University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Examining the experiences of high school counselors when advising student athletes on the NCAA college going process

(USC Thesis Other)

Examining the experiences of high school counselors when advising student athletes on the NCAA college going process

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 1

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS WHEN ADVISING
STUDENT ATHLETES ON THE NCAA COLLEGE GOING PROCESS

By

Alejandro Paramo Garfio

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHREN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirement for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2017

Copyright 2017 Alejandro Paramo Garfio
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 2
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to the following people without whom I could not have persisted
through this long, but worthwhile journey:
 My incredible wife Jannah, who has been by my side every step of the way. Thank you
for providing me with encouragement, love and inspiration throughout the journey. I am
eternally grateful to have you in my life. I love you to the moon and back.
 My beautiful mother, who has always been, and will forever, be my hero. Thank you for
all the sacrifices you have made throughout your life to ensure that my brother and I have
opportunities accomplish feats such as this dissertation. Te amo!
 My younger brother Andres, thank you for being honest and vulnerable with me during
this process. Your presence throughout this journey provided me with the confidence and
gratitude to persist.
 To my family and friends, thank you for your unconditional love and support over these
last few years. I look forward to making up for lost time.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 3
Acknowledgements
I would like to take the time to acknowledge the following incredible people who assisted
and encouraged me throughout this journey:
 Dr. Donna Heinel, my mentor, thank you for providing me the opportunity to thrive in
this field and for constantly pushing me to become a better athletic administrator.
 Dr. Pat Tobey, my dissertation chair, thank you for guidance and positivity throughout
this process.
 Dr. Briana Hinga and Dr. Martin Jauregui, my dissertation committee panel members,
thank you for you your guidance, expertise and friendship.
 Dr. Cory Buckner, my dear friend, thank you for keeping me up and holding me
accountable throughout this journey. You are one of a kind and are destined for
greatness.
 Thank you to all my former track and football coaches, and athletic administrators for
showing me the transformative power that athletics can have on a person and instilling in
me a passion for student athlete welfare and success.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 4

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 5
Table of Contents
Dedication ..................................................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 3
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ 8
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................... 10
Chapter One: Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 11
Background of the Problem .................................................................................................................... 11
Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................................................ 13
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................................... 14
Research Questions ................................................................................................................................. 16
1. What knowledge and training do counselors have on the student athlete NCAA college going
process? ................................................................................................................................................... 16
2. What are some of the organizational challenges that counselors face when advising high school
student athletes through the NCAA college going process? ................................................................... 16
3. What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to advise student athletes on NCAA
requirements? .......................................................................................................................................... 16
4. How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the NCAA college going process? ...... 16
Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................................ 16
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................................................. 17
Definitions and Terms ............................................................................................................................. 18
Organization of the Study ....................................................................................................................... 19
Chapter Two: Literature Review................................................................................................................. 20
Student Athlete College Going Requirements ........................................................................................ 21
NCAA Academic Initial Eligibility. ................................................................................................... 22
Student Athlete Admissions. ............................................................................................................... 29
Institutional Match. ............................................................................................................................. 32
Recruiting Process. ............................................................................................................................. 35
Athletic Scholarships and the National Letter of Intent. ..................................................................... 40
High School Counselors ......................................................................................................................... 43
Role of Counselor. .............................................................................................................................. 44
Counselor Training. ............................................................................................................................ 46
Best Practices. ..................................................................................................................................... 47
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 6
Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................................... 49
Ecological Systems Theory. ................................................................................................................ 49
Ecological Systems Theory and the High School Counselor. ............................................................. 53
Literature Review Summary ................................................................................................................... 54
Chapter Three: Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 57
Research Design Overview ..................................................................................................................... 57
Sampling ................................................................................................................................................. 58
Instrumentation - Why Qualitative Methods? ......................................................................................... 59
Data Collection ....................................................................................................................................... 60
Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 62
Credibility and Trustworthiness. ............................................................................................................. 63
Chapter Four: Research Findings ................................................................................................................ 65
Participant Background Information ....................................................................................................... 66
Research Question 1: What knowledge and training do counselors perceive they have on the student
athlete NCAA college going process? .................................................................................................... 70
Lack of formal training. ...................................................................................................................... 71
Research Question 2: What are some of the organizational challenges that counselors face when
advising high school student athletes through the NCAA college going process? ................................. 76
Counselors experience lack of formal role and responsibilities when working with student athletes.76
Communication between all stakeholders in the NCAA process. ...................................................... 79
Research Question 3: What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to advise student
athletes on NCAA requirements? ........................................................................................................... 83
No formal protocol or policy for advising student athletes. ................................................................ 83
Research Question 4: How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the NCAA college
going process? ......................................................................................................................................... 86
Parents and students - managing expectations. ................................................................................... 86
All on the same page with shared accountability. ............................................................................... 89
Emergent Themes: Using personal connection to community and athletics .......................................... 90
Summary and Discussion of Findings .................................................................................................... 92
Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 94
Summary of Previous Chapters............................................................................................................... 95
Discussion of Findings ............................................................................................................................ 99
Findings Summary. ............................................................................................................................... 106
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 7
Implications for Practice ....................................................................................................................... 107
Recommendations - “Accurately informed, all on the same page.” ................................................. 108
Limitations ............................................................................................................................................ 111
Recommendations for Future Research ................................................................................................ 111
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 113
References ................................................................................................................................................. 114
Appendix A ............................................................................................................................................... 121
IRB Approval Form .............................................................................................................................. 121
Appendix B .............................................................................................................................................. 123
Interview Protocol Form .................................................................................................................... 123
High School Counselor Interview Protocol................................................................................... 123

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 8
List of Tables
Table 1 Participant Information ................................................................................................................. 66

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 9
List of Figures
Figure 1. Renn and Arnolds Adaptation of Bronfenbrenner's Model ......................................................... 51
Figure 2. Student Athlete Adaptation of Bronfenbrenner’s Social Ecology Model ................................ 107

