Abstract
This research analyzed sources of knowledge used by Spanish coaches according to competition level, gender, and professional experience. It provides valuable insight regarding the influence of demographic factors on the knowledge acquisition of coaches in a sub-group of the population (Spanish coaches) for which little is known. Participants were 675 coaches of different team and individual sports. Data were collected through the use of a standardized validated questionnaire. Results indicated that coaches in Spain subscribe to informal knowledge acquisition methods more than formal and non-formal ones. The sources of knowledge most used were an exchange of knowledge with other professionals, observation of other coaches, and previous athletic experience. The sources of knowledge least used were reading books or magazines, and conducting research. Additionally, it was found that coach demographics were associated with differences in the priority given to specific sources of knowledge. Consequently, commonly utilized formal knowledge translation approaches may need to be reconsidered.
Introduction
In the world of sport, there is clearly a strong belief regarding the inherent value of research related to coaches and their knowledge acquisition as a means to develop professional practice. This importance of understanding how coaches learn and thereby improve their training is evident in the considerable amount of research that has been published in the past decade about coaches’ sources of knowledge,1–12 and this area of research continues to grow.13–22 A major reason for the growth of such research has been thanks to findings that suggested current formal coach training programs do not adequately prepare coaches to meet the learning needs required by their discipline,2,5,23 and coaches need to develop a wide range of knowledge and skills to adapt to environmental conditions.3,11,24–26
Studies have suggested that coaches need access to different educational opportunities including formal, non-formal, and informal, to facilitate learning and subsequent development as a coach.1–6,9,27 Evidence has been found to support these formal, non-formal and informal learning situations in many studies completed with higher-level coaches.7,9,15,25 As a result, it appears as though development as a coach can come from learning in a multitude of ways that involve various sources of knowledge. These include educational programs, previous coaching experiences, previous athletic experience, observation of other coaches, mentors, exchange with other coaches, family and friends, personal reflection, external consultants, previous occupations, self-learning through reading books, magazines, technological resources, or researching.2,5,6,11,24,28,29 Several authors have argued that coaches have different needs according to the context in which they work.6,12,20,30 In fact, there are essential differences between training contexts related to the competitive level and desired results.6,30 The objectives as well as the skills and knowledge demands are different according to the form of sport coaching (i.e. participation coaching versus performance coaching) 26 and according to the competitive level of athletes. 30
In Spain, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports 31 classifies different forms of sport participation as follows: sports promotion (similar to participation coaching) and high-level sport (similar to performance coaching). The main objectives of sports promotion are leisure time fun, personal growth, teaching the values of cooperation and teamwork, and leading participants towards a healthier and harmonious physical development. These activities are mainly promoted by the school (primary and secondary), by municipalities, or by sports clubs. Development of coaches at the sport promotion level can follow an immense variety of training models and there are even coaches at this level who have no formal coach training.14,29,32 Additionally, it is not uncommon for sport promotion level coaches to coach several sports, and the age of the coaches at this level is younger because the occupation is not as stable. 33 Alternatively, high-level sports are characterized by higher technical and scientific requirements and they function at the national and international levels (i.e. representing their states in national competition or their country in international competition). The development of high-level sport is primarily the responsibility of the Spanish sports federations and is funded primarily by the State. These coaches are required to have formal coach training, tend to be more specialized and they are, on average, older than their sport promotion level counterparts.34,35 In close association to the level of competition at which coaches work is also the issue of coaches’ overall level of experience. This also needs to be considered when examining sources of learning among coaches because there is no guarantee that coaches of the highest level athletes are the most experienced. According to existing research on coaches’ professional experience, a variety of studies have suggested that experienced and inexperienced coaches can have extremely different ways of learning.1,11,14,16,36 That said, it has been suggested that it would be interesting for researchers to seek information on the knowledge base and subsequent practical application for different levels of coaches. 13 Furthermore, it has been suggested that more research is needed to understand the developmental stages between inexperienced coaches and exceedingly experienced ones, especially in order to make the process more explicit and self-determined. 13
It has also been suggested that gender is an emerging variable that should be considered with relation to this topic of how coaches learn. 12 As Trudel and Gilbert, 23 Kerr and Marshall, 37 and Callary et al. 38 indicated, there is a need for research on learning situations of female coaches because there is a paucity of empirical research in this population. Callary and colleagues 38 analyzed the learning situations of female coaches across different sports and encouraged a need for a greater understanding with respect to why and how these learning situations influence the diverse experiences of female coaches. Similarly, Carter and Bloom 9 argued that it would be interesting to explore how female coaches with no previous experience as athletes have overcome barriers and frustrations. In Spain, there are a variety of studies that have provided evidence for a low percentage of women working in sports training, 33 indicating that it is a male-dominated environment. However, the number of females in sports training in Spain has been increasing, which shows it is an important source of female employment.34,45 Therefore, the existing literature would appear to justify a need to also know the learning paths of female coaches. The majority of these studies have been conducted in the closely tied English-speaking countries of Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Consequently, there is a need to examine this topic outside these countries to provide a more global understanding.
