedback was the most dominant displayed by coaches and accounted for 10.2% of the 

training session. Junior coaches gave feedback 44 times during an average training session – with an 

equal number being classified as corrective/specific or positive feedback (18.5). As would be 

expected the corrective feedback contained more information and was longer in duration. 

Previously coaches were encouraged to continuously provide feedback as soon as a task was 

completed. This resulted in improved performance during training. However, research now suggests 

that frequent corrective feedback creates players dependent on the coach providing information on 

correcting performance rather than the players using intrinsic feedback for error detection (Masters, 

2008). This means that players will struggle to perform when the feedback is not provided e.g. 

during competition when the coach is not on the field. Feedback schedules are recommended where 

the coach deliberately reduces the frequency of feedback while encouraging the player to detect 

and correct their own errors. For example, the coach may initially give feedback after every third 

repetition and slowly expand the number of repetitions between coach’s feedback. 

Behaviour 

Mean 

Occurrences 

per session 

Mean Total 

Duration (s) 

% of Total 

Practice 

Session 

Mean D (s) 

of single 

event 

Range (%) 

Rank 

Corrective/specific 

feedback 

18.5 306 10.2 16.3 1 - 34 5 

General feedback 3.9 59 2.0 22.9 0 - 9 13 

Positive feedback 18.5 177 5.9 10.7 1 - 19 6 

Negative feedback 4.3 52 1.5 12.3 0 - 8 15 

Scold 4.1 59 1.8 14.7 0 - 9 14 

When general, positive and negative feedback are combined to form the broader ‘general feedback’ 

a ratio of general – to-specific feedback can be calculated. This ratio is 1.4: 1 indicating that slightly 

more general feedback is given to players. This ratio is better than that reported for volleyball 

players during a summer camp (13:1) but not as effective as the feedback given by coaches to elite 

archers (1:1, Van der Mars, 1991). The learning environment may be an important factor here – 

individual sports often provide one-on-one opportunities for the coach and athlete whereas in team 

sports it may be one coach to twelve players making it more difficult to give each player high levels 


of specific or corrective feedback. Specific feedback is more meaningful and influential to young 

players than general feedback (Horn, 1985). 

It is also important to monitor the amount of positive and negative feedback given to players. To 

determine this calculation accurately scold was combined with negative feedback and resulted in 

twice as much positive feedback as negative (2.2: 1). As an important motive for continual 

participation at the junior level is fun and perceived competence, too many negative comments will 

adversely affect junior players’ enjoyment levels. Positive feedback can be used by coaches to 

reinforce behaviours and enhance players self confidence and self esteem (McKenzie and King, 1982; 

Rink, 1996; Van der mars et al., 1991). The results from this study are lower than reported for elite 

women’s soccer (5:1, Vangucci et al., 1997),youth soccer (16:1, Smith and Cushion, 2006) and college 

volleyball (7:1, Lacy and Martin, 1994). 

Observation 

Observation was the most dominant single coaching behaviour exhibited by junior coaches and 

accounted for 16.8% of training sessions and occurred on an average of 28 separate occasions during 

training. Each observational period lasted for an average of 22 seconds before the coach displayed a 

different behaviour. These observational periods allow coaches the opportunity to monitor player 

performance and contemplate appropriate modifications or interventions (Cushion and Jones, 2001; 

McGaha, 2000). This is therefore classified as an effective coaching strategy. This is also an ideal 

time to formulate corrective or specific feedback for players. Claxton (1988) recorded a trend 

towards more successful tennis coaches remaining silent and observing players for greater amounts 

of time compared to less successful coaches (14.6 v 11.3%). Coaches that have low amounts of 

observation time may be ‘over-coaching’ their players. 

Behaviour 

Mean 

Occurrences 

per session 

Mean Total 

Duration (s) 

% of Total 

Practice 

Session 

Mean D (s) 

of single 

event 

Range (%) 

Rank 

Observation 28.0 502 16.8 22.0 2 - 62 1 

Not on task 5.3 143 4.9 30.6 1 - 23 7 

However it is important that there is a balance between too much and not enough observation of 

players performance. Too much silence can suggest to players that the coach is disinterested or lacks 

knowledge while continual talk from the coach can lead to players feeling that ‘they never get it 

right’, have constant information overload or that players become dependent on the coach 

(McGaha, 2000). 

In previous research the category coded was referred to as silence. For this study we divided this 

into observation and off task/conferring with others. Junior coaches spent just under 5% of the 

training session off task which amounted to approximately 2 minutes of the average training session. 

Unfortunately the current observation instrument was not sensitive enough to identify the reason 


for the coach being off task - were they talking to parents, talking on the phone etc. This behaviour 

should be explored in more detail in future studies. 

Management / Organisation 

Management or organisation accounts for 12.7% of the average training session. At the elite 

(Vangucci et al., 1997), professional (Potrac et al., 2007) and college (Lacy and Martin, 1994) level, 

management has been reported to account for less than 6.5% of practice time compared to over 

14% of high school training sessions (Lacy and Goldston, 1994; Rupert and Buchner, 1989; Stewart 

and Bengier, 2001). This suggests that junior coaches may not have efficient transitions from one 

activity to the next which reduces the practice time available to players. Establishing protocols can 

save considerable time. When considered in relation to the coaches interview responses it can be 

suggested that management / organisation time is also negatively impacted by players not turning 

up for training and players being ill-disciplined or bullying. Therefore junior coaches may benefit 

from knowing a number of strategies of how to deal with these issues which has the potential to 

reduce the amount of time spent managing or organising players. 

Behaviour 

Mean 

Occurrences 

per session 

Mean Total 

Duration (s) 

% of Total 

Practice 

Session 

Mean D (s) 

of single 

event 

Range (%) 

Rank 

Management / Org’n 12.5 369 12.7 35.1 2 - 27 4 

When management/organisation is combined with pre-instruction, technical explanation, 

questioning and modelling it suggests that players are inactive for 36.1% or approximately 20 

minutes of the average 55 minute training session. 

Other behaviours 

Two other coaching behaviours displayed by coaches were humour (ranked 16 th ) and hustle (ranked 

9 th ). These results indicate that junior coaches do not rely on either behaviour as a significant 

coaching strategy. On average the coaches would hustle or encourage their players on eight 

occasions or 3.5% of the training session. This was significantly lower than rates reported by Bloom 

et al (14.5%, 1999) and Vangucci et al (14.5%, 1997). This may reflect the coaches’ belief that fun 

and learning is more important than the level of intensity that activities are performed. The low 

levels of humour recorded by coaches were surprising given the emphasis on fun and enjoyment at 

this player level. Although most coaches indicated they forgot about the microphone and video 

camera once their coaching session started this may have had an inhibiting effect on them. 

Behaviour 

Mean 

Occurrences 

per session 

Mean Total 

Duration (s) 

% of Total 

Practice 

Session 

Mean D (s) 

of single 

event 

Range (%) 

Rank 

Hustle 8.0 113 3.5 14.9 0 - 31 9 

Humour 1.3 14 0.6 13.6 0 - 10 16 

Uncodable 1.8 82 2.7 62.7 0 - 12 10 


2. Modified Rating Scale for Coaching Sessions 

Table 4-10 indicates the percentage distribution of variables from 1 to 5 that are included in the 

modified rating scale for coaching sessions. The results indicate that 61% of junior coaches display an 

authoritarian leadership style with 59% coaches displaying a ‘player-centred’ approach compared to 

22% that were classified as using a ‘coach-centred’ approach to coaching. It seems junior coaches 

are skilled when selecting the type of drills or activities to include in their practice session with 89% 

coaches choosing suitable activities for this age group. 


Table 4-9 Percentage distribution of variables included in the rating scale of the coaching event 

Variable Percentage of Scores (1-5) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

(%) 

(%) 

(%) 

(%) 

(%) 

Teaching arrangements 

Organizational skills Poor 0 5 11 37 47 Good 

Leadership style Authoritarian 10 51 29 10 0 Laissez-faire 

Teaching method Coach centred 15 7 19 48 11 

Suitability of drills for age 

group 


Player 

centred 

Suitable 57 32 3 3 5 Unsuitable 

Clarity of instructions Unclear 0 2 13 47 39 Clear 

Tone of voice & gestures Negative 0 3 16 50 31 Positive 

Positive feedback Little 2 5 30 45 18 A lot 

Target of positive feedback Individual 3 8 32 44 13 Group 

Negative feedback Little 31 35 26 8 0 A lot 

Target of negative feedback Individual 5 30 31 18 16 Group 

Was a humorous approach 

used 

Working methods 

Not at all 8 42 32 15 3 Mostly 

Whole group Little 0 5 11 37 47 A lot 

Divided group, same task Little 40 13 15 21 11 A lot 

Divided group, different task Little 63 10 8 16 3 A lot 

Pairs training Little 62 21 8 6 3 A lot 

Individual practice Little 89 6 5 0 0 A lot 

Coach-athlete interaction 

Amount of interaction Little 0 2 11 56 31 A lot 

Acceptance of suggestions rejective 0 5 32 42 21 acceptive 

Coach behaviour discouraging 0 0 11 45 44 encouraging 

Consistency of behaviour inconsistent 0 2 8 50 40 consistent 

Player participation 

Intensity of performance Ineffective 0 8 37 40 15 Effective 

Engagement in tasks Not involved 2 2 26 61 9 Involved 

Amount of practice time Little 2 8 34 35 21 A lot 

Player attentiveness Insufficient 2 8 26 51 13 Sufficient 

Interaction between players Little 0 2 18 58 22 A lot 


On the surface junior coaches appear to have good communication skills. Although junior coaches on 

the whole give clear instructions (86%) we know from the systematic observation analysis that these 

messages are often lengthy in duration. The aim is for the coaches to be able to give clear and 

concise instructions to players. These results support the findings reported by Liukkonen et al. 

(1996) when observing Finish youth sport coaches. 

The results of the rating scale support the systematic observation data in relation to coaches giving 

players more positive feedback than negative feedback. Interestingly the target of the positive 

feedback tended to be the group or team (57%) rather than individual players (11%) while negative 

feedback, although low, was evenly distributed between groups and individuals (35%). The literature 

indicates when positive feedback is directed to a group rather than an individual some players will 

assume that the comments are not related to them and therefore perceive that low amounts of 

positive feedback have been given. 

