“FAIR PLAY EVERYDAY”

1. “FAIR PLAY EVERYDAY” A Sportsmanship Training Program for High School Coaches

2. Do high school coaches need a sportsmanship program? • Most are doing OK • Shake hands • Treat Opponents OK BUT • 1996 Head Butting • Jersey Switching • Baiting Officials • Abuse:

3. The Number One Goal: The NFHS and Most State Associations To improve the level of sportsmanship and fair play in all high school athletic events.

4. Do guidelines exist for coaches? • National Federation of High School Associations (NFHS) publishes rules and sportsmanship programs • Many State Associations annually publish sportsmanship manuals • Some school districts have sportsmanship codes or guides

5. 1997 state coaches association survey: 504 coaches surveyed 239 surveys returned 47% return rate Results: Only 27.2 % had received the Manual Only 19.2 % had read the Manual However!

6. Basic Guidelines Questions of Right Choice • Is the action or behavior Honorable? • Is the action or behavior Responsible? • Does the action or behavior foster or improve Cooperation?

7. Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of a cognitive sportsmanship training program, based on the stated concepts of a high school activities association sportsmanship manual, on selected coaches as evidenced on a pencil and paper test instrument.

8. Group 1 Group 2 Control Group Fair Play Everyday video & SQ NFHS Be A Sport video & SQ No video or program Sportsmanship Questionnaire only Group Design

9. Video Development • Limited to 15 minutes • Use possible real life dilemmas that occur in sport settings • Use training methods of presentation, reinforcement, repetition, saturation • Questions of Right Choice are presented in 9 different ways • watch video

10. Data Collection School selection: Random selection • Representatives from 37 of 42 schools in the region • N = 420 • Group 1 (Fair Play Everyday) = 171 • Group 2 (NFHS Be A Sport) = 135 • Control Group (No Treatment) = 114

11. Coaches by School Size Size Coaches A-1 = 181 A-2 = 109 A-3 = 60 A-4 = 67 Coaches by Gender Gender Number Male = 317 Female = 103 Data Collection (continued)

12. Statistical Hypothesis One No difference exists by coaching treatment group on cognitive sportsmanship test scores

13. Statistical Hypothesis One (continued) • Group 1 M = 3.942a • Group 2 M = 3.652a • Control M = 3.338b • There is a significant difference

14. Statistical Hypothesis Two No difference exists by coach gender on cognitive sportsmanship test scores.

15. Statistical Hypothesis Two(continued) Gender: Male M = 3.565 Female M = 3.723 There is no significant difference Female mean is slightly higher

16. Statistical Hypothesis Two(continued) • Results are different from previous research • Goeb (1997): athletes tend to mirror coach’s level of moral reasoning (UND) • Fewer female coaches • Are female athletes becoming more affected by male coaches? • Difference in size of sample (317-103)?

17. Statistical Hypothesis Three No difference exists by coach school size on cognitive sportsmanship test scores.

18. Statistical Hypothesis Three(continued) School Size Mean SEM A-1 3.267b .097 A-2 3.767a .147 A-3 3.826a .166 A-4 3.716a .150 There is a significant difference.

19. Statistical Hypothesis Three(continued) • Larger schools scored much lower than the other school classifications. • Does school size affect how coaches view sportsmanship? • What is the best sized school for the best education? • Lee & Smith (1997) 600-900 • Bracey (1998) Grad follow-up study • Sense of community and caring

20. Statistical Hypothesis Three(continued) • Begley, et al (1999) in Newsweek Large schools dampen enthusiasm for extracurricular activities • Is there a connection between school size and sportsmanship? • Can communities within larger schools be established to increase a sense of belonging?

21. Implications & Recommendations • Major question: could a 30-minute cognitive training program improve coaches’ sportsmanship information and application of questions of right choice? • Both treatment groups scored higher than the control (significantly) • Controls scored about the same as the pilot coaches • Indicates some change occurred with TRT

22. Implications & Recommendations • Sportsmanship Training Program seemed to fill a void • Athletic Directors were given relief • Large District AD said “sportsmanship is something we all need to discuss and practice, but are reluctant to bring it up” • Program provided a beginning point for further discussions • Coaches were anxious to talk after the presentations

23. Implications & recommendations • Coaches were given questions that can be applied everyday • Athletic Directors can use Fair Play Everyday for clinics • Fair Play Everyday can be used for boosters/parents

24. Implications & Recommendations • Sportsmanship Training Program • Discussion of application to dilemmas by coaches • Coaches should have an open forum for discussion of possible solutions among schools (develop Sportsmanship Plan for the school)

25. Implications & Recommendations • Program would require release time for coaches • Sends a message that Sportsmanship is important • Combats limited time of coaches

26. Implications & Recommendations The objective has been to improve Sportsmanship in high school sports. The finish of this part of the project...

27. Implications & Recommendations … is the beginning of a greater challenge and crusade. “The journey is better than the inn” Cervantes

28. Conclusion The Journey continues. . .