Coaching Under Pressure: Examining the Personal and Professional Challenges of Drill Team Coaches by Logan George A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION with an emphasis in SPORTS COACHING LEADERSHIP WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY Ogden, Utah August 2025 Approved Ryan Zimmerman, Ph.D. Chad Smith, Ph.D. Mandy Kirkham, Ph.D. 1 Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 Literature Review………………………………………………………………………………….. 4 Methodology………………………………………………………………………………………... 8 Results and Findings…………………………………………………………………………….. 11 Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………………. 15 Limitations…………………………………………………………………………………………. 17 Conclusion and Future Research……………………………………………………………… 18 References…………………………………………………………………………………………. 19 Appendices………………………………………………………………………………………… 21 Appendix A: Email to Participants Appendix B: Survey Introduction Appendix C: Demographic Questions Appendix D: Coaching Issues Survey (CIS) Appendix E: Informed Consent Form 2 Introduction In a single drill team season, I average nearly one thousand hours spent coaching in practice and countless others preparing for it. Burnout among drill team dance coaches in Utah is a significant issue driven by the demanding nature of their roles during the extended season. The consistently increasing demands for more and better performances have forced preparation for successful dance to become a year-round endeavor (Koutedakis, 2000). Drill team coaches often face long hours during a full-year season by managing practices, choreographing routines, organizing performances, and supporting athletes, all while balancing administrative duties and meeting the lofty expectations of competitions. Such stress and burnout can lead to coaches withdrawing from sports (Vealey et al., 2020). The lack of recognition for their work efforts and less-than-ideal resources further exacerbate the problem, leaving numerous coaches overwhelmed and questioning their longevity in the sport. Addressing burnout requires a shift toward prioritizing work-life balance, offering resources for mental health, and creating a more supportive community within the competitive drill team landscape. Burnout among drill team dance coaches is a problem worth addressing because it directly impacts not only the well-being of the drill coaches but also the success and health of their dancers and teams. Burnout is more likely to develop in professionals whose job roles are based on interpersonal relationships, which are a critical part of sports coaching (Olusoga et al., 2019). When coaches are overwhelmed and exhausted, their ability to inspire, coach, and lead diminishes, potentially damaging the development of young dancers. The emotional toll of burnout can lead to higher turnover rates, creating instability and inconsistency in drill team programs that strive to create strong leadership. Furthermore, burnout affects the overall culture of the sport, fostering cycles of stress and uncertainty that flow down to athletes, parents, and the school. By addressing this issue, schools and athletic organizations can ensure healthier 3 environments, retain accomplished coaches, and uphold the positive experiences that drill teams are meant to provide for both coaches and athletes. Research on burnout among drill team dance coaches in Utah is limited. However, studies on related populations offer valuable information. A 2021 thesis from the University of Northern Colorado examined causes of burnout among K -12 public school dance teachers, identifying factors such as professional responsibilities, instructional challenges, classroom management, student behavior, parental involvement, and personal issues as significant contributors (Latson, 2021). In addition, a research study in 2000 emphasized the importance of optimizing the quality of dance classes to achieve more in less time, thereby positively impacting dancers' physical and mental health (Koutedakis, 2000). While these studies focus on dance educators and dancers in general, their findings can correlate to drill team coaches in Utah, suggesting that high demands and insufficient support can lead to burnout. By further examining the relationship between coach burnout and overall well-being, we can better understand the needs of drill team coaches and what can be done to increase retention in the profession. The goal of this thesis is to explore the issue of burnout among drill team coaches in Utah, identifying the causes, impacts, and potential solutions to this issue. By examining the demanding nature of drill team coaching, the emotional and physical toll it takes, and its domino effect on teams and programs, this thesis aims to raise awareness and provide attainable recommendations. Ultimately, it seeks to build a healthier, more sustainable coaching environment that benefits coaches, teams, and athletes while contributing to the wider field of dance and athletics as a whole. RQ1: What causes do drill team coaches perceive in relation to coach burnout? 