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 10
Abstract
This exploratory study examined the experiences of high school counselors when advising
student athletes on the NCAA college going process. Ecological Systems Theory was used as a
lens from which to view the significance of the counselor’s role within this process. The complex
NCAA college going process was examined by outlining the varying requirements and
experiences that high school student athletes must meet before matriculating to NCAA sponsored
institutions. Relevant research has indicated high school counselors are often responsible for
assisting the student athlete in navigating the transition to NCAA collegiate athletics. However,
counselors rarely receive adequate training in this realm, which can lead to the student athlete not
having adequate support to effectively navigate this process and take full advantage of post-
secondary options. Qualitative methods were employed through the use in depth interviews to
better understand the experiences that counselors face when advising students through this
process. A sample of eight high school counselors was purposefully selected from a variety of
high schools in order to gain insight into the varying experiences of this population. The
Constant Comparative Method was employed to analyze the data from the interviews and
uncover themes from the counselor’s experiences (Straus, 1965). Six themes were drawn from
the research, including one emergent theme, which in total, assisted in answering the research
questions.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 11
Chapter One: Introduction
This study examined the experiences of high school counselors when advising student
athletes on the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) college going process. Many
researchers have emphasized the importance of the high school counselor in this process, as they
are often the individuals responsible for ensuring that student athletes are able to take advantage
of post-secondary opportunities (Padilla, 2015; Goldberg & Chandler, 1995). The study
demonstrated that the NCAA college going process encompasses numerous regulations and
requirements that can make the process exceptionally challenging to navigate, for both student
athletes and counselors. To exasperate the difficulty in navigating the process, many counselors
do not receive sufficient training, or are over burdened with other responsibilities to adequately
assist the student athlete population (McDonough, 2005; Perusse, Goodnough, & Noel, 2005).
This study employed qualitative research methods to investigate the experiences of high school
counselors who work directly with student athletes in order to gain a better understanding into
the challenges they face and to uncover techniques that have been found to be effective in
supporting this population.
Background of the Problem
Within the American educational milieu, athletics have and continue to be deeply
ingrained within our educational system. From early in the K-12 structure, through post-
secondary education, athletics play a fundamental part of these institutions. The National
Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) reported that the over seven million high
school student athletes that participate in athletics in the United States have overall higher grade-
point averages, lower dropout rates, better daily attendance, and fewer discipline problems than
non-athletes (Lumpkin & Stokowski, 2011). At the collegiate level, athletics serves to achieve
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 12
similar goals, however, often on much more competitive and visible scale. The collegiate
athletic system is a multi-billion-dollar industry that can provide institutions with increased
visibility and profit (Sperber, 2000). With many American higher education institutions
sponsoring collegiate athletics teams, high school student athletes are provided with a myriad of
opportunities at varying levels of institutions to pursue athletics while also seeking to obtain a
college education. Within the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) alone, there are
over 1,100 institutions that provide opportunities to over 480,000 student athletes (NCAA,
2016).
Collegiate athletics can provide countless opportunities for prospective student athletes;
however, the NCAA college going process can often be a complicated and convoluted one,
which many student athletes have difficulty navigating. This process includes constantly
changing academic benchmarks, varying admissions requirements, athletic recruitment, and the
financial aid/scholarship process, among others (Padilla, 2015; Goldberg & Chandler, 1995).
Student athletes without the resources and knowledge to navigate this process could be denied
access to pursue athletics in college, and for many, their student athlete careers could come to an
end in high school. For high school student athletes, the high school college counselor is often
the person charged with assisting them through the NCAA college going process, as it is
assumed that the counselors are the most knowledgeable in this realm. Yet, at many schools,
counselors are not equipped with the resources and training to adequately meet the needs to of
this population (McDonough, 2005; Perusse, Goodnough, & Noel, 2005). It is imperative that
high school support staffs are equipped with the knowledge of this process in order to adequately
advise student athletes so that they may take advantage of the opportunities available through
athletics.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 13
Statement of the Problem
Since the inception of high profile and revenue generating intercollegiate athletics in
higher education, significant emphasis has been placed on the recruitment of high school student
athletes. Within the last few decades, recruitment efforts have intensified as intercollegiate
athletics has transformed into a multi-billion-dollar industry that has shifted the way athletic
departments and universities operate (Sperber, 2000). The need for elite student-athletes has
created a highly competitive environment where institutions attempt to recruit the best available
prospects to their respective schools. This process can place tremendous pressure on prospective
student athletes as they may be bombarded by coaches from differing institutions with varying
goals and requirements. Moreover, in efforts to maintain fairness and integrity within member
institutions, the NCAA has implemented a series of regulations and academic requirements that
have direct implications for student athletes (NCAA, 2016). Consequently, high school student
athletes must be well equipped with the knowledge of these requirements, as failure to meet
these requirements can lead to the loss of opportunity to matriculate into NCAA schools.
High schools are often the organizations that can help most student athletes navigate the
complex NCAA college going process, and in particular, this responsibility regularly falls on the
high school college counselor. Since the student athlete college going process is so specialized,
many high school counselors do not typically receive adequate training for assisting this group of
students. Therefore, the problem is that high school student-athletes may not be able to rely on
their school counselor for information and assistance in their college preparation. High school
counselors, who work with these student athletes and do not have adequate information or are
misinformed, may have an impact on a student’s exposure to the many opportunities in
intercollegiate athletics. Moreover, without the opportunity to obtain this information, the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 14
student athlete may be led to retire from their sport upon completion of high school, and even
more troubling, may have to face the loss of access to higher education.
Student athletes come from a wide array of backgrounds, which vary in regards to the
levels of social, financial and cultural support that each has access to. Bourdieu (1977) advanced
the concept of social capital, which is found in the relations between people and the creation of
human capital developed by these relationships. The concept of social capital is applicable to the
NCAA college going process, as student athletes have varying levels of social capital, which can
influence their knowledge of the college going process and ultimately may determine the
opportunities they have access to. If properly knowledgeable and experienced in the NCAA
college going process, high school counselors can serve as positive agents and a source of social
capital for high school student athletes when navigating the NCAA process.
Purpose of the Study
The aim of this study is to inquire into the experiences of high school counselors when
advising student athletes that are going through the NCAA college going process. This
exploratory study of counselors sought to gain a better understanding of the issues that
counselors face, with an emphasis in training of counselors and effective advising techniques.
Using a constructivist worldview, an inductive qualitative approach through comparative case
studies was employed to gain insight into the counselor experience (Creswell, 2014). In-depth,
semi-structured interviews were used to construct meaning from the experiences of high school
counselors when advising student athletes on the NCAA college going process. A sample of
counselors was selected from the Southern California area. High school size, type, and student
athlete demographics were taken into consideration in order to find any possible difference
between counselors advising experiences.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 15
The college going process can be a highly stressful period for high school student athletes
and support from social circles, including the counselor, is necessary (Goldberg & Chandler,
1995). To help frame this study, Urie Bronfenbrenner's (1974, 1977, 1993) Ecological Systems
Theory was employed to demonstrate the importance of the high school’s role, specifically the
counselor, in the college going process for the student athlete. From this information the hope
was to gain a better understanding of some of the gaps in advisement of this population as well
as best practices that many schools may have developed.
Previous research has focused on high school counselor and student athlete knowledge of
NCAA academic requirements (Padilla, 2015). Also, research has examined the knowledge of
counselors from underfunded schools. However, little research has been conducted on
counselor’s experiences of navigating the entire student athlete matriculation process, which
include; NCAA academic initial eligibility, student athlete admissions, institutional match, the
recruiting process, athletic scholarships, and the National Letter of Intent. Collectively, these
terms encompass the NCAA college going process and each will be discussed in detail in the
following chapter. This study provided a better understanding of HS counselor’s experiences of
this process, while also uncovering effective advising techniques when assisting student athletes.
Therefore, in order to frame this study and guide the research from a qualitative approach, the
following research questions were developed:
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 16
Research Questions
1. What knowledge and training do counselors have on the student athlete NCAA college
going process?
2. What are some of the organizational challenges that counselors face when advising
high school student athletes through the NCAA college going process?
3. What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to advise student athletes
on NCAA requirements?
4. How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the NCAA college going
process?
Significance of the Study
The findings developed through this research were used to gain a better understanding of
the issues that counselors face when advising student athletes. The study is important because
little research has been conducted on the experiences of high school counselors when advising
student athletes through the NCAA college going process. Previous research has shown that the
needs of student-athletes are often not met by the high school. The lack of support for high
school student athletes may be because high school counselors have varied responsibilities and
are often not required to be knowledgeable in the student athlete realm (McDonough, 2005;
Perusse, Goodnough, & Noel, 2005). The study provided a better understanding of the issues
that counselors face when navigating this process with student athletes. This information will
help high school counselors, and stakeholders in this process, acquire information on how to
better to serve this unique population of students. Ultimately, the objective is to develop a series
of implications/best practices that high school counselors can utilize to more effectively advise
the student athlete population in an appropriate way.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 17
Limitations and Delimitations
Although many steps were taken to mitigate any potential threats to validity of this study,
there were limitations and delimitations that may affect or restrict the methods and analysis of
the research data. With regards to the limitations of the research, the sample of counselors was
drawn from a population of counselors strictly from the Southern California area. It is important
to note that the state of California has its own standards for counselor credentialing, and these
may vary from other states. These credential requirements may vary from other states with
regards to their emphasis on student athlete advising. This may affect the generalizability of the
study when being applied to other states. Additionally, because of time and funding constraints,
the sample was only limited to eight participants. If time and funding permitted, the sample
would be increased.
With regards to delimitations, this study only employed qualitative methods, with a
relatively small sample of counselors. Future research on this topic may benefit from the use of
quantitative methods in order to obtain a larger sample, and also to measure the level of
knowledge that counselors have on the NCAA college going process. For the purposes of this
study, qualitative research methods were used solely since the nature of the research questions
warranted more in depth responses regarding the experiences of counselors when working with
student athletes. Moreover, the interview protocol only asked counselors about the counselor’s
experiences working with NCAA sponsored schools, effectively eliminating all community
colleges and National Intercollegiate Athletic Association (NAIA) institutions. Lastly, literature
on the topic is extremely limited and much of it can be considered outdated.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 18
Definitions and Terms
This section defines the terms used throughout this study. They are presented
alphabetically.
Division 1: Division I schools generally have the largest student bodies, manage the
largest athletics budgets and offer the most generous number of scholarships. Schools who are
members of Division I commit to maintaining a high academic standard for student-athletes in
addition to a wide range of opportunities for athletics participation (NCAA, 2016).
Division 2: Division II is a collection of more than 300 NCAA colleges and universities
that provide thousands of student-athletes the opportunity to compete at a high level of
scholarship athletics while excelling in the classroom and fully engaging in the broader campus
experience (NCAA, 2016).
Division 3: Division III, the largest NCAA division both in number of participants and
number of schools. The Division III experience offers participation in a competitive athletic
environment that pushes student-athletes to excel on the field and build upon their potential by
tackling new challenges across campus (NCAA, 2016).
Eligibility: Eligibility refers to the academic qualifications required by the NCAA for
athletes to participate in a particular sport (NCAA, 2016).
High School counselor: Counselor who is certified by the State Department of Education
and works in the 9-12 grade schools to provide academic, career, and personal/social guidance to
students within his/her school (ASCA, 2016).
High school student-athlete: Student in grades 9-12 who is currently (within the present
school year) participating in a high school sponsored athletic sport (NCAA, 2016).
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 19
National Letter of Intent (NLI): The NLI is a binding agreement (contract) between a
student athlete and a NLI member institution for the period of one academic year.
NCAA: The NCAA is the governing body that regulates, enforces, and develops
intercollegiate athletic programs, standards, and services for student-athletes and member
institutions (NCAA, 2016).
NCAA Eligibility Center: The organization that determines whether prospective college
athletes are eligible to play sports at NCAA Division I or Division II institutions (NCAA, 2016).
Recruiting: The process of college coaches pursuing high school student-athletes to
attend their institution and to participate in NCAA athletics (NCAA, 2016).
Recruited student-athlete: A high school student-athlete who is being actively sought out
by college recruiters either by telephone, mail, and/or in person (NCAA, 2006).
Special Admits: student athletes who do not meet the normal or standard entrance
requirements of the average applicant (Robelnolt, 2012).
Social Capital: structure of relations between people, such as the close ties among family
members, community residents, and religious affiliates (Bourdieu, 1977).
Organization of the Study
Chapter two will provide a background into the intricacies involved in the NCAA college
going process. Relevant research on this process will be discussed as a way to frame its
complexity when viewed from the lens of student athlete and counselor. A section on the high
school counselor’s historic role and training will also be addressed from the context of working
with student athletes. A theoretical framework will also be established to develop the
importance of the high school counselor’s role in the process. Chapter three will introduce the
methodological approaches that will be utilized in this study and chapter four will outline the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 20
findings. Lastly, Chapter five will provide an analysis on the research findings along with
outlining implications for practice, limitations of the study, and an overall summary.
Chapter Two: Literature Review
The purpose of this chapter is to highlight existing literature on the NCAA college going
process and the many variables that affect a high school student athlete’s knowledge and agency
in gaining access to college through athletics. Specific focus will be placed on those individuals
at the high school level who directly provide support and guidance to student athletes throughout
the process. Specifically, the role of the high school counselors will be highlighted as previous
research has indicated that they play an important role in the process by informing and educating
members of the athletic triangle, which include students, parents, and coaches (Goldberg &
Chandler, 1995). The counselor can highlight the opportunities that athletics can provide and
the steps that student athletes must take in order to matriculate to college and participate in
intercollegiate athletics while pursuing a degree (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995). Through this
NCAA college going process, the role of the counselor will be the lens from which this review is
framed.
The existing strands of literature that have been published on high school athletes
highlight the NCAA college going process for high school student athletes, with a focus on the
multitude of requirements that student athletes must meet in order to effectively matriculate to
NCAA sponsored institutions (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995: Padilla, 2015). These requirements,
which will be discussed in detail in this review, include; (a) NCAA initial eligibility academic
requirements, (b) the student athlete admission process, (c) institutional match, (d) the
recruitment process, and (e) the NCAA scholarship process. Through this review, each of the
requirements will encompass current literature that highlighted hot topics and the implications
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 21
for those individuals who advise student athletes, specifically, the high school counselor.
Additionally, the role of the high school counselor in the current educational milieu will be
discussed along with the role they play in mentoring student athletes. This literature review will
encompass existing best practices for high school support staff when working with high school
student athletes.
The reviewed literature was developed using database searches that included a review of
journal articles, books, and dissertation findings. This chapter provided a brief overview of each
section and then identified and review relevant empirical and theoretical work. At the conclusion
of each section, a connection was made to the relevance of the literature in terms of the
investigation on the advisement of high school student athletes on the NCAA college going
process. Moreover, theoretical frameworks were discussed in detail to help frame the current
investigation.
Student Athlete College Going Requirements
NCAA collegiate athletics offer students the opportunity to pursue higher education,
while also continuing to participate in athletics. Moreover, athletics can serve as a unique access
point to higher education for student athletes who may not have had the historical opportunity or
socio-economic resources; this access point is particularly evident for many first generation and
minority students (Rudolph, 1990). To an extent, collegiate athletics has been able to level the
playing field of access to higher education for many individuals by increasing the college going
opportunities for first generation and minority students (Rudolph, 1990; Watt & Moore 2001).
Still, the transition from high school athletics to NCAA collegiate athletics can be a lengthy and
convoluted process that involves time, planning, and research by high school staff, student
athletes and parents.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 22
There are many components of the college going process that high school student
athletes must understand and navigate in order matriculate to NCAA sponsored institutions.
Among those components are the consistently changing NCAA academic requirements, which
vary based on the division that the student matriculates to, recruiting, college choice, and
knowledge of scholarships and financial aid (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995: Padilla, 2015).
Navigating this process can be a very arduous undertaking for student athletes to handle alone,
specifically for those who do not have the social capital and resources to obtain the necessary
knowledge of the process. Bourdieu (1977) defines social capital as the value, both culturally
and economically, found in the structure of relations between people. Therefore, the
involvement of high school staff, including coaches, administrators and counselors, is essential
to mitigating any potential problems that occur during this process in order to allow the student
athlete the opportunity to pursue higher education (Smrt, 2001). The following sheds light on
the noteworthy components of the NCAA athletics college going process.
NCAA Academic Initial Eligibility. Since the creation of the NCAA in 1905, reform in
intercollegiate athletics has mostly derived from one of four reasons: (1) for the development of
a “level playing field”, (2) to create financial sustainability,(3) developing rules to limit or
eliminate offensive practices, or (4) to maintain academic integrity (Smith, 2011). For the first
part of the 20th century, the academic preparation of student athletes was a topic that was largely
absent in the reform discussions. In fact, prior to 1965, institutions were permitted to recruit and
provide athletic aid to student athletes regardless of their high school academic preparation,
which ultimately led to widespread academic integrity issues (Smith, 2011). Therefore, in 1965
the NCAA implemented the first initial eligibility reform by requiring a 1.6 high school GPA for
freshmen to receive athletic aid (Smith, 2011). The 1.6 GPA standard ultimately did little to
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 23
increase academic standards as institutions continued to admit many student athletes who were
academically deficient. In subsequent years, the NCAA implemented a series of propositions
that sought to increase initial eligibility requirements by requiring minimum test scores and
setting a 2.0 minimum GPA.
Currently, the Eligibility Center (EC) is the organization within the NCAA that works to
determine if student athletes meet the minimum academic requirements for matriculation and
competition during their first year in college. The EC is responsible for reviewing student
athlete's high school academic record (transcripts) and ACT and/or SAT test scores as indicators
for meeting initial eligibility requirements (Silver, 2015). These academic requirements were
developed using data analysis to determine the best indicators of college success and graduation
(Hosick & Sproul, 2012). The EC reviews student athletes matriculating to NCAA Division I
and Division 2 institutions, however; Division 3 academic requirements are institutionally
prescribed, and are usually linked to admission (NCAA, 2016a).
Division I. NCAA Division I is comprised of 350 colleges and universities, and these
institutions generally have significantly larger student bodies, and manage larger athletic
programs that their Division II or III counterparts (NCAA, 2016). The roughly 170,000 student
athletes who compete in Division I athletics all go through the stringent incoming initial
eligibility requirement process (NCAA, 2016). Using data metrics and analysis, the NCAA has
found specific predictors of college academic success, which has led to the creation of these
requirements (Hosick & Sproull, 2012).
In 2012, the NCAA implemented the newest wave of academic reform, aimed at
improving academic preparedness of college bound student athletes heading to Division I
institutions (Hosick & Sproull, 2012). The new requirements include an increased GPA
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 24
requirement for competition during the student athletes first year, from 2.0 to 2.3 (NCAA, 2016).
The reform also established an “academic redshirt”, which requires student athletes to sit out of
competition their freshman year while they focus on their academics (Hosick & Sproul, 2012).
Moreover, academic redshirt student athletes must meet progress towards degree requirements in
order to be eligible for their second season of competition. These academic reforms are justified
because they are seen as a way to level the playing field of competition while also maintaining
academic standards (Hosick & Sproul, 2012). However, critics of the reform have expressed
concerns about the tendency for these requirements to exclude certain demographics from the
opportunity to pursue higher education (Hosick & Sproull, 2012). As of 2016, the NCAA initial
eligibility requirements for Division I encompass the following:
● Graduate from high school, on time, and with the student-athlete's initial 9th
grade cohort
● Complete 16 NCAA approved core courses in the following distribution:
○ 4 years of English.
○ 3 years of mathematics (Algebra I or higher).
○ 2 years of natural/physical science (1 year of lab if offered by high
school).
○ 1 year of additional English, mathematics or natural/physical science.
○ 2 years of social science.
○ 4 years of additional courses (from any area above, foreign language or
comparative religion/philosophy).
● Earn a GPA of 2.0 in these 16 core courses for access to Division I, 2.3 GPA
minimum to compete the first year.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 25
● Complete at least 10 of these core courses, prior to the student athlete's senior
year, with 7 of those 10 being in English, math or natural/physical science.
● Achieve an SAT or ACT minimum score of 400 combined (reading/math) or 34
sum (English, math, reading, science) score, respectively.
● Earn an SAT combined score or ACT sum score matching your core-course GPA
on the Division I sliding scale (NCAA, 2016).
Student athletes who meet all these requirements are deemed final-academic qualifiers, which
grant them the ability to receive athletic aid, and compete during their first academic year
(NCAA, 2016). Those student athletes who fall short of these requirements are deemed non-
qualifiers, and are denied access to compete at the Division I level until they meet an additional
set of requirements, traditionally at a community college (Silver, 2015). Effective August 1st,
2016, students who fall within the 2.0-2.99 GPA while meeting all other requirements will be
deemed an “academic redshirt”, which will allow student athletes access to college and aid, but
will require them to sit out of competition for a year (NCAA, 2016).
Division II. There are roughly 300 Division II colleges and universities that offer student
athletes the opportunity to compete in quality-level athletics (NCAA, 2016). Similar to Division
I, Division II also requires student athletes to meet initial eligibility requirements, although, there
are many differences among the two divisions. The following are the initial academic
requirements for Division II:
● Graduate from high school.
● Complete 16 NCAA approved core courses in the following distribution:
○ 3 years of English.
○ 3 years of mathematics (Algebra I or higher).
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 26
○ 2 years of natural/physical science (1 year of lab if offered by high
school).
○ 3 year of additional English, mathematics or natural/physical science
○ 2 years of social science.
○ 4 years of additional courses (from any area above, foreign language or
comparative religion/philosophy).
● Earn a GPA of 2.0 in these 16 core courses for access to Division II
● Earn a SAT combined score of 820 or an ACT sum score of 68 (NCAA, 2016).
Student athletes who meet these requirements are deemed final academic qualifiers for
Division II and are able to matriculate, compete and receive athletic aid during their first
academic year. Those student athletes who graduate and meet the 16 core courses, yet only meet
either the GPA requirement or the test score requirement, can only be deemed partial qualifiers,
which allows the student athlete access to matriculate, and access to athletic aid, but not
competition during the first academic year (NCAA, 2016). Those student athletes who fail to
meet the GPA requirement and the test score requirement are deemed non-qualifiers and are not
permitted to receive athletic aid or compete during the first year.
Division III. Division III is comprised up of 444 institutions and over 170,000 student-
athletes, making it the largest division (NCAA, 2016). The primary focus of Division III
student athletes is on academics, as athletics departments are significantly smaller in scale and
budgetary sizes; athletic achievement takes a backseat to academic achievement (NCAA, 2016).
Unlike the other divisions, Division III does not require initial eligibility standards to be met, but
rather are institutionally prescribed (NCAA, 2016). Institutionally prescribed entails that one can
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 27
gain access to Division III if the institution feels that a student athlete has met the academic
requirements for admission, while not requiring additional academic benchmarks.
Initial Eligibility Discussion. The NCAA initial eligibility academic requirements were
developed to preserve academic standards within intercollegiate athletics, while maintaining
fairness and integrity between institutions (NCAA , 2016). The current standards were guided
by empirical research, which aimed at creating standards predictive of academic success in
college (Petr & McArdle, 2012). This research was conducted by employing a longitudinal
study between 1994 and 2002, where institutions were asked to submit all academic data for their
incoming scholarship student athletes, which created a sample of over 100,000 students per year
(Petr & Paskus, 2009). What resulted was a set of predictive variables of college success, which
the NCAA has used to guide the newest wave of academic reform that was outlined previously in
this section. Among the predictive variables, Petr and Paskus (2009) noted the following:
● High school grades are better predictors of success than standardized test scores
● A combination of grades and tests is a better predictor than either of the two variables
used in isolation.
● The use of a core-curriculum GPA provides better prediction than using the overall high
school GPA.
● Demographic variables, such as socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity, should be
considered in the models; however, they are generally accounted for once tests and
grades are included in the model.
● Different demographic groups have different distributions of scores within the variables
of use (e.g., test scores and grades), so the imposition of almost any rule will lead to
differential impacts on various subgroups (Petr & Paskus, 2009).
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 28
The last bullet point regarding the impacts of these initial eligibility requirements on
various subgroups has created the most criticism on the NCAA’s influence over academic
regulation. Petr and McArdle (2012) acknowledge that these initial eligibility requirements that
are based on GPA’s and test scores are more likely to directly impact African American and low-
income students. However, they stress that is due to “distributional differences in those variables
as opposed to differences in the actual predictive validity of the measurements” (Petr &
McArdle, 2012, p. 31). This research has ignited a dialogue inquiring into whether these
requirements institutionally deny access to these subgroups. Hosick and Sproul (2015) contend
that because of the varying resources of high schools, and the different experiences that they
provide their students, often depending on location, students from lower socioeconomic
backgrounds have a more challenging path to achieving entrance and participation requirements.
This discussion around the negative implication of NCAA initial eligibility standards on
students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds has prompted many to argue for the elimination
of initial eligibility standards (Silver, 2015). Silver (2015) maintains that these standards, for the
most part, “exist to regulate the recruitment of highly talented but academically at-risk prospects
in men's basketball and football”. Additionally, Silver (2015) contends that these standards have
a contrasting impact on African-American student athletes from urban school districts. This has
led to the proposal for the elimination of the current initial eligibility model. In its place, each
respective institution would have the autonomy to review and consider each student athlete for
admission and aid on a case by case basis, similar to the application process (Silver, 2015).
Regardless of the debates around the NCAA initial eligibility requirements, all student
athletes with aspirations to matriculate to an NCAA sponsored Division I or II institution must
currently meet the established standards. Therefore, it is imperative that student athletes,
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 29
parents, counselors, and high school support staff are adequately versed in this process in order
to make the matriculation process as seamless as possible. Implications for working with
students from underserved communities must also be taken into consideration, as they are most
at risk of not receiving accurate information regarding this process. High school student athletes
rely heavily on the advice and leadership of high school staff members, and these individuals
bear great accountability in gaining knowledge and experience in this process to better advise
their student-athletes (Lawrence & Wright, 2009).
Student Athlete Admissions. One of the most important aspects of student athlete
matriculation to college is the student athlete admission process. As aforementioned, not only do
student athletes have to meet NCAA initial eligibility requirements, but they must also ensure
that they are admissible to their respective college of choice. Similar to other talent-based
majors (i.e. music, theatre, art, etc.), student athletes tend to proceed through the admission
process via special channels outside of the regular application review, where their athletic talent
is considered alongside their academic preparedness (Winters & Gurley, 2012). For Division I
institutions, there has been a perception that it would be very difficult to fill competitive rosters,
particularly in the sports of football and basketball, with students that would meet the regular
admission standards (Duderstadt, 2003). Consequently, the student athlete admission process
continues to be one of the most contested aspects of intercollegiate athletics. Still, it is important
that high school support staff have a firm understanding of student athlete admissions in order to
guide their students through the process.
Athletic Admission Process. The admission process for student athletes can vary from
institution to institution; however, most institutions have developed their own admission process
for evaluating this population (Duderstadt, 2003). A common format for admitting student
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 30
athletes comes in the way of a student athlete admission committee (Duderstadt, 2003). In this
format, members of the institutions admission department review each student athlete's academic
file to ensure that they are academically prepared for higher education. Many times, members
of the athletic department are present during these meetings to serve as a liaison between the
coaches and the admissions department. For student athletes and high school support staff, it is
important to understand that the admission process is guided by the institutional mission and
what they place value in. For instance, Ivy League institutions and a handful of power athletic
programs still maintain rigorous academic standards for their student athletes (Duderstadt, 2003).
Conversely, it has been shown that institutions that place a high value on athletics are more
likely to be more flexible with their admission decisions (ESPN AP, 2009).
Special Admits. One of the major concerns with the admission process is the notion that
students are allowed “special admission” based on their athletic talent, and not necessarily their
college academic preparedness. Under the current milieu of intercollegiate athletics and the
overemphasis on recruiting, the admissions process can be altered by the perceived benefits of
athletic ability, often at the detriment of academic “fit” (Winters & Gurley, 2012). Robelnolt
(2012) defines special admits as student athletes who do not meet the normal or standard
entrance requirements of the average applicant. Special admits are also commonly referred to as
“wild card” admits or “at-risk” admits, because of their tendency to matriculate with lower
academic preparedness (Duderstadt, 2003). Studies have identified the following factors that
constitute a special admit student athlete: (a) participation in sport, (b) academic
underachievement, (c) issues related to low socioeconomic status and (d) lack of preparation for
the SAT (Robenolt, 2012).
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 31
Adversaries of special admit programs argue that special admissions are the most
problematic issue in college sports, especially at highly selective institutions (New, 2014). A
recent review by the Associated Press compiled admissions data submitted to the NCAA by a
majority of the 120 schools in college football's Division I and found that athletes had
admissions standards significantly altered for them (ESPN AP, 2009). The review identified at
least 27 schools where student-athletes were ten times more likely to be admitted because of
