huml & svensson - ali forum
TRANSCRIPT
EXPLORING THE ROLE OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN STUDENT-ATHLETE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENTMr. Matt Huml, University of Louisville
Mr. Per Svensson, University of Louisville
Muhammad Ali Center Athletes and Social Change Forum
INTRODUCTION
Student-athletes Known in the community (McHugo, 2005)
Athletic departments Wanting to connect with the community Corporate Social Responsibility Benefits for student-athlete volunteering
Community Service Organization (CSO) Looking for volunteers
LITERATURE REVIEW Community Service – Volunteer
Perspective Student Involvement Theory (Astin, 1984)
“The quality and quantity of a student's academic and personal development is a direct function of the student's degree of involvement in the academic experience.”
Long term impact for volunteering on students (Astin & Sax, 1998) & (Astin, 1999)
Academic Development, Life skills development, and civic responsibility
Impact for student-athlete volunteering (Marks & Jones, 2004) & (McHugo, 2005)
Reasons for volunteering (Clary, Snyder, and Ridge, 1992), (Clary & Snyder, 1999) & (Blocker, 2011)
Social, Value, Career, Understanding, Protective, and Esteem Reasons for student-athlete volunteering (Boettger, 2007)
& (Chalk, 2008)
LITERATURE REVIEW CONTINUED
Community Service – CSO Perspective Advantages/Disadvantages of employing volunteers
(Blouin & Perry, 2009), (Schmidt & Robby, 2002), & (Chupp & Joseph, 2010) Free labor and expanding resources Requires multi-year commitment
Mission Statements Impact of mission statements (Bart, 1996) & (Sidhu, 2003)
Impacts actions of internal stakeholders
Mission statements in higher education (Davis, Ruhe, Lee, and Rajadhyaksha, 2006) Higher perceived character trait importance/reinforcement
Athletic department mission statements and community service (Andrassy & Bruening, 2011)
Disparity between mission statement and action
NCAA Division II Philosophy Statement
PROPOSAL How many athletic department mission statements
and/or student-athlete handbooks discuss community service?
Purpose Include and compare:
NCAA Division I & II Student-Athlete Handbook
≥ 6 research projects (Andrassy & Bruening, 2011)
Analyze community service policies in both the athletic department mission statement and student-athlete handbook
Propose recommendations for improving student-athlete community engagement
METHOD
Collected mission statements and student-athlete handbooks Online Content Analysis
88 Institutions 40 NCAA Division I
Big East, Big Ten, and Northeast Conferences 48 NCAA Division II
Great Lakes Intercollegiate Athletic, Great Lakes Valley, and Pennsylvania State Athletic Conferences
FINDINGS
Mission Statements (63 of 88 schools) 63 schools with athletic
department mission statements 36 (90%) Division I vs. 27 (56%)
Division II 24 of 63 mission statements
mention community service/engagement
CONFERENCE COUNTBig East 9 (64%)Big Ten 3 (27%)Northeast 1 (9%)Total Division I 13 (36%)GLIAC 3 (38%)GLVC 4 40%)PSAC 4 (44%)Total Division II 11 (41%)
FINDINGS
Student-Athlete Handbooks (55 of 88 schools) 55 student-athlete handbooks found
29 (72.5%) Division I vs. 26 (54%) Division II 49 of 55 mentioned community service
28 Division I, 21 Division II 7 mention NCAA Division II Philosophy
Division I vs. Division IICategory Division I Division IICommunity Service as Sanction/Punishment 8 (29%) 4 (19%)Mandatory Community Service 5 (18%) 0 (0%)Community Service Opportunities 13 (46%) 7 (33%)Awards Opportunities 8 (29%) 1 (5%)Specific Examples 10 (36%) 3 (14%)Specific Contact Information 6 (21%) 4 (19%)
FINDINGS
Community Service Webpages (40 of 88 schools) 40 schools mentioned community service on
website 24 (60%) Division I vs. 16 (33%) Division II
33 mention specific projects 17 mention 6 or more community service projects
Division I vs. Division II
Category Division I Division IIOutdated Information/Inactive Links 11 (46%) 5 (31%)
Specific Contact Information 13 (54%) 2 (13%)
Forms for Community Agencies 10 (42%) 2 (13%)
Forms for Student-Athletes 8 (33%) 1 (6%)
Team Highlights 12 (50%) 8 (50%)Video 3 (13%) 1 (6%)
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Lack of focus on community service in mission statements, student-athlete handbooks, and websites among Division I FCS and Division II
Mission Statements
Handbooks Webpages
Divi-sion I
0.892857142857143
0.75 0.821428571428571
Divi-sion I-FCS
0.916666666666667
0.666666666666667
0.166666666666667
Divi-sion II
0.5625 0.541666666666667
0.333333333333333
What do they have?
Percen
tag
e
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
Information needs to be continuously updated Athletic departments need to be proactive
Provide electronic forms for community agencies interested in partnerships
Use video features (e.g., Syracuse University) Develop community service social media accounts
E.g., Seton Hall University Communicate weekly volunteer opportunities
E.g., University of Minnesota Avoid mandatory or sanctioned community service Include specific contact information in handbooks
LIMITATIONS & FUTURE RESEARCH
Limitations Geographical choices Content Analysis NCAA Division III institutions
Future Research Corporate Social Responsibility Community Service Organizations (Svensson & Huml, 2013)
