JOURNAL OF TEACHING IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION, 1985, 4, 256-270
Systematic Observation of Behaviors
of Winning High School Head Football Coaches
Alan C. Lacy
Texas Christian University
Paul W. Darst
Arizona State University
The purpose of the study was to analyze the teachinglcoachingbehaviors of winning
high school head football coaches during practice sessions. A systematic observation
instmment with 11 specifically defined behavior categories was utilized to collect data
on behaviors of 10 experienced winning coaches in the Phoenix, Arizona, metropolitan
area during the 1982 season. Each coach was observed in three phases of the season:
preseason, early season, and late season. Segments of the observed practices were
classified as warm-up, group, team, or conditioning. Analysis of the data showed that
the total rate per minute (RPM) for behaviors was higher in preseason than in either
of the other two phases. Four of the 11 defined behavior categories (praise, scold,
instruction, positive modeling) had significant differences (.05 level) in RPM between
the preseason and the other two phases of the season. No significant differences were
found between the early season and the late season phases. The group segment was
used most in the preseason, while the team segment was used more of the time in the
early season and late season. A lower RPM during the warm-up and conditioning
segments indicated less involvement by the head coaches than in the group and team
segments of practice.
It would seem beneficial to teachers and coaches if systematic observational research were to be focused on the behaviors of winning coaches of different sports at various
levels of athletic competition (youth sports, high school, college, etc.). The use of systematic
observation instruments enables researchers to report objective findings on the behavior
of coaches. Completed research using systematic observation in athletic/coaching environments is not widespread. However, several studies have been completed using behavior
categories similar to the coaching behaviors defined and observed in this study.
Tharp and Gallimore (1976) devised a 10-category system for systematic observation in a teachinglcoaching setting. This system was designed to observe John Wooden,
basketball coach at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), during 15 practice sessions spread over the final two-thirds of the 1974-1975 season. The investigators
reported that more than half of Wooden's behavior was in the instruction category. Another
Request reprints from Alan C. Lacy, Dept. of Kinesiological Studies, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX 76219.
BEHAVIORS OF WIN'NING FOOTBALL COACHES
257
interesting finding was that the number of praises (6.9% of all behaviors) was almost equal
to the number of scolds (6.6% of all behaviors).
Williams (1978) employed a modified replication of the Tharp and Gallimore
instrument to systematically observe a successful high school head basketball coach.
Williams observed practices twice a week throughout the season and gathered data using
event-recording procedures. The results were compared to those of Tharp and Gallimore's
study on Wooden. The findings indicated that the high school coach emphasized instruction, as did Wooden, but used praise (25% of all behaviors) much more frequently than
Wooden did. Williams suggested that the differences in maturity, skill level, and motivation of players at the high school and college levels could possibly explain this disparity
in the use of praise.
Langsdorf (1979) used an observation instrument based on the Tharp and Gallimore
(1976) research to objectively observe the coaching behavior of Frank Kush, head football coach at Arizona State University, during 18 spring practice sessions. Findings of
this research showed the greatest percentage of behavior for Kush occurred in the instruction category, followed by the hustle and scoldlreinstruction categories. Praise was the
fourth most frequently displayed behavior and was almost equal to the percentage of the
scold category. A majority of scold statements were followed by behaviors of an instructive nature.
Behaviors were analyzed according to the segment of practice in which they occurred. Kush's behaviors varied according to the segment of practice. The conditioning
segment was high in the hustle category, the individual work segment was high in the
praise category, and the scrimmage segment was high in the scold category.
Another facet of this study was the comparison of behavior percentages of each
category for Kush and Wooden. A Spearman rho rank-order correlation coefficient of 3 5 ,
significant at the .O1 level of confidence, showed close similarities in the behaviors of
the two coaches. Kush, however, had higher percentages in both the praise and scold
categories, even though both coaches utilized the two categories in almost a one-to-one
ratio. Wooden's percentage in the instruction category exceeded Kush's by approximately 15%.
A data base is slowly emerging as findings are reported from research using
systematic observation in the athleticlcoaching environment. This can be a beginning to
the development of a more complete understanding of the science of coaching. The purpose of the study was to analyze the teachinglcoaching behaviors of winning high school
head football coaches during practice sessions by using an objective method of systematic
observation.
Methods
Subjects
The subjects for this study were 10 high school head football coaches in AAA
classification (mininum 1,600 pupil enrollment) schools in the Phoenix, Arizona,
metropolitan area. Each subject was required to have at least 4 years' experience as a
head football coach at the varsity high school level and .600 or higher career winning
percentage. Collectively, these coaches had compiled a 735-302-21 record in 98 seasons
for a winning percentage of .709.