their special admit status than the regular applicant (ESPN AP, 2009). Perhaps the most striking
figure was that of the 2008 Football National Champion, Alabama, whose specially admitted
student athletes were 43 times more likely to benefit from the special admission program (ESPN
AP, 2009).
Currently, this practice of special admits is permissible under NCAA rules as long as this
opportunity is also offered to other types of students within talent based majors, such as music,
art, etc. (New, 2014). Special admits matriculate to higher education with far lower level of
academic preparation, and many require remediation and additional academic services (New,
2014). The argument has been made that the prevalence of special admits has not only led to
academic scandals and lower graduation rates of student athletes, but also the exploitation of
historically underrepresented minority students, specifically, African American students (New,
2014; Harper, 2016).
Student Athlete Admission Discussion. Under the current structure of big time collegiate
athletics, the admission process continues to be a divisive topic within academia. Knowledge of
this process is imperative as athletics can provide a student athlete with access to higher
education (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995). Institutions vary widely on the emphasis they place on
athletics, which as research has indicated, creates disparities in the admission process based on
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 32
the institution (Duderstadt, 2003, ESPN AP, 2009). Student athletes and those advising them
need to work cooperatively with the institutions, including coaches and admission staff to ensure
that all admission requirements are met. Moreover, counselors should have a firm
understanding of how athletics participation can affect the admission process for their respective
student athletes.
Institutional Match. Similar to regular students seeking to matriculate to higher
education, student athletes must also assess and research their college options in order to find a
good match for their collegiate careers. Like regular students, student athletes need to have a
firm understanding of the type of institution, location, academic majors offered, and support and
social services that are offered at each school that they are considering. However, student
athletes must also be cognizant of athletically related factors, such as the fit within a team, the
coaching staff, and the historical academic success of student athletics at each institution. For
many student athletes, athletics can provide a path to higher education; however, the over-
emphasis on recruiting elite talent can also lead to inequitable outcomes for certain populations
(Harper, 2016). Under the current milieu of collegiate athletics, student athletes, parents, and
high school support staff must be diligent in researching and asking the right questions to ensure
that there is a fit between the student athlete and the institution.
Access Through Athletics. Historically, athletics has often linked with increasing access
to traditionally white systems of higher education for traditionally underrepresented populations.
Football in particular has been one of the major contributing factors for college access of
historically underrepresented individuals while also serving to break down class distinctions
(Rudolph, 1990). With the increasing popularity of football at the turn of the 20th century, the
search for dominant football players became a crucial aspect of a school’s success. The search
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 33
for college football players “was one democratic solution to the increasing number of rich men’s
sons on the American campus” (Rudolph, 1990, p.378). Watt and Moore (2001) highlight the
evolution of college sports and emphasize an increasing trend of student athletes of color and
from lower socio economic backgrounds. In today’s world of intercollegiate athletics, “African
American students constitute the largest percentage of college athletic scholarships” (Watt &
Moore, 2001, p. 59).
Exploitation of Student Athletes. Recent research has shifted this paradigm from one of
access to one of exploitation of African American student athletes in revenue generating sports.
Harper, Williams and Blackman (2013) conducted a national survey of NCAA Division I
institutions from major athletic conferences in order create transparency within academics in the
sports of football and basketball. Their findings indicate that African Americans make up 2.8%
of full time undergraduate students; however, they made up 57.1 % of football players and
64.1% of basketball players (Harper et al., 2013). The research also shows that African
American student athletes graduated within six years at a rate of 50.2%, while the rate for student
athletes overall was 66.9%. Additionally, the overall undergraduate graduation rate was even
higher 72.8% (Harper et al., 2013). In a similar study, Sack, Park and Thiel (2011) found that the
more academically selective the institution, the wider the graduation rate between student
athletes and the general student population. This research indicates that African American
student athletes are being recruited and admitted to college; however, they are not succeeding as
high as their peers academically.
Current research on this topic has led to criticism of the NCAA for making claims that
Black male student athletes graduate at higher rates than Black men who do not play sports
(Harper, 2016). Harper (2016) asserts that the NCAA is able to make these claims since the data
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 34
they use is aggregated, and lumps Black male athletes from all divisions together, while masking
the fact that most of the graduation issues occur within the larger power five athletic conferences.
Harper’s (2016) research is a call for transparency and action by the NCAA, and its member
institutions in order to create more racial equity within the NCAA. One recommendation by
Harper (2016) is for the NCAA to disseminate transparent data that is disaggregated by race, sex,
sport, division, and specific subsets within divisions. This type of data will allow individuals to
see exactly where the issues lie within the current structure of intercollegiate athletics.
Institutional Match Discussion. Within the NCAA college going process for student
athletes, educational outcomes are often overshadowed by the drive to recruit top talent and
maintain winning programs, which can affect a student athlete's fit within an institution. Student
athletes must be equipped with the facts regarding the outcomes of the institutions that they are
considering. The NCAA states that their ultimate goal for the college experience is graduation,
and thus they have placed tremendous emphasis on researching student athlete graduation
success rates (GSR) for all member institutions (NCAA, 2016). The goal of this research is to
hold institutions accountable for academic success, and to provide the prospective student
athletes with invaluable information regarding the academic performance of each institution, as a
way to ensure that the academic rules of the institutions are not devalued (NCAA d, 2016).
Student athletes, and those individuals charged with advising them, should be
knowledgeable in this valuable resource as it is an indicator of what an institution places value
in. As Harper’s (2016) research has indicated, student athletes often choose institutions based on
their success on the field, but not necessarily in the classroom. The NCAA’s (2016) GSR data
can serve as a catalyst to shift the dialogue on college choice from one of athletic factors to one
of academic match for student athletes. Consequently, high school counselors should strive to
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 35
establish cooperative relationships with admission professionals that aim at properly matching
the student athlete with an institution.
Recruiting Process. The student athlete recruiting process can be considered the lifeline
for intercollegiate athletics, as the recruitment of talented high school student athletes is essential
to the future success of collegiate athletic programs (Clotfelter, 2011). This process can also
serve as an instrumental time for prospective student athletes to gauge a coach's interest in them
and also learn more about the coaches, team, and institutional culture to determine if there is a fit
between the two parties. In an effort to protect student athletes’ well-being, the NCAA has
implemented regulations that seek to maintain a fair recruiting environment that limits intrusions
into the lives of student athletes and their families (NCAA, 2016). The NCAA defines
recruitment as when:
“A college employee or representative invites a high school student-
athlete to play sports for their college. Recruiting can occur in many ways, such as
face-to-face contact, phone calls or text messaging, through mailed or emailed
material or through social media” (NCAA, 2016, p. 1).
According to the NCAA (2016), a student athlete is considered a recruitable prospect on
their first day of their 9th grade year (7th grade for basketball), which marks the dates that
recruiting regulations begin for institutions and their staff members. Although high school
support staffs, other than coaches, are not directly part of the recruitment process, it is important
for them to understand key concepts of the process in order to assist their respective student
athlete population. The NCAA has very detailed recruiting rules, which vary by sport and
division. The NCAA Guide for the College-Bound Student-Athlete provides a resource that
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 36
summarizes the recruiting guidelines for prospective student athletes and those advising them
(NCAA, 2016).
Recruiting Experiences. Through the recruitment process, the student athlete can gain
valuable insight into the institution, the campus, the team climate and the resources and support
that are provided. A recent study by the Chronicle of Higher Education surveyed hundreds of
Division I athletes to gain more insight into their respective recruiting experiences. Of the over
300 athletes who responded to the survey, representing seven universities in the Mid-American
Conference, most expressed feelings that the coaches accurately portrayed their institution during
the recruitment process (Sanders, 2008). This study also highlighted that some student athletes,
however, felt as if the coach was not transparent during the process. One student athlete
commented, “"Coaches can tell you whatever they want, pretty much what you want to hear. But
once you sign your name on the dotted line, they can do whatever they want, and you're stuck
there" (Sanders, 2008. p.1). These experiences highlight how student athlete perceptions of the
recruiting process can vary greatly depending on student athlete, coach, and institution.
NCAA rules on recruiting have become more intricate and convoluted, which has
impacted how and when coaches may communicate with prospective athletes. These regulations
were enacted as a way to protect recruits from the barrage of telephone calls, visits, and mailings
by coaches who are eager to sway prospects. Interestingly, the Chronicle of Higher Education
survey indicated that there were mixed feeling with the regulation rules, as some found them
beneficial and others viewed them as a burden (Sanders, 2008). The study found that while
some people believed that the NCAA regulations protected the student athlete from excessive
phone calls and e-mail messages, there were an equal number of individuals who wished for
more unfettered communication with coaches (Sanders, 2008). One thing to note about the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 37
Chronicle of Education survey, is that the Mid-Atlantic conference is considered a “mid-major”
conference, and many of the student athletes that are recruited to these institutions are not
considered blue chip prospects, and are often not be as heavily recruited as their major
conference counterparts. This study would benefit from replication at a power conference, such
as the PAC-12 or SEC, to see if perceptions of the regulations would be different for more highly
recruited prospects.
The Chronicle of Education survey also showed that recruiting is spreading to ever-
younger athletes, and many of these recruits are taking agency over the process by making
greater numbers of unofficial visits to campuses before their senior year (Sanders, 2008).
Unofficial visits are considered trips that the students or their families must pay for, as opposed
to official visits that the institution pays for. The survey indicated that more than four-fifths of
the surveyed athletes made at least one unofficial visit, and nearly one in five players went on
five or more unofficial recruiting trips (Sanders, 2008). After a student athlete's senior year
(dates may vary by sport), they are able to take official visits to campuses, which entail 48 hour,
all expense trips to an institution to gain a better perspective on that specific campus (NCAA,
2016). During these official or unofficial visits, current athletes are often called on to entertain
prospective recruits (Sanders, 2008). The survey indicated that more than half of the athletes
surveyed spent more than 12 hours entertaining prospective student athletes (Sanders, 2008).
Through NCAA recruiting regulations, and the creation of official and unofficial visits,
the prospective student athlete is provided with a safe and less intrusive environment from which
to learn more about a team and institution. It is important for student athletes and high school
support staff to understand their place in the recruitment process, and ask questions that seek to
uncover if the institution is the right fit for the student. As one of the respondent of the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 38
Chronicle of Higher Education survey stated, "It's not terrible to show flaws," one athlete wrote.
A program doesn't have to be "perfect" -- it just has to be "the right fit" (Sanders, 2008, p. 1).
Overemphasis on Recruiting & Violations. Since the inception of high profile and
revenue generating intercollegiate athletics in higher education, significant emphasis has been
placed on the recruitment of elite student athletes. Within the last few decades, recruitment
efforts have intensified as intercollegiate athletics has transformed into a multibillion-dollar
industry that has shifted the way athletic departments and universities operate (Sperber, 2000).
A 2015 USA Today Sports analysis of recruiting spending in the sport of football found that
Division I spending increased 30% in 2013 from 2008 among all public schools (Brady, Kelly, &
Berkowitz, 2015). This report indicated that on average, these institutions spent $360,000 on
their recruiting efforts (Brady, Kelly, & Berkowitz, 2015). The data for private schools was not
included as they are not required to report this information. A 2014 report by the NCAA found
that Division I institutions spent an average of $969,000 a year in 2014 for all sports. These
recruiting expenses include items such as flights, hotels, publications and mailings, official visits,
among other incidental costs (Brady, Kelly, & Berkowitz, 2015).
The excessive spending and overemphasis on recruiting elite student athletes has
prompted an influx of NCAA violations related to recruiting. A 2011 review of the NCAA major
infractions database, revealed that 53 of the 120 football bowl subdivision institutions have
broken major NCAA rules, many of those related to recruiting (Lederman, 2011). The NCAA
has in place a series of sanctions, ranging in gravity depending on the magnitude of the violation.
These sanctions are in place to deter future violations of NCAA rules and to create an “equal
playing field” for all institutions, where the student athlete welfare is prioritized (Smith, 2015).
A recent study analyzing NCAA sanctions on Division I institutions highlighted that the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 39
sanctions offered little to no economic or reputation damage on the institution (Smith, 2015).
The findings of this study proposed that the sanctions have little deterrent effects on institutions,
and insinuate that these schools may find it beneficial to “bend the rules” as a way to gain a
competitive edge (Smith, 2015). Although the findings indicate that the sanctions carry little
deterrent effects, the symbolic value of having them in place is imperative to the protection and
success student athletes.
Minority Student Athletes. Revenue generating sports have relied heavily on the
recruitment of minority student athletes for their success, specifically African Americans. Watt
and Moore (2001) highlight the evolution of college sports and emphasize an increasing trend of
student athletes of color and from lower socio-economic backgrounds. This population comes
from varying backgrounds and in fact, half of all football and basketball players come from the
lower socio-economic quartile (Person, Benson Quaziena & Rodgers, 2001). For many African
American student athletes from lower socio-economic backgrounds, it is common to be the first
generation in their family to go to college and thus, many lack the social capital to navigate the
educational system (Sellers & Damas, 2002). Moreover, on average, African American student
athletes matriculate to colleges with lower grade point averages and test scores, which can make
it difficult for them to succeed at their respective universities (Sellers & Damas, 2002). These
external factors often make the transition to higher education for African American student
athletes challenging. Additionally, the transition to college is compounded as these student
athletes have increased time demands due to their athletic commitment (Sellers & Damas, 2002).
Recruiting Discussion. For student athletes, the recruiting process is valuable time to
gain more insight into the institution. As the recruitment of student athletes is shifting towards
targeting younger and younger prospects, it is imperative that both student athletes and the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 40
recruiting institution thoroughly vet one another in order to ensure a proper fit for both parties
(Sanders, 2008). Counselors and supports staff can provide guidance to student athletes by
encouraging them to wait until a recruit’s senior year to make college commitments. This
guidance would allow more time for the student athlete to mature and develop more knowledge
about their interest as a way to ensure that they make an educated decision. Smrt (2001)
supports this notion by stating that "the best deterrent to reduce the opportunities for problems to
occur is the involvement of the high school coach or administrator in the prospect's recruiting
process" (p. 16).
Athletic Scholarships and the National Letter of Intent. Athletic scholarships can
provide prospective student athletes with the means to attend college, while mitigating part or the
entire financial burden that is associated with higher education. The advent of the athletic
scholarship was developed in response to the then illegal “pay for play” format, where
institutions would hire talented players to create a competitive advantage, a practice which was
widespread in the sport of football (Smith, 2011). In the 1950’s prior to the creation of athletic
scholarships, many programs that yielded football teams argued that student athletes could not
realistically attend school, participate in athletics and also work to support themselves (Smith,
2011). What resulted was the creation of the initial athletic scholarship, which sought to create
an environment where student athletes could focus on academics and athletics without having to
be concerned about the financial implications of paying for college. The advent of full
scholarships as one of the major events that led to the influx of specific populations to higher
education, including African American and international student athlete (Bale, 1991). Full
scholarships allowed many student athletes to attend American higher education institutions, as it
eradicated the financial barriers that many students face while attending higher education (Bale,
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 41
1991). However, the scholarship process can be complex as different NCAA divisions, teams
and respective institutions all have different policies and regulations to allocate the funds.
Current Athletic Scholarship Model. The NCAA currently sets limits on athletic
scholarships, which vary depending on division, and specific sport. NCAA Division I and II
institutions provide more than 2.7 billion dollars annually to student athletes (NCAA, 2016).
Division III does not award athletic scholarships, but student athletes may be provided with
institutional aid based on need and merit, which cannot be related to athletics. For those student
athletes that receive full athletic scholarships, their package will cover tuition and fees, room,
board and course-related books (NCAA, 2016). However, a majority of student athletes who
receive athletics scholarships receive an amount covering a portion of these costs. Those student
athletes, who do not receive full scholarships, must supplement the remainder of their
educational costs in other ways. Many of these student athletes also benefit from academic
scholarships, NCAA financial aid programs such as the NCAA Division I Student Athlete
Opportunity Fund and need-based aid such as Federal Pell Grants.
National Letter of Intent (NLI). The NLI program has been the subject of much criticism
stemming from the lack support for student athletes; however, it still continues to be widely used
by student athletes and institutions. Today, 650 Division I and II institutions participate in this
program, which is managed by the NCAA (NCAA, 2016). The NLI is a binding agreement
(contract) between a student athlete and a NLI member institution for the period of one academic
year. By signing the NLI, the student athlete agrees to attend the institution for one full
academic year, and in return, the institution agrees to provide athletic financial aid for that period
of time. For the student athlete, signing an NLI signifies the culmination of the recruitment
process by other institutions. The NLI is a legally binding contract, and the student athlete can
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 42
be penalized for not fulfilling the agreement by serving one year in residence at the following
institution and losing one year of competition (NCAA, 2016).
Many have argued that the NLI program provides institutions with excessive power,
while minimizing the bargaining rights of student athletes. In her analysis on NCAA lawsuits,
Meyer (2004) poses that once a student athlete signs an NLI, the institution has almost complete
control over the decision making rights if a student athlete chooses to transfer institutions. In
fact, in most of these lawsuits, it was found that the institution, via the coach, made oral promises
to the student athlete that were not fulfilled once the student was on campus, prompting them to
seek transfer to other institutions. However, because of the current NLI format, the institution
was able to determine the stipulations of the transfer, and the penalties that were to be applied.
In these instances, the legal NLI contract trumps the oral agreements made by the coaches and
the student athlete is left with little to no recourse (Meyer, 2004). Additionally, the NLI binds a
student athlete to an institution, not a coach, so if the coach that recruited the student athlete
leaves for another job, the student athlete is still responsible for fulfilling their NLI (Meyer,
2004). The binding nature of the NLI in its current format leaves the student athlete susceptible
to many false promises during the recruitment process, which can be detrimental to student
athletes with little knowledge or social capital to navigate the NLI process.
Athletic Scholarship Discussion. There is no doubt that athletic scholarships provide
countless opportunities for students to pursue higher education while participating in athletics.
Yet, the convoluted NLI process can leave a student athlete susceptible to aggressive recruiting
causing them to make uninformed decisions on where they chose to matriculate and sign the NLI
contract. Meyer (2004) proposes that student athletes must make informed decisions and take
advantage of the recruiting process to ensure that they choose the right institution for them.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 43
However, Meyer (2004) also contends that this can be difficult since the NCAA and the NLI
websites and publications offered very minimal information on the NLI process. For many
student athletes, the college counselor can serve as a mediator and guide through the scholarship
process. Meyer (2004) proposes that student athletes be advised that their decisions should not
be based off of any coach or athletic team, but rather the academic and institutional fit. In such
instances, a student athlete without the knowledge of the NLI process and without social capital
may be taken advantage of by coaches, leading them to make decisions that are not in their best
interests. The counselor can serve as a resource and advocate for a student athlete in order for
them to recognize the differences between institutions, while helping them understanding the
intricacies of the NLI process. By having the support of a knowledgeable counselor, the hope is
that the student athlete makes educated decisions on not only the NLI process, but the entire
student athlete college going process.
High School Counselors
For many students, high school counselors are an integral aspect of their exposure to the
college going process. For student athletes, the college going process is exacerbated by the
additional requirements, which are necessary to make the transition to NCAA sponsored
institutions. Although student athletes may be a very small percentage of the population that the
high school counselors serve, the unique experiences, and varying, and constantly changing
demands require counselors that are adept and knowledgeable in this arena. High school
counselors must not only monitor graduation and college going requirements, but also the many
issues that arise with the NCAA process (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995). With the current milieu
of elite intercollegiate athletics, high school counselors’ knowledge, guidance and mentoring
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 44
philosophies play a crucial role in ensuring that student athletes remain on track to take
advantage of their college opportunities.
Role of Counselor. Historically, the role of a high school counselor has encompassed
many duties and responsibilities in working with students. School guidance emerged at turn of
the 20th century, as schools began responding to the increased industrialization and urbanization
of the country by implementing programs to prepare students for the workforce (Bauman, Siegel,
Falco, Szymanski, Davis & Seabolt, 2003). These initial programs were traditionally based in
large, urban cities and focused primarily focused on vocational guidance, with some aspects of
educational and academic guidance as a supplement (Bauman et al., 2003). It was not until 1952
that counseling was recognized a profession, a milestone marked by the formation of the
American School Counselor Association (ASCA) and the American Counseling Association
(ACA) (Bauman et al., 2003).
Beginning in the 1960’s, high school counselors began to emerge as “gatekeepers” for
higher education, essentially having the power to influence who gains access to college
(Rosenbaum, Miller, & Krei, 1996). In the 1970’s, as budgetary constraints began to threaten
the profession, counselors added additional responsibilities, including administrative, and mental
health roles in order to conserve their positions (Lambie & Williamson, 2004). Counselors still
maintain these additional responsibilities; however, where college access was once reserved for
an elite group of students, it is now expected that all students have access and attend college,
creating more pressure on counselors to meet the needs of their students (Krei & Rosenbaum,
2001). Additionally, studies have shown that counselors vary in their perceptions of their day to
day duties, which include academic counseling, college and career counseling, class scheduling,
registration, individual personal counseling, test administration, parent conferences and
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 45
miscellaneous administrative duties, among others (Burnham & Jackson, 2000; Hutchinson,
Barrick, Groves, 1986).
With so many varying responsibilities and duties, research has indicated that the
counseling profession faces an identity crisis that can have negative implications for students
(Bauman et al., 2003). This identity crisis and confusion can manifest when counselors do not
have clear expectations of what role they are expected to fulfill and how much time and energy is
needed to accomplish tasks (Janson, 2009). Annual studies by the Joyce Ivy Foundation (2008,
2009) in Michigan, found that counselors were stretched thin with their time commitments,
which often affected their time commitment to college counseling, a problem that is exasperated
when they do not have clear definitions of their positions. In fact, it was found that only 29% of
counselor’s time was allocated for college counseling, while the other time was spent primarily
on administrative tasks (Joyce Ivy Foundation, 2008). The varying responsibilities and role
confusion for counselors can have a direct impact on the effectiveness of advising student
athletes, however; additional research will be needed into this connection.
With regards to a counselor's role in the NCAA college going process, the College Board
(2016) has outlined a series of responsibilities, which assume that the counselor is the most
influential member in this process. The College Board (2016) asserts that the counselor's
“number one role is to provide information to all students about the academic requirements for
high school graduation, college admission and athletic participation” (p 1). Moreover, the
counselor is expected to be the mediator between the student athlete, the parents and the coaches
throughout the process. The role of the counselor is very ambiguous causing a strain in time
demands and role confusion. The additional responsibility of advising student athletes through
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 46
the NCAA college going process can be a difficult one to navigate, and adequate training on this
process must be taken into consideration.
Counselor Training. Along with facing an undefined set of responsibilities, counselors
also encounter issues when it comes to training and preparation. The ASCA (2016) states that
school counselors must have a minimum of a master's degree in school counseling and also meet
the state certification standards of their respective state. However, research has indicated that
many training programs for counselors fail to effectively prepare them for college counseling
(McDonough, 2005; Perusse, Goodnough, & Noel, 2005). In a survey of counselor’s perceptions
of graduate preparation programs, many expressed concern that the program did not adequately
prepare them for college counseling, and that these programs often overemphasized topics that
were not relevant to their day-to-day responsibilities (Perusse, Goodnough, & Noel, 2005).
Similarly, McDonough (2005) found that “major counseling textbooks used to train new
counselors rarely, if ever, mention or index’ college’ or “college counseling’” (p.18). As a
result, graduate preparatory coursework in education, rarely includes adequate training in college
advising (McDonough, 2005). Lack of training requires that counselors develop intrinsic
motivation to seek out effective training and knowledge of the college advising process once
employed in a school (McDonough, 2005). Inadequate counselor training can have a direct
effect on the advisement of student athletes, as counselors not only need to have a solid
knowledge of college advisement, but also the added requirements needed to participate in
collegiate athletics.
Minimal research has been conducted on the training of high school counselors on
working with student athletes through the NCAA college going process. Instead, numerous
resources have been developed by various stakeholders with a goal of training counselors on this
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 47
process. Most notably, the NCAA has developed a “high school portal” which serves as a
resource page for high school counselors, and as a self-help tool. The portal provides information
on numerous topics ranging from NCAA initial eligibility standards, to amateurism issues. Yet,
without a conceptual framework for this information, the portal can be difficult to understand
and navigate. Research has indicated that counselors do not find the NCAA portal sufficient,
and that additional training resources need to be made available for counselors (Padilla, 2015).
In a study of high school counselors in Title 1 California schools, counselors expressed the need
to more outreach by the NCAA in order to adequately educate them on the constantly changing
rules and regulations (Padilla, 2015). Counselors also felt that attending training workshops on
NCAA related regulations are necessary; however, many of them expressed concern that the cost
of these workshops created budgetary constraints for their schools and that free training
opportunities should be made available (Padilla, 2015).
Best Practices. High school counselors play many roles and have various duties on their
respective campuses, one of which is guiding student athletes through the NCAA process.
Counselors whom are well versed in the process have the capability of providing student athletes
with accurate information and guidance throughout the process, especially in order for student
athletes to take advantage of their opportunities at NCAA institutions. Goldberg and Chandler
(1995) have proposed a series of implications for high school counselors when advising the
student athlete population on the NCAA college going process. At the foundation of these
implications, Goldberg and Chandler (1995) suggest that counselors must have an understanding
that student athletes face unique difficulties, and the existing network of high school support
services must be utilized to meet their needs. Most importantly is the development of a positive
working alliance between the athlete, parent and coach (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995).
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 48
Specifically, a positive collaboration with the coach can be effective in developing programming
and communicating requirements to the student athlete (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995). However,
this collaboration is being threatened as there is a trend in school districts to hire part time
coaches who are not teachers on campus, and have little interaction or knowledge of the student's
school during the regular school day (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995).
Goldberg and Chandler (1995) also emphasize the importance of hosting NCAA
workshops on site in order to adequately educate parents and students. These workshops should
be developed to inform stakeholders on the academic requirements, but also to highlight the
school's goals and purpose for athletics (Goldberg, 1991). Moreover, Goldberg and Chandler
(1995) pose that workshops in the student athlete's junior and senior year should focus on the
transition from high school to college, particularly with regards to NCAA academic and
graduation requirements. Organizations such as the NCAA, College Board and ASCA have also
attempted to create best practices on their respective websites, as self-help tools. However,
many of these workshops and best practices tend to focus on one aspect of the process fail to
address the entire scope of the NCAA college going process.
As Goldberg and Chandler (1995) stressed, the student athlete exists within a social
context, and many individuals within their social network can serve as positive agents for them
to navigate the NCAA college going process. Of these individuals, the high school guidance
counselor has tremendous influence over the student athlete and if properly informed and
knowledgeable on the process, can create many opportunities for them. The following section
will establish a theoretical framework based on Urie Bronfenbrenner's (1974, 1977, 1993)
Ecological Systems Theory, which emphasized that students develop as a result of their social
context and networks. This framework will help contextualize the study to illustrate the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 49
importance of the high school counselor as a positive social agent for student athletes, and the
importance of creating self-efficacy of the counselor in order to mitigate any issues that may
arise in the process.
Theoretical Framework
In order to adequately examine the student athlete NCAA college going process and the
role of the high school counselor, a theoretical framework will be presented to inform this study.
Maxwell (2012) poses that a theoretical framework refers “to the actual ideas or beliefs that you
hold about a phenomena studied” (p. 39). Having experiential knowledge on this topic, I was
able to select a theoretical framework which will serve as a lens to explore this process.
Ecological Systems Theory of student development will be reviewed in this section to gain a
better perspective on the factors that influence counselors and student athletes face when
navigating this process. This framework assumes that student athletes do not exist in isolation,
but rather in a larger social environment, which can affect the college going process. Moreover,
this study will presuppose that many student athletes may not have the social capital or resources
to successfully navigate this often-complex process. To combat this, high school counselors
must become knowledgeable enough to navigate this process in order to mitigate the lack of
social capital.
Ecological Systems Theory. Ecological Systems Theory was first developed in the
1970’s by psychologist Urie Bronfenbrenner as a way to explain growth and development of a
person in early childhood (Evans, 2010). The theory is based on his review and analysis of many
empirical studies from diverse fields, dating back to the 19th century (Bronfenbrenner, 1993).
The theory remained in a state of constant evolution as Bronfenbrenner revised and refined it
until his death in 2005 (Evans, 2010). At the core of Bronfenbrenner’s (1974, 1977, 1993)
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 50
theory is the notion that the development of a person is not determined solely by individual
attributes, but that rather the interaction of the person with their ecological context.
Additionally, Bronfenbrenner (1974) asserted that prior to his theory, much of the research on
child development assumed that the child existed in a two-person system, treating the
development of a child as if it existed in isolation from any other social context that could
potentially affect it. Instead, Bronfenbrenner (1974) argued for an ecological orientation, which
highlighted the importance of other relations between systems and the child as critical for
development. For instance, the importance between a child's home and school can be influential
factors in their development.
At the heart of Ecological System Theory, Bronfenbrenner (1974, 1977, 1993) contends
that in order to understand the development of a person, we must analyze their entire ecological
system where growth occurs. Through the evolution of the theory, Bronfenbrenner (1974, 1977,
1993) delineated five organized subsystems that he proposed can help support or deter human
growth; these five subsystems are microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystems and
chronosystems. Renn and Arnold (2003) were able to apply Bronfenbrenner’s model to college
student development, which in turn, lead to a visual representation of the theory (Fig. 1). At the
center of these subsystems, is the individual, which for purposes of this study will be the student
athlete.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 51