In Spain, there has been minimal research focusing on coaches’ sources of knowledge, and the research that has been conducted has been in specific sports, such as basketball, 39 handball, 14 and football. 40 These studies have suggested that it is necessary to reflect and rethink the training of coaches in the sports analyzed, because the coaches acquire their professional knowledge through different methods, beyond formal education. For example, in the study Jimenez et al. 39 conducted with basketball coaches, it was found that the coaches valued formal education less than informal education. Furthermore, the study by Abad et al. 40 indicated that football coaches report regularly attending formal courses and seminars intended to enhance professional practice, but that these formal education strategies are of minimal interest and these coaches prefer the exchange of views and experiences with other coaches. In the case of handball coaches, 14 it was found that knowledge used in the development of coaching duties came mainly from initial formal training, followed by experiences as an athlete, and finally professional experience. Additionally, this study indicated that handball coaches with greater amounts of experience reported informal training through networking with other coaches as being an extremely valuable source of knowledge. Although the abovementioned studies have provided some interesting preliminary insights into the learning preferences and activities of coaches from particular sports (i.e. basketball, handball, and football), there is little specific knowledge about coaches outside of these sports and how their demographics shape their learning habits (i.e. competition levels, professional experience, and gender).
At the present time, changes to the training component of the National Coaching Certification program in Spain are undergoing an approval process. The reason for these changes is that in the past coach training depended solely on the sports federations and now the training is being integrated into the educational vocational programs of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport. Therefore, the current training of coaches in some sports is regulated. In others, regulations are being developed and some sports have yet to start this process. In the end, it is hoped that this transition will improve the quality of coach training through expanding the curriculum, qualifications, material resources, and facilities of these programs. 41 However, despite the enforcement of some requirements for certification to work as a coach (National Coaching Certification), different studies have shown that, in Spain, coaches can have all sorts of different documented sports qualifications and that there are many coaches working who have no documented sports qualifications. 41
Therefore, the purpose of this study was to provide a broader scope by analyzing the actual sources of knowledge most used by people who work as coaches in a wide variety of the sports being played in Spain; with one of the key objectives being to investigate how different demographic variables (i.e. different competition levels of teams or athletes that coaches work with; years of coach professional experience; and coach gender) are associated with the sources of knowledge used by coaches. This will not only add to the depth of existing literature but it will also contribute to a greater understanding of the learning needs of Spanish coaches.
Method
Participants
Participants in this study were 675 coaches working in Spain of whom 593 were men (88%) and 82 were women (12%). 33 According to existing research,34,35 these percentages are an accurate reflection of the overall gender distribution among coaches in Spain. The participants’ ages ranged from 17 to 68 years with a mean age of 32.94 (SD = 10.58), and based on arguments made by Abraham et al. 3 and Mesquita et al., 11 coaches in the study were classified as either less experienced (1 to 9 years of experience: n = 418, 61.9%) or more experienced (more than 10 years of experience: n = 257, 38.1%). Educationally, the sample was composed of 243 (36%) coaches with the highest level of education completed being a university degree, 211 (31.2%) who completed vocational programs, 201 (29.8%) who completed secondary school, and 20 (3%) with the highest level of education completed being primary school or less. In addition, the sample was made up of coaches representing three different levels of competition: state level (e.g. school competition and regional competition) (n = 625); national level (e.g. national sport federation competition) (n = 142); and international level (e.g. international sport federation competition) (n = 40).
