Authors: Kristen Betts1 Cam Kiosoglous 2 Tamara Galoyan 3 Fiona Murray 4 Julie Perrelli 5 Sara Steinman6 Mariette Fourie7 Ellana Black 8
1School of Education, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
2School of Education, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
3School of Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
4Special Olympics International, Coaching and Education, Dublin, Ireland
5School of Professional Studies, Western Connecticut State University, Danbury, Connecticut, USA
6 School of Education, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
7 Faculty of Community and Health Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Capetown, South Africa
8School of Education, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Corresponding Author:
Kristen Betts, EdD
3401 Market Street, Third Floor
Philadelphia, PA, 19104
912-257-8336
Kristen Betts, EdD, is a Clinical Professor in the School of Education at Drexel University. Her research focuses on the educational neuroscience, learning sciences, learning technologies, Artificial Intelligence, neurodiversity, and professional development.
Cam Kiosoglous, PhD, is an Assistant Clinical Professor at Drexel University. His research focuses on learning effectiveness, reflective practices, and professionalization of coaching.
Tamara Galoyan, PhD, is a Learning and Curriculum Specialist at the Lemelson-MIT program at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Her research is at the intersection of learning sciences, STEM education, learning technologies, and teacher training and professional development.
Fiona Murray is Director, Coaching and Education with Special Olympics International. Her primary role is in supporting the development of sports coach education and development systems and opportunities across the Special Olympics movement.
Sara Steinman, EdD holds her doctorate in Education from Drexel University in Philadelphia, PA. Her research focuses on transgender athlete inclusion.
Mariette Fourie, DEd, is the Learning and Teaching Specialist of the Faculty of Community and Health Sciences at the University of the Western Cape (UWC) in South Africa. Her research focuses on educational neuroscience.
Julie Perelli, PhD, is the Interim Dean of Student Success & Engagement, faculty member in Health Promotion and Exercise Science, and NCAA Faculty Athletics Representative. Her research focuses on student engagement, retention, and academic achievement.
Ellana Black, PhD, is a professional development administrator for global educators. Her research examines the adoption of evidence-based educational practices and how psychological and cultural factors influence teaching and learning in diverse settings.
International Study of Professional Development in Sports Coaching: Awareness of Neuromyths, Brain Knowledge, and Evidence-Based Practices
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Professional development is fundamental to coaching. It can expand a coach’s knowledge, skills, and practice by building upon fields such as neuroscience, psychology, and education. The purpose of this study was to (a) examine professional development attended by sports coaches, (b) compare awareness levels regarding neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices among sports coaches, and (c) identify interest levels in acquiring scientific knowledge about the brain. Methods: This study reports on the first phase of a two-year explanatory sequential mixed methods study focusing on sports coaches working in Pre-Kindergarten to 12th grade schools, higher education, and sports-related organizations. Descriptive and inferential statistics were conducted, including Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to compare mean percentages of accurate responses between groups and factors associated with awareness. Results: While there were no statistically significant differences between the three groups of sports coaches or across demographics, the data revealed an opportunity to enhance professional development to increase levels of awareness of neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices. All three groups of sports coaches ranked onsite professional development as their preferred format followed by hybrid, online, and HyFlex. High levels of interest were found among all groups of sports coaches regarding scientific knowledge about the brain. Conclusions: Professional development provides a unique opportunity in sports coaching education to integrate research to increase awareness about the brain, learning, and evidence-based practices as well as debunk neuromyths and pseudoscientific ideas. Applications in Sports: This study contributes to sports education since it provides insightful research into professional development and identifies opportunities for enhanced awareness of neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices. Furthermore, it provides data on the types of strategies, practices, and concepts that participants are applying to their coaching, where they learned about them, and what they would like to learn more about.
Keywords: neuroscience, psychology, pseudoscientific beliefs, training
INTRODUCTION
Professional development plays a pivotal role in coaching as it enhances a coach’s knowledge, skills, and effectiveness while supporting continued growth. Sports coaches, whether they work in Pre-Kindergarten to 12th grade schools (PK-12 education), two or four-year higher education institutions (HEIs), or professionally in sports-related organizations, need to embrace professional development as a way to stay current and relevant in their respective domains. Coaching is a multifaceted discipline that can greatly benefit from fields such as neuroscience, psychology, and education. By integrating research advancements on how humans learn, professional development can provide opportunities for sports coaches to expand their general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices related to learning. Attending workshops, seminars, and training programs can expose sports coaches to new theories, concepts, and strategies that can be integrated into their coaching practices. This expanded understanding enhances cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition so sports coaches can gain greater insight into their own strengths and areas for further development, allowing them to become more self-aware and effective in their coaching roles.
Sports coaching is an emerging academic discipline, drawing from other disciplines, such as psychology, education, and the sports sciences (1). Within the literature, sports coaching is often described as complex (2-5). With increasing pressure for competitive success and an ongoing search for innovative approaches to improve athletic performance, there may be increased vulnerability to pseudoscientific ideas among coaches and sports-related organizations (6-7). Therefore, sports coach education programs must become more rigorous and evidence-based (8-9). It is important for sports coaching to increase levels of professionalization to develop a more complete body of knowledge that more accurately reflects current forms of evidence-based practices (7, 9).
Research on neuromyths and pseudoscientific ideas in sports coaching has been limited in the past, but has recently gained more attention in the literature. The existing research highlights the need for increasing the awareness of neuromyths and pseudoscientific ideas, dispelling them, and emphasizing the importance of incorporating accurate, evidence-based neuroscience-based information into training and professional development programs.