Figure 1. Renn and Arnolds Adaptation of Bronfenbrenner's Model
The following section describes each subsystem in detail with examples of how they are
related to the high school student athlete and the NCAA college going process:
Microsystem. Bronfenbrenner (1993) proposes that microsystems are a person’s
immediate relationships that have an effect on development. Bronfenbrenner (1993) defines it
as:
“microsystem is a pattern of activities, roles, and interpersonal relations
experienced by the developing persons in a given face-to-face setting with
particular physical, social and symbolic features that invite, permit or inhibit
engagement in sustained, progressively more complex interaction with, and
activity in, the immediate environment “(p.15).
For students, microsystems encompass immediate relationships, which can include family,
friendship groups, school staff, and teachers (Renn & Arnold, 2003). For high school student
athletes, the microsystems tend to include parents, teammates, coaches, and high school guidance
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 52
counselors. These individuals in the microsystem can have tremendous influence over the
college going decision making of this population.
Mesosystems. The microsystem entails the linkages and relationships between two or
more settings containing the individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1993). In other words, it is the
relationship between two or more different microsystems. For student athletes, a positive
working relationship between the school and the family can increase their college opportunities.
This notion is supported by Goldberg and Chandler (1995) as they also found that the high
school counselor played an integral role in building strong relationships with parents and
coaches, built on a foundation of solid communication of the NCAA college athletic going
process.
Exosystem. Bronfenbrenner (1993) contends that the exosystem encompass the linkages
and relationships between two or more settings, but unlike the mesosystem, at least one of the
settings does not contain the individual. Instead, the exosystem may prompt events that influence
the immediate setting (microsystem) that contains the individual. For example, the relationships
between the parents work life and the household could have an impact on the individual. For
student athletes, an example of an exosystem can be the NCAA, whose complex regulations
regarding the college going process can have an effect of the counselor, and in turn can affect the
opportunities for the student athlete. Even though the student athlete may have never met an
individual from the NCAA, the student athlete and their microsystems are still directly affected
by their policies. As a microsystem, the high school counselor can serve as a mediator between
the NCAA and the student athlete by become knowledgeable in the regulations in order to assist
the student athlete in navigating the process.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 53
Macrosystem. Bronfenbrenner (1993) stated that the macrosytem “consists of the
overarching pattern of micro, meso and ecosystems characteristics of a given culture” (p. 40).
This includes the social ideologies and values that make up cultures and subcultures. Within the
higher education context, Renn and Arnold (2003) contend that a macrosystem entails
“meritocratic notions derived from democratic values and capitalist ideology” (p. 273). One
aspect of how macrosystems influence college is the cultural elements that influence access to
higher education, which in turn can create barriers to higher education for those who do not
know about them. These cultural components can be things such as knowledge of college going
requirements, financial support to pay for college and of the financial aid process. From a
student athlete standpoint, the counselor can also serve as a bridge and a knowledgeable resource
for these students.
Chronosystem. The last component of Bronfenbrenner’s (1993) model is the
chronosystem which “encompasses change or consistency over time not only in the
characteristics of a person but also of the environment in which that person lives” (p. 40).
Examples of the chronosystem can be changes of school structure over a lifetime, and changes
over time in NCAA college going requirements. The chronosystem directly affects high school
student athletes and counselors as they must constantly keep abreast of changes in the NCAA
regulations, as well as the specific college requirements. Moreover, the college transition
process is a longitudinal one in which the student athlete must start preparing early in their high
school careers. The chronosystem component affects all other subsystems since the theory
assumes that the subsystems are constantly interacting and changing over time.
Ecological Systems Theory and the High School Counselor. The student athlete does
not exist in isolation, and many social, historical, and cultural factors can affect their
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 54
development and transition into college. At its core, the ecological systems theory is grounded
in the idea that the different subsystems interact in ways that directly affect the development of a
person. As a microsystem agent, the high school counselor has immediate and direct contact
with the student athlete on a regular basis and can serve to be a bridge between the other
subsystems (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995). For instance, the counselor has the ability to bring
together other members within the student athlete’s mesosystem for a common goal of
cultivating a college going plan. Moreover, the counselor can become knowledgeable on the
NCAA requirements, which are part of the exosystem, in order to disseminate this information to
the other members of the student athlete’s microsystem. The knowledge of this process by the
counselor is imperative as it can ensure that the student athlete has as many opportunities
available to them as possible.
Literature Review Summary
NCAA collegiate athletics present a unique opportunity for students to not only continue
to compete in their respective sports, but more importantly, offer an access point to higher
education. Yet, the changing landscape of athletics has made the transition process to NCAA
sponsored institutions much more complex for student athletes. As collegiate athletics have
continued to grow and develop into a multi-billion-dollar industry, institutions have entered into
an arms race to develop competitive programs with the help top recruits, coaches, and athletics
facilities (Sperber, 2000). In order to maintain the integrity of collegiate athletics and higher
education institutions, the NCAA has implemented a series of regulations and requirements that
stakeholders must abide by (Smith, 2011). Consequently, the NCAA college going process has
become very convoluted, as high school student athletes must meet a myriad of requirements.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 55
For many student athletes, the NCAA college going process may be too difficult to navigate
alone, as they may face limited opportunities without adequate guidance.
This issue is exasperated as high school student athletes vary greatly with regards to the
levels of social, financial and cultural support that each has access to. Specifically, Bourdieu
(1977) developed the concept of social capital, which is found in the relations between people
and the creation of human capital created by these relationships. Social capital can determine a
person's access and knowledge or skills acquired through the educational system. Within the
NCAA college going process, student athletes have varying levels of social capital, which can
influence their knowledge of the college going process and ultimately may determine the
opportunities they have access to. School counselors are critical for student athletes who lack
other resources, such as parents who have already navigated the college going process
themselves.
Research has supported the notion that counselors play an integral role in the student
athlete college going process (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995). Studies have also indicated that the
role of the counselor encompass a myriad of responsibilities on their respective campuses,
leading to role confusion, which may ultimately have an impact on their advisement of students
(Burnham & Jackson, 2000; Hutchinson, Barrick, Groves, 1986). Moreover, counselor training
programs rarely emphasize or adequately prepare counselors for college advising (McDonough
2005; Perusse, Goodnough, & Noel, 2005). When it comes to NCAA college going
requirements, research has shown that counselors feel that these requirements are not
disseminated appropriately, and that additional training is required (Padilla, 2015). This lack of
training can have a detrimental impact on the college going opportunities for student athletes.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 56
Through the lens of Bronfenbrenner’s (1974, 1977, 1993) Social Systems Theory, the
role of the counselor in the NCAA college going process is critical to the success and
matriculation of student athletes. Counselors interact with student athletes on a regular basis, and
have the potential to bridge the gap between the different subsystems that contain the student
athlete. From serving as a mediator with the college institution, to informing the student athlete
of NCAA requirements, the counselor plays a vital role in the success of the student athlete. It is
imperative that counselors have a firm understanding and knowledge of the NCAA college going
process. Therefore, this study was sought to understand the challenges that counselors face when
advising student athletes, while exploring ways to better prepare counselors for this role. The
following section will highlight the research methods for the study.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 57
Chapter Three: Methodology
This section will provide a summary of the research methods that were employed for this
study. Reasoning and rationale for the usage of the research methodology will also be provided.
First, the research questions and purpose of the study will be reviewed in order to lay the
foundation for this inquiry. This section will continue with an overview of the sample and
population and the method of their selection. Lastly, the instrumentation and data collection
methods will be discussed, followed by how the data was analyzed.
Research Design Overview
Using a constructivist worldview, an inductive qualitative approach was employed to gain
insight into the high school counselor experience (Creswell, 2014). Specifically, a comparative
case study using in depth semi-structured interviews was employed. The comparative case study
was used to gain perspective into what some schools and counselors were doing effectively and
conversely, to gain better insight into schools that do not enroll many student athletes. Maxwell
(2013) suggests that semi-structured interviews allow for more flexibility to ask clarifying and
probing questions, which can lead to more detail and can help increase the validity of the
findings. Therefore, in order to frame this study and guide the research from a qualitative
approach, the following research questions were developed:
1. What knowledge and training do counselors have on the student athlete NCAA
college going process?
2. What are some of the organizational challenges that counselors face when advising
high school student athletes through the NCAA college going process?
3. What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to advise student athletes
on NCAA requirements?
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 58
4. How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the NCAA college going
process?
Since this study sought to examine the experiences of high school counselors, the research
questions were suitable for this qualitative study as they guided the research (McEwan &
McEwan, 2003). However, it was important that the sample selected for this study represented
the differing counselor backgrounds and school types in order to adequately answer the research
questions.
Sampling
In an effort to target counselors from a variety of high school types, purposive sampling
was used to explore the experiences of high school counselors. Johnson and Christensen (2000)
propose that purposive sampling is utilized when “the researcher specifies the characteristics of a
population of interest and then tries to locate individuals who have those characteristics” (p.
264). Purposive sampling is a non-random technique that in this case was utilized to locate high
school counselors from varying backgrounds and high school types, which aligns with the
research questions and ultimate design of the study (Creswell, 2014). Although purposive
sampling can have some limitations with regards to generalizability, the technique is an
appropriate approach for this particular research design (Johnson & Christensen, 2000).
For the purposes of this study, a small sample size (N=8) was purposefully selected for
in-depth interviews. The population that this sample was drawn from was high school
counselors from the greater Southern California area. Purposeful sampling ensured that
counselors were selected from a variety of high schools, specifically accounting for counselors
that come from schools that have a large number of student atheltes that matriculate to NCAA
programs (4), and those that for multiple reasons, do not (4) (Johnson & Christensen, 2000).
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 59
Access to this sample was provided through established relationships with counselors in the
Southern California area stemming from personal knowledge of their respective policies and
procedures for working with student athletes. These two populations were compared to gain a
better understanding of how each navigate the NCAA college going process.
Through existing rapport with and established relationships with counselors in the area,
there were no gatekeeping issues when accessing this population and selecting the sample.
However, the position I hold within the USC Athletic Department grants me inherent knowledge
of the topic and authority on the college going process in the area. Furthermore, many
counselors in the area attend workshops that are hosted by myself and a colleague on the NCAA
college going process. Therefore, it was determined that my positionality with local counselors
may affect the sample selection process and the data collected. Purposeful sampling mitigated
my positionality with the local counselors by allowing me to select counselors that have not
attended NCAA workshop in the past (Creswell, 2014).
Instrumentation - Why Qualitative Methods?
According to Creswell (2013), “qualitative data tends to be open-ended without
predetermined responses, while quantitative data usually includes closed ended responses such as
those found on questionnaires or psychological instruments” (pg. 14). Since this study sought to
understand the experiences of high school counselors, qualitative research allowed for richer, and
more in-depth data from which meaning can be deciphered. Therefore, comparative case studies
using in-depth semi-structured interviews were employed to allow the data to emerge naturally
throughout the process. Additionally, semi structured interviews allowed for the adjustment of
the questions based on previous responses, in order to create a more naturally flowing
conversation. The emergent design of this study enabled flexibility with the questions being
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 60
asked, while also providing the freedom to ask any clarifying and probing questions. By asking
clarifying and probing questions, more detail was gained, which helped increase the validity of
the findings (Maxwell, 2013). This method is effective when attempting to answer the research
questions proposed in the study, as the purpose was to gain a perspective into the experiences of
high school counselors.
Ultimately, a qualitative design by way of in-depth, semi structured interviews was an
appropriate method to understand the experiences of high school counselors when advising
student athletes through the NCAA college going process. As aforementioned in chapter two,
Bronfenbrenner’s (1974, 1977, 1993) Ecological Systems Theory contends that an individual
develops through interactions with various subsystems within a person’s ecology. For student
athletes, these subsystems can become convoluted and complex, and may require additional
support from high school counselors. Since the process consists of many variables and
requirements, the emergent design of this study allowed the counselors to provide rich detail of
their experiences in assisting students through this process, while highlighting common issues
and best practices.
Data Collection
Once the research sample size was developed, data collection methods were employed to
obtain the most accurate data for the research question. Therefore, an interview protocol
(Appendix B) was developed to guide the semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured
interviews allowed individual respondents some latitude to talk about what is of interest to them,
in particular how they experienced navigating the NCAA college going process (Creswell,
2014). The interview questions that were selected were somewhat open-ended which allowed
the respondents the freedom to discuss their experiences and expertise, or lack
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 61
thereof. Moreover, questions were selected that clearly asked the respondent how confident they
felt in their training and preparation for advising this unique population. From a constructivist
point of view, the questions were very open ended and allowed the respondent to create meaning
to their experiences and perceptions.
Prior to the interviews, the participants were provided with the Institutional Review
Board (IRB) approved study document, which included a summary of the study as well as other
pertinent information (Appendix A). This document was reviewed and approved by the IRB
board at prior to the data collection process. The time and location of the interviews were
important because it allowed the interviewer to acquire much richer data and thicker description
since the interviewee’s felt comfortable during the meeting. Some of the interviews were
conducted in person, and some over the phone at the participant’s convenience, and all of them
were recorded using a recording device. Thus, the counselors were permitted to select the time
and location of the meeting, since research indicated that their schedules are varied and
demanding (Burnham & Jackson, 2000; Hutchinson, Barrick, Groves, 1986).
Throughout the data collection, many steps were taken to ensure that the process was
conducted ethically. Most notably, the interview protocol included a section for informed
consent and an explanation of the research to be conducted. The participant had the option to
opt out of answering any question if they did not feel comfortable. Moreover, the participant
was made aware that their identity would remain confidential. Lastly, the participants were
verbally asked for consent to interview them and also to record the conversation, to which they
all agreed.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 62
Data Analysis
The effective organization of the data was a major component to the analysis of this
study. One method to ensure organization was the use of a recording device, which was
employed to collect and analyze all of the data to make the process more efficient. Audio
recordings of the interviews were then transferred to text analysis, using a word
document. These audio recordings ultimately made the data collection process easier, while also
ensuring that no information was overlooked during the interview process. Once all the data
was compiled and transcribed into word, organizational files were created on Google Drive to
make the analysis process easier. Moreover, Google Drive provided a safe place to store the
data, while also serving as a great organizational tool to alternate back and forth between data
sources.
Once all the data was compiled and organized, the analysis of the data began. Glaser and
Strauss’ (1965) constant comparative method was employed as a tool to identify categories and
themes within the data. Additionally, Strauss and Corbin (1990) developed a flexible model for
coding data using three levels of coding, which include, open coding, axial coding and selective
coding. Open coding refers to the process of breaking down data to its lowest possible unit
(Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Open coding was used in this study to ensure that there was no
researcher subjectivity in the analysis of the data. From the open codes that were deciphered,
axial codes were developed based on groupings of open codes. Once numerous axial codes
emerged, similar axial codes could be grouped to develop selective codes, which were the
overarching themes, findings and assertions that helped answer the research questions (Strauss &
Corbin, 1990).
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 63
The open, axial, and selective codes were compiled in an Excel database. This
“codebook” consisted of all the codes that emerged from the eight interviews. The codebook
allowed for an organized, central location for all the main codes that emerged from the data,
which ultimately made it easier to develop themes that helped in addressing the research
questions. The codebook included the name of the code, a description of what the code stood
for, and an example of the code from actual data. The codebook provided a great visual
representation to see the logical progression of how conclusions were drawn.
Throughout the analysis process, Ecological Systems Theory was used as a theoretical
framework from which to better understand the findings. As themes emerged, the role of the
high school counselor within the student athlete’s social ecological system was taken into
consideration.
Credibility and Trustworthiness.
Thought the analysis process, many steps were taken to ensure the credibility and
trustworthiness of the findings. Namely, the work of Miles, Huberman and Saldana (2014) was
used as a guide when analyzing the data for this study. One method that was employed is
“checking for researcher effects”, also referred to as reflexivity (Miles et. al., 2014). As a NCAA
institutional representative, a conscious effort was made to not let pre-existing biases on the topic
affect judgment while analyzing the data. A conscious effort was also made to not let my
positionality based on my role within the department affect my judgment. The constant
comparative method assisted in this as the open codes created an environment that ensured that
the data was not interpreted using with preexisting biases. Triangulation was also employed to
develop internal validity of my findings. Triangulation serves as a cross referencing technique to
ensure that my findings are similar throughout different methods (Miles, Huberman & Saldana,
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 64
2014). Triangulation was used in this study through member checking of participants, as this
was an important aspect of creating credibility and trustworthiness. This feedback was achieved
by following up with the participants when interview responses required additional clarification.
Transferability of the data was achieved by establishing thick description in the narratives
provided by the counselors. The following section will summarize the findings that emerged
from the research data.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 65
Chapter Four: Research Findings
The purpose of this chapter is to examine the research findings from in depth structured
interviews of high school counselors. The in depth interviews in this study focused on the
experiences of high school counselors when advising student athletes on the NCAA college
going process. The following research questions guided this study and facilitated the rich
narratives of the counselors:
1. What knowledge and training do counselors perceive they have on the student athlete
NCAA college going process?
2. What are some of the organizational challenges that counselors face when advising high
school student athletes through the NCAA college going process?
3. What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to advise student athletes on
NCAA requirements?
4. How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the NCAA college going
process?
Through the emergent design of the structured in depth interviews, the high school
counselors were asked a series of questions that sought to invoke their thoughts, feelings and
specific experiences and examples of working with aspiring college student athletes. Previous
research has indicated that high school counselors often feel overwhelmed and confused by the
varying roles they play on their respective campuses, and that minimal training is provided to
them when working with student athletes (McDonough, 2005; Perusse, Goodnough, & Noel,
2005). The interview protocol was designed to allow the counselors to able speak openly about
their experiences, while also ensuring their confidentiality as names in this study were changed
to pseudonyms to protect the identity of the students, staff, and site.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 66
The data collection occurred over a three-month period at various high schools
throughout the Southern California area, beginning in September 2016 and culminating in
November 2016. After the initial data collection, additional communication by way of phone
calls followed to clarify statements and allow the participants to add additional interpretation
about regarding their responses. The following section provides demographic information about
each participant, in order to provide valuable background information and provide context to the
findings section.
Participant Background Information
The participants in this study varied greatly with regards to demographic backgrounds,
affiliation with athletics, and type of school of employment. For the purposes of this study, all
participants chosen were employed by public high schools. Private high schools were omitted
from this research as they often greatly differ with regards the amount of emphasis and funding
they provide athletics and athletics support programs. The following table will provide
information concerning the participants, including years working with student athletes in a
counseling capacity, training history for working with student athletes, type of high school
institution, responsibilities in current role, and if they were a student athletes themselves.
Table 1
Participant Information
Participants

