Tags: Respiratory Therapist Research PaperDeception EssayAmerica Angel EssayMoral Skepticism EssayCollege Business PlanWhat Makes A Successful Business PlanWhat Makes A Good Coach Essay
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. 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.
Once again, a better analysis method could have been chosen based on the nature of the data collected. The ecological generaliziability for the study is fairly high.
The surveys were mailed out, and returned on a volunteer basis.
However, due to the nonrandom nature of the sample, the results would not generalizable beyond the 162 participants in the study. In order to reduce threats to internal validity, the participants were asked to respond honestly and confidentiality was stressed so that the coaches might feel more at ease in responding. The researchers mention that the scales were given in a variety of settings.
This could present a threat to the internal validity in that participants might not have been entirely focused on completing the scale, but instead on coordinating practice, completing paperwork, etc.
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.
Junior high coaches also demonstrated a lesser degree of social support than either the high school or college coaches.
A MANOVA was again used to analyze the data for any interaction between gender and coaching level with regard to overall leadership behavior.
In previous classes we spent more time talking about statistics than the literature review. The sample was nonrandom, including 162 coaches that were chosen on a volunteer basis.
That's why you'll see some fairly complex explanations in this paper on the data analysis but no information on the literature review. Within the sample, 118 (0.73) of the coaches were male, while 44 (0.27) were female.