1. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EMPLOYEE SAFETY TRAINING AMONG HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC AND CONDITIONING COACHES Participation in high school athletics continues to grow and many see the benefits of strength and conditioning (S&C). With a greater number of students participating in athletics, more injuries may occur. High school athletic programs should foster a culture of safety for their coaches and athletes. Employee safety training for athletic and S&C coaches is essential for achieving this outcome. However, specific needs for employee safety training may differ between male and female coaches. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the gender differences in employee safety training among high school athletic and S&C coaches. METHODS: The Recreational Sports Safety Culture Questionnaire, which was a previously developed web-based survey, was distributed to 4975 high school athletic and S&C coaches via e-mail. Participants were asked nine questions under the construct “employee training” which dealt with how coaches felt administration “conducts safety audits” (Item 1), “develops a safety centered organization” (Item 2), “emphasizes sufficient safety training” (Item 3), “emphasizes safety during the orientation process” (Item 4), “updates safety manuals” (Item 5), “simplifies safety procedures” (Item 6), “recognizes hazardous situations” (Item 7), “responds to harmful events” (Item 8), and “communicates safety” (Item 9). The questions were scored on a 6-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree to 6 = strongly disagree). RESULTS: A total of 420 surveys were completed (response rate of 8.4%), of which 327 were deemed useable. The male responders (n = 228) provided significantly lower scores compared to the female responders (n = 99) for Item 3 (Chi2 = 20.137, p 0.05), Item 2 (Chi2 = 7.548, p > 0.05), Item 5 (Chi2 = 3.882, p > 0.05), Item 6 (Chi2 = 5.628, p > 0.05), Item 7 (Chi2 = 2.913, p > 0.05), and Item 8 (Chi2 = 9.295, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that male athletic and S&C coaches believe their organization emphasizes sufficient safety training (Item 3); emphasizes the safety orientation process (Item 4) and communicates safety in the organization (Item 9) to a greater extent compared to their female counterparts. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: High school athletic administrators should be aware that safety training procedures may need be adjusted to meet gender-specific needs. Administrators also need to determine if understanding and communicating safety training procedures are comprehended equally by both male and female coaches. Coaches are essential for injury prevention of athletes and are common first responders to an emergency situation. Therefore, appropriate and individualized safety training may be necessary if administrators want to create a culture of safety within athletic and S&C programs. Introduction and Purpose Conclusion George R. Schaefer, Ph.D.; Michael R. Esco, Ph.D., CSCS*D; Angela R. Russell, M.Ed., Cornell E. Foo, Ph.D.; and Brett S. Nickerson, ED.S. Auburn University at Montgomery, AL, USA Participation in high school athletics continues to grow and many see the benefits of strength and conditioning (S&C). With a greater number of students participating in athletics, more injuries may occur. High school athletic programs should foster a culture of safety for their coaches and athletes. Employee safety training for athletic and S&C coaches is essential for achieving this outcome. However, specific needs for employee safety training may differ between male and female coaches. The purpose of this study was to explore the gender differences in employee safety training among high school athletic and S&C coaches. Methods The Recreational Sports Safety Culture Questionnaire, which was a previously developed web-based survey, was distributed to 4975 high school athletic and S&C coaches via e-mail. Participants were asked nine questions under the construct “employee training” which dealt with how coaches felt administration “conducts safety audits” (Item 1), “develops a safety centered organization” (Item 2), “emphasizes sufficient safety training” (Item 3), “emphasizes safety during the orientation process” (Item 4), “updates safety manuals” (Item 5), “simplifies safety procedures” (Item 6), “recognizes hazardous situations” (Item 7), “responds to harmful events” (Item 8), and “communicates safety” (Item 9). The questions were scored on a 6-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree to 6 = strongly disagree). This study suggests that male athletic and S&C coaches believe their organization emphasizes sufficient safety training (Item 3); emphasizes the safety orientation process (Item 4) and communicates safety in the organization (Item 9) to a greater extent compared to their female counterparts. More inquiry is necessary to discover why there are gender differences