Abstract
Many parents suppose that their kids are not safe with volunteer coaches because of the inadequate professional training of volunteers. The results of such coaching are too well known: poor communication with children and apathy. No special checks are made to ensure psychological and communication adequacy and the abilities of coaches to work with children. No character education or training was provided by volunteer coaches. The task of making the necessary arrangements for intra-mural games is seldom very arduous. 1 out of 4 parents is dissatisfied with safety concerns and communication between volunteer coaches and children proposed by Parks and Recreation Departments NC. The Department promises safety and protection of children, but in reality, volunteer coaches lack professional skills to support young children and provide adequate training and communication.
Parks and Recreation Departments
Parks and Recreation Departments NC is one of the largest and most popular sports agencies proposing children and parents recreational facilities. Despite apparent benefits proposed by these programs, many parents are concerned about safety and risks factors. The volunteer coach helps the younger boys with their sports, or he may, more or less automatically, come to the charge of a house or form team, or he may by the same token find himself the recognized coach of one of the several teams representing the county. Sometimes this relation is of his frank seeking. Sometimes it develops gradually out of his duties as a housemaster or his playing in a coaches’ or old boys’ match.
Professional skills of volunteer coaches
The majority of respondents (87%) state that lack of professional skills and teacher training lead to inadequate communication patterns between children and a volunteer coach. The importance o the problem is explained by the fact that volunteer coaches are not the only ones who are serious; players are as well. One boy took the game so seriously that he talked about knocking down opposing batters when he pitched, and he did appear to “brush back” several batters. Other players deliberately slid into infielders when running the bases. One of the most frequent complaints aimed at coaches by their preadolescent charges was that they didn’t call enough practices and that they were not strict enough in enforcing discipline. As soon as a team takes the field, the captain is solely responsible for its strategy and tactics during the game. Parents admit that no coach interferes in any way.
The fact that substitution of players is not permitted in a Rugby game eliminates the carrying of hints or directions for conducting the fifteen from the sidelines to the field, and, even if such interference were possible, it is doubtful if captains would brook it. In cricket, all coaching during a game is by the captain on a signal from the bowler. In short, once in the field, the play of a team is governed only by its captain. The result is, of course, some decrease in the precision of play, but a great increase in the captain’s responsibility. Thus upon the captain, and upon no one else, rests the burden of leadership not only in matches but in the preparation for all contests, of whatever importance. Many children claim that the selection of players for representative teams rests upon the captain, who may advise or not with others in the exercise of this important function. This practice is considerably modified by placing the choosing of teams in the hands of a selection committee. This division of responsibility seems to work well wherever it has been tried, whether one committee has general jurisdiction over the aggregate of county teams, or a separate committee is appointed to exercise this function concerning each sport. There is little practice (Cassidy et al 2004).
1 out of 4 parents admits that the part played by volunteer coaches in the arranging of intra-mural contests varies considerably, but, in theory, at least, the general principle followed appears to be to put as much of the burden as possible upon the boys themselves. This seems to be the rule whether the contests are in charge, actual or nominal, of a games committee of volunteer coaches, or whether one or more games volunteer coaches are in control. Beneath the practice lies a conviction that the responsibility entailed is one of the means of maturing the boys chosen to manage these matters. Parents explain that the boy coaches are said to be mere figureheads; all responsibility for controlling and directing contests rests really upon certain masters. Whatever the method, the general principle as regards responsibility and the maturing boy seems to remain a good deal the same.
The task of making the necessary arrangements for intra-mural games is seldom very arduous, for the matches are “fixtures,” that is, once having filled places in a schedule, they fall on dates that are correspondingly the same from year to year, the most important matches coinciding with various festivals. The outstanding consideration seems to be to avoid serious conflicts with inter-county matches. Games have for years been encouraged by people who had very little idea of the reasons why they supported them. Masters who coach cricket teams get far more recreation from “bowling at the nets” than the victims of compulsory sport. Parks and Recreation Departments NC has gone at games haphazard, without regard to what value they might possess as an educational implement. Games interest boys because they allow a boy to measure his progress; they have a real ethical value, “a more genuine ‘mental discipline’ than the phrase implies in current cant.” At their best, they represent cooperation and collective unselfishness. They give the best opportunity for boys to govern themselves. Getting the players to pay attention often proves challenging for the coach.
56% of all respondents argue that the problem is that even on the field, their children are not always oriented to the tasks at hand — particularly when in the outfield; they are over-distanced from their roles. Players pick dandelions, do little jigs, throw pebbles, and even sit down. Part of this behavior relates to the nature of playing in the outfield, where few balls are hit. As one regular infielder commented when asked to play in the outfield: “I need more action. That right field is so boring”. Even infielders may not attend to what is happening close enough to suit their coaches. Behavior in the dugout poses even greater challenges for coaches.