Neuromyths are commonly held misbeliefs that come from misunderstandings or misconceptions about the brain often associated with learning and education. Research and publications on neuromyths, education and the brain, and the learning sciences date back to the 1990s and early 2000s (10-12). Many studies have investigated the belief in neuromyths, particularly the impact on educators’ understanding of neuromyths within PK-12 education (13-16) and increasingly within higher education (17-18). However, fewer studies have focused on neuromyths within sports coaching.
Pseudoscientific ideas are beliefs or practices that claim to be scientific but lack empirical evidence or theoretical support (6, 7). Bailey et al. (7) conducted a groundbreaking study on pseudoscientific ideas and neuromyths among British and Irish sports coaches. Their research revealed a high prevalence of neuromyth beliefs, similar to previous findings among PK-12 school teachers. The results of this study also indicated sports coaches’ willingness to improve their understanding of applied neuroscience. Balagué et al. (19) expanded on these findings and recommended further research involving more diverse samples and sub-populations of sports coaches, as well as qualitative data analysis to help ensure that sports coaching is grounded in accurate and evidence-based principles that support optimal athlete growth and performance.
The role of a sports coach is multidimensional, demanding, complex, and rewarding (20-22). The broader purpose of formal sports coach education includes, but is not limited to, certifying, educating, and developing sports coaches (23). Within the field of coaching, understanding the human learning process is important since this can impact athletic performance (24-25). Therefore, being able to discern facts about the brain and learning from pseudoscientific ideas and neuromyths within coaching is critical. Building on Bailey et al. (7) there is need to better understand the awareness of neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices among sports coaches across diverse roles. The purpose of this survey study was to address this gap by examining professional development opportunities and practices in sports coaching education, as well as sports coaches’ levels of awareness of neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices among sports coaches. The study offers new insights into the knowledge and experiences of sports coaches and contributes to the broader understanding of the complex processes and conditions involved in training them to succeed in their professional roles.
METHODS
Participants
This study employed a survey design to examine the types of professional development attended by sports coaches who worked in PK-12 education, two- and four-year HEIs, and sports-related organizations. This quantitative study was part of a broader explanatory sequential mixed methods study design that integrates both quantitative and qualitative approaches to examine the research questions more comprehensively (26).
Specifically, the study sought to identify strategies, principles, and practices applied to support coaching as well as which strategies, principles, and practices sports coaches would like to learn more about. Furthermore, the study examined sports coaches’ awareness of neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices among sports coaches as well as explored potential differences among sports coaches working in PK-12 education, higher education, and sports-related organizations. Lastly, the study sought to identify sports coaches’ level of interest among sports coaches in scientific knowledge about the brain. The data collected from this quantitative study were used to design the questions for follow-up focus groups in the second phase of this mixed methods project that explored, which explored sports coaches’ experiences with professional development attended in 2022.The broader mixed methods research study was approved by Drexel University’s Institutional Review Board. Informed consent was required to participate in the study (IRB 2106008600).
Instruments and Procedures
This study included a quantitative Qualtrics survey with five sections: (a) General Statements about the Brain and Learning, (b) General Statements about Coaching, Learning, and Assessment, (c) Instructional Practices, (d) Professional Development, and (e) Demographics and Professional Background. This study used convenience and snowball sampling. The participants included individuals worldwide who were coaching in PK-12 education, higher education, and sports-related organizations. Survey data was collected between October 2021 and January 2022. Members of the research team sent emails to peers inviting them to complete the online Qualtrics survey and encouraging them to share the invitation with other peers working as sports coaches in PK-12 education, higher education, and sports-related organizations. Two reminder emails were sent out by research team members to their initial invited peers. At the end of the survey, participants also had the opportunity to further volunteer to participate in a focus group on professional development in sports coaching education.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS for Windows, version 29) was used to analyze the data collected from the survey. Descriptive data included frequencies and cross-tabulations. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate differences in the mean scores among the three professional groups (PK-12 sports coaches, higher education sports coaches, and sports-related organization coaches). For the inferential statistics, a significance criterion of α =0.05 was used. In examining the internal consistency, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was .826 for the 27 neuromyths and general knowledge about the brain and learning items, and .784 for the 23 evidence-based practices items, indicating a high level of internal consistency.
RESULTS
A total of 107 individuals consented to participate in this study. Of the survey respondents, one-third were sports coaches who worked in PK-12 education (33.3%) while 42.4% worked in higher education, and 24.2% worked with sports-related organizations. Of the sports coaches who worked in higher education, 86% worked in four-year institutions and 14% worked in two-year institutions. Twenty-two percent of the sports coaches working in PK-12 education identified as teachers. Fourteen percent of the sports coaches working in higher education identified as teaching in undergraduate and graduate programs. Thirteen percent of the sports coaches were working with sports-related organizations as a consultant, an adjunct professor, head of a department, an instructor/volunteer, and with Special Olympics.
Participants included head coaches (39.4%), assistant coaches (21.2%), athletic directors/coaches (19.2%), and coach educators/developers (8.1%). Twelve percent of the participants identified as both head coaches and assistant coaches. Approximately two-thirds of coach educators (64.3%) and athletic directors (65.2%) were full-time in their positions while less than half of the coaches (45.6%) and assistant coaches (36.2%) were full-time in their positions. One-quarter of the head coaches (25.0%) and coach educators/developers (25.0%) were part-time while 17.0% of assistant coaches and 13.0% of athletic directors were part-time. The highest percentage of volunteers were assistant coaches (46.8%) followed by head coaches (29.4%), athletic directors (21.7%), and coach educators/developers (10.7%).
