University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An evaluation of the contribution of athletic counselors to the academic success of student-athletes at the California community colleges

(USC Thesis Other)

An evaluation of the contribution of athletic counselors to the academic success of student-athletes at the California community colleges

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

An Evaluation of the Contribution of Athletic Counselors to the Academic Success of Student-
Athletes at the California Community Colleges

by

Kelsey K. Iino
___________________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2014

Copyright 2014 Kelsey Iino
Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Table of Contents

Dedication iv

Acknowledgments v

Abstract vi

Chapter One: Introduction 1
Background of the Problem 2
Statement of the Problem 7
Purpose of Study 8
Research Questions 8
Importance of the Study 8
Limitations and Delimitations 9
Definitions of Terms 10

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Introduction 15
History of the California Community Colleges 15
History of Athletics at the California Community Colleges 19
Characteristics of Student-Athletes at the Community College 23
Student-Athletes vs. Non-Athlete Students 23
Academic Persistence of Student-Athletes 25
History of the Role of the California Community College Counselor 26
Significance of Athletic Counseling 30
Conclusion 35

Chapter Three: Methodology
Rationale for the Study 36
Research Questions and Hypotheses 36
Population and Sample 37
IRB Approval 38
Qualitative Research 39
Quantitative Research 41
Data Analysis 42
Conclusion 44

Chapter Four: Research Results
Overview 45
Population Samples 45
Data Obtained 46
Study Findings 48
Conclusion 64

ii

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Chapter Five: Conclusions
Summary 66
Limitations 67
Summary of Findings 68
Recommendations for Practice 68
Implications for Practice 69
Recommendations for Research 70
Conclusion 71

References 73

Appendices 84

Charts and Graphs 91
iii

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Dedication

I dedicate this dissertation to my family. Without their unconditional love and support, I
would not have had the opportunities in life to make it this far. I am forever grateful and
humbled by the adversities they have overcome to afford me the mindset and determination to
accomplish my goals.

To my parents, Steve and Patty Nagano, thank you for pushing me to always believe I
can do better. You have taught me a strong work ethic, how to advocate for justice, and how to
be passionate for the things I believe in.

To my dad, Steve Iino, you have built a safety net for me that has allowed me not to fear
failure, and because of that, I am here today.

To my grandparents, Dr. Reverend Paul and Florence Nagano, you set the bar! I can only hope
and aspire to create a legacy as influential as yours. You paved the way and have shown me what
it means to be an agent of change.

To Marcus, thank you for being my rock. You have played an instrumental role in my
ability to persist through this challenging process.

To Peanut Butter, you have been a driving force who has always encouraged me to aim
higher. You are my solace and comfort in life.
iv

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Acknowledgments

I acknowledge and thank my Dissertation Committee, Dr. Lawrence Picus, Dr. Pedro
Garcia, and Dr. Dipali Potnis, for their support and constant encouragement.

I also thank USC Rossier School of Education faculty, Dr. Robert Keim and Dr. Dennis
Hocevar, for their support and expertise. Although not on my Committee, they were instrumental
in helping me finish this dissertation.

Acknowledgment goes to Tina Tajima for her amazing ability to support people,
including me, in a most significant way. She has managed to make my life’s challenges, this
dissertation process included, worthwhile. Acknowledgment also goes to Tina’s colleague and
friend, Wendy Alexander-Adams, for entering the crazy world that was this dissertation, for
finding meaning in my writings, and for helping give structure to a piece of work that I now feel
proud to present.

Acknowledgment is due to my El Camino College colleagues—first to Dipte Patel for
consistently making me feel good and excited about this doctoral journey and for motivating me
to persist; second to Chris Jeffries, my athletic counseling mentor, my colleague, and my friend,
whose passion for this profession is inspiring. I am the athletic counselor I am today because of
Chris’ unrivaled dedication, knowledge, and expertise. I am fortunate to work with someone who
complements my personality and passion for the profession. I also owe Carolyn Pineda a great
deal of gratitude for always answering my research data questions. This project and its final
wrap-up would not have been possible without Carolyn’s quality work.

I also acknowledge Evans Roderick, the godfather of community college athletic
counseling. Your advocacy, commitment, and passion for the profession are the reasons it exists
today.

A special acknowledgment goes to my 2010 Ed.D. cohort family—I’m glad we survived
this challenging and wonderful experience together. I thank Anthony Lee, my first friend at
USC, for the study sessions, conversations, and encouragement provided throughout the
program. I could always depend on Anthony to refocus me toward our goal. I thank Dianne
Yoon for the study sessions, the dinners, and the support throughout. I also wish to acknowledge
Dipali Potnis for a second time, not only because she served on my Committee but also because
she has been a great friend and voice of reason. I believe that I met all three of these persons at a
very important time in my life, and I know we are bound by this experience and our friendship.

v

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Abstract

More than 27,000 student-athletes (SAs) participate annually in intercollegiate athletics
within the California Community College System (CCCS). This population is considered an at-
risk population; SAs face challenges in achieving their educational goals. This mixed methods
comparative study evaluates the contribution of specialized athletic counselors to the academic
success of SAs in the CCCS. The following research questions are to be answered:
1. What are the best practices and most useful student services specific to
counseling SAs in the CCCS?
2. Do specialized, designated athletic counselors in the CCCS support and
thereby enhance educational outcomes for the SAs?
The academic eligibility requirements for SAs continue to evolve, becoming
increasingly strict. This dissertation argues that athletic counselors provide SAs with
essential information to foster their persistence and assist them toward academic success.
The study was designed to close the gap in the literature aimed specifically at the
academic needs of CCCS SAs.
The study compared the experiences of SAs at two California community colleges
(CCCs), each with an intercollegiate athletics program but only one with specialized athletic
counselors. The study questions were approached by qualitative analysis of interviews conducted
with athletics personnel at the two schools, qualitative analysis of information obtained through a
questionnaire-based survey of SAs at the two schools, and quantitative analysis of SA cohort
data obtained from the Institutional Research office at each school. The cohort data comprised
remedial placement rates plus educational outcomes, i.e., certificates or degrees earned and/or
academic transfer to a four-year school for intercollegiate athletics and covered SA cohorts in
attendance during academic years 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, and/or 2012-2013.
Overall, the analysis identified specialized athletic counseling as a critical student
service that supports SAs in their persistence toward and accomplishment of their
educational goals. In particular, a significant association was found between SAs’
accessibility to a designated athletic counselor and the rates at which SAs meet their
educational goals. The study findings highlight the need for the CCCS to mandate that
any CCC with an intercollegiate athletics program create one or more faculty positions to
cover for the specialized counseling needs of SAs.

vi

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Chapter One: Introduction

Community colleges are America’s overlooked asset (College Board, 2008).
Grubb and Badway (2005) describe the California Community College System (CCCS)
in particular as “the clearest example of inclusiveness and equity in a system that is
otherwise devoted to competitive entry, exclusiveness, and elitism” (p. 2). With 112
colleges in 72 districts, the CCCS serves more than 2.4 million students, making it the
largest system of higher education in the world. It serves over 70% of the post-secondary
student population in California (Community College League of California [CCLC],
2013; Melguizo, 2007; Shulock & Moore, 2005a; Smith, 2012).
California community colleges (CCCs) are affordable and provide access via an
open door policy to all students, regardless of their educational and career goals
(California Community College Chancellor’s Office [CCCO], November 7, 2012;
Haggan, 2000). Students can attend a CCC and complete courses (1) to transfer to a four-
year college or university, (2) to graduate with a two-year Associate in Arts or Science
degree, (3) to obtain a vocational certificate or license, (4) to develop basic skills in
English and mathematics, (5) to attain proficiency in English as a second language (ESL),
(6) to prepare for a career change, or (7) for personal development. Some student
populations served by community colleges are identified as “at-risk” populations because
they comprise low-income students and/or underrepresented minorities, they may be
employed full-time or part-time, and they are typically in need of remediation in English
and/or mathematics (Boswell, 2004; Cox et al., 2009; Leonard, 2002; McCurdy, 1994;
Shulock & Moore, 2005b).
1

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

One particular population served by community colleges is the population of
student-athletes (SAs) who enroll for at least one of the several reasons listed above. The
CCCS has more than 27,000 SAs who participate annually in intercollegiate athletics
(California Community College Athletic Association [3C2A], 2013). This population too
is considered an at-risk population. Historically, intercollegiate SAs score low on
entrance exams, and they face challenges in achieving their educational goals (Ferris,
Finster, & McDonald, 2004; Petrie & Russell, 1995; Watt & Moore, 2001). This
population is subject to attrition rates that are higher than those of other populations of
community college students who report the same initial educational goal of transferring
to a four-year college or university (Druehl, 1992; Gomez, 1991; Shulock, & Moore,
2005b; Grubb, 2006; Kuh, Kinzie, Buckley, Bridges, & Hayek, 2006).
In October 1991, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation published The
Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, an in-depth report on intercollegiate
athletics. The report criticized the overall operation of athletic programs at four-year
colleges and universities, citing SAs’ low academic perseverance, low academic success,
low graduation rates, and questionable academic standards. The report included
recommendations and suggestions that were later adopted by the National Collegiate
Athletic Association (NCAA) to reform academic eligibility requirements for
participation in intercollegiate sports (Knight, 1991). Although changes were
implemented at the four-year colleges and universities, the 3C2A made no modifications
to address the same types of issues at the CCCs.
Background of the Problem
Under the open door policy, there are definite reasons why students choose to
2

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

participate in intercollegiate athletics within the CCCs (Letawsky, Schneider, Pedersen,
& Palmer, 2003). The CCCs provides access and upward mobility to the many SAs who
are first-generation college and/or low-income students (Boulard, 2008; Gaston-Gayles,
2004; Horton, 2009a; London, 1992; Weatherspoon, 2007). These SAs make up the very
large population of male and female athletes who participate in 23 intercollegiate sports
at 104 of the 112 CCCs (3C2A, 2013).
The literature suggests that SAs face unique challenges that require specialized
student support services (Druehl, 1992; Ferrante, Etzel, & Lantz, 2002; Haggan, 2000;
Horton, 2009b; Thiss, 2009; Greer & Robinson, 2006; Watson, 2005, 2006; Watson &
Kissinger, 2007; Watt & Monroe, 2001). In looking at this issue from the schools’
perspective, Bryant (2001) suggests the following: “To serve the diverse community
college student population, institutions must remain cognizant of student needs when
developing policies, programs, and services” (p. 1). This is a somewhat novel point of
view; Wong (2006) insightfully notes, “Historically, NCAA eligibility standards have
placed accountability on the student-athlete, as well as on the parents and school
advisors” (p. 8). The NCAA has acknowledged the need and requires its member
institutions to provide specifically tailored support services for their SAs. However, the
3C2A has yet to mandate that its members offer differentiated support services for their
SAs.
Some of the CCCs provide specialized support services for their SAs. Some of the
CCCs have designated counselors who are trained in athletic counseling (3C2A, n.d.).
These specialized counselors are knowledgeable about the NCAA academic requirements
and can thus provide accurate, specific guidance and counseling to SAs (Druehl, 1992;
3

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Ferrante, Etzel, Lantz, 2002; Haggan, 2000; Horton, 2009b; Thiss, 2009; Greer &
Robinson, 2006).
Counseling at the community college level is a vital student support service. In
serving the various student populations and students with different educational goals,
community college counselors demonstrate a wide breadth of knowledge (Carroll, &
Tarasuk, 1991; Coll, & Rice, 1993; Durodoye, Harris, & Bolden, 2000; Grubb, 2001;
Haggan, 2000; Henriksen, 1995). In addition to the complexities and wide range of
general knowledge that need to be mastered to counsel the community college student
population, comprehension of detailed eligibility requirements for SAs is critical for
counselors working with SAs.
Athletic counselors help SAs maintain their eligibility to compete in
intercollegiate sports at the CCC level by informing them of the academic requirements
and helping to ensuring that they are working toward meeting their academic goal, that is,
graduating from the CCC with an Associate Degree or a Certificate of Achievement
and/or preparing to transfer to a four-year institution on the basis of academics or
athletics.
Over the past few decades, several new academic eligibility criteria for college
athletes have been enforced. In 1986, Proposition 48 established minimum academic
eligibility standards for incoming SAs at NCAA four-year institutions. If a student who is
graduating from high school meets the Proposition 48 academic standards, he or she is
considered a qualifier. As a qualifier, a student is eligible to practice or compete for a
four-year NCAA institution during his or her first year of college, to receive an athletic
scholarship, and to continue to play four seasons in the sport as long as he or she
4

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

maintains academic eligibility each academic year (Price, 2010). If a student fails to meet
the initial minimum academic standards from high school, that student is considered a
non-qualifier, and he or she becomes academically ineligible for an athletic scholarship
and not eligible to practice or compete in a sport during the first year at an NCAA four-
year institution.
If a non-qualifier wants to immediately participate in intercollegiate athletics and
have the opportunity to compete for four seasons while working toward a bachelor’s
degree, the student is given the option of attending a community college. At the
community college the student can compete in intercollegiate sports for a maximum of
two seasons. While attending the community college the student can also meet the NCAA
academic eligibility standards and transfer to a four-year institution and compete for the
remaining number of seasons for which they are eligible (NCAA, n.d.).
There are many qualifiers who do not go directly to a four-year institution to
compete in intercollegiate athletics; instead, they start their college career at a CCC.
Some qualifiers may not have been accepted to compete at the four-year institution of
their choice or will not receive the athletic scholarship they need to attend the four-year
institution of their choice and cannot afford to try to “walk on” to an athletic team. If any
such student decides to attend one of the four-year institutions where he or she was
accepted and later decides to transfer to another four-year institution, this student may be
ineligible to compete and have to sit out one full year due to NCAA rules and regulations.
If a qualifier decides to first attend a CCC, this qualifier is eligible to immediately
compete in intercollegiate athletics, can develop and refine his or her athletic skills to
gain enough recognition to compete at a four-year institution, and can fulfill requirements
5

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

to transfer on an academic basis to a four-year institution (3C2A, 2013).
There are also situations in which a qualifier attends a four-year college or
university, competes in intercollegiate athletics for the first year, and then decides to
transfer to another college. If this SA transfers to another four-year college or university,
he or she is ineligible to immediately compete in intercollegiate athletics—he or sit must
sit out for 1 year. However, if the transfer is to a two-year community college, the SA is
eligible to compete as long as he or she transfers with a 2.0 GPA. If this SA transfers
back to a four-year school, he or she becomes a so-called a 4-2-4 transfer (NCAA, n.d.).
With the implementation of qualifier and non-qualifier statuses, in 1995,
Proposition 16 reevaluated Proposition 48 and increased the minimum eligibility
standards for athletic scholarships and competition. A sliding scale was created with a
minimum 2.0 grade point average (GPA) in 16 approved academic core courses along
with a Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) combined math and verbal score of 1010 or an
American College Testing (ACT) combined score of 86 required to establish qualifier
status (NCAA, n.d.).
Over the last few years there have been changes in the academic eligibility
standards for both non-qualifiers and qualifiers at the CCC who want to transfer to an
NCAA Division I (DI) institution (NCAA, 2013). The Division II (DII) institutions have
also recently announced that they will be increasing their CCC academic eligibility
standards for both non-qualifiers and qualifiers who want to transfer (NCAA, n.d.). The
CCCs needs to prepare their SAs and properly address these new admission requirements
to ensure that SAs successfully meet the eligibility requirements and can transfer to a DI
or DII institution to compete in intercollegiate athletics (Thiss, 2009).
6

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

The 3C2A (n.d.) has reported that 92% of non-qualifiers who enter a CCC must
take remedial English and/or math courses. The academic eligibility requirements that
SAs must meet at a CCC are complex, and they are tailored to each student’s needs.
Numerous researchers have determined that the support services needed for SAs differ
from the support services provided for regular, non-athlete students (Ferrante, Etzel, &
Lantz, 2002; Thiss, 2009; Watson, 2005, 2006; Watson & Kissinger, 2007; Watt &
Monroe, 2001).
Counseling an SA is multi-faceted. In addition to general counseling knowledge,
athletic counseling requires knowledge of numerous factors and specific requirements
that only an SA must fulfill (3C2A, n.d.). The SA will have only two seasons of
eligibility to compete at a CCC and a limited time to compete at a four-year institution.
Determining the courses that the SA must take is critical to determining his or her
eligibility status and to meeting the requirements necessary for transfer (Druehl, 1992;
Thiss, 2009).
Statement of the Problem
Most CCCs provide the same student services to their SAs that they provide to
their regular students. However, the SA niche requires specific, differentiated counseling
support to prepare the SAs to meet their educational goals.
This study looked at one CCC that has had designated, specialized athletic
counselors for the past 21 years, and at a second CCC that currently does not have any
designated, specialized athletic counselors. In addition to proficiency in CCC general
counseling, the athletic counselor needs full knowledge of high school eligibility
requirements, 3C2A academic eligibility rules and regulations, academic transfer
7

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

requirements, detailed NCAA DI, DII, and DIII eligibility rules and requirements, and
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) eligibility rules and
requirements to properly counsel SAs. If a CCC does not have a specialized athletic
counselor, the school’s SAs are likely to be at great disadvantage.
Purpose of the Study
This study looked at one CCC that has specialized, designated athletic counselors
and at a second CCC that does not have a specialized, designated athletic counselors to
determine whether athletic counseling is an important student service that increases the
number of SAs who meet their educational goals.
Research Questions
3. What are the best practices and most useful student services specific to
counseling SAs in the CCCS?
4. Do specialized, designated athletic counselors in the CCCS support and
thereby enhance educational outcomes for the SAs?
Importance of the Study
Student services such as academic counseling for SAs in the CCCS is a topic that
has been neglected in the literature on student services in higher education (Druehl, 1992;
Knapp & Raney, 1988; Peterman & Matz, 2000; Thiss, 2009). Athletic counselors
provide vital information and work closely with SAs to encourage persistence and assist
them toward academic success. Most of the published research has been conducted
exclusively at four-year colleges and universities.
With the stricter academic transfer requirements for community college SAs it has
become crucial to provide optimum student support services such as athletic counseling
8

