The Effect of a Coaching Education Program on Coaching Efficacy

By L. Malete, D. Feltz. 2000

158 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Safety Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/48643ed8f3ea3ed2964e557331098670c74b892a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. P. Potrac
2. Robyn L. Jones
3. J. Côté
4. K. Erickson
5. P. Trudel
6. Gavin Chesterfield
7. W. Rodgers
8. Ian L. Reade

In Safety Research

1. N. Holt
2. Dany J. MacDonald
3. P. Trudel
4. J. Côté
5. M. Bruner
6. A. Kent
7. W. Rodgers
8. K. Erickson

In Social Psychology

1. P. Trudel
2. J. Côté
3. P. Potrac
4. Robyn L. Jones
5. N. Holt
6. K. Erickson
7. C. Cushion
8. Dany J. MacDonald

Citations in the corpus

• Developmental Consulting in a Professional Football Academy: The 5Cs Coaching Efficacy Program (2008, unknown): “The original CES (Feltz et al., 1999; Malete & Feltz, 2000) contains 24 items measured on a Likert scale in terms of efficacy strength, ranging from 0 ( not at all confident ) to 9 ( extremely confident ).”
• ‘Studentship’ and ‘impression management’ in an advanced soccer coach education award (2010, background): “To date, the available literature on coach education has focused on coach development and learning (e.g. Gilbert & Trudel, 1999; Malete & Feltz, 2000; Cushion et al., 2003), coach effectiveness in the context of youth sports (e.g. Smith & Smoll, 1990; Smoll et al., 1993; Smith et al., 1995) and the…”
• Examining relationships between emotional intelligence and coaching efficacy (2008, unknown): “Finally, in an examination of coach certification, Lee, Malete, and Feltz (2002) suggested certified coaches would experience greater coaching efficacy than those without certification.”
• Gaining Insight into Actual and Preferred Sources of Coaching Knowledge (2008, background): “Several studies have noted a number of benefits from this type of learning including: (a) increased perceived coaching efficacy [16], (b) better facilitation of social development and growth of athletes [17], and (c) decreased rate of coach burnout by teaching stress management and coping strategies”
• The relation of coaching context and coach education to coaching efficacy and perceived leadership behaviors in youth sport. (2012, background): “uncertified) has been a significant predictor of CE (Campbell & Sullivan, 2005; Lee et al., 2002; Malete & Feltz, 2000) and was therefore included in the design.”
• Coaching Efficacy as a Predictor of Leadership Style in Intercollegiate Athletics (2003, methodology): “While Feltz et al. s (1999) original study, and the work by Malete and Feltz (2001) focused exclusively on high school coaches, the present sample was a heterogeneous sample of collegiate coaches.”
• How Youth-Sport Coaches Learn to Coach (2007, background): “…report data on the certification status of youth-sport coaches (Hansen & Gauthier, 1988; Lee, Williams, & Capel, 1989) and coaching efficacy, that is, coaches’ beliefs in their coaching ability after completing a coach-education course (Feltz, Chase, Moritz, & Sullivan, 1999; Malete & Feltz, 2000).”
• New Ideas for High Performance Coaches: A Case Study of Knowledge Transfer in Sport Science (2008, background): “Previous research on coaching has contributed to the understanding of coaches’ knowledge acquisition by suggesting that coaches acquire knowledge through various processes including mentorship by other coaches [1-3], through their experience as athletes [4-7], through coaching experience and reflect”
• Knowledge Transfer: How do High Performance Coaches Access the Knowledge of Sport Scientists? (2008, background): “There is general agreement regarding the basic knowledge required by coaches to work effectively with athletes that is reflected in the extant literature [1-3] and in the content of International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 3 · Number 3 · 2008 319”