Similar to the Liukkonen et al. (1996) study, the junior coaches preferred the players to participate in 

various activities as a whole group (84%) with little pair work or individual practice. On those 

occasions when the coaches divided the players into small groups they preferred to have the players 

complete the same task. The reliance on ‘whole group’ activities reduces the opportunities players 

have to complete specific skills and make decisions. Concurrent small sided games or activities 

would be more effective. Minimal use of pairs and individual practice may also reduce the player’s 

opportunity to develop initiative (Liukkonen et al., 1996). This suggests that the junior coaches may 

lack confidence in their management and organisational skills. This will be explored in further detail 

during the section examining the semi-structured interviews. 

The results indicate that the junior coaches have a healthy interaction with their players. The 

majority of coaches are receptive to player suggestions (62%), are encouraging (89%) and display 

consistent behaviour (90%). 

However, the results on the variables labelled under ‘player participation’ suggest that junior RL and 

RU coaches could improve their planning and implementation of their coaching session. This 

conclusion is based on the following: 

 

 

 

 

55% of the training sessions were rated as performing at an ‘effective’ level of intensity 

In 70% of training sessions players were ‘ engaged’ in tasks 

56% of training sessions scheduled ‘a lot’ of practice time 

64% of training sessions were observed where players were sufficiently attentive 

Interestingly in these training sessions there was a substantial amount of interaction between 

players (80%) compared to that reported between Finish junior athletes (32%). 

In summary the results from the rating scale suggest that junior coaches need further assistance 

with the planning and managing of their training session. Coaches should be encouraged to plan 

activities that require working in small groups or pairs, increase game activities and decrease 

instruction time. This aspect could be addressed in future coach education courses for junior 

coaches. 


Coaches’ Reflections on the Training Sessions 

This section of the report focuses on what the coaches thought about their coaching session, what 

they liked and disliked about it and how they thought it could be improved. The section also covers 

what the coaches perceived to be happening in their sessions in terms of time allocated to skills, 

games and various levels of physical activity etc. 

How did you think today’s session went 

Directly after the observed training session, coaches were asked to reflect on the session and give an 

overall rating on how they thought their training session went. The results of the self reflection can 

be seen in Figure 4-4. 

60% 

Coaches' Self Reflection on Their Session 

50% 

40% 

48% 

43% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

9% 

Good Average Bad 

Coaches' Self Reflection 

Figure 4-4 How the coaches rated their training session immediately afterwards 

The graph highlights that 48% of the coaches thought that their training session was good and only 

9% thought that it was bad. Further investigation of this revealed that the coaches liked it when the 

players tried hard and worked well in the session and when the players listened. In contrast to this 

the coaches reported that they disliked it when the players did not turn up to training or when the 

players were not concentrating. From the list of reasons given it can be summarised that coach 

satisfaction is predominantly linked to player centred issues (80% - boys tried hard, listened, were 

enthusiastic, enjoyed themselves and were improving). 

A list of the major likes and dislikes that the coaches reported about their training sessions can be 

seen in Table 4-10. 


Table 4-10 What the coached liked and disliked about the coaching session 

What the coaches liked about their 

training session 

% What the coaches disliked about 

their training session 

% 

Players tried hard / worked well 29 Players not turning up 32 

Players listened 24 

Drills worked well 13 

Lack of concentration /players 

distracted 

Players not working to desired 

intensity 

Players enthusiastic 13 Poor discipline 6.5 

Well balanced session/good flow 8 Players fighting/name calling 6.5 

Players enjoying themselves 5 Started late 6.5 

Players improving 2.5 Lack of organisation 6.5 

Players got a workout 2.5 Equipment not set up on time 3 

Player commitment to come to 

training 

2.5 

Some players not up to same 

standard as rest of team 

23 

6.5 

Could have done better drills 3 

Trying to fit everything in 3 

3 

The coaches were also asked at the end of the training session what they thought could have 

happened to improve their sessions. A number of common suggestions emerged from an analysis of 

the data related to this question. These suggestions are shown in Table 4-11. It is interesting to note 

that the main suggestion that coaches put forward on how the training session could be improved 

relates to greater player attendance at training. This could be interpreted as saying that some 

coaches cannot quickly adapt their planned training sessions to cater for smaller numbers – but 

further research in this area is needed if this notion is to be fully understood. 

The other suggestions on how coaches thought their training session could be improved are also 

interesting. A number of these suggestions relate to specific issues revealed earlier in this chapter; 

namely management/organisation and instruction. By addressing these issues it would be of interest 

to see what effect they have on other suggestions shown in the table e.g., if a coach had greater 

management and organisation skills and could give better instructions, would this have an effect on 

the players focus levels Although more qualitative research is needed in this area, addressing 

management and organisational skills as part of junior coach education would be valuable. 


Table 4-11 Personal reflective suggestions on how the coaches thought they could have improved their training session 

Reflective suggestions 

on how the coaches could have 

improved their training session 

Having greater attendance at training 

Management - less discipline problems 

More help from other parents 

Players staying focused 

Change activities (more games; mix up activities) 

More practice time 

Players working to desired intensity 

More organised; better logistics 

Don’t know 

Better instructions 

Increased training knowledge 

Keeping Players active 

Reduce time between activities 

Number of 

Suggestions 

10 

6 

4 

4 

4 

4 

2 

2 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Did you achieve your goals for the training sessions 

The coaches were also asked if they thought they had achieved the goals they stated in the pre 

session interview. The responses to this question point out that 68.5% of the coaches thought that 

they did meet their stated goals while only 31.5% thought that they did not meet their goals. 

% of Coaches Who Thought They Achieved 

Their Sessions Goals 

31.5 

68.5 

Achieved Goals 

Did not Achieve Goals 

Figure 4-5 The percentage of coaches who thought they achieved their goals they set for their training session 


51

The coaches were then asked what they based this decision on. The results from this can be seen in 

Table 4.12.The most prevalent reason for not achieving their goals were related to planning – “didn’t 

have the numbers for what I planned” (36%) and “didn’t get through everything” (23%). Planning was 

also the dominant reason given for achieving their session goals – “I got through everything we 

planned” (56%). An interesting aspect of reasons why goals were or weren’t achieved is the ‘coach 

centred’ focus of what the coach did in relation to his planning rather than reasons related to players 

level of enjoyment, learning or performance. 

The recurring theme of low player numbers at training was again an issue and contributed to 

training session goals not being achieved. It is also worth pointing out that the second and third 

most prevalent reasons why coaches did not meet their goals, “not getting through everything” and 

“discipline issues” can also be directly and indirectly related to another recurring theme – 

management/organisation and instruction. These findings suggest that junior coaches need support 

with planning (and in particular adjusting plans when player numbers vary) and management skills. 

As expected 81% of coaches who rated their coach as ‘good’ also indicated that they had achieved 

their session goals. However a surprising result was that three of the coaches who rated their 

training session as ‘bad’ indicated that the session’s goals were achieved. The following comment 

from a coach reflects their reasoning: “completing the skills that were planned but not all players 

turned up so it was difficult and a bit boring”. 

Table 4-12 Self reported reasons on why or why not the coaches achieved their session goals 

Why the coaches thought their 

session goals were achieved 

% 

Why the coaches thought their 

session goals were not achieved 

% 

Got through everything planned 56 

Did not have the numbers for what 

I planned 

Players listened 15.5 Did not get through everything 23 

Targeted specific areas 15.5 Discipline issues 14 

Players were happy 9 

Team knows drills – “I do not have to 

explain them” 

No other adults to assist – could 

not run drills properly 

5 Bad weather 9 

36 

I need to plan more 4.5 

Players not interested 4.5 

9 


Coaches perceptions of the training sessions 

In an attempt to gain a better understanding of how accurate coaches perceptions are regarding 

their training sessions they were asked two questions – “how active do you think the players were 

during the session” and “can you accurately indicate how much time was spent in skills, games, 

fitness, management and instruction”. Research indicates that there is a tendency for coaches to 

overestimate some aspects while underestimating other aspects of training. For example De Marco, 

Mancini and West (1997) reported that a college baseball coach overestimated his use of praise 

(perception 40% v actual 8%) during training and underestimated his use of directions /instructions 

(perception 10% v actual 30%). The researchers found that a process of self reflection (keeping a 

journal and viewing 5 practice sessions) improved the coach’s ability to more accurately perceive his 

own behaviours. The development of strategies to attain coaching goals set by the coach after 

viewing his first practice on video-tape also resulted in improved coaching – with a reduction in ‘over 

directing’ behaviour and an increase in the use of ‘questioning’. The following quote indicates the 

difference between the coaches perception and reality after seeing video of his coaching session 

coded using systematic observation - 

Although I have often been aware of my tendency toward verbosity, I had literally no 

idea I could be that long-winded on the ball field. Although I’d always prided myself on 

being able to provide good task analysis, I had no conception of just how long or how 

often I spent engaged in lengthy and, sometimes, even rambling monologue (p. 150- 

151). 

How active do you think the athlete’s were during the session 

Figure 4-6 illustrates that junior coaches significantly over-estimated how active the players were 

during training. However they were quite accurate in determining how inactive the players were. 

80 

70 

70 

60 

50 

46 

40 

38 

Coaches Perception 

30 

Actual Observations 

20 

10 

16 

19 

11 

0 

Relatively Inactive Moderately Active Very Active 

Figure 4-6 A comparison between coaches perceptions of the level of physical activity and the recorded level of physical 

activity 


Figure 4-7 illustrates the coaches’ perceptions in relation to recorded observations from training 

sessions. These results support the findings of De Marco et al. (1997) where coaches underestimated 

the amount of ‘instruction’ given to players. They over-estimated the amount of time 

spent in skills, fitness and managing players. The over-estimation of players participating in ‘fitness’ 

activities reflects the coaches’ over-estimation of players being ‘very active’. However care must be 

taken in interpreting this result as coaches may have included ‘conditioning games’ rather than 

traditional fitness activities which would contribute to their perception of the amount of fitness in 

the training session but would be coded as ‘games’ in the SOFIT instrument. It can also be speculated 

that coaches over-estimated the time they spent managing players because they often found this 

aspect of coaching as one of the most challenging. 