4 Coaching Burnout in Drill Teams: A Literature Review Introduction Coaching burnout has become a critical issue across various sports, including Utah Drill Teams. The overwhelming nature of coaching responsibilities, combined with high-performance expectations, emotional investment, and administrative burdens, often leads to significant stress and burnout among coaches. Burnout can have considerable consequences, affecting not only the well-being of the coaches but also the performance, motivation, and overall experience of the athletes they coach. Given the increasing awareness of mental health challenges in the coaching profession, it is crucial to explore the factors contributing to burnout, its effects, and the potential strategies for its mitigation. While there is extensive research on coaching burnout in general sports and dance education, there is a notable lack of research specifically addressing burnout in drill team coaching. This gap in literature promotes the need for further research into the unique stressors and challenges that drill team coaches face, specifically in the state of Utah. This literature review investigates the primary causes of coaching burnout and its psychological and physiological effects, with an emphasis on drill team and dance coaches. Causes of Coaching Burnout Research has consistently identified several key factors that contribute to coaching burnout. One of the primary stressors is the prominent level of performance pressure placed on coaches. Carson et al. (2019) examined the mental well-being of Australian sports coaches. They found that external performance expectations, job insecurity, and difficulties maintaining a work-life balance were significant factors contributing to stress and burnout. The pressure to consistently achieve excellence in competitions and performances places an additional burden on drill team coaches, who are responsible for both technical training and varsity-level competitiveness. 5 Additionally, added professional responsibilities contribute to burnout, particularly among educators and drill team coaches. Latson (2021) investigated burnout among K -12 public school dance teachers and found that classroom management, student behavioral issues, and the expectation to fulfill multiple roles simultaneously were leading causes of stress. These findings are directly relevant to drill team coaches, who often function as choreographers, mentors, and counselors for their athletes. Furthermore, many Utah Drill Team coaches also hold education positions at the schools where they coach, ranging from PE, Health, Science, and Math teachers. The multifactorial nature of their job increases the risk of emotional exhaustion and role overload. Internalized expectations of perfection is a symptom of the drill team cultural envrioment as well as a contributor to coaching burnout. Vealey et al. (2020) found that socially prescribed perfectionism—where individuals feel compelled to meet external expectations—was strongly associated with burnout symptoms. Similarly, research by Nordin-Bates and Jowett (2022) demonstrated that elevated stress levels resulted when coaches encountered relentless external demands, particularly in performance-driven disciplines like dance and drill teams. The need to constantly produce perfect routines and ensure competitive success intensifies the pressure on drill team coaches, potentially leading to increased emotional and psychological exhaustion. However, while studies have examined perfectionism in dance coaching, there is still a lack of literature exploring its effects on drill team coaches specifically, even though they operate in similarly high-pressure environments. Effects of Coaching Burnout The impact of burnout extends beyond the coach themself, influencing both their professional effectiveness and the well-being of their athletes. Price and Weiss (2000) conducted a study on the relationship between coach burnout and athlete experiences, concluding that higher burnout levels correlated with reduced coaching effectiveness, decreased athlete motivation, and negative training experiences. Coaches experiencing emotional 6 exhaustion often struggle to maintain enthusiasm and engagement, negatively affecting team unity and overall performance quality. Furthermore, emotional suppression, or "surface acting," has been identified as a key factor in burnout progression, which has been examined with emotional intelligence and burnout among high school athletic coaches. This study found that those who consistently suppressed their emotions to maintain professional composure experienced greater levels of stress and job dissatisfaction (Lee & Chelladurai, 2017). Over time, this emotional detachment can lead to coaches