To What Extent Is a Highly Successful Men’s NCAA Division II Cross Country Coach Humanistic? A Case Study

Abstract

The purpose of this case study was to investigate the coaching philosophy of a highly successful men's United States National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) division II cross country coach and determine to what extent his stated philosophy and actual coaching methods were humanistic. For the past 13 seasons, the participant coach's men's cross country team has finished either first or second at the NCAA division II national championships. In-depth semistructured qualitative interviews of the participant coach and three of his athletes were conducted in addition to eight overt naturalistic training session observations. All data were triangulated to generate themes to determine if the stated coaching philosophy and actual methods were congruent with the humanistic philosophy. The findings indicated that the coach was for the most part humanistic in regards to individualization, but was not humanistic in relation to open communication and collaborative decision-making with athletes, or a process-orientated definition of success. Implications of these findings include what may be the most effective coaching philosophy for men's NCAA division II cross country running through examining a highly successful coach in the discipline.

Goals and Success in Sport: The Perspectives of Parents and Adolescent Girls in Kayaking

“…Research has shown that even in competitive environments, such as NCAA college basketball in the USA, coaches often place significant importance on realizing each athlete's potential, holistic development, and self-fulfillment. These aspects are considered essential parts of the definition of success in sport in these contexts [15]. Further research among coaches found that perceived success in sport includes the development of the players as a central component, followed by group performance, with victory only ranking in third place [16,17].…”

“…The goals included athletic achievements, whereas success was not necessarily dependent upon this measure. Among other things, this discrepancy stems from a holistic perception of sport as providing education in values other than competitiveness [15,18]. This discrepancy has three possible explanations.…”