258
LACY AND DARST
Phases of the Season
For purposes of the study, the season was divided into three phases. The preseason
phase was August 23 through September 3, the early season phase was September 13 through
October 4, the late season phase was October 18 through November 10. Each coach was
observed once in each phase. Thus, each coach was observed three times with behaviors
being recorded over a total of 30 practice sessions for the 10 subjects.
During the early and late season phases, practices were observed on Monday,
Tuesday, or Wednesday. Thursday and Saturday practices were not observed because normally they were light practices before and after the Friday night game. None of the coaches
was observed on the same day in early and late season phases. There was a five-game
interval between observations for each coach in these two phases. The day of observation
in the preseason was not considered important, since no games were scheduled during
this phase.
Segments of the Practice Sessions
In order to observe and analyze the behaviors of the head coach during specific
parts of the workout, practice segments for this study were described as follows:
1. Warm-up: Typically, this was the first segment of a practice session designed
to prepare the athletes for strenuous activity. It could include stretching,
calisthenics, isometric exercises designed to strengthen the musculature of the
neck, and footworldagility drills.
2. Group: This segment involved separating the team into combinations of positions
to work on specific skills or strategies.
3. Team: This segment incorporated a gamelike situation in which all 11 members
of the offensive, defensive, or kicking teams worked together. Usually this portion of practice involved the starters (first team) working against nonstarting teammates to simulate game conditions.
4. Conditioning: This was a short portion or practice consisting of various forms
of running to improve muscular and cardiovascular endurance. Some teams included short bursts of push-ups, sit-ups, and so forth, in their conditioning.
Behavior Categories
Eleven specific categories of coaching behavior were included in this systematic
observation system modified from Tharp and Gallimore (1976). These behavior categories
were defined as follows:
when
e speaking directly
1. Use ofjrst name: Using the first name or ~ ~ k I I a m
to a player, for example, "Bill, nice block!" or "That was a poor tackle, Tank."
2. Praise: Verbal compliments or statements of acceptance, such as "Nice going,
gang" or "Great catch."
3. Scold: Verbal statements of displeasure such as "That was a terrible effort!" or
"You looked awful on that play."
4. Instruction: Verbal statements to the players referring to fundamentals or
strategies of the game, which can come in the form of questioning (e.g., "Who
do you block on 44 dive?"), corrective feedback (e.g., "You didn't keep your
BEHAVIORS OF WINNING FOOTBALL COACHES
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
259
feet moving on that block"), direct statements (e.g., "Block down on the tackle
of 26 blast"), or statements of strategy (e.g., "Against Mesa High we must
rush their passer").
Hwtle: Verbal statements intended to intensify the efforts of the players, such
as "Be quick, be quick" or "Push yourself, push yourself."
Nonverbal reward: Nonverbal compliments or signs of acceptance such as a
smile or a pat on the back.
Nonverbalpunishment: Nonverbal behaviors of displeasure such as kicking the
ground, throwing a clipboard, or slapping a player's helmet.
Positive modeling: A demonstration of correct performance of a skill or playing
technique.
Negative modeling: A demonstration of incorrect performance of a skill or
playing technique.
Management: Verbal statements related to organizational details of practice
session not referring to strategies or fundamentals of the game; verbal interaction with assistant coaches (e.g., "Give me three lines facing me on the goal
line" or "Coach, is your group ready for team offense?").
Other: Any behavior that cannot be seen or heard clearly or that does not
fall into the above categories such as checking injuries, joking with players,
or talking with bystanders.
Data Collection Procedures
The procedure used for data collection in this investigation is known as event
recording, which is a cumulative record of the number of discrete events occurring within
a specified time (Siedentop, 1976). Each time a specified predefined behavior was observed,
that behavior was recorded on the coding sheet. Each practice segment observed was timed
to the nearest minute for the purpose of determining the rate per minute (RPM)of each
behavior category occurring during that particular part of the workout.
Checks for interobserver agreement (IOA) were made in the first week of each
phase of the season to ensure the accuracy of the coding procedures of the investigator.
During IOA checks the independent observer and the investigator were situated far enough
apart so that neither could influence the behavior being recorded by the other. The percentage
of IOA agreement was determined by dividing the agreements by the sum of the agreements
and disagreements and then multiplying by 100. In observational studies, two independent observers must be able to obtain 85 % agreement on what they observe and record
(Siedentop, 1976).
