The Duality of Sport Social Workers Coaching Critical Positive Youth Development

Background

Given the contemporary sociopolitical landscape—which includes systemic racism (Newman et al., 2022), gender inequity (Jeanes et al., 2021), LGBTQ+ discrimination (Robinson et al., 2022), and mental health issues (Vella et al., 2021)—youth are confronted with complex challenges. To meet the diverse needs of youth athletes within society, the privilege and responsibility of youth sport coaching must be reimagined. Critical positive youth development (CPYD)—grounded in Freire’s (1972) critical consciousness—has been positioned as a strengths-based approach that aims to help youth develop the required knowledge, skills, and efficacy to reflect on, critically question, and challenge inequitable sociopolitical norms (Gonzalez et al., 2020). In other words, CPYD emphasizes the urgency to empower youth to promote social justice and increase their ability to contribute to societal change. Considering the scarcity of CPYD in coach education, sport social workers may offer unique educational experiences and critical learning opportunities that may help fulfill a CPYD mandate within the youth sport landscape.

Method

From a social constructivist perspective, the aim of the current study was to explore the duality of sport social workers coaching competitive youth sport. Specifically, the study was designed to understand perspectives towards the similarities, differences, and conflicts between the two youth-oriented professions. Ten sport social workers participated in the study, of which six self-identified as white, two as Asian, one as Black, and one chose not to disclose. Six participants self-identified as female and four as male and were an average of 35.3 years of age (SD=7.6). All participants earned at least a MSW degree and six were licensed social workers. Participants had 11.4 years (SD=7.2) of coaching experience in sports such as track, gymnastics, volleyball, and rugby.

Participants engaged in a series of two semi-structured interviews, each was designed to be 45-60 minutes. Interview one explored experiences of being a social worker and being a competitive youth sport coach. Interview two, which occurred one week later, explored if and how being a social worker influenced their coaching. Following the guidelines put forth by Braun and Clarke (2021), a six-step reflexive thematic analysis was used to analyze interview data.

Results

Findings suggest the values, knowledge, and skills of the social work profession offer a transferable skillset and lessons to be emulated by coach education. For instance, because of their unique education and training, social workers are taught to use a strengths-based approach, maintain a holistic perspective, and teach life skills. However, key differences between the two professions included communication styles and types of goals. Finally, several role conflicts were highlighted, such as ethical differences and the discussing social justice.

Implications

Despite the similarities and differences in terms of responsibilities, roles, and demands present in social work and coaching, in principle, participants recognized that sport can and should be used to enhance youth development. Indeed, sport social workers acknowledged they were in a privileged position to create an environment where traditional PYD could be welcomed. However, the emphasis on CPYD—even for sport social worker—seemed to be controversial.