Sport coaches analyzed in the study.
Instrument
This study utilized the previously validated 43 PROAFIDE standardized questionnaire. This questionnaire analyzes the professional situation and functions of people working in physical activity and sport in Spain. The specific version of the questionnaire used in the present study was an adaptation and extension of a previous questionnaire developed by Campos-Izquierdo 34 and has been used in various research publications and doctoral theses.35,44,45 Expert opinion provided by 16 independent experts, a discussion group composed of national and international experts, as well as a pilot study utilizing the questionnaire, were all methods used to ensure content validity. The final version of the questionnaire consisted of 57 closed questions. To address the objectives of the present research study, only the items related to sources of knowledge to develop professional activity were utilized. In total, nine items adapted to fit the Spanish context were analyzed: previous athletic experience; formal education; training courses outside the formal system; observation of other coaches; exchange with other professionals; reading books; technological resources and internet; and researching. These nine potential sources of knowledge were selected based on their identification in previous literature.2,6,11 Although previous coaching experiences have often been cited as an important source of knowledge in existing research, we opted not to include knowledge gained from previous coaching experience. This was due to the closed format of the items in the questionnaire, and the consequential lack of clarity with regards to how the coaches from the various regions of Spain would understand coaching experience as a source of knowledge. Specifically, we had concerns regarding whether this sample of coaches would view coaching experience as a conscious effort of reflection that provides knowledge relevant to constant improvement and training, or if coaches would simply consider coaching experience as the time they have remained in their profession.
Participants rated each item based on the frequency with which they used that source of knowledge to improve their professional practice. Each item was rated using a 5-point Likert scale where 1 = never; 2 = very seldom; 3 = sometimes; 4 = almost always; 5 = always. The interaction of this item was studied in relation to closed questions that collected specific demographic data (i.e. level of competition, gender, and professional experience). The reliability index obtained through the calculation of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (alpha = 0.732) indicated an acceptable internal consistency for the questionnaire. 46
Procedure
To complete this descriptive study, the researchers used a random sample of participants. 47 The research was approved by the Ethical Commission of Polythecnic University of Madrid. The interviews were conducted by 19 interviewers who were primarily university graduates with degrees in Science of Physical Activity and Sport. All interviewers completed an interviewer training seminar led by the principal researcher at the Polytechnic University of Madrid. In this training seminar, they were provided with detailed explanations of the procedures to be followed for collecting information, strategies for effective interviewing, and given the opportunity to conduct mock interviews. Additionally, each of the questionnaire items was discussed in depth and the interviewers were given ample opportunity to ask questions of the principal researcher and prepare.
To select coaches, probabilistic multi-stage sampling 48 was used. The groups were stratified by region, province, municipality, sports facility, and subject to be interviewed. The interviewer visited the sports facility (i.e. schools, multi-sport facilities, single sport facilities, pools), identified coaches and selected randomly among the coaches available to answer the questionnaire. All coaches were then interviewed in their work setting (before or after training sessions or games). Before the start of the interviews, the coaches were given full details about the nature of the study. In addition, they were informed that confidentiality and anonymity were assured. Following this, participants completed the study questionnaires through an oral interview with one of the interviewers, as is common practice for questionnaires in these types of studies in Spain. The face to face nature of the data collection provided the participants an opportunity to ask any questions that arose with regards to the questionnaires or the study in general. The time to fill in the questionnaires ranged from 12 to 17 min.
Data analysis
Data were recorded, entered into a computer, and analyzed using a univariate and bivariate descriptive analysis as well as an inferential analysis with Crosstabs Commands that included the Pearson’s Chi-square value. All the statistical analyses were done using the statistical software package SPSS 19.0. Significance levels were set at p < 0.05.