Participants represented 18 countries across five continents including North America, South America, Asia, Europe, and Africa. The majority of participants (58.3%) self-identified as male with 40.8% self-identifying as female, and 1% as non-binary. At the time of the survey, most of the participants were between the ages of 25 to 34 years old (23.9%), 35 to 44 years old (27.2%), and 45 to 54 years old (21.7%). Over half of the participants had earned a master’s degree (45.1%) or doctoral/first professional degree (10.7%), including PhD (3.9%), EdD (2.9%), and Juris Doctorate (3.9%). Table 1 includes a breakdown of participant demographics.
Table 1
Demographics
| Frequency | Valid Percent | |
| Primary Role | ||
| Head Coach | 39 | 39.4 |
| Assistant Coach | 21 | 21.2 |
| Coach Educator | 8 | 8.1 |
| Athletic Director/Coach | 19 | 19.2 |
| Head Coach & Assistant Coach | 12 | 12.1 |
| Total | 99 | 100 |
| Institution Level | ||
| PK-12 Education | 33 | 33.3 |
| Higher Education | 42 | 42.4 |
| Sports-Related Organizations | 24 | 24.2 |
| Total | 99 | 100 |
| Institutional Type | ||
| Public | 44 | 44.0 |
| Private | 38 | 38.0 |
| For-Profit | 1 | 1.0 |
| Other | 17 | 17.0 |
| Total | 100 | 100 |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 60 | 58.3 |
| Female | 42 | 40.8 |
| Non-Binary | 1 | 1.0 |
| Total | 103 | 100 |
| Age at Time of Survey | ||
| 18 to 24 years | 7 | 7.6 |
| 25 to 34 years | 22 | 23.9 |
| 35 to 44 years | 25 | 27.2 |
| 45 to 54 years | 20 | 21.7 |
| 55 to 64 years | 15 | 16.3 |
| 65 years or older | 3 | 3.3 |
| Total | 92 | 100 |
| Highest Degree of Completion | ||
| Associate’s Degree | 3 | 2.9 |
| Bachelor’s Degree | 19 | 18.6 |
| Completed some postgraduate | 12 | 11.8 |
| Master’s Degree | 46 | 45.1 |
| PhD — Doctor of Philosophy | 4 | 3.9 |
| EdD — Doctor of Education | 3 | 2.9 |
| JD — Juris Doctor | 4 | 3.9 |
| Other | 11 | 10.8 |
| Total | 102 | 100 |
| Years Since Completing Highest Degree | ||
| Less than 1 year | 8 | 11.3 |
| 1-4 years | 20 | 28.2 |
| 5-9 years | 9 | 12.7 |
| 10-14 years | 11 | 15.5 |
| 15+ years | 23 | 32.4 |
| Total | 71 | 100 |
Sports coaches attended different types of professional development during the pandemic. Participants were asked to identify the type(s) and number of professional development offerings related to coaching that they completed between March 1, 2020 and October 1, 2021. Across all three groups of sports coaches, the types of professional development attended most often included workshops and webinars followed by certificate programs (completion, non-credit bearing) and certificate programs (credit, degree bearing). Just over one-quarter of the participants attended 1-2 workshops, 1-2 webinars, 5+ webinars, and 1-2 certificate programs (completion, non-credit bearing). Table 2 provides a breakdown of the type of professional development attended.
Table 2
Types of Professional Development Related to Coaching
| Valid Percent Enrolled in 1- 2 | Valid Percent Enrolled in 3-4 | Valid Percent Enrolled in 5+ | Valid Percent Did not enroll | |
| Workshops | 27 | 10 | 16 | 47 |
| Webinars | 31 | 14 | 27 | 28 |
| Certificate Program (institutional credit; undergraduate; graduate; post-baccalaureate, post-master’s) | 18 | 7 | 9 | 66 |
| Certificate Program (completion, attendance, no institutional credit) | 25 | 7 | 10 | 58 |
| MOOC | 13 | 7 | 11 | 70 |
When asked to rank their preferred format for professional development, participants across all three groups ranked onsite: PK-12 sports coaches (M = 1.80), higher education sports coaches (M = 1.81), and sports-related organization coaches (M = 1.95). Table 3 provides a breakdown of the preferred format for attending professional development by modality.
Table 3
Ranked Level of Preference in Modalities for Attending Professional Development
| Participant Group | Modality | Mean | Standard Deviation |
| PK-12 Sports Coaches | Onsite Hybrid Online HyFlex | 1.80 2.60 2.72 2.88 | 1.000 0.866 1.275 1.054 |
| Higher Education Sports Coaches | Onsite Hybrid HyFlex Online | 1.81 2.58 2.69 2.92 | 1.059 0.987 0.970 1.197 |
| Sports-Related Organization Coaches | Onsite Hybrid Online HyFlex | 1.95 2.42 2.63 3.00 | 1.079 0.961 1.212 1.054 |
Participants were asked to identify from a list of 23 strategies, principles, or practices from the learning sciences which ones they were currently using or previously had used as part of their coaching practice to support learning. Table 4 provides an overview of the strategies, principles, or practices identified by the participants. The five strategies, principles, and practices used most by participants included Promoting Growth Mindset (78%), Active Learning (74%), Modeling (74%), Experiential Learning (73%), and Mindfulness (70%). It should be noted that 83% of participants indicated they were currently or had been coaching to athletes’ learning styles, and 18% of participants were currently or had been coaching to right and left brain characteristics to support learning.