60 

50 

51 

43 

40 

35 

30 

28 

Coaches Perception 

20 

22 

20 

19 

Actual Observations 

10 

12 11 

9 

0 

Skills Games Instruction Management Fitness 

Figure 4-7 A comparison between coaches perceptions of how they allocated time during training sessions and the 

actual observations 

Strategies coaches employ to ensure players have fun 

A component of the post session semi structured interview asked the coaches to reflect on what 

they did during their coaching sessions to ensure that their players had fun while they were training. 

Coaches’ responses to this question were coded and grouped according to common themes as they 

emerged during an analysis. An overview of the themes relating to what coaches do to ensure their 

players have fun during training can be seen in Table 4.12. 

The table indicates that 21% of coaches interviewed consciously incorporated a variety of different 

activities to ensure that their players have fun at training. The table also indicates that a further 21% 

of the coaches reported that they deliberately used skill focused games as a way of making their 

training session enjoyable. 


It is interesting to note that 3.5% of the coaches (n=2) reported that the main strategy they use to 

ensure that their players have fun is “… to tell them to have fun”. While this response may be light 

hearted it may also suggest that some coaches are not aware of the importance of planning for 

player fun and enjoyment. 

Table 4-12 What coaches reported they do in training sessions to ensure their players have fun 

What Coaches do to Ensure Players Have Fun at 

Training 

Variety in the session 

(not too much time spent on the one activity) 

% 

21 

Incorporate skills into games 21 

End the training session with a game 

(3 coaches indicated that this is a reward for good 

behaviour or completing skills) 

17 

Encouragement 7 

Keep them active 7 

Let players have a say / do what they like 5 

Use small groups – so everyone gets the ball more 5 

Tell them to have fun 3.5 

Not be too tough on the kids 3.5 

Give everyone a go – they all achieve success 2 

Train hard 2 

Give them feedback 2 

Make it educational 2 

I get involved with the games 2 

Coach enjoyment and displeasure 

The majority of junior coaches are volunteers. They play a vital role in providing opportunities for 

players to have a positive and enjoyable sporting experience. This is more likely to occur if the 

coaches themselves are enjoying coaching. Examining the aspects of coaching that coaches enjoy or 

cause dissatisfaction will provide a greater understanding of coaching today and may assist with 

developing strategies that will assist with the retention of volunteer junior coaches. 

As expected most coaches identified aspects directly involving children as the most enjoyable part of 

coaching with 57% indicating “watching kids have fun or improve”. This was followed by ‘athletecoach 

relationships or interactions’ and “teaching”. 


Table 4-13 What the coaches enjoy most about coaching 

What the Coaches Enjoy Most About Coaching 

% of Similar 

Responses 

Enjoy watching the players have fun 30 

Enjoy watching the players improve 26 

Player/coach interaction 17 

Enjoy teaching in general 17 

Just love doing it 4 

Other 4 

Finished playing and wanted to stay involved 2 

Perhaps more important for coach educators is identifying aspects of coaching that coaches enjoy 

least and developing strategies to reduce or minimise these aspects. It has been suggested that 

volunteer junior coach turnover could be linked to coaches being dissatisfied with their coaching 

experience. 

The broad category of ‘parents’ accounted for over 50% of responses. This included abusive parents, 

parents emphasis on winning, criticism from parents, and parents who think their kids are better 

than what they are (table 4.14). Parents also contribute to another cause for concern – poor player 

attendance. The other major contributor is discipline issues and misbehaviour. In total these reasons 

account for 77% of responses. 

Abusive and critical parents can make things difficult for the coach. This situation sends mixed 

messages to the players. This can contribute to player defiance and discipline becomes a problem. 

Players are more likely to have a poor concept of ‘team’ if their parents are always pushing them to 

the detriment of others. Abusive and critical parents often make excuses for their son so the player 

never has to be responsible for their actions. Parents who place an over emphasis on winning also 

makes things difficult for the coach who is trying to be inclusive of all players and provide enjoyable 

opportunities that may contribute to lifelong participation in the sport. 

The coaches in this study indicated that their motive was to create an environment for fun and 

learning but it seems there is a high level of stress and pressure which must surely challenge the 

coach’s motive to continue. 


Table 4-14 What the coaches enjoy least about coaching 

What the Coaches Enjoy Least About Coaching 

% of Similar 

Responses 

Parents (51.5) 

• Abusive parents 18 

• Emphasis on winning 18 

• Criticism from parents 13 

• Parents who think their children are better than 

what they are 

Discipline issues/ misbehaviour 18 

Poor player attendance 8 

Politics / selection issues 8 

When things do not go to plan 5 

Weekly reports 2.5 

Lack of support (general) 2.5 

Players of different abilities in one team 2.5 

No comments reported 2 

2.5 

Main issues facing junior coaching today 

Following on from the question asking coaches what they least liked was exploring the main issues 

they faced in junior coaching today. Again parents were the number one issue followed by an 

‘emphasis on winning’ and ‘discipline issues/trying to manage players’. Coaches also identified ‘lack 

of support’ which related both to the organisation and other parents who could assist at training e.g. 

‘holding the tackle bags’. 

These issues must be addressed if sports organisations are to entice junior coaches to continue 

coaching. Strategies must be developed to support the coach. If coaches do not have fun, then as is 

the case with children, they will not return (Wiersma and Sherman, 2005). As these findings suggest, 

most coaches have had experiences with athletes and parents who are difficult to handle. Smith and 

Smoll (2002) looked extensively at youth sport and have identified a number of strategies to deal 

with challenging situations that may deter continued participation as a youth sport coach. Some 

examples include the uncoachable child, the spoilt brat, overcritical parents and sideline coaches 

(see Smith and Smoll, 2002, Way to go, coach!, p141-176). It has also been suggested that coaches 

should seek out social support during times of high stress in order to experience a relatively less 

stressful environment (Kelley and Gill, 1993). If coaches are given assistance in dealing with these 

situations it may decrease stress and increase enjoyment thereby encouraging them to continue 

coaching. 


Table 4-15 The main issues facing coaching today as reported by coaches 

Issues Facing Coaching Today 

as Reported by Coaches 

% of Similar 

Responses 

Parents 25 

Emphasis on winning 14.5 

Discipline issues / trying to manage kids 14.5 

Lack of support (in general) 10.5 

Player concentration levels 6 

Lack of coaches 4 

Poor quality of referees 4 

Team selection issues 4 

Hard for parent coaches to plan sessions (time) 4 

Lack of coach knowledge 4 

Lack of resources 2 

Discipline of other coaches during games 2 

No semi finals 2 

Coach has a lot of responsibility 2 

Other strategies could include developing coaching communities (club coaches or networks of 

coaches within similar age groups meet and share ideas), mentoring or e-mentoring programs that 

may support and assist coaches in maintaining interest and enjoyment in junior sport coaching 

(O’Connor and Bennie, 2006). 


Comparisons Between Coaches 

This section of the report looks at comparisons and relationships between characteristics of the 

coach and the effects that these characteristics may have on certain aspects of a training session. 

The specific characteristics that this section investigates are the level of qualifications of the coach 

and the number of years of experience in coaching rugby league or rugby union that the coach has. 

The first comparison to be made, shown in Table 4-16, is between the level of qualifications that a 

coach holds and 24 selected aspects of the training session. The table displays the aspect of the 

training session to be compared, the means scores from the coaches with introductory qualifications 

and higher qualifications (Level 2 and above, and coaches with a BEd in Physical Education) and the 

difference between the mean scores. The table also displays the “t” value. 

The first observation to make from the table is that coaches with lower qualifications conduct 

training sessions that are significantly longer than highly qualified coaches. This difference equates 

to 54.5 minute sessions conducted by highly qualified coaches compared to 62.7 minute sessions 

conducted by coaches with introductory level qualifications. 

The table also reveals the coaches with higher qualifications have been coaching for a significantly 

longer period of time than coaches with lower qualifications. This is a promising sign as it suggests 

that coaches are attended coaching courses throughout their coaching career. 

Another interesting finding shown in Table 4-16 is that highly qualified coaches gave more technical 

explanations than coaches with introductory level qualifications. A possible reason behind this could 

be the knowledge not only gained from coaching experience, but also from the additional coaching 

courses that more experienced coaches have attended. 

A final point to raise from the comparison of highly qualified coaches with introductory level coaches 

is that, in this research project, the level of coaching qualification had no significant difference on 

the outcome of the 21 of the 24 aspects tested. This interesting fact suggests that coaching courses 

and subsequent qualifications may not be having the desired effect of changing coach behaviour 

that sporting organisations are hoping for. However, in order to fully understand this concept more 

research is needed in this area. 


