1. TOWARD A VALIDATED MEASURE OF TEACHER/COACH ROLE CONFLICT Thomas J. Templin Purdue University Department of Health and Kinesiology Chantal Levesque-Bristol Purdue University Center for Instructional Excellence K. Andrew R. Richards Purdue University Center for Instructional Excellence Center for Instructional Excellence HEALTH AND KINESIOLOGY

2. How individuals are expected to act in social settings Socialization and the development of a role identity Role performance and consensus In the absence of consensus, individuals may experience stress related to role performance (Biddle, 1986; Hindin, 2007; Linton, 1936; Parsons, 1951; Stryker, 2001)

3. Role stressors that impact individuals’ work: Role Ambiguity Role Overload Role Conflict Two forms of role stressors: Intrarole stress Interrole stress (Richards et al., 2013; Richards & Templin, 2012; Turner, 2001)

4. Concurrent performance of teaching and coaching roles Rewards and accountability tend to favor coaching Role retreatism occurs when the T/C puts effort into one role while neglecting the other T/Cs may be able to achieve a sense of role balance Determined by individual and socialization level factors that influence the T/C (Konukman et al., 2010; Locke & Massengale, 1978; Richards & Templin, 2012)

5. While T/C role conflict has garnered significant interest, the literature lacks validated measure of the construct Ryan (2008) created the T/C Role Conflict Scale (T/C-RCS) Adapted Kopelman et al’s (1983) instrument for measuring family/work role conflict “Teaching-to-coaching” and “coaching-to-teaching” conflicts The current study sought to investigate the factorial, convergent, and divergent validity of Ryan’s scale

6. RESEARCH METHOD

7. Participants included 194 T/Cs (87 male, 107 female) Rural (N=106), small city (N=67), college-town (N=21) schools Taught core (64.4%) and non-core (35.6%) subjects All T/Cs completed an online survey that included: The T/C-RCS (Ryan, 2008) The Teacher Role Stressors Scale (TRSS) The Personal Accomplishment (PA) Subscale of the Maslach- Burnout Inventory (MBI; Maslach et al., 1996)

8. The T/C-RCS proposed by Ryan (2008) was subjected to confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using LISREL 9.1 Two factors with five items per factor Several fit indices were used to evaluate model fit: RMSEA and SRMR should be below.08 CFI and NNFI should be above.90 Correlational analysis was used to evaluate: Convergent validity (T/C-RCS with the TRSS) Divergent validity (T/C-RCS with the PA subscale)

9. RESULTS

10. CTT1 CTT2 CTT Conflict CTT3 TTC1 CTT5 CTT4 TTC2 TTC3 TTC5 TTC4 ErrorsItemsFactors TTC Conflict

11. Initial CFA indicated a good fit of the model to the data χ 2 (34)=109.31, p<.001; CFI=.96; NNFI=.95; SRMR=.06; RMSEA=.11 Correlated an error covariance between two items on the “coaching-to-teaching conflict” factor Following the modification, the fit because very good χ 2 (33)=88.92, p<.001; CFI=.97; NNFI=.96; SRMR=.05; RMSEA=.09 t-values for factor loading were all significant at p<.001

12. ItemsCTTTTCt values 1. My coaching makes it difficult to be the kind of teacher I'd like to be..77---10.89 2. Because of the amount of energy I spend in coaching, I often come to class too tired to do some of the things that I would like to do..78---10.86 3. Coaching takes up time that I would spend involved in my teaching role..77---14.32 4. I am often preoccupied with an aspect of my coaching while I am in the classroom..61---8.34 5. Because coaching is demanding, at times I am irritable while teaching..75---10.32 6. Because teaching is demanding, at times I am irritable while coaching.---.767.76 7. In teaching, I have so much work to do that it takes away from my coaching. ---.658.81 8. After teaching, I go to my practices or games more fatigued than I would prefer. ---.658.81 9. My teaching schedule makes it difficult to perform my coaching duties.---.699.36 10. I am often preoccupied with an aspect from the classroom while I am coaching. ---.689.30 Factor loadings and t values for each item

13. CTT1 CTT2 CTT Conflict CTT3 TTC1 CTT5 CTT4 TTC2 TTC3 TTC5 TTC4 0.41 0.39 0.40 0.63 0.44 0.41 0.58 0.52 0.53 0.77 0.78 0.77 0.61 0.75 0.69 0.76 0.65 0.69 ErrorsItemsFactors 0.17 TTC Conflict 0.89

14. ScaleCTTTTCRARCROPA CTT1 TTC.73**1 RA.27**.30**1 RC.25**.34**.39**1 RO.31**.44**.34**.52**1 PA-.27**-.29**-.33**-.17*-.16*1 Mean3.293.872.323.355.264.97 SD1.281.22.961.451.58.73 Skewness.16.081.51.37-.84-.66 Minimum1.00 2.50 Maximum7.00 6.00 Coefficient Alpha.86.82.77.73.86.75 Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Correlations Convergent Validity Divergent Validity

15. DISCUSSION AND FINAL THOUGHTS

16. Results support for the factorial, convergent, and divergent validity of the T/C-RCS Overall, fit indices point to good model fit Factor loadings were all strong and significant The sample of T/Cs was diverse, which extends validity to teachers of numerous content areas Teachers across all content areas engage in coaching roles (Richards & Templin, 2012) The T/C-RCS is a valid and reliable measure of T/C role conflict for use by sport pedagogy researchers

17. Evaluate the impact of role priority on role conflict Examination of the impact of role balance (Marks & MacDermind, 1996) on T/C stress Use the T/C-RCS to make recommendations for T/Cs experiencing significant conflict Applications in inservice and preservice training programs As research related to teacher socialization continues to evolve, valid and reliable measures are a necessity The T/C-RCS can be for role conflict, but surveys measuring other constructs (e.g., marginalization) would be beneficial

18. Thomas J. Templin Purdue University Department of Health and Kinesiology Chantal Levesque-Bristol Purdue University Center for Instructional Excellence K. Andrew R. Richards Purdue University Center for Instructional Excellence Center for Instructional Excellence HEALTH AND KINESIOLOGY Questions or Comments?