Table 4
Currently Use or Previously Used: Strategies, Principles, and Practices to Support Learning
| Valid Percent Currently Use or Have Used | |
| Promoting Growth Mindset | 78 |
| Active Learning | 74 |
| Modeling | 74 |
| Experiential Learning | 73 |
| Mindfulness | 70 |
| Spaced Practice | 66 |
| Differentiated Instruction | 65 |
| Multisensory Learning | 61 |
| Elaboration | 58 |
| Low Stakes Evaluations | 57 |
| Social Emotional Learning | 55 |
| Retrieval Practice | 49 |
| Culturally Responsive Practices | 44 |
| Scaffolding | 41 |
| Metacognition | 39 |
| Creativity and Innovation Integration | 38 |
| Backward Design | 32 |
| Interleaved Practice | 32 |
| Cognitive Load Theory | 29 |
| Epistemic Cognition | 19 |
| Coaching to Athletes’ Learning Styles | 83 |
| Massed Practice | 54 |
| Coaching to Right and Left Brain Characteristics | 18 |
Participants were asked to identify when and where they had learned about the 23 strategies, principles, or practices. Table 5 provides an overview of the responses and indicates that participants learned about many of the strategies, principles, or practices during their undergraduate and graduate degree programs as well as in professional development offered during the pandemic and through colleagues, online/internet, and books.
Table 5
Learned about Strategies, Principles, and Practices to Support Learning
| Percent During my high school education | Percent During my undergraduate education | Percent During my graduate education | Percent PD prior March 1, 2020 | Percent PD between March 1,2020 and October 1, 2020 | Percent Colleagues | Percent Online / Internet (e.g., content, blogs, podcasts, etc.) | Percent Books | Percent Articles | Percent Unsure | Percent N/A | |
| Active Learning | 11 | 21 | 24 | 3 | 10 | 12 | 15 | 15 | 10 | 3 | 3 |
| Backward Design | 4 | 5 | 12 | 9 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Coaching | 10 | 26 | 24 | 30 | 17 | 22 | 22 | 16 | 16 | 3 | 4 |
| Cognitive Load Theory | 4 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 7 | 12 |
| Creativity and Innovation Integration | 4 | 14 | 11 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 10 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 11 |
| Culturally Responsive Practices | 7 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 13 | 13 | 12 | 9 | 8 | 6 | 8 |
| Differentiated Instruction | 8 | 14 | 20 | 30 | 11 | 19 | 15 | 16 | 15 | 5 | 4 |
| Elaboration | 10 | 14 | 21 | 22 | 8 | 9 | 12 | 12 | 9 | 7 | 7 |
| Epistemic Cognition | 4 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 13 |
| Experiential Learning | 11 | 22 | 22 | 22 | 11 | 14 | 18 | 14 | 15 | 6 | 4 |
| Interleaved Practice | 4 | 9 | 13 | 11 | 8 | 8 | 10 | 6 | 4 | 8 | 8 |
| Low Stakes Evaluations | 8 | 12 | 14 | 17 | 10 | 8 | 14 | 13 | 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Metacognition | 6 | 12 | 17 | 13 | 6 | 13 | 14 | 12 | 11 | 8 | 6 |
| Mindfulness | 6 | 19 | 19 | 24 | 16 | 20 | 28 | 18 | 17 | 5 | 4 |
| Modeling | 11 | 24 | 23 | 25 | 9 | 14 | 11 | 10 | 11 | 5 | 3 |
| Multisensory Learning | 8 | 16 | 19 | 19 | 9 | 10 | 12 | 10 | 9 | 4 | 4 |
| Promoting Growth Mindset | 9 | 21 | 24 | 30 | 22 | 20 | 26 | 23 | 16 | 3 | 3 |
| Retrieval Practice | 17 | 16 | 14 | 15 | 6 | 15 | 16 | 12 | 12 | 8 | 8 |
| Scaffolding | 6 | 14 | 12 | 13 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Social Emotional Learning | 7 | 15 | 21 | 21 | 15 | 16 | 16 | 17 | 13 | 6 | 5 |
| Spaced Practice | 11 | 15 | 20 | 22 | 7 | 15 | 14 | 11 | 14 | 7 | 2 |
| Massed Practice | 15 | 16 | 17 | 19 | 8 | 12 | 11 | 9 | 9 | 7 | 4 |
| Coaching to athletes’ Learning Styles | 5 | 17 | 39 | 38 | 17 | 30 | 24 | 15 | 24 | 3 | 2 |
| Coaching to Right and Left Brain Characteristics | 5 | 8 | 9 | 13 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 10 |
Lastly, sports coaches were asked which of 23 practices, strategies, and principles they would like to learn more about to support learning. Below is the list of the top 10 practices, strategies, and principles selected by the participants. Approximately one-third of all participants indicated they wanted to learn more about epistemic cognition, cognitive load theory, and interleaved practice. Around one-quarter of all participants wanted to learn more about metacognition, retrieval practice, backward design, creativity and innovation, scaffolding, elaboration, low stakes evaluations.
- Epistemic Cognition (34.6%)
- Cognitive Load Theory (30.8%)
- Interleaved Practice (29.9%)
- Metacognition (28.0%)
- Retrieval Practice (28.0%)
- Backward Design (27.1%)
- Creativity and Innovation Integration (26.2%)
- Scaffolding (26.2%)
- Elaboration (23.4%)
- Low Stakes Evaluations (23.4%)
Cross-tabulations were used to report on the percentage of accurate responses related to neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices broken down by the coaching roles (PreK-12 education, higher education, and sports-related organizations). Tables 6-8 provide the results of the cross-tabulation analysis and the answer key for each statement.