Table 4-16 A comparison between the level of coaches qualifications and aspects of the training session 

Aspect of 

Training Session 

Mean Score of 

Coaches with 

Lower Level 

Qualifications 

Mean Score of 

Coaches with 

Higher Level 

Qualifications 

Difference 

Between 

Means 

t 

Length of session (mins)* 62.7 54.5 8.2 ± 3.5 2.306 

Number of years coaching (yrs)* 3.83 9.88 6.4 ± 3.5 3.274 

Were the session goals achieved (y/n) 1.64 1.70 0.05 ± 0.1 0.2808 

How the coaches rated their session (1-3) 2.43 2.50 0.07 ± 0.2 0.3323 

Use of a warm up (y/n) 1.89 2.00 0.05 ± 0.09 0.5386 

Use of a cool down (y/n) 1.17 1.38 0.2 ± 0.1 1.372 

Time in MVPA (%) 

82.7 

82.9 

0.9 ± 2.1 

0.7536 

Time in MVPA (mins) 

51.26 

45.21 

6.0 ± 3.9 

1.523 

Time spent on fitness (%) 

7.2 

12.0 

4.8 ± 1.9 

0.8246 

Time spent on fitness (mins) 

4.54 

6.56 

2.0 ± 2.4 

0.8371 

Time spent playing games (%) 

19.1 

15.6 

3.5 ± 3.4 

1.023 

Time spent playing games (mins) 

12.00 

8.48 

3.5 ± 2.8 

1.254 

Time spent on skill development (%) 

45.8 

41.3 

4.5 ± 3.8 

1.596 

Time spent on skill development (mins) 

28.74 

22.52 

6.2 ± 3.6 

1.697 

Concurrent instruction (%) 13.61 16.38 2.7 ± 3.3 0.8509 

Corrective or specific feedback (%) 7.88 13.91 6.0 ± 3.2 1.859 

General feedback (%) 1.61 2.06 -0.4 ± 0.8 0.4905 

Pre instruction (%) 18.12 16.48 1.6 ± 5.5 0.2990 

Management or organisation (%) 11.16 12.12 0.9 ± 2.6 0.3085 

Negative feedback (%) 2.00 2.25 0.2 ± 0.8 0.4564 

Negative modelling (%) 0.28 0.06 0.2 ± 0.19 1.487 

Observation (%) 15.86 7.58 8.2 ± 6.4 1.281 

Positive feedback (%) 4.97 7.65 2.7 ± 1.6 1.680 

Questioning (%) 3.30 2.96 0.34 ± 1.2 0.2061 

Scold (%) 1.80 2.24 0.4 ± 1.0 0.4534 

Technical explanation (%)* 2.92 6.85 3.9 ± 1.7 2.278 

Player equipment ratio (1-4) 3.17 3.13 0.04 ± 0.3 0.1393 

Appropriate group size for the drills (1-4) 2.83 3.00 0.17 ± 0.2 0.6060 

Coach’s level of enthusiasm (1-4) 3.67 3.69 0.02 ± 0.2 0.1258 

Note. *p < .05 

Another comparison to be made relates to what effect experience in coaching has on certain aspects 

of a training session. The results of this comparison can be seen in Table 4-17. Like the previous 


table, certain aspects of a training session are listed on the right, followed by the mean score of 

novice coaches (i.e., those who have coached for less than two years) and the mean scores of highly 

experienced coaches (i.e., those who have coached for more than 5 years). The difference between 

the means is also displayed followed by the t-score. 

Table 4-17 A comparison between highly experienced coaches and novice coaches 

Aspect of 

Training Session 

Mean Score of 

Novice 

Coaches 

Mean Score of 

Highly 

Experienced 

Coaches 

Difference 

Between 

Means 

t 

Length of Session (mins) 59.9 53.3 6.6 ± 4.6 1.646 

Were the session goals achieved (y/n) 1.83 1.67 0.2 ± 0.3 0.6202 

How the coaches rated their session (g/b) 2.33 2.50 0.2 ± 0.7 0.4152 

Use of a warm up (y/n) 2.00 2.00 0.0 ± 0.0 - 

Use of a cool down (y/n) 1.63 1.20 0.4 ± 0.2 1.632 

Time in MVPA (%) 

82.8 

77.9 

4.9 ± 2.9 

1.864 

Time in MVPA (mins)* 

49.6 

41.5 

7.6 ± 4.5 

2.194 

Time spent on fitness (%) 

14.3 

11.4 

2.9 ± 2.9 

0.396 

Time spent on fitness (mins) 

8.6 

6.1 

2.5 ± 3.5 

0.4865 

Time spent playing games (%) 

31.2 

14.9 

16.3 ± 10.1 

1.969 

Time spent playing games (mins) 

18.7 

7.9 

10.8 ± 5.2 

2.050 

Time spent on skill development (%) 

34.9 

46.7 

12.0 ± 8.7 

1.324 

Time spent on skill development (mins) 

20.9 

24.9 

4.0 ± 5.3 

0.4924 

Concurrent instruction (%) 16.85 11.99 4.8 ± 3.6 1.331 

Corrective or specific feedback (%) 5.96 11.22 5.2 ± 3.0 1.676 

General feedback (%) 2.23 3.32 1.09 ± 1.2 0.7666 

Pre instruction (%) 13.75 10.66 3.1 ± 7.6 0.4042 

Management or organisation (%) 12.51 15.77 3.6 ± 3.4 0.8510 

Negative feedback (%) 1.26 2.19 0.9 ± 1.2 0.9098 

Negative modelling (%) 0.04 0.09 0.0 ±0.0 - 

Observation (%) 26.66 15.58 11.1 ± 10.5 1.026 

Positive feedback (%) 6.00 6.82 0.82 ± 2.0 0.5829 

Questioning (%)* 0.95 3.60 2.6 ± 0.9 2.736 

Scold (%) 1.52 2.54 1.0 ± 1.5 0.6496 

Technical explanation (%)* 1.95 5.72 3.76 ± 1.9 2.803 

Player equipment ratio 3.0 3.0 0.0 ± 0.3 0.0000 

Appropriate group size for the activity* 3.25 2.70 0.5 ± 0.2 2.451 

Coach’s level of enthusiasm* 3.50 3.90 -0.4 ± 0.2 2.314 

Note. *p < .05 


Table 4-17 indicates that several significant differences occur in training sessions conducted by 

experienced coaches when compared to those conducted by novice coaches. The first notable 

difference is that players in training sessions conducted by novice coaches spent significantly more 

time being active (7.58 minutes more) when compared to sessions of experienced coaches. Further 

analysis shows that there is a strong trend in the data that novice coaches spend more time in games 

as well, which could account for the higher levels of MVPA. Another strong trend in the data that 

could also explain this is that the training sessions of novice coaches tended to run longer, by 6.6 

minutes than those of experienced coaches. 

In addition to this Table 4-17 points out that more experienced coaches spend significantly more 

time giving technical explanations and more time questioning their players than novice coaches. This 

advanced teaching technique enables players to construct their own knowledge and to subsequently 

develop a deeper understanding of the skill being learnt (Entwistle, 1988). Another interesting fact 

shown in Table 4-17 is that the more experienced coaches who adopted this teaching technique 

were observed to be more enthusiastic throughout the coaching session when compared to novice 

coaches. The benefits of being more enthusiastic is that it correlates with higher student (player) self 

concept and achievement (Woods and Locke, 1983). 

Another observation to make from the data displayed in Table 4-17 is that novice coaches were 

observed to have significantly more appropriate group sizes for the activity being conducted than 

experienced coaches. Possible reasons for this are varied and before any conclusive comments can 

be made, further research is recommended. This may be influenced by the trend of novice coaches 

using more games where the team is divided into 2 groups. Interestingly player-to-equipment ratios 

were similar for novice and experienced coaches. 

Perhaps the most interesting observation to make from Tables 4-16 and 4-17 is that for most of the 

aspects of the training sessions, various levels of coach qualifications and experience do not have a 

significant influence. 

The final comparison to be made between the data looks at whether the context of a training 

session is significantly different between coaches who plan for certain activities and coaches who do 

not plan for the activities. Specifically the areas of fitness training, ball work, tackling, games and skill 

development were investigated, with the results displayed in Table 4-18. 


Table 4-18 A comparison between the contexts of training session as determined by the coaches’ planned activity in the 

session 

Planned Activity 

% of coaches who 

planned to 

specifically focus on 

the activity 

Mean time of 

coaches who 

planned the activity 

vs. coaches who did 

not plan (mins) 

t 

Fitness Work ** 20% 

Ball Work* 34% 

Tackling 30% 

Games 30% 

Skill Development* 42% 

Planned 11.5 

Not Planned 3.5 

Planned 8.4 


Planned 5.0 


Planned 14.5 


Planned 27.5 


5.213 

2.024 

0.5689 

1.841 

2.035 

Note. *p < .05 

**p

Chapter 5 

Conclusions and Recommendations 

This final chapter of the report presents the conclusions of the research project in relation to the 

outcomes and objectives of the study. It also presents other interesting findings from an analysis of 

the results. The recommendations of the project are presented followed by guidelines for effective 

junior training sessions. Finally future research is suggested. 

Objectives of the research as guided by the Project Steering Committee 

The aim of the research was to conduct an investigation to develop a deeper understanding of the 

makeup of junior Rugby League and Rugby Union coaching sessions. Specifically the research 

revolved around the six objectives as outlined by the project steering committee. Each objective of 

the research is presented below. 

1. Determine the proportion of time junior coaches spend organising their players 

To measure the proportion of time junior coaches spend organising their players the study used 

two instruments; the SOFIT tool and systematic video observation. The agreement percentage 

between the two instruments in relation to the amount of time coaches spend organising their 

players was high at 95.1%. The proportion of time that junior coaches spend organising (or 

managing) their players is 13% or 7.1 minutes. This is similar to the time high school coaches are 

reported to spent on management but less than that reported at the college and professional 

level (< 6.5%). Reducing this time will create further opportunities for players to be engaged in 

play or practice activities. 

2. Determine the proportion of time junior coaches spend instructing their players 

The proportion of time that junior coaches spend instructing their players is 48% or 26.4 

minutes. Pre-instruction and concurrent instruction each accounted for 14.3% of the training 

session and were ranked equal second as the most dominant individual behaviours displayed by 

junior coaches. On average junior coaches gave pre-instructions on 15 occasions throughout a 

training session. The effectiveness of pre-instructions and concurrent instructions must be 

questioned considering the lengthy duration of each ‘instruction’. This suggests that coaches 

may be long-winded, over prescriptive and continually ‘telling’ and ‘correcting’ their players 

during training sessions. 


The amount of time that Under 10 rugby players were engaged in moderate to vigorous levels 

of physical activity was measured using the SOFIT instrument. Results from the study found that 

during an average 55 minute training session players were involved in MVPA for 82% or 45.1 

minutes. A further breakdown of this reveals players are: 

Sitting for 2.2 minutes (4%) 

Standing for 7.7 minutes (14%) 

Walking for 22.5 minutes (41%) 

Jogging for 15.9 minutes (29%) 


Involved in vigorous activity for 6.6 minutes (12%) 

Participation in an average rugby league or rugby union training session provides players with 

75% of the minimum daily recommended amount of exercise. 