Results
Overall use of various sources
Sources of knowledge most used by coaches for the development of their professional activity.
Sources of knowledge most used by coaches for the development of their professional activity.
Level of competition
Coaches who work at the higher levels of competition, most frequently indicated previous athletic experience in regards to their sources of knowledge. Specifically, coaches who are working with athletes competing at the national and international level always or almost always used previous experience as an athlete with percentages of 84.5% and 85%, respectively (X2 = 3.455; p > .05). Exchange of knowledge with other professionals was a close second for these coaches (84.6% and 75%, respectively) (X2 = 21.313; p < .05) followed by observation of other coaches (81% and 72.5%, respectively) (X2 = 12.210; p < .05). In comparison, coaches at state level competition place previous athletic experience in second place with 80.5% after exchange with other professionals (82.1%), and similar to their higher level counterparts observation of other coaches (72.8%) rounds out the top three sources of knowledge.
Sources of knowledge used by most coaches for the development of their professional activities by level of competition.
Significant group differences by level of competition (p < .05).
Significant group differences by level of competition (p < .01).
Gender
With regards to gender, the results demonstrated that male coaches in the study most frequently indicated always or almost always using exchange with other professionals (81.8%) as a source of knowledge (X2 = 7.380; p > .05). However, almost the exact same frequency was reported for previous experience as an athlete (81.5%) (X2 = 4.350; p > .05). Observation of other coaches was rated as the third highest percentage of always or almost always among the male coaches in the study (72.1%) (X2 = 3.883; p > .05). Female coaches, on the other hand, give different priority to these three main sources, using first observation of other coaches (81.7%), second exchange with other professionals (80.4%), and third place previous experience as an athlete (75.6%).
Sources of knowledge used by most coaches for the development of their professional activity by gender.
Significant group differences by gender (p < .01).
Significant group differences by gender (p < .05).
Professional experience
With respect to the years of professional experience, coaches with less than 10 years of experience, most frequently suggested that they always or almost always used experience as an athlete as a source of knowledge (81.3%) (X2 = 1.698; p > .05). The second source most commonly used (almost equal to that of experience as an athlete) was exchanged with other professionals (81.1%) (X2 = 3.319; p > .05). Coaches with 10 or more years of experience were found to provide similar high ratings for these to variables with regards to frequency of use, but they were the opposite of their less experienced counterparts in that they were more likely to always or almost always exchange with other professionals (82.5%) as a source of knowledge in comparison to (79.8%) for previous experience as an athlete. Observation of other coaches was the third most used source for both groups of coaches, with percentages of 73% for coaches with less than 10 years experience and 73.9% in the case of coaches with 10 or more years of experience (X2 = 5.675; p > .05).
Some interesting differences were visible between the more experienced and less experienced coaches in regards to formal education and reading books as sources of knowledge. Exactly half of the coaches with less than 10 years of coaching experience indicated never or very seldomly using formal education as a source of knowledge (X2 = 15.698; p < .05). Furthermore, they were almost 13% more likely than their more experienced counterparts to indicate never using formal education as a source of knowledge. A similar disparity was found with regards to never using books as a source of information. Just over a third (35.6%) of coaches with less than 10 years experience provided this answer, in comparison to just 21.8% of the coaches with 10 or more years of experience (X2 = 17.958; p < .05).
Sources of knowledge used by most coaches for the development of their professional activity by professional experience.
Significant group differences by professional experience (p < .01).
Significant group differences by professional experience (p < .05).
Discussion
The main sources of knowledge
The results of this study obtained from the general descriptive analyses, and in all the specifically analyzed variables (i.e. competition level, gender, years of professional experience), indicated that the knowledge sources used most frequently by all coaches to develop their professional activity (over 70% between always and almost always) were the exchange of knowledge with other professionals, previous experience as an athlete and observation of other professionals. These findings lend some support to the findings of other studies in which it has been suggested that informal training is the preferred method of coaches when it comes to learning, in addition to professional experience.5,6,24,30,39 Furthermore, it is noteworthy that of these informal methods of gaining knowledge, most coaches indicated that interactions with other professionals were their most commonly accessed source of knowledge. Various studies have shown that interaction with other coaches is a very important source of knowledge acquisition for coaches of all levels.6,7,9,11,12,15,21–24,40,49,50 Thus, it appears as though coaches in Spain are no different.