being “checked out,” increased turnover rates, and even early career departure. For drill team coaches, whose roles demand extensive emotional and athletic investment, burnout can severely impact their ability to inspire and guide their dancers. Burnout also has significant psychological and physiological implications. Chronic stress and emotional exhaustion can contribute to mental health challenges such as anxiety, depression, and feelings of inadequacy. Physically, long-term burnout is associated with fatigue, sleep disturbances, and weakened immune function, leading to increased susceptibility to illness and prolonged recovery times (Olusoga et al., 2019). These factors further confirm the importance of addressing burnout to ensure the long-term sustainability of athletic coaching careers in high-pressure environments, such as drill team. Despite these well-documented consequences, there is still a noticeable gap in research detailing how drill team coaches experience and cope with these symptoms compared to their counterparts in other sports coaching fields. Conclusion Existing research highlights the substantial impact of coaching burnout, especially in performance-intensive sports similar to drill team. Factors such as external expectations, excessive job demands, emotional distress, and perfectionism contribute to heightened stress levels, which can have negative effects on both coaches and their athletes. Future research should explore the drill team-specific challenges in greater depth and develop tailored 7 interventions to support these coaches in sustaining their passion, effectiveness, and career longevity. 8 METHODS Research Design This study utilizes a quantitative research design to explore coach burnout among Utah drill team coaches. The primary aim of the study is to understand the unique factors contributing to burnout in drill team coaches with a focus on their experiences, perceptions, and the challenges they face. Quantitative data was collected through the Coaching Issues Survey (CIS), which was distributed via email to approximately 100 Utah drill team head and assistant coaches. Coaching Issues Survey The Coaching Issues Survey (CIS) was designed to assess sport-specific stressors within the coaching role. Factor analysis identified four key stress-related subscales: Win-Loss, Time-Role, Program-Success, and Athlete-Concerns, all of which demonstrated strong reliability and stability (Kelley et al. 1999). The CIS is aligned with previously existing stress and burnout measures, showing strong predictive validity for stress assessment and moderate predictive power for burnout. These findings support the CIS as a useful tool for examining coaching-related stress and burnout, aiding in the understanding and management of challenges faced by athletic coaches in a variety of sports. Participants The participants in this study consist of Utah drill team head and assistant coaches, with a sample size of 27 coaches. The participant pool was drawn from a list of coaches compiled through the Utah Drill and Dance Association communication inventory. Invitations to participate in the study were sent via email, with coaches being asked to participate in the study voluntarily. In order to participate, individuals had to meet the following criteria: ● Be currently employed as a drill team coach at a Utah high school, as either a head or assistant coach 9 ● Be willing to engage in a qualitative survey that addresses issues of burnout and stress within their coaching role Participation in the study is voluntary, and participants were given the opportunity to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence. Coaches who agreed to participate provided informed consent before completing the Coaching Issues Survey (CIS). Data Collection Data for this study was collected using the Coaching Issues Survey (CIS), a standardized instrument designed to assess various aspects of coach burnout and stress. The CIS includes 30 questions that participants will rank on a Likert scale, one to five, in regards to their stress levels. The survey was delivered to head drill coaches via email, with a request for them and their assistant coaches to complete it within two weeks of receiving the survey. To ensure high response rates and maintain participant engagement, reminder emails were sent one week after the initial invitation and again at the end of the two-week data collection period. The email included a brief explanation of the study, the purpose of the survey, and the importance of their participation in helping to understand coach burnout in drill team settings. Additionally, participants were assured of the confidentiality of their responses. Ethical Considerations Ethical approval for this study was completed through the Weber State University institutional review board (IRB) to ensure the research adheres to ethical standards. The