As shown in Tables 6 and 7, when it comes to neuromyths and general knowledge about the brain and learning, the percentage of accurate responses varied greatly depending on the statement. For example, a high percentage of accurate responses by all the three groups were observed for certain statements related to the general knowledge about the brain and learning (Table 7) such as Individuals use their brains 24 hours a day (91% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 86% of Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 88% of Sports-Related Organization Coaches), The brain shuts down during sleep (91% of PK-12 and Higher Education Sports Coaches, 83% of Sports-Related Organization Coaches), and Chronic stress can change brain structure (94% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 88% for Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 92% of Sports-Related Organization Coaches). In contrast, a lower percentage of accurate responses were seen across the three roles for several neuromyths such as Individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning styles (e.g., auditory, visual, kinesthetic) (12% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 2% of Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 13% of Sports-Related Organization Sports Coaches), Listening to classical music increases reasoning ability (12% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 19% of Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 4% of Sports-Related Organization Coaches), and A common sign of dyslexia is seeing letters backwards (15% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 7% of Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 8% of Sports-Related Organization Coaches).
Table 6
Neuromyths
| Statement | % Accurate Responses by Role | Answer Key | ||
| PK-12 Sports Coaches | Higher Education Sports Coaches | Sports-Related Organization Coaches | ||
| Individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning styles (e.g., auditory, visual, kinesthetic) | 12 | 2 | 13 | Incorrect |
| Listening to classical music increases reasoning ability | 12 | 19 | 4 | Incorrect |
| A common sign of dyslexia is seeing letters backwards | 15 | 7 | 8 | Incorrect |
| Some individuals are “left- brained” and some are “right-brained,” and this helps explain differences in learning | 39 | 24 | 21 | Incorrect |
| Humans use 10% of their brain | 42 | 43 | 25 | Incorrect |
| It is best for children to learn their native language before a second language is learned | 42 | 50 | 17 | Incorrect |
| There are critical periods in human development after which certain skills can no longer be learned | 70 | 67 | 63 | Incorrect |
| Learning problems associated with developmental differences in brain function cannot be improved by education | 70 | 79 | 71 | Incorrect |
Table 7
General Knowledge about the Brain and Learning
| Statement | % Accurate Responses by Role | Answer Key | ||
| PK-12 Sports Coaches | Higher Education Sports Coaches | Sports-Related Organization Coaches | ||
| The brain is a muscle | 27 | 36 | 33 | Incorrect |
| Learning is due to the addition of new cells to the brain | 42 | 41 | 29 | Incorrect |
| When a brain region is damaged, other parts of the brain can sometimes take up its function | 52 | 57 | 63 | Correct |
| Extended practice of some mental processes can change the shape and structure of some parts of the brain | 64 | 69 | 71 | Correct |
| The left and right hemispheres of the brain work together | 64 | 71 | 91 | Correct |
| Normal brain development involves the birth and death of brain cells | 70 | 50 | 54 | Correct |
| The brain acts as a filter to help individuals focus their attention | 70 | 55 | 67 | Correct |
| Production of new neuronal connections in the brain continues over the lifespan | 79 | 64 | 83 | Correct |
| Neuroplasticity is the brain’s ability to reorganize and rewire itself over the lifespan | 79 | 67 | 79 | Correct |
| Learning physically changes the brain | 79 | 76 | 67 | Correct |
| Brain development has finished by the time children reach puberty | 79 | 83 | 63 | Incorrect |
| Learning occurs when there are changes to the connections between brain cells | 88 | 62 | 71 | Correct |
| Individual learners show preferences for the mode in which they receive information (e.g., auditory, visual, kinesthetic) | 88 | 76 | 96 | Correct |
| Human brains are relatively as unique as fingerprints | 88 | 81 | 75 | Correct |
| Individuals use their brains 24 hours a day | 91 | 86 | 88 | Correct |
| The brain shuts down during sleep | 91 | 91 | 83 | Incorrect |
| Information is stored in networks of cells distributed throughout the brain | 94 | 76 | 71 | Correct |
| Intelligence is fixed at birth | 94 | 81 | 75 | Incorrect |
| Chronic stress can change brain structure | 94 | 88 | 92 | Correct |
Similar to neuromyths and general knowledge about the brain and learning, the percentage of accurate responses varied greatly across different statements when it comes to the participants’ knowledge of evidence-based practices (Table 8). For instance, a high percentage of accurate responses by all the three groups were observed for statements such as Maintaining a positive sports environment helps to promote learning (100% of PK-12 and Sports-Related Organization Sports Coaches, 95% of Higher Education Sports Coaches), Emotions can affect human cognitive processes, including attention, learning and memory, reasoning, and problem solving (100% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 98% of Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 96% for Sports-Related Organization Coaches), and Repeated practice and rehearsal of learned material or a skill help to consolidate it in long-term memory (100% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 91% of Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 96% of Sports-Related Organization Coaches). In contrast, a lower percentage of accurate responses were observed for several statements including Differentiated instruction is individualized instruction (39% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 17% of Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 33% of Sports-Related Organization Coaches) and Critical thinking requires epistemic cognition (30% of PK-12 Sports Coaches, 31% of Higher Education Sports Coaches, and 38% of Sports-Related Organization Coaches).