Years
Counseling
Student
Athletes
Type of Public
Institution
Type of
Training
Responsibilities in
Current Role
Former
Athlete?
Michael
Cordero
5 Suburban Middle
Class High
School. Medium
level of emphasis
on athletics
MA
Counseling,
NCAA
Workshops
AP, 4-Year plans,
study skills,
relaxation tips,
coach, transition
help, NCAA
Yes –
High
School
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 67
advising
Jane
Villanueva

8 Suburban, Title 1
Charter School.
High level of
emphasis on
athletics
MA
Counseling,
NCAA
Workshops
Coach, guidance
counselor, NCAA
advising
Yes –
Division I
Rafael Solano

9 Urban Title 1
school. Very
high level of
emphasis on
athletics
MA
Counseling,
NCAA
Workshops
9th grade
counselor,
discipline,
scheduling,
NCAA advising
No
Janette Sautele

13 Suburban Middle
Class High
School. High
level of emphasis
on athletics
MA
Counseling,
NCAA
Workshops
Advising,
scheduling, 4-year
plans, career
plans, personal
counseling, parent
meeting, NCAA
advisins
No
Donna Batiste

3 Large middle
class suburban
high school, with
medium
emphasis on
athletics
MA
Counseling,
Ed.D.
Education,
NCAA
Workshops
Academic
counseling, career
advising, college
guidance, parent
meetings,
financial aid and
scholarships,
NCAA advising
No
Abigail Smith

2 Large affluent
suburban high
school with a
very high
emphasis on
athletics
MA
counseling,
and NCAA
workshops
Academic
counseling,
personal and
social advising,
NCAA advising
No
Kim Sellens

3 Large middle
class high school
with medium
emphasis on
athletics
MA
counseling
College advising,
career advising,
NCAA advising
l Yes – 1
year of HS
Mary Lopez