Players involved in Under 10 RL and RU training sessions practice the following skills: 

• Passing and catching for 6.6 minutes (12%) 

• Ball carry for 4.8 minutes (9%) 

• Tackling for 4.4 minutes (8%) 

• Kicking for half a minute (1%) 

• Ruck and maul skill (union only) for 1.6 minutes (3%) 

However they also participate in game play for 20% of a training session which equates to a 

possible additional 11 minutes of skill development. Consequently on average players are 

engaged in game and skill based activities for 64% of a training session (35 mins). 

5. Determine if coaches have an accurate understanding of how active their players are 

during a coaching session 

It appears the coaches grossly over estimate the amount of time that their players are very 

active and grossly under estimate the amount of time that their players are moderately active. 

This trend is repeated when they reflect on components of the training session – overestimating 

how much time they spend on management, fitness and skill activities and underestimating 

how much instruction they give to players. A coach’s inability to accurately estimate 

time spent on different aspects of training or recall the specifics regarding their own coaching 

behaviours have been documented in the literature. 



Coach accreditation appeared to have very little influence on the type of training session 

conducted in terms of what players did or what behaviours were predominantly displayed by 

coaches. However, there were two significant differences. Firstly, coaches with lower 

qualifications conduct training sessions that are significantly longer than highly qualified 

coaches. This difference equates to 54.5 minute sessions conducted by highly qualified coaches 

compared to 62.7 minute sessions conducted by coaches with introductory level qualifications. 

Secondly, highly qualified coaches gave more technical explanations. 

Experience appears to be more of a discriminator. Results indicate that several significant 

differences occur in training sessions conducted by experienced coaches when compared to 

those conducted by novice coaches: 

 

 

 

 

Experienced coaches spend significantly more time questioning their players. 

Experienced coaches spend significantly more time in technical explanation. 

Experienced coaches were observed showing significantly more enthusiasm than novice 

coaches 

In training sessions conducted by novice coaches, players have significantly higher levels of 

MVPA 


However on all other aspects of coaching there was no significant difference between 

experienced (> 5yrs) and inexperienced (< 2 yrs) coaches. 

Commendations 

Throughout this study, we have gained an immense insight into junior sport. Individual coaches, 

clubs and state sporting organisations need to be congratulated on creating an enjoyable and 

successful environment for the junior players in their charge. 

The main areas worth noting are: 

1. Player enjoyment. The majority of players were very enthusiastic about their sport. The two 

aspects of training that they enjoyed the most were playing with friends and playing games. 

They enjoyed the training sessions as well as competition and did not want to miss out on 

participating. It was pleasing that players believed they were improving and also ‘knew what 

they were meant to do’. The coaches have done a great job in ensuring players have fun with the 

main strategies being: variety in the session; incorporate skills into games and finishing training 

with a game. 

2. MVPA levels. During an average under 10’s RL or RU training session the players are in MVPA 

82% of the time (45 mins) which equals 75% of the minimum daily recommended amount of 

exercise. 

3. Qualifications. All participating coaches except two had a relevant coaching qualification. Sixtythree 

percent of coaches have coached for at least five years. 

4. Choice of activities. It seems junior coaches are skilled when selecting the type of drills or 

activities to include in their practice session with 89% coaches choosing suitable activities for this 

age group. 

5. Interaction with players. The results indicate that the junior coaches have a healthy interaction 

with their players. The majority of coaches are receptive to player suggestions (62%), are 

encouraging (89%) and display consistent behaviour (90%). 

6. Goals. All coaches were able to indicate what their goals were for the current training session. At 

the conclusion of the session 68.5% of the coaches thought that they did meet their stated goals. 

7. Coach enjoyment. Coaches identified aspects directly involving children as the most enjoyable 

part of coaching with 57% indicating ‘watching kids have fun or improve’. This was followed by 

‘athlete-coach relationships or interactions’ and ‘teaching’. 

Additional Findings with Recommendations 

Even when coaches are doing things well, there is always room for improvement. This section will 

highlight areas that are causing major concern with coaches and players as well as offering possible 

solutions. 


1. Management and organisational skills: Coaches are generally well educated on the basics of 

creating a good training session. They are not well equipped to execute and manage a session 

with a group of very active and chatty players who are there to have fun. 


 

 

A review of coach education courses is needed to include not only the skills based content, 

but content that will give coaches confidence and strategies to cope with discipline issues, 

management issues and enhance their ability to give clear concise instructions to players. 

Develop workshops specifically for junior coaches that address relevant management and 

discipline issues and communication skills that can be conducted in local communities. 

Recommendation to the clubs 

Encourage all coaches to attend workshops 

2. Coach – Parent relationship: Parental input during training sessions and particularly at games 

can be detrimental to the well being of the team and the coach. Coaches are not well trained in 

how to influence the attitude of parents or to reduce conflict from the side line. This results in 

coaches feeling more pressure and less enjoyment. 


Greater support needs to be provided to junior coaches regarding parenting issues. Possible 

strategies include: 

Create an education package for parents that the individual clubs can use each season to 

reduce inappropriate parent behaviour. Issues to be addressed in the package could include: 

unreasonable expectations; objectives of junior sport; how parents can support their child 

and the coach. This package may include video, handouts, question/answer session. We 

recommend a more thorough investigation into this issue to create the most appropriate 

education package for parents. 

 

 

 

 

Develop a parent behaviour self assessment tool 

Provide junior coaches with coping mechanisms for dealing with abuse and criticism. This 

module/workshop can be added to the coach education program for new coaches. 

Experienced coaches also need to have access to this information. 

Emphasise to coaches that effective communication skills will assist in developing positive 

relationships with other parents. For example, listening to parents; showing empathy; 

communicating clear goals and messages to parents 

Offer conflict resolution sessions 

Recommendations for clubs 

Embrace the new parent education package and introduce it to parents as quickly as 

possible. 


In the meantime, during the registration process, parents should be reminded of the clubs 

overall aims for the season. This will cover the importance of equal participation, enjoyment 

for all, respect and learning. A reminder that winning is not the goal, doing your best is, and 

other similar ideologies are important to communicate strongly and frequently. 

3. Communication and ‘instruction’. In general, communication skills are not a strong point for 

junior coaches. In particular there is: 

A lack of clear & concise instructions 

The role of ‘cues’ doesn’t seem to be used effectively (concurrent instruction) 

A belief that coaches need to be continually talking and ‘instructing’ players – ‘observation’ 

of players is an effective and necessary coaching strategy 

Over-coaching 

Minimal use of questioning 

Minimal evidence that coaches cater for the different learning styles of their players 

A need to increase corrective and positive feedback 


 

 

Communication skills are critical to success. It cannot be assumed that all junior coaches are 

naturally good communicators. This is a skill that must be learned. A communication 

module must be included in any coach education course. Information on effective 

communication and instruction strategies should be supported by various practical 

activities and video examples relevant to the junior coach. 

Develop a variety of assessment tools that are easy to administer that could be used in the 

junior coach setting. An example would be a checklist of variables related to instruction that 

a parent or other coach could complete while observing a training session. This would 

provide instant and specific feedback to the coach. This could supplement the coach’s own 

self-evaluation. 

4. Coaches have no baseline for comparison on how effective they are as a coach or how they can 

improve. Junior coaches have difficulty accurately estimating what happens during a training 

session. They tend to over-estimate how active players are and under-estimate how much they 

‘talk’ or instruct. 


 

Create formal and informal mentoring activities – provide opportunities for coaches to 

observe other junior training sessions; consider establishing a pool of mentors and 

developing a system that provides access to e-mentors. 

Develop guidelines on how to develop and implement ‘coaching communities’. Provide 

support (1-2hr workshop) on facilitation role. Meetings could be scheduled on the Saturday 

before competition starts, once during the season (a non-playing Saturday) and the final 

Saturday. Saturdays that are cancelled due to wet weather may also be used. These 

meetings provide coaches with an opportunity to support each other and work through 

common issues. Examples may include: 


o 

o 

Planning and conducting training sessions that everyone then tries with their own team 

(agree on goals, content etc) 

Working on one problem at a time e.g. player concentration levels 

Develop guidelines to assist junior coaches in assessing their own performance and 

developing effective self reflective skills. 

Suggest an evaluation system for coaches. This may include the identification of 2 things 

under the following 3 headings – 

o What I need to start doing 

o What I need to stop doing 

o What I need to keep doing 

These can be determined by the coach themselves or in consultation with mentor, other 

coaches or ‘assistant’ parents 

5. Training Session. Prior planning and continual learning will assist coaches in providing players 

with greater opportunities for deliberate ‘play’ (games) and practice. 


Provide an online resource available to assist coaches with planning and selection of 

activities for training sessions. This would expand on what is available at the rugby’s online 

coaching centre. Relevant and specific games, activities and drills would be included in 

written and video form. An example in another sport is available at 

www.globalfootballsystems.com This online resource could be available free for all 

registered coaches (accessed through a login) or for a small fee paid by each club and 

available to all their coaches. 

Consider adopting a ‘long term athlete development’ or ‘development model of sports 

participation’ framework. This would encourage a greater emphasis on ‘games’ play for 9-12 

year olds. 

Encouragement of small group activities to increase player involvement and decision-making 

opportunities. This would supplement whole group activities. The minimal use of small 

group work at training may be a reflection on the over-emphasis on team ‘runs’ where 

coaches believe they must run as a team for lengthy periods. Examples to be included in 

coach education courses and the e-resources. 

Reinforce the importance of a ‘cool down’. As well as being ‘good’ practice in terms of 

recovery it is an ideal time where coaches can summarise the main points learnt during the 


6. Coach frustration with low numbers at training. Coaches lack the adaptability to change 

training plans quickly to meet new situations. Coaches appear to lack confidence and skills in 

running small group activities. 



Junior coaches need to be given suggestions for events such as reduced player numbers at 

training so contingency plans can be formulated. This information can be discussed and 

demonstrated at coaching courses and made available on the junior coaching website. 

7. Support. The coaches feel they have a lack of support and often feel isolated 


 

 

 

Provide a blog where junior coaches could communicate and share ideas and experiences 

Provide access to an e-mentor: junior coaches are able to ask questions and receive advice 

on specific junior coaching issues 

Demonstrate to coaches how they can include other parents by setting roles and 

boundaries. An example would be having parents as ‘assistants’ to supervise small group 

activities. If parents have a role and can contribute at training they are more likely to be 

positive and supportive. 