Culver and Trudel, 51 Gilbert et al., 52 as well as Nash and Sproule 13 have all highlighted the importance of discussion groups to build solutions to different problems. Based on this and the fact that coaches of all levels seem inclined to seek knowledge from other coaches and professionals in the field, it would seem beneficial for official bodies responsible for training coaches to provide tools and opportunities for the exchange of information. Specifically, there appears to be a need for encouragement of and improved spaces for regular discussion groups where coaches can share ideas and views, as well as concerns and opinions.11,12,15,18,39,51 An example of this would be the Ministry of Education in Spain that instigates and even provides support for regular working groups of teachers to exchange information for physical education in primary and secondary schools. This improves teaching practice and educational innovation of these teachers. Similar support for coach to coach interaction would appear justified by the research as it would provide easy access to other coaches and promote the exchange of information between coaches, which appears to be of the upmost priority to coaches of all levels.
In a similar vein of thought, it was also interesting to find that the observation of other coaches was likewise used frequently by the participants in this study. This source of knowledge has been found to be valued positively in other studies.12,15,39,49,53 This is because observations of other coaches training sessions can provide a greater understanding of the game and the specific physical needs of each player and help coaches learn how to interact with their athletes, so that coaches can implement these in their own practice. More specifically, coaches can learn from the appropriate actions observed as well as learning what not to do from the observed errors.15,38 This observation of other experienced coaches may occur as an athlete or coach. 6
This study also demonstrated that previous experience as an athlete is among the top three sources of knowledge most used by coaches. This was not surprising as it has been found in numerous other studies that previous experience as an athlete is commonly considered a key source of knowledge among coaches.1,2,4,6,11,12,14,19,20,29,39,52 Having personally gone through the learning and development process as a player is comparable to any individual who recalls previous experiences in a similar activity as a means of influencing decisions or actions for current participation in an activity. It may be because experiences as a player provide general knowledge of the sport (including technical, tactical, physical aspects) as suggested by Wilson and colleagues, 12 but it may also be associated with the opportunity to see how different coaches operate (good and bad)5,54 or to help them better understand the roles of a coach. 52
Although these three main sources of knowledge were the ones most commonly used by all the coaches in the present study, there were differences in their order of frequency when competition level was considered. Specifically, it was found that the lower the competitive level of a coaches’ athletes, the less likely it is that previous experience as an athlete was suggested to be the most frequently accessed source of knowledge. This may be because coaches with minimal experiences themselves as an athlete are going to have fewer personal experiences to reflect upon, and you are more likely to encounter such coaches working with lower competitive level athletes. However, Hanratty and O’Connor 15 reported in their study that previous experience as an athlete is not essential to the high level coach. In fact, there are studies which have suggested that some coaches working with high level athletes achieve this without having had previous personal experience as a high level athlete.9,24 Then again, it has also been reported by Carter and Bloom 9 that some high level coaches suggest that a lack of elite sports experience was an initial obstacle to development, but that there are other ways to acquire knowledge. Consequently, both athletes and coaches should be made aware of the potential benefits and disadvantages this source of knowledge may have on coaching and make certain that other sources of knowledge are being referenced to help ensure the quality of ideas and information being used.
With regards to gender, the results again demonstrated a difference in the order of frequency for the three main sources of knowledge identified in this study. Female coaches were found to prioritize observation of other coaches and exchange with professionals over previous experience as an athlete. However, male coaches reported previous experience as an athlete to be the most commonly utilized source of knowledge. This could be because a very low percentage of women in Spain (18%) work in the area of sports training and coaching. 34 These women are likely to feel isolated and thus seek other female coaches to connect with Callary et al. 38 In fact, Callary and colleagues suggested that this might stem from a need among female coaches to share information and experiences, as well as overcome possible barriers, due to the mostly male-dominated environment of sports training.