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

to ensure these students’ progress toward their academic goals. This study aimed at
closing the gap in the literature aimed specifically at the academic needs of SAs attending
the CCCs.
Limitations and Delimitations
• This study is limited in scope to the general counselors and athletic counselors
who serve in the CCCs. The knowledge of other counselors at the CCC level
may vary.
• This study attempted to identify factors that are critical to an evaluation of the
influence of athletic counselors on the academic success of SAs; it is
impossible to identify all factors that influence the academic success of SAs.
• This study was conducted at the community college level, and the results may
not be generalizable to other types of higher education institutions.
• This study was limited to looking at the CCC SA population, and the results
may not be generalizable to other CCC student populations.
• The past few years were marked by economic challenges, so there may be
additional factors, such as students having to work on the side to support their
families or pay for schooling, that ultimately take away from the time they can
dedicate to their educational goals. These may be background factors affecting
academic outcomes. These factors were not addressed in this study.
• The study looked primarily at SAs who participated in sports that exist at both
schools and may not be generalizable to SAs that participate in other sports.
9

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Definition of Terms (Glossary)
4-2-4: A student-athlete (SA) who initially plays at a four-year institution, transfers to a
two-year community college, then transfers back to a four-year institution to compete.
40/60/80% rule: The current NCAA Division I progress-toward-degree rule. According
to this rule, after enrollment for four semesters, an SA must have completed at least 40%
of his or her degree requirements; i.e., 40% of required general education, major, and
minor (if applicable) courses. After 6 semesters, the SA must have completed at least
60% of the required courses. After 8 semesters, the SA must have completed at least 80%
of the required courses (Wong, 2006).
Academic counseling: The most popular and traditional approach to student assistance
and the one that is consistently supported in athletic associations. The more established
programs have acknowledged and accepted responsibility for providing more extensive
assistance to the SAs by providing an environment in which appropriately trained life
skills development, clinical counseling, and performance enhancement practitioners are
available for individual and group consultation (Broughton & Neyer, 2001).
Academically underprepared student-athletes: SAs who do not meet the NCAA
academic qualifying standards upon high school graduation and thus continue their
athletic and academic careers at a two-year college (Smith, 2009).
Academic greyshirt: An SA that falls under the greyshirt rule, which postpones the start
of a student’s NCAA DI or DII eligibility and thus increases the student’s transfer
opportunities. A greyshirt differs from a redshirt in one major way: the greyshirt takes
fewer than 12 credits and works out with the team. The 5-year eligibility clock does not
start until the student takes 12 credits.
10

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Academic redshirt: An SA who may receive athletic aid (scholarship) for the first year
of enrollment and may practice during the first regular academic term (semester or
quarter) but may not compete during the first year of enrollment. After the first term is
completed, the SA must be academically successful at his/her college or university to
continue to practice for the rest of the year (NCAA, n.d.).
California Community College Athletic Association (CCCAA or 3C2A) previously
the Commission on Athletics [COA]: The association that administers the athletic
activities of the nearly 27,000 men and women SAs in the state. It is an integral part of
California's extensive community college system and is authorized by the State
Legislature through the Education Code to establish the rules and regulations of
intercollegiate sports at the CCC level (3C2A, 2013).
Division I (DI): Division I schools generally have the biggest 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.
With nearly 350 colleges and universities in its membership, Division I schools field
more than 6,000 athletic teams, providing opportunities for more than 170,000 student-
athletes to compete in NCAA sports each year (NCAA, n.d.).
Division II (or DII): Division II is a collection of almost 300 colleges and universities
that provide thousands of student-athletes the opportunity to compete at a high level
while excelling in the classroom and fully engaging in the broader campus experience.
This balance, in which student-athletes are recognized for their academic success, athletic
contributions, and campus and community involvement, is at the heart of the Division II
11

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

philosophy. The Division II approach provides growth opportunities through academic
achievement, learning in high-level athletics competition and a focus on service to the
community. The balance and integration of these different areas of learning provide
Division II student-athletes with a path to graduation while cultivating a variety of skills
and breadth of knowledge for life after college (NCAA, n.d.).
Division III (or DIII): More than 170,000 student-athletes at 444 institutions make up
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. Academics are the primary focus for
Division III student-athletes. The division minimizes the conflicts between athletics and
academics and helps student-athletes progress toward graduation through shorter practice
and playing seasons and regional competition that reduces time away from academic
studies. Participants are integrated on campus and treated like all other members of the
student body, keeping them focused on being a student first (NCAA, n.d.).
Educational outcome: Completion of a certificate, associate’s degree, and/or transfer to
a four-year college or university (Student Success Task Force Recommendations, 2012).
Five-year clock: The five calendar years that DI SAs are given from the time of their
initial enrollment at a two- or four-year school to complete four seasons of competition
(NCAA, n.d.).
Full Division I qualifier: A student who may receive athletic aid (scholarship) and
practice and compete during the first year of enrollment at a DI college or university.
This student must have completed 16 core courses, 10 before the seventh semester (senior
12

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

year) of high school. Seven of the 10 core courses must be in English, math, or science
and the student must have a minimum core course GPA of 2.3. The student must also
meet the Competition sliding scale requirement of GPA and ACT/SAT score. Graduate
from high school (NCAA, 2013).
Division I Non-qualifier: An SA who cannot receive athletic aid (scholarship), cannot
practice, and cannot compete during the first year of enrollment at a DI college or
university. This student does not meet the requirements for Full Qualifier or academically
for the NCAA.
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA): An athletic association that
organizes college- and university-level athletic programs. NAIA members are smaller
colleges and universities across the United States. The NAIA allows membership of
colleges and universities outside the United States (NAIA, n.d.).
National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA): An athletic association that
regulates and organizes college and university level athletic programs. NCAA members
are larger colleges and universities across the United States. NCAA membership is
separated into three competitive divisions, known as Divisions I, II, and III. Each division
creates its own rules that govern personnel, amateurism, recruiting, eligibility, benefits,
financial aid, and playing and practice seasons–consistent with the overall governing
principles of the Association. Every intercollegiate program must affiliate its core
program with one of the three divisions (NCAA, n.d.).
Proposition 16: The NCAA regulation covering initial eligibility requirements for SAs at
more than 300 DI colleges and universities. Implemented in 1995, Proposition 16 is a
more restrictive successor to Proposition 48, which went into effect in 1986. High school
13

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

graduates who do not meet Proposition 16 requirements are precluded from participating
in intercollegiate competition and may be denied athletic scholarships. To qualify for full
eligibility, SAs must have a 2.0 GPA in 13 approved academic core courses and a
combined SAT score of 1010 or combined ACT score of 86. Students with lower test
scores need higher core course GPAs. The minimum test score for students with a GPA
of 2.5 or higher is 820 SAT/68 ACT. A modified version of Proposition 16 applies to
SAs at the 254 DII NCAA schools (Price, 2010).
Proposition 48: An NCAA regulation that stipulates minimum high school grades and
standardized test scores that SAs must achieve to participate in college-level athletic
competition (Price, 2010).
14

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Introduction
Over the past decade, eligibility rules and regulations standards for California
Community College student-athletes (CCC SAs) have become more intricate and
demanding. With increased standards, specialized academic counseling for SAs becomes
vital. With CCC SAs having only two years of eligibility to compete and a low rate of
academic goal achievement, it is of paramount importance that SAs be put on a path to
academic success via counseling on the appropriate coursework.
Most of the existing literature on athletic counseling focuses on the psychological
needs of SAs. Some of the literature refers, though not in depth, to academic counseling
and other services for these students. However, most of the published research focuses on
four-year institutions (Storch & Ohlson, 2009). Although the literature does not focus on
student services for SAs at two-year institutions, the published research does provide a
context for the present study on specialized academic counseling for community college
SAs.
History of the California Community Colleges
The history of the CCCs sheds light on how athletics fits into the mission of the
CCCS. The matter of adequate learning became a national concern in the 1890s when
data showed that the average American received less than a fifth-grade education (Brint
& Karabel, 1989). Thus, in 1892, the community college system was created as an
extension of the secondary school system (Jeynes, 2007; Smith, 2012).
Recognizing the lack in education, the University of Chicago’s president decided
to separate instruction into two sets of curricula, naming the first set of curricula “junior
15

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

college,” and the second set “senior college” (Bogue, 1950; Brint & Karabel, 1989). A
few years later, in 1900, the University began to award associate degrees to students who
finished the two-year junior college curricula. From 1901 to 1980 the number of two-year
programs grew from a single college to over 1,200 institutions, representing almost 40
percent of America’s colleges (Brint & Karabel, 1989).
In California, the first junior college was authorized by the state legislature in
1907 as an extension to public secondary schools (Cohen, 2003). The law passed was
called the Upward Extension Law, and it allowed high school graduates to take post-
secondary courses. The first junior college was established at Fresno High School in 1910
(Smith, 2012; Witt, Wattnebarger, Gollattscheck, Suppinger, 1994). Within the next few
years, the cities of Bakersfield, Fullerton, and Long Beach opened junior colleges, and by
1916 Azusa, Chaffey, Riverside, Sacramento, and Santa Ana also started junior colleges.
Within a decade, California had established the most extensive junior college
system in the country (Witt et al., 1994). By 1921, separation of the junior colleges from
secondary schools was approved. Due to the Great Depression of 1929-33, the junior
colleges witnessed increased enrollment as people turned to education as a way to
improve their skills and enhance their employment opportunities. This growth in
enrollment increased the number of junior colleges in California to 35, with over 13,000
students enrolled (Elles, 1931).
Initially the purpose of the junior college was to provide post-secondary courses
to high school students. It expanded to helping returning adults gain skills in a
competitive job market, and due to the increased demand during World War II, the junior
colleges took on the responsibility of starting vocational programs (Witt et al., 1994).
16

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

These successful and established vocational programs increased public acceptance of the
junior colleges (Witt et al., 1994). As the war ended, the junior colleges continued to gain
recognition and support, and the junior college became known officially as the
community college (Brint & Karabel, 1989; Cohen, 2003). Additionally, the GI Bill
provided World War II veterans with monetary incentives to attend college. President
Truman’s Commission on Higher Education kept tuition costs low, and the GI Bill
provided a free college education to veterans that had served over 90 days or were injured
in the line of duty and were honorably discharged. The GI Bill resulted in an increase in
enrollment and in governmental funding of the CCCs (Cohen & Brawer, 2003; Witt et
al., 1994).
By 1960, enrollment had grown considerably, and the Donahoe Higher Education
Act was implemented. The Master Plan was intended to provide access and choice to all
residents seeking higher education and to establish differentiated admission pools for the
California universities and so-called state universities, to maintain low tuition fees as a
part of the commitment to access, and to keep enrollment at schools in the University of
California and the California State University systems manageable (Breneman, 1995;
McCurdy, 1994; University of California, 2007). The California Master Plan for Higher
Education divided the responsibilities between the three California public higher
education sectors, with the CCCS providing a low-cost post-secondary education
opportunity for any interested Californian. A student’s enrollment at a CCC could, in
turn, lead to transfer to a four-year college or university, to vocational and career
certification and degrees, to improve basic skills education, or to personal improvement
17

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

(Johnson, 2011). The California Master Plan for Higher Education also separated the
CCCS from the K-12 system (Livingston, 1998).
The literature describes the CCCs as serving one of the most diverse student
populations in the world, in terms of race, ethnicity, language, culture, national origin,
socio-economic status, age, physical ability, sexual orientation, and religious beliefs, with
both part-time and full-time students, and with the purpose of serving the needs of the
respective communities (Brown, Martinez, & Daniel, 2001; Bryant, 2001; Community
College League of California, 2000). With its open door policy, the CCCS provides
higher education access to all students. The flexible course offerings, including daytime
and nighttime classes, allow students to take classes part-time or full-time. Thus, the
CCCs purpose is to create an adaptable environment for student development and
positive educational outcomes (Bryant, 2001).
Today, as noted in Chapter One, the CCCS is the largest system of higher
education in the world, enrolling more than two thirds of California’s college students,
i.e., over 2.7 million students, with 112 colleges and 71 educational centers in 72 districts
and offering more than 175 degree and certificate programs (California Community
College Chancellor’s Office [CCCC], 2012; Foundation for California Community
Colleges [FCCC], 2012).
The CCCs are also seen as a good investment for the community. The FCCC
(2012) states the following:
For every dollar California invests to get students in and through college, the
state’s economy receives a $3 net return on investment. For every dollar spent on
economic and workforce development programs at Community Colleges, there is
18

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

a $12 increase in California’s business income and employee wages. A 2%
increase in the share of the population with an associate’s degree, combined with
a 1 percent increase in the share with a bachelor’s degree, results in $20 billion in
additional economic input, $1.2 billion more in state and local tax revenues
annually, and 174,000 new jobs (CCCCO, 2014).
Although the CCCS is a single system, the institutional characteristics and
mission of each campus vary (Thiss, 2009). The overarching vision of the CCCS is
“access to lifelong learning for all citizens and [creation of] a skilled, progressive
workforce to advance the state’s interests” (CCCCO, 2013).
History of Athletics at the California Community Colleges
Although there is evidence that intercollegiate athletics existed at two-year
institutions prior to World War I, the early literature rarely mentions intercollegiate
athletics. Koos (1927) was the first to write about the community colleges, and he only
mentioned athletics along with other student activities. Later, Fields (1962) suggested
that intercollegiate athletics at one of the junior colleges he looked at was significant in
building student and community engagement.
A decade later, Thornton (1972) published The Community Junior College.
Thornton examined the role of intercollegiate athletics at the two-year institutions and
found an association between participation in sports, student development, and social
integration. He also identified intercollegiate athletics as a student activity that appealed
not only to the SAs but also to the spectators and the greater community.
In 1992 at the NCAA Academic Conference, the NCAA Council of Presidents
recommended a code revision that would affect the eligibility of community college SAs
19

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

striving to eventually compete at the four-year institutions. The Council did not feel that a
community college would properly prepare an SA for the rigors of a four-year institution
or that an associate degree was an adequate indication of academic achievement. Instead
the Council recommended that an SA be ineligible for competition for 1 year to
academically prove himself or herself to the four-year institution (NCAA, 1992). The
recommendation did not pass; however, criticisms of the academic and athletic programs
at the community college level became quite apparent.
The California Community College Athletic Association (3C2A) quickly
responded to the concerns of the NCAA Council of Presidents, and a series of standards
was passed and put into place to increase academic standards for CCC SAs (3C2A,
2013). Two significant SA eligibility measures were passed and implemented: 9 of the 12
required semester units taken by the SAs must count toward certification, graduation,
remediation, and/or transfer, and all SAs must have an individualized educational plan
(IEP) completed by a CCC counselor and documented on the Student Eligibility Report,
also known as Form-1 in the season of competition (Commission on Athletics [COA],
n.d).
With the intention of increasing graduation rates in 2003, the NCAA DI increased
the progress-toward-degree rule from 25/50/75% to 40/60/80%, indicating the units that
an SA must complete toward a degree. The percentage depends on the student’s year in
college or the number of full-time semesters completed. The greater the number of full-
time semesters completed, the greater the percentage of units that must be earned toward
a degree. For example, if a bachelor’s degree is 120 units and the SA has been enrolled
full time for four semesters, he or she is required to complete 40% of the total units
20

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

needed for the degree, i.e., a minimum 48 units toward the degree; if enrolled for six
semesters, the SA is required to complete 60%, i.e., a minimum 72 units toward the
degree. This rule was another response to the Knight Commission to ensure that SAs are
taking courses that will help them fulfill the requirements for graduation.
Wong (2006) found the 40/60/80% rule to be challenging and to have an adverse
impact on community college SAs. If a community college SA who is a non-qualifier can
accumulate 60 transferable units in 2 years, there is no adverse effect. Conversely,
frequently, in their first year, community college students take below college level
courses, have not chosen a major, or have not selected four-year college or university to
transfer to. With degree and major requirements varying from institution to institution,
the 40/60/80% rule can negatively impact SAs at community colleges who plan to
transfer and compete at a DI institution. Moreover, the number of units a community
college student must earn can exceed the number of units that can be transferred. The
40/60/80 rule could adversely impact an SA if the student needs to attend a community
college for 3 years. SAs completing a third year of community college and starting a
fourth year of full-time collegiate enrollment must have completed 60% of the degree
requirements (e.g., 72 units of a 120-semester unit degree program). By the fifth year,
80% of the degree requirements have to be fulfilled (Wong, 2006).
Cohen and Brawer (2003) published several editions of The American Community
College, but they too only mentioned intercollegiate athletics along with student
activities. More recent literature shows that intercollegiate athletics on a community
college campus generates revenue for the school and develops the students’ collegiate
experience (Casteñeda, 2004; Horton, 2009a; Mendoza, Horton, & Mendez, 2012;
21