following ethical considerations were observed throughout the study: informed consent, voluntary participation, data security, potential risks, and benefits. Data Analysis Given the quantitative nature of the study, data analysis follows a deductive approach, focusing on the statistical analysis of structured survey responses. The analysis has been conducted using descriptive statistics to examine trends, relationships, and significant factors contributing to burnout among Utah high school drill team coaches. The data analysis process 10 begins with data preparation, where collected responses have been cleaned and checked for missing values to ensure completeness and reliability. Next, descriptive statistics have been calculated to provide an overview of key variables. Finally, the interpretation involves a comprehensive statistical report that details findings and correlations, with results presented in tables to highlight key trends and relationships relevant to drill team coaching burnout. 11 Results/Findings The survey was completed by 27 Utah drill team coaches representing a variety of classifications from 2A to 6A, see Figure 2. Participants included both head and assistant coaches, with coaching experience ranging from one to over ten years, see Figure 1. 81% of the responders specified that they held a primary job outside of their coaching role, most often in education-related fields including 59% responders working as teachers, see Figure 3. This dual responsibility played a significant role in their reported experiences of stress and burnout. Figure 1 Years Spent Coaching Drill Team Figure 2 Classification of Team Coached 12 Figure 3 Primary Job of Coach The results revealed several key factors to burnout among the coaches surveyed. The most common source of stress was the substantial number of hours spent working in a day, with an average rating of 4.33 out of 5 on a Likhert scale. 85% of coaches rated this item at the highest levels of stress, indicating that the time commitment required for coaching, on top of other employment, was overwhelming. Closely related to this, many coaches reported difficulty in successfully fulfilling their non-coaching responsibilities, especially their primary job duties. Balancing the expectations of both professional roles emerged as a major strain. In addition, 74% of coaches reported “not having time for myself” as a 4 or 5 on the scale which further emphasizes the stress on coaches’ well-being. Budget limitations were also highlighted as a significant concern. Coaches expressed frustration that restricted funding negatively impacted their ability to recruit, travel, and provide competitive opportunities for their teams. Inconsistent judging during competitions was another common stressor, with an average ranking of 4 out of 5, leading to frustration of biased scoring and its impact on team motivation and outcomes, see Figure 4. In addition, a lack of personal time and the interference of coaching responsibilities with family or social life were frequently mentioned, including 70.3% of coaches reporting that coaching interferes with their family or social life, see Figure 5. These findings strengthen the idea that burnout is deeply tied not only to workload but also to the negative impact of work-life balance. 13 Figure 4 Inconsistent Judging During Competition (1 = No Stress, 5 = Extreme Stress) Figure 5 Career as a Coach Interferes with Family and/or Social Life (1 = No Stress, 5 = Extreme Stress) Several stressors were rated in the moderate range, ranking from 3.4 to 3.7 on average, including understanding athletes’ emotional needs, managing negative media or social media coverage, navigating conflicts over facility use, and dealing with inconsistent athlete performance. Coaches also reported moderate stress in relation to the pressure to win, particularly in competitions where their teams were evenly matched with other teams, with an average rank of 3 reported by coaches. Objectively, certain stressors appeared to be less concerning to respondents. Handling defeat, dealing with momentum shifts during competition, and making unpopular decisions with athletes were generally rated as lower stress factors. Similarly, concerns about athlete retention 14 or players not returning the following year were not widely reported as major contributors to burnout by coaches and thus are insignificant in the previous data points. Overall, the data suggest that the most pressing issues for drill team coaches center around time demands, conflicting job responsibilities, and system limitations including budgeting and competition culture. While competitive pressures exist, they appear secondary to the broader challenges of the intense workload. These findings highlight the complex nature of coaching burnout and the need for internal support to address its root causes. Figure 6 Top 5 Reported Burnout Stressors