Other sources of knowledge
In the present study, the use of technology and the Internet as a source of knowledge was not found to be one of the three main sources of knowledge, but over half of the coaches did indicate always or almost always using this source of knowledge. Several previous studies have highlighted the fact that coaches are giving more and more consideration to the new technologies and the Internet as an important strategy for solving specific problems.4–6,11,27 One potential reason that coaches use technology less often than some other sources of knowledge is because the vertiginous increase that technological resources have year after year makes it hard for coaches to keep up to date, and thus they are less likely to take the time needed to learn to use this source of knowledge effectively. That said, this study demonstrated how important engaging with other coaches seems to be a source of knowledge, and thus the use of technologies like social networking could play a valuable role in increasing the number of other professionals that coaches can regularly engage with.
One interesting finding in relation to the use of technology as a source of information for coaches was that state level coaches prioritized technological resources (fourth most commonly used source of information) in comparison to their national level and international level counterparts (seventh and eighth most commonly accessed source of knowledge, respectively). It is possible that this might be because coaches of state level athletes often have less access to other coaches/professionals, and thus are more likely to seek alternative sources of information outside of the three identified main sources of knowledge. Gender and years of experience were both found to not really have much association with the use of technology as a source of knowledge among coaches. The lack of a gender gap with respect to the use of technology as a source of information was no surprise as this has also been found in other fields.55,56
With respect to formal education, this was the source of knowledge that had the greatest variability among the coaches’ ratings. For example, 43.9% of the coaches in the study indicated always or almost always using formal education as a source of knowledge, but conversely, 40.6% of the coaches answered that they never used this source of knowledge. This may be because the coaches in Spain have a very heterogeneous formation, whose training varies from coaches who are university graduates in the science of physical activity and sport, to people without any university degree.14,34,35 Coaches who have no training in physical activity and sport may not have considered formal training as a source of knowledge as they have less exposure to this form of knowledge development. That stated other studies have also posited that formal learning spaces are less valued by coaches than daily learning experiences. 24 In this regard, Nash and Sproule 13 argue that coaches have difficulty applying knowledge gained from formal training courses to their actual playing/training environment. Similarly, various researchers have claimed that formal learning situations do not take into account the specific learning context of each individual in attendance.2,4,18,28,36 However, based on the findings of the present study, there are groups of coaches in Spain that do not follow these beliefs.
The present study shows a clear association between both the level that coaches are working at (i.e. state, national, international) and their years of experience, and the frequency with which they indicated using formal education as a source of knowledge. In particular, it was found that the coaches with more years experience or those who train at the national and international levels were much more likely to indicate using formal education as a source of knowledge than their state-level colleagues. These findings support those of Young et al. 8 that indicated more experienced national level coaches value more formal educational activities than club level coaches. However, it is also possible that in the present study the reason for these findings could be due to the fact that the higher level coaches in Spain are more likely to be forced to attain their qualification and therefore more likely to have been exposed to formal learning/training programs. In addition, these findings that higher level coaches in Spain more regularly use formal education as a knowledge source actually contradicts Erickson et al. 6 who claim that development-level coaches prioritize formal education because the main objective is the development of skills above elite performance. Thus, it appears that there may be a great benefit to increasing the numbers of less experienced and state level coaches in Spain who complete formal training and achieve qualification, as this might help them see the value of these programs just like the national and international level coaches. This would be consistent with suggestions made by Nash and Sproule 13 that in the early stages of development as a coach more importance should be to training courses since they can improve effectiveness as a coach and can increase confidence levels.
With respect to gender, female coaches appear to prioritize formal education more than the male coaches. Most noticeably, the male coaches were much more likely to indicate never using formal education as a source of knowledge. This underlines the importance given by women to formal education. Similarly, in a study by Callary et al., 38 the importance of learning through formal education was found to be of considerable importance to female coaches. This is valuable information, as the number of females in sports training in Spain has been steadily increasing over the past decade,34,35 and thus understanding the ways in which this new group of coaches prefers to get knowledge, in this case through formal education, could mean there is a need for more formal coach learning programs in Spain.