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Williams & Pennington, 2006). Williams, Byrd and Pennington (2008) identified
intercollegiate athletics as a means of supporting access and opportunity for students at
the two-year institutions.
Other studies found that intercollegiate athletics at the community colleges
contribute to increased numbers of full-time enrolled students (FTES), both SAs and non-
athlete students (Casteñeda, 2004; Casteñeda, Katsinas, & Hardy, 2006). Horton (2009a)
found that intercollegiate athletics at the community colleges benefits campus life. He
explained that the experience in playing for an intercollegiate team adds to the overall
college experience of traditional-aged students. In his earlier work, Horton also identified
the open access of the community colleges as an opportunity for SAs to develop their
athletic skills, along with their social skills, academic skills, and increases their human
capital (2009b).
As SAs have developed their skills at the community colleges, the NCAA has
instituted quite a few policy changes over the last 5 years. In 2008, Proposition 16
increased the academic standards for SAs from those of Proposition 48 (Price, 2010;
Storch & Ohlson, 2009). The new NCAA rule required 16, instead of 14, core classes for
high schoolers, and a minimum GPA of 2.0 (Price, 2010). An athletic eligibility sliding
scale was also developed based on the core courses’ GPA with SAT or ACT scores. In
August 2009, the NCAA required all transfer students to complete six credits of English
and three credits of mathematics at a community college as part of the admission
requirements to athletically transfer to an NCAA institution.
As of 2011, three units of a science became an admission requirement. Most
recently, in 2012, the NCAA DI schools changed their minimum athletic transferable
22

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

GPA from 2.0 to 2.5 (NCAA, n.d.). Also in 2012, the 3C2A mandated that the IEP for an
SA be completed by a CCC counselor, prior to the first game of competition. An SA
without a completed IEP is not truly eligible to compete before documentation of the IEP
on the Form-1, and if the student does compete without an IEP on file, those games and
meets must be forfeited (3C2A, n.d.). All of these stringent academic requirements place
an additional strain on SAs’ ability to successfully accomplish their academic goals.
Characteristics of Student-Athletes at the Community Colleges
In previous studies, most community college SAs have been identified as first-
generation college students, students requiring remedial English and math, learning-
disabled students, or students undecided on an academic major. SAs are also likely to
come from an under-represented minority group (Brown, 2004; Hall, 2007; Horton,
2009a).
These student characteristics are typically associated with relatively low
persistence rates. In the late 1970s, student affairs professionals and administrators began
to identify the SA population as a unique population with special concerns and issues
(Shriberg & Brodzinski, 1984; Smith, 27, 2009). There has not been a substantial amount
of research done on institutional and individual factors that affect whether SAs complete
their educational goals at the community college level (Horton, 2009b; Knapp & Raney,
1988).
Student-Athletes vs. Non-Athlete Students
A few previous studies have compared SAs with non-athlete students to identify
any differences in academic performance and persistence between the two groups. Kanter
and Lewis (1991) examined 11 different CCCs to find any difference in educational goal
23

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

achievement by grade point average (GPA) between SAs and non-athlete students. They
found that the SAs completed a greater number of units but fewer transferable units per
year, and that their GPAs were slightly lower than the GPAs of non-athlete students.
However, the authors did find that male Black and Hispanic SAs had higher GPAs than
male Black and Hispanic non-student-athletes.
Carr, Kangas, and Anderson (1992) conducted a multi-institutional study to
investigate the influence of athletic participation and specialized student support
programs for Black males on their persistence through four semesters at two CCCs. They
found an increased level of social and academic integration due to participation in
intercollegiate athletics. They also reported that encouragement and mentorship provided
by athletic coaches, and other staff and faculty, increased retention rates for Black male
SAs compared to rates for Black non-athlete students.
A study published by Sawyer in 1993 examined retention rates for SAs and non-
athlete students who transferred to the California State University system within 5 years.
Sawyer (1993) found that the non-athlete students were better retained than the SAs. The
literature also supports the findings of Kanter and Lewis (1991), who showed that SAs
completed fewer transferrable units than non-athlete students and that the female athletes
had higher GPAs and completed more units than the male athletes (Sawyer, 1993).
Horton (2009b) completed a study comparing SAs with non-athlete students. He
found that SAs of color and female SAs took more units each semester and had higher
GPAs than non-athlete students with similar backgrounds and characteristics. Horton also
concluded that SAs from relatively low socioeconomic backgrounds earned fewer units
24

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

per semester, and their GPAs were lower than those of students from higher
socioeconomic backgrounds (2009b).
Academic Persistence of Student-Athletes
There has been little research on the effect of participation in intercollegiate
athletics and the academic persistence of SAs at the community college level (Knapp &
Raney, 1988; Horton, 2009b; Mendoza, Horton & Mendez, 2012; Thiss, 2009). In
addition, the existing literature does not identify key factors needed to support SAs and
increase their persistence toward their own academic goals (Druehl, 1992, Thiss, 2009;
Smith, 2009).
A study done by Hobneck, Mudge, & Turchi (2003) on a single-campus
community college showed that SAs were not prepared for the academic and athletic
rigors necessary for a successful first year in college. They found that 14% of the units
attempted by SAs resulted in a failing grade or that the SAs withdrew from the courses,
and 17% of the units attempted were in remedial courses. The researchers identified lack
of academic preparedness and an inflexible daily athletic schedule as challenges the SAs
faced in maintaining the minimum academic eligibility necessary to continue athletic
participation in their second year.
Numerous researchers have reported that SAs require specific, unique student
services to support pursuit of and success in their educational goals. Traditional student
services are insufficient in providing proper support for SAs (Ferrante et. al., 2002,
Kissinger & Watson, 2013, Thiss, 2009, Watt & Moore, 2011).
Thiss (2009) researched the availability of academic support services specifically
for SAs at the CCCs. He evaluated 84 different CCCs during academic years 2004-05,
25

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

2005-06, and 2006-07 to determine which athletic-specific academic support services
were utilized by SAs and which ones supported pursuit of their academic goals during
their first year at a CCC. The research suggests that there was a significant association
between availability of the support services specifically for SAs and their persistence.
The most significant relationship indentified in from the study was that between
Counselor and Advisor with and SAs’ persistence (2009).
History of the Role of the California Community College Counselor
For several decades, as higher education has become more of a necessity, the
community colleges have accommodated the diverse waves of students (Cross, 1983).
With the open door policy, counselors needed to adapt to the variety of students attending
the CCCs and help them meet their educational goals (Bundy & Benshoff, 2000; Cohen
& Brawer, 2003; Grub 2001; Orozco, Alvarez, & Gutkin, 2010; Sheldon, 2003).
Traditionally, counselors have taken the role of student advocate, and as such they have
contributed to the success of the community colleges as well as the junior college
movement in general (Coll, & Rice, 1993; Durodoye et al., 2000; Orozco et al., 2010).
The role of counseling was first documented in the 1920s. Leonard Koos (1927)
was the first to examine the role of counselors in the community colleges. His study
established counseling as a critical function for student success in junior college. Initially,
the college counselors provided career and personal guidance in addition to educational
guidance (Koos, 1927). These services were shown to reduce attrition by helping students
identify and accomplish their academic goals (Leonard, 2002; Pulliams, 1990). From
other studies the researchers found that community college counselors must be
encouraging and empathetic and must build a positive rapport with their students while
26

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

maintaining a strong sense of professional mission (Durodoye et al., 2000; Orozco et al.,
2010; Pulliams, 1990).
In the 1950s and the 1960s, the role of the community college counselor remained
relatively consistent, with an emphasis on providing students with personal counseling
and vocational guidance in addition to social and academic support (Pulliams, 1990).
During this time the community colleges separated from the high schools, and the CCC
counselors were given the title of faculty member.
Since the early 1960s, there have been significant studies, scholarly publications,
and theoretical models focusing on student retention in the community colleges. Tinto’s
(1975) theory on student departure is one of the models most referenced in student
attrition and retention studies. Tinto found that institutional characteristics affect
students’ persistence in college. The more socially and academically integrated a student
becomes while in college, the more likely the student will persist toward his or her
educational goal. Counselors are an essential component of students’ social integration
because counselors provide valuable information and serve as a resource for students
entering the CCC. Studies have shown that when immediate academic involvement and
social integration are established, students’ persistence in college increases (Astin, 1975,
1991, 1993; Cohen & Brawer, 2003; Grubb & Badway, 2005; Kuh; 2002; Lee, Olson,
Locke, Michelson, & Odes, 2009; Leonard, 2002; Mattanah, Ayers, Brand, Brooks,
Quimby, & McNary, 2010; Pascarella; 2006; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991; Tinto, 1975,
1987, 1998, 2006).
King (1993) also showed that academic advising is a vital factor for student
retention because it helps facilitate students’ integration into academic and social systems
27

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

while in college. Willett (2001) found that students who saw a counselor were more
likely than other students to persist. Orozco et al. (2010) found that CCC counselors are
highly influential in assisting students with their educational plans as they enter the
college. Pascarella and Terenzini (1977) discovered that faculty and student interactions
are important indicators of student persistence in college. Mattanah et al. (2010) reported
that students are more likely to make the college transition, focus on their studies, cope
with the increased academic demands, and succeed academically if they seek out support
from faculty and peers.
From the 1970s into the 1980s, the community college student population became
increasingly diverse as ethnic minorities, women, adults, part-time students, and
displaced workers began to enroll (Pulliams, 1990). As mentioned in Chapter One, these
non-traditional students often balanced multiple responsibilities in addition to facing
challenges that would affect their success in college (Boswell, 2004; Cox et al., 2009;
Leonard, 2002; Shulock & Moore, 2005b). This expanded counselors’ responsibilities to
meet students’ psychological and emotional needs, to impart to students the importance
of academic endeavor, and to assist students in understanding that the skills they develop
will help them accomplish their educational goals (Durodoye et al., 2000; Orozco et al.,
2010; Pulliams, 1990).
Because of the increase in enrollment in the 1980s, the community colleges
reinstated assessment tests, dismissal and probation policies, and general education
requirements (Pulliams, 1990). Counselors contribute their expertise related to each of
these areas by providing information, guidance, and educational planning to assist
students as they go through the system. The counselor is the first professional a student
28

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

comes into contact with when enrolling in a CCC. Counselors welcome the students onto
the campus and acknowledge and validate their educational goals (Bundy & Benshoff,
2000; CCCCO, 2005; Durodoye et al., 2000; Orozco et al., 2010; Pulliams, 1990).
Henriksen’s (1995) research revealed that students must feel welcomed when first
entering college; otherwise, they are likely to drop out. Henriksen’s data proved that
orientation and counseling are highly influential in terms of students becoming more
invested and successful while in college. Matriculation had increased persistence rates as
well as increased overall grade point averages (GPA) compared to students who did not
participate in the services (Henriksen, 1995). This supports Pascarella and Terenzini’s
(1991) theory that students’ individual quality of effort and level of involvement affect
the overall impact and students’ persistence in college.
In 1986, Assembly Bill 3, also known as the Seymour-Campbell Matriculation
Act, was enacted to provide annual funding to support CCC student counseling services
(Lowenthal, 2012; Smith, 2012). Matriculation is an accessible, on-going process
designed to help match interests, abilities, needs, and goals with the courses, programs,
and services offered at the college to help students attain success and achieve their
educational goals (Sheldon, 2003). Matriculation is a four-step process: (1) filing an
application to a particular college, (2) participating in assessment for educational
planning, (3) participating in new student orientation, and (4) meeting with a counselor to
create an educational plan that meets the student’s educational goal (ECC, 2012;
Pulliams, 1990). An evaluation of matriculation services by the chancellor’s office
proved that the services improved student outcomes in terms of persistence in college,
GPA, and retention (Henriksen, 1995).
29

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Often the low performing students, along with the undecided, are the ones who do
not see a counselor because they lack the cultural capital or they lack the ability to
navigate the college process. In a study in which community college students were
interviewed, Grubb (1996) identified limited resources, awkward schedules, and lack of
cultural capital as factors restricting some students from seeking counseling while
attending college. Lee et al., (2009) confirmed that the retention rates for students who
had seen a counselor were higher than the retention rates for students who had not seen a
counselor, proving that the relationship between a counseling encounter and the
probability of student retention was statistically significant. Bundy & Benshoff (2000)
found that if students were unable to receive the support they felt necessary, they would
withdraw or dropped out to attend another community college.
Community college counselors face responsibilities, duties, and pressures in
addition to the traditional role of counseling (Bundy & Benshoff, 2000; Coll & Rice,
1993; Durodoye et al., 2000; Keim, 1988). It is often challenging for counselors to be ‘all
things to all people’ (Carroll & Tarasuk, 1991, p. 34). While dealing with increased
enrollment, the counseling division must also identify effective strategies to increase
retention (Ashburn, 2007; Durodoye et al., 2000; Pulliams, 1990; Sheldon, 2003).
Significance of Athletic Counseling
As stated previously, counseling at the CCCs is a critical student service
component that supports students’ academic success perseverance as well as ultimate
success and persistence while in college. For SAs, the support and information provided
by the counselor is vital to their academic and athletic eligibility while attending a CCC
as well as their eligibility for transfer to a four-year institution.
30

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Specialized athletic counseling and support for SAs did not begin until 1983. In a
personal interview, Evans Roderick explained the history and evolution of athletic
counseling at the CCCs (personal communication, January 12, 2014). Prior to 1983, CCC
SAs did not have any specialized support, and there were no specific academic rules for
their eligibility to compete at the two-year level. Some SAs enrolled only in physical
education courses. The lack of academic requirements and specialized athletic counseling
made it easy for SAs to compete, but once their two-year eligibility was completed, they
were academically ineligible to transfer and compete at the four-year level, thus ending
their academic and athletic careers. With the support of the Mount San Antonio College
president, a former Mount San Antonio College coach, Evans Roderick, became the first
designated athletic counselor at the CCC level. He had the required graduate level degree
to take on this assignment and the previous intercollegiate background to identify key
ways to support the SA population.
In the fall of 1985, Roderick gained support from his mentor, Willie Wu, an SA
support services expert from USC’s athletic program. Wu encouraged Roderick to
become an active member of the National Association of Academic Advisors for
Athletics (N4A), a newly formed organization comprising mostly NCAA DI I members
and no community college members. As momentum picked up for the SA support
program at Mount San Antonio College, other CCCs took interest in providing additional
services such as athletic counseling for SAs. In the fall of 1986, Mount San Antonio
College hosted its first southern California SA support program symposium with 37
persons in attendance, including athletic directors, deans, assistant deans, and general
counselors. Without a set agenda, the meeting featured an open discussion about the trials
31

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

and tribulations of creating a successful SA support program. Shortly after the southern
California symposium, a northern California meeting was scheduled. This meeting had
39 attendees, CCC stakeholders similar to those who attended the southern meeting.
By fall 1987, the official California Community College Counselors Advisors
Academic Association for Athletics (3C4A) was established. Members included 18
CCCs, and at its peak membership reached 70 individuals (E. Roderick, personal
communication, January, 12, 2014). There are currently 64 members of the 3C4A (3C4A,
n.d.). The mission statement of the 3C4A is as follows:
This is an organization established in the State of California whose purpose is to
bring together individuals who provide academic counseling, advisement and
assistance for student-athletes at the community college level.
If you are concerned about the academic assistance provided for student-athletes
at your institution, or if it is your responsibility to provide them with that
assistance, then the CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE
COUNSELORS/ADVISORS ACADEMIC ASSOCIATION FOR ATHLETICS
(3C4A) is an organization for you. Please accept this as a personal invitation to
join a growing professional association that promotes you and your efforts on
behalf of the student-athlete.
The 3C4A is an affiliate organization recognized by the Commission on Athletics
(COA). In addition, the 3C4A has created and developed a close working
relationship with the NCAA and the National Association of Academic Advisors
for Athletics (N4A). The 3C4A will enhance the quality of education for the
student-athlete; provide information, new ideas, program development, a
32

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

professional structure, a political voice and an extensive network system. Your
role as a counselor will be greatly enhanced by your participation in this
organization
Your participation is absolutely vital in the development of an organization whose
purpose is to promote the educational concerns of the student-athlete (3C4A,
n.d.).
Knowledgeable, designated athletic counselors provide up-to-date information on
the continued changes to the eligibility rules and regulations for SAs to compete at the
two-year institutions and the four-year institutions (3C2A, n.d.). The 3C2A bylaws state
that as of 2011 all representatives who might have contact with SAs are required to
become certified by taking and passing, with a minimum score of 80%, a compliance
rules exam that covers the 3C2A Constitution and Bylaws. They are also required to sign
the Statement of In-Service Training, Form R-2 annually. All representatives who work
with SAs promise to adhere to the 3C2A Constitution and Bylaws and understand that
violations may result in penalties to the athletic program and the institution (3C2A, n.d.).
It is now a 3C2A eligibility requirement that all SAs have a counselor-completed
IEP on file. Prior to November 2012, the IEP was to be completed before the second
semester of attendance at the CCC, but as of November 2, 2012, all IEPs were required
prior to the first official competition to avoid forfeiture of games, meets, and other
competitions (3C2A, n.d.).
The entire intercollegiate athletics department of each two-year college depends
on the counselors to ensure that their SAs are academically eligible to compete for the
school. Not only is the IEP a requirement, it is an essential tool and guide for the SAs to
33