Among Utah Drill Team Coaches Inconsistent judging during competitions 3.96 Placing pressure on myself to win 3.63 Injury to one of my starters or top athletes 3.41 Players’ inconsistency in executing fundamental skills or competition plans 3.41 The expectation to win a competition in which teams are evenly matched 3.41 *Average Stress Rating on a scale of 1 - 5 (1 = No stress, 5 = Extreme Stress) 15 Discussion The findings of this study highlight the significant and multifactored nature of burnout among Utah drill team coaches. The data suggests that the leading contributors to burnout are systemic and logistical stressors rather than isolated, competition-based pressures. The largest among these stressors was the overwhelming number of hours worked each day. This issue was worsened by the reality that most coaches also held primary jobs, often in education. Balancing the demands of coaching with full-time employment created a considerable mental strain, making it difficult for coaches to meet their personal and professional responsibilities effectively. Another key factor to burnout identified in the data was the challenge of fulfilling non-coaching obligations, particularly teaching duties. This finding mirrors existing literature, which notes that role overload is a common source of emotional exhaustion for individuals in multifaceted positions (Latson, 2021; Carson et al., 2019). The dual role of teacher and coach appears especially difficult within the drill team world, where coaches are often responsible for high stress performances that demand year round preparation. Additionally, budget limitations were frequently referenced, with coaches noting that restricted funding hindered their ability to recruit, travel, and offer competitive experiences to their athletes, an issue included in previous research regarding resource shortage and coach stress. Inconsistent judging during competitions was also a commonly reported frustration. Unlike more objective sports, dance and drill are subject to highly variable interpretations of performance quality. This lack of consistency contributes not only to overall dissatisfaction but also to a perceived lack of control, further intensifying burnout symptoms. Coaches also reported stress related to work-life imbalance, particularly in how coaching duties interfered with family and social life. These findings are consistent with prior research indicating that when coaches sacrifice personal well-being for professional performance, their burnout risk increases dramatically (Vealey et al., 2020; Lee & Chelladurai, 2017). 16 Interestingly, the data showed that competitive pressures such as making unpopular decisions, handling defeat, or athlete retention were rated lower on the scale of burnout contributors. This may suggest that coaches are more accepting of challenges basic to competition, but find greater difficulty in managing the ongoing, systemic stressors that impact daily responsibilities and long-term sustainability. This difference is important, as it implies that reducing burnout may not be a matter of teaching resilience against defeat or failure, but rather creating internal support to reduce chronic overwork and overall burden. Ultimately, the findings align with existing research in related athletic fields while also contributing specific insight into drill team coaching. The emotional labor, physical time demands, and organizational constraints that these coaches face paint a clear picture: burnout is not simply a personal problem but a systemic one. To reduce coach burnout, schools and athletic departments must consider implementing meaningful supports, including mental health resources, flexible scheduling, financial assistance, and clearer judging criteria for competitions. These systemic changes have the potential to improve not only the coaches’ well-being but also the experience of the athletes they serve. 17 Limitations While this study provides valuable insight into drill team coaching burnout in Utah, limitations must be acknowledged. First, the sample size of 27 participants, although sufficient for primary analysis, limits the significance of the findings. A larger sample would provide a more comprehensive understanding of statewide trends and offer greater statistical power to detect subgroup differences based on classification, experience level, or employment status. Part of this problem was the high turnover rate of drill team coaches this off season. There were 30 head coach position changes this spring, leading to a trickle effect of new head and assistant coaches. In order to be eligible to participate in this study coaches had to have had at least one year of experience. Due to the high prevalence of brand-new coaches this year, the sample size of this study was affected negatively. Second, the study relied on self-reported data gathered through a single survey instrument (the Coaching Issues Survey), which may be subject to response bias. Participants may have over or under reported stressors based on personal interpretation, social appeal, or current emotional state at the time of completion. Furthermore, the survey's structure, while aligned with validated subscales, did not allow for open-ended responses that could capture the complexity of individual experiences. Lastly, this study used a quantitative design and did not include qualitative interviews or longitudinal follow-up. This limits the depth of understanding around how burnout changes over time or how coaches cope with ongoing stress. Future research that includes interviews, case studies, or a mixed-methods approach could offer deeper, more detailed insight into the emotional and psychological aspects of coaching burnout. Despite these limitations, this study offers a crucial first step in identifying and understanding the burnout experiences of drill team coaches in Utah. The insights gathered can inform future investigations and guide efforts to support and retain coaches in this demanding but important role. 18 Conclusion and Future Research The results of this study suggest that the most significant contributors to burnout are not isolated or competition-specific events, but rather ongoing systemic and internal pressures such as time demands, dual job roles, limited resources, and subjective judging. These findings highlight that burnout in drill team coaching is not solely a personal or emotional failure, but a structural issue rooted in the nature of the profession. While some stress is expected in any athletic coaching role, the degree and consistency of the stress reported in this study expresses a need for change. Athletic departments, school districts, and state associations must begin to implement proactive strategies to support coach mental health and job sustainability. Solutions may include offering more flexible work schedules for dual-role educators, increasing funding for program needs, and incorporating burnout prevention training into professional development. Despite the valuable information of this study, the findings also highlight a need for additional research. Future studies could expand the participant pool to include coaches from other states or regions to compare trends and identify broader patterns. In addition, qualitative research, such as in-depth interviews or focus groups, could offer richer context behind the data. Longitudinal research tracking burnout symptoms over time would also provide a better understanding of how stress evolves across a season or a coach’s career. In conclusion, this research serves as a call to action. By recognizing the sources and consequences of coach burnout in the Utah drill team community, coaches and athletic directors can begin to develop meaningful solutions. Supporting coaches is not only vital to their personal well-being but is essential to preserving the quality, consistency, and success of drill team programs across the state. 19 References Carson, F., Malakellis, M., Walsh, J., Main, L. C., & Kremer, P. (2019). Examining the mental well-being of Australian sport coaches. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(23), 4601. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234601 Carson, F., Walsh, J., Main, L. C., & Kremer, P. (2018). High performance coaches’ mental health and wellbeing: Applying the areas of work life model. International Sport Coaching Journal, 5(3), 293–300. Kelley, B. C., Eklund, R. C., & Ritter-Taylor, M. (1999). Development of the coaching issues survey (CIS). Journal of Sport Behavior, 22(2), 162–183. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262375303_Development_of_the_Coaching_Is sues_Survey_CIS Koutedakis, Y. (2000). “Burnout” in dance: The physiological viewpoint. Journal of Dance Medicine & Science, 4(4), 122–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089313X0000400402 Latson, R. (2021). Causes of burnout among K-12 public school dance teachers: Preventative strategies to improve teacher retention in 21st-century education (Master’s thesis). University of Northern Colorado. https://digscholarship.unco.edu/theses/236 Lee, Y. H., & Chelladurai, P. (2017). Emotional intelligence, emotional labor, coach burnout, job satisfaction, and turnover intention in sport leadership. European Sport Management Quarterly, 18(4), 393–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2017.1406971 Lundkvist, E., Gustafsson, H., Gerber, M., Lundqvist, C., Ivarsson, A., & Madigan, D. J. (2019). Commentary: Early risk detection of burnout: Development of the Burnout Prevention Questionnaire for coaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2721. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02721 20 McNeill, K., Durand-Bush, N., & Lemyre, P.-N. (2020). Can learning self-regulatory competencies through a guided intervention improve coaches’ burnout symptoms and well-being? Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology, 14(2), 149–169. Nordin-Bates, S. M., & Jowett, G. (2022). Relationships between perfectionism, stress, and basic need support provision in dance teachers and aesthetic sport coaches. Journal of Dance Medicine & Science, 26(1), 26+. https://doi.org/10.12678/1089-313X.031522d Olusoga, P., Bentzen, M., & Kenttä, G. (2019). Coach burnout: A scoping review. International Sport Coaching Journal, 6(1), 42–62. https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2018-0092 Price, M. S., & Weiss, M. R. (2000). Relationships among coach burnout, coach behaviors, and athletes’ psychological responses. Sport Psychologist, 14(4), 391–409. Strand, B., & Samuelson, J. (2021). Physically and mentally exhausted: Overtraining and burnout in sports. VAHPERD Journal, 42(1), 13+. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A668713837/AONE?u=ogde72764&sid=summon&xid=b4 a3da0a Vealey, R. S., Coppola, A., Martin, E., Ward, R. M., & Chamberlin, J. (2020). The slippery slope: Can motivation and perfectionism lead to burnout in coaches? International Sport Coaching Journal, 7(1), 1–10. 21 Appendix A EMAIL TO DRILL TEAM COACHES Dear Utah Drill Team Coaches, I hope this message finds you well! My name is Logan George and I have been coaching at Roy High for the last 5 years. I am a masters student at Weber State University pursuing my M.ED in Sports Coaching Leadership. I am writing to you wonderful coaches because I am conducting a research project for my thesis and would love your help. I am researching the causes of coach burnout and stress among drill team coaches. To support this research, I’ve created a short, anonymous survey that should take no more than 10-15 minutes to complete. Your insights and experiences are incredibly valuable and will help shed light on the challenges we all face as drill team coaches. Head coaches – please forward this email to your assistant coaches so we can gather a wide range of perspectives. Here’s the survey link: UTAH DRILL TEAM COACHING BURNOUT Thank you so much for your time and support. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out! Best, Logan George 801-814-5161 Masters Candidate 22 Appendix B SURVEY INTRODUCTION Utah Drill Team Coaching Burnout The goal of this thesis is to explore the issue of burnout among drill team coaches in Utah, identifying the causes and impacts to this issue. By looking at the demands of the job and its emotional and physical toll, the goal is to raise awareness and brainstorm practical solutions. In the end, it aims to create a healthier, more sustainable environment for coaches, teams, and the broader drill community. *By completing and submitting this survey, the participant gives consent for the inclusion of their data and information to be used as part of the study. 23 Appendix C DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION The following information will be used to organize data by different demographic points including classification, title, and years of experience. Title (check the one that applies) o Head Coach o Assistant Coach Years spent coaching Drill Team o o o o o 1-2 years 4-5 years 6-7 years 8-9 years 9+ years What classification are you currently coaching? o o o o o o 6A 5A 4A 3A 2A 1A Do you currently work a primary job? o Yes o No If you answered yes to the previous question, what job do you have? (check all that apply) o o o o o Teacher (at my high school or another school) Dance Teacher (at a studio) Other school jobs (secretaries, counselors, etc.) Other dance jobs (choreography, private lessons, etc.) Other 24 Appendix D COACHING ISSUES SURVEY (CIS) Please rate the DEGREE to which each issue described below causes you or produces stress in your coaching situation. DEGREE 1 = No Stress, 2 = Low Stress, 3 = Moderate Stress, 4 = High Stress, 5 = Extreme Stress 1. Understanding my athletes' emotional responses and motivations. 2. Not having enough time to devote to my coaching responsibilities. 3. Negative media coverage. (social media included) 4. Other sports or campus events conflicting with my team's use of facilities. 5. Personality conflicts with my athletes. 6. Not successfully fulfilling my responsibilities outside of my coaching duties (teaching). 7. Not being able to hire adequate assistant coaches and support staff. 8. Not having time for myself. 9. Inadequate travel budget for competitions with highly competitive teams. 10. Making decisions which are not popular with my athletes. 11. My career as a coach interfering with family and/or social life. 12. Not reaching my coaching goals. 13. Not knowing the criteria by which I will be judged. 14. The expectation to win a competition in which my team is predicted to win by a close score. 15. Injury to one of my starters or top athletes. 