3 Large urban high
school with high
emphasis on
MA
counseling
Lead counselor,
12th grade
counselor, college
No
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 68
athletics counselor
Michael Cordero is a high school high school counselor working in a large, middle class
suburban school, and is the sole athletic counselor at his site. Prior to this high school, Michael
worked in a similar role at a smaller highly academic technical school. Michael was a former
high school student athlete and is also a coach at his current school. Michael feels that his
experiences as a former student athlete and his insight in the coaching realm provide him an
advantage when working with student athletes in the counseling role. Michael acknowledges
that he does not know all the NCAA requirements, but he consistently and actively searches for
information on the topic.
Jane Villanueva is a counselor at a large, suburban Title 1 charter school that places a
high level of emphasis on athletics. Jane herself was a standout athlete in high school and at a
Division I college and feels responsible for assisting other students in their college athletic
endeavors. Jane has been working at the high school level for over 20 years, and over the last 8
years she has transitioned into counseling. Jane’s school does not have a sole NCAA counselor;
instead, all students are divided amongst six guidance counselors. Jane is the unofficial “NCAA
expert” on her campus and she often attends workshops and comes back to present her findings
to the rest of the staff. She is also a coach on her campus and tries her best to assist her student
athletes on the process.
Rafael Solano is a counselor at a large urban, Title 1 high school with one of the most
storied athletic programs in the Los Angeles area, specifically in the sport of football. Rafael’s
high school places much emphasis on athletics, and many stakeholders work together to ensure
that the student athletes are successful on and off the field. The high school does not have an
official NCAA counselor; however, Rafael has taken it upon himself to learn the process in order
to advise the student athletes. Although Rafael was not a student athlete himself, he has
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 69
developed a passion for high school athletics. He not only is responsible for advising his 9th
grade students, but has unofficially taken on the role of working with student athletes as well.
Janette Sautele is in her 13th year as a counselor at a large, suburban high school outside
of Los Angeles. Janette’s school has a strong athletic department that consistently sends student
athletes to college on athletic scholarships. Her high school does not have one specific counselor
that works with athletes. Instead, all counselors work with athletes that fall within their specific
caseload. Janette exemplifies the “role confusion” dilemma, as she is responsible for numerous
roles on her campus, while also taking the athletic advisor role on willingly. Janette feels very
strongly about supporting student athletes through the college going process, and believes that
student athletes deserve all-encompassing support.
Donna Batiste is in her third year working as the sole NCAA counselor for student
athletes at a large, suburban middle class high school. Donna is the most experienced NCAA
counselor on staff and other staff members and coaches rely on her for up to date information
and guidance on the process. When she does not have an answer to an NCAA related question,
Donna actively reaches out to the NCAA and experts at college institutions in order to gather the
correct information. Despite having multiple roles on her campus, Donna believes that if she
does not support the student athletes on her campus, they may slip through the cracks and will
lose the opportunity to matriculate to post-secondary institutions.
Abigail Smith is a second year counselor in an affluent, suburban school with a very rich
tradition of athletic success. Abigail believes that with the affluence of the families in her
school, comes high expectations for academic and athletic success. The role of NCAA counselor
was recently given to Abigail, and she is currently figuring out how to navigate the process,
while learning as much as possible about the rules and regulation. Abigail is navigating an
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 70
internal debate on whether students should take more accountability over the NCAA process, or
if the school should provide more support in the process. With so many student athletes at a
program with so much athletic success, there is really no set procedure at this site as to how to go
about advising student athletes - Abigail is seeking to rectify this.
Kim Sellens is a third year guidance counselor at an urban, middle class high school.
Kim was assigned the role of NCAA counselor upon taking the job at this school and had no
previous experience. Although she only played a year of high school athletics, Kim describes
herself as a “huge sports fan” and takes a lot of ownership over the NCAA process. Kim’s
school does not have a sole NCAA counselor as they divide students by last name, but she has
assumed the role of unofficial NCAA advisor. Kim’s primary responsibilities include career and
college counseling, and she admits that she does not have much responsibility over the social-
emotional aspects of the counseling profession. Kim’s school divides up caseloads by alphabet;
however, most of the student athletes are sent to her for NCAA advisement.
Mary Lopez is in her seventh year as a high school counselor at a large urban high school
that places much emphasis on athletic success. Mary is the lead counselor at her high school and
she manages and directs all operations of her office. Mary’s school is broken up by grade, and
she oversees the senior year students. Mary does not have any formal NCAA training and often
finds it difficult to navigate the process. Mary has designated someone in her office to be the
NCAA counselor and is hoping that this person will be able to train and keep the rest of the staff
updated on all the requirements.
Research Question 1: What knowledge and training do counselors perceive they have on
the student athlete NCAA college going process?
Through the utilization of the constant comparative method, one major theme and three
subthemes emerged as it relates to the knowledge and training of high school counselors on the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 71
student athlete NCAA college going process. The overarching theme that emerged through the
narratives is a general lack of formal training. The lack of training was prevalent to some degree
with all respondents, and it affected the way the counselors perceived and experienced their
advisement of student athletes on the NCAA college going process.
Lack of formal training. Consistent across all the interviews in this study, was the
absence of formal training on the NCAA college going process. This theme manifested with
three sub themes; 1.lack of preparation during graduate school, 2. Counselors taking a reactive
approach to learning about the NCAA requirements, and 3) lack of formal training affects the
counselor’s perceived ability to adequately advise student athletes.
Graduate preparation. All participants stated that they did not receive any formal
training prior to working with student athletes, despite them all graduating from Master’s level
coursework with emphasis in counseling. Many of the counselors expressed concern that their
graduate programs brushed over many important facets of the practical components of
counseling, including the student athlete NCAA experience. The narrative of Kim Sellens offers
a great perspective into this, as she offered,
“I really loved my graduate program, but it was very much based on really the
social and emotional interaction, but there was only one course out of my entire
Master's program that even talked about college and career counseling, though
when you put that in perspective, when you’re in school for two years to do it one
course really isn't going to give you much and it didn't touch on NCAA at all. It
barely even covered applications and agencies and all of that, nothing.”
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 72
Donna Batiste also expressed a similar experience, stating that “the requirements with my
graduate program, especially within counseling, was more geared towards personal, social and
academic, the rest of it was more hands on once you got into the position at the school site.”
This strong sentiment about lack of NCAA training within counseling graduate programs
is pervasive among all the interviews. Yet, the participants stressed that all counselors on their
respective sites have consistent interactions with student athletes. Mary Lopez expressed that
“all of us (counselors) work with the student athletes at our school, and to be honest, there really
isn’t anyone on our campus that thoroughly understands all the dynamics of the NCAA
process...it’s really sad because many of these kids could be losing an opportunity to play at the
next level.” Mary also indicated that she did not receive graduate training, or any type of NCAA
training prior to working with student athletes. The lack of graduate training was evident
throughout all respondents, although the extent to which each went about gaining further
knowledge varied greatly.
Counselors take a reactive approach to learning about the NCAA requirements. A
common sub-theme that emerged from the interviews was that the counselors educated
themselves about the NCAA process through their interactions with the student athletes, taking a
reactive approach to counseling this population. Counselors described many ways in which they
researched and self-taught themselves the many facets of the NCAA college going process,
ranging from reading NCAA literature to attending workshops. This is exemplified in the
comment by Janette Sautele, who noted “I had no training grad school, I had no training as an
intern in the district, I had no training when I started the job, my training was basically I had an
athlete in front me asking me how he can be eligible and I had to go online and do research
through the eligibility center.” Janette also stressed her concern with inaccurate information that
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 73
she found on online athletic recruiting sites, “I've looked at other websites and some of the things
weren't accurate, and I think those were more sites that are used by travel ball coaches and
people who are trying to sell their recruiting to kids, which is a shame.” Janette’s account of her
experiences highlight how she took a reactive approach to learning about the process, and despite
taking the initiative to research the NCAA process, she was still unable to locate the accurate
information.
Many other participants indicated that they used the NCAA resources as a way to teach
themselves about the student athlete college going process. Responses with regards to the NCAA
resources varied greatly, as some counselors viewed the resources as confusing and cumbersome
while others found them very helpful. Michael Cordero went as far as reading the entire NCAA
Handbook (300 pages) and admitted that he was perplexed, “I was thoroughly confused, I had no
idea what was going on.” Michael also took advantage of the training videos provided by the
NCAA, and stated that some videos where “very helpful”, while others were “crazy long.” A few
of the counselors had positive experiences when using the toll-free NCAA number to answer
many of their questions; however, a majority of them have never tried this option. Rafael Sotello
shared, “when I’m in doubt about anything, I'll call the toll free number and just ask those
specific questions. There was something last year I had to ask them about, there was a notation
on a particular class from a different school and I wasn't clear on, so I called them and they
cleared it right up for me.” Michael also uses the NCAA as a resource. “I'm particular about
getting correct information, he added, “so, whether it's calling NCAA or looking at whatever
information online they have, that’s kind of how I learned most of the stuff.” For most
counselors, however, the NCAA rules were confusing and convoluted. As Janette explained,
“the NCAA makes it even more crazy, like changing the rules all the time and even to the point
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 74
where last year I was trying to track a student and we as counselors don’t have access to his
NCAA profile information.”
Another subtheme that emerged with regards to reactive training is the prevalence of
NCAA based workshops that many counselors attended in order to take a crash course on the
subject matter. These workshops were attended by a handful of the participants, and they are
primarily run by local athletic departments and at counselor conferences. As Michael explains,
“the workshops have been a great help too, when I go to those and I’ll come back and I'll present
to the other counselors.” These workshops are a great example of counselors attempting to
educate themselves. Yet, for many counselors, these workshops can be overwhelming and
confusing. Abigail admits, “I went to the NCAA conference and it was too much information, I
didn’t even know the basics and they were going into very advanced content, I couldn't keep up.”
Abigail’s narrative illustrates that even the available training resources pose challenges to high
school counselors.
Lack of formal training affects the counselor’s perceived ability to adequately advise
student athletes. A prominent sub theme from the interviews was the perception that the lack of
training would be detrimental to the counselor’s ability to advise the student athlete. Often, the
counselors expressed sentiments that that they would much rather pass the student athlete to
another, more knowledgeable person, instead of proceeding and possibly misadvising them.
This is evident with Abigail Smith’s response, “I will be completely candid with you, I feel like I
sort of try to push it off because I don't necessarily know as much.” Interestingly, Abigail admits
that her lack of training and knowledge has affected her self-efficacy to advise her student
athletes. In a follow up conversation, Abigail states that many times she feels like she does not
know where or how to find the answers to her NCAA questions, remarking, “sometimes I just
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 75
find myself pushing it off, like try to talk to somebody else who might know because I don't want
to give wrong information.”
The lack of training amongst the counselors was evident in the responses of other
counselors as well. Although having many years of experience in working with student athletes,
Kim Sellens still questions her knowledge and ability to adequately advise student athletes. In
her interview response, Kim acknowledges, “I think the biggest thing is just getting nervous that
I haven’t like checked the transcript properly or that some course has somehow slipped through.
I think there's always that nervousness and that fear that we've somehow not cross-checked it.”
This theme of self-doubt is also evident in the specific requirements for the different NCAA
divisions. Donna Batiste states, “I just know the information that if a student was an athlete they
needed to sign up with the Eligibility Center, not necessarily knowing the different divisions that
they can go to, and their specific requirements.” Donna added that for specific information
regarding requirements for different divisions, she would defer to others, including the NCAA
customer service line and more knowledgeable counselors.
The counselors’ focus on training on the NCAA college going process is amongst the
most prevalent theme that emerged in the interviews. All of the counselors openly expressed
concerns that they were not adequately trained for advising student athletes, and that there is a
need for additional knowledge and training. Donna Batiste affirmed, “like I said, if you are a
counselor and it's not your responsibility, but you have to work with the students, you don't
necessarily get all the training that you need to be able to do it effectively.” Steady across all the
interviews was the idea that properly advising students is important, and that additional training
must be sought. The narrative of Abigail Smith exemplifies this notion, as she specifically
commented, “long story short, I mean I really realize that it's an area that I think that we're not as
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 76
educated on and we need to be, it’s such a multilayered thing, there really needs to be more
specific training in it because I mean there is so much we need to know.”
Research Question 2: What are some of the organizational challenges that counselors face
when advising high school student athletes through the NCAA college going process?
Through the interview process many themes emerged with regards to the organizational
challenges that counselors face when advising student athletes at their respective sites. These
themes included; 1) lack of formal role and responsibilities when working with student athletes,
and 2) limited communication between different stakeholders in the process. Unlike many
professions that have set standards and responsibilities, the counselors in this study all vary
greatly with regards to the types of responsibilities each has on their respective campuses. This
is exemplified in the counselor's responses throughout the interviews as they expressed feelings
of role confusion. This also permeates into advising student athletes, as counselors expressed
concern that they do not know what their exact responsibilities are in working with this
population, a theme that is consistent among all respondents. The counselors indicated that lack
of set roles ultimately affects the communication between the different stakeholders in the
NCAA college going process. The following section will highlight these themes by employing
the rich narratives from the interviews of the counselors.
Counselors experience lack of formal role and responsibilities when working with
student athletes. A common narrative among all participants is the idea that the role of NCAA
counselor was not a voluntary decision, but rather was one that was imposed on them by their
supervisors. In a discussion about how he came about working with student athletes, Michael
Cordero confesses, “I was thoroughly confused, I had no idea what was going on, again the
person who was doing it for me had left, so It was kind of just left to me, like, well you can
figure it out and make it work, and I was like what!?” Michael admitted that his supervisors
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 77
delegated the role to him, with no formal training and without a thorough understanding of what
the responsibilities that the position entailed. Michael expressed feelings of being overwhelmed
by the addition of this role, since he already had so many responsibilities under his purview. In
turn, Michael had a difficult transition into this role, a feeling that was shared by many of the
participants.
Counseling structure affects self-efficacy. Although a majority of the counselors were
delegated the role of NCAA counselor, many of the schools varied in the way they structure their
advising of student athletes. The two most common methods were having a sole counselor on
campus that advises all student athletes, and the second being dividing up the student athletes
based on last name in the alphabet or year in school. One interesting sub-theme that emerged
was that those counselors who served as the sole NCAA counselor on their campus expressed
more ownership over the process, which in turn led to higher levels of perceived self-efficacy in
learning the role and advising their respective student athletes. Rafael has unofficially taken the
role of NCAA counselor, and he recognizes:
“I take a lot of ownership in it myself but that's kind of just how I’m wired and I
know not every counselor does. I think you know, a lot of times I feel like
educators make an excuse to place more ownership on the parents and the
students, I almost feel like that's somewhat of a copout sometimes, because it's
kind of my job.”
Rafael, being the sole NCAA counselor on his campus, has taken tremendous ownership and
responsibility over the proper advisement of his student athletes. Donna, who is also the sole
NCAA counselor at her school, also expressed a similar sentiment, as she actively researches
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 78
information in order to become knowledgeable with the content, as well as education fellow
counselors and staff members.
Conversely, those counselors who come from schools that divide up student athletes by
last name or grade level expressed that they were more willing to delegate the advising
responsibilities to another person- often one who they felt was more knowledgeable in the
subject matter. Mary Lopez, a counselor from a school that divides up its student athletes,
disclosed, “with regards to advising, I would try my best, but I mean a lot of them have very
specific contact with their (college) coaches, like the ones that are Division I athletes probably
know what they are doing, and I don’t have to do a lot, which is good.” Mary’s narrative
assumes that the student athletes who are NCAA Division I caliber will get properly advised by
the recruiting university, and thus, do not need to be advised on the process. Abigail described a
similar sentiment in her interview, stating, “I think there's this sort of unspoken theory (about
advising student athletes) that the colleges that are going to deal with it, we sort of think they're
going to college, why do we have to deal with it now, I mean if the college wants them then the
college needs to handle it.”
Additionally, counselors from schools that divide up their student athletes often felt that
the parents and student athletes should take considerably more responsibility over the process.
Abigail expanded on this by asserting, “what we try to do is put it more back on them (students
and parents) so they can sort of take the responsibility because here it's like if you mess up or
give anyone any kind of wrong information it’s very detrimental, so we try to give them some
resources, sort of where to go and what to do but we don't do it for them.” Other counselors from
schools with similar structures admitted that when it came to advising student athletes, they
would also often refer them to more knowledgeable counselors or coaches.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 79
Communication between all stakeholders in the NCAA process. The interview
narratives from the counselors indicated that they often felt that communication among all
stakeholders in the NCAA college going process was limited. The stakeholders that were
described by the counselors in this process included the counseling staff, administration,
coaches, parents and the student athlete. Consistent among counselors was the aspiration to
improve communication in the process in order to become better informed of student athletes
who have potential to play at the NCAA level, and subsequently advise them on the process.
Mary Lopez’ response exemplifies this theme, as she recognized, “I don't think we communicate
well with one another and it's not because, it's not like I don't want to, it’s just that I don't think
it’s ever been done.” Mary’s sentiment indicates that there has never been a protocol for
communication regarding student athletes, something she wishes they had established on her site.
Counselors express ineffective communication about student athletes with NCAA
aspirations. A collective sentiment among the participants is the belief they are often not made
aware of student athletes with aspirations to matriculate to NCAA institutions. The counselors
stressed that this lack of communication creates challenges as students can slip through the
cracks, or are not properly advised until well into their junior or senior years. In his
communication with coaches, Michael attempts to be proactive by reaching out them, often to no
avail “Of the twenty coaches I emailed,” he noted, “ I got like two to respond and they had sent
me a couple names. It's tough. I don't know if it’s because they're busy or what or maybe they
just don't know and they're not well versed in like what’s good enough or not good enough but
it’s like every year it’s kind of like a different battle.” This narrative indicates that there is a
communication disconnect between the coaches and the counselors. Michael’s experience in
communication with coaches is a common narrative among most counselors. Kim admits that
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 80
student athletes often do not seek her assistance until late in the process, maintaining, “something
that comes up a lot is kids suddenly getting into their senior year and you know they haven't
registered (with the NCAA Eligibility Center) they haven't even really looked at their
requirements for NCAA because no one ever told me before that they were interested me doing
that.” Kim expressed fear that this lack of communication is most detrimental for student
athletes from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Kim divulges from her experiences of working
with students from lower-socioeconomic backgrounds:
“I think one thing with not knowing about the low income kids, I think one
missing link is that they don't always know that they're eligible for waivers for
testing or for the Eligibility Center, they're also not aware that there are
scholarship opportunities for camps and things like that, I think that's where you
lose a lot of the inner city kids you know their parents can’t afford eighty dollars
to sign them up for NCAA.”
Narratives such as this indicate that counselors are committed to assisting student athletes, yet
they do not have a communication protocol to know who they should be advising.
Counselors only aware of student athletes with elite level potential. Another important
sub theme that emerged is the notion that counselors are only aware of student athlete with elite
level talent, which they believe can create challenges for student athletes who may be
overlooked. In her experiences, Mary articulated, “I’m more familiar with the 4-year specific
students. There are more that may go to other divisions, or community college that I don’t know
about.” Similarly, Janette states, “some coaches will send us lists, juniors and seniors, at the end
of the year they’ll give us the tenth, eleventh graders that are legit, like these kids you need to
track them.” Kim corroborates this sentiment, since she does not receive a list of prospects from
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 81
coaches but rather relies on discussions with her principal to identify NCAA-caliber student
athletes. Kim stated, “I try to talk to the principal who has to go to every activity anyway and he
can usually tell me… and he’s a huge sport fan too so he's always like ‘look this kid is legit’ or
‘this one not so much.’” These narratives highlight that counselors are well aware of students
that are “legit”, meaning students who have obvious athletic talent and would be candidates for
athletic scholarships. However, there is a lack of a communication protocol to identify all student
athletes, not just the ones with elite talent. In her interview, Mary expressed fear that many
student athletes may be losing their post-secondary opportunities because of this lack of
communication.
Communication with club and volunteer coaches. A subtheme that emerged several
times in this study was the impact of coaches that are not employed full-time by the school.
Counselors voiced concerns that many student athletes are now playing club sports or sports that
are not sponsored by the school. The responses specify that sports like equestrian and rowing,
for example, create unique communication challenges since the counselors have little influence
or knowledge about the message that the club coach is having with the student athlete. Mary
Lopez admitted, “I’m now finding that many of my students now play sports that are not offered
at school, like fencing and gymnastics, and I rarely know who these students are.” With regards
to club soccer, Kim stated, “they're (student athletes) always bringing up the fact that their club
coach has been advising them on the process, so I don't really get to have those conversations
with the coach myself typically, but I do know that those are conversations that are happening.”
Kim’s experiences indicated that there is a disconnect between club coaches and the school that
the student attends. Kim added, “We can be such a good resource, but I think the parents don’t
really listen to us here, they'd rather listen to a club coach.” Janette contributed to this sentiment,
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 82
“the parents, they sometimes depend too much on the travel ball coach who typically knows
nothing about NCAA, absolutely nothing, I mean to the point where sometimes it makes me
crazy, the information these kids get from their travel ball coaches, it blows my mind, they are so
uninformed.”
The high school counselors also worried that volunteer coaches pose specific challenges
to effective communication about the NCAA process. This sub theme emerged as counselors
expressed the concern that volunteer coaches are not as invested in the success of the student
athletes, since they are not on campus full time and they may not be as knowledgeable with the
process. Rafael revealed that his school no longer hired volunteer head coaches because of
previous communication issues. Rafael asserted “I think we’ve completely moved away now
from having off campus head coaches for our sports teams, everyone that is a head coach is here
during the day pretty much all day and you know that helps to keep the kids in line so to speak to
make sure we're functioning properly.” Rafael’s feelings about volunteer coaches highlight the
goal to increase communication in order to provide student athletes with the proper advisement
and opportunity to take advantage of their post-secondary options.
The theme of effective communication was one of the most prevalent that emerged in the
research. Kim Sellens’ narrative provided a good summary of the communication problem that
occurs when counselors are attempting to advise student athletes:
“We have so many athletes that we kind of wait to seek the ones that are really
serious about it, I think that’s of how we have been trained to handle it, kind of
the way we’ve done it, but that is where that lack of communication comes into
play.”
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 83
Kim’s description of her experiences illustrated a major disconnect in not only communication,
but an overall lack of protocol on how to identify student athletes with aspiration and potential to
continue their athletic participation in college and to receive accurate information NCAA
information.
Research Question 3: What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to advise
student athletes on NCAA requirements?
The narratives that emerged from the interviews indicated that counselors lacked training
on the NCAA college going process; however, through their experiences, counselors have shared
that they have developed their own methods and practices to attempt to advise their respective
student athlete population. As discussed in chapter two, the study was developed as a
comparative case study, as the sample of eight counselors were chosen based on their having
students matriculate to NCAA institutions. However, a major finding in this study was there
were no discernable practices between counselors at schools that were perceived as effective and
those that were less so. In fact, every counselor at every institution varied greatly with regards to
the practices they employed. The counselors acknowledged that they did not have a formal
protocol for advising their student athletes, as the narratives highlighted that they all varied
greatly by the type of support they provided them and how much ownership they took over the
process.
No formal protocol or policy for advising student athletes. Through their narratives,
counselors admitted that they each developed their own specific ways to advise student athletes
on the NCAA college going process. Rarely were these strategies part of a larger, school-wide
formalized policy, but rather it was mostly left at the discretion of the counselor or coach to
decide how they would go about the process. This is exemplified in Jane’s response, as she
stated with some uncertainty regarding their NCAA procedure, “I think first they ask their coach,
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 84
and their coach will probably refer them to….probably me or the other counselor that's also a
coach.” Jane’s response demonstrates that there is no protocol that guides counselors on the
process, from the identification of a student athlete to matriculation to a university or lack of
matriculation. This sentiment was shared among many respondents. The following section will
highlight some practices that counselors often utilize to advise their student athletes.
NCAA presentations for student athletes and parents. The most common practice that
counselors discussed in their interviews was the use of presentations or workshops to
disseminate information to parents and students. Rafael highlighted that “we have a couple of
orientations, we have a general orientation for when they come in and the other part I would add
is that every orientation communication we have with parents and or students, particularly the
younger ones, we’re always at some point bringing up athletics, I mean we kind of have to know
since we have so many in athletics now.” Michael’s school offers two NCAA presentations a
year, but the attendance at the workshops varies, and coaches rarely encourage their students to
attend the workshops. Michael explained, “We have these workshops, and we work hard on
them, but we only get a handful of parents and student athletes attending every year...I think the
coaches can do a better job of supporting us and spreading the word.” Mary’s school also offers
presentations, and she admitted, “We do presentations every year, but we don't really get into
that (NCAA process) very much other than probably one of our slides in our junior presentation.
I don’t think were fantastic at it unfortunately.” These narratives demonstrate that presentations
to student athletes and parents are very common, but there are many challenges associated with
them, specifically with regards to the content of the presentation and emphasis on NCAA issues,
and also the attendance of these presentations.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 85
Maintaining a list of potential student athletes and tracking progress. A sub theme that
emerged through the interviews was that counselors often maintained unofficial lists of student
athletes in order to advise them on the NCAA process. Michael emailed coaches on an annual
basis to get information on student athletes, and subsequently keeps a binder of all student
athletes in order to conduct NCAA evaluations on their files. However, as aforementioned,
coaches rarely respond back to Michael’s emails, which makes is challenging to maintain a
comprehensive binder or list. As Michael explained, “I try to keep the binder as up to date as
possible, but I still get kids that come to my office during their senior year asking for NCAA
advise, and I’m like, ‘why didn't you come in sooner?’” Mary also tries to maintain a list, but
she also faces challenges, recognizing “I try to send out a questionnaire at end of their junior
year, and the AD (athletic director) will put us in contact with students, but we don’t get the best
response so it's hard to get a formal list of all student athletes.”
Aspiration to develop formal policy - “all on the same page”. Many of the respondents
expressed the desire to help develop a formal NCAA policy in order to properly advise student
athletes. In her response, Donna conveyed her goal to be more proactive, avowing:
“I think we're working on implementing quite a bit of policy. For example, just
putting stuff together like a 1-2-3 step guide of this is what you need to do for
your student athlete and that’s something for policy we are working on. I believe
we will have it fully implemented by spring, because we are trying to have parent
conferences, parent nights, where our upcoming seniors and each grade level in
the spring to help figure it out. I’m hoping we can have some kind of guidelines
together, to tell them these are the steps you need to take at each grade level,
we're working on trying to some policies and procedures in place.”
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 86
Kim corroborated this sentiment, by stating that they provide a lot of services, but there is really
nothing in place with regards to procedure. Kim revealed “I've noticed that we need something
more formal, but I think the assumption is that it's such a small percentage of kids that are
actually going to go play in the NCAA, you know it's not something that we end up hopping on.
Yeah, but maybe that’s part of the problem, why kids aren’t coming to us until senior year.” The
lack of formal policy created specific challenges to counselors as they have illustrated that that
many of their students do not get proper advisement because they slip through the cracks or they
are notified of them much too late in the process.
Research Question 4: How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the NCAA
college going process?
Bronfenbrenner’s (1974, 1977, 1993) Ecological Systems theory indicated that the
interrelationship between individuals, groups and institutions work in conjunction to shape
psychological development of an individual. Specifically, the microsystem encompasses the
organizations and individuals that a person interacts with on a daily basis, and can have major
influence over the development of the person. For the purposes of this study, the microsystem of
student athlete includes the parents, coaches, administrators and counselor. Therefore, it is
important that the interactions of these individuals in the microsystem are thoroughly explored.
Through the in depth interview process, the high school counselors provided rich narratives on
their experiences in their interactions with all stakeholders through the NCAA college going
process. The following section will highlight some of the themes that emerged pertaining to the
experiences of counselors when interacting with various stakeholders.
Parents and students - managing expectations. A prominent theme that emerged in the
responses was the notion that counselors often struggled with parents and students that expected
the counselor to handle all aspects of the NCAA process for them. Similarly, counselors
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 87
expressed that parents and students often had unrealistic expectations with regards to their
athletic talent. These narratives of the counselors indicate that they often conflicted with this
dynamic, as they want to be helpful and honest, yet they do not want to deter their student
athletes from reaching their goals.
Unrealistic athletic aspirations. Counselors expressed the perception that many student
athletes and parents had inflated expectations of their athletic talent level. Counselors voiced
that it was their job to keep the student athletes grounded with regards to the reality of playing
college athletics, while managing the high expectations of parents. Jane candidly expressed this
sentiment, stating “depending on the sports, they think their kids going to the NBA, and it’s kind
of like, you know we have to put them in check, or show hey they're not that good, you’ve got to
relax here.” Kim also expressed a similar sentiment, confessing, “we have parents all the time
that are convinced that their kid is going to a Division I school and that kid doesn’t even have his
name in the newspapers.”
This was a common theme amongst the counselors’ responses, creating a difficult
situation for them with regards to providing the student athletes real, honest feedback regarding
their talent, and confusion as to whether or not that should be their role. Kim added, “it's sad
because, I don’t want to be that person, but you know kind of our philosophy here is if we’re not
seeing that (name in paper) from you, you probably aren’t going DI, let's think about it and we
try to approach it in the nicest way possible but I feel like around here, every ones parents are
very much convinced that they're going to play DI when we know that they are not.” These
narratives illustrate that the counselors face challenges working with parents and students
because of their unrealistic expectations. This dynamic makes effective communication with
parents difficult for counselors since many times, they are not able to be honest and candid with
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 88
them because they fear that they may insult them. Jane added, “I know they are not going to
USC or UCLA, but I also don’t think it’s really my place to say that to a student or a parent.”
Parents and students expectations of counselor. Another sub theme that emerged was
that counselors felt that parents and students expected them to take responsibility for all aspects
of the NCAA process. Michael's narrative highlighted this sub theme, “one of my parents said,
‘can you get him a scholarship’ and I had to clarify like what my role was, they were confused
with like what the expectation was which is oh well you’re the NCAA supervisor so ‘you’ll
network with all these schools to get my son a scholarship.’” Michaels experience with parents
indicated that parents often expect that counselors are in place to provide student athletes with
much more than just academic, college and career guidance, often to the level of advocating for
them in the scholarship discussions. Michael added, “that's not the process, the process is you
know I'm just here to guide and then let you know what he's doing right or what we need to
change or a what needs to be added or subtracted to get him on track to be eligible.” In a similar
sentiment, Kim shared, “I think some of our parents assume that because their kid is an athlete
that we're going to know, that we're going to somehow track every one of our athletes to make
sure they get to the next level, and we don't.”
To compound this issue, counselors also expressed feelings that parents tend to get highly
involved in the process later in the student athlete's career, often when it’s too late. Janette
alluded to this by stating, “Parents aren't really aware, they just think if a kid is passing classes,
until they hit a point where that kid is really being recruited and they know there's definitely
potential then our parents become very involved, that’s typically junior year.” Abigail also
shared a similar sentiment in her narrative:
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 89
“I feel like I only talk to the parents when they need something from me, so I only
work with them on a needs basis it's not like I really know much as far being
updated as what's going on with the student like oh you know he's being you
know I don't get updates like oh he's being looked at by this school and this
school is booking him and this is what's going on.”
Rafael believed his school has great parent involvement, but he still thought his interactions with
parents can improve, “well I mean it varies, I think with anything. You know we do wish they
were more involved earlier in the process and I think you wish they were more I think realistic,
the other thing too, one of the frustrations.”
All on the same page with shared accountability. One of the most poignant themes that
emerged in the interviews was the counselors feeling that all stakeholders should take shared
accountability over the NCAA college going process, with everyone communicating and being
on the same page. Consistent amongst the participants, was the wish to have all stakeholders
involved, from the principal and athletic director to the coaches and student athlete. Donna felt
passionate about shared accountability, and would like to plan a meeting with her leadership to
discuss how all stakeholders can get on the same page. Donna shared:
“All three of us will sit down at least myself and the athletic director (and
assistant principal) we’ll sit down to figure out how can we better service our kids
or what do we need to put in place or how can we make communication better and
so even help us setting up meetings with the coaches to where we are all on the
same page as opposed to me knowing something, her knowing something and
everybody else, we try to make it uniform so everybody gets the same
information.”
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 90
Donna’s narrative highlighted the aforementioned theme of lack of communication amongst the
stakeholders, and that all parties need to share some accountability in order to ensure that the
student athlete is provided with accurate information. Mary added to this notion, by stating, “I
think it should be shared among us and the counselors/athletic director, coach.” Mary also
agreed that the student athlete and the parent should take ownership for researching and applying
to college, as she expressed that the counselor cannot do it all for them. Ultimately, Mary did
admit “I do think we need to do a little bit of a better job of communicating what the
expectations are and things like that. And actually having a set process where right now we don't
necessarily, we just kind of like figure it out as it comes along.”
Emergent Themes: Using personal connection to community and athletics
An important sub theme that surprisingly emerged in the coding process, which warrants
further discussion, is the role that a counselor’s personal connection to community and past
history with athletics affects the advising practices utilized. Personal connection to community
refers to how invested a counselor is to the school, many times based on their relationship with
the community (i.e. counselor went to school, lives in community, etc.). This is evident in
Rafael’s powerful remark about advising student athletes:
The school that I’m at, I graduated from here, I’m from this community, I live in
the community, I can’t walk out the front door of my house without running into
current or former students or going somewhere running into parents so it's like I'm
part of all of this, so I tend to take a lot of ownership in it, I take a lot of pride the
successes that we've been able to have in that regard. I know we’re in a bit of a
different situation and not every school is going to have the resources to provide
specifically to athletics, and to be quite honest with you, we don't have the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 91
resources because it’s a lot of… you know I'm paid to be the ninth grade
counselor, anything I do beyond that for athletics, I'll get a stipend one year and
one year you won't, it just depends on how things are going to work out, but I still
do everything I do, the reward isn’t about what you’re getting compensated for all
the time.”
Rafael’s affinity and relationship with his community and school provides him with more
passion and investment in the future of his student athletes. In his narrative, Rafael added his
love for the school provides him with more incentive to search for different advising practices,
from having college players come back to speak to his students to being more invested in his one
on one meetings with student athletes. Rafael’s comment also touches on an important point
regarding resources, his school is in a low socio-economic area, and he acknowledges that if he
did not volunteer to support student athletes, his school would not have the resources to
adequately provide support to student athletes on the NCAA college going process.
Similarly, narratives from counselors indicated that the relationship that a counselor has
with athletics affected how they went about the advisement process. Michael who is an avid
sports fan and a coach at his school conveyed that “I wanted to know more because I enjoy
working with that the athletes because being a coach, it made it easier to kind of have that
conversation with student athletes. I can coach them and I can counsel them academically, so I
can comment on both, so I mean I would look forward to the challenges of getting to work with
them. I think that's why I like it so much though.” Jane is also a coach at her school and she
expressed that she is more proactive with advisement because she wants to make sure her student
athletes make the most of their opportunities. Kim admits, “I'm a huge sports fan, and I really
enjoy the challenge of working from kids from different sports, they are all different and you
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 92
really need to advise them differently.” Narratives such as these illustrate that those counselors
with strong ties to athletics tend to be more proactive with their advisement of student athletes.
Summary and Discussion of Findings
This chapter presented an overview of the data collected from the in depth interviews
with high school counselors regarding their experiences advising student athletes on the NCAA
college going process. The responses and subsequent themes that emerged were guided by the
following research questions:
1. What knowledge and training do counselors have on the student athlete NCAA college
going process?
2. What are some of the organizational challenges that counselors face when advising high
school student athletes through the NCAA college going process?
3. What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to advise student athletes on
NCAA requirements?
4. How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the NCAA college going
process?
The themes that emerged from this study were important to the understanding of the experiences
of high school counselors when advising their student athletes. Through the use of the constant
comparative method, the key overarching themes were identified and were placed strategically
under the corresponding research questions. Although, many of the themes could have been
placed under multiple research questions, the researcher placed themes under the section as to
ensure that the research questions were adequately answered while maintaining the validity of
the data.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 93
Through this study, a total of six overarching themes emerged to provide rich insight into
the counselor’s experiences when advising student athletes. These themes that emerged are as
follows; 1) Lack of formal training, 2) Counselors experience lack of formal role and
responsibilities when working with student athletes, 3) Limited communication between all
stakeholders in the NCAA process, 4) No formal protocol or policy for advising student athletes,
5) Parents and students - managing expectations 6) All on the same page with shared
accountability. Additionally, an emergent theme was uncovered, which was 7) Using personal
connection to community and athletics to advise student athletes. Together, these themes
illustrated that counselors do in fact face many challenges when advising the student athlete
population, ranging from lack of training to confusion on their role in the process. Moreover, the
themes also provided an outline for implications for practice, from which counselors can start
asking questions as to how they can improve their advisement strategies.
This final chapter, chapter five, summarizes the significant findings, provides in depth
analysis of the findings, theoretical implications as well as implications for current and future
practice. In addition, limitations of this study will be reviewed followed by recommendations for
future study and finally a recap of the entire study.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 94
Chapter Five: Discussion
The purpose of this study was to identify and analyze the experiences of high school
counselors when advising high school student athletes on the NCAA college going
process. Research has indicated that the high school counselor is an important influence over
this process for the student athlete, as they are often the individuals responsible for ensuring that
they are able to take advantage of post-secondary opportunities (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995;
Padilla, 2015). This study demonstrated that the NCAA college going process is multi layered,
encompassing numerous regulations and requirements that can make the process challenging to
navigate, for both student athletes and counselors. To exasperate the difficulty in traversing the
process, many counselors do not receive sufficient training, or are over burdened with other tasks
to adequately assist the student athlete population (McDonough, 2005; Perusse, Goodnough, &
Noel, 2005). The student athlete experience is unique, and additional research into their college
going experience is necessary in order to ensure that they are exposed to and properly advised on
all higher education opportunities. Thus, the purpose of the study was to delve into the
counselors’ experiences, in order to gain a better understanding of the challenges they face, while
also uncovering potential best practices that can be used to ensure future generations of student
athletes are properly advised.
Chapter five will begin with an overview of the previous chapters, starting with a brief
synopsis of the problem and research questions, followed by a summary of the relevant research
on the NCAA college going process, the role of the counselor and subsequent gaps in the
literature, a brief description of the methodology that was employed in this study, and lastly, a
succinct review of the major findings that were identified through the interviews. Additionally,
this chapter will provide an analysis and thorough discussion of the role of the counselor in the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 95
NCAA college going process, when viewed through Bronfenbrenner's (1974, 1977, 1993)
Ecological Systems Theory. Finally, this chapter concludes with recommendations for practice
and a discussion of the implications of the findings for future research.
Summary of Previous Chapters
Chapter one provided the foundation for a discussion on the emergence and continued
emphasis of interscholastic athletics within the structure of secondary and postsecondary
academic institutions. This chapter highlighted that within the American educational milieu;
athletics have and continue to be deeply entrenched within our educational system. College
athletics are a multi-billion-dollar industry that can provide institutions with increased visibility
and profit (Sperber, 2000). Within the NCAA alone, there are over 1,100 institutions that
provide opportunities to over 480,000 student athletes (NCAA, 2016). These institutions offer
student athletes access to higher education, while also allowing them to continue to compete in
their respective sports, often with the assistance of athletic scholarships.
College athletics provide many opportunities; nevertheless, the NCAA college going
process can habitually be a challenging one to navigate, as there are many varying requirements
that are regularly fluctuating. This process includes constantly changing academic benchmarks,
varying admissions requirements, athletic recruitment, and the financial aid/scholarship process,
among others (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995; Padilla, 2015). Student athletes without the social
capital and knowledge to navigate this process could be denied access to pursue athletics in
college, and for many, their student athlete careers could come to an end in high school. For
high school student athletes, the high school college counselor is frequently the person held
accountable for assisting them through this process, as it is assumed that they are the most
knowledgeable in this realm. Yet, at many schools, counselors are not equipped with the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 96
resources and training to adequately meet the needs to of this population (McDonough, 2005;
Perusse, Goodnough, & Noel, 2005). Chapter one stressed the importance of the counselor's role
in this process, and introduced the following research questions which guided the study:
1. What knowledge and training do counselors have on the student athlete NCAA college
going process?
2. What are some of the organizational challenges that counselors face when advising
high school student athletes through the NCAA college going process?
3. What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to advise student athletes on
NCAA requirements?
4. How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the NCAA college going
process?
These research questions were developed to gain a better understanding of the counselors’
previous experiences in working with student athletes in order to highlight potential
challenges and best practices.
Chapter two provided an exhaustive summary of the many components of the NCAA
college going process, from academic requirements to the recruitment process. The existing
literature, although limited, has focused on the multitude of requirements that student athletes
must meet in order to effectively matriculate to NCAA sponsored institutions (Goldberg &
Chandler, 1995: Padilla, 2015). The specific requirements that were discussed in detail,
included, (a) NCAA initial eligibility academic requirements, (b) the student athlete admission
process, (c) Institutional match, (d) the recruitment process, and (e) the NCAA scholarship
process. The research on these requirements contributes to the notion that the NCAA college
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 97
going process is not a straightforward one, and that each of the aforementioned elements requires
specific training.
Chapter two also described the historical development of the counseling profession in the
United States and the role it plays in the NCAA college going process. The review of the
literature indicated that the profession began through the implementation of programs to prepare
students for the workforce (Bauman, Siegel, Falco, Szymanski, Davis & Seabolt,
2003). However, over the last half century, the profession has expanded and now includes;
academic counseling, college and career counseling, class scheduling, registration, individual
personal counseling, test administration, parent conferences and miscellaneous administrative
duties, among others (Burnham & Jackson, 2000; Hutchinson, Barrick, Groves, 1986). With so
many varying responsibilities and duties, research has indicated that the counseling profession
often faces an identity crisis and role confusion that can have negative implications for students
(Bauman et al., 2003). For counselors that work with student athletes, this process is
exacerbated by the additional requirements that are necessary to make the transition to NCAA
sponsored institutions. Although student athletes may be a very small percentage of the
population that the high school counselors serve, the unique experiences, and varying and
constantly changing demands require counselors that are adept and knowledgeable in this
arena. High school counselors must not only monitor graduation and college going
requirements, but also the many issues that may arise with the NCAA process (Goldberg &
Chandler, 1995).
Chapter two culminates with a detailed discussion of the theoretical framework that was
employed to guide the study. Urie Bronfenbrenner’s (1974, 1977, 1993) Ecological Systems
Theory was selected as a guiding theory because of its application to student athletes, as their
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 98
development is directly related to their interactions with the social world. Ecological Systems
Theory contends that in order to understand the development of a person, we must analyze their
entire ecological system where growth occurs. Through the evolution of the theory,
Bronfenbrenner (1974, 1977, 1993) delineated five organized subsystems that he proposed can
help support or deter human growth; these five subsystems are microsystem, mesosystem,
exosystem, macrosystems and chronosystems. Renn and Arnold (2003) were able to apply
Brofenbrenner’s model to college student development, and for the purposes of this study, it was
applied specifically to student athletes.
Chapter three provided a comprehensive summary of the research methods that were used
in this study. Because this study focused on the experiences of high school counselors on the
NCAA college going process, qualitative methods were employed through the use of in depth
interviews to better understand the specific challenges and practices that counselors face when
advising students through this process. A semi-structured interview protocol was developed and
implemented in order to allow the counselors to openly respond and to provide thick description,
while not restricting their narratives. Follow up phone calls and emails were made as a way to
member check any interview responses that were unclear, which improved the internal validity
of this study. A sample of eight high school counselors was purposefully selected from a variety
of high school types in order to gain insight into the varying experiences of this population. The
names and identities of these participants were protected using pseudonyms.
Chapter four presented the data that emerged from the qualitative in-depth
interviews. The Constant Comparative Method was employed to analyze the data from the
interviews and uncover themes from the counselor’s experiences (Straus, 1965). These themes
and subthemes that emerged from the narratives were organized and discussed by research
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 99
question. The following will outline each finding, and discuss their specific connection to
literature.
Discussion of Findings
A total of seven overarching themes emerged in this study, which provided rich insight
into the counselor’s experiences when advising student athletes. These themes that emerged are
as follows: 1) Lack of formal training, 2) Counselors experience lack of formal role and
responsibilities when working with student athletes, 3) Limited communication between all
stakeholders in the NCAA process, 4) No formal protocol or policy for advising student athletes,
5) Parents and students - managing expectations 6) All on the same page with shared
accountability and an unexpected emergent theme in 7) Using personal connection to community
and athletics to advise student athletes. Together, these themes answer the research questions,
and provide rich narratives to the experiences that counselors face when advising student
athletes. The following will provide an overview of the themes along with a short discussion and
how they are linked to previous research.
Research Question 1: What knowledge and training do counselors perceive they
have on the student athlete NCAA college going process? Previous literature has highlighted
that counselors play an important role in the process by informing and educating members of the
athletic triangle, which include students, parents, and coaches (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995).
Despite the fact that all counselors confirmed that they work directly with student athletes,
parents and coaches, none of the responses indicated that they had formal training on the NCAA
college going process prior to taking on the role. The lack of training on the NCAA process was
the most pervasive theme throughout the interviews. The counselors all expressed concern that
their graduate programs did not cover many topics that would serve them well in their current
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 100
roles, including working with student athletes. Consequently, a subtheme that emerged was that
counselors were reactive in learning about the requirements. In most situations, the counselors
learned about the process by working directly with student athletes as specific issues
arose. However, the majority of counselors were unsure where to find the answer for those
questions, and if they did, they remained hesitant that they may be proving misinformation to the
athlete. The effect of this was that counselors expressed that they were not always confident with
the guidance they were providing their student athletes. Another sub theme was that the
counselor would defer the student athlete to another person who they felt was more qualified to
answer their questions. This theme of lack of training not only affected the counselors’ advising
practices, but also their self-efficacy to search for the correct answer to specific questions.
In applying Bronfenbrenner’s (1974, 1977, 1993) Ecological Systems Theory to this
study, the counselor exists within the microsystem of the student athlete, as they are in
immediate and constant interaction with the student athlete. Other key members of the
microsystem include the student athlete’s coach, parents and friends. Within the context of the
NCAA college going process, Goldberg & Chandler (1995) contend the counselor is often the
most critical to the success and matriculation of student athletes. Nevertheless, this study
indicated that counselors are severely under trained on this process, which has shown to affect a
counselor’s self-efficacy and level of advisement that they provide a student athlete.
Additionally, the finding that graduate programs did not adequately prepare the counselors for
the NCAA process was consistent with the research findings of Perusse, Goodnough, and Noel
(2005), which also showed that counselor training programs rarely emphasize or adequately
prepare counselors for college advising. This research question was thoroughly addressed
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 101
through the research methodology, as lack of training theme permeated the narratives of all the
high school counselors.
Ultimately, the counselor’s knowledge of the NCAA process is vital to providing
accurate information to student athletes who may not have the social capital to navigate the
NCAA process. Bourdieu (1977) advanced the concept of social capital, which is found in the
relations between people and the creation of human capital developed by these relationships.
Therefore, the counselors’ level of knowledge on the NCAA college going process can
determine the access and knowledge or skills that student athletes acquire through the
educational system.
Research Question 2: What are some of the organizational challenges that
counselors face when advising high school student athletes through the NCAA college going
process? The counselor narratives indicated that the structural organization of the high schools
create unique challenges for them when advising student athletes. The emerging themes that
helped inform this research question include: 1) a lack of formal role and responsibilities when
working with student athletes, and 2) limited communication between different stakeholders in
the process.
Consistent amongst many of the counselors was that the role of advising student athlete
was not a voluntary one, but rather one that was imposed upon them by their respective
supervisors. Consequently, counselors expressed that the role was not necessarily voluntary, and
they had no formal understanding of what the position entailed, adding to the idea of role
confusion as discussed in chapter two. This lack of understanding on what the responsibilities of
working with student athletes created a difficult transition into the role. Interestingly, those
counselors who were assigned as the sole athletic counselor tended to take more ownership and
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 102
have more self-efficacy than those counselors who had a structure that was divided up by
alphabet or grade. This specific finding has interesting implications for future research and for
practice.
In agreement with Bronfenbrenner’s (1993) Ecological Systems Theory, Goldberg and
Chandler (1995) highlighted that the student athlete exists within a social context, and many
individuals within their social network can serve as positive agents for them to circumnavigate
the NCAA college going process. Yet, this study illustrated that the organizational structure for
advising student athletes, or lack thereof, created specific challenges for counselors. Counselors
in this study acknowledged that the role of NCAA counselor was one that was added to their
many list of responsibilities by their high school administration. This led to many counselors
expressing sentiments of being confused as to what the position entailed, as many were not
provided a student athlete advisement protocol. This is consistent with the Janson’s (2009)
concept that the counseling profession faces an identity crisis. This identity crisis and confusion
occurs when counselors do not have clear expectations of what role they are expected to fulfill
and how much time and energy is needed to accomplish tasks (Janson, 2009).
The communication, or lack thereof, of stakeholders in the process was one of the most
prominent sub-themes with regards to the structure of high schools. Counselors expressed that
they were often unaware of student athletes who were interested in pursuing athletics at
postsecondary institutions, and thus, many of them were not advised. The sentiments of lack of
communication was often directed at the full time, volunteer and club coaches, as counselors
stressed that coaches were not consistent with informing them of student athletes with college
athletic aspirations. This finding was consistent with Goldberg and Chandler’s (1995) work,
which stressed that effective communication is critical, as there is a trend in school districts to
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 103
hire part time coaches who are not teachers on campus, and have little to no interaction or
knowledge of the student's school during the day. Responses illustrated that many students did
not approach counselors about their athletic goals until late in their high school careers, which
created additional challenges for those students with lower academic records. For instance, many
counselors described occasions where student athletes became NCAA non-qualifiers because
they did not have enough time to rectify academic deficiencies Additionally, counselors also
admitted that they often only knew of elite level student athletes, while most other students were
not on their radar for the NCAA college going process.
Research Question 3: What are the practices that high school counselors utilize to
advise student athletes on NCAA requirements? The narratives that emerged from the
interviews indicated that counselors varied greatly with regards to the methods and practices
they used to attempt to advise their student athlete population. The counselors acknowledged
that they did not have a formal protocol for advising their student athletes, as their accounts
underlined that they all varied greatly by the type of support they provided them and how
much ownership they took over the process. Most acknowledged that they desired a formal
protocol to rely on when advising the student athlete population. Nonetheless, the counselors
adapted their own strategies, including hosting presentations and workshops for student
athletes and parents. These presentations varied greatly with regards to structure and
effectiveness, as some included a slide or two on the process while others dedicated an entire
presentation to discussing the intricacies of the NCAA process. Another strategy used by
counselors was the development of a list or binder to keep track of all students that have
NCAA aspirations. However, as previously discussed, this practice is often undermined by
the lack of communication about these students. Ultimately, counselors expressed their desire
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 104
for all the stakeholders to be on the same page through the development of a protocol that
would include a formal guide and schedule of how to advise student athletes.
The overall lack of a specific protocol or list of responsibilities has made it difficult for
counselors to adequately advise their students on the NCAA process. Although many of them
employ various practices to identify and advise student athletes, none have created a
comprehensive protocol in order to maintain consistency in the process. The counselors in
this study have adapted their advisement strategies on a case-by-case basis, and there is a
general lack of consistency with NCAA workshops and communication about the process.
Goldberg and Chandler (1995) emphasized the importance of having a structure in place for
properly identifying and advising student athletes. Moreover, workshops should be developed
to inform stakeholders on the academic requirements, but also to highlight the school's goals
and purpose for athletics (Goldberg, 1991). Through the vantage point of Ecological Systems
Theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1993), the creation of a formal protocol would assist the counselor in
creation more synergy between the different social systems that the student athlete operates.
Research Question 4: How do counselors work with other stakeholders during the
NCAA college going process? Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems theory asserts that the
mesosystem entails the linkages and relationships between two or more settings containing the
individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1993). In other words, it is the relationship between two or more
different microsystems (i.e. counselor, parent, coach, etc.) that can have an effect on the
individual’s development. . For student athletes, a positive working relationship between the
high school counselor and the many stakeholders in the process can increase their college
opportunities. Therefore, it was critical that this study assessed the relationships that the
counselor had with other important microsystems involved in the NCAA college going process.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 105
For example, high school counselors provided rich description on their experiences when
interacting with all stakeholders in the NCAA college going process; however, the interface with
parents and student athletes were the most prevalent. The responses showed that the counselors
believed that parents and student athletes had unrealistic expectations regarding their perceived
level of athletic talent. Counselor’s also articulated frustration with parents who were too
assertive with their perception of their students’ talent level. Additionally, responses illustrated
that parents and students were often confused with the exact role of the counselor, as one went as
far as asking the counselor to provide them with an athletic scholarship. This is consistent with
the Bourdieu’s (1977) concept of social capital, as many parents as parents are unaware of the
steps in the process and do not have social networks themselves to effectively assist their student
athletes. Thus, parents often rely on the counselor to support them in the process, as they fill the
gap in social capital.
One of the most important sub themes from a future implications standpoint was the
notion that all stakeholders should take some responsibility over the NCAA college going
process. To accomplish this, counselors believed that everyone should have some working
knowledge on what their respective role should be so that everyone is on the same page.
Additionally, the counselors expressed a desire for all the stakeholders to communicate openly
and effectively regarding student athletes, so that they do not get disregarded in the process.
This is an important finding since counselors occupy an important role in the process and can
serve as the “quarterback” of the team, essentially leading and the other team members
through effective communication. Previous research has stressed that the high school
counselor has immediate and direct contact with the student athlete on a regular basis and can
aid to be a bridge between the other stakeholders (Goldberg & Chandler, 1995).
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 106
Findings Summary. Through the analysis of these findings, it became clear that the
high school counselor plays a pivotal role in the level of success of student athletes.
Counselors have the ability to serve as the coordinator, or “quarterback” of the entire process.
If properly educated on the process, the “quarterback” can be not only serve as a major agent
in the student athlete’s microsystem, but can also occupy the role of looping in and
coordinating the rest of the stakeholders within the microsystem. This coordination with
different stakeholders can be seen through the lens of Bronfenbrenner’s model, as the
mesosystem entails the interaction between different microsystems. With regards to the
NCAA process, the counselor can play a major role in ensuring the mesosystem
communication operates efficiently, and that everyone is on the same page with advising the
student athlete (Figure 2). Additionally, through additional training, the counselor can become
knowledgeable on the NCAA requirements, which operate under the exosystem. Since the
student athlete may not have strong relationships with NCAA staff and knowledge of NCAA
policies, the counselor can serve as a mediator between the two groups. Under the
macrosystem level, the counselor can provide the student athlete with the social capital to
navigate the college going process, as they may have a better understanding of the American
higher education system.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 107

