高校教练员教育项目评价

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH International Sport Coaching Journal Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1123/iscj.2022-0050
L. Gano-Overway, S. Sackett, J. Wigglesworth, Madelynn E. Knight
{"title":"高校教练员教育项目评价","authors":"L. Gano-Overway, S. Sackett, J. Wigglesworth, Madelynn E. Knight","doi":"10.1123/iscj.2022-0050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper outlines how a program evaluation of a U.S. higher education coaching minor program was executed to clarify program needs and identify areas of improvement. Data were gathered from university students (n = 113), current minors (n = 13), program graduates (n = 26), coach education experts (n = 4), and community administrators/coaches (n = 13) using multiple methods including archival data collection, online surveys, and individual/group interviews. Descriptive statistics, curriculum mapping, and qualitative thematic analysis were used to document findings aligned with the CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product) evaluation model. The context evaluation identified the target population, program goals, opportunities, barriers, and the highest priority programmatic needs. The input evaluation outlined themes highlighting the importance of understanding one’s context, incorporating evidence-based practices and teaching principles, aligning assessments with learning outcomes, establishing faculty buy-in, and advocating for the program. The process evaluation revealed programmatic alignment with national coaching standards with inconsistencies and the need to expand current content to achieve learning outcomes. The product evaluation showed that students acknowledged learning outcomes, were satisfied with the program, and felt ready to engage in coaching. Program graduates indicated preparedness to coach with some exceptions. The findings provided insight into how a multifaceted and targeted program evaluation can inform program improvements and next steps in the evaluation process.","PeriodicalId":45934,"journal":{"name":"International Sport Coaching Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Program Evaluation of a University-Based Coach Education Program\",\"authors\":\"L. Gano-Overway, S. Sackett, J. Wigglesworth, Madelynn E. Knight\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/iscj.2022-0050\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper outlines how a program evaluation of a U.S. higher education coaching minor program was executed to clarify program needs and identify areas of improvement. Data were gathered from university students (n = 113), current minors (n = 13), program graduates (n = 26), coach education experts (n = 4), and community administrators/coaches (n = 13) using multiple methods including archival data collection, online surveys, and individual/group interviews. Descriptive statistics, curriculum mapping, and qualitative thematic analysis were used to document findings aligned with the CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product) evaluation model. The context evaluation identified the target population, program goals, opportunities, barriers, and the highest priority programmatic needs. The input evaluation outlined themes highlighting the importance of understanding one’s context, incorporating evidence-based practices and teaching principles, aligning assessments with learning outcomes, establishing faculty buy-in, and advocating for the program. The process evaluation revealed programmatic alignment with national coaching standards with inconsistencies and the need to expand current content to achieve learning outcomes. The product evaluation showed that students acknowledged learning outcomes, were satisfied with the program, and felt ready to engage in coaching. Program graduates indicated preparedness to coach with some exceptions. The findings provided insight into how a multifaceted and targeted program evaluation can inform program improvements and next steps in the evaluation process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Sport Coaching Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Sport Coaching Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2022-0050\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Sport Coaching Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2022-0050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文概述了如何对美国高等教育辅修课程进行项目评估,以明确项目需求并确定改进的领域。通过档案资料收集、在线调查和个人/小组访谈等多种方法,从大学生(n = 113)、未成年人(n = 13)、项目毕业生(n = 26)、教练教育专家(n = 4)和社区管理人员/教练(n = 13)中收集数据。描述性统计、课程映射和定性专题分析被用来记录与CIPP(上下文、输入、过程、产品)评估模型一致的发现。背景评估确定了目标人群、项目目标、机会、障碍和最优先的项目需求。输入评估概述的主题强调了理解个人背景的重要性,结合循证实践和教学原则,使评估与学习成果保持一致,建立教师支持,并倡导该计划。过程评估显示,项目与国家指导标准的一致性存在不一致性,需要扩大现有内容以实现学习成果。产品评估显示,学生们认可学习成果,对课程感到满意,并准备好参与指导。项目毕业生表示愿意做教练,但也有例外。这些发现为我们提供了深入了解多方面和有针对性的项目评估如何为项目改进和评估过程的下一步提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Program Evaluation of a University-Based Coach Education Program
This paper outlines how a program evaluation of a U.S. higher education coaching minor program was executed to clarify program needs and identify areas of improvement. Data were gathered from university students (n = 113), current minors (n = 13), program graduates (n = 26), coach education experts (n = 4), and community administrators/coaches (n = 13) using multiple methods including archival data collection, online surveys, and individual/group interviews. Descriptive statistics, curriculum mapping, and qualitative thematic analysis were used to document findings aligned with the CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product) evaluation model. The context evaluation identified the target population, program goals, opportunities, barriers, and the highest priority programmatic needs. The input evaluation outlined themes highlighting the importance of understanding one’s context, incorporating evidence-based practices and teaching principles, aligning assessments with learning outcomes, establishing faculty buy-in, and advocating for the program. The process evaluation revealed programmatic alignment with national coaching standards with inconsistencies and the need to expand current content to achieve learning outcomes. The product evaluation showed that students acknowledged learning outcomes, were satisfied with the program, and felt ready to engage in coaching. Program graduates indicated preparedness to coach with some exceptions. The findings provided insight into how a multifaceted and targeted program evaluation can inform program improvements and next steps in the evaluation process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Sport Coaching Journal
International Sport Coaching Journal EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
17.60%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
INTERNATIONAL SPORT COACHING JOURNAL Dominant Discourses at Play: How Children’s Soccer Coaches of Mixed-Sex Programs in Ontario, Canada, Understand Sex and Gender International Council for Coaching Excellence (ICCE) 14th Global Coach Conference INTERNATIONAL SPORT COACHING JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL SPORT COACHING JOURNAL
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1