16. Placing pressure on myself to win. 17. Being unable to recruit the key personnel that my team needs to be successful. 18. The expectation to win a contest in which my team is predicted to win by a large margin. 19. Players' inconsistency in executing the fundamental skills or competition plan. 20. Not having enough time for recruiting. 21. The expectation to win a competition in which my team is predicted to lose by a close score. 22. Being concerned that my athletes might not return to the team for the next year. 23. Inconsistent judging during a competition. 25 24. Momentum turning against my team in a competition. 25. Handling defeat. 26. Budget limitations hampering my program and recruitment. 27. The expectation to win a competition in which my ream and the opposing teams are evenly matched. 28. Substantial number of hours spent working in a day. 29. Not successfully fulfilling my responsibilities outside my coaching duties. 30. Being a source of help to my athletes. 26 Appendix E INFORMED CONSENT WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY INFORMED CONSENT Coaching Under Pressure: Examining the Personal and Professional Challenges of Drill Team Coaches You are invited to participate in a research study of coaching burnout among Utah drill team coaches. You were selected as a possible subject because you are listed as a drill team coach in Utah. We ask that you read this form and ask any questions you may have before agreeing to be in the study. The study is being conducted by Logan George, Master degree candidate from Weber State University. STUDY PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to explore the issue of burnout among drill team coaches in Utah, identifying the causes and impacts to this issue. NUMBER OF PEOPLE TAKING PART IN THE STUDY: If you agree to participate, you will be one of 50-100 subjects who will be participating in this research. PROCEDURES FOR THE STUDY: If you agree to be in the study, you will do the following things: Completing an anonymous survey answering questions about stress and burnout related to your role as a drill team coach. RISKS OF TAKING PART IN THE STUDY: Possible risk/side effect statements include: The risks of completing the survey are being uncomfortable answering the questions. The risks of possible loss of confidentiality BENEFITS OF TAKING PART IN THE STUDY You (will/will not) receive payment for taking part in this study. The benefits of this study are a healthier, more sustainable environment for drill team coaches and teams. ALTERNATIVES TO TAKING PART IN THE STUDY: Instead of being in the study, you have these options: contact me directly to answer questions, or do not participate. CONFIDENTIALITY Efforts will be made to keep your personal information confidential. We cannot guarantee absolute confidentiality. Your personal information may be disclosed if required by law. Your identity will be held in confidence in reports in which the study may be published. Organizations that may inspect and/or copy your research records for quality assurance and data analysis include groups such as the study investigator and his/her research associates, the Weber State University Institutional Review Board or its designees and (as allowed by law) state or federal agencies. 27 CONTACTS FOR QUESTIONS OR PROBLEMS For questions about the study, contact the researcher Logan George at 801-814-5161 or the researcher’s mentor Ryan Zimmerman at 801-626-6633. For questions about your rights as a research participant or to discuss problems, complaints or concerns about a research study, or to obtain information, or offer input, contact the Chair of the IRB Committee IRB@weber.edu. VOLUNTARY NATURE OF STUDY Taking part in this study is voluntary. You may choose not to take part or may leave the study at any time. Leaving the study will not result in any penalty or loss of benefits to which you are entitled. Your decision whether or not to participate in this study will not affect your current or future relations with Utah Drill Teams. SUBJECT’S CONSENT In consideration of all of the above, I give my consent to participate in this research study. I will be given a copy of this informed consent document to keep for my records. I agree to take part in this study. Subject’s Printed Name: Subject’s Signature: Date: Printed Name of Person Obtaining Consent: Signature of Person Obtaining Consent: Date: L. George - Thesis V11.docx (1) Final Audit Report Created: 2025-08-14 By: Chad Smith (chadsmith6@weber.edu) Status: Signed Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAtJVMefO8D02kmeJfDtDiN9KRTtwSKHhn "L. George - Thesis V11.docx (1)" History Document created by Chad Smith (chadsmith6@weber.edu) 2025-08-14 - 3:11:56 PM GMT- IP address: 38.46.209.42 Document e-signed by Chad Smith (chadsmith6@weber.edu) Signature Date: 2025-08-14 - 3:12:45 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 38.46.209.42 2025-08-14