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

follow to ensure that they are completing the proper courses to maintain eligibility at the
CCC while meeting the requirements for certification, an associate degree, and/or transfer
to four-year NCAA DI, DII, DIII, or NAIA institution, or in many cases, to transfer for
academics (and not athletics) to a four-year university or college (Lowenthal, 2012;
3C2A, n.d). It is the athletic counselor’s responsibility to strategically plan the SA’s
coursework and course load. Often it is the athletic counselor that will identify and
advocate for an SA to greyshirt his or her initial year in college. Because SAs may not be
academically college-ready, the greyshirt provides them with the grace period they need
to catch up academically. Often a redshirt will also be utilized by the SA to preserve his
or her athletic eligibility; this is also a detailed strategy that an athletic counselor is
knowledgeable in when planning proper course work for the student (3C2A, n.d.).
Willoughby, Willoughby, and Moses (1991) found that support services
specifically for SAs contribute to their academic success. “The Task Force
Recommendations on Academic Performance of Student Athletes” by the 3C2A (1991)
identified the need for student services and recommended that the general matriculation
standards be communicated and adhered to within the intercollegiate athletic programs at
the CCCs. Smith (2009) stated that academic advising is directly linked to successful
transfer of the SAs from a community college to a four-year institution.
Storch and Ohlson (2009) suggested, “one of the leading factors of academic
success of today’s student-athlete at both two-year and four-year institutions is the
presence of a strong student service program” (p. 76). Storch and Ohlson (2009)
described a strong student services division as one of the most effective factors in the
recruitment and retention of SAs. An established need for athletic academic support
34

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

services has been noted repeatedly in the literature (Berg, 1989, 1992; Coleman & Baker,
1991; Cone & Rosenbaum, 1990; Gurney & Johnston, 1986; Hedlun, & Jones, 1970).
Conclusion
This study, with its emphasis on student services, athletic counseling in particular,
will add to the existing literature on CCC SAs. The literature supports the need for this
type of study. The next chapter explains how the study was actually carried out.
35

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Chapter Three: Methodology
Rationale for the Study
The researcher chose a mixed methods approach to thoroughly address the
research questions. The purpose of the study was to determine whether designated
athletic counselors, in comparison to general counselors, have a significant effect on
student-athletes (SAs) in terms of persistence toward and achievement of their
educational goals at the community college level.
Research on counseling specific to California Community College (CCC) SAs
and its effect on the persistence of these students in meeting their educational goals is
lacking. The results of this study and the data obtained will be useful in ultimately
providing resources and services that will increase SAs perseverance toward reaching
their benchmark goals, which for many would mean transfer to a four-year college as an
athlete eligible to compete in intercollegiate sports and perhaps attainment of a degree or
certificate.
This chapter reiterates the research questions and introduces the associated
hypothesis guiding the study. This is followed by a description of the study population
and research sample. The mixed methods approach to the study questions is summarized.
The chapter concludes with an explanation of how the data were collected and analyzed.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
Information that was obtained through structured qualitative interviews with key
athletics department personnel, information that was obtained from SAs via a
questionnaire designed by the researcher, and data showing academic achievements of
SAs were analyzed to answer the following research questions:
36

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

1. What are the best practices and most useful student services specific to counseling
SAs at the CCCs?
2. Do designated, specialized athletic counselors at the CCCs support and thereby
enhance educational outcomes for SAs?
To answer these research questions, a research hypothesis was tested.
Research Hypothesis
In the previous chapter, we saw that the literature pertaining to student services,
counseling in particular, leaves the effects of such counseling on SAs’ realization of their
academic goals unclear. Literature on academic counseling for SAs enrolled at the CCCs
is extremely limited. Based on the different and limited findings reported from previous
research on the influence of student services on SAs’ completion of their educational
goals, the following hypothesis is proposed and its corresponding null hypothesis is
shown:
H1: The percentage of educational goals, i.e., attainment of certificates and
degrees and/or transfers to four-year institutions, met by SAs at CCCs that have a
designated academic athletic counselor is greater than the percentage of educational goals
met by SAs at CCCs without a designated academic athletic counselor.
H0: The percentage of educational goals, i.e., attainment of certificates and
degrees and/or transfers to four-year institutions, met by SAs at CCCs that have a
designated academic athletic counselor does not differ from the percentage of educational
goals met by SAs at CCCs without a designated academic athletic counselor.
Population and Sample
37

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

The population of interest is the entire CCCS SA population. To draw a study
sample, the researcher identified two CCCs that are within the CCCS and that have
intercollegiate athletic programs. For the sake of anonymity and at the request of both
institutions’ institutional research offices, both colleges are referred to by pseudonyms.
Accordingly, College X is the identified CCC that has a designated athletic counselor,
and College Y is the identified CCC that does not have a designated athletic counselor.
College X has 21 intercollegiate athletic teams, and College Y has 12.
College X’s SA population is generally above 500, and College Y’s SA
population is approximately 300. College X has one athletic director, 19 head coaches,
and 26 assistant coaches, and College Y has one athletic director, 16 head coaches, and
30 assistant coaches (Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE), 2013). College X has 28
full-time counselors, three of whom devote 50% of their time serving as designated
athletic counselors. Athletic counseling has existed at College X since 1993. College Y
has 23 full-time counselors, referred to as general counselors, none of which is a
designated athletic counselor.
IRB Approval
Prior to commencement of the study, the mixed methods study protocol, including
the plan to conduct interviews with key athletics personnel at the two colleges, the plan to
distribute questionnaires to currently enrolled SAs at the two colleges, and the gathering
of cross-sectional data from the two colleges, was submitted to the University of
Southern California Institutional Review Board (USC IRB) for approval. Both College X
and College Y have specialized research departments that focus solely on gathering data
upon request. Thus, once the USC IRB gave its approval, an IRB approval form was
38

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

submitted to the respective college Institutional Research offices. Once granted approval
by these offices, the researcher submitted a Research Request Form (Appendix A) to
each. The completed Research Request Forms were identical, with the exception of the
name of the college. The data requested are summarized below (see Quantitative
Research). Interviews with athletic personnel were also scheduled.
Qualitative Research
Qualitative research was conducted for a comprehensive understanding of the
complexities of the SA population (Creswell, 2009). The qualitative research involved an
interview-based survey of athletics personnel at both colleges and a questionnaire-based
survey of SAs at both colleges. In general, the athletics personnel interviews were
intended to provide the researcher with an insider perspective, giving the researcher some
insight into the setting being investigated (Patton, 2002). The interview questions
(Appendix B) for this study were open-ended questions developed with the research
questions in mind. The SA questionnaires (Appendix C) were closed-ended and intended
to provide the researcher with information on SAs’ use of student services, especially
counseling services, and to determine whether SAs consider the services provided to be
effective in supporting persistence toward their academic goals.
Interviews and Analysis of the Interview Responses. In general, the athletics
personnel chosen for interview were athletics department members who play key roles in
athletics at either of the two institutions and were thus considered by the researcher to
have the most direct contact with the SA population. These were department
administrators, coaching faculty, counseling faculty, and athletic classified staff at the
39

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

two institutions. These personnel are collectively referred to herein as athletic staff or
simply staff. The personal identities of these staff will remain confidential.
Specifically, the athletic staff interviewees consisted of the dean of health
sciences and athletics from College X, athletic directors of both institutions, coaches,
designated athletic counselors from College X, a general counselor from College Y, and
athletic eligibility specialists from both institutions. The interviews were conducted
within a 2-week period in February 2014. All of the interviews were done either in-
person, over the telephone, or via email. The telephone and in-person interviews ranged
from 30 minutes to over an hour. All interviews were conducted one-on-one by the
researcher to determine which student services the staff identify as being helpful toward
promoting SAs’ educational goals. In the interviews, an emphasis was placed on
counseling to identify whether there is a qualitative difference between designated
athletic counselors and general counselors in terms of the persistence of SAs toward
achieving their educational goals.
The open-ended questions allowed the interviewees to provide in-depth responses
that encapsulated their opinions, perceptions, experiences, and knowledge (Patton, 2002).
Notes were taken, the interviews were recorded, and the recorded interviews were
transcribed. Each interviewee was given the opportunity to review the transcribed version
of his or her individual interview.
The interviews were recorded and transcribed, and the interview responses were
coded. A content analysis was then performed on the interview responses to identify
themes that were embodied in the research questions. The researcher looked for any
common themes indicating whether or not designated athletic counseling is deemed a
40

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

valuable student service. Some of the interviews required follow-up for clarification and
confirmation of some of the recurring themes.
Distribution and Collection of SA Questionnaires. The SAs to whom
questionnaires were distributed were first-year, second-year, third-year, fourth-year, and
fifth-year SAs from each of the two colleges. The questionnaires were distributed
between April 21 and April 29, 2014. The researcher handed them out to SAs in person,
to 65 SAs at College X and to 40 SAs at College Y. The intention was to survey a
minimum of 30 SAs at each college. The questionnaire items covered each SA’s
educational goal, the counseling services utilized by the SA and the frequency of
utilization, and the SA’s subjective assessment of athletic counselors’ and/or general
counselors’ contribution to attainment of their educational goals. Other items on the
questionnaire were related to other student services each of the two colleges provides.
Most questions were followed by several options from which SAs could select one or
more responses, and some questions were followed by a place for the respondents to
supply details. The SAs were asked to fill out the questionnaires “on the spot.” It took
between 10 and 20 minutes for SAs to fill them out, and they were returned to the
researcher in person upon completion.
Most of the SAs who were surveyed had not yet completed their community
college careers, and thus educational outcomes in this group of SAs could not be
ascertained.
Quantitative Research
The Institutional Research office at each campus was asked to provide certificate
and degree completion rates as well as four-year college transfer rates for four different
41

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

SA cohorts: SAs who enrolled in academic year 2009-2010, in 2010-2011, in 2011-2012,
and in 2012-2013. These rates were taken as educational outcomes. The researcher
intended to capture the greatest possible number of educational outcomes accomplished
by SAs at each of the two institutions.
For homogeneity between the SA population samples, this request for data was
limited to SAs competing on teams that were common to both schools and did not
include the entire SA population at both schools. So, for example, College X has men’s
and women’s intercollegiate volleyball teams, but College Y does not. Thus, the data
requested from the Institutional Research offices excluded data for SAs who participate
only in volleyball.
These SAs were chosen for quantitative analysis of actual goal achievement of
SAs in general because goal achievement could not be ascertained for the SAs surveyed
via questionnaire. The surveyed SAs had not yet reached the end of their community
college careers.
Both Institutional Research offices were asked in addition to provide placement
test scores for reading, writing, and math, and any documentation of certificate
completion, degree completion, and/or transfer for the 2009-2010, 2010-11, 2011-12, and
2012-13 SA cohorts. Many SAs who were asked to complete questionnaires were
members of one of these cohorts.
Data Analysis
The responses obtained from the SA questionnaires were coded, and both the
coded responses and quantitative data obtained from the Institutional Research office at
each college were analyzed by descriptive statistics. Student services utilized by College
42

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

X and College Y SAs and those identified as useful by College X and College Y SAs
were then subjected to chi-square test or t-test, as appropriate. Frequencies of student
services identified from the SA questionnaire were analyzed to answer Research
Question #1.
The coded responses to the SA questionnaires were labeled and input into SPSS
for analysis. Chi-square tests were used to identify any significant association between
SAs’ responses to the questionnaire and the colleges in which they were enrolled, in other
words, whether there was any association between the “benefit” reported by SAs and
provision of an athletic counselor (College X) or general counselor (College Y). SAs use
of student services other than counseling was analyzed according to the frequencies of
use. Differences in the frequencies of the specific student services used were analyzed by
independent sample t-test.
Independent Variables.
The independent variables entered into quantitative analysis were the two types of
colleges, as represented by College X (college with specialized athletic counselors) and
College Y (college with general counselors but no specialized athletic counselors). The
primary purpose of this study was to identify whether counselors have an effect on
educational outcomes pertaining specifically to SAs at each of two CCC colleges; thus,
comparing mean completion rates were compared between the two schools.
Dependent Variables.
Educational outcomes (quantitative data provided by the Institutional Research offices)
for SAs enrolled between academic years 2010-2011 and 2012-2013 were tallied according to
category, and differences in completion rates between the two colleges were analyzed.
43

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

All statistical analyses were performed with use of the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS), version 21. The study-wide level of significance was set at alpha = .05 a priori.
Conclusion
The findings generated by this study are intended to provide a better understanding of the
current trends in academic persistence, degree completion, and university transfer of SAs in the
CCCS. Most importantly, the findings are intended to clarify the role played by athletic
counselors vs. general counselors in these trends.

44

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Chapter Four: Research Results
Overview
The purpose of this mixed methods study was twofold: to identify the practices and
student services that best support California Community College student-athletes (CCC SAs) in
achieving their educational goals and to determine whether designated, specialized athletic
counselors at the CCCs support and thereby enhance educational outcomes for SAs. Qualitative
and quantitative data were collected and analyzed to answer the research questions, and results
are presented here.
Population Samples
The population samples were drawn from two CCCs (referred to as College X and
College Y) with intercollegiate athletics programs. The two CCCs were chosen as representative
colleges in the California Community College System (CCCS), with College X representing
those that have a dedicated athletic counselor and College Y representing those that do not.
College X and College Y compete in the same athletic conference and follow the same
conference constitution and by-laws.
College X is the sole CCC in its district and has a total enrollment of 24,463 students. Of
these students, 31% are full-time attendees and 69% are part-time attendees. Approximately 41%
identify themselves as Latino, 18% as African American, 17% as White, and 14% as Asian; 3%
identify with two or more racial/ethnic groups, as race/ethnicity unknown, or as non-resident
alien, and 1% identify themselves as Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. Of the students
attending College X, 52% are female and 48% are male; 67% are 24 years of age or younger,
with the remaining 33% aged 25 years or over (NCES, 2014).
45

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

College Y is the sole CCC in its district and has a total enrollment of 7,510 students. Of
these students, 23% are full-time attendees and 77% are part-time attendees. Approximately 44%
identify themselves as Latino, 40% as African American, 4% as White, and 6% as Asian; 4%
identify with two or more racial/ethnic groups, as race/ethnicity unknown, or as non-resident
alien. Of the students attending College Y, 65% are female and 35% are male; 58% are 24 years
of age or younger, with the remaining 42% aged 25 years or over (NCES, 2014).
As noted in Chapter Three, College X has 21 intercollegiate athletics teams, and College
Y has 12. Each year, there are more than 500 SAs attending College X, and there are nearly 300
SAs attending College Y. Although the number of SAs attending College Y is smaller, the
percentage (4%) is greater than the percentage attending College X (2%).
The population sample from each college consisted exclusively of SAs from men’s and
women’s basketball, men’s football, men’s and women’s soccer, men’s baseball, men’s softball,
men’s and women’s track and field, men’s and women’s cross country, and women’s badminton
teams. The population samples were derived from these teams because these are the
intercollegiate teams the two schools have in common. Over the 4 years for which SA cohort
data were obtained, the number of SAs at College X averaged 356 individuals and the number of
SAs at College Y averaged 280. These numbers appear low in relation to the total number of SAs
attending each school because these numbers are limited to the cohort SAs who participated the
sports named above.
Data Obtained
Data for the study were obtained by the researcher from three different sources: from
athletics staff at the two colleges via personal interview, from currently enrolled SAs at the two
colleges via questionnaire, and from the Institutional Research offices at the two colleges.
46

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Eight athletics staff from College X were interviewed, and five athletics staff from
College Y were interviewed (Appendix D). Of the original 65 SA questionnaires handed out at
College X, 50 completed questionnaires were given back to the researcher for a return rate of
77%, and of the original 40 SA questionnaires handed out a College Y, 31 completed
questionnaires were given back for a return rate of 78%. As requested, the Institutional Research
offices provided data differentiating between degree, certificate, and/or transfer attainment for
cohort SAs identified by academic years 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, and 2012-2013. As
noted above, the cohorts for which these data were obtained were made up of SAs who
participated in the sports listed above. In addition, these offices provided initial reading, writing,
and math placement test scores of cohort SAs from the same academic years. These cohorts
included all SAs enrolled during those academic years, no matter what sport they participated in.
The simple flowchart below showing the two study research questions; the information
collected to answer these questions; and the pertinent interview questions, items, and data will
guide readers through presentation of the study results.

