Extending Validity Evidence for Multidimensional Measures of Coaching Competency
Myers, Nicholas D., Wolfe, Edward W., Maier, Kimberly S., Feltz, Deborah L., Reckase, Mark D., Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
This study extended validity evidence for multidimensional measures of coaching competency derived from the Coaching Competency Scale (CCS; Myers, Feltz, Maier, Wolfe, & Reckase, 2006) by examining use of the original rating scale structure and testing how measures related to satisfaction with the head coach within teams and between teams. Motivation, game strategy, technique, and character building comprised the dimensions of coaching competency. Data were collected from athletes (N = 585) nested within intercollegiate men's (g = 8) and women's (g = 13) soccer and women's ice hockey (g = 11) teams (G = 32). Validity concerns were observed for the original rating scale structure and the predicted positive relationship between motivation competency and satisfaction with the coach between teams. Validity evidence was offered for a condensed post hoc rating scale and the predicted relationship between motivation competency and satisfaction with the coach within teams.
Key words: multidimensional Rasch model, multilevel modeling, rating scale effectiveness, satisfaction
Horn's (2002) model of coaching effectiveness is founded on at least three assumptions (see Figure 1). First, both contextual factors and athletes' personal characteristics indirectly influence a coach's behavior through the coach's expectancies, beliefs, and goals. Second, a coach's behavior directly affects athletes' perceptions and evaluations of a coach's behavior. Third, athletes' perceptions and evaluation of a coach's behavior mediate the influence a coach's behavior has on athletes' self-perceptions and attitudes, which, in turn, directly affects athletes' motivation and performance. Because athletes' perceptions and evaluation of a coach's behavior are believed to play a critical role in coaching effectiveness, accurately assessing athletes' evaluations of key coaching competencies is important to the continued coaching improvement and to further development of coaching effectiveness models.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
There are many instruments designed to measure a coach's behavior. (1) The Coaching Behavior Assessment System (CBAS; Smith, Smoll, & Hunt, 1977), the Leadership Scale for Sports (LSS; Chelladurai & Saleh, 1978, 1980), and a Decision Style Questionnaire (DQS; Chelladurai & Arnott, 1985) are three of the most prominent. As reviewed by Horn (2002), these instruments also have been used to assess athletes' perceptions of their coach's behavior (e.g., how often does your coach use positive reinforcement with athletes) and or decision styles (e.g., what decision style would your coach employ to select a team captain). However, none of these instruments measure athletes' evaluations of their coach's behavior (e.g., how competent is your coach in teaching the skills of soccer). While each instrument has contributed to understanding coaching behavior over the last few decades, Smoll and Smith (1989) noted that, "... the ultimate effects that coaching behavior exerts are mediated by the meaning that players attribute to them" (p. 1527). The said instruments do not measure these effects.
Unlike the CBAS, the LSS and the DQS, the Coaching Evaluation Questionnaire (CEQ; Rushall & Wiznuk, 1985) and the Coaching Behavior Questionnaire (CBQ; Kenow & Williams, 1992) were designed to assess athletes' evaluative reactions to specific aspects of their coach's behavior. The CEQ allows athletes to evaluate a coach on his or her personal qualities, personal and professional relationships, organizational skills, and performance as a teacher and a coach. Although the items are suggested to measure separate constructs, scores are to be totaled across items or formed at the item level (Rushall & Wiznuk). Psychometric evidence for the CEQ appears to be limited to item-level test-retest reliability. The CEQ rarely appears in the literature.
The CBQ allows athletes to evaluate their coach's typical behavior, specifically his or her negative activation and supportiveness/emotional composure during competition against a top opponent. …