Data Analysis
A Fortran computer program was used to perform the quantitative analysis of the
observed coaching behaviors. Analysis of variance with repeated measures pixon & Brown,
1977) was used to statistically determine if significant differences existed at the .05 level
of confidence between the means of the various coaching behavior categories in the different phases of the season.
The per-comparison alpha level was adjusted to correct for an inflated experimentwide alpha error rate that would occur with multiple dependent variables (Games, 1971).
With those means indicating a significant difference at the adjusted alpha level, a post
hoc Tukey's test (Bartz, 1981) was administered to determine the exact nature of the dif-
LACY AND DARST
260
ferences between phase. The numbers of behaviors were totaled for each category of
coaching behavior in order to determine the percentage and RPM of total behaviors exhibited for the group of coaches for each practice segment and for each phase of the season.
By definition, the use-of-first-name behavior always occurred in conjunction with
another behavior. The number of occurrences of first name use was subtracted from the
total number of behaviors before percentages of each of the other behavior categories were
calculated. If this were not done, the percentages of each category would decrease and
the true percentages would be distorted. The percentage of behaviors accompanied by the
use of first name should be considered separately from the percentages calculated in the
other behavior categories.
Results
The interobserver agreement percentage for the preseason check was 93 % ,for the
early season check it was 95.3%, for the late season check it was 98.4%, and for the
total season it was 96.4%. These IOA percentages are in excess of the required 85 % as
determined by Siedentop (1976).
A summary of each behavior category for each phase of the season is shown in
Table 1. Season totals for each behavior are also included. The number of behaviors, rates
per minute, and percentages in the table represent overall behaviors for the group of subjects.
More behaviors were recorded in the preseason phase than in either of the other
two phases. This plus the fact there were fewer minutes of observation in the preseason
Table 1
Comparison of Behaviors by Phases
Behavior
category
Total
RPM
010
Total
Preseason
First name
Praise
Scold
Instruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
.70
.60
.32
1.88
.72
.02
.01
.15
.05
.77
.09
RPM
Early season
630
380
158
1,837
670
8
10
91
29
767
67
.
a
.50
.30
.13
1.46
.53
.06
.08
.07
.02
.61
.05
010
BEHAVIORS OF WINNING FOOTBALL COACHES
261
Table 1 (cont.)
Behavior
category
Total
First name
Praise
Scold
Instruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
548
390
163
1,445
666
31
21
62
24
613
73
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
4,036
1,099
RPM
Late season
.50
.36
.15
1.32
.61
.03
.02
.06
.02
.56
.07
Oh
15.7*
11.2
4.7
41.4
19.1
.9
.6
1.8
.7
17.6
2.1
Total
1,955
1,434
669
5,356
2,134
60
41
323
110
2,229
239
RPM
Entire season
.56
.41
.19
1.55
.62
.02
.01
.09
.03
.64
.07
010
15.5'
11.4
5.3
42.5
16.9
.5
.3
2.5
.9
17.7
1.9
14,550
3,464
3.67
4.20
*Denotes percentage of behaviors accompanied by use of first name.
caused the RPM to be much higher than for the early and late season phases. The total
RPM in the preseason was 5.31, as compared to 3.70 in the early season and 3.67 in the
late season. Further, every behavior category except nonverbal punishment and nonverbal reward showed a higher RPM in the preseason than in either of the other two phases.
Because of a lower number of total behaviors in the early and late season phases, the behavior percentages showed no such trend.
None of the 11 mean percentages of behavior was found to differ significantly
between phases. However, 4 of the 11 mean RPMs proved to be significantly different
between phases. They were the behavior categories of praise, scold, instruction, and positive modeling. In each of the four behaviors a significant difference occurred at the .05
level of confidencebetween the preseason phase and both the early and late season phases.
There was no significant difference in any of the four behaviors between the early and
late season phases. These findings are illustrated by Figures 1 through 4.
To obtain a more complete description of the coaching behaviors of the group of
subjects, the data were analyzed by comparing each segment of the practice session (warmup, group, team, conditioning) across the phases of the season. The data are illustrated
in Tables 2-5.
A comparison of segments for the total season is illustrated in Table 6. Most
behaviors exhibited throughout the season occurred in either the group segment or the
team segment, the group segment accounting for 42.4% of total behaviors and the team
segment totaling 45.5 %. Seven percent of total behavior exhibited occurred in the warmup segment, while conditioning accounted for 5%. The total RPM was higher in the group
segment, 5.48, than in any other segment. The team segment RPM was 3.78, followed
by the warm-up RPM of 3.05 and conditioning RPM at 2.93.