Table 8
Evidenced-Based Practices
| Statement | % Accurate Responses by Role | Answer Key | ||
| PK-12 Sports Coaches | Higher Education Sports Coaches | Sports-Related Organization Coaches | ||
| Critical thinking requires epistemic cognition | 30 | 31 | 38 | Correct |
| With respect to memory, massed instruction is superior to spaced instruction | 36 | 55 | 46 | Incorrect |
| Differentiated instruction is individualized instruction | 39 | 17 | 33 | Incorrect |
| Experts and novices approach solving problems in essentially the same way | 42 | 69 | 71 | Incorrect |
| Human memory works much like a digital recording device or video camera in that it accurately records the events individuals have experienced | 52 | 50 | 42 | Incorrect |
| Frequent, low stakes assessments do not enhance learning | 58 | 57 | 67 | Incorrect |
| Spaced practice is remembered better than massed practice of the same information | 58 | 60 | 67 | Correct |
| Multitasking increases productivity | 58 | 62 | 67 | Incorrect |
| Left-handed individuals are more creative than right-handed individuals | 61 | 52 | 42 | Incorrect |
| The human brain seeks and often quickly detects novelty | 64 | 64 | 67 | Correct |
| Focused attention is essential for learning new information | 64 | 79 | 75 | Correct |
| Metacognition plays a role in learning | 73 | 55 | 75 | Correct |
| Athletic assessment, in general, tends to detract from learning | 73 | 71 | 54 | Incorrect |
| Rereading course materials is the best strategy for learning | 79 | 52 | 33 | Incorrect |
| One is either born creative or not; creativity cannot be taught | 82 | 71 | 79 | Incorrect |
| Stress can impair the ability of the brain to encode and recall memories | 91 | 100 | 83 | Correct |
| Sleep has a vital role in memory consolidation | 97 | 98 | 92 | Correct |
| Meaningful feedback accelerates learning | 97 | 98 | 96 | Correct |
| Repeated practice and rehearsal of learned material or a skill help to consolidate it in long-term memory | 100 | 91 | 96 | Correct |
| The mind connects new information to prior knowledge | 100 | 88 | 100 | Correct |
| Explaining the purpose of a learning activity helps engage students in that activity | 100 | 93 | 96 | Correct |
| Emotions can affect human cognitive processes, including attention, learning and memory, reasoning, and problem-solving | 100 | 98 | 96 | Correct |
| Maintaining a positive sports environment helps to promote learning | 100 | 95 | 100 | Correct |
The 27 statements for neuromyths and general knowledge about the brain and learning across groups were examined using one-way ANOVA. The analysis revealed no statistically significant differences across levels of institution (F = 1.53, df = 2, p > .05). There were also no statistically significant differences found when examining sports coaches by primary role (F= .41, df = 4, p > .05). The related mean percentages across groups is shown in Figures 1 and 2. Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences found between awareness of neuromyths and general information about the brain and learning and institution type (public, private, for-profit), institution level, highest degree earned, time from highest degree earned, age, and gender.
The 23 statements for evidence-based practices were examined using one-way ANOVA to compare the mean percentage of accurate responses across levels of institution. There were no statistically significant differences found across levels of institution (F= .22, df = 2, p > .05). Similarly to neuromyths and general knowledge about the brain and learning, no significant differences were found when examining sports coaches by primary role (F = 1.53, df = 4, p > .05). The related mean percentage scores are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences found between awareness of evidence-based practices and general information about the brain and institutional type (public, private, for-profit), institutional level, highest degree earned, time from highest degree earned, age, and gender.
Figure 1
Coaching Groups: Mean Percentage of Accurate Responses for Neuromyths and General Knowledge about the Brain and Learning, and Evidence-Based Practices
Figure 2
Coaching Roles: Mean Percentage of Accurate Responses for Neuromyths and General Knowledge about the Brain and Learning, and Evidence-Based Practices
Participants were asked if they found scientific knowledge about the brain and its influence on learning valuable for their coaching and professional development. Additionally, participants were asked about their interest in learning more about the brain and its influence on learning. Table 9 reveals that participants perceived a high value and interest in scientific knowledge about the brain. The majority of participants agreed or strongly agreed that scientific knowledge about the brain was valuable for their coaching (96%) and professional development (97%). Comparably, 97% of the participants agreed or strongly agreed that they were interested in learning more about scientific knowledge about the brain and its influence on learning.
Table 9
Statements about Value of and Interest in Scientific Knowledge about the Brain
| Valid Percent Strongly Disagree/Disagree | Valid Percent Strongly Agree/Agree | |
| I find scientific knowledge about the brain and its influence on learning valuable for my coaching | 4 | 96 |
| I find scientific knowledge about the brain and its influence on learning valuable for my professional development | 3 | 97 |
| I am interested in learning more about the brain and its influence on learning | 3 | 97 |
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine professional development in sports coaching education and levels of awareness of neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices among sports coaches. A wide variety of professional development opportunities are offered for many professionals, including sports coaches, at all levels, to engage in a different approach to professional development, especially through online platforms.
Professional development underwent a transition during 2020 and 2021 with most offerings transitioning to online platforms due to the pandemic. This shift not only ensured the continuity of learning but also eliminated barriers such as travel time and costs, enabling wider participation and access for individuals seeking to enhance their professional skills (26). Many different options were offered to sports coaches, to explore various subjects ranging from sports-specific content to a focus on general performance improvement. While the professional development experience of sports coaches was explored more attention is required to better understand the learning that took place for sports coaches during this time (27-28). Investigating these experiences is crucial to better understand the learning processes and outcomes that occurred during the unique aspects of the pandemic period. Gaining deeper insights into the effectiveness of online professional development can identify areas for improvement and best practices that enhance coach learning, ultimately leading to better athlete support and performance. This knowledge can also inform future professional development programs, ensuring they meet the evolving needs and challenges of sports coaches in an ever-changing sports landscape.
