Question

NCAA

Please provide a citation for each response; you can not simply cite the textbook because textbook have many contributors.

1. Discuss the importance of recruiting as a component of resource acquisition for athletic departments.
2. Discuss the specifics pertaining to permissible financial assistance available to student-athletes.
3. Discuss how the current systems of rules governing the operation of intercollegiate athletic departments impact how departments are managed.
4. Discuss how the current systems of rules enforcement impact the management of intercollegiate athletic departments.
5. Discuss the distinction between initial and continuing academic eligibility.

Answer 1

Question: Discuss how the current systems of rules governing the operation of intercollegiate athletic departments impact how departments are managed?

Answer: Well, first, of course, they might got to clearly specify the intended learning outcomes resulting from students participating in intercollegiate athletics. To do this, an establishment might begin by trying to find performance improvements on outcome variables traditionally cited as reasons for offering students participation opportunities in sports. For example, an establishment might prefer to measure the extent that athletics builds and teaches character; good sportsmanship; teamwork; health, fitness and safety; social skills; the need of hard work and perseverance to achieve success; and so on. All of those should be guided, in theory , by the university’s educational mission, as embodied in its formal mission statement.

Once the institution identifies the best possible student learning outcomes, faculty members and administrators could then devise the soundest possible methods to measure how student-athletes perform vis-à-vis the specified learning outcomes. They would also, of course, need to make decisions about how often to live students’ performance aside from at the start and end of the program.

After the students’ learning outcomes are measured, the institution should then implement any necessary changes to the program to get higher achievement. For example, if the outcomes data signal that students’ performance against intentions is poor, it might then got to devise and implement changes to extend students’ success.

Question: Discuss how the current systems of rules enforcement impact the management of intercollegiate athletic departments?

Answer: The current systems of rules enforcement impact the management of intercollegiate athletic departments in following ways:

• A significant number of them were recruited having a strong sense of exaggerated entitlement that was reinforced and perhaps strengthened during the time they were athletes at the university. An example of how this possible learning outcome has been measured is the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s survey research on student-athlete social environments.
• A large and possibly systemic graduation gap exists between certain demographic groups of student-athletes. Outcomes on this issue are measured and widely reported, in summary and by university, during a study conducted by the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida.
• Student-athletes have maintained completely unrealistic expectations a few possible future professional athletic career. An example of how data on this outcome variable are collected would be the NCAA’s sponsored GOALS Study of the Student-Athlete Experience.
• Coaches have taught them by example that a “my way or the highway” sort of leadership is that the best thanks to work with, manage and control people. To measure this imagined outcome, personal interviews with athletes, coaches and administrators or surveys might provide insight into what participants have learned about leadership and leading from their coaches. Surveys that might be used or adapted for these purposes already exist in the social sciences.
• Experience has taught them to act as if the ends (e.g., athletic directors and coaches who lose enough games will definitely get fired, and winning is thus the sole thing that matters) fully justify the means (e.g., performance-enhancing drug use and other sorts of breaking and bending the principles are OK, even sometimes necessary for winning, as long together doesn’t get caught). As within the previous example, carefully designed personal interviews or surveys offers insight into student-athletes’, coaches’ and administrators’ values and ethics as they prepared for winning intercollegiate athletics competitions.
• A significant percentage of students had suffered predictable brain injuries and potential long-term brain damage in the course of their participation in college football. To provide measurement on these outcome variables, there's an excellent deal of knowledge collection underway, and variety of studies now getting published, that are asking tough questions about the character and effects of being concussed, also because the effects of repeated nonconcussive body blows on brain health. The results of this growing body of research are increasingly troublesome.

Obviously, no institution would be happy about receiving such imagined, and in some cases unconscionable, results -- particularly if it's clear, and feels strongly enough about, what educational benefits it intends for the students who are competing as athletes in its name and is committed to its mission.

Perhaps it's thus time that our colleges and universities, concerned about their integrity and responsibilities as educational institutions, begin to formally and transparently assess what students are literally learning and otherwise gaining as participants within the sports programs offered by our athletics departments -- this, of course, within the larger realities of the present intercollegiate athletics system. That system, largely driven by dollars at the all-important business level lately , and therefore the desire to earn or keep an athletic scholarship or develop the skills to play professionally at the scholar level, also includes and inspires sports programs for prospective athletes beginning in their youth and continuing through highschool .

In this effort, assessing the tutorial benefits of student participation in intercollegiate athletics should convince be a natural extension of the assessment policies and procedures already in situ to meet the varied accreditation and other (e.g., current and potential NCAA) mandates. I would hope that each one universities would be willing to require on this extra work because, first, which will correct a big oversight by assessing what student-athletes learn by participating in their sports then by “closing the loop” to enhance student learning. Second, it will allow institutions to recognize the urgent need to limit or eliminate, to the extent possible, very tangible threats to their integrity. Such threats are made only too real by the commercial risks and excesses, academic scandals, Title IX issues, and other concerns related to intercollegiate athletics programs.

It thus seems, a minimum of to me, that as institutionally sponsored avocational educational activities, college sports, within the larger context of student-athletes’ more important nonsports academic work, clearly got to be subject to an equivalent rigorous assessment processes as all of our other academic programs.

We should fully appreciate and consider our students’ participation in intercollegiate athletics as an extracurricular education , and intrinsically a crucial a part of their collegiate learning and growth experiences. If we do so, our institutions, the athletics conferences and therefore the NCAA might then be willing to simply accept whatever difficult changes faculty members and administrators, working together, decide need to be made to the system to bring our athletics programs into better compliance with our foundational educational missions -- and ultimately the general public trust we serve.