8. Coach Education. A review of the effectiveness of current coach education courses. This will 

involve interviewing graduates from the previous two years to determine the relevance and 

applicability of knowledge gained from the courses. 

Recommendation 

Consideration should be given to both the delivery and content of coach education. 

Suggestions include - 

Player centred (rather than coach centred) 

Problem-based learning – emphasis on ‘How’ as well as ‘what’ 


Management and organisational skills 

Assessment and reflection 

Checklist for effective junior training sessions 

The following list of items are to assist coaches evaluate the quality of their training session. Which 

items were present in your training session today The more items you can answer ‘yes’ the higher 

the quality of your training session. 

Early in the season 

Roles and boundaries have been set for parents and players 

I am aware of each players learning style or preference 

I am aware the emphasis for this age group is on ‘deliberate play and games’ rather 

than deliberate practice (isolated skills and drills) 

TRAINING SESSION 

Organisation of training session 

Planned the training session in relation to specific goals (written down) 

Dominant component of training was ‘game play’ rather than isolated skills or standing 

around listening to the coach 

Incorporated small group activities as well as whole group activities 


Activities that were planned were appropriate for the stage the players were at 

Developed contingencies for reduced player numbers 

Equipment was checked beforehand; where possible activities were set up prior to the 

start of the training session 

Maximised the use of available equipment 

Structure of the training session 

Started the session with a warm up 

Focus of the day was presented to the players 

Clear and concise instructions given 

Where applicable used demonstrations 

Used appropriate cues so ‘concurrent instruction’ was brief and to the point 

Corrective and positive feedback given where appropriate (to individuals and team) 

Asked players questions to get them thinking, making decisions and enhance learning 

Times where I observed players practicing 

Used every players’ name; offered encouragement 

Avoided undue criticism and yelling 

Corrected player errors without hurting confidence or causing resentment 

Was aware of each player so modified training when necessary so every player 

achieved some form of ‘success’ at some stage during the training session 

Variety of activities and games included to enhance player enjoyment 

Smooth transition from one activity to the next 

Emphasis was on fun, mastery or learning rather than only performance outcomes 

Encouraged cooperation – competitiveness; fair play 

Player accountability measures were applied 

Activity level was high 

Maximised use of training time – 

minimised ‘off task’ time 

minimised time ‘managing’ players 

Players concentrated and tried hard 

Followed the plan but made adjustments when necessary 

De-briefed players during cool down stretch – summarised key points to enhance 

learning; highlighted good aspects of the session; rewarded effort; reinforced fun and 

enjoyment 

Evaluation 

Made notes for the next training session 

Good communication with parents 

You were enthusiastic and motivated 

In order to improve your coaching list 2 things under the following 3 headings – 

What I need to start doing 

What I need to stop doing 

What I need to keep doing 

(These can be determined by the coach themselves or in consultation with mentor, other 

coaches or ‘assistant’ parents) 

Over the next few weeks monitor your coaching in relation to your responses above 


Further research 

There is a need for evidence-based practice to inform our decisions regarding coaching 

effectiveness. Evidence can be determined through the use of randomised and non-randomised 

controlled trials, case studies, cross-sectional studies and descriptive reports. Suggested avenues for 

future research are briefly indicated below. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Examine the coaching practices at the other two stages of development – the specialising years 

(13-15 yrs) and investment years (16-22 years). 

Investigate further the involvement of parents – understanding the role of the sports parents, 

effective and ineffective parenting behaviours, problems coaches perceive with interacting with 

parents, and scientifically based strategies for maximising successful coach-parent relationships 

Investigate the effectiveness of various intervention strategies through the use of randomised or 

non-randomised control studies. Suggested intervention strategies include – 

o Workshop on management and organisational skills. This could also include 

contingencies for reduced player numbers at training. 

o Workshop on communication skills 

o Workshop on interacting with parents; strategies for dealing with ‘difficult’ parents 

o Workshop on game sense approach 

o Use of mentors or e-mentors 

o Application of coach assessment and reflection practices 

These interventions could be in the form of workshops, newsletters or online modules 

specifically for junior coaches. Each intervention would be examined with a separate cohort. 

Explore the effectiveness and practicalities of the notion of ‘community of coaches’ through a 

small case study 

Longitudinal study on players and coaches – retention, withdrawal, performance levels 

The above mentioned research projects could be broadened to other sports 

Examining female coaches or female sports at the sampling (6-12 yrs) and specialising (13-15 yrs) 

and investment (16-22 yrs) stages 


References 

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2008). Physical activity in Australia: a snapshot 2004-2005. Australian 

Bureau of statistics retrieved September 3 rd 2009. 

Australian Sports Commission (2006) Beginning Coaching Manual. Government of Australia 

Barnett, N., Smoll, F & Smith, R. (1992). Effects of enhancing coach-athlete relationships on youth 

sport attrition. The Sport Psychologist, 6, 111-127. 

Bengoechea, E., Strean, W. & Williams, D. (2004). Understanding and promoting fun in youth sport: 

coaches’ perspectives. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 9, 197-214. 

Bloom, G., Crumpton, R. and Anderson, J. (1999). A systematic observation study of the teaching 

behaviours of an expert basketball coach. The Sports Psychologist, 13, 157-170. 

Booth, M., Okely, A.D., Denney-Wilson, E., Hardy, L., Yang, B., & Dobbins, T. (2006). NSW Schools 

Physical Activity and Nutrition Survey (SPANS) 2004: Full Report. Sydney: NSW Department 

of Health 

Campbell, H. (1993). Comparisons of male collegiate tennis coaches who coach male tennis players 

and male coaches who coach female tennis players. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, 

University of Southern Mississippi 

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi experimental designs for research. 

Chicago: Rand McNally. 

Claxton, A. (1988)Systematic observationof more and less successful high school tennis coaches. 

Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 7, 302-310. 

Coleman, R. (2002). Characteristics of volunteering in UK sport: Lessons from cricket. Managing 

Leisure, 7(220-238). 

Cote, J (2008). An athlete-centred approach to expert coaching. International Coaching Conference, 

London. 

Cote, J., Baker, J. & Abernethy, B. (2003). From play to practice: A developmental framework for the 

acquisition of expertise in team sport. In J.Starkes and K. Ericsson (Eds). Recent advances in 

sport expertise (pp 89-114). Champagin, IL: Human Kinetics 

Cote, J. And Fraser-Thomas, J. (2008). Play, practice and athlete development. Farrow, D., Baker, J 

and McMahon, C. (Eds). Developing Sport Expertise: Researchers and coaches put theory into 

practice. (17-24). Oxon: Routledge. 

Cushion, CJ & Jones, RL (2001). A systematic observation of professional top-level youth soccer 

coaches. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 24(4), 354-375. 

Darst,P., Mancini, V. And Zakrajsek, D. (1983). Systematic observation instrumentation for physical 

education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics 

De Marco, G., Mancini, V and West, D. (1997). Reflections on change: A qualitative and quantitative 

analysis of a baseball coach’s behaviour. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 20, 135-163. 

Department of Health and Ageing (2004) Active Kids Are Healthy Kids: Australia’s Physical Activity 

Recommendations for 5–12 Year Olds. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia. 

Douge, B. and Hastie, P. (1993). Coach effectiveness. Sports Science Review. 2, 14-29. 


Eisner, E. W. (1997). The Enlightened Eye: Qualitative Inquiry and the Enhancement of Educational 

Practice (2nd ed.). New York: Merrill Publishing Company. 

Entwistle , N. (1988). Styles of Learning and Teaching, David Fulton. 

Evertson, C. M., & Harris, A.H. (1992) What We Know About Managing Classrooms Educational 

Leadership 49 (7):74–78. 

Farrow, D., Baker, J and McMahon, C. (2008). Developing Sport Expertise: Researchers and coaches 

put theory into practice. Oxon: Routledge 

Fisher, C., Mancini, V., Hirsch, R., Proulx., T. & Straurowsky, E. (1982). Coach-athlete interactions and 

team climate. Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 388-404. 

Fraser-Thomas, J & Cote, J (2006). Youth sports: Implementing findings and moving forward with 

research. Athletic Insight, 8, 12-27. 

Giacobbi, P., Roper, E., Whitney, J. & Butryn, T. (2002). College coaches’ views about the 

development of successful athletes: A descriptive exploratory investigation. Journal of Sport 

Behaviour, 25(2), 164-180. 

Gilbert, W., Gibert, J. & Trudel, P. (2001). Coaching strategies for youth sports. JOPERD, 72, 29-33. 

Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational 

Technology Research and Development, 29(2), 75-91. 

Hedstrom, R., & Gould, D. (2004). Research in youth sports: Critical issues status. Retrieved 18th 

May, 2006, from http://edweb3.educ.msu.edu/ysi/project/CriticalIssuesYouthSports.pdf 

Horn, T & Harris, A. (2002). Perceived competence in young athletes: research findings and 

recommendations for coaches and parents. In F. Smoll & R. Smith (Eds). Children and youth 

in sport: A biopsychosocial perspective (2 nd Ed) (pp. 435-464). Dubuque, IW: Kendall-Hunt 

Horton, S., Baker, J. and Deakin, J. (2005). Experts in action: A systematic observation of 5 national 

team coaches. International Journal of Sports Psychology, 36, 299-319. 

Kahan, D. (1999). Coaching Behaviour: A review of the systematic observation literature. Applied 

Research in Coaching and Athletics Annuals, 14, 17-58. 

Kelley, B. C., & Gill, D. L. (1993). An examination of personal/situational variables, stress appraisal, 

and burnout in collegiate teacher-coaches. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 64(1), 

94-102. 

Kirk, D. (2005). Physical education, youth sport and lifelong participation: The importance of early 

learning experiences. European Physical Education Review, 11, 239-255. 

Lacy, A and Darst, P. (1985) Systematic observation of behaviours of winning high school football 

coaches. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 4(4), 256-270. 

Lacy, A & Darst, P (1984). Evolution of a systematic observation system: The ASU coaching 

observation instrument. Journal of Teaching Physical Education, 3, 59-66. 

Lacy, A. and Goldston, P. (1990). Behaviour analysis of male and female coaches in female 

basketball. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 13, 29-30. 