Study Findings
Research Question #1: What are the best practices and most useful student services specific
to counseling SAs at the CCCs?
Research
Question 1
Athletic
Personnel
Interviews
SA
Questionnaire

Athletic
Personnel
Interviews
SA
Questionnaire
Research
Question 2
Institutional
Research Data
Qs 5, 6, 8 Item 3 Qs 7, 8, 9 Items 3, 4,5, 6, 7
Remedial placement rates
Goal completion rates
47

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Information obtained from interviews with athletics personnel
The first analysis performed to answer this question was a content analysis of the 13
interviews conducted with athletics personnel. Athletics personnel at both colleges identified
comprehensive athletic counseling and access to an athletic counselor as the best practice and
most useful service. Although none of the interviewees used the word comprehensive
specifically, all understood the specific athletic counseling to be counseling to ensure that SAs
complete their IEPs, to ensure that SAs questions and concerns regarding academic eligibility are
properly and adequately addressed, and to ensure that SAs have the support and guidance they
need to transfer to a four-year school as an academically eligible intercollegiate athlete. In
addition, interviewees from College X noted and elaborated on a specific service they provide:
athletic counselor-initiated registration labs held on campus. Three themes emerged.
Theme One: Importance of comprehensive, designated athletic counseling—All
interviewees from College X reported that access to comprehensive athletic counseling is key to
equipping SAs with the proper information on what courses they need to take, the grades they
need to achieve, what their athletic and academic options are at the two-year college and four-
year college and university levels, including whether they are potential candidates for athletic
recruitment and scholarships. A coach at College X emphasized the need for SAs to meet with a
specialized counselor to discuss their plans for transfer, noting that he actively encourages SAs
to do so. The following interview response typifies the viewpoint of College X athletics
personnel:
Although College Y does not have a designated athletic counselor, the athletics staff
interviewees reported that having a counselor that understands athletic-academic eligibility for
both two-year and four-year colleges is vital for SAs’ to persist towards their educational goals.
48

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Currently the SAs at College Y must meet with a general counselor to be eligible to compete at
the two-year level. Often, it is difficult to meet with a general counselor, and often the general
counselors are ill equipped to advise SAs on athletic eligibility rules and regulations, as well as
SA transfer requirements. This creates additional challenges for SAs in attempting to meet their
educational goals. The eligibility specialist and the coaches at College Y often pick up the slack
by helping SAs determine which classes they should take. Although it is not their role to do so,
they feel responsible to assist their SAs in knowing whether they are eligible to apply for athletic
scholarships because these students are not getting the proper guidance from the general
counselors.
The athletic eligibility specialist, the general counselor, and the athletic director from
College Y provided detailed, real-life examples showing that although SAs at the college are
athletically competitive and are being recruited to DI schools, not all of these SAs meet
academic-athletic eligibility requirements and are thus not actually eligible to attend a DI school
or eligible to take advantage of potential scholarship opportunities. For example, one College Y
interviewee stated the following:
Counseling an athlete can be very different than counseling a general student. None of
the counselors are knowledgeable in the detailed rules and requirements for students who
play sports at our college and plan to transfer and play at a university. It would be great if
there were a counselor for this population to work with—to ensure they succeed and take
the proper classes to transfer. I do know the requirements can be just as complicated,
intricate, and detailed as academic transfer requirements. (College Y General Counselor,
personal communication, August 19, 2014)
49

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

In summary, the interviewees from both institutions acknowledged that having
comprehensive, designated athletic counselors is a critical student service for SAs. College X
views their athletic counselors as a valuable resource, and College Y vocalizes a need to have an
athletic counselor for their SAs.
Theme Two: Importance of access to an athletic counselor—The interviewees from
College X emphasized that an accessible athletic counselor is vital for SAs’ success in meeting
their educational goals. They explained that at College X there is no need for SAs to schedule
appointments long in advance. Whereas non-SAs at College X are required to book appointments
online 1 week in advance, SAs can see an athletic counselor immediately or are granted an
appointment within just a few days. The appointment process operates on a first-come first-
served basis, and available appointment slots often book up quickly, especially during peak
periods.
The interviewees from College Y explained that because College Y does not have an
athletic counselor, College Y SAs must schedule appointments with a general counselor in the
same way that non-SAs schedule counseling appointments— online, in-person, or over the phone
and 1 week in advance. With a counselor to student ratio of 1 to 769, most SAs find it somewhat
difficult to see a counselor for assistance. Often when an SA meets with a general counselor, the
counselor provides generic information without informing the SA of specific requirements for
athletic eligibility, transfer to a four-year school, and scholarship awards.
According to the interviewees from College X, the counseling system there allows SAs to
seek out an athletic counselor as needed and at their own convenience. The SAS can meet the
counselor quickly if necessary. Several of the athletics personnel interviewed at College X
50

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

described the athletic counseling system as “vital,” “accessible,” “convenient,” “flexible,” and
“immediate.” One interviewee stated the following:
I think their accessibility and role are vital for student-athletes. If there is an eligibility
issue, I can contact one of the athletic counselors to review the situation and identify what
the academic needs are for the student-athletes. I can also send the student immediately to
meet with the athletic counselor. (College X Eligibility Specialist, personal
communication, February 21, 2014)
In summary, the interviews revealed the critical importance placed on athletic counseling
by all athletics personnel who are aware of the functional link between the athletic counselors
and the SAs. Athletic counseling is a student service that provides support, clarity, and success
when it comes to SAs completing their educational and athletic goals. Whether the full benefits
of such counseling can be reaped by SAs depends on the accessibility of athletic counselors.
Thus, accessibility is key to an effective system a clear disparity between the two types of
counseling systems is evident, and that the importance placed upon specialized athletic
counseling by athletics faculty and staff who serve as or alongside specialized athletic counselors
is noteworthy.
Theme Three: Usefulness of counselor-initiated registration labs—Nearly two thirds of
College X staff listed the athletic counselor-initiated registration labs as the best practice and
most useful service. This type of service does not exist at College Y. However, the athletic
counselors at College X organize registration labs in one of the on-campus computer labs.
Responses such as the following summarized interviewees’ point of view:
Some of the student-athletes do not have access to a computer or they may not know how
to register for classes. (College X Coach, personal communication, February 6, 2014)
51

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

The athletic counselors organized the labs to optimize students’ access to counselors
during the peak registration time. Instead of several student-athletes waiting outside the
counselors’ offices for assistance, they can use the lab to start registering themselves into
classes, work with other student-athletes to pick classes. (College X Athletic Counselor,
personal communication, February 11, 2014)
The interviewees clarified that SAs at both colleges are given priority registration. This
means SA are given a few days to register for classes before the majority of the general student
population registers. This is granted to help SAs meet their educational goals despite their
rigorous athletic schedules.
Registration is typically a peak period for all counselors due to the high counselor to
student ratio of 1 to 889 at College X and 1 to 769 at College Y (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2014). The athletic counselors at College X take full advantage of priority registration
by making themselves fully available to SAs during that time and by avoiding the need to repeat
the sharing of information on a student-by-student basis. Thus, they host these registration labs.
The information gathered from the interviews of athletics personnel at College X showed this
particular counseling practice to be especially helpful to SAs by informing them of their options
and by helping them select the classes they need to achieve their educational goals in a timely
manner.
Information obtained from SA questionnaires
The second analysis performed to answer Research Question #1 was an analysis of the
data collected from the SA questionnaires. SAs from College X identified athletic counseling as
a well-utilized and beneficial counseling service. Ninety-four percent of the SAs from College X
reported meeting with an athletic counselor, and 98% of those SAs reported that the athletic
52

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

counselor was helpful. Thirty-four percent of the College X SAs identified both athletic
counseling and academic counseling as the reason for meeting with the athletic counselor, 31.9%
identified only academic counseling, and 29.8% identified only athletic counseling as the reason
for meeting with the athletic counselor.
The SA questionnaire was also used to determine the top five student services used. In
contrast, SAs at College Y identified general counseling, transfer counseling, financial aid
counseling, career counseling and EOPS counseling as a well-utilized and beneficial student
service. However, this is in the absence of a specialized athletic counselor.
The list below shows the top five student services used at College X and at College Y, as
indicated on the questionnaires returned by SAs from each school. Notably, at College X,
athletic counseling and registration labs ranked highest, with 47 of the 50 SAs reporting that they
had used these two services. Use of these two particular services by almost all of the SAs is
consistent with the themes identified from the staff interviews.
College X

College Y
Athletic counseling 47/50 General counseling 21/31
Registration labs 47/50 Transfer counseling 12/31
Financial aid counseling 23/50 Financial Aid counseling 25/31
Student Resource Center 10/50 Career counseling 8/31
Transfer counseling 8/50 EOPS counseling 4/31
Note. EOPS = Extended Opportunity Program and Services.
Responses to the SA questionnaires from both schools point to counseling as the best
practice and most useful student service. Not all counseling services are created equal, however.
Of the types of counseling services that can be offered, specialized athletic counseling that
includes attention paid to eligibility rules and regulations at the two-year and four-year college
levels is particularly beneficial to SAs who plan to transfer as academically eligible athletes, and
ready access to counselors who can provide this type of support is critical.
53

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

From the information collected from both the interviews and the SA questionnaire, it is
clear that counseling is an important student service that provides valuable assistance to SAs.
Specialized athletic counseling is of utmost importance in terms of SAs’ realization of their
combined academic and athletic goals. Both institutions describe an athletic counselor as a vital
resource for SAs. An athletic counselor’s knowledge of SA eligibility and transfer and
scholarship opportunities exceeds that of the general counselor and is identified by this study as
particularly helpful to SAs. The services provided by athletic counselors are especially tailored to
the needs of SAs, and the access SAs are given to proper guidance during their time at a CCC is
considered invaluable.
Research Question #2: Do designated, specialized athletic counselors at the CCCs support
and thereby enhance educational outcomes for SAs?
Information obtained from interviews with athletics personnel
The first analysis performed to answer Research Question #2 was again a content
analysis of the 13 interviews conducted with athletics staff. Three interview questions
specifically addressed Research Question #2. The first was question 7: Does your college
have a designated athletic counselor? If yes, please explain how you think their role is
more or less helpful than that of general counselors when working with student-athletes.
If no, whom do student-athletes see to get the mandated educational plan for eligibility,
and please explain how you think their role is more or less helpful when working with
student-athletes (See Appendix B).
The second was question 8: In your experience please describe any best practices
and most useful student services specific to counseling student-athletes. (See Appendix
B).
54

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

The third was question 9: In your opinion, do the specialized, designated athletic
counselors provided by some community colleges, in comparison to the general student
counselors provided by other community colleges, better support the educational goals of
student-athletes and thus ensure better outcomes? Please explain why or why not. (See
Appendix B). Four themes emerged:
Theme One: Athletic counselors are remarkably helpful and singularly qualified
to assist SAs. Previous chapters have gone into extensive detail to the wide breadth of
complex knowledge that is required when working with SA. The eligibility as well as
compliance rules and regulations for SA to compete at the two-year and four-year
colleges are constantly changing. So that the CCC can stay abreast of these changes and
properly assist SAs with meeting their educational goals, a designated athletic counselor
should be mandatory. The following response to question 7 highlights this point:
Since I started, I have seen the need and have addressed that need with
supplementary counseling support that is paired with eligibility requirements. The
two go hand-in-hand; a trained counselor would have the experience in dealing
with both. (College Y Athletic Director, personal communication, February 12,
2014).
The registration labs organized at College X by the athletic counselors serve as a
hub for SAs where they can register for classes, complete an IEP with an athletic
counselor, and review degree, certificate, and graduation requirements. These labs also
give SAs the opportunity to work together planning their upcoming semester schedules.
Often, coaches accompany their entire team to the registration lab in preparation for the
upcoming school term. The interviewees commented in question 8 that registration labs
55

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

create a sense of community, increase student engagement and self-efficacy, and ensure
that the SAs are registering for classes that will allow them to meet their educational
goals.
The following response to question 8 illustrates this point:
The registration labs organized by counselors are essential for maximizing SAs’
opportunities to utilize priority registration while also confirming with a counselor that
they are taking the correct courses to meet their educational goals. (College X Coach,
personal communication, February 6, 2014)
The interviewees reported that designated athletic counselors are more informed
and better equipped to assist SAs in accomplishing their educational goals. In response to
question 9, one interviewee stated the following:
I believe right now our current counselors are doing a huge disservice to our
student population and have impacted their availability to transfer and accept
scholarships based on this lack of knowledge. (College Y Athletic Eligibility
Specialist, personal communication, February 12, 2014)
Another put it as follows:
I believe they [athletic counselors] increase the educational outcomes for student-athletes.
They know the system [and] know the individuals at the next level. Relationships have
been built and cultivated. They reinforce the student-athletes’ engagement and
persistence. (College X Dean of Health Sciences and Athletics, personal communication,
February 12, 2014)
Overall, according to the responses of the interviewees to questions 7, 8, and 9, athletic
counselors are seen as helpful and viewed to be more qualified than general counselors to work
56

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

with SAs. Their in-depth, practical knowledge of eligibility and compliance regulations exceeds
the practical knowledge of the general counselors.
Theme Two: Athletic counselors are engaged and establish strong relationships
with SAs. According to the responses to question 7, designated athletic counselors are
seen to provide SAs with continuity, guidance, motivation, and trust.
The following response to question 9 further illustrates this theme, as the
interviewees from College X see the athletic counselors as being engaged, understanding
of the unique challenges of the SA population, and knowledgeable of the strict rules and
regulations surrounding eligibility, transfer, and scholarship. The following College Y
response to question 7 illustrates how the deficient athletic counseling can adversely
affect SAs:
Without these specialty services, our students lack the necessary support they
need to be successful student-athletes and earn scholarships for their talent.
(College Y Eligibility Specialist, personal communication, February 12, 2014)
The interview responses describe the benefits, or at least the perceived benefits, a
school gains by having a designated athletic counselor who works with SAs. That
counselor establishes rapport with the SAs and in so doing assists them with the intricate
academic requirements they must meet to achieve their educational goals.
Theme Three: Athletic counselors add to the framework of accountability. Being
up-to-date in their knowledge of eligibility requirements and as partial stakeholders in
SAs’ success, designated athletic counselors provide SAs with the information they need
to accomplish their educational goals. The interviewees believe that athletic counselors
57

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

become an additional accountability factor by giving SAs a proper academic road map to
follow.
The following response to question 9, given by a College Y interviewee who
works with SAs in the absence of a specialized athletic counselor, expressed the need for
the kind of accountability that can be provided by an athletic counselor:
Yes, we have to set up higher standards and better support services. I use to teach
human development classes to student-athletes. I expected them to learn 85% of
the material I provided them. Other general counselors didn’t expect as much, but
I felt that if my expectations of them were higher, then learning outcomes would
increase. But we still need that additional athletic counseling expertise. (College
Y General Counselor, personal communication, August 14, 2014)
Increased accountability toward a goal is critical. The sense of accountability
provided by athletic counselors should prove to support and increase SAs educational
outcomes. With some of the interviewees highlighting athletic counseling as an increased
accountability measure for SAs, it becomes evident that specialized athletic counselors do
indeed support and thereby enhance educational outcomes for SAs. This conjecture is
reinforced by the Institutional Research data presented later in this chapter.
Theme Four: General counselors are not qualified to assist SAs with their
educational goals, which are based on eligibility requirements, and can even impede
their progress. Although general counselors provide a valuable student service, an
obstacle arises when general counselors who are not familiar with athletic eligibility and
compliance rules work with SAs. According to the interviews, SAs that meet exclusively
58

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

with general counselors to obtain help with eligibility are often misinformed and
misguided. The following responses to question 7 illustrate this point:
General counselors can in no fashion begin to understand these rules and properly
counsel student-athletes. A student-athlete’s athletic future can be severely
hampered by wrong counseling only because the counselor is not familiar with the
rules. (College X Athletic Counselor, personal communication, February 20,
2014)
The general counselors don’t take the time to go over eligibility requirements.
They need a counselor in their department—physically—in the department.
(College Y General Counselor, personal communication, August 19, 2014)
When general counseling is the only option at a particular school like College Y,
the interviewees explain that the SAs will often seek guidance from other athletics
personnel with whom they have established a rapport. A particularly informative
response came from the eligibility specialist at College Y, who expressed frustration
when explaining that in some situations SAs were held back from completing their
educational goals because of the misinformation given to them by the general counselor.
The following response to question 9 illustrates this point:
I believe right now our current counselors are doing a huge disservice to our
student population. (College Y Athletic Director, personal communication,
February 12, 2014)
It is appropriate for SAs, like the general student population, to have access to
general counselors for non-athletic-specific counseling. However SAs need an informed,
59

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

designated athletic counselor to review their athletic eligibility and help them reach their
educational goals.
Information obtained from SA questionnaires
The second analysis performed to answer Research Question #2 was a
comparison of the SAs’ responses to questionnaire item 1 against the cohort SA
certificate completion, degree completion, and four-year college transfer rates provided
by the two offices of Institutional Research. In response to item 1, What is your
educational goal?, 100% of the SA respondents at both colleges reported transfer to a
four-year college or university and/or earning a degree and/or certificate as their goal.
The breakdowns in educations goals reported by SAs at College X and College Y are
shown in detail on Table 1. The table shows that the SA population samples from College
X and College Y had comparable educational goals.
Table 1. Educational Goals Reported by SAs at College X and College Y
College X College Y
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
Degree (D)
6 12
4 12.9
Certificate (C) 0 0 1 3.2
Transfer (T)
26 52
16 51.6
D+C
1 2
1 3.2
D+T
14 28
9 29
D+C+T
3 6
0 0
Total 50 100 31 100

Information obtained from the cohort data
The researcher investigated how well the educational outcomes for the SA cohorts
(2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013 cohorts) reflect the expressed goals of
the SAs who completed the questionnaires. The educational outcomes were first
compared between the two colleges and analyzed for any statistical difference. Notably,
60

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

there were greater percentages of specific outcomes realized at College X than at College
Y for all four cohorts. That is, a significantly higher percentage of College X cohort SAs
(vs. College Y cohort SAs) completed a certificate, earned a degree, and/or transferred to
a four-year college or university. The completion rates in each category (certificate,
degree, transfer) were consistently higher for SAs at College X than for SAs at College Y
(Table 2).
Table 2. Educational Outcomes for Cohort SAs at College X and College Y
Outcome
2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013
X Y X Y X Y X Y
n=382 n=228 n=356 n=272 n=332 n=298 n=352 n=321
Degree 24% 15.30% 23.30% 14% 17.70% 10.40% 0.08% 0.04
Certificate 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% 0 0.01% 0 <0.01% <0.01%
Transfer 36.60% 20.60% 43% 20.60% 34.30% 18.10% 15.60% 0.08
Note. The percentages of goals completed decrease as the cohorts become more recent. This is because the 2009-
2010 SAs have had more time than the 2010-2011 SAs to complete their goals, and so on. The 2012-2013 SAs have
had only 1 year to complete their goals. Data were provided by the offices of Institutional Research.

Also shedding light on Research Question #2 are the percentages of cohort SAs shown
(Table 3) to require remedial reading, writing, and math courses. Placement scores for SAs at the
two colleges were comparable for math. Scores for SAs at the two colleges were farther part for
reading and writing than for math, but taken together the scores indicate that the academic
achievement of SAs at the two schools at the time of initial enrollment was similar. The
dissimilar definitive achievement rates suggest that College X is doing something that College Y
is not doing to help its SAs persist toward their educational goals.
Table 3. Cohort SAs Requiring Remedial Courses at College X and College Y
Course
2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013
X Y X Y X Y X Y
Remedial Reading 50.9 64.3 46.3 71.8 46.8 58.6 47.6 53.3
Remedial Writing 46.5 41.7 42.9 48.5 38.9 25.8 65.3 33.3
Remedial Math 60.5 67.0 67.3 68.0 57.9 59.2 65.8 60.1
Note. Numbers shown are the percentages of SAs from each cohort requiring a remedial course. Data were provided
by the offices of Institutional Research.