between athletic and strength coaches. Practical Applications Administrators of high school sports programs should be aware of the results of this study when developing safety protocol for their athletic and conditioning programs. Both male and female athletic and conditioning coaches should be respected as an integral part of establishing safety procedures. Their knowledge of the dangers involved with physical activity is vital when generating a culture of safety. Further study is warranted to determine why many athletic and conditioning coaches believe that they have little input or get little recognition for safety procedure development or new safety ideas especially in the area of gender. As organizations continue to report difficulty deriving action plans to actually transform their safety culture, they need to remember a key element to creating a culture of safety involves organizational leaders who are willing to nurture, foster, and assist with the design of a plan. The leadership must also influence employees throughout the organization to “buy-in” to the vision of safety. Safety culture is very complex. Involving all athletic and strength coaches is essential when creating a culture of safety as they are the experts in their various areas, and ultimately, leading to a safer environment for the athletes and coaches. Abstract References 1.CDC (2006). Sports-related injuries among high school athletes- --United states, 2005—2006 school year. MMWR Weekly, 55(38), 1037-1040. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5538a1.htm. 2. Heese, M. (2012). Got the results, now what do you do? Safety culture transformation from theory to practice. Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors 2(1), 25-33. 3. Martin, N. T., (2007). Safety culture assessment in campus recreation sports: Item development, validity evidence development, and reliability analyses. Doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. 4. National Federation of State High School Associations (2012). Participation data for 2011-12 high school athletics participation survey results. Retrieved from http://www.nfhs.org/content.aspx?id=3282 5. Sammer, C. E., Lykens, K., Singh, K. P., Mains, D. A., & Lackan, N. A. (2010). What is safety culture? A review of literature. Journal of Nursing Scholarship 42(2), 156-165. 6. Wiegmann, D.A., Von Thaden, T.L., & Gibbons, A.M. (2007). A review of safety culture theory and its potential application to traffic safety. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 1-16. Retrieved from http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/WiegmannVonThadenGibbo ns.pdf Survey Results, Cont. StAASwASwDDStD M53 (23.2%) 94 (41.2%) 61 (26.8%) 11 (4.8%) 5 (2.2%) 4 (1.8%) F18 (18.2%) 41 (41.4%) 33 (33.3%) 4 (4.0%) 3 (3.0%) 0 (0%) Item 5: Updates safety manuals M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 3.882, p =.556 StAASwASwDDStD M51 (22.4%) 126 (55.3%) 41 (18.0%) 7 (3.1%) 2 (.9%) 1 (0.4%) F23 (23.2%) 45 (45.5%) 25 (25.3%) 3 (3.0%) 3 (3.0%) 0 (0%) Item 6: Simplifies safety procedures M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 5.628, p = 0.344 StAASwASwDDStD M40 (17.5%) 100 (43.9%) 54 (23.7%) 27 (11.8%) 5 (2.2%) 2 (0.9%) F17 (17.2%) 41 (41.4%) 23 (23.2%) 13 (13.1%) 5 (5.1%) 0 (0%) Item 7: Recognizes hazardous situations M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 2.913, p = 0.713 StAASwASwDDStD M40 (17.5%) 99 (43.4%) 58 (25.4%) 28 (26.5%) 2 (.9%) 1 (0.4%) F17 (17.2%) 37 (37.4%) 29 (29.3%) 10 (11.5%) 6 (6.1%) 0 (0%) Item 8: Responds to harmful events M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 9.295, p = 0.098 StAASwASwDDStD M42 (18.4%) 114 (50%) 50 (21.9%) 16 (7.0%) 4 (1.8%) 2 (0.9%) F21 (21.2%) 32 (32.3%) 26 (26.3%) 16 (16.2%) 3 (3.0%) 1 (1.0%) Item 9: Communicates safety M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 12.104, p = 0.033 Survey Results StAASwASwDDStD M31 (13.6%) 97 (42.5%) 61 (26.8%) 17 (7.5%) 20 (8.8%) 2 (0.9%) F14 (14.3%) 43 (34.7%) 27 (27.6%) 10 (10.2%) 3 (3.1%) Item 1: Conducts safety audits M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 4.000, p = 0.549 StAASwASwDDStD M38 (16.7%) 108 (47.4%) 61 (26.8%) 12 (5.3%) 7 (3.1%) 2 (0.9%) F19 (19.2%) 38 (38.4%) 28 (28.3%) 5 (5.1%) 9 (9.1%) 0 (0%) Item 2: Develops a safety centered organization M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 7.548, p = 0.183 StAASwASwDDStD M56 (24.6%) 104 (45.6%) 51 (22.4%) 16 (7.0%) 0 (0%) 1 (0.4%) F24 (24.2%) 41 (41.4%) 22 (22.2%) 4 (4.0%) 8 (8.1%) 0 (0%) Item 3: Emphasizes sufficient safety training M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 20.137, p = 0.001 StAASwASwDDStD M53 (23.2%) 100 (43.9%) 54 (23.7%) 18 (7.9%) 1 (.4%) 2 (0.9%) F23 (23.5%) 36 (36.7%) 26 (26.5%) 6 (6.1%) 7 (7.1%) 0 (0%) Item 4: Emphasizes safety during the orientation process M = Male, F = Female, StA = Strongly Agree, A = Agree, SwA = Somewhat Agree, SwD = Somewhat Disagree, D = Disagree, StD = Strongly Disagree Chi Square = 14.768, p = 0.011