Lacy, A. and Martin, D. (1994). Analysis of starter/non starter motor engagement and coaching 

behaviours in collegiate women’s volleyball. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 13, 

95-107. 


LeCompte, M. D., & Goetz, J. P. (1984). Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research. 

San Diego: Academic Press. 

Liukkonen, J., Laakso, L. & Telama, R. (1996). Educational perspectives of youth sport coaches: 

Analysis of observed coaching behaviours. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 27, 

439-453. 

Lyle, J. (1992). Systematic coaching behaviour: An investigation into the coaching process and the 

implications of the findings for coach education. In T. Williams, L. Almond & A. sparkes (Eds). 

Sport and Physical Activity: Moving towards excellence (pp. 463-469), London: E & FN Spon 

Massey, C. (2000). An analysis of teaching and coaching behaviours of strength and conditioning 

coaches using systematic observation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of 

Southern Mississippi 

Masters, R. (2008). Skill learning the implicit way – say no more! In Farrow, D., Baker, J and 

McMahon, C. (Eds). Developing Sport Expertise: Researchers and coaches put theory into 

practice (pp. 89-103). London: Routledge 

McCracken, G. (1988). The long interview. Newbury Park, Ca.: Sage Publications. 

McGaha , P.(2000). A quantitative and qualitative exploration of coaching behaviours of successful 

high school baseball coaches. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Florida State University. 

McKenzie, T. and King, H. (1982). Analysis of feedback provided by youth baseball coaches. 

Education and Treatment of Children, 5, 179-188. 

McKenzie, T. L., Sallis, J. F., Nader, P. R. (1991). SOFIT: system for observing fitness instruction time. 

Journal of Teaching Physical Education. 11:195–205. 

McKenzie, T.L., Feldman, H., Woods, S.E., & Romero, K.A. (1995). Children's activity levels and lesson 

context during third-grade physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 66 

(3): 184-193. 

Mesquita, L., Sobrinho, A., Rosado, A., Pereira, F. and Milisteded, M. (2008). A systematic 

observation of youth amateur volleyball coaches behaviours. International Journal of Applied 

Sport Science, 20, 37-58. 

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis : An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd 

ed.). CA: Sage Publications. 

Millard, L. (1996). Differences in coaching behaviours of male and female high school soccer 

coaches. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 19(1), 19-21. 

Miller, A. (1992). Systematic observation of behaviour similarities of various youth sport soccer 

coaches. Physical Educator, 49, 136-143. 

Motl, R. W., Dishman, R.K., Saunders, R., Dowda, M., Felton, G., & Pate, R.R. (2001). Measuring 

enjoyment of physical activity in adolescent girls. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 

21(2), 100-117. 

O’Connor, D. And Bennie, A. (2006). The retention of youth sport coaches. Change: Transformations 

in Education, 9(1), 27-38. 


Okely, A. & Booth, M. L (2004) Mastery of fundamental movement skills among children in New 

South Wales, Australia: Prevalence and socio demographic distribution. Journal of Science 

and Medicine in Sport, 7, 358-372 

Orlick, T. (1973). Children’s sport – A revolution is coming. Canadian Association of Health, Physical 

Education and Recreation Journal, 12-14. 

Phillips, T (1991). An analysis of teaching behaviours through systematic observation of basketball 

coaches. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi 

Poole, C. and Miller, S. (2006). Ages and Stages: Let me think about that. Early Childhood Today, 4, 4- 

5. 

Potrac, P., Brewer, C., Jones, R., Armour, K. & Hoff, J. (2000). Toward a holistic understanding of the 

coaching process. Quest, 52, 186-199. 

Potrac, P., Jones., R. and Cushion, C. (2007). Understanding Power and the Coach's Role in 

Professional English Soccer: A Preliminary Investigation of Coach Behaviour. Soccer and 

Society. 8, 33-49. 

Rink, J. (1996). Effective instruction in physical education. In S. silverman & C. Ennis (Eds). Student 

learning in physical education, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 171-198. 

Sage, G. H. (1989). Becoming a high school coach: From playing sports to coaching. Research 

Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 60(1), 81-92. 

Salmela, J. H. (1995). Learning from the development of expert coaches. Coaching and Sport Science 

Journal, 2(2), 3-13. 

Salminen, S. & Liukkonen, J. (1996). Coach-athlete relationship and coaching behaviour in training 

sessions. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 27, 59-67. 

Schinke, R., Bloom, G., & Salmela, J. H. (1995). The career stages of elite Canadian basketball 

coaches. AVANTE, 1 (1), 48-62. 

Seagrave, J. and Ciancio, C. (1990). An observational study of a successful pop warner football coach. 

Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 9, 294-306. 

Smith, M. and Cushion, C. (2006). An investigation of the in-game behaviours of professional, toplevel 

youth soccer coaches. Journal of Sport Sciences, 24, 355-366. 

Smith, R.E. & Smoll, F.L. (2002). Way to Go, Coach! California: Warde Publishers. 

Smith, R., Smoll, F. & Curtis, B (1979). Coach effectiveness training: a cognitive-behavioural approach 

to enhancing relationship skills in youth sport coaches. Journal of Sport Psychology. 1, 59-75. 

Smith, R., Smoll, F. & Hunt, E. (1977). A system for the behavioural assessment of athletic coaches. 

Research Quarterly, 48(2), 401-407. 

Stewart, M. and Bengier, M. (2001). An analysis of volleyball coaches’ coaching behaviour in a 

summer volleyball camp. Physical Educator, 58, 86-99. 

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative 

Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

Tharp and Gallimore (2004). What a coach can teach a teacher, 1975-2004: Reflections and 

reanalysis of John Wooden’s teaching practices. Sport Psychologist, 18, 119-37. 


Trudel, P., Cote, J. and Bernard, D. (1996) Systematic observation of youth ice hockey coaches during 

games. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 19(1), 50-53 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2009) Healthy People 2010: Understanding and 

Improving Health. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Van der Mars, H., Darst, P. and Sariscany, M. (1991). Practice behaviours of elite archers and their 

coaches. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 14, 103-112. 

Vangucci, M., Potrac, P. and Jones, R. (1997). A systematic observation of elite women’s soccer 

coaches. Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Physical Education, 1, 1-17. 

Wallen, N. E., & Fraenkel, J. R. (2001). Educational research : a guide to the process (2nd ed.). 

Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Walsh, J. (2004). Development and application of expertise in elite-level coaches. Unpublished 

Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University of Technology, Melbourne. 

Wiersma. L. and Sherman, C. (2005). Volunteer youth sport coaches’ perspectives of coaching 

education and parental codes of conduct. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 76, 324 – 

338. 

Williams, A.M., & Hodges, N.J. (2005). Practice instruction and skill acquisition: Challenging tradition. 

Journal of Sports Sciences, 23, 637-650. 

Yamaguchi, Y. & Takahashi, S. (2000). A study of sport volunteers in youth sport. (Abstract). In Sports 

Medicine Australia, Book of abstracts: 2000 Pre-Olympic Congress: International Congress on 

Sport Science, Sports Medicine and Physical Education, Brisbane Australia 7-12 September 

2000, Australia, The Congress, 2000, p.17. Retrieved May 2, 2006, from 

http://www.ausport.gov.au/fulltext/2000/preoly/abs017b.htm 


Appendix 1 

Modified Athlete Enjoyment Scale 


MODIFIED ATHLETE ENJOYMENT SCALE 

Name 

Date 

Club 

Age 

When I am at Training 

Disagree 

a lot 

Disagree 

a little 

Neither agree 

nor disagree 

Agree 

a little 

Agree 

a lot 

…it’s fun 

… I enjoy the stuff we do 

to get fitter. 

… I enjoy playing the 

games 

… I enjoy practicing 

skills. 

…I enjoy playing with my 

friends 

… I like coming to 

training. 

… I enjoy competitions 

at training 

…I am improving 

…I know what I’m meant 

to do 


Appendix 2 

Semi Structured Interview 


Junior Community Coaching - Coach Interview 

Date Code RL RU Club: 

Observer: 

Coach: 

Pre Training Questions (Record Answers Here): 

1. First of all I would like to ask you some questions about your coaching experience: 

How many years have you been coaching 1 2 3 4 >5 

What Ages have you coached 

U12 

 

13-17 

 

Do you have any coaching qualifications No Yes 

If so, what are they: Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 

Others Relevant Qualifications (i.e. teaching degree,) 

18+ 

 

Rep 

 

2. What are you planning to do today during the training session today 

Thank you, I would like to ask some more questions after the session if that is ok. 

Post Training Questions 

1. How did you think today’s session went 

a. What did you like/dislike about it 

b. How do you think it could be improved 

2. Do you think you achieved everything you set out to do during the session 

a. Why/Why not 

3. How active do you think the athlete’s were during the session Do you think you could 

accurately guess the percentage of time the students were: 

a. Relatively inactive (e.g. sitting/standing) 

b. Moderately Active (e.g. walking/jogging) 

c. Very active (e.g. training hard) 

4. Do you think you could accurately guess the percentage of time spent on the following: 

a. Players practicing skills, 

b. Playing games 

c. Fitness training 

d. Giving instructions 

e. Management 

5. What do you do to try and make sure the players have fun during practice 

6. What do you think are the main issues facing junior coaching today 

7. Why did you start coaching 

8. What do you enjoy most about coaching 

9. What do you enjoy least about coaching 

Thank you very much for your time, the research team really appreciates it. 