Reading books and research can both be important sources of information to a coach. However, in the present study, these were two of the least commonly used sources of information by all coaches. This is consistent with some studies,6,7,11 but also contrasts with others which place readings as a source widely used by coaches3,15,23,24,39,57 because of its accessibility and usefulness in travel and households. 39 The reason for these sources of knowledge being used infrequently in the present study may be due to several different factors. Two factors that have received some support are the potential for coaches having limitations in searching scientific journals and the lack of transfer of knowledge from sports scientists to coaches.7,50 It may also be due to the inaccessibility of some journals as databases of government agencies (e.g. universities) are available in the formative stages, but once in the workplace access to them is limited. Based on this and the findings of the present study, in Spain, it would appear that arguments by other researchers for training courses related to searching scientific journals and encouraging basic research7,58 would be of value.
Conclusion
This article was intended to provide some descriptive insight into the sources of knowledge used by coaches in Spain. The results obtained indicate that the knowledge sources used most frequently by all coaches to develop their professional activity are the exchange of knowledge with other professionals, previous experience as an athlete and observation of other professionals. The findings also provide support for coaches of different gender, different levels of competition and with different years of professional experience, to consider the value of using all sources of knowledge for professional development. Furthermore, they help to demonstrate a need in Spain for adequate initial training and provision of opportunities for permanent training.
Because the coaches in this study largely used informal learning strategies, it would be good to promote learning/knowledge sharing discussion groups that engage both coaches and other professionals on a regular basis to officially exchange/share ideas and information. Also, due to the low reported frequency of reading books, magazines, and researching among all coaches, it would seem beneficial if coaches were offered more opportunities to learn how to search the literature effectively.
This is a valuable article given the lack of research that exists in this area outside of Australia, the UK and Canada. Also, this research has attempted to consider the relationship between sources of coaching knowledge and the level at which coaches operate, years of coaching experience, and the gender of coaches. The consideration of these various dimensions, alongside a relatively large sample size brings a degree of novelty and weight to this study that makes the findings a valuable addition to existing literature. This will contribute to a greater understanding of the learning needs of Spanish coaches.
However, there are limitations to this study that should be noted. Perhaps most importantly, the quantitative nature of this study does not permit deeper understanding with respect to why some coaches use certain sources of knowledge more than others. For example, it may be that the female coaches in this study rated observation of other coaches more highly than previous experience as an athlete, because they simply did not have much experience as an athlete. A second notable limitation is the exclusion of previous coaching experiences as one of the knowledge sources investigated (as explained in the instrument section), despite this being identified as a potential source of in previous literature. It is hoped that using qualitative methods for future follow-up studies on Spanish coaches will help to address both of these limitations. That said, it must also be noted that this limitation stems from the fact that the specific questionnaire used in the present study does not assess previous coaching experience, and thus items examining previous coaching experience should likely be added to this questionnaire for any future research that employs this tool to investigate knowledge sources of coaches. Finally, one other limitation that should be mentioned is that the cross-sectional design of this study provides data only related to the sources of knowledge being used by participants at the time the questionnaire was completed. Thus, the work of coaches previously at potentially different levels and the sources of knowledge they used in the various stages of their career are not defined by the results presented here.
There are multiple future directions for this research. Most notably, there appears to be a need for continuation of this research in the Spanish context through a qualitative design as a means of addressing some of the limitations noted in the present study. Specifically, such research could help to explain why some of the sources of knowledge are more commonly used by certain groups of coaches. Extending the research on coaches’ sources of knowledge to different contexts, such as coaches’ of athletes with physical disabilities could also prove to be beneficial. In addition, given the great diversity of people working without qualifications and with different qualification in Spain, it would be interesting to assess the associations between this variable and the different knowledge sources examined here. Finally, comparisons of the sources of knowledge used by coaches in different countries could be interesting.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research is part of the Fundamental Research Project I+D+i DEP2009-12828 funded by Ministry of Science and Innovation of Spain.