61

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Shedding further light on this question is the fact that 92% of SA questionnaire
respondents from College X and 93.5% from College Y reported planning to transfer to a
four-year college or university as an academically eligible athlete. When asked if their
counselor went over athletic eligibility for a four-year college, 82.6% of the SAs from
College X responded “yes”; however, only 3.8% of the respondents from College Y
responded “yes.” With such significant percentages of the population samples indicating
that their goal is to transfer as academically eligible athletes, failure of counselors to
review four-year eligibility places SAs at College Y at a disadvantage when they need to
meet the academic eligibility requirements for transfer as an athlete.
SAs’ responses to questionnaire item 5, Do you think athletic/general counseling
has helped? (YES/NO), were analyzed statistically. Of the 51 College X respondents, 50
(98%) reported that athletic counseling was helpful, whereas 9 (29%) of the 31 College Y
respondents indicated that general counseling was helpful.
The responses to questionnaire item 4d, Did the athletic/general counselor go
over your athletic eligibility?, are illustrated in Figure 1 below.
62

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Figure 1. Responses to SA questionnaire item 4d.
A marked difference emerged in the number of SAs from College X versus the
number from College Y who reported that they received eligibility counseling from their
respective counselors. A marked difference also emerged in the number of SAs from
College X versus the number from College Y who reported not receiving eligibility
counseling from their respective counselors. When these numbers of SAs were converted
to percentages of those who returned the questionnaires, the marked differences
remained.
The responses to item 4d were subjected to crosstab analysis (Table 4) with
eligibility counseling and no eligibility counseling and College X (i.e., athletic counselor)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Yes No
College X (athletic
counselor)
College Y (general
academic counselor)
Count
Did the counselor go over your athletic eligibility?
63

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

and College Y (i.e., general counselor) included as the categorical variables. Statistical
analysis (Table 5) showed that the differences did not arise from random variation.
Table 4. Eligibility counseling * College (type of counselor) Crosstabulation

College X College Y
Total (Athletic counselor) (General Counselor)
Eligibility counseling provided?
Yes 45 5 50
No 4 22 26
Total 49 27 76
Note. The SA respondent counts are shown. One of the 50 College X SAs and 3 of the 30
College Y SAs did not respond to this question.

Table 5. Chi-Square Test Result

Value Degree of freedom Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson’s chi-square 24.990
a
1 .000

Results of the analysis of item 5, the themes identified in the interviews, together
with results of the crosstab analysis indicate that although general counseling is
acknowledged by SAs as a beneficial student service, general counseling does not
prepare SAs for transfer as academically eligible athletes. The data obtained from the two
Institutional Research offices combined with the information obtained from staff
interviews and the SA questionnaire at both colleges support the conclusion that
designated athletic counselors specifically guide SAs toward successful completion of
their educational goals.
Conclusion
As described in Chapters One and Two, with its open door policy, the CCCS
serves a particular population of high school graduates who wish to begin a college-level
athletic-academic career. These are high school athletes who, for various reasons, are not
ready to enter a four-year college. Thus, they enter a CCC as SAs. The literature
identifies SAs collectively as a disadvantaged student population that requires specific
64

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

student services and suggests that, individually, SAs face distinct challenges requiring
specialized support services. The data obtained from this mixed methods study support
the researcher’s hypothesis that designated athletic counselors at the community college
level enhance the educational outcomes of SAs in the CCCS. With constant changes in
academic eligibility requirements for SAs to meet, it is imperative that they have the
proper support.
In the study described herein, specialized, designated athletic counselors were
found to provide a vital service that promotes SAs’ success. The relationships established
and the SA-tailored counseling provided help equip these students with the information
they need to stay on track toward their athletic and educational goals.

65

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Chapter Five: Conclusions
Summary
The purpose of this mixed methods study was to add to our understanding of the
student-athlete (SA) population at the community college level, particularly the academic
persistence of this population and the specific student services that support SAs so that
they may reach their academic and athletic goals. The study was conducted to determine
whether specialized athletic counseling in the California Community Colleges (CCCs) is
a student service that positively influences educational outcomes for the SA population.
The researcher examined two representative CCCs, both of which have an intercollegiate
athletics program. The first, College X, has a designated athletic counselor to assist SAs,
whereas the second, College Y, does not. The researcher interviewed athletic staff from
the two schools, surveyed SAs at the two schools, and obtained cohort SA academic
placement and educational outcomes data from the offices of Institutional Research at the
two schools. The information collected from the two schools was compared to determine
whether specialized athletic counseling is a student service that enhances SAs’
achievement as measured by the percentage of SAs that transfer to four-year colleges as
academically eligible athletes.
Results of the data analysis supported the study hypothesis that the percentage of
educational goals, i.e., attainment of certificates and degrees and/or transfers to four-year
institutions, met by SAs at CCCs that have a designated academic athletic counselor is
greater than the percentage of educational goals met by SAs at CCCs without a
designated academic athletic counselor, and the same results ruled out the null hypothesis
that the percentage of educational goals, i.e., attainment of certificates and degrees and/or
transfers to four-year institutions, met by SAs at CCCs that have a designated academic
66

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

athletic counselor is equal to or less than the percentage of educational goals met by SAs
at CCCs without a designated academic athletic counselor.
A positive association was found between the availability of specified athletic
counseling and SAs’ completion of their educational goals.
Limitations
One of the study limitations is the difference between the colleges that were
compared. The researcher attempted to identify and study two CCCs that are fairly
homogeneous in terms of student demographics and the size of the athletic program.
However, it turned out to be challenging to gain the interest and endorsement of two fully
comparable CCCs. The two institutions that ultimately agreed to participate were not as
similar in location as the researcher had initially hoped.
A second limitation is that it was not possible to conduct a longitudinal study that
followed the SAs who returned questionnaires until completion or non-completion of
their academic goals at the community college level. Instead, the researcher had to rely
on cohort data from the two colleges to identify trends in SA goal completion rates.
A further limitation could have been introduction of a so-called selection bias into
the study. The SA questionnaires were completed by students who were willing to
participate. It is unknown what the responses of SAs who declined to participate would
have been and how these responses might have influenced the researcher’s perception of
the salient themes. In addition, students’ loyalties to their own schools could bias their
questionnaire responses, and athletic faculty members could express similar biases in
terms of counseling-related student services. Without input from a greater number of
counselors at College Y, it is unknown to what degree the responses of the individuals at
67

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

College X holding positions as specialized athletic counselors might have been
influenced by their own subjective evaluation of the importance of their jobs. Control for
these potential biases was less than ideal.
Summary of Findings
Comparison of the quantitative data provided by both Institutional Research offices
showed that the percentage of SAs at College X earning a degree or certificate and/or
transferring was higher than the percentage of those at College Y. Comparison of the qualitative
information collected via the SA questionnaires indicated that access to a designated athletic
counselor is a clear benefit to SAs who desire to transfer to four-year schools as academically
eligible athletes.
To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, this mixed methods study is the first study of
its kind to examine athletic counseling at the CCCs and its impact on SAs’ realization of their
educational goals. The study revealed the crucial role played by specialized athletic counselors in
the academic success of SAs at the CCC level. The researcher has come to believe that the CCCS
should recognize designated specialized athletic counseling as an important student service that
increases SAs’ persistence toward achieving their educational goals.
Recommendations for Practice
The study findings clearly point to the need for each CCC with an athletics program to
provide their SAs with one or more athletic counselors who are knowledgeable in the specific
rules and regulations governing successful transfer of these SAs to four-year schools as
academically eligible athletes.
Each designated athletic counselor must stay abreast of the constant changes to the
academic eligibility requirements. In addition, the importance of professional development must
68

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

be recognized by these counselors and school administrators, who can foster such development
by requiring these counselors to attend pertinent conferences and meetings and join related
associations such as the N4A, 3C2A, and 3C4A. Involvement of athletic counselors in these
professional activities will help create broad-scale institutional change in the CCCS, mandating
that any CCC with an athletics program be required to hire an athletic counselor.
Implications for Practice
The study findings add to the existing but limited literature on the academic success of
SAs and provide insight into the specific student services needed by SAs at the CCCs. The
literature summarized in Chapter Two describes the long-recognized importance of academic
counseling at the CCCs and the relatively recent history of specialized support for SAs at the
CCCs. The study described herein investigated in further depth the role of this specialized
support and showed that designated athletic counseling is a student service that increases SAs’
academic persistence. Simply stated, CCC’s with intercollegiate athletic programs need
designated athletic counselors who can serve the SA population.
General academic counselors can provide recommendations for degree, certificate, and
academic transfer, but specialized athletic counselors are knowledgeable in all of these things as
well as NCAA DI, DII, DIII, and NAIA transfer admission rules for qualifiers, non-qualifiers, 4-
2-4 transfers. It is this breadth of knowledge that is vital for SAs’ success. It becomes the athletic
counselors’ responsibility to stay abreast of the regulations that SAs must follow to be
academically eligible to for athletic transfer to a four-year college or university. Failure to
provide the SA population at the CCCs with appropriate student services such as designated
athletic counseling is actually a disservice.
69

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

For those colleges that currently have an athletics program but do not have a designated
athletic counselor, the athletics and counseling personnel should advocate for a designated
athletic counselor who is well versed in the athletic academic eligibility rules. According to this
study, more than 92% of CCC SAs plan to transfer to a four-year institution where they can
continue participating in intercollegiate athletics. The CCCs need designated athletic counselors
to ensure that this student population transitions seamlessly into the four-year institutions; the
personnel best fit to guide these students are the designated athletic counselors.
This study’s unveiling of the relationship between specialized athletic counseling and
educational outcomes of SAs confirmed that establishment of faculty positions to address the
specific, complex needs of SAs is warranted. Neither the role nor the importance of designated
athletic counselors in the academic-athletic careers of SAs should be underestimated or
overlooked. In the long run, the CCCS should mandate that specialized athletic counselors be
hired at each institution that has an intercollegiate athletics program.
Recommendations for Research
The study described herein found specialized athletic counseling to be a student service
that supports and increases SAs’ educational outcomes. However, the study was limited to two
representative CCCs, leaving open the question of whether the results are generalizable to other
intercollegiate athletic programs at other CCCs. The researcher recommends that a similar study
be conducted at the state level that would ideally include all CCCs.
A further recommendation is that a longitudinal study be conducted to track the academic
outcomes of two groups of SAs—a group from a CCC or CCCs with designated athletic
counselors and a group from a CCC or CCCs without designated athletic counselors. Such a
70

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

longitudinal study would further test the researcher’s contention that, for full realization of their
educational and athletic goals, SAs at the CCCs need specialized athletic counselors.
Conclusion
With its open-door policy, the CCCS provides access and upward mobility to SAs
who, for one reason or another, cannot enroll in a four-year school immediately upon
graduation from high school. The literature indicates that junior college SAs face unique
challenges that require specialized student support services (Druehl, 1992; Ferrante,
Etzel, & Lantz, 2002; Haggan, 2000; Horton, 2009b; Thiss, 2009; Greer & Robinson,
2006; Watson, 2005, 2006; Watson & Kissinger, 2007; Watt & Monroe, 2001). Thus, the
study described herein focussed specifically on specialized athletic counseling as a
student support services provided specifically for SAs.
As noted in Chapter One, the NCAA has mandated minimum eligibility standards
for participation of SAs in intercollegiate athletics. It has placed the accountability
burden on the SAs themselves, but acknowledges the responsibility of parents and school
advisors alike to ensure that SAs are meeting the requirements. Importantly, the NCAA
requires its member institutions to provide specifically tailored support services for their
SAs. However, at the CCC level, there is no mandate for establishment of differentiated
support services aimed at SAs.
This study aimed to find the best practices and most useful student services
specific to assisting CCC SAs in achieving their academic goals and maintaining their
eligibility for eventual participation in intercollegiate athletics at the four-year college
level. The study showed designated athletic counseling to be the student service most
useful to SAs who aspire to complete their education and at the same time maintain their
71

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

eligibility. Specialized athletic counselors are better equipped than general student
counselors to inform SAs at the CCCs of NCAA eligibility requirements, and thus they
provide not only a meaningful but also a critical student support service. The
recommendations are for all CCCs with an intercollegiate athletics program to create one
or more faculty positions to cover for this need and for the CCCS to mandate such a
practice.
In addition to the focus on SAs, on a grander scale, the research methods from this study
could be applied to other student populations in the CCCs that may need specialized support
services that are not necessarily offered at each institution. The study design itself need not be
limited to the SA population. Other student populations can be looked at in the same manner to
identify which student services will help them achieve their educational goals.
72

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

References

Ashburn, E. (2007). To increase enrollment, community colleges add more sports. Chronicle of
Higher Education, 53(44), A31-A32.

Ashburn, E. (2007). A 2-year start on the future: Community colleges put renewed emphasis on
helping their students succeed. Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(9).

Astin, A. W. (1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A. W. (1991). Four critical years: Effects of college on beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge
(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited (1st ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Berg, R. (1989). Making the grade. Athletic Business, 42, 30-34.

Berg, R. (1992). The issue is academic. Athletic Business, 16(1), 29-30.

Bogue, J. P. (1950). The community college. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Boswell, K. (2004). Bridges or barriers? Public policy and the community college transfer
function. Change, 36(6), 22–29.

Boulard, G. (2008). Athletics can provide a shot in the arm. Community College Times.
Retrieved from http://www.communitycollegetimes.com/ Article.cfm?ArticleId=1095

Breneman, D. W., Estrada L. F., & Hayward G. C. (1995). Tidal wave II: An evaluation of
enrollment projections for California higher education (Technical Report #95-6). San
Jose: California Higher Education Policy Center.

Brint, S., & Karabel, J. (1989). The diverted dream: Community colleges and the promise of
educational opportunity in America, 1900-1985. New York, NY: Oxford.

Broughton, E., & Neyer, M. (2001). Advising and counseling student athletes. New Directions
for Student Services, 2001(93), 47-53. Retrieved from
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.libproxy.usc.edu/store/10.1002/ss.4/asset/4_ftp.pdf?v=1&t
=hj677tpo&s=ffc9222820384107df2b2c12a243a0bcaf4a6ee7

Brown, G. T. (2004). Division I Board of Directors implements historic reforms: Disincentives
package culminates initiative. The NCAA News.

Brown, L., Martinez, M., & Daniel, D. (2002). Community college leadership preparation:
Needs, perceptions, and recommendations. Community College Review,30(1), 45-73.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/213201853?accountid=14749
73

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Bryant, A. N. (2001). ERIC review: Community college students: Recent findings and trends.
Community College Review, 29(3), 77-93. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/213284898?accountid=14749

Bundy, A. M. (2000). Students' perceptions of need for personal counseling services in
community colleges. Journal of College Counseling, 3(2), 92.

Bundy, A. P. and Benshoff, J. M. (2000), Research: Students' perceptions of need for personal
counseling services in community colleges. Journal of College Counseling, 3, 92–99.
doi: 10.1002/j.2161-1882.2000.tb00169.x

California Community College Athletic Association [CCCAA]. (n.d)

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2005).Workgroup on 75/25 Issues. (2005).
Report and recommendations. Sacramento: California Community Colleges,
Chancellor’s Office. Retrieved from
http://californiacommunitycolleges.cccco.edu/Portals/0/Reports/workgroup_75_25_propo
sal.pdf

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (August 30, 2012). Press Release:
community colleges Chancellor Scott Lauds Passage of Student Success Act of 2012;
Says Reforms Will Result in More Students Reaching Their Educational Goals. Retrieved
from
http://californiacommunitycolleges.cccco.edu/Portals/0/DocDownloads/PressReleases/A
UG2012/PRESS_RELEASE_SB1451ClearsFinalHurdle_083012_FINAL(new).pdf

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (Updated November 7, 2012). Impact of
Budget Cuts on the California Community Colleges & Value of the System to California.
Retrieved from
http://californiacommunitycolleges.cccco.edu/PolicyInAction/KeyFacts.aspx

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2013). Mission and Vision. Retrieved
from:
http://californiacommunitycolleges.cccco.edu/ChancellorsOffice/MissionandVision.aspx

California League of Community Colleges (2003). League Issues Brief: Is there system-wide
support for a new funding allocation mechanism for California community colleges?

Carr, P., Kangas, J., & Anderson, D. (1992). College success and the Black male. San Jose, CA:
San Jose City College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED348100).
Carroll, B. W., & Tarasuk, P. E. (1991). A new vision for student development services for the
90s. Community College Review, 19(2), 32-42.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009155219101900206
Castañeda, C. (2004). A national overview of intercollegiate athletics in public community
74

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

colleges. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(8), 2915. (UMI No. 3144975)
Castañeda, C., Katsinas, S. G., & Hardy, D. E. (2005). The importance of intercollegiate
athletics at rural-serving community colleges. A policy brief of the University of Alabama
Education Policy Center for the MidSouth Partnership for Rural Community Colleges.
Mississippi State, MS: MidSouth Partnership for Rural Community Colleges.Tuscaloosa:
University of Alabama Education Policy Center, MidSouth Partnership for Rural
Community Colleges. Retrieved from
http://rcca.msgovt.org/docs/MSPBRIEFATHLETICS.pdf
Cohen, A. M.(2003). The community colleges and the path to the baccalaureate. Center for
Studies in Higher Education. University of California, Berkeley: Center for Studies in
Higher Education. Retrieved from: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/1dx9w981
Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (2003). The American community college (4
th
ed.). New York,
NY, Wiley & Sons.
Coleman, V. D., & Barker, S. A. (1991). Academic counseling for student-athletes: A model.
The Academic Athletic Journal, 13-19.