Figure 2. Student Athlete Adaptation of Bronfenbrenner’s Social Ecology Model
The experiences expressed by the counselors illustrate that they play a critical role in the
NCAA college going process for student athletes. However, counselors continue to be perplexed
by the many challenges they face in working with this small, but unique population.
Implications for Practice
The following section will outline a series of recommendations that seek to advance the
effectiveness of the advisement of student athletes. These recommendations were generated by
the analysis of the findings and will be presented in the form of questions for stakeholders in the
process to consider. The purpose of these questions is to allow stakeholders in the NCAA college
going process to take a reflective approach regarding their knowledge of the process, their
school’s protocol for advisement, and their communication with other stakeholders. Ultimately,
the hope is that high schools develop a series of answers to these questions that would seek to
improve the way they go about advising student athletes through this process.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 108
Recommendations - “Accurately informed, all on the same page.”
1. What role should graduate programs play in incorporating the advising of student
athletes in their curriculum? Despite the fact that most counselors work directly with
student athletes on a regular basis, respondents in this study indicated they did not have
any training prior to taking on the role of NCAA counselors. This raises the question,
should counselors be exposed to the NCAA requirements during graduate
school? Counselors encompass many roles on their respective campuses, and although
advising student athletes may be a small percentage of their daily tasks, proper training
on the subject should be considered. Graduate programs in counseling may consider
inviting experts from their respective campuses to provide trainings, particularly if the
college or university sponsors an athletic department.
2. How can counselors seek additional information and stay up to date on the NCAA
college going process? As discussed in the literature review, the NCAA rules and
regulations are constantly changing, and it is critical that high school counselors are being
adequately informed on this information. Counselors need to be open to opportunities to
learn about the NCAA process through a variety of channels, including resources on the
NCAA website, and regional and national workshops and trainings. University athletic
departments are also a valuable resource for learning more about the process.
3. How can the development of a formal NCAA advising protocol improve the
advisement of student athletes? The narratives of the counselors in this study
illustrated that there was rarely a formal protocol to identify and properly advise student
athletes. Counselors expressed frustration with student athletes who slip through the
cracks, or approach them when it’s too late in the process. A formal protocol would
outline the responsibility of all stakeholders and would provide a timeline for the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 109
advisement of the student athletes. A protocol could also lead to improved
communication between all the stakeholders
4. Should there be a lead student athlete counselor at each high school? High schools
structure their counseling caseloads in many different ways, with the most common being
by alphabet of by grade year. Yet, the question should be asked, would high school
benefit from designating one person as the NCAA expert that would oversee all the
student athletes? This is an important question that schools must ask themselves, while
also considering the potential drawbacks, most notably being the movement of counselors
between different schools. Sole NCAA counselors may hold significant institutional
knowledge about the NCAA process, and once they leave, they may take that knowledge
with them.
5. How early in a student athlete's high school career should counselors start tracking
student athletes? Counselors in this process expressed that one of their concerns was
that too often they advised student athletes who were far along in their high school
careers. This created challenges in advisement, since for some student athletes; they are
too far behind to meet all necessary requirements. Combined with a thorough protocol
and effective communication, early identification and advisement of student athletes
should be considered.
6. What kind of outreach should be made to student athletes and parents? High school
representatives should consider what kind of outreach and messaging they would like to
relay to their student athletes and parents, if any. By discussing the NCAA process at an
early stage in a student’s high school career, the student and the parent become exposed
to opportunities at an earlier age.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 110
7. Should all head coaches be permanent employees of the high school? This study
illustrated that often counselors felt that the prevalence of volunteer head coaches created
a communication chasm in the NCAA college going process. Do these coaches pose a
threat to the process since they are not on campus to consistently interact with their
student athlete’s?
8. How can all stakeholders work together to ensure the student athletes are well
informed on the NCAA college going process? The results from this study indicated
that counselors desire better collaborations between all stakeholders in the process. By
developing a formal protocol, which includes roles and responsibilities, along with a
communication plan, student athletes can be better informed on the NCAA college going
process.
9. How would the implementation of an “NCAA 101” webinar for high school
counselors influence student athlete outcomes? At the moment, the NCAA workshops
are primarily located in person, and require counselors to take time off, and often, pay out
of pocket fees. However, the implementation of online webinars at a more reasonable
price may make it easier for counselors to attend.
10. What would the effect be of hiring a member of the community or former student
athletes to oversee the NCAA process? One of the emerging themes in this study was
that counselors from the community and/or former student athletes took more ownership
over the NCAA college going process. It may be difficult to find counselors that meet
these requirements, but it may be beneficial to seek out counselors with these
backgrounds.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 111
Limitations