- p l o 3 30
~ asn JOJ saseqd uaaMjaq sneam y sa3uaiafia
-as!=% 30 asn JOJ saseqd uaadljaq msam m sa3uaiama
-
amZ!&
- 1 amZ!a
BEHAVIORS OF WINNING FOOTBALL COACHES
INSTRUCTION
(RPM)
Mean 2 SEM
Preseason
Figure 3
Early Season
Late Season
- Differences in means between phases for use of Instruction.
POSITIVE
MODELING
WPM)
Mean i SEM
Preseason
Figure 4
Early Season
Late Season
- Differences in means between phases for use of Positive Modeling.
LACY AND DARST
Table 2
Comparison of Behaviors in Warm-up Segments by Phases
Behavior
category
Total
RPM
Yo
Total
Preseason
First name
Praise
Scold
lnstruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
.303
.270
.I23
1.270
1.139
.016
RPM
Early season
31
9
5
62
113
0
0
5
1
66
16
.272
,079
,044
549
.991
-
.049
.009
.579
.I40
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
010 behaviors
of phase
Late season
First name
Praise
Scold
lnstruction
, Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
% behaviors
of phase
*See note, Table 1.
.235
.I33
.082
.357
.765
.082
-
.01
.316
.204
Entire season
91
55
28
252
327
10
0
13
2
169
72
.272
.I65
.084
.755
.979
.03
-
,039
.006
506
.216
Oh
BEHAVIORS OF WINNING FOOTBALL COACHES
Table 3
Comparison of Behaviors in Group Segments by Phases
Behavior
category
Total
First name
Praise
Scold
lnstruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
RPM
Preseason
.95
.96
.40
2.42
.72
.01
.02
.28
.ll
.91
.06
Yo
Total
230
193
47
759
203
3
3
57
23
258
24
RPM
Early season
.55
.46
.ll
1.82
.49
.O1
.01
.14
.06
.62
.06
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
O
h behaviors
of phase
First name
Praise
Scold
Instruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
O
h behaviors
" See note, Table 1.
Late season
.80
.65
.15
1.82
.70
.01
.02
.ll
.04
.72
.06
861
791
263
2,316
706
11
15
210
81
854
65
Entire season
.76
.70
.23
2.06
.63
.O1
.01
.19
.07
.76
.06
YO
LACY AND DARST
Table 4
Comparison of Behaviors in Team Segments by Phases
Behavior
category
Total
First name
Praise
Scold
lnstruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
RPM
010
Preseason
.63
.41
.33
1.79
.54
.03
.O1
.08
.01
.71
.05
15.9'
10.4
8.3
45.1
13.7
.8
.2
2.1
.3
17.9
1.1
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
010 behaviors
of phase
First name
Praise
Scold
Instruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
010 behaviors
of phase
*See note, Table 1.
Total
RPM
347
167
103
996
266
4
7
29
5
383
20
Early season
.54
.26
.16
1.54
.41
.01
.01
.05
.01
.59
.03
915
540
360
2,717
785
38
26
98
26
1,046
69
Entire season
.52
.31
.21
1.55
.45
.02
.O1
.06
.01
.60
.04
34.8
Late season
.44
.29
.17
1.41
.42
.03
.02
.05
.02
.53
.04
2,254
657
14.8*
9.7
5.6
47.1
14.2
1.O
.8
1.6
.8
17.7
1.5
010
267
BEHAVIORS OF WINNING FOOTBALL COACHES
Table 5
Comparison of Behaviors in Conditioning Segments by Phases
Behavior
category
Total
First name
Praise
Scold
lnstruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
% behaviors
of phase
First name
Praise
Scold
Instruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
% behaviors
of phase
*See note, Table 1.
RPM
Preseason
.40
.18
.08
.36
1.08
0
0
.O1
.01
.58
.18
010
Total
RPM
Early season
.29
.14
.04
.26
1.14
.O1
0
0
0
.78
.09
2.89
Late season
.35
.24
.09
.23
1.52
0
0
.O1
0
.57
.ll
3.13
Entire season
.35
.19
.07
.28
1.24
.01
0
.O1
.01
.63
.13
Yo
LACY AND DARST
Table 6
Comparison of Behaviors by Segments for Total Season
Behavior
category
Total
RPM
Warm-up
First name
Praise
Scold
Instruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
.27
.I6
.08
.75
.98
.03
-
.04
.01
.51
.22
YO
Total
RPM
010
Group
.76
.70
.23
2.06
.63
.O1
.01
.19
.07
.76
.06
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
010 behaviors
of season
Team
First name
Praise
Scold
Instruction
Hustle
N-V reward
N-V punish.
Pos. model.
Neg. model.
Management
Other
.52
.31
.21
1.55
.45
.02
.01
.06
.O1
.60
.04
Conditioning
.35
.19
.07
.28
1.24
.01
-
.01
.01
.63
.13
Total
behaviors
minutes
RPM
% behaviors
of season
Figuresfor the entire group of segments are identical to those listed in Table 1 for the entire
season.
*See note, Table 1.
BEHAVIORS OF WINNING FOOTBALL COACHES
269
The instruction category dominated the group and team segments and accounted
for 42.5% of all behaviors during the season. The hustle category was most widely used
in both the warm-up and conditioning segments. Hustle ranked third in RPM and percentage behind the management category during the total season.
Discussion
The total rate per minute for behaviors was higher in the preseason (5.31) than
in either the early (3.70) or late season (3.67) phases. The behavior categories of praise,
scold, instruction, and positive modeling were significantly different between phases. Results
of a Tukey test showed the preseason RPM for each of the four categories was significantly higher than the other two phases. There were no significant differences between the
early and late season phases.
This indicates a more intense teaching style by coaches in the first part of the
year as they concentrate on basic fundamentals and individual skills. This is further reinforced by the fact that the group segment was used most extensively in the preseason.
During the early and late season, the team segment was employed more frequently than
other segments. In these parts of the season, coaches turn their attention to preparing for
the next opponent and emphasizing team strategies.
The lower RPM of head coaches during the warm-up and conditioning segments
of practice showed a less active involvement during these short portions of practice. Typically, assistant coaches and team leaders led these segments. The hustle behavior category
was the most highly observed behavior among the head coaches during these two segments.
Thus, the major function of the subjects was to encourage better effort in these segments.
Praise was used more often in the group segment (.70 RPM) than other segments,
as was the scold category (.23 RPM).Across the entire season, praise was used over twice
as much as scold. This reinforces the popular opinion that more can be accomplished by
the coach using positive rather than negative interactions (Cratty, 1973; Singer, 1972;
Tutko & Richards, 1971; Wilson, Buzzell, & Jensen, 1975).
The instruction category was used more than twice as often as any other behavior
in every phase of the season. Across the entire season it dominated the group and team
segments. These findings support the idea that informational feedback is a prerequisite
for effective teachinglcoaching. The dominant nature of the instruction category is not
surprising, given that other observational studies using similar categories (Langsdorf, 1979;
Tharp & Gallimore, 1976; Williams, 1978) have reported comparable results.
Since it is apparent that the instruction behavior category is used extensively, it
should be subdivided into more specific categories for further examination. Suggested
categories (Lacy & Darst, 1984) are manual manipulation, questioning, preinstruction,
concurrent instruction, and postinstruction. Coaches should utilize observational instruments
to aid in objective self-evaluation of individual behaviors. By becoming aware of their
behavioral habits, they can possibly modify their behaviors to become more effective
coacheslteachers.
Additional observational research of this nature can further enhance understanding
of the science of teaching and coaching. Recommendations for further study would be
270
LACY AND DARST
to complete investigations focusing on groups of coaches at various levels of competition
involved in individual as well as team sports. Comparison of behaviors of winning and
losing coaches would also be of value.
References
Bartz, A.E. (1981). Basic statistical concepts (2nd ed.). Minneapolis: Burgess.
Cratty, B.J. (1973). Psychology in contemporary sport. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Dixon, W.J., & Brown, M.D. (Eds.) (1977). Biomedical computer programs P-series. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Games, P.A. (1971). Multiple comparison of means. American Educational Research J o u m l , 8 ,
531-565.
Lacy, A.C., & Darst, P.D. (1984). The evaluation of a systematic observation instrument. Journal
of Teaching in Physical Education, 3(3), 59-66.
Langsdorf, E.V. (1979). A systematic observation of football coaching behavior in a major university environment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University.
Siedentop, D. (1976). Developing teaching skills in physical education. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Singer, R.N. (1972). Coaching, athletics, and psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Tharp, R.G., & Gallimore, R. (1976). What a coach can teach a teacher. Psychology Today, 9(8),
75-78.
Tutko, T.A., & Richards, J.W. (1971). Psychology of coaching. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Williams, J.K. (1978). A behavioral analysis of a successful high school basketball coach. Unpublished master's thesis, Arizona State University.
Wilson, S., Buzzell, N., & Jensen, M. (1975). Observational research: A practical tool. Ihe Physical
Educator, 32(2), 90-93.