Coll, K. M., & Rice, R. L. (1993). Role conflict among community college
counselors. Community College Review, 21(1), 58-67.

College Board, The Center for Innovative Thought (2008) Winning: The skills race and
straightening America's middle class. Report of the National Commission on Community
Colleges. Retrieved from
http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/public/pdf/rd/winning_the_skills_race.pdf

Commission on Athletics [COA]. (n.d.). Commission on Athletics. Retrieved from
http://www.coasports.org/about.asp

Community College Counselors/Advisors Academic Association for Athletes [3C4A]. (2014).
Community College Counselors/Advisors Academic Association for Athletes Homepage.
Retrieved from http://www.3c4a.org/

Cone, A. E., & Rosenbaum, J. L. (1990). Predicting academic success among student-athletes.
The Academic Athletic Journal, 1-8.

Cox, E. M., Cerven, C., Haberler, Z., Smith, M., Chang, Y. C., Naylor, N. J., & Mulholland, S.
(2009). Promising Practices: California’s Community Colleges: Draft Final Report.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Cross, K. P. (1983). The impact of changing student populations on community colleges.
Community College Review, 10(4), 30-34. Retrieved from
http://crw.sagepub.com.libproxy.usc.edu/content/10/4/30.full.pdf
75

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Druehl, G. S. (1992). The effect of academic advising on student athlete scholastic achievement:
A community college study. (Order No. 9223718, University of San Francisco). ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses, 120-120 p. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/304023418?accountid=14749. (304023418).

Durodoye, B. A., Harris, H. L., & Bolden, V. I. (2000). Personal counseling as a function of the
community college counseling experience. Community College Journal of Research &
Practice, 24(6), 455–468.

Elles, W. C. (1931). The junior college. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Ferrante, A. P., Etzle, E., & Lantz, C. (2002). Counseling college student-athletes. In E. F. Etzel,
A. P. Ferrante, & J. W. Pinkney (Eds.), Counseling college student-athletes: Issues and
interventions, 2, 3-26. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.

Ferris, E., Finster, M., & McDonald, D. (2004). Academic fit of student-athletes: An analysis of
NCAA division I-A graduation rates. Research in Higher Education 45(6), 555-575

Fields, R. R. (1962). The community college movement (Vol. 20700). New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill.

Foundation for California Community Colleges [FCCC]. (2012). About the Colleges website:
http://www.foundationccc.org/AbouttheColleges/FactsandFigures/tabid/636/Default.aspx

Gaston-Gayles, J. L. (2004). Examining academic and athletic motivation among student athletes
at a division I university. Journal of College Student Development, 45, 75 – 83.

Gomez, P. (1991, October 2). A Proposition 48 success story. San Jose Mercury News, October
2, 1991.

Greer, J. L., & Robinson, J. D. (2006). Student-athletes. Understanding college student
subpopulations: A guide for student affairs professionals, 53-68.
http://www.naspa.org/membership/mem/pubs/ebooks/UCCS.pdf#page=65

Grubb, W. N. (1996). Working in the middle: Strengthening education and training for the mid-
skilled labor force. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Grubb, W. N. (2001). Getting into the world: Guidance and counseling in community colleges.
New York: Columbia University, Community College Research Center. Retrieved from:
http://counselors.cccco.edu/Portals/2/assets/Documents/332_23CCRC%20Grubb%20Cou
nseling%202001.pdf

Grubb, W. N., & Badway, N. N. (2005). From compliance to improvement: accountability and
assessment in California community colleges: Report prepared for California Community
Colleges Chancellor’s Office, Sacramento, CA.
76

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Grubb, W. N. (2006). Like, what do I do now?. The dilemmas of guidance counseling. In T.
Bailey & V. S. Morest (Eds.), Defending the Community college equity agenda, 195-222.
Retrieved from
http://zb5lh7ed7a.scholar.serialssolutions.com/?sid=google&auinit=T&aulast=Bailey&ati
tle=The+Community+College+Equity+Agenda+in+the+Twenty-
First+Century&title=Defending+the+community+college+equity+agenda&date=2006&s
page=246

Gurney, G. S., & Johnston, S. P. (1986). Advising the student athlete. The Academic Journal, 35-
38.

Haggan, P. S. (2000). Transition counseling in the community college. Community College
Journal of Research & Practice, 24(6), 427-442. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com.libproxy.usc.edu/doi/pdf/10.1080/10668920050137192

Hall, M. R. (2007). A study of a learning community for the community college student-athlete.
(Order No. 3287700, Fielding Graduate University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses,
179. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304705249?accountid=14749.
(304705249).

Hedlund, D. E., & Jones, J. T. (1970). Effect of student personnel services on completion rate in
two-year colleges. J Coll Student Personnel.

Henriksen, J. A. S. (1995). Orientation and counseling in a California community college:
Surveying the perspectives of a multicultural student population. Community College
Review, 23(2), 59-74. Retrieved from
http://crw.sagepub.com.libproxy.usc.edu/content/23/2/59.full.pdf+html

Hobneck, C., Mudge, L., & Turchi, M. (2003). Improving student athlete success and retention.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED478782).

Horton, D. (2009a). Class and cleats: Community college student athletes and academic success.
New Directions for Community Colleges, 2009(147), 15-27.

Horton, D. J. (2009b). Comparative study of the persistence and academic success of Florida
community college student-athletes and non-athlete students: 2004 to 2007. (Order No.
3467701, University of Florida). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses,166. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/880863005?accountid=14749. (880863005)

Jeynes, W. (2007). American educational history: school, society and the common good.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Johnson, H. (2011). Higher education in California: New goals for the master plan. Public Policy
Institute of California. Retrieved from
http://www.faccc.org/images/New_Goals_Master_Plan.pdf
77

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Kanter, M. & Lewis, M. (1991). A study of the academic performance of student-athletes in
California’s community colleges. California Community College Fund for Instructional
Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED332763).
Keim, M. C. (1989). Two-year college counselors: Who are they and what do they
do? Community College Review, 16(1), 39-46.
King, M. C. (1993). Academic advising: Organizing and delivering services for student success.
New directions for community colleges. New Directions for Community Colleges, 82.
Kissinger, D. B., & Watson, J. C. (September 8, 2013). Athletic participation and wellness:
Implications for counseling college student-athletes. Journal of College Counseling,153.
Knapp, T. J., & Raney, J. F. (1988). Student-athletes at two-year colleges: Transcript analysis of
grades and credits. Community Junior College Quarterly of Research and Practice,
12(2), 99-105.
Knight Commission. (March 1991-March, 1993). A new model. In keeping faith with the student
athlete: The Knight Commission’s Groundbreaking Report. Retrieved from:
http://www.knightcommission.org/images/pdfs/1991-93_kcia_report.pdf
Koos, L. V. (November, 1927). The junior-college curriculum. The School Review, 35(9), 657-
672. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1078685?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739
256&sid=21104071101057
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2006, July). What matters
to student success: A review of the literature. In Commissioned Report for the National
Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a Dialog on Student
Success.
Kuh, G. D. (2002). The college student report (4
th
ed.). National Survey of Student Engagement,
Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.

Lee, D., Olson, E. A., Locke, B., Michelson, S. T., & Odes, E. (2009). The effects of college
counseling services on academic performance and retention. Journal of College Student
Development, 50(3), 305-319.

Leonard, M. Q. (2002). An outreach framework for retaining nontraditional students at open
admissions institutions. Journal of College Counseling, 5(1), 60-73. Retrieved from:
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=837c69c8-51e5-44b1-94e3-
d2dacdd8775c%40sessionmgr112&vid=1&hid=127&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2
ZQ%3d%3d#db=pbh&AN=6533139

78

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Letawsky, N. R., Schneider, R. G., Pedersen, P. M., & Palmer, C. J. (2003). Factors influencing
the college selection process of student-athletes: Are their factors similar to non-athletes?
College Student Journal, 37(4), 604-610.

Livingston, T. (1998). History of California’s AB1725 and its major provisions. Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED
425764

London, H. (1992). College athletes who never graduate. Academic Questions, 6(1), 10-11.

Legislative Analysts Office. (2012). The 2012-13 Budget: Analysis of the Governor’s Higher
Education Proposal. Retrieved from
http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis/2012/highered/higher-ed-020812.pdf

Legislative Analysts Office. (2012). The 2012-13 Budget: Proposition 98 Educational Analysis.
Retrieved from
http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis/2011/highered/ccc_courses_enrollment.aspx

Legislative Analysts Office. (2012). The 2013-14 Budget: California’s Fiscal Outlook. Retrieved
from http://www.lao.ca.gov/

Lowenthal, A. (2012). Student Success Act of 2012: Senate Bill 1456. Retrieved from
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_1451-
1500/sb_1456_bill_20120224_introduced.html

Mattanah, J. F., Ayers, J. F., Brand, B. L., Brooks, L. J., Quimby, J. L., & McNary, S. W. (2010).
A social support intervention to ease the college transition: Exploring main effects and
moderators. Journal of College Student Development, 51(1), 93-108. Retrieved from:
http://muse.jhu.edu.libproxy.usc.edu/journals/journal_of_college_student_development/v
051/51.1.mattanah.html

McCurdy, J. (1994). Broken promises: The impact of budget cuts and fee increases on the
California community colleges. San Jose, CA: California Higher Education Policy
Center.

Melguizo, T. (2007). Latino and African-American students' transfer pathway to elite education
in California. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 39(6), 52-55.

Mendoza, P., Horton, Jr., D., & Mendez, J. P. (2012). Retention among community college
student-athletes. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 36(3), 201-219.

Moore, C., & Shulock, N. (2010). Divided we fail in LA: Improving completion and closing
racial gaps in the Los Angeles community college district. Institute for Higher Education
Leadership & Policy. Retrieved from http://www.csus.edu/ihelp/PDFs/R_DWF_LA_11-
10.pdf

79

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

National Association of Academic Advisors for Athletics [N4A]. (2014), History and evolution
of the national association of academic advisors for athletics (N4A). Retrieved from
http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/nacda/sports/nfoura/auto_pdf/2011-
12/misc_non_event/historyupdate.pdf

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2014). Integrated Postsecondary Education
Data System (IPEDS). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA]. (2013). 2013-14 NCAA banned drugs.
Retrieved from
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/ssi/resources/drug+testing+resources/
ncaa+banned+drugs+list

National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA]. (n.d.). Official web site of the NCAA.
Retrieved from http://www.ncaa.org/

National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA]. (1992). The NCAA News - NCAA.org.
Retrieved from http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/NCAANewsArchive/1992/19920520.pdf

National Collegiate Athletic Association [NCAA]. (2008). 2008-09 Guide for the college-bound
student-athlete: Follow the base path to success – as a student athlete. Retrieved October
6, 2008, from http://www.ncaapublications.com/Uploads/PDF/2008-
09%20CBSA9c29e699-00f6-48ba-98a9-6456c9b98957.pdf

Orozco, G. L., Alvarez, A. N., & Gutkin, T. (2010). Effective advising of diverse students in
community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 34(9), 717-
737. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com.libproxy.usc.edu/doi/pdf/10.1080/10668920701831571

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1977). Patterns of student-faculty informal interaction
beyond the classroom and voluntary freshman attrition. The Journal of Higher Education,
540-552.

Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and
insights from twenty years of research (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Pascarella, E. T. (2006). How college affects students: Ten directions for future research. Journal
of College Student Development, 47(5), 508-520.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Petrie T. A., & Russell, R. K. (1995). Academic and psychosocial antecedents of academic
performance for minority and non-minority college football players. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 73, 615-620.

80

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Peterman, D. S., & Matz, M. (2000). Athletics and student development in the community
college. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 24(9), 767.

Porter, S. R. (2000). The robustness of the graduation rate performance indicator used in the U.S.
News and World Report college rankings. International Journal of Educational
Advancement, 1(2), 145-163. Retrieved from
http://www.stephenporter.org/papers/usnews.pdf

Price, J. A. (2010). The Effects of Higher Admission Standards on NCAA Student-Athletes: An
Analysis of Proposition 16. Journal of Sports Economics,11(4), 363-382.

Pulliams, P. (1990). The emerging role of the community college counselor. Highlights: An
ERIC/CAPS Digest. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED315707.pdf

Sawyer, D. T. (1993). Analysis of sport participation on retention of community college transfer
students at a california state university. (Order No. 9323947, University of San
Francisco). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 100-100 p. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/304105724?accountid=14749. (304105724).

Sheldon, C. Q. (2003). ERIC review: The impact of financial crises on access and support
services in community colleges. Community College Review, 31(2), 73-90.

Shriberg, A., & Brodzinski, F. R. (Eds.). (1984). Rethinking services for college athletes. New
Directionsfor Student Services, No. 28. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Shulock, N., & Moore, C. (2005a). A framework for incorporating public trust issues in states'
higher education accountability plans. Institute for Higher Education Leadership &
Policy.

Shulock, N., & Moore, C. (2005b). Diminished access to the baccalaureate for low-income and
minority students in California: The impact of budget and capacity constraints on the
transfer function. Educational Policy, 19(2), 418-442.

Smith, K. (2009). Advising the academically underprepared first-year community college student
athlete for transferability. (Order No. 3369768, The University of Alabama). ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses, , 168. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/304824534?accountid=14749. (304824534).

Smith, C.J. (2012). Trustee Handbook. Community College League of California. Retrieved
from http://www.ccleague.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3285

Storch, J., & Ohlson, M. (2009). Student services and student athletes in community colleges.
New Directions for Community Colleges, 2009(147), 75-84.

Thiss, P. J. (2009). Effects of dedicated academic support services on the persistence rates of
California community college student-athletes. (Order No. 3351837, North central
81

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 185-n/a. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/305173808?accountid=14749. (305173808).

Thornton, J. W. (1972). The community junior college (3
rd
ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.
Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125.

Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago,
IL, University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1998). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously.
Review of Higher Education, 21, 167–177.

Tinto, V. (2006). Research and practice of student retention: What’s next? Journal of College
Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8, 1-19.

University of California. (2007). Major features of the California Master Plan for Higher
Education. Retrieved from http://www.ucop.edu/acadinit/mastplan/mpsummary.htm

Watson, J. C. (2005). College student-athletes' attitudes toward help-seeking behavior and
expectations of counseling services. Journal of College Student Development, 46(4), 442-
449.

Watson, J. C. (2006). Student-athletes and counseling: Factors influencing the decision to seek
counseling services. College Student Journal, 40(1), 35-42.

Watson, J. C, & Kissinger, D. B. (2007). Athletic participation and wellness: Implications for
counseling college student-athletes. Journal of College Counseling, (2), 153-162.

Watt, S. K., & Moore, J. L., III. (2001). Who are student athletes? In Howard Hamilton, M. F., &
Watt, S. K. (Ed.), Student services for athletes (pp. 7-18). New Directions for Student
Services, 93. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Weatherspoon, F. D. (2007). Black male student-athletes owe themselves, forefathers more.
Diverse Issues in Higher Education, 23(25), 31.
Williams, M. R., Byrd, L., & Pennington, K. (2008). Intercollegiate athletics at the community
college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 32(4-6), 453-461.
Williams, M. R., & Pennington, K. (2006). Community college presidents' perceptions of
intercollegiate athletics. Community College Enterprise, 12(2), 91-104.
Willett, T. (2001). Preliminary report on the impact of follow-up counseling on academic
performance and persistence. Gavilan College, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED 461399).
82

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Willoughby, L. M., Willoughby, D. S., & Moses, P. A. (1991). Mentors for beginning college
student athletes: A possible aid academic success. The Academic Athletic Journal, 1-12.
Witt, A.A., Wattenbarger, J.L., Gollattscheck, J. F. & Suppinger, J.E. (1994). America's
Community Colleges: The First Century. Washington, D.C.: Community College Press.

Wong, W. F. (2006). The national collegiate athletic association 40/60/80% impact on
California community college student athletes' ability to transfer to a division I
university. (Order No. 3218183, Fielding Graduate University). ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses,, 105-105 p. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/304913576?accountid=14749. (304913576).

83

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Appendices

Appendix A

Research Request Form
Form: [researchrequestiformrevised]
URL:
Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Time: 07:19:52 PM

Name: Kelsey Iino

Email: kiino@usc.edu

Phone: [Intentionally omitted from Appendix]

Campus/Location: [Intentionally omitted from Appendix]
Office Location: (Room #, Building) [Intentionally omitted from Appendix]

Unit: Student Services

Division: Counseling

Supervisor Name: Dean of Health Sciences and Athletics/Dean of Student Learning

Department: Counseling

Supervisor Email: [Intentionally omitted from Appendix]

Date Needed: (MM/DD/YYYY) For standard requests, please allow 3 - 4 weeks for
delivery. 03/14/2014

Data Type: Placement into remedial courses; Educational outcomes, i.e., graduation,
certification, transfer to four-year college or university.

Report Title: Student-athletes educational outcomes and remedial placement

Time Frame (specify terms, etc):
--> 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013

Describe your request. What question(s) are you trying to answer? If you are requesting a
survey, indicate the number of copies needed.

84

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

For comparability, the study will focus on the intercollegiate sports teams that both
institutions have: badminton, baseball, men’s and women’s basketball, football, men’s
and women’s soccer, softball, men’s and women’s track and field, and men’s and
women’s cross-country.

 Can you give me the percentages of student-athletes that place in remedial
courses?
 How many student-athletes per year graduate, obtain a certificate, or transfer to a
four-year college or university?

If your request is similar to work that was done previously, indicate for whom and the
approximate date the work was done.
--> None

Main Purpose (select one that most closely matches the reason for your request):
> Student learning outcomes creation/assessment

With whom will the data be shared?
--> The data will be used in a dissertation and will not be identified with the college by
name. The college will be given a pseudonym.

How do you plan to use this information to improve the college?
--> The long-term goal is to increase retention rates and improve educational outcomes of
student-athletes.

Strategic Initiatives related to this request (check all that apply):
--> Strategic Initiative A (Enhance teaching to support. . .; Strategic Initiative B
(Strengthen quality educational and support services. . .); Strategic Initiative C (Foster a
positive learning environment. . .); Strategic Initiative E (Improve processes, programs. .
.).

85

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Appendix B

Athletic Staff Interview Questions

1. What is your job title:
2. How long have you had this position?
3. In what capacity do you work with student-athletes?
4. What services do you currently offer to your student-athletes?
5. What student services do you feel are most helpful to student-athletes and why?
6. Are there any student services you would like to offer your student-athletes that
you currently do not provide?
7. Does your college have a designated athletic counselor?
a. If yes, please explain how you think their role is more or less helpful than that
of general counselors when working with student-athletes?
b. If no, whom do student-athletes see to get the mandated educational plan for
eligibility, and please explain how you think their role is more or less helpful
when working with student-athletes.
8. In your experience please describe any best practices and most useful student
services specific to counseling student-athletes.
9. In your opinion, do the specialized, designated athletic counselors provided by
some community colleges, in comparison to the general student counselors provided by
other community colleges, better support the educational goals of student-athletes and
thus ensure better outcomes? Please explain why or why not.
10. Additional comments or feedback (optional):
86

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Appendix C

SA Closed-ended Questionnaire
1. What is your educational goal? (circle all that apply)

Degree Certificate Transfer

Other:________________________

a. If you are planning to transfer are you trying to compete at the four-year
college or university? YES NO

i. If YES (please circle all divisions you are considering)

division I division II
division III NAIA

2. What student services have you used? (circle all that apply)

CalWORKS Career Center General Counseling EOPS/CARE

Career and Technical Education Veterans Counseling Project
Success

First Year Experience (FYE) Honors Transfer Program (HTP)

Puente Project Transfer Center Financial Aid

Historically Black Colleges and University (HBCU) Transfer Initiative

Athletic Counseling Women in Industry and Technology (WIT)

Mathematics, Engineering & Science Achievement Program (MESA/ASEM)

Athletic Counseling Student Athlete Independent Learning (SAIL) Registration
Lab

Student Enhancement Program (SEP) (student-probation)

Student Resource Center (SRC) TRIO/Upward Bound

Other(s):__________________________________________________________

87

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

3. Please list the top five student services that you feel are the most important towards
helping you reach your educational goal.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

4. Have you seen a designated Athletic Counselor? YES NO

a. If YES why did you see the athletic counselor? (circle all that apply)

Athletic Counseling Academic Counseling

Personal Counseling Other:___________________________

b. how many times have you seen the athletic counselor? _______________

c. how did you select the athletic counselor you met with? (circle all that apply)

Referred by Coach Referred by Teammate

Referred by other Counselor Other: __________________________

d. did the athletic counselor go over your athletic eligibility?

i. to compete at the two-year level YES NO

ii. to compete at the four-year level YES NO

5. Do you think athletic counseling has helped? YES NO

a. If YES how? (circle all that apply)

persistence towards goal motivation setting goals

probation academically academic athletic eligibility

picking a major other:____________________________________

b. If NO explain why (optional):______________________________________

6. Have you seen a General Counselor? YES NO
88

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

(Not a designated athletic Counselor)

a. if YES why did you see the general counselor? (circle all that apply)

Athletic Counseling Academic Counseling

Personal Counseling Other:___________________________

b. how many times have you seen a general counselor? _______________

c. how did you select the general counselor you met with? (circle all that apply)

Referred by Coach Referred by Teammate

Referred by other Counselor Other: __________________________

d. did the general counselor go over your athletic eligibility? YES NO

i. if yes, to compete at the two-year level YES NO

ii. if yes, to compete at the four-year level YES NO

7. Do you think general counseling has helped? YES NO

a. If YES how? (circle all that apply)

persistence towards goal motivation setting goals

probation academically academic athletic eligibility

picking a major other:____________________________________

b. If NO explain why (optional):_______________________________________

8. Which academic year did you start your college education? (circle one)

Before 2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

9. Did you transfer from another college/university? YES NO

a. If YES where? _______________________________
89

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Appendix D

Persons Interviewed

College X
1. Dean of Health Sciences and Athletics (administrator)
2. Athletic Director (administrator)
3. Football Coach (faculty)
4. Men’s Baseball Coach (faculty)
5. Women’s Soccer Coach (faculty)
6. 50% Designated Athletic Counselor (faculty)
7. 50% Designated Athletic Counselor (faculty)
8. Athletic Eligibility Specialist (classified staff)
College Y
1. Athletic Director (administrator)
2. General Counselor (faculty)
3. General Counselor (faculty)
4. Football Coach (faculty)
5. Athletic Eligibility Specialist (classified staff)

90

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Charts and Graphs:

College 1=College X
College 2=College Y
College X
Q: Which academic year did you start your college education?
Start

Year
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Before 2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
Total
2 4.0 4.3 4.3
2 4.0 4.3 8.5
10 20.0 21.3 29.8
18 36.0 38.3 68.1
15 30.0 31.9 100.0
47 94.0 100.0

Missing 3 6.0

Total 50 100.0

91

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: What is your educational goal?
Educational Goal

Frequenc
y
Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Degree (D)
Transfer (T)
D+ Certificate (C)
D+T
D+C+T
Total
6 12.0 12.0 12.0
26 52.0 52.0 64.0
1 2.0 2.0 66.0
14 28.0 28.0 94.0
3 6.0 6.0 100.0
50 100.0 100.0

Q: If you are planning to transfer are you trying to compete at the four-year
college or university?
Plans to Transfer

Frequency Percent Valid % Cumulative %
Yes
No
Maybe
Total
46 92.0 92.0 92.0
3 6.0 6.0 98.0
1 2.0 2.0 100.0
50 100.0 100.0

Q: If YES (please circle all divisions you are considering)
division I division II division III NAIA
Plans to Transfer Athletically (DIV)

Frequency Percent Valid % Cumulative %
Division I (DI)
Division II (DII)
NAIA
DI+Division III (DIII)
DI+DII+NAIA
DI+DI+DIII+NAIA
DII+DIII
DII+DIII+NAIA
DI+DII+DIII
Total
14 28.0 30.4 30.4
9 18.0 19.6 50.0
1 2.0 2.2 52.2
11 22.0 23.9 76.1
3 6.0 6.5 82.6
4 8.0 8.7 91.3
1 2.0 2.2 93.5
2 4.0 4.3 97.8
1 2.0 2.2 100.0
46 92.0 100.0

Missing 4 8.0

Total 50 100.0

92

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: Please list the top five student services that you feel are the most important towards helping
you reach your educational goal.
College X Top 5 Frequency of Student Services
Student
service
Athletic
Counseling
Registration
Labs
Financial Aid
Counseling
Student
Resource Center
Transfer
Counseling
valid 47 47 23 10 8
missing 3 3 27 40 42
N 50 50 50 50 50

Q: Have you seen a designated Athletic Counselor?
Athletic Counseling

Frequency Percent Valid % Cumulative %
Yes
No
Total
47 94.0 94.0 94.0
3 6.0 6.0 100.0
50 100.0 100.0

93

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: Do you think athletic counseling has helped?
Athletic Counseling Benefit

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes
No
Total
49 98.0 98.0 98.0
1 2.0 2.0 100.0
50 100.0 100.0

Q: If YES why did you see the athletic counselor?
Reason to see Athletic Counselor (AC Reason)

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Athletic Counseling (AC)
Academic Counseling (CC)
AC+CC
CC+Personal Counseling
Total
14 28.0 29.8 29.8
15 30.0 31.9 61.7
16 32.0 34.0 95.7
2 4.0 4.3 100.0
47 94.0 100.0

Missing 3 6.0

Total 50 100.0

94

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: Did the athletic counselor go over your athletic eligibility?
To compete at the two-year level YES NO
Athletic Counseling 2year Eligibility

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes
No
Total
43 86.0 89.6 89.6
5 10.0 10.4 100.0
48 96.0 100.0

Missing 2 4.0

Total 50 100.0

Q: To compete at the four-year level YES NO
Athletic Counseling 4year Eligibility

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes
No
Total
38 76.0 82.6 82.6
8 16.0 17.4 100.0
46 92.0 100.0

Missing 4 8.0

Total 50 100.0

95

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

College Y

Q: Which academic year did you start your college education?
Start

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Before 2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
Total
3 9.7 10.7 10.7
8 25.8 28.6 39.3
5 16.1 17.9 57.1
9 29.0 32.1 89.3
3 9.7 10.7 100.0
28 90.3 100.0

Missing 3 9.7

Total 31 100.0

96

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: What is your educational goal?
Educational Goal (EG)

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Degree (D)
Certificate (C)
Transfer (T)
D+C
D+T
Total
4 12.9 12.9 12.9
1 3.2 3.2 16.1
16 51.6 51.6 67.7
1 3.2 3.2 71.0
9 29.0 29.0 100.0
31 100.0 100.0

Q: If you are planning to transfer are you trying to compete at the four-year
college or university? YES NO
Plans to Transfer

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Yes
No
Total
29 93.5 96.7 96.7
1 3.2 3.3 100.0
30 96.8 100.0

Missing 1 3.2

Total 31 100.0

97

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: If YES (please circle all divisions you are considering)
division I division II division III NAIA
Plans to Transfer Athletically (DIV)

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Division I (DI)
Division II (DII)
DI+DII
DI+DII+NAIA
DI+DII+Division III (DIII)+NAIA
DII+DII+NAIA
DI+DII+DIII
DII+NAIA
Total
3 9.7 11.1 11.1
3 9.7 11.1 22.2
5 16.1 18.5 40.7
3 9.7 11.1 51.9
7 22.6 25.9 77.8
1 3.2 3.7 81.5
2 6.5 7.4 88.9
3 9.7 11.1 100.0
27 87.1 100.0

Missing 4 12.9

Total 31 100.0

98

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: Please list the top five student services that you feel are the most important towards helping
you reach your educational goal.
College Y Top 5 Frequency of Student Services
Student
service
Financial Aid
Counseling
General
Counseling
Transfer
Counseling
Career
Counseling
EOPS
valid 25 21 12 8 4
missing 6 10 19 23 27
N 31 31 31 31 31

Q: Have you seen a designated Athletic Counselor?
Athletic Counselor

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
No 31 100.0 100.0 100.0

Q: Have you seen a General Counselor?
General Counselor

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Yes
No
Total
30 96.8 96.8 96.8
1 3.2 3.2 100.0
31 100.0 100.0

Q: If YES why did you see the general counselor? (circle all that apply)
Athletic Counseling Academic Counseling
Personal Counseling Other:___________________________

General Counseling Reason (GCreson)

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Academic Counseling (CC)
Personal Counseling (PC)
Athletic Counseling (AC)+PC
Total
23 74.2 79.3 79.3
3 9.7 10.3 89.7
3 9.7 10.3 100.0
29 93.5 100.0

Missing 2 6.5

Total 31 100.0

99

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: Did the general counselor go over your athletic eligibility?
General Counseling Eligibility

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Yes
No
Total
5 16.1 18.5 18.5
22 71.0 81.5 100.0
27 87.1 100.0

Missing 4 12.9

Total 31 100.0

(1.0=yes; 2.0=no; 99=blank)

Q: If yes, to compete at the two-year level?
General Counseling on Two-year Eligibility

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Yes
No
Total
3 9.7 11.5 11.5
23 74.2 88.5 100.0
26 83.9 100.0

Missing 5 16.1

Total 31 100.0

100

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

Q: If yes, to compete at the four-year level?
General Counseling on Four-year Eligibility

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Yes
No
Total
1 3.2 3.8 3.8
25 80.6 96.2 100.0
26 83.9 100.0

Missing 5 16.1

Total 31 100.0

Q: Do you think general counseling has helped?
General Counselor Benefit

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative %
Yes
No
Total
9 29.0 29.0 29.0
22 71.0 71.0 100.0
31 100.0 100.0

College X Q: Did the athletic counselor (AC) go over your athletic eligibility?
College Y Q: Did the general counselor (GC) go over your athletic eligibility?
Eligibility counseling* College (type of counselor) Crosstabulation

College X College Y Total
Athletic Counselor General Counselor
Eligibility counseling
Provided?
Yes 45 5 50
No 4 22 26
Total 49 27 76

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Exact Sig.
(2-sided)
Exact Sig.
(1-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 24.990
a
1 .000

Continuity Correction
b
5.748 1 .017

Likelihood Ratio 7.071 1 .008

Fisher's Exact Test

.039 .039
Linear-by-Linear
Association
24.500 1 .000

N of Valid Cases 51

101

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

a. 3 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .04.
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

102

Specialized Athletic Counselors and Academic Success of Student-Athletes in the CCCS

College X Educational Outcomes
year 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013
n 382 % 356 % 332 % 352 %
degree 93 66% 83 23.30% 59 54.20% 28 0.08%
certificate 4 0.01% 3 0.00% 2 0.01% 1 > 0.01%
transfer 140 36.60% 153 43% 114 34.30% 55 15.60%
ßAnother limitation was the deficiency in educational outcomes for both campuses in the 2012-
2013 academic year

College Y Educational Outcomes
year 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013
n 228 % 272 % 298 % 321 %
degree 35 15.30% 38 14% 31 10.40% 13 0.04
certificate 3 0.01% 0 0 0 0 1 > 0.01%
transfer 47 20.60% 56 20.60% 54 18.10% 27 0.08
Another limitation was the deficiency in educational outcomes for both campuses in the 2012
2013 academic year

College X Placement
2009-10
Athletes
2010-11
Athletes
2011-12
Athletes
2012-13
Athletes
n % n % n % n %
523 100.0 506 100.0 501 100.0 526 100.0
Total Reading Placement Tests 332 63.5 363 71.7 391 78.0 395 75.1
Remedial Reading Placement 169 50.9 168 46.3 183 46.8 189 47.6
Total Writing Placement Tests 333 63.7 364 71.9 388 77.4 392 74.5
Remedial Reading Placement 155 46.5 156 42.9 151 38.9 256 65.3
Total Math Placement Tests 332 63.5 364 71.9 387 77.2 404 76.8
Remedial Reading Placement 201 60.5 245 67.3 224 57.9 266 65.8

College Y Placement
2009-10
Athletes
2010-11
Athletes
2011-12
Athletes
2012-13
Athletes
n % n % n % n %
228 100.0 272 100.0 298 100.0 321 100.0
Total Reading Placement Tests 115 50.4 103 37.9 133 44.6 105 32.7
Remedial Reading Placement 74 64.3 74 71.8 78 58.6 56 53.3
Total Writing Placement Tests 115 50.4 103 37.9 132 44.2 105 32.7
Remedial Reading Placement 48 41.7 50 48.5 34 25.8 35 33.3
Total Math Placement Tests 109 47.8 103 37.9 125 41.9 114 35.0

103

Abstract (if available)

Abstract More than 27,000 student-athletes (SAs) participate annually in intercollegiate athletics within the California Community College System (CCCS). This population is considered an at-risk population

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The perceived importance coaches have on student-athletes' academic performance

PDF

A study of Pacific Islander scholarship football players and their institutional experience in higher education

PDF

Resource allocation practices in three charter middle schools in relation to student achievement improvement strategies

PDF

Allocation of resources and personnel to increase student achievement

PDF

Effective services provided to community college student-athletes: a gap analysis

PDF

When parents become students: An examination of experiences, needs, and opportunities which contribute to student parent engagement in community college

PDF

Leadership styles of California community college presidents: a four‐frame model analysis

PDF

The moderating effects of racial identity and cultural mistrust on the relationship between student-faculty interaction and persistence for Black community college students

PDF

Four year college access for undocumented Latino students

PDF

An examination of the Oregon state college and career education investment and the Eastern Promise program

PDF

Understanding the barriers to college access for former foster youth at the Los Angeles Community College District

PDF

Student-athletes and leadership: a case study of the impact of collegiate athletics on social change behavior and leadership development

PDF

The successful implementation of STEM initiatives in lower income schools

PDF

Engagement of staff within student-athlete academic services

PDF

A case study of five latino male college students: What contributes to their educational success?

PDF

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

PDF

Native Hawaiian student success in the first-year: the impact of college programs and practices

PDF

An examination of traditional versus non-traditional superintendents and the strategies they employ to improve student achievement

PDF

Walking away from the game: a phenomenological study on student-athletes career transition

PDF

Resource allocation strategies and educational adequacy: an examination of an academic & financial plan used to allocate resources to strategies that promote student achievement in Hawaii

Asset Metadata

Creator Iino, Kelsey Kikuye (author)

Core Title An evaluation of the contribution of athletic counselors to the academic success of student-athletes at the California community colleges

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 09/19/2014

Defense Date 09/03/2014

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

Tag Athletics,California community college,community college,community college counseling,counseling,OAI-PMH Harvest,student-athlete

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence O. (committee chair), García, Pedro Enrique (committee member), Potnis, Dipali (committee member)

Creator Email kiino@usc.edu,kkikuye@aol.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-479736

Unique identifier UC11286981

Identifier etd-IinoKelsey-2962.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-479736 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-IinoKelsey-2962.pdf

Dmrecord 479736

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Iino, Kelsey Kikuye

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