Similar to research conducted by Bailey et al. (7), this study found a relatively high prevalence of neuromyths. While many sports coaches provided accurate responses to certain statements about the brain and evidence-based practices, overall, there remains a significant number of sports coaches who lack knowledge in those areas. The issue might stem from the lack of opportunities for sports coaches to participate in professional development programs focused on human learning and evidence-based pedagogical practices that can enhance coaching practices. This study is significant since it helps to identify opportunities for sports leaders and program developers to find ways to increase awareness regarding neuromyths, general knowledge about the brain and learning, and evidence-based practices among sports coaches in professional development programs. Addressing neuromyths and pseudoscientific ideas through professional development reduces the risk of misinformation or unsubstantiated practices being integrated into coaching and negatively impacting athletes’ performance or epistemological beliefs.
A key finding from this study is that, regardless of levels of engagement in professional development and awareness levels, sports coaches expressed high levels of interest in acquiring more knowledge about the brain and specific knowledge about evidence-based practices. Sports coaches acknowledged the importance of knowledge of the brain to positively impact their own effectiveness and the connection that this has to their athlete’s performance.
Another key finding is sports coaches’ interest in diverse strategies, principles, and practices that support learning. Between one-quarter to one-third of the participants indicated they wanted to learn more about epistemic cognition, cognitive load theory, interleaved practice, metacognition, and retrieval practice as the top five selected strategies, principles, and practices. These are all critical topics related to the human learning process, the construction of knowledge, and the formation of memory. Professional development that integrates research grounded in the learning sciences can assist in debunking neuromyths and dispel pseudoscientific ideas, such as the idea that humans use 10% of their brain, that individuals are left- or right-brained, or that human memory works like a digital recording devise or video camera. Understanding neuroplasticity and the brain’s ability to change through experience and practice can be transformational to coaching. Furthermore, a deeper understanding of key topics like cognitive load theory and epistemic cognition can provide critical insight into understanding evidence-based practices such as why focused attention is essential for learning new information and why spaced practice is remembered better than massed practice of the same information.
Sports coaches work very closely with athletes. What sports coaches share through their instruction, feedback, and encouragement directly impacts athletes’ learning, performance, and development. By imparting knowledge grounded in the learning sciences, sports coaches can enhance athletes’ acquisition and retention of complex skills. Through integrating evidence-based practices such as metacognition, retrieval practice, and interleaving, and by explaining how the brain continues to change through neuroplasticity, sports coaches can enhance athletic performance, well-being, and resilience in their athletes. Therefore, further research is required to develop a deeper understanding of sports coaches’ perceptions of the brain and learning as they relate to the complex nature of the coaching process (7, 19, 23).
This study has several limitations. The first limitation is that the study utilized convenience and snowball sampling. Each member of the research team invited participants to be a part of the study based on their connections which may cause potential bias. The non-random nature of this recruitment method may result in a sample that is not entirely representative of the broader population and may limit the generalizability of the findings to a wider population. The second limitation is that the survey was internationally distributed. The unequal sample sizes representing different countries may introduce potential bias which may impact the generalizability of the collected data beyond the studied sample. The third limitation is a low response rate. Within one week of sending out the survey, educational institutions shut for a second time due to the pandemic. This sudden shift may have impacted the availability of participants to complete the survey. Another consideration is the limited nature of the demographic information collected and the type of analysis that could be conducted across different demographic groups. For instance, knowing the number of years participants served in their current roles and their tenure or non-tenure status would allow for additional analysis to examine the impact of the years of experience and the type and frequency of professional development on sports coaches’ knowledge, experiences, and preferences. For example, the responses from sports coaches with limited experience and exposure to professional development might have skewed the data, highlighting another potential limitation.
Conclusions
Findings from this study both support and build upon research by Bailey et al. (7) that examined the prevalence of neuromyths and pseudoscientific ideas in sports coaches in Ireland and the United Kingdom. Reporting similar levels of awareness of neuromyths as Bailey and colleagues (7) this study further examined knowledge about the brain and learning, as well as the use of evidence-based practices of sports coaches working within PK-12, higher education, and sports-related organizations. Future research can continue to expand on valuable insights that contribute to the development of more effective, evidence-based sport coaching practices, ultimately enhancing athlete performance and fostering a culture of continuous learning and improvement within the sports community.
Sports coaches reported interest in scientific knowledge about the brain and its influence on learning, further supporting previous research. Exploring opportunities for collaboration between neuroscience, education, and sports coaching experts can facilitate the development of innovative, evidence-based coaching strategies that incorporate the latest research on brain science and learning. Finally, this study examined the engagement of sports coaches in professional development, identifying a preference for onsite professional development opportunities over hybrid, online, and HyFlex modalities as well as the practices, strategies, and principles they were most interested in learning about. These findings suggest both a need and an interest in addressing topics related to the brain and learning and the use of evidence-based practices through sports coach education, in order to better prepare sports coaches to recognize neuromyths and pseudoscientific ideas. Professional development opportunities may provide a variety of accessible formats to address this need.
Applications in Sports
Professional development is fundamental to sports coaching. It provides a unique opportunity to integrate evidence-based practices from research related to neuroscience, psychology, and education to the coaching profession, as well as to debunk scientific ideas. According to Waring (25), “The ability to conceptualize the coaching process in terms of brain functions may enhance coaching skills and practice and may also be an additional coaching competency” (p. 68). By acquiring scientific knowledge about the brain and learning, sports coaches may find more efficient ways to plan and implement practice sessions and may also find more effective ways to communicate with their athletes (19). Furthermore, sports coaches may be more readily able to apply strategies, practices, and concepts to support learning and transfer of learning. Engaging in professional development related to neuroscience, psychology, and education will not only inform sports knowledge, but also inform sports pedagogy
REFERENCES
1.North, J., Callary, B., Dieffenbach, K., Galatti, L., Lara-Bercial, S., Nash, C., & O’Connor, D. (2021). A reflection on the state of sport coaching research, its community, and representation: The 2020 International Council for Coaching Excellence Research Committee consultation. International Sport Coaching Journal, 8(3), 405-413. https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2021-0041
2.Ferner, K., Ross-Stewart, L., & Dueck, D. (2023). The role of coach education in coaching philosophy development and implementation: A dual case study. The Sport Journal, 1-19. https://thesportjournal.org/article/the-role-of-coach-education-in-coaching-philosophy-development-and-implementation-a-dual-case-study/
3.Gilchrist, M., & Mallett, C. J. (2017). The theory (SDT) behind effective coaching. In R. Thelwell, C. Harwood, & I. Greenlees (Eds.), The Psychology of Sports Coaching: Research and Practice (pp. 38-53). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
4.Lyle, J. (2007). Dealing with complexity in conceptualising coaching in team sports. 1st Congresso Internacional de Jogos desportivos, Porto, Portugal. https://eprints.leedsbeckett.ac.uk/id/eprint/4240/1/dwciccits.PDF
5.Nash, C., Ashford, M., & Collins, L. (2023). Expertise in coach development: The need for Clarity. Behavioral Sciences, 13(11), 924. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13110924
6.Bailey, R., Bailey, R., Schaefer, S., Tomporowski, P., & Meeusen, R. (2018). Science, pseudoscience and exercise neuroscience: Untangling the good, the bad and the ugly. In Physical Activity and Educational Achievement (1st ed., pp. 335–359). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315305790-19
7.Bailey, R. P., Madigan, D. J., Cope, E., & Nicholls, A. R. (2018). The prevalence of pseudoscientific ideas and neuromyths among sports coaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 641. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00641
8.Piggott, D. (2015). The open society and coach education: A philosophical agenda for policy reform and future sociological research. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 20(3), 283-298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2013.837435
9.Stodter, A., & Cushion, C. J. (2019). Evidencing the impact of coaches’ learning: Changes in coaching knowledge and practice over time. Journal of Sports Sciences, 37(18), 2086–2093. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2019.1621045
10.Bruer, J. T. (1997). Education and the brain: A bridge too far. Educational Researcher, 26(8), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X026008004
11.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2002). Understanding the brain towards a new learning science. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/31706603.pdf
12.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2007). Understanding the brain: The birth of a learning science (1st ed., pp. 263–263). OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264029132-en
13.Bei, E., Argiropoulos, D., Van Herwegen, J., Incognito, O., Menichetti, L., Tarchi, C., & Pecini, C. (2023). Neuromyths: Misconceptions about neurodevelopment by Italian teachers. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 100219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2023.100219
14.Dekker, S., Lee, N. C., Howard-Jones, P., & Jolles, J. (2012). Neuromyths in education: prevalence and predictors of misconceptions among teachers. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 429–429. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00429
15.McMahon, K., Shu-Hua Yeh, C. & Etchells, P. J. (2019) The impact of a modified initial teacher education on challenging trainees’ understanding of neuromyths. Mind, Brain and Education, 3(4), 288–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12219
16.Tardif, E., Doudin, P.-A., & Meylan, N. (2015). Neuromyths among teachers and student teachers. Mind, Brain and Education, 9(1), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12070
17.Betts, K., Miller, M., Tokuhama-Espinosa, T., Anderson, A., Borja, C., Galoyan, T., & Delaney, B. (2019). International report: Neuromyths and evidence-based practices in higher education. Online Learning Consortium. https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/read/international-report-neuromyths-and-evidence-based-practices-in-higher-education/
18.Macdonald, K., Germine, L., Anderson, A., Christodoulou, J., & McGrath, L. M. (2017). Dispelling the myth: Training in education or neuroscience decreases but does not eliminate beliefs in neuromyths. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1314. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01314
19.Balagué, N., Pol, R., & Guerrero, I. (2019). Science or pseudoscience of physical activity and sport? Apunts. Educació Física i Esports, 136, 129–136. https://doi.org/10.5672/apunts.2014-0983.es.(2019/2).136.09
20.Gründel, A., Schorer, J., Strauss, B., & Baker, J. (2013). Does playing experience improve coaching? An exploratory study of perceptual-cognitive skill in soccer coaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 129. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00129
21.Jhoty, B. (2024, January 31). The crucible of coaching in a professional sport. Esquire. https://www.esquire.com.au/sports/mental-demands-of-coaching-sport/
22.Special Olympics. (2020). The role of the coach. Gallagher. https://media.specialolympics.org/resources/sports-essentials/coaching-guides/Sports-Essentials-The-Role-of-the-Coach-2020.pdf
23.Watts, D. W., Cushion, C. J., & Cale, L. (2021). Exploring professional coach educators’ journeys and perceptions and understandings of learning. Sport, Education and Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2021.1887115
24.Moore, M. (2014, February 18). The neuroscience of good coaching. Great Good Magazine. Berkley University. https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/the_neuroscience_of_good_coaching
25.Waring, P. A. (2008). Coaching the brain. Coaching Psychologist, 4(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpstcp.2008.4.2.63
26.Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3-20.
27.Matsieli, M., & Mutula, S. (2024). COVID-19 and digital transformation in higher Education Institutions: Towards inclusive and equitable access to quality education. Education Sciences, 14(8), 819.
28.Callary, B., Brady, A., Kiosoglous, C., Clewer, P., Resende, R., Mehrtens, T., … & Horvath, R. (2020). Making sense of coach development worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Sport Communication, 13(3), 575-585.
