High School and Social Support

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 973
  • Published : September 12, 2010
Open Document
Text Preview
Jamber, E. A., & Zhang, J .J. (1997). Investigating leadership, gender, and coaching level using the Revised Leadership for Sport Scale. Journal of Sport Behavior, 20, 313-322.

The purpose of the study was to determine possible differences in leadership behaviors,

using the Revised Leadership for Sport Scale (RLSS), between male and female coaches

and among different coaching levels. The researchers submitted two hypotheses. The first

hypothesis was that male and female coaches would respond differently to the RLSS in

overall leadership behaviors. The second hypothesis was that differences on the RLSS

would occur among coaching levels: junior high, high school, and college.

The sample was nonrandom, including 162 coaches that were chosen on a volunteer

basis. Within the sample, 118 (0.73) of the coaches were male, while 44 (0.27) were

female. With regard to coaching level, 25 (0.15) were junior high coaches, 99 (0.61) high

school, and 38 (0.24) at the college level. While this is a good sample size, the problem lies

with the distribution of the sample. The sample number for junior high coaches, in particular,

is rather low. A larger sample with regard to all categories would have aided in the data

analysis, particularly when looking for possible interactions between gender and coaching

level.

The instrument utilized was the Revised Leadership for Sport Scale (RLSS) developed

by Zhang, Jensen, and Mann in 1996. This scale is used to measure six leadership

behaviors: training and instruction, democratic, autocratic, social support, positive feedback,

and situational consideration. The scale uses 60 statements, which were preceded by “In

coaching, I:” A Likert scale was then given for each statement: 1 = never; 2 = seldom; 3 =

occasionally; 4 = often; and 5 = always. This produced an ordinal level data set. Scales

were administered in a number of environmental settings: classrooms, gymnasiums, practice

fields, and offices. The internal consistency for each section was calculated: 0.84 for training

and instruction; 0.66 for democratic; 0.70 for autocratic; 0.52 for social support; 0.78 for

positive feedback; and 0.69 for situational consideration. There was no information,

however, regarding the validity of the RLSS.

A MANOVA was used to analyze the data for differences between male and female

coaches with regard to leadership behaviors. This is not consistent with the type of data

collected. The RLSS used a Likert scale (ordinal), yet a MANOVA would be most

applicable for normally distributed, quantitative data. The analysis showed there were no

significant differences between male and female coaches in overall leadership behaviors.

When the six leadership styles were examined separately, there was a significant difference

in social support between males and females. In general, females scored much higher than

did the male coaches.

A MANOVA was also used to examine the data for differences between the three

levels of coaching (junior high, high school, and college) with regard to leadership behavior

in general. There were significant differences between the three levels. When breaking

down the six behaviors and examining them individually, an ANOVA was used to analyze

the data. Again, because the data for the RLSS is ordinal, an ANOVA is not the best

analysis tool. The three coaching levels scored differently on three of the six behaviors:

democratic behaviors, training and instruction, and social support. High school coaches

scored much higher than college level coaches in democratic behavior. Junior high coaches

were significantly lower in training and instruction than either high school or college coaches.

Junior high coaches also demonstrated a lesser degree of social support than either the high...
tracking img