Dugout activity more often than not deals with topics unrelated to the game and provides prima facie evidence the players are not paying attention. It is as if the inferior team thought with one mind, “We may be beaten, but we’re going to give them as hard a time as possible to beat us by playing as hard as we can. And, of course, we may win. At any rate, we shall have the satisfaction of making them work for their victory.” This situation may develop not once but scores of times in the county life of any county boy. Not only does it at length give a certain hardness and seeming indifference to defeat, and provide a refuge for disappointed youthful hopes, but it does much to rob victory of its factitious and disproportionate charm. The attitude of mind that it engenders in the boy is one of the strongest holds that the Department tradition exercises over the national life, and it lies at the very core of the conception of sport. Its importance will be considered later in its bearing upon games. (Cassidy et al 2004).
It was found that mothers are more concerned about safety issues and the professional skills of volunteer coaches. All mothers admit that lack of professional skills is closely related to the lack of attention and the problem of preadolescent apathy — those situations in which players are over-distanced from the reality of the sport. Often during games children are neither enthusiastic nor angry. They sit in the dugout watching the game quietly or talking and joking with each other. The problem of apathy rests on a distinction between players who are in the game, waiting for things to happen, and those who are at the game but not immediately involved. In the first case apathy or inattention is a serious structural problem.
For example, an outfielder may not attend completely to the game and thus may miss a play. Likewise, batters not “mentally prepared” are criticized. Although apathetic performances are formally inappropriate they are not often corrected or condemned. However, apathy is always potentially subject to condemnation from players or coaches, even when players aren’t formally involved in the game. Thus, it is legitimate for coaches and teammates to tell inattentive boys in the dugout to “stop horsing around,” “act alive,” or “make yourself hoarse.” Because many recreational activities are team activities, all activities within the fences should, in theory, be directed toward the work of baseball. Coaches and many players expect the participants to adhere to a Puritan work ethic, preparing themselves for adult life. When they don’t, moral disparagement is seen as warranted and is judiciously applied (Cassidy et al 2004).
At Parks and Recreation Departments there are paid coaches in boxing, and professional trainers or coaches for track athletics, but for cricket practically all the paid coach does, if he is not a groundsman, is to bowl at the nets and give a few “pointers” on the game. In other branches of sports, coaching is in the hands of older members of the teams, old Blues, who return, sometimes at a personal sacrifice, to assist in developing the team, and certain dons. These older men are rather instructors, advisers, and critics than what Americans regard as coaches. They have little power, and the responsibility for the development of the team, and especially for conducting it in matches, rests upon the captain. They may advise captains in the selection of teams, but they seldom if ever proffer the advice. More important still, these principles are rigidly adhered to, and whether in college or Ě“varsity sport, if the opinions of the coach and the captain conflict, the final decision lies with the undergraduate.
Coaching in sports generally implies no very rigid course of the procedure. These, being the chief tests of the teams, are felt to warrant an intensification of practice and coaching, as well. Sometimes an old Blue or two comes up to supplement the coaching staff, which, by the way, is never very numerous. The coaches begin a more businesslike period of instruction, and the players who have not already gone into training generally begin. This course is followed by variations for the two forms of football and hockey. In the branches of track and field athletics, the professional coach usually devotes to individuals the attention that seems to him necessary. Whatever the sport, the responsibility and the development of the team rests upon volunteers coaches, but if they lack professional education they cannot ensure safety for all children.
It was found that any checks are made to ensure professional and communication skills pf volunteer coaches. Never does the man in charge of physical training seem to have any responsibility for training teams. There are, to be sure, professionals for real tennis and rackets, and the groundsman, who, as has been indicated, maybe an old footballer or cricketer, will perhaps advise about kicking or bowl at the nets and instruct in batting as a part of his regular duties. Old boys, graduates of the school, are happy to come down before a big match and with their assistance take part in the development of the team or crew. Thus, practically all of the coaching is of the nature of help from within the county, and all of the more effective coachings is the outcome not of the expenditure of dollars, but the Department loyalty. Even the groundsman has for the Department a loyalty of his own that seems almost feudal and is certainly vastly different from the punctual enthusiasm of the hired professional coach.
Summary
In sum, it was found that many volunteer coaches have poor communication skills and professional training which prevents them to communicate effetely with children. Many parents are afraid of negligence and inadequate training provided by volunteer coaches. The results of this absence of mercenaries are as apparent in the balance sheets for games and sports as in the spirit with which, in the best schools, contests are undertaken. No one is dependent for his living upon the success of any crew or team. No checks are made to test the professional skills and psychological adequacy of volunteer coaches.
References
Parks and Recreation Departments North Carolina. (2008). Web.
Cassidy, T., Jones, R., Potrac, R. (2004). Understanding Sports Coaching: The Social, Cultural and Pedagogical Foundations of Coaching. Routledge.