Appendix 3 

Coach Rating Scale 


Coach Rating Scale 

Date Code RL RU Club: 

Observer: 

Coach: 

Procedures 

After you have finished videoing the coaching session, please take some time to complete the 

following questions based on the coaching session 

Variable 

Teaching Arrangements 

Organizational skills poor 1 2 3 4 5 good 

Leadership Style authoritarian 1 2 3 4 5 laissez-faire 

Teaching method coach centred 1 2 3 4 5 player centred 

Suitability of drills for age 

group 

suitable 1 2 3 4 5 unsuitable 

Communication Skills 

Clarity of instructions unclear 1 2 3 4 5 clear 

Tone of voice & gestures negative 1 2 3 4 5 positive 

Positive feedback little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Target of positive feedback group 1 2 3 4 5 individual 

Negative feedback little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Target of negative feedback group 1 2 3 4 5 individual 

Was a humorous approach 

used 

not at all 1 2 3 4 5 mostly 

Working Methods 

Whole group little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Divided group, same task little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Divided group, different tasks little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Pairs training little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Individual practice little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Coach-Athlete Interaction 

Amount of interaction little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Acceptance of suggestions rejecting 1 2 3 4 5 acceptive 

Coach behaviour discouraging 1 2 3 4 5 encouraging 

Consistency of behaviour inconsistent 1 2 3 4 5 consistent 

Player Participation 

Intensity of performance ineffective 1 2 3 4 5 maximally effective 

Engagement in tasks not involved 1 2 3 4 5 involved 

Amount of practice time little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 

Player attentiveness insufficient 1 2 3 4 5 sufficient 

Interaction between players little 1 2 3 4 5 a lot 


Appendix 4 

Specific Rugby League Information 


Rugby League 

This section of the report contains information that relates specifically to Rugby League. The findings 

of the research, as they relate to Rugby League, are presented as per the objectives of the study. 

1. Determine the proportion of time junior coaches spend organising (i.e., managing) and 

instructing their players 

The table below gives an overview of the average amount of time Under 10 Rugby League 

coaches spend on various aspects during a typical training session. This was measured using 

the modified SOFIT instrument. 


% of Session 



(mins) 



Fitness Activity 12 6.2 

Skills Practice 43 22.4 

Game Play 22 11.4 

Other 3 1.6 

(N=43; Average session length = 52 mins; Frequency twice per week) 

The table below gives a more detailed breakdown of the type of instruction given by Under 

10 Rugby League coaches as measured by systematic video observation. 

Instructional Process 

Used 

% of Total 

Instruction Time 

Frequency of 

Instructional 

Process 

Mean Duration 

of Instructional 

Process (secs) 

Pre- Instruction 9.8 9.3 22.1 

Concurrent instruction 15.1 27.3 13.9 

Technical Explanation 3.6 3 23.1 

Corrective Feedback 8.9 17.1 11.1 

Questioning 1.5 3.2 10.6 

Positive Modelling 1.7 2.8 11.9 

Negative Modelling 0.1 0.2 1.2 



The following table gives an overview of the percentage of time Rugby League players spent 

at various levels of physical activity during an average training session. This was measured 

using the modified SOFIT instrument. 



Time (%) 

Amount of 


Lying Down 1 0.5 

Sitting 2 1.0 





Time in MVPA 80% 41.6 mins 



The following table gives an overview of the percentage of time Rugby League players spent 

on specific skills during an average training session. This was measured using the modified 

SOFIT instrument. 







(mins) 


Ball Carry 8 4.2 


Kicking 2 1.0 

Ruck and Maul (union only) n/a n/a 

Other 11 5.7 

Total Time on Skills 43% 22.4 mins 





The figure below illustrates how the perceptions of Under 10 Rugby League coaches differ 

from actual observations in regards to their players level of physical activity during an 

average training session. 

80 

70 

69 

60 

50 

51 

40 

38 

Coaches Perception (%) 

30 

Actual Observations (%) 

20 

10 

16 

19 

12 

0 


(N=21 Coaches) 



Due to the limited sample size (N=21) and the range of coaches within the sample it was not 

possible to calculate any significant differences between coaches with different levels of 

experience or qualifications. For more information on this please see the Comparisons 

Between Coaches (p.59) Error! Bookmark not defined.section of the report, where results 

are calculated for both Rugby Union and Rugby League combined. 


Rugby League Results from the Modified Athlete Enjoyment Scale 

When I am at training… Mean (5) (SD) 

… its fun 4.75 0.25 

…I enjoy the stuff we do to get fitter 4.68 0.29 

… I enjoy the games 4.88 0.18 

… I enjoy practicing skills 4.75 0.24 

… I enjoy playing with my friends 4.87 0.19 

…I enjoy coming to training 4.62 0.34 

…I enjoy competitions 4.82 0.19 

… I am improving 4.77 0.19 

… I know what I’m meant to do 4.75 0.25 

General comments about the Rugby League training session as observed by the trained researchers 

Observation % 

Warm up included 80 

Cool down included 24 

Players appeared to be enjoying themselves 77 

Players understood management and tasks 76 

Group Sizes appropriate 72 

Adequate player : equipment ratio 71 

Players rewarded for out-of-session training 31 

Coaches showed enthusiasm for coaching 84 


The table below outlines additional coaching behaviours exhibited by Under 10 Rugby 

League coaches as measured by systematic video observation. 


Used 

% of Total 


Frequency of 

Instructional 

Process 

Mean Duration 



Management / 

Organisation 

14.2 11.1 40.1 

Observation 24.7 40.1 21.7 

General feedback 1.9 4.3 14.1 

Positive feedback 4.7 16.8 9.1 

Negative feedback 0.7 1.8 7.0 

Scold 1.5 3.0 9.6 

Hustle 2.8 7.7 12.2 

Humour 0.7 1.2 7.0 

Off task/conferring with 

others 

4.6 4.4 27.2 

uncodable 3.7 2.2 36.7 


% of training session 


Humour 


Scold 

Questioning 



Hustle 


Uncodable 

Not on task 


Corrective/specific feedback 




Observation 

0.1 

0.7 

0.7 

1.5 

1.5 

1.7 

1.9 

2.8 

3.6 

3.7 

4.6 

4.7 

8.9 

9.8 

14.2 

15.1 

24.7 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 


Percentage of Rugby League coach’s behaviours during their training sessions 


Appendix 5 

Specific Rugby Union Information 


Rugby Union 

The section of the report contains information that relates specifically to Rugby Union. The findings 

of the research, as they relate to rugby union, are presented as per the objectives of the study 

1. Determine the proportion of time junior coaches spend organising (i.e., managing) and 

instructing their players 

The table below gives an overview of the average amount of time Under 10 Rugby Union 

coaches spend on various aspects during a typical training session. This was measured using 

the modified SOFIT instrument. 


% of Session 



(mins) 



Fitness Activity 5 3 

Skills Practice 45 27 

Game Play 17 10.2 

Other 5 3 

(N=27; Average session length = 60 mins; Frequency once per week) 

The table below gives a more detail breakdown of the type of instruction given by of Under 

10 Rugby Union coaches as measure by systematic video observation. 


Used 

% of Total 


Frequency of 

Instructional 

Process 

Mean Duration 



Pre- Instruction 21.2 22.4 32.9 

Concurrent instruction 12.4 21.4 17.4 

Technical Explanation 5.8 5.6 25.6 

Corrective Feedback 11 19.3 17.4 

Questioning 2.9 3.8 18.8 

Positive Modelling 3.2 4.5 17.1 

Negative Modelling 0.3 0.4 7.1 



The following table gives an overview of the percentage of time Rugby Union players spent 

at various levels of physical activity during an average training session. This was measured 

using the modified SOFIT instrument. 



Time (%) 

Amount of 


Lying Down 1 0.6 

Sitting 5 3 





Time in MVPA 84% 50.4 mins 



The following table gives an overview of the percentage of time Rugby Union players spent 

on specific skills during an average training session. This was measured using the modified 

SOFIT instrument. 







(mins) 


Ball Carry 10 6 


Kicking 1 0.6 

Ruck and Maul (Union Only) 7 4.2 

Other 6 3.6 

Total Time on Skills 45% 27 mins 





The figure below illustrates how the perceptions of Under 10 Rugby Union coaches differ 

from actual observations in regards to their players’ level of physical activity during an 

average training session. 

80 

70 

73 

60 

50 

40 

41 

46 

Coaches Perception (%) 

30 

20 

10 

20 

17 

10 

Actual Observations (%) 

0 


(N= 16 Coaches) 



Due to the limited sample size and the range of coaches within the sample it was not 

possible to calculate any significant differences between coaches with different levels of 

experience or qualifications. For more information on this please see the Comparisons 

Between Coaches (p.59) section of the report, where results are calculated for both rugby 

union and rugby league combined. 


Rugby Union Results from the Modified Athlete Enjoyment Scale 

When I am at training… Mean (5) (SD) 

… its fun 4.47 0.45 

…I enjoy the stuff we do to get fitter 4.42 0.33 

… I enjoy the games 4.78 0.26 

… I enjoy practicing skills 4.38 0.40 

… I enjoy playing with my friends 4.83 0.20 

…I enjoy coming to training 4.18 0.59 

…I enjoy competitions 4.57 0.33 

… I am improving 4.62 0.27 

… I know what I’m meant to do 4.57 0.25 

General comments about the Rugby Union training session as observed by the trained researchers 

Observation % 

Warm up included 89 

Cool down included 33 

Players appeared to be enjoying themselves 87 

Players understood management and tasks 74 

Group Sizes appropriate 79 

Adequate player : equipment ratio 84 

Players rewarded for out-of-session training 35 

Coaches showed enthusiasm for coaching 90 


The table below outlines additional coaching behaviours exhibited by Under 10 Rugby Union 

coaches as measured by systematic video observation. 


Used 

% of Total 


Frequency of 

Instructional 

Process 

Mean Duration 



Management / 

Organisation 

10.6 14.6 28.1 

Observation 5.5 10.5 18.3 

General feedback 2.0 3.4 22.5 

Positive feedback 7.7 21.0 13.0 

Negative feedback 2.7 7.8 11.4 

Scold 2.3 5.8 12.3 

Hustle 4.4 8.5 17.4 

Humour 0.5 1.5 8.1 

Not on task/conferring 

with others 

5.1 6.5 28.2 

uncodable 1.5 1.3 27 




Humour 

Uncodable 


Scold 


Questioning 


Hustle 

Not on task 

Observation 




Corrective/specific feedback 



0.3 

0.5 

1.5 

2 

2.3 

2.7 

2.9 

3.2 

4.4 

5.1 

5.5 

5.8 

7.7 

10.6 

11 

12.4 

21.2 

0 5 10 15 20 25 


Percentage of Rugby Union coach’s behaviours during their training sessions

Community Junior Sport Coaching final report - 2009

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?