This study faced several limitations. One of the most prominent limitations is with
relation to the sample size (N=8). The sample of eight counselors was pulled from the Southern
California area. Moreover, private and religious high schools were omitted from study because
they often vary greatly with the amount of economic resources they have at their
disposal. Limited time was another limitation as the research clearly indicated that many
counselors indicated that they were busy and only had a set time for our discussion. There was
an opportunity to follow up with a phone call, but often, it was difficult to restart the
conversation with the same rapport that was established in the previous
interaction. Additionally, biases might have been present impacting the responses from
participants’ due to the positionality of the interviewer as the interviewer offers NCAA
workshops in the area, and many of the counselors have attended the workshops. These
counselors in attendance may perceive the interviewer as an expert, which may lead to altered
responses. Lastly, the primary focus of this study was the focus on advisement on the NCAA
college going process. A limitation of this study is that it does not address the requirements to
matriculate to community college and the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics
(NAIA), although the NCAA requirements are very similar.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study focused on the experiences of eight local public high school counselors when
advising student athlete on the NCAA college going process.
1. Experiences of counselors at private and religious high schools -The narratives of
private and religious high schools could be beneficial as they may provide a series of best
practices or specific challenges that would be beneficial to all schools. Private and
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 112
religious high schools in the area have historically sponsored strong athletic programs,
and the experiences of counselors from these schools would be critical to the body of
research.
2. Expanding the sample location to outside of the Southern California –Expanding the
sample outside of the region would be advantageous as this region is a highly populated
area, with many resources available to counselors in the way of post-secondary athletic
departments, and access to workshops. By broadening the scope of the sample, narratives
from different regions and demographics would be helpful as each has its own athletic
culture.
3. Role of the counselor’s connection, or lack thereof, to the community in which they
currently work -As the emergent theme indicated in this study, those counselors who
had a strong connection with the school and the community were more invested in the
success of their respective student athlete. This particular finding warrants further
research. Additionally, the counselor’s connection and history with athletics should also
be considered as the narratives in this study indicated that those individuals who played
sports in the past, or are currently coaches, had a better understanding and connection
with their respective student athletes.
4. Experiences of high school student athletes when navigating the NCAA college
process -A plethora of research exists with regards to the experiences of college student
athletes; however, the experiences of high school student athletes are largely
nonexistent. By gaining a better understanding of the thought process of high school
student athletes, support staff may be better equipped to provide adequate support and
resources for this population. These student athlete narratives would also give insight
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 113
into how they view their own talent, the role of the counselor, and their overall thoughts
on the NCAA college going process.
5. Quantitative inquiry into NCAA college going process - This research should also take
a quantitative approach to understand how many student athletes are “slipping through
the cracks” because of lack of advisement.
6. The role and experiences of parents - Within Bronfenbrenner’s Social Ecology model,
the parents play a significant role in the development of children, thus understanding their
narratives would shed light on valuable information that could help support future student
athletes.
Conclusion
High school counselors are important members of the high school community, as they
provide the student athlete with valuable advisement with regards to academic, personal,
emotional, and career matters. Although research has illustrated that counselors are not always
equipped with the structure and training to succeed, they still play an integral role in the
development and success of high school students. The counselors provide student athletes with
the social capital to navigate this often complex and unwieldy process. By learning about the
experiences of these counselors, one can gain a better understanding into the myriad of issues
that they face when advising their student athletes. Additionally, these experiences can also shed
light on effective techniques in advising the student athlete population. This study addressed a
gap in literature with regards to the experiences of counselors in navigating the NCAA college
going process and adds their rich narrative to this body of knowledge. With additional training,
formalized procedures, and improved communication between all stakeholders, high school
counselors are in position to effectively advise student athletes through the process.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 114
References
Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1991; 1990). Backboards & blackboards: College athletes and role
engulfment. New York: Columbia University Press.
American School Counselor Association. (2016). The role of the school counselor. Retrieved
May/2016, 2016, from:
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/home/RoleStatement.pdf
Associate Press. (2009), Report: Exemptions benefit athletes. ESPN. Retrieved from:
http://www.espn.com/college-football/news/story?id=4781264
Bale, J. (1991). The brawn drain: Foreign student-athletes in american universities. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press.
Bauman, S., Siegel, J., Falco, L., Szymanski, G., Davis, A., & Seabolt, K. (2003). Trends in
school counseling journals: The first fifty years. Professional School Counseling, 7(2), 79-
90.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. CUP, Cambridge.
Brady, E., Kelly, J., & Berkowitz, S. (2015, February 3rd). Schools in power conferences
spending more on recruiting. USA TODAY Sports. Retrieved from
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/recruiting/2015/02/03/college-football-
recruiting-signing-day-sec-power-conferences/22813887/
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1974). Developmental research, public policy, and the ecology of
childhood. Child Development, 45(1), 1-5. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1974.tb00552.x
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American
Psychologist, 32(7), 513-531. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 115
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1993). The ecology of cognitive development: Research models and
fugitive findings. In R. Wozniak, & Fischer K. (Eds.), Development in context: Acting and
thinking in specific environments (). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bronfenbrenner, U., 1917-2005, & ebrary, I. (1996; 1978; 2009). The ecology of human
development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Burnham, J. J., & Jackson, C. M. (2000). School counselor roles: Discrepancies between actual
practice and existing models. Professional School Counseling, 4(1), 41-49.
Clotfelter, C. T. (2011). Big-time sports in american universities. Cambridge ;New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches / john W. creswell. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Duderstadt, J. J., 1942, & ebrary, I. (2003). Intercollegiate athletics and the american university:
A university president's perspective (1st pbk. ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Evans, N. J., 1947. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd
ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Glaser, BG. & Strauss, AL. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for
Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Goldberg, A. D. (1991). Counseling the high school student-athlete. The School Counselor,
38(5), 332-340.
Goldberg, A. D., & Chandler, T. (1995). Sports counseling: Enhancing the development of the
high school Student ‐Athlete. Journal of Counseling & Development, 74(1), 39-44.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1995.tb01820.x
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 116
Harper, S. R., Williams, C. D., & Blackman, H. W. (2013). Black male student-athletes and
racial inequities in NCAA division I college sports. Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania, Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education.
Harper, S. R. (2016). Black male student-athletes and racial inequalities in NCAA division I
college sports: 2016 edition . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania: Center for the Study
of Race and Equity in Education.
Hosick, M. B., & Sproull, N. (2012). NCAA: Eligibility and success. Journal of College
Admission, (214), 31.
Hutchinson, R. L., Barrick, A. L., & Groves, M. (1986). Functions of secondary school
counselors in the public schools: Ideal and actual. The School Counselor, 34(2), 87-91.
Janson, C. (2009). High school counselors' views of their leadership behaviors: A Q
methodology study. Professional School Counseling, 13(2), 86.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. B., 1941. (2000). Educational research: Quantitative and
qualitative approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Joyce Ivy Foundation. (2008). The eleven-month challenge: 22 recommendations for improving
the transition from high school to college (michigan high school counselor report). Ann
Arbor, MI: The Joyce Ivy Foundation.
Joyce Ivy Foundation. (2009). Converting high school achievement into adult opportunity: The
school counselor role and beyond (ohio high school counselor report). Ann Arbor, MI: The
Joyce Ivy Foundation.
Krei, M. S., & Rosenbaum, J. E. (2001). Career and college advice to the forgotten half: What do
counselors and vocational teachers advise? Teachers College Record, 103(5), 823-842.
doi:10.1111/0161-4681.00135
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 117
Lambie, G. W., & Williamson, L. L. (2004). The challenge to change from guidance counseling
to professional school counseling: A historical proposition. Professional School Counseling,
8(2), 124-131.
Lawrence, H., & & Wright, A. (2009). A four-year plan: Preparing your athletes for college
recruiting. Interscholastic Athletic Administration, 3B(1), 8-11.
Lederman, D. (2007). Bad apples or more? Retrieved August 15, 2011, from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/02/07/ncaa_punishes_almost_half_of_members
_of_football_bowl_subdivision_for_major_rules_violations
Lumpkin, A., & Stokowski, S. (2011). Interscholastic sports: A character-building privilege.
Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(3), 124-128.
Maxwell, J. A., (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.
McDonough, P. M. (2005). Counseling and college counseling in America’s high schools.
Alexandria, VA: National Association for College Admission Counseling.
McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What's good, what's not,
and how to tell the difference. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.
Meyer, S. (2004). Unequal bargaining power: Making the national letter of intent more equitable.
Marquette Sports Law Review, 15(1), 227.
Miles, Huberrman, & Saldaña (2014). Chapter 4: Fundamentals of qualitative data analysis.
Qualitative Data Analysis: A methods sourcebook (3
rd
ed.) (pp. 86-93 ONLY). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
National Collegiate Athletic Association (2006a). Retrieved May 2, 2016, from
http://www.ncaa.org/html.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 118
National Collegiate Athletic Association (2016b). Guide for college-bound student athletes.
Indianapolis: Indiana.
New, J. (2014, November 19). A competitive disadvantage. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/11/19/are-selective-colleges-big-time-sports-
greater-risk-compromising-academics
Padilla, C. C. (2015). High school counselor knowledge of NCAA regulations for prospective
student-athlete transition to college. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing).
Person, D. R., Benson ‐Quaziena, M., & Rogers, A. M. (2001). Female student athletes and
student athletes of color. New Directions for Student Services, 2001(93), 55-64.
doi:10.1002/ss.5
Perusse, R., & Goodnough, G. E. (2005). Elementary and secondary school counselors'
perceptions of graduate preparation programs: A national study. Counselor Education and
Supervision, 45(2), 109-118. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2005.tb00134.
Petr, T., & MeArdle, J. (2012). Academic research and reform: A history of the empirical basis
for NCAA academic policy. Journal of Intercollegiate Sport, 5(1), 27-40.
Petr, T.A. & Paskus, T.S. (2009). A process for sharing research data collected by the NCAA.
Journal of Intercollegiate Sport, 5(8), 1.
Petr, T. A., & Paskus, T. S. (2009). The collection and use of academic outcomes data by the
NCAA. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2009(144), 77-92. doi:10.1002/ir.315
Renn, K. A., & Arnold, K. D. (2003). Reconceptualizing research on college student peer
culture. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(3), 261-291. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/stable/3648273
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 119
Robenolt, P. J. (2012). What's so special about intercollegiate athletic special admits?
implications for academic support programming. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing).
Rosenbaum, J. E., Miller, S. R., & Krei, M. S. (1996). Gatekeeping in an era of more open gates:
High school counselors' views of their influence on students' college plans. American
Journal of Education, 104(4), 257-279. doi:10.1086/444135
Rudolph, F. (1990). The american college and university: A history. New York: Knopf.
Sack, A. L., Park, E., & Thiel, R. Watch the gap: Explaining the retention gaps between FBS
Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 4, 55-73.
Sanders, L. (2008). For college athletes, recruiting is a fair (but flawed) game. The Chronicle of
Higher Education, 55(17), A.1.
Sellers, R. M., & Damas A. (2002). The African American student athlete experience. In E.
Etzel, Ferrante, J. Pinkey (Eds.), Counseling College Student Athletes (pp. 55-76).
Morgantown: Fitness Information Technology, Inc.
Silver, G. (2015). Some progress in NCAA reform, but still a long way to go. The Chronicle of
Higher Education, 61(26)
Smith, D. R. (2015). It pays to bend the rules: The consequences of NCAA athletic sanctions.
Sociological Perspectives, 58(1), 97-119. doi:10.1177/0731121414556844
Smith, R. A. 1. (. A., & ebrary, I. (2011; 2010). Pay for play: A history of big-time college
athletic reform. Urbana, Chicago: University of Illinois Press. doi:10.5406/j.ctt1xckxq
Smrt, C. (2001). Controlling the recruiting process - the involvement of the high school coach or
administrator. Interscholastic Athletic Administration, 34(3), 16-17.
Sperber, M. A. (2000). Beer and circus: How big-time college sports is crippling undergraduate
education (1st ed.). New York: Henry Holt.
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 120
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures
and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Watt, S. K., & Moore, J. L. (2001). Who are student athletes? New Directions for Student
Services, 2001(93), 7-18. doi:10.1002/ss.1
Winters, C. A., & Gurney, G. S. (2012). Academic preparation of specially-admitted student-
athletes: A question of basic skills. College and University, 88(2), 2.
Working with Student-Athletes. (n.d.). Retrieved September 08, 2017, from
https://professionals.collegeboard.org/guidance/prepare/athletes

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 121
Appendix A
IRB Approval Form

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education

INFORMATION SHEET FOR RESEARCH

Experiences of Guidance Counselors when Advising Student Athletes

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Alex Garfio under the supervision
of Dr. Pat Tobey at the University of Southern California because you have been identified as
someone who works closely with high school student athletes and that can impart important
knowledge on advising this population on the college going process. Research studies include
only people who voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this
study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
This study examines the experiences of high school counselors when advising student athletes on
the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) college going process. The complex
NCAA college going process will be examined by outlining the varying requirements and
experiences that high school student athletes must meet before matriculating to NCAA sponsored
institutions. Relevant research has indicated high school counselors are often responsible for
assisting the student athlete in navigating the transition to NCAA collegiate athletics. However,
counselors rarely receive adequate training in this realm, which can lead to the student athlete not
having adequate support to effectively navigate this process and take full advantage of post-
secondary options. This study seeks to understand the experiences of counselors when advising
students through this process, paying close attention to specific challenges and best practices in
advising high school student athletes.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in a 30-minute audio-taped
interview. You do not have to answer any questions you don’t want to; if you don’t want to be
taped, handwritten notes will be taken.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with your employer will not be affected
whether you participate or not in this study. If you are not comfortable participating due to your
professional relationship with the researcher, you should not participate.

Due to the small sample size (8 participants) and depending on your responses, it may still be
possible to identify you in the final report, even if no identifiers are included. If you would not be
comfortable having your de-identified responses shared with your employer in the final reports,
or with your employer discovering that you are a participant, you should not participate.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 122

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential.
Your responses will be coded with a false name (pseudonym) and maintained separately. The
audio-tapes will be destroyed once they have been transcribed. Data will be stored on a secure
computer. At the completion of the study, direct identifiers will be destroyed and de-identified
data may be used for future research studies. If you do not want your data used in future studies,
you should not participate.

The results of this research may be made public, shared with participating sites and quoted in
professional journals and meetings, but results from this study will only be reported as a group
such that no individual respondents can be identified. No identifiable information will be
included.

The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects
Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research
studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Alex Garfio
(Principal Investigator, garfio@usc.edu, 213.740.5326), or Dr. Pat Tobey (Faculty Sponsor,
tobey@usc.edu, 213.740.7884)

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the
research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone
independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board
(UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu.

EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 123

Appendix B
Interview Protocol Form
High School Counselor Interview Protocol
High School Institution: _____________________________________________________
Interviewee (Title and Name): ______________________________________
Interviewer: _____________________________________________________
Survey Section Used:
_____ A: High School Counselor Background
_____ B: High School Counseling Organization
_____ C: High School Counselor Knowledge
_____ D: High School Counselor Challenges
_____ E: High School Counselor Best Practices
_____ F: Demographics (no specific questions)
Other Topics Discussed:____________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
Documents Obtained: _____________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
Post Interview Comments or Leads:
________________________________________________________________
Introductory Protocol
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 124
To facilitate our note-taking, we would like to audio tape our conversations today. Please sign
the release form. For your information, only researchers on the project will be privy to the tapes
which will be eventually destroyed after they are transcribed. In addition, you must sign a form
devised to meet our human subject requirements. Essentially, this document states that: (1) all
information will be held confidential, (2) your participation is voluntary and you may stop at any
time if you feel uncomfortable, and (3) we do not intend to inflict any harm. Thank you for your
agreeing to participate.
We have planned this interview to last no longer than one hour. During this time, we have
several questions that we would like to cover. If time begins to run short, it may be necessary to
interrupt you in order to push ahead and complete this line of questioning.
Introduction
Good afternoon.
Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to talk to me about your experiences on
counseling student athletes on the NCAA college going process. You have been selected to
speak with me today because you have been identified as someone who has a great deal to share
about this complex, yet very important process. This research is focused on the experiences of
high school counselors in order to understand some of the challenges they face and best practices
that have been employed in the advising of student athletes. Through this study I hope to better
understand these experiences in order to learn practices and techniques to better assist counselors
develop strategies and techniques to support this population. Furthermore, through the research I
hope to assist student athletes in making their NCAA educational dreams a reality. Before
getting started, I wanted to see if I have your permission to audio record your responses to the
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 125
interview question. Most importantly, confidentiality is critical, as your name will not be
disclosed.
A. High School Counselor Background
How long have you been:
_______ in your present position?
_______ at this institution?
_______working with student athletes?
How many student athletes do you advise per academic year?
Interesting background information on interviewee:
What is your highest degree? ___________________________________________
What is your field of study? ____________________________________________
1. Briefly describe your daily responsibilities (advising, administrative, discipline, scheduling,
etc.) as it is related to counseling students?
Probes:
 What are your responsibilities in working with student athletes?
 Are you the sole student athlete counselor on your campus?
If so, how did you get involved?
If not, how is your counseling department structured as it related to student athletes?
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 126
B. High School Counseling Organization
1. What is the strategy at your school for identifying student athletes that have the potential to
matriculate to NCAA sponsored schools?
Probes:
 Is it working – why or why not?
3. Walk me through the process of working with a student athlete on a regular day?
Probes:
 Can you provide a good and bad example?
3. What is the strategy at your school for informing and advising student athletes on the NCAA
college going process?
Probes:
 Are they effective – why or why not?
2. What resources are available to counselors for assisting student athletes through the NCAA
college going process?
3. How are coaches involved in the advisement of high school student athletes?
4. How are parents involved in this process?
5. How do you work with NCAA institutions during this process, if at all?
C. High school Counselor Knowledge
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 127
1. Tell me about your knowledge of the NCAA college going process?
Probes:
 Do you feel more confident about one requirement as opposed to the others
 Ask them about their knowledge and experience with each of requirement not discussed
(ie. Scholarships, recruiting, academics, academic fit, athletic admissions, etc.)
2. Describe your training and preparation for advising student athletes?
Probes:
 Did you feel that your graduate program prepared you, how or how not?
3. How do you stay abreast of changes with the requirements involves in the NCAA college
going process?
Probes:
 Workshops? If so, which?
 What specifically do you find beneficial?
 How often?
 How is this information disseminated to stakeholders? (coaches, parents, student
athletes)
4. What kind of support does your school provide you when advising student athletes?
5. What types of training would you find beneficial to stay up to date on the NCAA
requirements?
EXPERIENCES OF HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS 128
6. Do you think your coaches are well educated on the requirements?
D. High School Counselor Challenges
1. What are some of the major challenges your school faces when advising student athletes?
Probes:
 How can these challenges be overcome?
2. Where does the student athlete advising process fall within the scale of importance with all
your other responsibilities?
3. To what extent do coaches and parents
E. High School Counselor Best Practices
1. What specific policies or procedures that your school has implemented for working with
student athletes?
Probes:
 Have they been effective? Why or why not?
2. To what extent has communication with parents and coaches assisted in this process?
F. Demographics
Post Interview Comments and/or Observations:

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Latino/a college student-athletes: Influences on recruitment, enrollment and degree completion

PDF

Exploring the academic success of black male former student-athletes and their experiences with academic support upon re-entry to college

PDF

Food insecurity and the impact on community college students

PDF

Time out for mental health: barriers and strategies for high school coaches

PDF

Parental perspectives on the collegiate sports recruiting process

PDF

Problems and solutions for school counselors supporting Black and Latinx students in the 21st century

PDF

Factors impacting four-year postsecondary matriculation at a college-preparatory, Catholic high school: an innovation study

PDF

The beauty of resilience: an examination of how continuation high school students overcome daily adversities

PDF

""Having the right info"": College readiness as college knowledge among minoritized students in an urban education setting

PDF

Examining the impact of continuation high schools on students' self-efficacy

PDF

Federal loan borrowing in community colleges: examining the decision making processes of non‐traditional community college students

PDF

New school counselor's perception of preparedness

PDF

The role of historically underserved students’ perceptions of their high school counselor in overcoming the equity gap in college admissions: an evaluative study

PDF

Beyond persistence and graduation rates: examining the career exploration processes of first-generation college students

PDF

Validation matters - student experiences in online courses: a mixed method study

PDF

Center court: exploration of access to mental health services by female university athletes

PDF

And still we rise: examining the strengths of first-generation college students

PDF

Oppression of remedial reading community college students and their academic success rates: student perspectives of the unquantified challenges faced

PDF

Understanding the non-financial benefits that intercollegiate athletics provides the university

PDF

Examining the relationship between students’ pre-college experiences and outcomes in diversity courses

Asset Metadata

Creator Garfio, Alejandro Paramo (author)

Core Title Examining the experiences of high school counselors when advising student athletes on the NCAA college going process

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 10/19/2017

Defense Date 05/03/2017

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag college matriculation,ecological systems theory,high school coaches,high school counselors,NCAA,NCAA recruiting,OAI-PMH Harvest,student athlete

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Hinga, Briana (committee member), Jauregui, Martin (committee member)

Creator Email garfio@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-447409

Unique identifier UC11264174

Identifier etd-GarfioAlej-5841.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-447409 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-GarfioAlej-5841.pdf

Dmrecord 447409

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Garfio, Alejandro Paramo

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA