Winning trend or not?

The number of non-teachers who coach school teams in Iowa has soared in recent years - up 14 percent in the past five years, and 26 percent more over the last decade. These coaches are filling a need that some state athletic and education officials say is critical to maintaining high school athletic opportunities for students because fewer and fewer teachers want to coach or have the time to do so.

Non-teacher applicants for coaching jobs are required to complete several certification courses and submit to a criminal-background check. Iowa's requirements are considered among the strongest in the nation, although candidates don't need a college degree to be eligible.

STUDENTS MORE AT RISK?

Nonetheless, as a May 9 Gazette news story noted, there also are state and national experts who worry that this trend increases the risk that student-athletes will encounter sexual or other inappropriate contact from these coaches, who don't have traditional teacher training. They also note that these coaches don't have regular interaction with students within the normal school environment.

Are critics' fears justified? We don't know.

That's because no credible data exists that provides enough insight into the impact of non-teacher coaches in Iowa. No objective comparisons to coaches who do teach. There's also no sign that this trend of using more non-teachers in coaching roles will end any time soon.

So we think it's time for more research.

This practice has long passed the experimental stage. More than 10,000 non-teachers have active coaching authorizations in Iowa. The state first allowed non-teachers to coach in 1984, adding a required coaching authorization of required college credit courses in 2004.

The concern about inappropriate contact with students stems in part from what data does exist. The number of investigations involving the six most common infractions involving sexual contact or other inappropriate relationships with students increased nearly 200 percent over the last 10 years, according to the Iowa Board of Educational Examiners. However, that figure doesn't necessarily mean that many more such incidents are occurring - more willingness among victims to report abuse, more public awareness, and the impact of social media all could be factors. Again, the data is too limited to tell.

In one high-profile case involving a non-teaching coach in Davis County, the Education Board ruled he had sexually exploited a student and his teaching authorization was yanked. However, the Iowa Supreme Court reversed the charges last month, ruling that non-teacher coaches don't meet the definition of a school employee under Iowa law. State lawmakers since have changed that law to define non-teacher coaches as school employees.

REASONS FOR RESEARCH

The Education Board's limited overall data on investigations and complaints does not break down whether perpetrators were teachers or non-teachers. That's one reason we think the board should authorize more research.

We also suggest the board study how non-teacher coaches' influence on student-athletes compares with that of coaches who are teachers. Among other questions that could be considered in this expanded research:

'

What are the participation rates in the athletic programs that non-teachers lead or help coach?

'

Do these coaches focus primarily on teaching skills, teamwork and healthy lifelong lessons to all participating students, or are they focused only on winning games and grooming the most talented athletes?

'

Do these coaches stay with a school's program very long, helping build consistency and stability, or do many bounce around from one school to another?

'

Are there ways beyond the coaching authorization courses to better prepare non-teachers to coach, such as Iowa City West's policy of mentoring newcomers from the community and starting them as an assistant or freshman coach instead of a higher position?

'

Should the coaching authorization requirement be beefed up?

It may well be that non-teacher coaches are serving Iowa's student-athletes quite well. But given the lack of concrete evidence, let's not assume they are. Deeper research can help determine whether changes in standards or practices are needed to better protect our young people.

' Comments: editorial@thegazette.com or (319) 398-8262